diff options
Diffstat (limited to '44010-0.txt')
| -rw-r--r-- | 44010-0.txt | 41384 |
1 files changed, 41384 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/44010-0.txt b/44010-0.txt new file mode 100644 index 0000000..d731577 --- /dev/null +++ b/44010-0.txt @@ -0,0 +1,41384 @@ +*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK 44010 *** + +Transcriber's Note: Stylized "U" and "V" are denoted as =U= and =V=. +Italics are represented by _underscores_. + + + + + INVESTIGATION OF + + THE ASSASSINATION OF PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY + + + HEARINGS + Before the President's Commission + on the Assassination + of President Kennedy + +Pursuant to Executive Order 11130, an Executive order creating a +Commission to ascertain, evaluate, and report upon the facts relating +to the assassination of the late President John F. Kennedy and the +subsequent violent death of the man charged with the assassination and +S.J. RES. 137, 88TH CONGRESS, a concurrent resolution conferring upon +the Commission the power to administer oaths and affirmations, examine +witnesses, receive evidence, and issue subpenas + +_Volume_ X + + +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 X: +Everett D. Glover, who became acquainted with Lee Harvey Oswald +following his return to Texas in 1962; Carlos Bringuier, Francis L. +Martello, Charles Hall Steele, Jr., Charles Hall Steele, Sr., Philip +Geraci III, Vance Blalock, Vincent T. Lee, Arnold Samuel Johnson, James +J. Tormey, Farrell Dobbs, and John J. Abt, who testified concerning +Oswald's political activities and associations; Helen P. Cunningham, +R. L. Adams, Donald E. Brooks, Irving Statman, Tommy Bargas, Robert L. +Stovall, John G. Graef, Dennis Hyman Ofstein, and Charles Joseph Le +Blanc, who testified concerning Oswald's employment history; Adrian +Thomas Alba, who was acquainted with Oswald in New Orleans in 1963; +Chester Allen Riggs, Jr., Mr. and Mrs. Mahlon F. Tobias, Sr., Mr. +and Mrs. Jesse J. Garner, Richard Leroy Hulen, Colin Barnhorst, and +Mr. and Mrs. Arthur Carl Johnson, who testified concerning Oswald's +various residences; and Clifton M. Shasteen, Leonard Edwin Hutchison, +Frank Pizzo, Albert Guy Bogard, Floyd Guy Davis, Virginia Louise +Davis, Malcolm Howard Price, Jr., Garland Glenwill Slack, Dr. Homer +Wood, Sterling Charles Wood, Theresa Wood, Glenn Emmett Smith, W. W. +Semingsen, and Laurance R. Wilcox, who testified concerning contacts +they believed they had with Oswald under varying circumstances. + + + + +Contents + + + Page + Preface v + + Testimony of-- + Everett D. Glover. 1 + Carlos Bringuier 32 + Francis L. Martello. 51 + Charles Hall Steele, Jr 62 + Charles Hall Steele, Sr 71 + Philip Geraci III 74 + Vance Blalock 81 + Vincent T. Lee 86 + Arnold Samuel Johnson 95 + James J. Tormey 107 + Farrell Dobbs 109 + John J. Abt 116 + Helen P. Cunningham 117 + R. L. Adams 136 + Donald E. Brooks 143 + Irving Statman 149 + Tommy Bargas 160 + Robert L. Stovall 167 + John G. Graef 174 + Dennis Hyman Ofstein 194 + Charles Joseph Le Blanc 213 + Adrian Thomas Alba 219 + Chester Allen Riggs, Jr 229 + Mrs. Mahlon F. Tobias 231 + M. F. Tobias, Sr 251 + Mrs. Jesse Garner 264 + Jesse J. Garner 276 + Richard Leroy Hulen 277 + Colin Barnhorst 284 + Mrs. Arthur Carl (Gladys J.) Johnson 292 + A. C. Johnson 301 + Clifton M. Shasteen 309 + Leonard Edwin Hutchison 327 + Frank Pizzo 340 + Albert Guy Bogard 352 + Floyd Guy Davis 356 + Virginia Louise Davis 363 + Malcolm Howard Price, Jr 369 + Garland Glenwill Slack 378 + Homer Wood 385 + Sterling Charles Wood 390 + Theresa Wood 398 + Glenn Emmett Smith 399 + W. W. Semingsen 405 + Laurance R. Wilcox 414 + + +EXHIBITS INTRODUCED + + Page + Commission Exhibit No. 427 183 + Bringuier Exhibit No.: + 1 42 + 2 41 + 3 44 + 4 46 + Cunningham Exhibit No.: + 1 119 + 1-A 119 + 2 121 + 2-A 121 + 3 156 + 3-A 156 + Dobbs Exhibit No.: + 1 109 + 2 109 + 3 109 + 4 109 + 5 109 + 6 111 + 7 110 + 8 112 + 9 110 + 10 110 + 11 112 + 12 113 + 13 114 + Garner Exhibit No. 1 49 + Hulen Exhibit No.: + 1 280 + 2 282 + 3 284 + 4 284 + 5 284 + 6 284 + 7 284 + 8 289 + 9 290 + 10 290 + 11 290 + 12 291 + 13 291 + 14 291 + 15 291 + Johnson (Arnold) Exhibit No.: + 1 97 + 2 99 + 3 99 + 4 100 + 4-A 101 + 5 101 + 5-A 103 + 6 101 + 7 103 + Johnson (Gladys) Exhibit A 294 + Lee Exhibit No.: + 1 87 + 2 88 + 3 88 + 3-A 88 + 4 88 + 5 88 + 6 90 + 7 91 + 8-A 91 + 8-B 91 + 8-C 91 + 9 91 + Pizzo Exhibit No.: + 453-A 350 + 453-B 350 + 453-C 350 + Semingsen Exhibit No.: + 3001 406 + 5118 406 + 5119 407 + 5120 407 + 5121 407 + Tobias (Mrs. Mahlon F.) Exhibit No. 1 233 + Tobias (Mahlon F., Sr.) Exhibit No. 2 253 + Tormey Exhibit No.: + 1 107 + 2 107 + Wilcox Exhibit No.: + 3002 415 + 3003 416 + 3004 416 + 3005 417 + 3006 417 + 3007 422 + 3008 423 + 3009 423 + 3010 423 + 3011 423 + 3012 423 + 3013 423 + 3014 423 + 3015 423 + 3016 424 + 3017 424 + + + + +Hearings Before the President's Commission + +on the + +Assassination of President Kennedy + + + + +TESTIMONY OF EVERETT D. GLOVER + +The testimony of Everett D. Glover was taken at 11 a.m., on March 24, +1964, in the office of the U.S. attorney, 301 Post Office Building, +Bryan and Ervay Streets, Dallas, Tex., by Mr. Albert E. Jenner, Jr., +assistant counsel of the President's Commission. + + +Mr. JENNER. Mr. Glover, would you stand? Do you promise to tell the +truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth in response to my +questions in the taking now of your deposition? + +Mr. GLOVER. I do. + +Mr. JENNER. Mr. Glover, you have received, I think, sometime last week +a letter from Mr. Rankin, general counsel for the Commission, advising +you we desire to take your testimony by deposition. + +Mr. GLOVER. Advising me that you wanted to take my testimony. I don't +know whether it was specifically deposition, but yes. + +Mr. JENNER. Now the Commission has been established to investigate and +report all the circumstances surrounding the assassination of President +Kennedy and any participation by Lee Harvey Oswald and Marina Oswald +and others in that tragic event. + +We understand that you had some acquaintance with the Oswalds as well +as people in the community who, in turn, had an acquaintance with +the Oswald's, and that you also had an acquaintance with George De +Mohrenschildt, naming him in particular, although there are others I +will probably examine you about. But it is in those general areas that +I will proceed. + +Now you are at liberty to have counsel present should you so desire, +and since you don't appear to have anybody with you, I assume you do +not wish any counsel? + +Mr. GLOVER. That's right. + +Mr. JENNER. Your name is Everett D. Glover? + +Mr. GLOVER. Right. + +Mr. JENNER. Do you reside in Dallas, Tex.? + +Mr. GLOVER. Right. + +Mr. JENNER. Where is your present residence? + +Mr. GLOVER. My present residence is 9838 Webbs Chapel Road, Dallas, 20. + +Mr. JENNER. How long have you resided there, sir? + +Mr. GLOVER. Since January 1, of this year, 1964. + +Mr. JENNER. Where did you reside immediately prior to that? + +Mr. GLOVER. 5723 Southwestern Boulevard. I forget the zone in Dallas. + +Mr. JENNER. How long had you resided there? + +Mr. GLOVER. Sometime around April 20, of 1963. + +Mr. JENNER. I will have to keep going back. Where did you live prior to +that? + +Mr. GLOVER. I lived at 4449 Potomac in Dallas also. It is in University +Park. + +Mr. JENNER. For what span of time? + +Mr. GLOVER. Span of time there, I don't have the figures right in my +mind, but approximately 2 years there. + +Mr. JENNER. That would take you back to sometime in 1961? + +Mr. GLOVER. Yes. We'd have to check these to be sure, this is +approximately. + +Mr. JENNER. That is sufficient. I will ask you this general question. +Over how long have you resided in Dallas or the Dallas area? + +Mr. GLOVER. Since 1955. June 2, 1955, I took a position with Socony +Mobil Oil Co. and came here to work on that day. I have lived here +since that time. + +Mr. JENNER. Are you married? + +Mr. GLOVER. I am married; yes. + +Mr. JENNER. Do you have a family? + +Mr. GLOVER. Well, I am married for the second time at the present +time. My former wife and a son by my former marriage are living in +Pennsylvania. + +Mr. JENNER. Of what country are you a native? + +Mr. GLOVER. United States. + +Mr. JENNER. You were born in the United States? + +Mr. GLOVER. Oh, yes. + +Mr. JENNER. How old are you? + +Mr. GLOVER. 47 years old. + +Mr. JENNER. Where were you born in the United States? + +Mr. GLOVER. I was born in Worcester, Mass. I resided in Millbury, +Mass., but I was actually born in the city of Worcester. + +Mr. JENNER. Tell me about your education, please. Elementary school and +high school and if you went beyond high school. + +Mr. GLOVER. Yes; I went to college at North Clark University in +Worcester, Mass., and I later went to the University of Wisconsin. +I completed a master's degree there and a great deal of work on a +doctor's degree. + +Mr. JENNER. So you have a bachelor of arts degree? + +Mr. GLOVER. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. And master's degree and you have completed a good deal of +work on a Ph. D.? + +Mr. GLOVER. Right. + +Mr. JENNER. You were first married when? + +Mr. GLOVER. 1940. + +Mr. JENNER. Where were you residing then? + +Mr. GLOVER. At that time I was residing in Worcester, Mass. + +Mr. JENNER. What was your wife's maiden name? + +Mr. GLOVER. The name was Mary Elizabeth Butler. + +Mr. JENNER. She was a resident of Worcester, was she? + +Mr. GLOVER. She was a resident of Worcester. + +Mr. JENNER. And was a native-born American? + +Mr. GLOVER. Yes; she was. + +Mr. JENNER. How many children do you have by that marriage? + +Mr. GLOVER. I have one. + +Mr. JENNER. He is with his mother, is he? + +Mr. GLOVER. He is with his mother now in Pennsylvania; yes. + +Mr. JENNER. That marriage was terminated in divorce when? + +Mr. GLOVER. In Texas last year, 1963, in June, I believe it was, the +29th. + +Mr. JENNER. All right, had you been separated from your wife prior to +that time? + +Mr. GLOVER. Yes; I had been separated. + +Mr. JENNER. When did the separation occur? + +Mr. GLOVER. The separation occurred on approximately September 1 of +1962. + +Mr. JENNER. Where were you residing then? + +Mr. GLOVER. I was residing at 4449 Potomac. + +Mr. JENNER. Did your wife leave this vicinity then? + +Mr. GLOVER. Yes; she left this vicinity then. + +Mr. JENNER. And returned to where or went to where? + +Mr. GLOVER. She didn't return. The circumstances of her leaving were +that my son is very interested avocationally in ice skating, and he had +earned enough money selling the Times Herald, the local newspaper, to +take him for 1 summer's ice skating, and it so happened that he ended +up in Hershey, Pa., which has a teacher or pro who is very good, and +the circumstances just happened that way. + +Mr. JENNER. Indoor arena rink? + +Mr. GLOVER. Yes; he stayed there for the summer and he wanted to stay +there beyond that time very badly. He wanted to continue his ice +skating under some such situation as he had there, and my wife and I +had not gotten along too well, and it seemed like a natural time to +make a separation, so she left and went to Pennsylvania during this +time at approximately the end of the summer and stayed there, and I +filed for a divorce. + +Again I am not sure of the actual date, but approximately December 1 +of that year, 1962. And the divorce was granted in the summer in 1963, +approximately June 29, of 1963. + +Mr. JENNER. And you remarried when? + +Mr. GLOVER. I remarried August the 26th of this same year, 1963. + +Mr. JENNER. And remained in the same quarters, did you? + +Mr. GLOVER. No; I moved about April 20 to 5723 Southwestern Boulevard +after having sold the house at 4449 Potomac, which I owned, and made +the divorce settlement. + +Then I moved to 5723 Southwestern Boulevard where I rented a house with +two colleagues of mine where I worked, who were all unattached, since +I had to move from 4449 Potomac. One moved in on December 1, 1962, and +another one on January 1, 1963. + +Mr. JENNER. Now when you and your wife separated, that is when she went +to Pennsylvania, Hershey, Pa., with her son for this period, did anyone +join you in your quarters as roommates or persons living with you? + +Mr. GLOVER. Well, these are the people I just referred to. One man, +Richard L. Pierce, who works with me in the same section of my +laboratory, joined me December 1, of 1962, and the second man, Volkmar +Schmidt, who came from Germany and worked with the company as a +geologist, came to live with me approximately January 1. + +It was an arrangement we tried out to see if there would be mutual +satisfaction. + +Mr. JENNER. Do you have a German derivation? + +Mr. GLOVER. I do not. + +Mr. JENNER. What is yours? + +Mr. GLOVER. My background on that respect, my derivation would be +English on both sides. I know on the Glover side it is English and goes +back down to the 1700, but I don't know the other side very well. + +Mr. JENNER. All right. What is your occupation, profession, business or +avocation? + +Mr. GLOVER. Well, occupation is as a chemist working with the geology +group in the exploration section of Socony Mobil Oil Co., Field +Research Laboratory here in Dallas. + +Mr. JENNER. Your master's degree was in what? + +Mr. GLOVER. It was in soil science. + +Mr. JENNER. Involved chemistry? + +Mr. GLOVER. Involved chemistry of fine grain material such as soil, +sediments, and so forth. + +This is the reason that I am working where I am, because of the kind +of work I do, in the geology section. It is not soil per se, but using +techniques in dealing with problems similar to soil problems. + +Mr. JENNER. And in turn, related to the discovery or production or +recovery of oil? + +Mr. GLOVER. It is related particularly to the exploration for oil. That +is the study of the mechanical constituents of rocks in which the oil +is found. + +I would say involving research work in order to find some more easily +recognized signs of oil. That is the long term objective. + +Mr. JENNER. I would say this to you, sir. It is common that witnesses +can, especially in this type of examination where the witness sits +across the desk from a questioner, to drop his voice. So to the extent +that you can recall it, you won't do it all the time, keep your voice +up. + +Mr. GLOVER. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. Are you acquainted with a Mr. George De Mohrenschildt? + +Mr. GLOVER. Yes; I am. + +Mr. JENNER. When and under what circumstances did you first become +acquainted with Mr. George De Mohrenschildt? + +Mr. GLOVER. Again this is connected with my ice skating activities +which I didn't mention. I mentioned my son's. + +One of my avocations is ice skating. I do not know the exact time, +but sometime in the period, I would say 1956 to 1959, when I have +been ice skating, I met Mrs. De Mohrenschildt on the ice rink skating +by herself. She skated a considerable time, maybe, probably, part of +a year, and then later she brought Mr. De Mohrenschildt there, and +that is the first acquaintance I had with them. This was a casual +acquaintance. + +Mr. JENNER. Is this the present Mrs. De Mohrenschildt? + +Mr. GLOVER. This is the present Mrs. De Mohrenschildt. + +Mr. JENNER. Was she then married to Mr. De Mohrenschildt? + +Mr. GLOVER. I have no way of knowing. I wouldn't have thought of this +particularly except in conversation with the FBI. By their reaction, +what he said, apparently there was some question about this, but I +wouldn't have known that myself. I assumed she was. + +Mr. JENNER. Well, in order that we are certain we have the same lady in +mind, did you learn what her first name was? + +Mr. GLOVER. Yes. The name she wanted to be called was "Jon," the French +J-e-a-n-n-e. + +I didn't see it written down, but she insisted on her being called +"Jon," the French. + +Mr. JENNER. By American, it is Jeanne? + +Mr. GLOVER. Jeanne, right. + +Mr. JENNER. When you talk about ice skating, you mean figure skating? + +Mr. GLOVER. Figure skating; right. + +Mr. JENNER. This relationship, at least for a time, was relatively +casual? + +Mr. GLOVER. It was very casual. In fact, they did not seem very much +interested in other people. + +Mr. JENNER. Did that acquaintance ripen eventually into a friendship, +or at least a closer relationship than that you have indicated? + +Mr. GLOVER. Well, there are two phases of my acquaintance with them. +The first phase ended when they didn't come to the skating rink any +more, and I cannot recall when this was. But if it were necessary to +find out, I could possibly find out more in detail, because they joined +the Dallas Figure Skating Club which I belonged to, and it was after I +had belonged to that organization a year or so that they left. + +Mr. JENNER. Would you give me for the moment your best recollection as +to when the first period of time to which you have reference ended? + +Mr. GLOVER. Ended? + +Mr. JENNER. That is, the casual acquaintance. + +Mr. GLOVER. I really honestly don't know when that was. + +Mr. JENNER. Maybe we can get at it this way. What is your present +recollection as to the intervening span in which you had either little +or no contact with the De Mohrenschildts? How long did that run? + +Mr. GLOVER. Well, I know when I met them--I think I know when I met +them again. This was in connection with playing tennis. And that must +have been in the spring, I believe, of 1962, sometime in that period. + +Mr. JENNER. You and your former wife were still living together at that +time? + +Mr. GLOVER. Yes, that's right; my former wife was still in Dallas. + +Mr. JENNER. Would you say that the intervening period when you had a +little or no contact with the De Mohrenschildts covered as much as a +couple of years? + +Mr. GLOVER. I would say that is what I think, but I could check this +point if necessary. + +Mr. JENNER. We will let you know as to whether we want you to do that. + +That acquaintance was then renewed under what circumstances? + +Mr. GLOVER. I went to a party at a friend's house one night. + +Mr. JENNER. Who is the friend? + +Mr. GLOVER. The man's name is Lauriston C. Marshall. + +Mr. JENNER. That is a new name to me. + +Mr. GLOVER. Well, he is called Larry, but his name, I am quite sure, +was---- + +Mr. JENNER. L-a-u-r-i-s-t-o-n C. M-a-r-s-h-a-l-l? + +Mr. GLOVER. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. All right. + +Mr. GLOVER. He lived in Garland here. + +Mr. JENNER. Garland, Tex.? + +Mr. GLOVER. Right. This is not where I met the De Mohrenschildts, but +that is the connection. I was at his house and I met Sam Ballen. And +something was said about playing tennis, and it turns out that he likes +to play tennis and I also like to play tennis. I hadn't played very +much since I had been in Dallas, but I always wanted to play more than +I had a chance to, and he said, "How about tomorrow morning?" and I +agreed, okay. + +So when I went to play tennis the next morning, it turned out that the +other two people involved in this match of four people, doubles, was +the De Mohrenschildts. + +Mr. JENNER. You played doubles in tennis with him the next morning, +Sunday morning? + +Mr. GLOVER. This sounds right. I believe it was a Saturday night party, +and I was playing Sunday morning. I believe that is what it was. + +Mr. JENNER. And your friendship with the De Mohrenschildts blossomed? + +Mr. GLOVER. Well, we played tennis an awful lot more. That was the +basis. + +Mr. JENNER. You say the double, the lady who played tennis with you on +that initial occasion, was the same lady who had accompanied Mr. De +Mohrenschildt earlier on the ice rink? + +Mr. GLOVER. That's correct. + +Mr. JENNER. Will you tell me, please, and I want you to tell me in your +own words. I will try not to interrupt you, or at least I will keep it +to a minimum, what you learned about George De Mohrenschildt first? + +Mr. GLOVER. You mean what I learned about him from my complete +acquaintance with him? + +Mr. JENNER. Yes. + +Mr. GLOVER. What he was like and so forth? + +Mr. JENNER. What he was like, what you learned from him, if you can +indicate information you received directly from him as to his travels, +if any, as to his work, as to any associations he had. + +Mr. GLOVER. Well, it is pretty hard to produce some order out of it, +because I never got a complete picture. But he had apparently, and I +believe this to be true, had come back from a trip to South America. I +mean to Mexico where he had walked from the north edge of Mexico down +to Central America, to Panama. + +Mr. JENNER. Your information in this respect was obtained directly from +him? + +Mr. GLOVER. Directly from him and also by films which he had showing +his trip, and also the fact that he apparently corresponded with Sam +Ballen during the time that he had been down there, and that was +mentioned, the fact that he had corresponded. + +Mr. JENNER. Who mentioned it, Ballen or De Mohrenschildt? + +Mr. GLOVER. I couldn't be sure about that, sir, but from one or the +other people, I am sure I got the distinct impression that they +corresponded. + +He sent letters to Sam Ballen during the time he was there, so I do +believe, and I have no reason not to believe, that he made such a trip, +seeing the film. + +Mr. JENNER. You saw the film? + +Mr. GLOVER. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. You also talked to Mr. De Mohrenschildt, or he with you? + +Mr. GLOVER. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. You had conversations with him about his trip to Mexico, +and he told you about it? + +Mr. GLOVER. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. Did he exhibit the film? + +Mr. GLOVER. He exhibited the film. + +Mr. JENNER. Was Mrs. De Mohrenschildt the lady called Jeanne and who +preferred to be called "Jon" (Jeanne)? + +Mr. GLOVER. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. Was she present when the film was shown? + +Mr. GLOVER. She was present. + +Mr. JENNER. And you also had conversation with her? + +Mr. GLOVER. Yes, sir; I did. + +Mr. JENNER. Did she confirm, as well as Mr. De Mohrenschildt, their +trip, walking trip into Mexico? + +Mr. GLOVER. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. Was anything said about the De Mohrenschildts, either of +them having any--having met any officials with the Soviet Union? + +Mr. GLOVER. During that trip? + +Mr. JENNER. Yes. + +Mr. GLOVER. No, sir; not that I remember. + +Mr. JENNER. Not at all? + +Mr. GLOVER. Nothing was said. + +Mr. JENNER. You have no impression on that score, then? + +Mr. GLOVER. I cannot remember any such thing was said. + +Mr. JENNER. I take it then, it is your impression that this was a +walking pleasure trip, a vacation, that sort of thing in which he and +Mrs. De Mohrenschildt traveled from the border--that would be the north +border of Mexico down as far as Panama? + +Mr. GLOVER. Yes, but I would amend your statement a little bit. You +said pleasure trip. It was in a sense, the way I understood the reason +for this was, that De Mohrenschildt had a son and daughter by his, +according to him, I believe, last marriage. The son had died of cystic +fibrosis, and I had the impression that he was very much attached to +his son, and this was one of the reasons that he sort of threw up +everything. I had been given to believe he was in the oil consulting +business. + +Mr. JENNER. You were given to believe that De Mohrenschildt was in the +oil consulting business? + +Mr. GLOVER. Previous to that and after that time, too, and that he had +thrown everything up and done this. He said that he and someone else +started to make this trip at a much earlier time. I am not sure what +time it was, but it was a long time. Seems to me he said they tried to +drive a Model "T" Ford and hadn't been successful. + +Mr. JENNER. That would be quite a long time ago? + +Mr. GLOVER. Yes. That might be older than De Mohrenschildt is. I don't +know when he came here, really, of course. + +Mr. JENNER. All right. + +Mr. GLOVER. But anyway, maybe it is a Model "A" Ford. I really am not +sure about that point. It doesn't sound right, a Model "T" Ford. + +Mr. JENNER. A Model "T," say that is my error, and the Model "A"---- + +Mr. GLOVER. Model "A" came in 1927 and 1928. + +Mr. JENNER. 1927, 1928, and 1929. I was about a junior in college then. + +Mr. GLOVER. Yes. I am a little bit younger than that. I was 10 years +old in 1927, but I distinctly remember the Model "T's." I am not sure, +but the important thing as far as my recollection was, he said he +wanted to take this trip and started to take it with another fellow and +he didn't get very far, but then he this time did take the trip and the +feeling I had was the motivation was--he had been completely broken +up by his son dying and he wanted to do this a long time ago, he went +ahead and did it. + +And his wife wanted to do it with him and they did it. + +Mr. JENNER. So the impression you obtained from the conversation you +heard overall was that the trip was not motivated by any objective or +plan to have any contact with any persons connected with the Soviet +Union, or representing the Soviet Union? + +Mr. GLOVER. No; I did not get any such impression. + +One other thing, I did get the impression, he mentioned specifically +that he had some business along the way, which was looking at old +mining areas. + +Now I got the impression, although it was a hazy one, that he was +actually being paid by some private concern to look at old mining areas +as he passed through there. + +Mr. JENNER. All right. Did you have any impression of any other trips +that Mr. De Mohrenschildt made outside of this country? + +Mr. GLOVER. Yes. He told me that after the war he was on a, I don't +know whether he was connected--somehow he said with a State Department +venture which he was doing something with regard to advising in oil +matters in Yugoslavia. + +Mr. JENNER. And that he had gone to Yugoslavia? + +Mr. GLOVER. He had gone to Yugoslavia, he told me that. He described +the living there when he was there, drinking lots of wine in Yugoslavia +with women and so forth, and it wasn't very descriptive, but from what +he said, I got a very distinct impression he had been there, yes. + +Mr. JENNER. Did you get an impression that he was married at that time? + +Mr. GLOVER. I did. In fact, the impression I have, and I am not +sure exactly where it all comes from, when I first met Mrs. De +Mohrenschildt, she was alone, and her husband was never with her, and +she was not very cordial at all. + +You saw someone skating around and you'd just say a word and she was +not particularly cordial. + +And even later, I am not sure exactly the amount of time, but maybe a +season of skating, he appeared. + +And I assumed afterwards, I am not sure what basis I had, that this was +the time that he was away in Yugoslavia, and he came back. And I think +they referred to that afterwards, as if that were the case. + +Mr. JENNER. In this early period was anything else said to you +affirmatively that Jeanne or "Jon" De Mohrenschildt was his wife at +that time? + +Mr. GLOVER. When I come to think of it, I don't know of any specific +instance where there was a big point made of them being married, but I +assumed, since they were living together, and I just assumed that. + +Mr. JENNER. How do you know they were living together? + +Mr. GLOVER. At what time? + +Mr. JENNER. The earlier period. + +Mr. GLOVER. The earlier period, no. The later period I didn't live too +far away from them. I would go to their house and have a glass of beer +after the tennis match, and later I went to their house quite often. + +Mr. JENNER. The tennis match was the second period? + +Mr. GLOVER. The first period I don't have any proof whatsoever except +it seemed to me they were giving the same name. + +Mr. JENNER. They were? + +Mr. GLOVER. I believe so. Now that could be checked with the Dallas +Figure Skating Club where they were members. I assumed they were +husband and wife. + +Mr. JENNER. What did you learn as to George De Mohrenschildt's past in +connection with whether he had been married more than once? + +Mr. GLOVER. He said he had been married four times, including this. + +Mr. JENNER. Including the marriage to Jeanne or Jon? + +Mr. GLOVER. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. So he had had three marriages prior to this time? + +Mr. GLOVER. That is what he said. He used to talk about that quite +often, make remarks to the fact that he had been married four times. + +Mr. JENNER. You have mentioned a son who died. Did he say anything +about having any other children? + +Mr. GLOVER. A daughter. + +Mr. JENNER. A daughter? + +Mr. GLOVER. Same wife. + +Mr. JENNER. Was anything said about whether she was alive or dead? + +Mr. GLOVER. Yes; he talked quite a bit about her. + +Mr. JENNER. As being alive or dead? + +Mr. GLOVER. As being alive. + +Mr. JENNER. Was there an occasion eventually in which there was a +discussion in which he indicated that she had been--she had become +deceased? + +Mr. GLOVER. No. He never indicated anything to me that she had become +deceased. He talked quite a bit about her and was still talking about +custody of the daughter who was remaining with the mother, who was +trying to prevent any possible change in custody. That was right up to +the last I knew him. + +Mr. JENNER. Do you recall whether at any time you stated to the FBI +that he had two children and they had both died? + +Mr. GLOVER. I stated that he had two children? + +Mr. JENNER. Yes. + +Mr. GLOVER. And they had both died? + +Mr. JENNER. Did die, yes. + +Mr. GLOVER. I did not state such. + +Mr. JENNER. Had two children by the marriage to Wynne Sharples. + +Mr. GLOVER. The last name Sharples is correct, and I remember the +nickname "Deedee" of the woman who he said he was married to by whom he +had two children. + +I did not say to the FBI that he had two children who died. I have +said he had two children one of which died who apparently had cystic +fibrosis. + +Mr. JENNER. All right, did he mention any other relative of his? + +Mr. GLOVER. I was asked this question by the FBI, and I believe he +mentioned--I know he mentioned a brother--a brother who taught school, +and I believe it is Dartmouth, N.H., and I think he taught history. + +Anyhow, he taught some subject or related subject on liberal arts, but +I don't know. + +Mr. JENNER. He did mention Dartmouth? + +Mr. GLOVER. I couldn't be sure. + +Mr. JENNER. Could have--could he have mentioned Princeton instead of +Dartmouth? + +Mr. GLOVER. I don't think so, because I remember it being in that area +up in the upper New England States, somewhere. + +Mr. JENNER. Was there any discussion of Jeanne or "Jon's" background? + +Mr. GLOVER. Yes. The impression I got of her background was that +she was of White Russian stock and came through China where she was +married, and then came to this country. That is the impression I got. + +Mr. JENNER. That she had come from Russia and gone to China? + +Mr. GLOVER. I don't know whether anyone said White Russia, but +whether they said that or not, I got the impression that she had come +originally from Russia. + +Mr. JENNER. Did you learn anything about--perhaps I'd better so pursue +Mrs. De Mohrenschildt. She had come through China? + +Mr. GLOVER. She lived in China and was brought up there as a young +girl, married, presumably, a Chinese man, and then came to this +country. That is the story I got, and apparently from what she said, he +did not adjust. + +Mr. JENNER. She came here with her husband? + +Mr. GLOVER. That is the impression I got. + +Mr. JENNER. You had the impression that he was a Chinese? + +Mr. GLOVER. I had that impression. + +Mr. JENNER. After they arrived here, the husband did not adjust well? + +Mr. GLOVER. Right, and it led to their breakup. + +Mr. JENNER. And they were then divorced? + +Mr. GLOVER. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. Or at least broke up, as far as you know? + +Mr. GLOVER. That is the impression I got. + +Mr. JENNER. And that her marriage to George De Mohrenschildt was her +second marriage? + +Mr. GLOVER. That is the impression I got. + +Mr. JENNER. Did you learn whether Mrs. De Mohrenschildt had any +business or occupation herself? + +Mr. GLOVER. Yes, I did. She had worked some time during--at the time +that I first met her, she worked as a designer of clothes. + +Mr. JENNER. For what company? + +Mr. GLOVER. I don't know what company, but she worked here in Dallas +at the time. I believe at the time she joined the Figure Skating Club, +someone learned that. I don't think she told me particularly, but +someone, that she did this. + +Mr. JENNER. Did you ever have a conversation on the subject with her +which served to confirm the report that you had obtained from someone +else? That is, that she worked as a designer here in Dallas. + +Mr. GLOVER. I cannot recall at the time of the first meeting with her, +but at a later time, from things that were said, I am quite sure that +she referred to that time when she worked, yes, here in Dallas. + +Mr. JENNER. Give me your general impression of her. What kind of person +was and is she? + +Mr. GLOVER. Well, the most obvious thing about her that I can recall +was her very, very great desire to help and dominate people, to help +solve their problems, is the thing that always impressed me about her. + +She had one daughter, which I haven't mentioned, apparently by this +previous marriage, who grew up and who I met one time when she was +passing through. + +Mr. JENNER. That is, passing through Dallas? + +Mr. GLOVER. With her husband. That was during the later period. + +Mr. JENNER. She was married and lived somewhere else in this country? + +Mr. GLOVER. All I know is that daughter and husband came from a Mexican +trip and were going to Alaska. + +And she had this one daughter who she talked very much about, how she +had brought her up and so forth, and she seemed to have a desire to +sort of help people out and sort of arrange their affairs. + +She tried one time to give me advice on my family situation, at +which time, as one would say, I told her off, told her that I had my +own ideas about what I wanted to do about the situation and was not +interested in hers at all. But that is the most outstanding impression +I have of her, always trying to do something for someone, arrange +things in some way, sort of an overdeveloped mother tendency, to me. + +Mr. JENNER. Describe the physical characteristics of her, please. + +Mr. GLOVER. Physically, I am depending somewhat on some pictures she +showed. According to her, when she showed pictures in the album. + +Mr. JENNER. I don't mean--are you relating to the pictures to describe +Mrs. De Mohrenschildt? + +Mr. GLOVER. No; well, I will just leave that out, if you prefer. + +Mr. JENNER. Describe the physical characteristics of Mrs. De +Mohrenschildt as you knew her, saw her. + +Mr. GLOVER. Well, she was a person who looked in fairly good physical +shape. + +Mr. JENNER. About how old? + +Mr. GLOVER. She looked like she was about 40 years old. She was +accumulating fat on her body which was very noticeable. We played +tennis all the time, and she looked like someone fortyish and was +beginning to get quite a lot of fat. + +Mr. JENNER. What about coloration? + +Mr. GLOVER. Color of hair was brown, medium brown. I don't remember +people's eyes very well. It sort of seems to me like they were blue. I +am not sure. Her height was medium height. + +Mr. JENNER. Medium for a woman and medium for a man differ--what would +you say, five two, or five three or five five? + +Mr. GLOVER. I am not very conscious. I would say five five or five six, +maybe. + +Mr. JENNER. Miss Reporter, would you please stand and tell us how tall +you are? + +The REPORTER. I am five two and a half in my stocking feet and about +five five with heels. + +Mr. JENNER. Having observed the reporter, what is your present +recollection about Mrs. De Mohrenschildt's height. Is she taller or +shorter? + +Mr. GLOVER. I would say her height without her heels or anything was at +least as tall as she is standing now, would be five five or five six +which I said, or possibly taller than that. I am not very sure. + +Mr. JENNER. But she was inclined to be on the heavy side? + +Mr. GLOVER. Slightly. She was getting heavy. + +Mr. JENNER. What would you say she weighed, offhand? + +Mr. GLOVER. She talked about that when we were playing tennis. I can't +remember. I really don't know. Maybe, I would say, 110 to 120, or so. + +Mr. JENNER. She was five five and she weighed 110 pounds? She would be +awfully thin. + +Mr. GLOVER. Well, she must have weighed more than that. I am not very +conscious about that. + +(Comments off the record.) + +Mr. GLOVER. Maybe she would be 130 or so. Maybe she weighed a little +bit more than that. + +Mr. JENNER. Did Mr. De Mohrenschildt speak to you of his background? + +Mr. GLOVER. He spoke somewhat of it. I didn't get a very clear picture +of the exact tracings of his background. I got a picture of him having +been born in Sweden. He said he came from Sweden. And having lived in +Russia for a short time, and then having left there. And the next thing +I remember him saying was that he fought with the Polish National Army +sometime in the Second World War, and had left the army. Now I am not +quite sure when that was, when the army was disbanded, when Hitler +invaded, or some other time. I am not sure. It must have been then, I +guess, but that is the hazy impression I have of that part of it. + +Mr. JENNER. At the time of the invasion of Poland by Hitler, which was +roughly September of 1939, De Mohrenschildt then left Poland? + +Mr. GLOVER. Well, he left the Polish Army at the same time. I really +don't know for sure when that was. I didn't think very much about it. + +Mr. JENNER. Did he say he came directly to this country at that time? + +Mr. GLOVER. I do not have any impression of him saying he came directly +here, no. The next thing I remember about his telling his background +was that he came here to this country. + +Mr. JENNER. Here in Texas? + +Mr. GLOVER. First he came to New York, according to his story. And I +remember one comment he made about that. He was wined and dined and +passed around to people who he knew in some way, and this was fine, +but when he came to find a job, he had a lot of trouble. And the next +period I remember is that he was at the University of Texas, and I +assume he was going to school and got a degree in petroleum engineering. + +Mr. JENNER. But you are not so sure about that? You have the impression +that he was a person who had the benefit of higher education? + +Mr. GLOVER. Yes; I assumed that he had had at least some school +knowledge of the subject of petroleum engineering or petroleum in +general. + +Mr. JENNER. He did say that he attended the university in this State? + +Mr. GLOVER. Yes; he said he attended the University of Texas, I am +quite sure. At least I got that impression. I am not sure of his exact +words. He talked about being a student, so I guess I just assumed that. +I don't know whether he said specifically he attended as a full-time +student. + +Mr. JENNER. Describe George De Mohrenschildt. + +Mr. GLOVER. He is a heavy set rather Mr. Atlas type. + +Mr. JENNER. Atlas or Adonis? + +Mr. GLOVER. I notice that he is still around, Mr. Atlas. Very healthy +looking specimen. Tall and heavy set. Little bit clumsy in his +movements. + +Mr. JENNER. A big man, in other words? + +Mr. GLOVER. Big man, yes. + +Mr. JENNER. And handsome? + +Mr. GLOVER. Well, that is a matter of what you call handsome. + +Mr. JENNER. You described him in that respect. + +Mr. GLOVER. Well, I think he was a, he might be called handsome by +somebody. I would call him a good heavy-looking physical specimen. + +Mr. JENNER. Color of hair? + +Mr. GLOVER. Hair was some kind of brown. + +Mr. JENNER. Had a good crop of hair? + +Mr. GLOVER. Yes; a lot of curly, wavy hair. + +Mr. JENNER. What about his personality? + +Mr. GLOVER. He was a very great mixture of things. + +Mr. JENNER. Tell us about it. + +Mr. GLOVER. He was a very cynical sort of person. He was a Bohemian +sort of person. + +Mr. JENNER. What do you mean by that? I think I know what you mean, but +what do you mean by "Bohemian type of person"? + +Mr. GLOVER. I mean he lived the kind of life where he went the way he +wanted to go and he did what he wanted to do and he didn't care very +much about what anyone said. + +He wanted to play tennis, morning, noon and night. He wanted to dress +the way he wanted to. He was not very conforming in his physical +dress or in his appearance or anything else. But the main thing that +impressed me most about him was his immaturity. He acted like a fellow +who is in his teens, who was reacting against everything in the world +and never settled down, and acted like this minor revolution which +occurs in most people, of being against authority and so forth, and +wanted to travel over the world and do things himself. He is sort of a +revolution inside of him. It never stops. He was sort of a rebel. + +Mr. JENNER. Would you say he really had somewhat adolescent tendencies +and had never grown up? + +Mr. GLOVER. I would say that he was very much so; yes. + +Mr. JENNER. In your time and my time, we talked about "Joe College." Is +that expression familiar to you? + +Mr. GLOVER. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. Was he that kind of a person, breezy? + +Mr. GLOVER. Yes; very much so. Very outspoken. His language sometimes +wasn't very nice. He said anything he wanted to say. + +Mr. JENNER. Was he, in his conversation, somewhat of a braggart? + +Mr. GLOVER. Yes; he was. + +Mr. JENNER. Talked about himself a great deal and what his +accomplishments were and so forth? + +Mr. GLOVER. Yes; he did. He was somewhat of a braggart. He did, like +many, many people, he embroidered things. I had the feeling one could +never place full stock in exactly all the things he said. He was like a +lot of people, he embroidered things. Not so much a braggart exactly as +just one who just talked a lot about everything. I think, yes; he was +sort of a braggart in a way. + +Mr. JENNER. What would you say were his attitudes and his +relationships, first, with the male sex, and second with the ladies? + +Mr. GLOVER. Female sex? + +Mr. JENNER. Overall attitude. + +Mr. GLOVER. His overall attitude, one of his preoccupations was sex, +seemingly, the female sex. He used to talk about every female he saw +go by. He would ride along in his car and blow the horn at any female +he saw going down the street. And his attitude toward males, as far as +I know, there was no particular, nothing particular to be said on that +subject. + +Mr. JENNER. But he showed considerable interest in ladies? + +Mr. GLOVER. Yes; he showed a very, very great interest in them, sort of +a preoccupation thing with him. + +Mr. JENNER. Did he seem to ingratiate himself with ladies when he was +in their presence? + +Mr. GLOVER. Yes; he was even somewhat rougher than that. He would act +very, very aggressive toward them, very aggressive toward them. I don't +know whether his bite was as bad as his bark. I never saw any evidence +of it, but he was very, very rough and aggressive with people. + +Mr. JENNER. Would you give me your present overall impression of George +De Mohrenschildt insofar as character and integrity are concerned? + +Mr. GLOVER. Well, he was a man who obviously very much embroidered +things he said. And also from his political opinions, which he gave out +from time to time, didn't show very clearly where he stood. + +Mr. JENNER. Now would you give the circumstances and your--first give +me your overall impression as to his political views. And I mean +political in the sense of, first, I mean political in the sense of the +views he entertained with respect to governments in general, and in +particular, I mean as against any political party. + +Mr. GLOVER. Well, he said--the main thing there is his cynical attitude +towards things. I don't think he respected any kind of authority. I +think that he is sort of apolitical. He sort of resented having to +conform very much. But his political views, as far as our system versus +communism, for instance, it wasn't very clear how he stood. He made +remarks which suggested that he didn't like the way the Communists were +treated. Very pointed remarks, sometimes. + +Mr. JENNER. He didn't like the way the Communists were treated? + +Mr. GLOVER. Yes; he didn't like the treatment that some Communists were +given. I can give you an example. + +Mr. JENNER. You mean in this country or in the Soviet Union? + +Mr. GLOVER. Well, I was thinking of outside this country. + +Mr. JENNER. All right. + +Mr. GLOVER. So I would say that the whole question---- + +Mr. JENNER. What did he say in that respect which gave you that +impression? + +Mr. GLOVER. Well, I remember that at the time of Castro and Cuba, when +the incident occurred of removing the Russian missiles---- + +Mr. JENNER. Missile sites? + +Mr. GLOVER. Yes; he was very much upset about this, and he was very +angry at Kennedy for doing what he did. + +Mr. JENNER. What did he say, as best you can give us in substance? I +know you can't remember the words, but in substance, what he said. + +Mr. GLOVER. Well, the substance of what he said, he didn't like what +Kennedy was doing at all. And the reason he gave, as far as I can +remember, was the possible involvement in a nuclear war. + +Mr. JENNER. You seek to imply that De Mohrenschildt was opposed to what +Kennedy was doing, not because of dislike for Castro, but rather that +he feared we would be, those actions might involve us in a nuclear war? + +Mr. GLOVER. Well, in this particular point, yes. He also remarked, +which shows that he had sympathy with Castro--it is not possible for me +to separate those exactly, but in this particular thing, I remember one +time being very, very excited about the missile business in Cuba, and +this business came up that that would lead us into a nuclear war. In +other words, he was suggesting that he was sympathetic with Castro, at +least I thought so--well, Castro is all right, he can't do any harm, he +is just a little guy, and this is the general impression I got. Again, +those may not be the exact expressions that he may have used. + +Mr. JENNER. Would you give me an example that he was sympathetic with +what Castro represented? + +Mr. GLOVER. He certainly never, in my acquaintance with him, tried to +make out a case for the Communist system against our system. It was +just sort of his shouting off about this thing I just described. And +also I remember one very distinctly, which I told the FBI. One time +there was a cartoon in the newspaper which pictured Khrushchev with the +face of a pig, a caricature, and George was very, very indignant about +them doing that. And I said to George, well, he does look like a pig. +And after all, the caricature has been around since the days of the +famous Frenchman---- + +Mr. JENNER. Lautrec? + +Mr. GLOVER. No; it isn't Lautrec. It's Daumier. I don't know, but that +is what I was thinking, and he does look like one. And so he showed on +this point that he resented something very much about this. + +Mr. JENNER. Did you ever get into any political discussions with De +Mohrenschildt? + +Mr. GLOVER. There is not very much I remember, because as I say, there +was never any real discussion about such issues, that amounted to +anything, but there were occasions when he seemed to agree to what I +consider a reasonable view. + +For instance, things in Russia at the present time. I recall one +instance once before that there was a discussion--whether it came from +a remark of a public figure in the press or somebody else who may have +been present, but there was a discussion about the fact that under the +Khrushchev regime things had loosened up somewhat in Russia. Whoever +was responsible for it, I think it was a public figure at the time who +was talking, said that it was very true, things had loosened up in +Russia, but how does the Russian feel about this. The answer was that +the Russians didn't feel that it is necessarily going to stay that way +very long. I remember talking about this in the presence of George and +he seemed to be quite agreeable on this idea. + +Mr. JENNER. When is the last time you saw De Mohrenschildt? + +Mr. GLOVER. I saw him sometime in the early part of May, I believe. I +moved into my house at 5723 Southwestern about the 20th of April, and I +had taken all his furniture which he had, looking for a place to store, +and we three fellows were needing furniture, because I sent all my +furniture to my former wife, all the good furniture, so he was going to +let us use the furniture for as long as we wanted, to save him storage +fees and help us out. We moved it over, and then he finally, on leaving +to go to Haiti, before he was going, he dropped by the house sometime +in the day he departed, I think it was in the last few days of May, +first week or two---- + +Mr. JENNER. 1963? + +Mr. GLOVER. 1963, right. He came by the house looking for something +which had been stored in some of the boxes, and they were loaded with +their trailer and cargo to load on the boat in Florida where they going +to take off from. They were sending goods by boat and flying themselves. + +Mr. JENNER. That's the last time you have seen him? + +Mr. GLOVER. That is the last time I have seen him. + +Mr. JENNER. Have you heard from him at any time? + +Mr. GLOVER. Have I heard from him? + +Mr. JENNER. What has been the extent of that contact, first? + +Mr. GLOVER. Well, he wrote to me and his wife wrote to me telling about +how things were going in Haiti, and I have replied very little to him. +I have replied, I don't know how many times, maybe once when they first +went down there, and I replied after January 1, when I moved. I shipped +most of his furniture to a storage, keeping some back that I can still +use in the new house, and I wrote to him telling him, I told him I +didn't need the furniture, and I haven't corresponded with him very +much. + +Mr. JENNER. In that correspondence he--has he given you any information +as to what they are doing in Haiti? Did you have any information before +they left for Haiti as to what they were, or thought they were, going +to do? + +Mr. GLOVER. Yes. I have the information from talking very much about +his Haiti venture, and the impression I got was somewhat hazy, but the +first part was that he was going to be doing a geological survey for +chemicals and minerals. + +Mr. JENNER. For what? + +Mr. GLOVER. Minerals of economic value. + +Mr. JENNER. Did he indicate the group or company for which he was to do +this work, or was it independent? + +Mr. GLOVER. I had the impression that he was the one who was running +the show himself, but he was associated with some other businessman +that was connected with it, that besides this initial venture of doing +this chemical survey, they were also going to do other things and set +up business ventures. That is what the other part involved, and I had +the impression that this all tied together. + +Mr. JENNER. This was in the nature, as near as you can recall, of a +joint venture of some kind? + +Mr. GLOVER. Yes; except he gave me the impression that he was really +running the show, and I also had the impression, which he didn't +emphasize, but that someone else was providing the money if there was +any money needed. + +Mr. JENNER. Give us your knowledge and also your impression of the De +Mohrenschildt's financial status when they resided here in Dallas? + +Mr. GLOVER. I had the impression that they didn't have very much money, +because he had been away, and the time he came back, the oil consulting +business had gone down pretty much. This was about the time when the +companies were reorganizing and they were tightening their belts, +and it just wasn't such good times, and he apparently had trouble in +getting any oil consultant jobs. This was the impression I got from him +and he didn't do very much, except I got the impression that he might +have owned some leases, and he---- + +Mr. JENNER. Oil leases? + +Mr. GLOVER. Oil leases. And he talked about one particular one where +there was litigation about it. And I got the impression that he didn't +have very much money, except possibly some money coming in from the +oil leases and they didn't have lots of food. They didn't have anything +but very simple food, simple clothes. They hadn't bought anything new. +They had clothes from time before, which were quite expensive, but they +did, however, have a nice car. But they didn't spend a lot of money and +didn't seem to have a lot. + +Mr. JENNER. Would you say they attempted to live frugally? + +Mr. GLOVER. Yes; I would say they attempted to live frugally. + +Mr. JENNER. Speaking there about attire, in this connection, as +evidence of their financial status or condition, do you recall +mentioning to the FBI their tennis clothing and from time to time +other clothing was quite informal, even to the extent of not being +appropriate? + +Mr. GLOVER. Well, Mrs. De Mohrenschildt used to wear a bathing suit all +the time when she was playing tennis, one piece bathing suit, in which +the lower half was sort of Bikini like. And George just wore a pair +of shorts. That is accepted attire for a man tennis player. We used +to go to the Dallas Athletic Country Club east of the city to play, +sometimes, because Sam Ballen had a membership, and she was told it is +against the rules to appear on the courts with a bathing suit. + +Mr. JENNER. Tell me about Sam Ballen. Who is he? + +Mr. GLOVER. Sam Ballen, I met him in the way I told you, and he told +me that he had been in the stock market business in New York, and came +here to organize a company which deals in cataloging, and has a library +for oil well logs. These are the records of the physical measurements +made in the oil well, and apparently was very successful in doing this. +I have known him for the past 2 years--I met him actually when I told +you; at Lauriston Marshall's house sometime in 1962, I guess. + +Mr. JENNER. Is Ballen a friend of Mr. De Mohrenschildt? + +Mr. GLOVER. Ballen is a friend of the De Mohrenschildts. + +Mr. JENNER. Was it your impression that they were closely acquainted? + +Mr. GLOVER. Fairly well, yes; closely acquainted. + +Mr. JENNER. Did you play tennis together with Mr. Ballen and the De +Mohrenschildts on more than one occasion? Did you continue to have this +acquaintanceship subsequent to that first occasion about which you have +testified? + +Mr. GLOVER. Very much so; yes. + +Mr. JENNER. Were there occasions thereafter--social events, parties, +visits in the home, and what not, that Sam Ballen participated? + +Mr. GLOVER. Yes; there were occasions, although the main association +was that we played tennis together. We made a very good team. We have +about the same degree of skill at it; yes. + +Mr. JENNER. Does he reside here in Dallas? + +Mr. GLOVER. Yes; he does. + +Mr. JENNER. He still stays--lives here? + +Mr. GLOVER. As far as I know. + +Mr. JENNER. Do you know of a company with which he is associated? + +Mr. GLOVER. I do not know the name offhand. + +Mr. JENNER. And that his name is spelled B-a-l-l-e-n, and his first +name is Samuel? + +Mr. GLOVER. I just call him Sam. I don't know whether his name is +Samuel or not. + +Mr. JENNER. Do you know anything about the De Mohrenschildts' views +toward religion? + +Mr. GLOVER. They are very much against religion, I am quite sure. They +don't think very much of organized religion at all. + +Mr. JENNER. Do you have any information more definite than that? Are +they atheistic, are they just--don't have any feeling one way or the +other? + +Mr. GLOVER. Be hard for me to say. I would think probably that +atheistic would be more the correct term, but I don't recall specific +remarks that they made. + +Mr. JENNER. Did you have any impression, and do you now, as to any +political affiliation of the De Mohrenschildts together or separate? + +Mr. GLOVER. Any kind of affiliation? + +Mr. JENNER. Political or otherwise. + +Mr. GLOVER. Political or otherwise. Well, business, he belongs to the +Petroleum Club. He talks about being down there. And I don't know of +any other organizations. + +Mr. JENNER. Well---- + +Mr. GLOVER. Well, cystic fibrosis, they are very active in that, +because of his son. + +Mr. JENNER. That is a charity organization? + +Mr. GLOVER. A charity organization. And they were very active in this, +because the wife, although it was not her son involved, was very, very +active in that and went from door to door collecting, trying to get +money for this purpose. I don't know of any other organizations. I +remember one time being invited to some kind of charity program over at +the--I don't know how to call it any more, but there is a center for +retarded children over in the Cedar Springs area, which it seems that +a Mexican-American organization was sponsoring, and he invited me to +go to that. I don't know if they were members or not. I think that was +sort of a Mexican-American, I am not sure. + +Mr. JENNER. Did you ever have the impression they ever belonged to any +political organizations? + +Mr. GLOVER. No; I did not have any impression that he belonged to any. + +Mr. JENNER. Did they express what their politics were? That is, say, as +between being Republican or Democrat? + +Mr. GLOVER. I don't recall anything very strong on that subject. + +Mr. JENNER. Did you, during your time here in Dallas, become acquainted +with Marina and Lee Oswald? + +Mr. GLOVER. I did. + +Mr. JENNER. Would you state when it was that you first became +acquainted with either or both of them. + +Mr. GLOVER. I am not able to give a specific time. I met Marina first +at the home of George De Mohrenschildt. + +Mr. JENNER. All right, give me the circumstances and when that occurred +and what led up to it, and what you knew in advance before the meeting +was held, about that? That is, whether this came all of a sudden +without any advance notice, or whether there had been some discussion +with the De Mohrenschildts prior to that time. Just tell me the whole +circumstances leading up to the moment you met Marina. + +Mr. GLOVER. I am not able to state a specific time, but of course it +was somewhere, I am not really able to say whether it was sometime in +December, or in January, or sometime in that time, or in the first part. + +Mr. JENNER. What year? + +Mr. GLOVER. This would be the year 1962-63. + +Mr. JENNER. Now would you fix it with respect to when your wife and you +separated. Was that in December of 1962, did you say? + +Mr. GLOVER. No, we separated before September 1, 1962. I am not able +to say when she (Marina) came to the De Mohrenschildts. Marina came +to the De Mohrenschildts several times. The first time I met her and +subsequent times, she was also there. + +Mr. JENNER. Had there been--has there been any conversation about the +Oswalds with you or in your presence prior to the time that you met +Marina? + +Mr. GLOVER. Well, I am not sure about this, but I would think, yes; +they had mentioned her. + +Mr. JENNER. The De Mohrenschildts had mentioned her? + +Mr. GLOVER. Had mentioned her and her husband and their situation, but +I really do not know a hundred percent that they mentioned it before +I came over there. I rather think they mentioned she was coming there +previous to my meeting her. + +Mr. JENNER. What did they say about her in advance of the meeting? + +Mr. GLOVER. Well, they told about, this is as far as I remember, that +they told about her coming over here with Oswald and, as far as I +remember the impression I got from De Mohrenschildt--it might not have +been entirely from him, it may have come later--Oswald had gone to +Russia to live and had become a citizen. That is the impression I got. +And that he had decided he didn't like Russia and he came back here and +brought his Russian-born wife with him, and were living in Fort Worth, +and they were having trouble getting along, the Oswalds were. + +Mr. JENNER. Getting along with each other? + +Mr. GLOVER. Getting along with each other. + +Mr. JENNER. You remember that distinctly? + +Mr. GLOVER. Yes; I remember that very distinctly, because they were +trying to find a place for Marina to stay. + +Mr. JENNER. You learned all this through conversations with the De +Mohrenschildts? + +Mr. GLOVER. Right. + +Mr. JENNER. Is that correct? + +Mr. GLOVER. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. And either or both of them told you that the Oswalds were +not getting along? + +Mr. GLOVER. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. And that they were seeking what for them? + +Mr. GLOVER. They were seeking a place particularly for Marina to stay. +She had a baby. And seeking a place for her to stay where she could +just get a living, because apparently her husband didn't get along with +her, Lee Oswald didn't get along, and I am not sure whether he had lost +his job or something. It was suggested it was financial difficulties, +the main thing, they didn't get along, and were trying to find a place +for her where she could live. + +Mr. JENNER. Did either of the De Mohrenschildts speak Russian? + +Mr. GLOVER. So far as I know, both of them spoke Russian. + +Mr. JENNER. In your presence? + +Mr. GLOVER. Yes; spoke Russian, what I assumed to be Russian. + +Mr. JENNER. What is your command, if any, of the Russian language? + +Mr. GLOVER. Well, I know "Da," but I know very little about it. I have +started to study Russian in connection with scientific work, because it +is very valuable to be able to speak Russian, and I have always wanted +to learn to speak Russian, but somehow I never got to do this. It is +very slight, actually, and they both, as far as I know, spoke Russian. + +Mr. JENNER. Now tell us what the occasion was, how it came about that +you met Marina on this first occasion? + +Mr. GLOVER. Well, I am not sure again as to all the details, but I +believe that it was this way. That they told about her and that, I came +over there one night when she was there. I might have been invited to +dinner when she was there, or I might have just come over when she was +there, and they called me during the day and said, "Glover, come over +and meet this woman." + +Mr. JENNER. Your recollection is that either George or Jeanne called +you and asked you to come over to their home to meet Marina? + +Mr. GLOVER. Yes; I am quite sure that he invited me to come over there, +because that is usually the way. They were always inviting me to come +over. + +Mr. JENNER. And your impression, this was an evening or during the +daytime? + +Mr. GLOVER. Well, I couldn't be sure, because she would sometimes come +and stay for a day. It might be in the evening or it might have been on +a weekend during the daytime. My impression was, it was in the evening. + +Mr. JENNER. But your impression also was that this time that she had +been invited by them on occasions prior to this particular one? + +Mr. GLOVER. I am not sure whether they had invited her prior or not. + +Mr. JENNER. I'm just asking you what your impression was at that time. + +Mr. GLOVER. At that time that I first saw her? + +Mr. JENNER. Yes; as to whether she had been there to visit the De +Mohrenschildts. + +Mr. GLOVER. My impression was that she probably had, but I really +couldn't be sure about that. + +Mr. JENNER. Anything said that evening indicating how she had reached +the De Mohrenschildt's home? + +Mr. GLOVER. You mean just physically brought there? + +Mr. JENNER. Had they, the De Mohrenschildts gone to pick her up? Had +she gotten there by bus herself? Had she gotten a cab, or how did she +get there? + +Mr. GLOVER. I don't remember specifically how she had been brought +there. + +Mr. JENNER. That subject was not raised so as to give you the +impression one way or the other, is that correct? + +Mr. GLOVER. Well, since she didn't have any means of going herself, I +am sure, whether she came by bus or whether she was brought by them, I +had the impression that she was living in Fort Worth at the time, and +I know she was, because at one time, either this time or another time, +I volunteered, since I had a car, to take her down to the bus station +with the De Mohrenschildts to take her on her way back to Fort Worth, +and the bus wasn't leaving right away, and there was a long wait, so we +took her over to Fort Worth. But I am not sure whether that was this +time or another time. + +Mr. JENNER. Had you had the impression then in that connection that +there were occasions when she had come or gone back by way of bus, or +that she was capable of doing so? + +Mr. GLOVER. That she was capable, yes. + +Mr. JENNER. And she knew enough about bus travel between Fort Worth +and Dallas and the location of the De Mohrenschildt home so that she, +unaccompanied by someone, could travel back and forth? + +Mr. GLOVER. Well, at least go to the Fort Worth bus. I'm not sure about +whether they would pick her up or what. That is the impression I got +from the fact we took her to the bus station and she was supposed to +leave by bus. + +Mr. JENNER. Who was present? Yourself, Marina, and the two De +Mohrenschildts on this occasion? + +Mr. GLOVER. I believe that is correct. + +Mr. JENNER. Anybody else that you can recall? + +Mr. GLOVER. I do not believe so, but I could not be a hundred percent +sure. I believe that is the way it was. + +Mr. JENNER. Have the De Mohrenschildts said anything to you about how +they had become acquainted with the Oswalds? + +Mr. GLOVER. They had not said anything specifically, but again, I had +the impression that because they were Russian speaking and knew some +of the other people around the area who were Russian speaking, they +learned from people they knew in Fort Worth of this Russian girl who +was here in this country. + +Mr. JENNER. What, if anything, did they say about their interest in her +beyond, let's say, pure curiosity? + +Mr. GLOVER. That is really the extent of what they ever said, that +they were curious, and also trying to help her out. This was right in +character with Jeanne, who was always trying to help people out in such +situations. + +Mr. JENNER. Was she a generous person in that respect? + +Mr. GLOVER. I think you would call it generous although you have to +realize this is a double-edged sword. People sometimes do things in +order to control things and arrange things, and other times they do +things out of the goodness of their heart, and I think it was one of +the facts, she liked to help people out, and arrange things. Maybe this +is my male bias coming into it. + +Mr. JENNER. But in any event, they were, on the surface at least, +cordial, and seeking to help her? + +Mr. GLOVER. That's right. + +Mr. JENNER. Did you detect that that was an active and not merely a +passive effort on their part? + +Mr. GLOVER. Yes; I felt it was an active thing. + +Mr. JENNER. They were pursuing it with some vigor? + +Mr. GLOVER. Yes; I would say so. + +Mr. JENNER. Let's take George in particular. Was it characteristic of +him? Was he a generous man and wanted to help others? + +Mr. GLOVER. Much less so, I would say, than Mrs. De Mohrenschildt. I +rather would attribute it to her. Maybe it is my male bias coming out, +blaming it on Jeanne for being so interested in somebody else, but he +went along with this too, and there were several other people I met +there who they were trying to be good to. I think they were trying +to do this to help. And shortly after my former wife left and I was +by myself, I think they, in their relation to me, were trying to do +something to help me out. + +Mr. JENNER. You met her on this occasion. How many additional occasions +were there? + +Mr. GLOVER. I can't be sure of the number of occasions, because she +came several times to the De Mohrenschildt house. + +Mr. JENNER. Alone? + +Mr. GLOVER. Yes; she came several times alone, and I would say two or +three times I saw her there. + +Mr. JENNER. And each occasion you saw her on these two or three or even +more occasions, she was always alone in the sense that she was not +accompanied on any of those occasions by Lee Oswald? + +Mr. GLOVER. That's correct. + +Mr. JENNER. Is that correct? + +Mr. GLOVER. That's correct. + +Mr. JENNER. What was the length of this visit that you had on the first +occasion? + +Mr. GLOVER. I am not really sure of the time, but the impression I had, +it was in the evening, and again I am not sure which one of the times, +but the impression I had, it was in the evening that I was over there, +either to eat, and she left quite early in the evening. Well, we took, +maybe, or she was taken by them, but one time she left around 9 o'clock +or something like this, to get a bus to Fort Worth. Whether this was +the first time, I really can't be sure. + +Mr. JENNER. Was it your impression she and her husband were living +together at that time? + +Mr. GLOVER. Yes; it was my impression. I am not really sure now whether +anything was said to the contrary on that or not. My impression was +that she was living with her husband on this first occasion, yes. + +Mr. JENNER. Did any occasion arise when you were advised or had the +impression that she was not then at that period of time living with her +husband? + +Mr. GLOVER. Yes; I think this is subsequent to this first time I met +her. Whatever those occasions were, they had arranged for her to stay +with someone here in the Dallas area. + +Mr. JENNER. Do you know the name? + +Mr. GLOVER. I do not remember the name of the people, but they had +arranged for her to stay here, and she had stayed for, as I recall, a +fairly short time, that the arrangement did not work out. + +Mr. JENNER. Does the name Elena Hall trigger your recollection? + +Mr. GLOVER. Elena Hall? + +Mr. JENNER. H-a-l-l? + +Mr. GLOVER. I don't recall ever having heard that name. + +Mr. JENNER. Meller, M-e-l-l-e-r? + +Mr. GLOVER. I couldn't be very sure about that. They might have +mentioned a name, but I do not recall. They mentioned the names of +quite a number of people to me, and I am not sure. + +Mr. JENNER. What impression did you have of Marina on this first +occasion? + +Mr. GLOVER. Well, my first impression was she was sort of an innocent +person caught up in the situation. Although I have very little to +go on, and I could not communicate with her, only through the De +Mohrenschildts. + +Mr. JENNER. Did she speak any English on that occasion? + +Mr. GLOVER. She spoke practically none. No English. She understood a +little bit that people said in English. + +Mr. JENNER. But she did not speak it? + +Mr. GLOVER. She couldn't speak English. It was very difficult for me to +get any real good impression from her. + +Mr. JENNER. And she was quite young? + +Mr. GLOVER. Yes; she was quite young. + +Mr. JENNER. Let's say this is February of 1963, did you say that was, +or March? + +Mr. GLOVER. This was sometime in the first part of the year. + +Mr. JENNER. Of 1963? + +Mr. GLOVER. Yes; it was probably in January. That would be my best +recollection. It was during that time. It might have been later than +that. I am hazy. The only thing I have to go by is, I learned later +after discussion of the visit of Oswald and his wife to our house, I +learned pretty much from the conversation that that meeting took place +in the latter part of February. + +Now I did not recall, I just talked with the other people who lived +in the house, and we figured it must have been about that time. And +other people present recalled this, so this is how I figured the whole +business. And I know I met Marina previous to that time. + +I know I was away for a week in February when I went on a business trip +to Pennsylvania, and so I assume it was somewhere in January, but I +really do not remember. + +Again, if I had to recall those events, I might be able to. I can +remember some of the events, but I am not very sure about it. + +Mr. JENNER. When next did you meet Marina after this occasion? + +Mr. GLOVER. Well, again, I am not sure at all about those occasions. +She would come and stay at the house, and if I came in from playing +tennis with George, she might have been there. This may have happened +two or three times. + +Mr. JENNER. There came an occasion, did there not, in which you met Lee +Oswald? + +Mr. GLOVER. Yes; when I met Lee Oswald the first time, was at their +house. + +Mr. JENNER. Did Marina accompany the De Mohrenschildts on that occasion? + +Mr. GLOVER. That's right. + +Mr. JENNER. When was that and how did that arise, and what was the +circumstance? + +Mr. GLOVER. The only thing I can remember about this, is again to fix +this with respect to the other meeting when he and his wife, Oswald and +his wife, came to my house, and that was apparently in late February, +so it must have been previous to that. + +Mr. JENNER. Does the date February 22, 1963, refresh your recollection +as to the occasion they came to your home? + +Mr. GLOVER. Well, I think I remember in the conversation with the FBI +they mentioned a date about Washington's Birthday. + +Mr. JENNER. It is not Lincoln's? + +Mr. GLOVER. I think it was Washington's Birthday, but I don't remember +dates, so I had no actual recollection of the specific date. + +Mr. JENNER. Yes; that is Washington's Birthday. [Checking calendar.] + +Mr. GLOVER. The only thing I have a hazy recollection about, that it +was on a Tuesday or Wednesday of the week. + +Mr. JENNER. Washington's Birthday in 1963, was on a Friday. + +Mr. GLOVER. Maybe it was. My recollection isn't worth much on this. + +Mr. JENNER. It was the latter part of February, in any event, of 1963? + +Mr. GLOVER. The meeting at which I first met Oswald was just previous +to the meeting where I met Oswald and his wife the second time. + +Mr. JENNER. There were two occasions when you met Oswald and his wife? + +Mr. GLOVER. That's right. The first one was at the De Mohrenschildts. + +Mr. JENNER. Excuse me, we have one meeting described which you +set in the early part of the year, Marina alone. That is, she was +unaccompanied by her husband, and you met her at the De Mohrenschildts? + +Mr. GLOVER. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. There might have been some additional occasions when you +saw her at the De Mohrenschildts prior to your having met Lee Oswald? + +Mr. GLOVER. That's right. + +Mr. JENNER. Now what was the circumstance under which you had your +first meeting or first occasion that you met Lee Oswald? + +Mr. GLOVER. On that occasion the De Mohrenschildts invited the two +Oswalds and invited quite a number of other people--I was included--to +their house. + +Mr. JENNER. About when was this? + +Mr. GLOVER. Well, this was just previous to the time that Oswald and +his wife came to my house, so I would say it was just a few days or a +week before that. + +Mr. JENNER. At the De Mohrenschildts, who was present on that occasion? + +Mr. GLOVER. This is where I have difficulty in recollection. Several +times the De Mohrenschildts had invited me to their house for dinner, +when he had informal dinners, and I am not really sure at all who was +present. I am sure that De Mohrenschildt and his wife, Marina Oswald +and Lee Oswald, and myself, and Volkmar Schmidt. + +Mr. JENNER. He was then living with you? + +Mr. GLOVER. Living with me. He was there. And of the other people, I +have just a poor impression as to whether---- + +Mr. JENNER. What about Pierce? + +Mr. GLOVER. Pierce was not there, I know that. + +Mr. JENNER. Wasn't there anybody by the name of Fredricksen? + +Mr. GLOVER. He was not there. + +Mr. JENNER. Do you know Fredricksen? + +Mr. GLOVER. You are talking about the first meeting? I know +Fredricksen. He had his office next to me at the laboratory. He works +also at the laboratory, so I know him quite well. He was not there. + +Mr. JENNER. You have exhausted your recollection now? There were +additional persons present on this occasion, but you don't recall their +names? + +Mr. GLOVER. I can recall names of people who might have been there, and +I certainly wouldn't swear to it, because I really don't remember that +well. + +Mr. JENNER. Was it a large party? + +Mr. GLOVER. There were quite a number of people for the small +apartment. There may have been five or six, seven or eight more people. + +Mr. JENNER. There may have been five or six or seven or eight more +people in addition to these you have named? + +Mr. GLOVER. Yes. Now I have an impression, and I may be completely +wrong, that a man by the name of Richmond was there. + +Mr. JENNER. Richmond? + +Mr. GLOVER. I am not sure how you'd spell his name. I know they called +him High Richmond, and he works at the, they call it SCAS, which is +Southwest Center for Advanced Studies. He has taught physics at SMU. He +may have been there. I do not know for sure. Sam Ballen might have been +there, I don't know. I am not clear at all who might have been there. + +Mr. JENNER. All right, this was a dinner party or an evening party? + +Mr. GLOVER. Sort of a dinner. + +Mr. JENNER. What did the Oswalds look like and what was your impression +of Lee Oswald? Tell me how the Oswalds were generally attired? Did +anything impress you? + +Mr. GLOVER. Not well attired for clothing and shoes, those sort of +things. I got the impression that they certainly were not perfectly +well attired. As I remember, Oswald just wore an open shirt and a pair +of pants. He wasn't dressed up at all. Some of the other people were +dressed up. + +Mr. JENNER. Even though this was in February 1963? + +Mr. GLOVER. Well, I don't know. I got the impression that he was +informally attired as opposed to formally attired, and his wife was +also. That is the impression I got. Maybe she was dressed up more. +Again, only impression I have is the informality of it as opposed to +some of the other people who would be wearing suits. I can't remember +what I was wearing at that time myself. I have the impression that they +were different people than a lot of other people. + +Mr. JENNER. You did? + +Mr. GLOVER. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. That would be true of each of them? + +Mr. GLOVER. About her, I don't know. It is hard to say. I don't +remember much of an impression of her, except she was a quiet little +girl with a baby over on the bed sofa. + +Mr. JENNER. She brought the child with her? + +Mr. GLOVER. I am pretty sure; yes. Now again, I believe so, but again, +I am not a hundred percent sure. + +Mr. JENNER. On this previous occasion had she brought her child with +her? + +Mr. GLOVER. I believe she always had her child with her. + +Mr. JENNER. To the best of your recollection, on that occasion, she had +the child with her? + +Mr. GLOVER. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. What occurred that evening in the way of discussion? + +Mr. GLOVER. This evening several people talked to Oswald. I talked very +little. + +Mr. JENNER. English or Russian? + +Mr. GLOVER. No, I don't remember whether there was any conversation in +Russian or not. I really didn't talk hardly any to the Oswalds, any +myself that evening. I know I remember that Volkmar Schmidt talked +with him considerably, but he did not talk in Russian. Volkmar talked +English. + +Mr. JENNER. Does Volkmar Schmidt have command of the Russian language? + +Mr. GLOVER. He has no command of Russian, although Norman Fredricksen +and Pierce and Volkmar all had started to study Russian. There was a +course at the school. I believe there was a course at the laboratory, +a private teacher was giving classes. They all three started to take, +but Volkmar and Pierce stopped, and Fredricksen was the only one who +continued. + +Mr. JENNER. Is the name Voshinin familiar to you? + +Mr. GLOVER. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. Was he the instructor or the tutor for Fredricksen and +Pierce? + +Mr. GLOVER. I do not believe so. I don't think that is the--I am quite +sure that is not the same person at all. The facts I have about the +teacher, it was a man who worked for some oil company here in Dallas +who taught classes on the side. Maybe he was an interpreter, or maybe +he was in the laboratory in geology for an oil company, but he was +teaching on the side. + +Mr. JENNER. Voshinin worked for Sun, did he not? + +Mr. GLOVER. Not the Voshinin that I know. I know one Voshinin, and he +is teaching in the Chemical Engineering School of SMU. And his wife +does translating. Now I don't know of any other Voshinin. I don't +recall the name very well of this man who was teaching, but Fredricksen +ended up by taking Russian lessons from an older woman who, I think, +was related to a woman who--I beg your pardon, Fredricksen took lessons +later from a woman who was related to the man who worked for some oil +company, who had originally given classes, and that woman's name I do +not remember. + +Mr. JENNER. His mother-in-law? Voshinin's mother-in-law, Mrs. Gravitis? + +Mr. GLOVER. She had some kind of a name she was known by. I am quite +sure--I can't remember whether it was Voshinin--it is not the Voshinin +that teaches at SMU. + +Mr. JENNER. It is a different one? + +Mr. GLOVER. The only Voshinin I know is the man that teaches at SMU. + +Mr. JENNER. Does anything stand out in your mind on this initial +meeting which you met Lee Oswald? And if so, would you please state it. + +Mr. GLOVER. Well, the story from the beginning that the De +Mohrenschildts told, and the meeting on this first occasion, I didn't +talk very much to him--was a perplexing business to me. + +In the first place, when he [De Mohrenschildt] told the story, I didn't +believe it was possible for any one to go to Russia and work as he did +and come back to this country. I doubted it was quite possible. And I +mentioned this fact to some of the people I worked with. One fellow +was particularly anti-Russian in every way, and he thought this easily +possible for a person to do this, that this made sense. + +In other words, that I was dubious of the story from the beginning. The +thing that I kept thinking all the time, and this is apparently where +I made a mistake, was that, if someone in his position had done what +he said and brought a Russian wife here, that certainly would be known +by the authorities, the FBI particularly, and that if a person like he +were running around the way he was and doing what he was doing, then he +would be someone who is known very well by the FBI people. I told the +FBI about this, and I also told them what De Mohrenschildt had written +to me quite recently. + +Mr. JENNER. Tell me about that. + +Mr. GLOVER. De Mohrenschildt told me in a letter that Oswald had been +checked by the FBI---- + +Mr. JENNER. Do you have it? + +Mr. GLOVER. I gave it to the FBI. They have the letter. He stated +in the letter that he had asked the FBI about this man, and I don't +remember the words he used in the letter, but they are in that letter, +but words to the effect that they passed on him, or he was harmless, +or he was something, suggesting that he was all right, he said, from +their point of view. + +Mr. JENNER. That is, De Mohrenschildt says in this letter that he made +an inquiry of the FBI and the FBI reassured him? + +Mr. GLOVER. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. That is, Oswald was all right? + +Mr. GLOVER. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. I don't want to put words in your mouth. I want you to, by +your recollection of what was stated, repeat it again so that it is not +in my words. + +Mr. GLOVER. Yes. Well, I did get the impression from what I recall of +his letter, that he had checked with the FBI, and I remember he stated +specifically in the letter, either in Fort Worth or Dallas, about +Oswald, and they told him that he was apparently all right, he was +acceptable. They passed on him in some way. I don't remember the exact +way he put it. It is in the letter. + +Mr. JENNER. Had you had any discussion with De Mohrenschildt on that +subject on or about the time of your meeting the Oswalds? + +Mr. GLOVER. When I got this letter, it reminded me that at one time +when they were first talking about putting Marina somewhere, getting +her to go somewhere, that he had made some remark to the same effect, +that he had some people who were very dubious of the situation, they +didn't want to have anything to do with the people, and he told them he +checked with the FBI and they were all right, or words to that effect. + +Mr. JENNER. You used an expression a few minutes ago that apparently +you made a mistake. Do you recall that? + +Mr. GLOVER. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. In this connection, what do you mean by that? + +Mr. GLOVER. I referred directly to one thing, I made the mistake of +assuming that a man in his situation--of assuming that, because this +man had the history of having been in Russia, apparently, and had +brought his Russian wife with him, and so forth, that the FBI would +know all about it, and although I was very much perplexed by him, I +felt that he must be not a dangerous person. I don't think the FBI +thought he was as dangerous as he was, and I think I made a mistake +when I assumed that they could know that he was harmless. I assumed +that the FBI would know about such a person, and in having this +conversation with them, they said, of course they are not able to do +that. + +Mr. JENNER. Did you have any contact with the FBI prior to November 22, +1963, concerning the Oswalds, or either of them? + +Mr. GLOVER. I did not. + +Mr. JENNER. Did they--they didn't interview you, and you made no calls +or had any contact with them? + +Mr. GLOVER. That's right. + +Mr. JENNER. What was your impression of Oswald on this first occasion +that you met him? + +Mr. GLOVER. Well, I didn't get too much of an impression. I didn't +really talk to him very much. + +Mr. JENNER. Did you get an impression of him being a man of education, +or lack of it? + +Mr. GLOVER. I certainly got the impression that he was someone who had +a fairly lowly background and didn't have very much in his life. + +Mr. JENNER. Very much in his life in the way of material things? + +Mr. GLOVER. Yes; I would say so. + +Mr. JENNER. Or very much in the way of an education? + +Mr. GLOVER. Material, educational, and spiritual. + +Mr. JENNER. Spiritual or education or material? + +Mr. GLOVER. That is the impression I got, but it's hard to put that +down as an impression of this first meeting exactly. My impression does +not come very much from the first meeting where I did not talk to him +very much. Subsequently talking with Schmidt and the subsequent meeting +at my house and talking with the other people, my impression comes from +that total rather than any detailed thing he said. + +Mr. JENNER. Then I will ask you what, as near as you can fix it, what +your impression of Oswald was? Let's say, as of November 21, 1963? I +am not thinking in terms that you thought about him on that day, but I +am trying to fix a cutoff period. + +Mr. GLOVER. Well, I came to the conclusion that he was, in the first +place, obviously a fellow who was not satisfied with anything. He was +not satisfied with what was in this country originally. He was not +satisfied with the life in Russia. And he was not adjusting at all when +he came back, so he was very maladjusted. + +Mr. JENNER. Had you had the impression that, or did you have the +impression that he was generally a maladjusted person? + +Mr. GLOVER. Well, certainly from his whole situation I would conclude +that he was maladjusted. In the course of fitting into a social and +political group at all, he didn't adjust, didn't fit in. + +Mr. JENNER. Had you had the impression then that he was not a person +of sufficient education with background or capacity, for example, for +travel or to become a part of the group strata of society in which you +moved? + +Mr. GLOVER. Oh, yes; I had the impression that he did not have a +capacity to do that. My best word to describe him, my own personal +word is that he was a ne'er-do-well. He did not adjust anywhere. He +obviously didn't get along with his wife. He was very---- + +Mr. JENNER. Was that obvious to you in her presence when you saw him in +her presence? + +Mr. GLOVER. No; it was not obvious. This was only obvious from the +description the De Mohrenschildts gave, but I still think this is a +very important thing. I don't judge another person by the detailed +things he says. I judge a person by the whole style of his life. This +includes his relationship to other people, like his wife. + +Mr. JENNER. I agree. The reason I pressed you again there was to bring +out whether you were relying entirely on what the De Mohrenschildts +said to you, or whether you were also relying on your contacts with the +Oswalds and the general reputation in that community in which you lived +in regard to that. They had views towards the Oswalds, and when I say +community, I mean a circle of people. + +Mr. GLOVER. Yes. Well, I have to admit that I have no direct evidence +of the two Oswalds having trouble, but it was mentioned by the De +Mohrenschildts, and I don't know whether by anyone else, that they +didn't get along. And that fact also, along with this, would fit into +the picture, as I learned later, he lost his job here in Dallas. And +he had apparently lost his job in Fort Worth, and this added to the +picture of someone who wasn't able to adjust. And such people who +cannot adjust in their own work are very likely to be people who are +not happy in their homelife and take it out on people in the homelife. + +This is the inference I gave, and the only evidence I have is what De +Mohrenschildt told me about that. I cannot say that I observed the +Oswalds being antagonistic to each other. + +Mr. JENNER. Now this first occasion then was an evening at the De +Mohrenschildts, that he called you up without you having any prior +notice, that the Oswalds were going to be there, and you went over and +met them? + +Mr. GLOVER. No. + +Mr. JENNER. You knew in advance? + +Mr. GLOVER. I believe they said when they called that these people were +going to be there. I don't know how much notice they gave. + +Mr. JENNER. Is there anything about which you haven't testified that +struck you about the Oswalds on that occasion? + +Mr. GLOVER. No; I don't believe so. + +Mr. JENNER. Did he speak Russian during the course of the evening? + +Mr. GLOVER. I'm not sure. + +Mr. JENNER. All right. Or at least a language that was not English? + +Mr. GLOVER. I really couldn't be sure on that point. + +Mr. JENNER. Did she take part in the conversation to any extent? + +Mr. GLOVER. Well, she never did take part in the conversation very much. + +Mr. JENNER. When was the last occasion you saw the Oswalds? + +Mr. GLOVER. This, as I said before, was a few days to a week, I +believe, after the time I saw them at the De Mohrenschildts'. + +Mr. JENNER. Was that at your home? + +Mr. GLOVER. That was at my home. + +Mr. JENNER. Was this a visit or an assembly that you organized? + +Mr. GLOVER. Yes; I was the prime mover in organizing it. + +Mr. JENNER. Tell us what motivated you and what you went about doing, +and who was there. + +Mr. GLOVER. Well, I didn't get a very good impression of Oswald this +first time, because I didn't talk with him. But I talked with Volkmar +Schmidt, and we talked with Dick Pierce, who was living with us, and +we talked about it. I asked Dick if he would like to meet this fellow, +like to see what he was like, because the whole thing seemed rather an +unbelievable story that this could happen. It was unknown as far as my +experience is concerned. And Mrs. De Mohrenschildt had been pushing the +fact that Marina did not have anyone to converse with, and she also +said that Lee would not make any effort to help his wife learn English. + +Mr. JENNER. All right. Now, I would like a little more development of +that. Who made the statement to you? + +Mr. GLOVER. One of the De Mohrenschildts. + +Mr. JENNER. One of the De Mohrenschildts? This was not merely an idle +remark, a chance remark made one time, but had they mentioned it +several times? + +Mr. GLOVER. I believe so; yes. + +Mr. JENNER. In talking to you about the Oswalds? + +Mr. GLOVER. I would say so. + +Mr. JENNER. They did say collectively--I mean--they did say +affirmatively that one of the problems was that Lee Oswald was adverse +to his wife Marina, learning the English language, or to use the +English language? + +Mr. GLOVER. Certainly that he didn't make any effort to help her. + +Mr. JENNER. All right, okay, go ahead about your party now. + +Mr. GLOVER. It so happened at this time that Ruth Paine, who is an +acquaintance of mine---- + +Mr. JENNER. How did you become acquainted with Ruth Paine? + +Mr. GLOVER. I became acquainted with Ruth Paine either through the +Unitarian Church here in Dallas, or through a singing group which had +members in it, from the Unitarian Church, I am not sure which. As I +remember, it may not be entirely correct, but sometime after '56, +I think, '56 to '58 in there, I was more active. I had joined the +Unitarian Church sometime after coming to Dallas, and I used to sing +some time in the church choir, and my former wife did sing much more +than I did. Sometime during that period Michael Paine came to sing with +the Unitarian Church. It seems he had been trying out various choirs +around the town. + +Mr. JENNER. Had you known him prior to this time? + +Mr. GLOVER. I had not and I don't think his wife came there much to the +church. I am not sure whether she ever came to the church. I believe +she is a Quaker, and I think she came very little to the church. +Maybe she did come and sing in the choir. Subsequently it was, as I +remember, it was through him that I met her, and probably at a singing +group which was organized, in which the majority of the members of the +singing group were people who sing in the Unitarian choir. + +Mr. JENNER. Was this kind of a madrigal group? + +Mr. GLOVER. Yes. This was what it was called, depending on the +membership at any time. They sing all kinds of things. + +Mr. JENNER. Go ahead about your party. + +Mr. GLOVER. Okay, so I knew at this time I had seen Ruth Paine on a few +occasions in the past 6 months or a year, and I must have been talking +with her or seen her somewhere previous to this time of the party, +at which time she mentioned that she was going, she thought she was +going to teach a course in Russian at St. Mark School; and that she +was trying to brush up on the Russian, on--or maybe I am just thinking +she said this latter. But she was interested, and I didn't really +know--I think at that time I was aware of the fact she had majored in +Russian in school, or knew Russian very well, and De Mohrenschildt's +wife Jeanne, was trying to find someone who could converse with her, +and I thought I would tell Ruth Paine about her, maybe she would be +interested in talking with this woman. So I invited her, and she said +she would be interested. That is the explanation of how she came. + +Mr. JENNER. Did you tell Ruth Paine about the Oswalds, to the extent +that you knew about them at that time? + +Mr. GLOVER. I am sure I did. + +Mr. JENNER. Did she indicate whether she had any acquaintance or +knowledge of the Oswalds? + +Mr. GLOVER. Well, it never occurred to me to question this until it was +brought up by the FBI. As far as I know, this was completely new to her. + +Mr. JENNER. Your reaction at that time, in any event, was, as far as +Mrs. Paine is concerned, your knowledge of her, she knew nothing about +the Oswalds? + +Mr. GLOVER. That's right, completely new to her. Dick Pierce came. At +the time, Dick kept company with a girl who works at the laboratory, +Betty MacDonald, and she came along. I believe he invited her to come. + +Mr. JENNER. Did she speak Russian? + +Mr. GLOVER. No; she did not. + +Mr. JENNER. All right, then you had Pierce accompanied by Betty +MacDonald? + +Mr. GLOVER. Right. + +Mr. JENNER. And you had Ruth Paine. Was she accompanied by her husband? + +Mr. GLOVER. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. She was accompanied by her husband on that occasion? + +Mr. GLOVER. I am pretty sure that he was there. Again I am not a +hundred percent sure. I think we talked about this, the three of us, +that were living together. I am sure he was there. + +Mr. JENNER. Were you aware that Mrs. Paine and her husband were +separated? + +Mr. GLOVER. I was. + +Mr. JENNER. As of that time? + +Mr. GLOVER. I knew about that situation; yes. I don't think I invited +him particularly, although I may have mentioned him, but I invited her +because of the Russian. + +Norm Fredricksen was in the office next to me, and I told him about the +situation and asked him if he would be interested in coming, and he +said he would come and he came. + +Mr. JENNER. Is he a married man? + +Mr. GLOVER. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. Did he bring Mrs. Fredricksen? + +Mr. GLOVER. He brought Mrs. Fredricksen; yes, sir. I had the impression +at that time that Norm had been the most studious of the three that had +taken Russian and he was continuing. He was going to graduate school +and he wanted to make it a major language. At least that was the motive +he presented to me. I was interested in someone who could speak Russian +and could hear both these people talk, so I invited him. + +I think that is all the people that were there. I know that when I +talked to the FBI, I omitted Betty MacDonald's name in my statement. + +Mr. JENNER. At least for the moment this exhausts your recollection as +to who attended your party? + +Mr. GLOVER. I believe so. I don't call it a party. + +Mr. JENNER. I think you mentioned the De Mohrenschildts. Did they drop +in? + +Mr. GLOVER. Yes; for a few minutes, and went somewhere else. They were +going somewhere. + +Mr. JENNER. Did the discussion take place--were there any discussions +during the course of that evening with Lee Oswald which dealt with his +political views? + +Mr. GLOVER. Yes; there were discussions. + +Mr. JENNER. Tell us about them. + +Mr. GLOVER. Again I have to give an overall impression I got. This may +be partly as a result of questioning from some of the people present, +but among the things that came out was that, and again I mentioned +this before in connection with the other meeting, it is an overall +impression--he was apparently a Marxist. + +Now I am not sure that I can say that he said exactly these words +himself, or whether this was repeated to me after by Schmidt or Pierce +or Mrs. Paine or someone, but as I say, I pay less attention to what +a person says in detail than to the overall impression of what their +style is; but I do remember specifically that he or someone else +present said he was a Marxist---- + +Mr. JENNER. What impression did you have of the distinction, if any, +between Marxism and Communism? + +Mr. GLOVER. Well, with reference specifically to the so-called +Communist regime, the impression I got was that he was a Marxist +theoretically, but he did not like what he saw in Russia. He didn't +like it and came back, but apparently this did not satisfy him. + +Mr. JENNER. He had theories, but what he saw in Russia didn't measure +up to those theories? + +Mr. GLOVER. Apparently so. + +Mr. JENNER. His so-called ideals? + +Mr. GLOVER. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. In any event, he had--what he had come back to here in +America didn't measure up to what he---- + +Mr. GLOVER. Apparently. He said so. + +Mr. JENNER. Would you put that in your own words. What did he say on +this occasion? + +Mr. GLOVER. Again I have to qualify this. Maybe it is one of the +impressions I got from other people talking afterwards, but I feel he +said that he did not think that the Russian system measured up at all +to his idea of what the society should be like, and obviously he didn't +think the American system measured up or he wouldn't have gone there in +the first place, and I am sure he said he did not think the American +system measured up to his ideals. + +Mr. JENNER. Was there any discussion about his life or their life in +Russia? + +Mr. GLOVER. Yes; there was considerable. + +Mr. JENNER. Tell us about that. + +Mr. GLOVER. Well, the thing I remember was that he was working in some +kind of a trade. I don't remember what trade he was working at. And I +don't remember really too many strong impressions. + +The strong impression I got of things that he talked about were +the--was the fact that his wife was not treated very well in Russia +after she married him. She was apparently looked down on. This was +the impression I had from listening to Oswald, either Oswald or +conversation with his wife. + +Mr. JENNER. That occurred at this meeting at your house? + +Mr. GLOVER. I believe so, yes. + +Mr. JENNER. By the way, how did you get the Oswalds there? Did you call +them directly, or did you have somebody intervene for you? How was that +arranged? + +Mr. GLOVER. I talked with the De Mohrenschildts as to where they lived. +By this time he was living in Dallas. He had gotten a job in Dallas and +they were living in Dallas. + +Mr. JENNER. Jaggars-Chiles-Stovall? + +Mr. GLOVER. I don't know the name of the company, but I asked them (De +Mohrenschildts) about where he lived, and they gave me his telephone +number at the place where he worked. I still have his telephone +number and I called him and asked him if he would come over to the +house to meet some people, some such words as that, and he said, he +would. I believe he gave me the address. It might have been the De +Mohrenschildts who gave me the address originally. I have that address +and had it on a slip of paper in my purse, and when I was about to +throw away the slip of paper on which I accumulated a lot of addresses, +I copied it down in my address book. I just in--I just had a feeling I +ought to record this. + +Mr. JENNER. He lived on Elsbeth Street? + +Mr. GLOVER. He lived on Elsbeth, that's right. The only thing I +remember about the place at work was that I think he worked in the +photographic department of some, apparently something to do with a +printing plant. Then I called him and I asked him if he would come +over, and he didn't have any transportation, and I offered to come over +and pick him up. My wife remembers that I was down at the ice rink +skating. I went down there early and picked him up on the way back home. + +Mr. JENNER. Was anything said during the time that you knew Oswald +or had any contact with him as to whether he was able to drive an +automobile and operate an automobile? + +Mr. GLOVER. I do not recall anything said about that. + +Mr. JENNER. I ask you to state the discussions that occurred at this +party in your home, or gathering, let's put it that way. Would that be +a better description? It was a gathering rather than a party? + +Mr. GLOVER. Well, of course, one's immediate reaction to being +associated with any dastardly act or event is of course so painful +that I shrink away from him. It wasn't a party. It was a gathering +for a fairly specific reason, to look at this fellow and let some +other people look at him and see what they made of him, so I call it a +gathering. + +Mr. JENNER. I think that that is a fair statement of it, in any event. +Tell us what he said his life in Russia was like, his views, if he +expressed any views, and then I am going to ask you after that your +impression of the man. + +Mr. GLOVER. Well, I don't really recall anything that he said +specifically. Seems like his conversation was of the type where he did +not initiate very much himself. He answered questions, and maybe it is +partly hindsight, now, I don't know, and it is hard to say, one has the +impression that he wasn't very candid at all. He was not the open type +of person who one might have hoped for. Maybe it was too much to hope, +but I believe it has happened of people who have done, say, something +like he did in the direction of Russia, and have realized how wrong it +was and have come back to the fold, and have been candid about their +experiences, and of people who have gone in a Communist direction +certainly, and who have retraced their steps and come back to realize +the truth of the matter and have been very candid about it. + +And he was certainly not a candid person. I do not remember +specifically anything he said. It is hard really to get a very good +impression of things. It seems like he was trying to go along with +things. He was enjoying being asked questions by people, and he was +going along with the questioning. That was the impression I got. I +remember this discussion of what he was doing (for work), but I don't +remember what it was. I remember his discussion of the--it might have +been his wife, I am not sure of which one it was, the uneven man to +woman ratio in Russia. And I don't know that that occurred that night +or sometime previous on another occasion. It might have occurred on +another occasion with his wife only present, but that fact was brought +out about the uneven ratio, and I got the impression that might have +been one of the reasons that she jumped at a chance to marry someone. + +An FBI man pointed out to me that this was not very logical because of +the differences in the age. She is very young, and the people were--who +were killed off in World War II would be in my generation of 40 or 50 +years old and there might not be much competition there. But that was +the impression I got. Then there was also something mentioned about the +treatment of the Cubans. It seems they lived near a place where there +were Cubans. + +Mr. JENNER. It seems what? + +Mr. GLOVER. It seems they were living at or near a place where Cubans +who had been brought from Cuba by the Communist regime were being +indoctrinated. + +Mr. JENNER. This is while they were in Russia? + +Mr. GLOVER. This is while they were in Russia, yes. + +Mr. JENNER. Then it must have been in the town, at least they knew of +some Cubans being in Russia? + +Mr. GLOVER. I used the words "being indoctrinated," because I assume +this is what was going on. I don't think he used that word. + +Mr. JENNER. Did he indicate that he had any contact with them? + +Mr. GLOVER. Nothing specifically that I remember was said about having +actual contact with individuals, but quite a bit was said about the +treatment. Actual contact, I don't know whether he said that, but it +didn't stick in my mind that he had any actual contact, but they did +talk about the way they were treated, and he gave the impression they +were really treated well. + +Mr. JENNER. The Cubans were? + +Mr. GLOVER. The Cubans were really treated well and given everything +they wanted, and lots of girls for them, and the girls all fell for the +Cubans, as it were, you know. + +Mr. JENNER. Did Oswald express views with respect to Castro and the +Cubans? + +Mr. GLOVER. I could not remember any specific view about them, but +I got the impression from his description of the Cubans who were +there, that he might have been trying to create the impression that +the Cubans were very much accepted by the Russians. Apparently, in +all this conversation, I believe he was being very cagey about making +statements, but he would give the impression that these people must +have been pretty nice. They were being treated so by the Russians. +Actually, he gave it as a matter of fact that they were being treated +very well. I don't remember him having said anything specifically about +his liking or not liking the Cubans or Castro. + +Mr. JENNER. Anything else that occurred that evening with respect to +conversation and his political views and life in Russia that you now +recall? + +Mr. GLOVER. No; I don't think there is anything that I recall right at +the moment. + +Mr. JENNER. Did Mrs. Paine take part in these discussions? + +Mr. GLOVER. Yes; she talked to both Oswald and she talked to his wife +very much. + +Mr. JENNER. When she talked to Marina, in what language did she speak? + +Mr. GLOVER. Well, I believe what she said, she said in Russian. I don't +believe Marina was able to converse in English. + +Mr. JENNER. Did she translate for Marina? + +Mr. GLOVER. Yes; I believe she did. + +Mr. JENNER. Did Oswald translate for her? + +Mr. GLOVER. Marina, I cannot be sure about that. I don't remember that +he did. + +Mr. JENNER. This was in a house or in an apartment? + +Mr. GLOVER. It was in a house. + +Mr. JENNER. Did the women kind of move around and the men gather +together, or would, as sometimes happens at meetings of this nature, +were you all gathered generally in the same room or the same general +vicinity and everybody take part in the social intercourse and +interplay? + +Mr. GLOVER. Well, I don't remember any particular pattern. The only +person who would talk very much to Marina was Ruth Paine, because she +was the only woman. + +Mr. JENNER. What about the De Mohrenschildts? Did they just drop in and +leave right away? + +Mr. GLOVER. They stayed a very brief time. + +Mr. JENNER. Did the De Mohrenschildts take part? There wasn't anybody +other than Mrs. Paine, or possibly Lee Oswald, to translate for Marina, +is that a fair statement? + +Mr. GLOVER. That's right. The De Mohrenschildts did not come in at the +beginning of the evening. They came sometime, if I remember, around 9 +o'clock and stayed a short while and left. + +Mr. JENNER. Did your guests press Oswald as to his political views? + +Mr. GLOVER. Yes; he had been in Russia. He didn't think very much of +that. He didn't think much of the United States' system, but what it +was about the system, he didn't know. + +Mr. JENNER. In other words, they pressed him so they backed him in a +corner, to use the vernacular, and he had no real answers? + +Mr. GLOVER. That's right. I think they ascertained that pretty well. + +Mr. JENNER. He just reiterated, "I am a Marxist," or "I believe in +communism," or I have these ideals, but I haven't found the ideal site +anywhere? So far, that is a fairly general statement? + +Mr. GLOVER. I think so. + +Mr. JENNER. Since I said so much about it, is there anything you want +to elaborate on in that connection? + +Mr. GLOVER. No; I think what you said I agree to, that he was +essentially more on the defensive. They asked him, as I just stated, +what is the answer, and he essentially stated he didn't know the +answer. + +Mr. JENNER. Do you have any impression as to why, if you had an +impression at all, why this man did not want his wife to learn English? +And if so, what was that impression? + +Mr. GLOVER. Well, the impression I had was simply one of maybe wanting +to control her, but I did not think of anything beyond the usual +situation which can happen with a man and his wife, where one person of +the two is much, is very much the dominating person. + +Mr. JENNER. Did you feel he was the dominating person in the couple? + +Mr. GLOVER. I certainly did, because in the first place, the story I +heard was they were trying to find a place for Marina where she could +get away from him, but this later time they appeared to get along, so I +assumed she was staying with him. + +Mr. JENNER. What impression did you have of him then and subsequently, +as to whether he was a stable person? + +Mr. GLOVER. I did not think of stability at all, because he was fairly +well behaved at the times I saw him. It is true, I did not think he was +very candid, but I felt---- + +Mr. JENNER. You did not think he was very candid? + +Mr. GLOVER. I did not think he was very candid, no; but I felt that +whatever he was doing, he was able to get along in some way. But I had +the impression of his being a ne'er-do-well sort of fellow, who would +go from one place to another, never making adjustments very well. I +did not get the impression, as I stated before, I did not get the +impression of him being violent, which later came out, and---- + +Mr. JENNER. Did you have any impression as to whether he was a man who +was well-adjusted, poorly adjusted, or otherwise? + +Mr. GLOVER. Well, in the sense that if a person's whole philosophy of +life, what he lives by, is very much in doubt, I would say from that +point of view, he was poorly adjusted. From the point of view, possibly +of his ability to get along in some fashion, he had one job and he had +another job--I mean he apparently worked in Fort Worth and then he got +a job in Dallas, and after he left here he went to New Orleans and got +a job, and he was able to get along in some fashion, but obviously he +was poorly adjusted as far as his whole living was concerned. + +Mr. JENNER. Do you have an opinion of how much maturity, a person +lacking in maturity, or what view, if any, do you have in that +connection, or did you acquire? + +Mr. GLOVER. Well, in the sense that a person is not mature until he +discovers what he is living by, he certainly was very immature. He +apparently never did develop any set rules by which he lived by, in +spite of his purported Marxism. Apparently the dominating thing in +this--in his life was that he had grown up in a poor environment, and I +am getting this from what I have read in the newspapers. It is sort of +hindsight. + +Mr. JENNER. Try to keep that out as much as possible. I am trying to +get your impression gleaned from the times you met the man. + +Mr. GLOVER. Well, I would say that I didn't really have any impression +of great instability. But I had the impression that he didn't know what +he wanted at all. + +Mr. JENNER. Did you have any impression that he was not capable of +knowing what he wanted? I don't mean mental operation. I mean a man +whose background was so shallow, and education so limited, that he +really had no capacity for determining in any reasonable capacity +since, what his regions of reaching and desires were? + +Mr. GLOVER. Well, I would guess, I thought at the time that a person +in his situation who had done the things he did, it looked like if he +had never discovered what he wanted to live by by that time, that he +probably never would discover what he was going to live by--of course I +didn't keep contact with him after this meeting--and, consequently, had +no further chance to observe him. + +Mr. JENNER. I am going to talk about that in a moment. + +Mr. GLOVER. Okay. + +Mr. JENNER. Did you get any impression of him as to whether he felt the +world had treated him poorly and he had any grudge as to the world, his +lot in life, if not directed toward any person, that he decided he +would rationalize to avoid self-analysis? + +Mr. GLOVER. I didn't get a very strong impression of that at all at the +time. I think he was particularly well behaved when we met him, because +I think he was pretty much flattered that someone else would take an +interest in him, and I think he ate this up to be questioned about +something by somebody who might have some status in society where he +didn't have any. But I didn't get the impression that he was terribly +bitter about this. I got the impression he was very unsatisfied and +unadjusted, maladjusted. He didn't make any adjustment. + +Mr. JENNER. During the conversation, did he make any remarks, that you +recall, concerning the United States? + +Mr. GLOVER. No; he did not make any remarks, except the remarks about +the system not being a satisfactory one. + +Mr. JENNER. Was President Kennedy mentioned? + +Mr. GLOVER. I do not believe so. + +Mr. JENNER. Did he say anything as to whether he was involved in or +supporting any particular political causes? + +Mr. GLOVER. No; he did not say anything about that at all. + +Mr. JENNER. You got no impression that evening as to whether he might +or could be or was--might be or could be or was a person given to +violence? + +Mr. GLOVER. No; I did not get the impression that he was given to +violence, except for the fact that he had mistreated his wife, +apparently, according to the De Mohrenschildts. They led me to think +that he might take out his aggression, as a psychologist might say, +but certainly not the violence of the type of the assassination or +something like this. + +Mr. JENNER. That is the last occasion that you saw the Oswalds? + +Mr. GLOVER. Essentially that is the last. I hedge a little bit on this +because I faintly recollect that De Mohrenschildt came by the house +where I was living once, and he may have had Oswald with him, but it +was nothing but a passing meeting. If it existed, I am not quite sure. +It was nothing of significance that existed. + +Mr. JENNER. Did you see or meet, or were you present at any time +subsequent to this meeting when Marina was present? + +Mr. GLOVER. Yes; I was present at one time. Let's see now, the sequence +of events after that were, De Mohrenschildt left for Haiti sometime in +early May. I am not really sure whether it is before they left. I guess +it might have been before they left, or right after they left. I had a +record player which they had loaned me. + +Mr. JENNER. From the De Mohrenschildts? + +Mr. GLOVER. The De Mohrenschildts had loaned me, and when Pierce and +Schmidt moved in, they had record players, and they (De Mohrenschildts) +wanted to give the record player to Marina. + +Mr. JENNER. The De Mohrenschildts? + +Mr. GLOVER. Yes; I had the record player, so one night when Pierce and +I were going to visit a friend for dinner, a fellow by the name of Bob +Tabbert, who I used to work with, we brought the record player with us +and left it off at Marina's place. + +Now at that time I knew where they lived, because I picked them up +before at Elsbeth, and this time it was in the evening and we drove up +by the apartment where they lived, and just as we drove up, Marina was +wheeling her baby on the side of the road, and it was obvious she was +going somewhere else, and it was difficult to communicate with her, but +apparently she knew about the record player, and she pointed up to a +house, and we drove and waited in the street until she went to a door +in the house, and we understood she lived there, and it was somewhat +of a ramshackled house, and it was around the corner, I don't know the +name of the street, I could find it, I'm sure, it was the first---- + +Mr. JENNER. Neely Street? + +Mr. GLOVER. I don't remember the name. I could find the street, because +it was the first street on the left going north on Elsbeth. + +Mr. JENNER. In any event, this was an apartment building or home +different from the one in which you picked them up in February of 1963? + +Mr. GLOVER. That's right. So I gave her the record player. + +Mr. JENNER. Gave it to her? + +Mr. GLOVER. That's right. That is what De Mohrenschildt asked me to do. + +Mr. JENNER. Lee Oswald did not appear on the scene at that time? + +Mr. GLOVER. No; he was not there. + +Mr. JENNER. Did you know he was not there? + +Mr. GLOVER. No; I didn't know he was not there; no. Well, I am not sure +about that. Seems to me, yes, that I asked if her husband was there, +because the record player had been standing waiting to be taken over +there for sometime when we were going, and it had fallen off and had +the arm damaged, and I could not converse with her, and I tried to +explain, and I asked if her husband was there, and I had the impression +he wasn't there, and I am not sure about that. + +Mr. JENNER. Then what we have referred to was the last contact you had +with Marina? + +Mr. GLOVER. That was the last time I saw her. + +Mr. JENNER. Did Mrs. Paine ever talk to you about Marina at any time +thereafter? + +Mr. GLOVER. The Paines, either one or the other, talked to me after +that time. On one occasion I got a call on the telephone, I am not +sure whether it was Mr. or Mrs. Paine, in which they said the record +player--I believe it was the same one I had given or taken over to her +that belonged to the De Mohrenschildts, was there at their house, and +that she--first of all, the events after that went like this. + +The De Mohrenschildts left and they told me Oswald lost his job and +had gone to New Orleans. Then I believe it was only later through the +Paines that I learned, I believe it was a telephone conversation, that +Marina was staying there with them, or had been staying with them, and +also left to go to New Orleans. + +Mr. JENNER. This was in the spring of 1963? + +Mr. GLOVER. This was sometime after the first of May. And I think at +this time I learned through them that Marina had gone to join him in +New Orleans. + +Mr. JENNER. Was anything said about Mrs. Paine having taken Marina to +New Orleans? + +Mr. GLOVER. Nothing was said about her taking her to New Orleans, but I +do believe I knew at that time that Marina had stayed with her. I think +I learned it through conversation with them. I don't remember having +heard from or seen the Paines since the time they were at my house +until the time that I have learned Marina had gone to New Orleans and +had previously stayed with Ruth. And until the time that Mike came over +and delivered the record player. I think Mike was the one who brought +the record player, and I don't remember the circumstances on that, but +I believe it was he. I am not sure I was home. I am not sure about that. + +Mr. JENNER. By the way, that letter that De Mohrenschildt wrote you +from Haiti, does this refresh your recollection more exactly as to his +remarks about what you have testified: + +"It is interesting, but before we began to help Marina and the child, +we asked the FBI man in Dallas or in Fort Worth about Lee, and he told +us he was completely harmless?" + +Mr. GLOVER. Yes; he used the word harmless, but I wasn't sure I was +quoting what he said. + +Mr. JENNER. Are you recounting a sequence of events with respect to +Marina? + +Mr. GLOVER. Yes; so I learned, at the time they brought the record +player, that she had gone to New Orleans. + +Then the only other connection I had with them was that later than +that, and now again I am not quite sure about the date, but it seems +it must have been after I was married and I was still living on +Southwestern, but I got a call from one of the Paines saying they had +records that the De Mohrenschildts had given Marina. These were for +Russian speaking people learning English, I believe, that they had, and +what to do with them? + +And I said, bring them over here and I will store them. And I remember +talking, and I remember Michael Paine brought the records over to me +and came in the house, and I talked with him a little bit. At this time +Michael Paine told me the last information I had about them. He told me +that, I am not sure whether he said they were back, Marina was coming +back, or Marina had already come back to Dallas, that Lee had lost his +job and that Lee was coming back, and that was in the time I believe---- + +Mr. JENNER. Was coming back to live or was visiting? + +Mr. GLOVER. Well, was coming back. Presumably he lost his job and was +coming back here. + +Mr. JENNER. Lost his job in New Orleans? + +Mr. GLOVER. Right; and he was coming back here to live. That is the +last I heard of them until the event of November 22d. + +Mr. JENNER. All right. Now, is there anything Mr. Glover, that has +occurred to you that you would like to add to the record that you +think might be helpful to the Commission in its investigation of the +assassination of President Kennedy and any of the people about which I +have questioned you, and--or anything else that you think might help +the Commission in the task of ascertaining the basic facts and truths +with respect to that tragic event? + +Mr. GLOVER. I don't believe there is anything else I have of any value +to add. + +Mr. JENNER. Now you understand the Rules of the Commission. You may, +if you wish, read over your testimony, and it will be available to +you next week if you wish to do so. If not, you have the privilege of +waiving that right should you so desire. You also have the privilege +of signing the deposition, if you prefer to do that. That is, read and +sign it. And you also have the privilege of waiving that right. Do you +have any reaction on either of those subjects at the moment? + +Mr. GLOVER. I don't have any reaction. I consider this as, because I +don't know very much about the legal aspects, I consider this to be a +technicality. Maybe I should ask someone. + +Mr. JENNER. Frankly, it is not anything of great moment, but if you +wish to, if you prefer--that you read your deposition over it will be +available to you next week, should you so desire. + +Mr. GLOVER. I believe so. I think I would like to read it. + +Mr. JENNER. I would think that it would be about Tuesday. If you will +call here and ask for me or ask for Mr. Liebeler, your transcript +will be available. And if you have any changes or corrections call +them to our attention and we will make them either on the face of the +deposition or ask you to be resworn and then you state the corrections +or additions. + +Mr. GLOVER. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. With this I have no further questions. I have only +this to say, that I appreciate your appearing here voluntarily and +inconveniencing yourself, and to the extent I had to inquire into your +personal life, I hope you realize that it is part of my job and nothing +personal on my part. + +Mr. GLOVER. I have something to say also. I think that it is not a +question of my doing anyone a favor. I consider it a duty to tell what +I know about such a situation. + +Mr. JENNER. All right, that is where we are at the moment. + + + + +TESTIMONY OF CARLOS BRINGUIER + +The testimony of Carlos Bringuier was taken on April 7-8, 1964, at +the Old Civil Courts Building, Royal and Conti Streets, New Orleans, +La., by Mr. Wesley J. Liebeler, assistant counsel of the President's +Commission. + + +Carlos Bringuier, having been first duly sworn, was examined and +testified as follows: + +Mr. LIEBELER. My name is Wesley J. Liebeler. I am a member of the legal +staff of the President's Commission investigating the assassination of +President Kennedy. + +Staff members have been authorized to take testimony of witnesses, +including you, by the Commission, pursuant to authority granted to the +Commission by Executive Order No. 11130 dated November 29, 1963, and +joint resolution of Congress No. 137. + +I understand that Mr. Rankin wrote to you last week, stating that I +would contact you in connection with the taking of your testimony. I +understand that he sent with his letter a copy of the Executive order +and resolution to which I have just referred as well as a copy of +the rules of procedure of the Commission relating to the taking of +testimony of witnesses. + +Did you receive Mr. Rankin's letter? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. Yes, sir; I received it. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And you received copies of the documents that I have +referred to? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. That is right. I received. + +Mr. LIEBELER. The Commission is interested in learning from you, Mr. +Bringuier, about the contact that you had with Lee Harvey Oswald while +he was present in New Orleans in the summer and early fall of 1963. +Before we get into the details of that testimony, however, will you +state your full name for the record. + +Mr. BRINGUIER. Carlos Bringuier. + +Mr. LIEBELER. What is your address, Mr. Bringuier? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. Excuse me one moment. May I explain to you? In Cuba +we use a long name with a lot of middle names. Do you want the whole +middle name too? + +Mr. LIEBELER. No; I think that is enough. + +Mr. BRINGUIER. It is enough? O.K. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Where do you live? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. I live in 501 Adele Street, Apartment F. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Here in New Orleans? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. Here in New Orleans. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Where were you born? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. I was born in Havana, June 22, 1934. + +Mr. LIEBELER. How long did you live in Havana? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. Well, I was living in Havana until May 4, 1960. I left +Havana to Guatemala and Argentina, and I came to the States in February +8, 1961. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You came then to New Orleans, is that correct? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. That day I arrived to Miami, Florida, and I was in Miami +for 10 days, and I came to New Orleans in February 18, 1961. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Have you been here in New Orleans ever since? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. That is right. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You are a Cuban national, is that correct? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. That is correct. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Are you presently employed? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. What do you do? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. Well, I am a salesman, retail clothing store with the +name of Casa Roca, 107 Decatur Street. I am a salesman and manager of +the store. + +Mr. LIEBELER. How long have you been so employed? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. I started to work in that store in October 1, 1962. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Had you been employed here in New Orleans prior to that +time? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. Yes, sir; I was working for 1 year in Ward's Discount +House, 708 Canal Street. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You worked there as a salesman also? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. As a salesman also. + +Mr. LIEBELER. What is your educational background? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. Well, I was attorney in Cuba and assistant secretary for +the criminal court in Havana. I got my degree in 1957. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Your degree in what field? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. Law. + +Mr. LIEBELER. In law? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. That is right. + +Mr. LIEBELER. So you then were trained as a lawyer in Cuba---- + +Mr. BRINGUIER. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Prior to the time that Castro came to power? Is that +correct? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. That is correct. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And did you actually practice law in Cuba? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. Not actually, no. I didn't practice law, because I was +working, as I told you, in the criminal court, and in Havana, in Cuba, +when you was employee of the criminal court, you could not practice law. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you become a member of the bar in Cuba or do some +act that is similar of becoming a member of the bar here in the United +States? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. No; I didn't do any act to become here in United States +member of bar. + +Mr. LIEBELER. But in Cuba? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. In Cuba, yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You actually were a member of the bar in Cuba? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. That is right. + +Mr. LIEBELER. It is my understanding that you have been active in the +Anti-Castro Movement here in New Orleans. Is that correct? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. That is correct. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Am I correct in understanding that you left Cuba because +of your feeling against the Castro regime and your opposition to that +regime? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. That is correct. I did not believe in it, I did not +agree with the Communist regime in Cuba. + +Mr. LIEBELER. As a result, you left Cuba and came to the United States? +Is that correct? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. That is correct. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Has your family joined you here in the United States? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. Well, when I went to Argentina, I went with my wife and +the three kids at that moment, and after I came to the United States +alone, and 2 months later they met me here in the States. I want to +explain that I am not in the States as a Cuban refugee but as an +immigrant, as a resident. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And as an immigrant from Cuba, or from some other---- + +Mr. BRINGUIER. From Cuba [producing document]. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You have shown me an identification card from the +Department of Immigration and Naturalization, indicating that you were +admitted to the United States as an immigrant on February 8, 1961. Is +that correct? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. That is correct. + +(Document returned to witness.) + +Mr. LIEBELER. I am correct in understanding, am I not, that you have +been involved to one degree or another in Anti-Castro activities here +in New Orleans since your arrival? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. Yes, sir; soon after I arrived here to New Orleans, +I founded a Newsletter for the Cubans with the name of Crusada. +That was my first work here in New Orleans. After that I joined, +at the beginning of 1962, the New Orleans Delegation of the Cuban +Revolutionary Council, and I was working as Secretary of Publicity and +Propaganda here in New Orleans for the Cuban Anti-Castro. That was, +I believe, June or July--June 1962. After that, I resigned, and in +July 1962 I was designated New Orleans delegate of the Cuban Student +Directorate, and I am in that position from that time to now. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did there come a time when you met Lee Harvey Oswald? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. I beg your pardon? + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did there come a time when you met Lee Harvey Oswald? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Tell us when that was and the circumstances of the event. + +Mr. BRINGUIER. Well, the first day that I saw Lee Harvey Oswald was on +August 5, 1963, but before we go deeper in this matter about Oswald, I +think that I would like to explain to you two things that I think will +facilitate the Commission to understand my feeling at that moment. + +Mr. LIEBELER. That is perfectly all right. Go ahead. + +Mr. BRINGUIER. And you see, in August 24, 1962, my organization, +the Cuban Student Directorate, carry on a shelling of Havana, and +a few days later when person from the FBI contacted me here in New +Orleans--his name was Warren C. de Brueys. Mr. de Brueys was talking +to me in the Thompson Cafeteria. At that moment I was the only one +from the Cuban Student Directorate here in the city, and he was asking +to me about my activities here in the city, and when I told him that +I was the only one, he didn't believe that, and he advised me--and I +quote, "We could infiltrate your organization and find out what you are +doing here." My answer to him was, "Well, you will have to infiltrate +myself, because I am the only one." And I want to put this out, because +after the assassination of Mr. Kennedy, when I was interviewed, I told +something that some part of the press or some persons now are trying to +use to tell that maybe Oswald was a man from the FBI or the CIA. I will +go into that later on. + +After that, after my conversation with de Brueys, I always was waiting +that maybe someone will come to infiltrate my organization from the +FBI, because I already was told by one of the FBI agent that they will +try to infiltrate my organization. + +Next thing is this: On August 2, 1963, I receive in my store--I have +over there the office of the delegation too, the visit of two Cubans, +who told me that they had already desert from one Anti-Castro training +camp that was across Lake Pontchartrain here in New Orleans. Until that +moment I did not know nothing about that Anti-Castro training camp +here in the city, and they told me that that Anti-Castro training camp +was a branch of the Christian Democratic Movement--that is another +Anti-Castro organization--and they told me that they had the fear +inside the training camp that there was a Castro agent inside that +training camp. + +A few days before, too, the police found here in New Orleans about 1 +mile from that training camp a big lot of ammunition and weapons and +all those things, and when Oswald came to me on August 5 I had inside +myself the feeling, well, maybe this is from the FBI, or maybe this is +a Communist, because the FBI already had told me that maybe they will +infiltrate my organization, but that feeling--I only had that feeling +on August 5, because 4 days later I was convinced that Oswald was not +an FBI agent and that he was a Pro-Castro agent. + +When I told that to the press after the assassination, I saw in some +magazines that I was not sure if he was an FBI or not, and that is not +the truth, because on August 9, 3 months before the assassination, I +was sure that he was a Pro-Castro and not an FBI. I want to have that +clear. + +Mr. LIEBELER. To summarize your statement, when Oswald came to see you +on August 5---- + +Mr. BRINGUIER. That is right. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You were suspicious of him on two different counts? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. That is right. + +Mr. LIEBELER. One, that he might possibly have been an infiltrator +working for the FBI? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. That is right. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And you were worried about this because of what Agent de +Brueys had said to you---- + +Mr. BRINGUIER. A year ago. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Almost a year prior to that time? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You were also concerned about the possibility that Oswald +might have been a Communist or a Castro agent of some sort, who was +trying to infiltrate your organization on behalf of that group? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. That is right. Now that day, on August 5, I was talking +in the store with one young American--the name of him is Philip +Geraci--and 5 minutes later Mr. Oswald came inside the store. He +start to look around, several articles, and he show interest in my +conversation with Geraci. I was explaining to Geraci that our fight +is a fight of Cubans and that he was too young, that if he want to +distribute literature against Castro, I would give him the literature +but not admit him to the fight. + +At that moment also he start to agree with I, Oswald start to agree +with my point of view and he show real interest in the fight against +Castro. He told me that he was against Castro and that he was against +communism. He told me--he asked me first for some English literature +against Castro, and I gave him some copies of the Cuban report printed +by the Cuban Student Directorate. + +After that, Oswald told me that he had been in the Marine Corps and +that he had training in guerrilla warfare and that he was willing to +train Cubans to fight against Castro. Even more, he told me that he was +willing to go himself to fight against Castro. That was on August 5. + +I turned down his offer. I told him that I don't have nothing to do +with military activities, that my only duties here in New Orleans are +propaganda and information and not military activities. That was my +answer to him. + +He insisted, and he told me that he will bring to me next day one book +as a present, as a gift to me, to train Cubans to fight against Castro. + +Before he left---- + +Mr. LIEBELER. Was Geraci present throughout this entire conversation? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. Pardon? + +Mr. LIEBELER. Was Mr. Geraci present throughout this entire +conversation that you had with Oswald? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. I think so, yes, sir; yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Was there a Mr. Blalock there? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. Who? + +Mr. LIEBELER. Blalock, B-l-a-l-o-c-k. Do you remember him? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. Well, there was another young boy. What was his name did +you say? + +Mr. LIEBELER. Blalock, B-l-a-l-o-c-k. + +Mr. BRINGUIER. I could not tell you, because I don't remember the name +of the other boy who was there, but I think that I saw him just one +time in my life. Geraci was with another person over there, another +young boy, and---- + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did Oswald mention during this conversation that he could +easily derail a train, for example, by securing and fastening a chain +around the railroad track? Do you remember him mentioning something +like that? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. Well, you see; I do not exactly remember all the +details, because we were talking for about--I believe about 1 hour, +something like that, and at that moment I didn't know what was going to +happen and I didn't pay too much attention to all the things that was +being telling over there, but the result of the conversation were this +that I am telling to you. Maybe he mentioned that. I could not tell +to you that he mentioned that, because I am not--I don't remember. He +could have mentioned that, because he was talking about the experience +that he had in guerrilla warfare in the Marine Corps. + +Before he left the store, he put his hand in the pocket and he offered +me money. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Oswald did? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. How much did he offer you? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. Well, I don't know. As soon as he put the hand in the +pocket and he told me, "Well, at least let me contribute to your group +with some money," at that moment I didn't have the permit from the +city hall here in New Orleans to collect money in the city, and I told +him that I could not accept his money, and I told him that if he want +to contribute to our group, he could send the money directly to the +headquarters in Miami, because they had the authorization over there +in Miami, and I gave him the number of the post office box of the +organization in Miami. + +And after that, I left the store, because I had to go to the bank +to make the deposit, and Oswald was in the store talking to my +brother-in-law--that is my partner in the store--Rolando Pelaez. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Is that P-e-l-a-e-z? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. That is right. Oswald was talking to him for about half +an hour, and later on when I came back from the bank I asked to my +brother-in-law, "Well, what do you think about this guy who was here?" + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did he tell you his name was Lee Oswald? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. Yes; he told me that his name was Lee Oswald, and he +told me one address in Magazine Street, but I didn't remember at +that moment the number, and when I asked to my brother-in-law that, +he told me that Oswald looked like really a smart person and really +interested in the fight against communism, and he gave to my brother +a good impression, and I told my brother that I could not trust him, +because--I didn't know what was inside of me, but I had some feeling +that I could not trust him. I told that to my brother that day. Next +day, on August 6, Oswald came back to the store, but I was not in the +store at that moment, and he left with my brother-in-law a Guidebook +for Marines for me with the name "L. H. Oswald" in the top of the first +page. When I came back to the store, my brother-in-law gave to me the +Guidebook for Marines. I was looking in the Guidebook for Marines. I +found interest in it and I keep it, and later--I forgot about that +just for 3 days more--on August 9 I was coming back to the store at 2 +o'clock in the afternoon, and one friend of mine with the name of Celso +Hernandez came to me and told me that in Canal Street there was a young +man carrying a sign telling "Viva Fidel" in Spanish, and some other +thing about Cuba, but my friend don't speak nothing in English, and the +only thing that he understood was the "Viva Fidel" in Spanish. He told +me that he was blaming the person in Spanish, but that the person maybe +didn't understood what he was telling to him and he came to me to let +me know what was going on over there. + +At that moment was in the store another Cuban with the name of Miguel +Cruz, and we went all three with a big sign that I have in the store +in color. The sign is the Statue of Liberty with a knife in the back, +and the hand, knifing her in the back, has the initials of the Soviet +Union, and it said, "Danger. Only 90 Miles from the United States Cuba +Lies in Chains." We pick up the sign and we went to Canal Street to +find the guy. + +We were walking all Canal Street to Rampart Street, but we could not +find him. We were asking to different people in the street, but nobody +saw him, nobody told us, Yes, I saw him, or, He went to this side. I +decided to get a Canal streetcar to search for him, and we went in the +Canal streetcar until about the 2700 block of Canal Street, and we came +back in the Canal streetcar, but we could not find him at that moment. + +I went back to the store, but just 3 or 4 minutes later one of my two +friends, Miguel Cruz, came back running and told me that the guy was +another time in Canal Street and that Celso was watching him over there. + +I went over there with the sign another time, and I was surprised when +I recognized that the guy with the sign hanging on the chest, said, +"Viva Fidel" and "Hands off Cuba," was Lee Harvey Oswald. Until that +moment I only knew Oswald as a guy who was offering his service to +train Cubans, and when I saw that he was with a sign defending Fidel +Castro and praising Fidel Castro, I became angry. That was in the 700 +block of Canal Street just in front of the store where I was working my +first year here in New Orleans. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Was that the International Trade Mart? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. No; Ward Discount House. He make another appearance in +the International Trade Mart, later, and I will go into that, too. + +When I saw that was Oswald and he recognized me, he was also surprised, +but just for a few seconds. Immediately he smiled to me and he offered +the hand to shake hands with me. I became more angry and I start to +tell him that he don't have any face to do that, with what face he was +doing that, because he had just came to me 4 days ago offering me his +service and that he was a Castro agent, and I start to blame him in the +street. + +That was a Friday around 3 o'clock at this moment, and many people +start to gather around us to see what was going on over there. I start +to explain to the people what Oswald did to me, because I wanted to +move the American people against him, not to take the fight for myself +as a Cuban but to move the American people to fight him, and I told +them that that was a Castro agent, that he was a pro-Communist, and +that he was trying to do to them exactly what he did to us in Cuba, +kill them and send their children to the execution wall. Those were my +phrases at the moment. + +The people in the street became angry and they started to shout to him, +"Traitor! Communist! Go to Cuba! Kill him!" and some other phrases that +I do not know if I could tell in the record. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You mean they cursed at him, they swore at him? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. That is right, some bad phrases, bad words. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Yes. + +Mr. BRINGUIER. And at that moment, one of the Americans push him by one +arm. One policeman came. When policeman came to me and asked me to keep +walking and to let Oswald distribute his literature that he was handing +out--he was handing out yellow leaflets of the Fair Play for Cuba +Committee, New Orleans Chapter--and I told to the policeman that I was +Cuban, I explained to him what Oswald did to me, and I told him that I +don't know if was against the law, but that I will not leave that place +until Oswald left and that I will make some trouble. + +The policeman left, I believe going to some place to call the +headquarters, and at one moment my friend Celso took the literature +from Oswald, the yellow sheets, and broke it and threw it on the air. +There were a lot of yellow sheets flying. And I was more angry, and I +went near Oswald to hit him. I took my glasses off and I went near to +him to hit him, but when he sensed my intention, he put his arm down as +an X, like this here (demonstrating). + +Mr. LIEBELER. He crossed his arms in front of him? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. That is right, put his face and told me, "O.K. Carlos, +if you want to hit me, hit me." + +At that moment, that made me to reaction that he was trying to appear +as a martyr if I will hit him, and I decide not to hit him, and just a +few seconds later arrive two police cars, and one of the policeman over +there was Lieutenant Gaillot, G-a-i-l-l-o-t. They put Oswald and my two +friends in one of the police cars, and I went with Lieutenant Gaillot +in the other police car to the First District of Police here in New +Orleans. + +When we were in the First District of Police, we were in the same room, +one small room over there, and some of the policemen start to question +Oswald if he was a Communist, what he was doing that, and all those +things, and Oswald at that moment--that was in front of myself--was +really cold blood. He was answering the questions that he would like +to answer, and he was not nervous, he was not out of control, he was +confident in himself at that moment over there. + +One of the questions that they asked to him was about his organization, +the Fair Play for Cuba, and I saw him showing some papers that--I +believe they were the credentials of the Fair Play for Cuba Committee, +that the Fair Play for Cuba Committee is a national organization, and +when he told that, he was so kind of proud that it was not a small +group but a national group all over the United States, and they asked +of him the name of the members. No. Excuse me. Before they asked him if +he has any office. He told them no, that there were--they were holding +the meetings in different house, different homes, different members +of the organization one night in one house, another night in another +house, but in front of me he didn't told nothing about any office. When +they asked him about the name of the members, he answered that he could +not tell the name of the members in front of myself, because he will +not like to let me know who were the ones who were helping him here in +the city, and at that moment the police came out of the room and that +was the last time that I saw him that day. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did the police keep you in jail too? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. Well, yes. I had to put--they took my fingerprints and +my picture, and I have to put $25 bond that night with my two friends +too, and I don't know, but after the assassination I heard that Oswald +didn't put the $25 bond, that somebody went to the First District and +make--I believe you call that an affidavit or something like that, and +he will appear in court and he will not have to put the $25. He didn't +put the $25 bond. That is what I heard. I didn't saw that. I am not +sure of that. Next time that I saw him---- + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you appear in court later? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. Yes, sir; later. That was August 12. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Yes, on Monday. + +Mr. BRINGUIER. Monday. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And you pleaded not guilty to the offense that you were +charged with? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. That is right; that is right. And he plead guilty. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Oswald was there in court? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And you saw him in court? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And that is what you were just about to tell me? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Go ahead. + +Mr. BRINGUIER. In August 12, we appear in the second municipal court in +New Orleans. I came first with my friends, and there were some other +Cubans over there, and I saw when Oswald came inside the court. I saw +him. He went directly to sit down in the middle of the seat of the +colored people. See, here in the court you have two sides, one for the +white people and one for the colored people, and he walked directly +inside of the colored people and he sat directly among them in the +middle, and that made me to be angry too, because I saw that he was +trying to win the colored people for his side. When he will appear in +the court, he will defend Fidel Castro, he will defend the Fair Play +for Cuba, and the colored people will feel good for him, and that is a +tremendous work of propaganda for his cause. That is one of the things +that made me to think that he was a really smart guy and not a nut. + +When the judge call us, he plead guilty, I plead not guilty, and +my friends plead not guilty. I brought the Marines guidebook, the +guidebook for Marines, and I explain to the judge that the incident was +originated when Oswald tried to infiltrate the organization and that if +he will not do that, I will not have any fight with him in the street, +and I showed to him the guidebook for Marines with the name of Oswald +on the top of the first page, and the judge dismisses the charges +against us and fined him $10. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Fined Oswald $10? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. Ten dollars, that is right. In the court was at that +moment one cameraman from WDSU, and he make--he did an interview to +Oswald after the trial and he took some movies of ourselves, and later +I receive one phone call from Bill Stuckey. I had talk to Stuckey the +day of the trial in the morning. I met him in the bank and I explained +to him what was going on in the second municipal court, and he was the +one who send the reporter over there to the trial. I am not sure if +was the same day or next day of the trial Stuckey called me asking for +Oswald's address. I get the affidavit from the court dissertation, and +I give to him the address in dissertation, and I asked him why he was +looking for that. He told me that he was going to make an interview +to Oswald. I disagreed with him at that moment, I told him that I was +thinking that it was not good to let a Communist go to radio station +and tell all his lies, because there are many people who understand +what was happening in Cuba, but there are many people who do not know +exactly what is happening in Cuba. Stuckey offered me to make another +interview to me next Saturday in his program, but I didn't agree with +that neither, and I asked him to arrange a radio debate, because in +that way we could tell our point of view at the same moment in the same +place. + +On August 16 another friend of mine left to me a message in the store +that Oswald was another time handing out pro-Castro propaganda for the +Fair Play for Cuba Committee, this time in front of the International +Trade Mart here in New Orleans. + +I wasn't in the store at that moment, and when I came back and I +received the message, I went to the International Trade Mart, but I +could not find Oswald, he had already left, and I was talking later on +with my friend, and the information that I received was that he was +over there with two other persons. Later I saw the picture of those two +persons, and they have a Latin aspect. I do not know if they are Latin +Americans or not, but at least there is one who is. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did somebody show you pictures of these individuals? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Who did? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. The Secret Service tried to see if I know them, if I +could identify them. + +Mr. LIEBELER. [Exhibiting photograph to witness.] I show you a picture, +which has previously been marked as "Pizzo Exhibit 453-A," and I ask +you if that is one of the pictures or a picture like the one the +Secret Service showed to you. + +Mr. BRINGUIER. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. [Exhibiting photograph to witness.] I show you another +picture, which has previously been marked "Pizzo Exhibit 453-B." + +Mr. BRINGUIER. [Indicating.] See this guy, see this Japanese? He +is from the Kasuga Co. here in New Orleans. He had the office in +International Trade Mart. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And you pointed to the person standing immediately behind +and to Oswald's right with his hands up behind his head? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. [Demonstrating.] That is right. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And that is on Exhibit 453-A. Now do you recognize the +person with the "X" over his head? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. Yes, sir; that was Lee Harvey Oswald. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Now there is a person standing to Oswald's left wearing a +white shirt and facing the same direction that Oswald was facing, and +I will indicate that person with a pen mark on the picture. [Marking +photograph.] I have drawn an arrow pointing to the person to which I +refer, and I ask you if you recognize that person. + +Mr. BRINGUIER. No; I don't recognize him. I believe that this is one of +the pictures that I saw before, but I don't recognize him. For me, he +looked like as a Latin American. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Now in the far foreground of this picture, there is a +man who has been marked with a green mark, just one mark, and we are +referring at this point to Exhibit 453-A. Do you recognize that person? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. No, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Is that another one of the individuals to which you +referred as having a Latin-type complexion, or is it not? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. No, sir. I believe--no; this is not the one that I said. + +Mr. LIEBELER. I have one other picture here of this scene which has not +previously been marked, and I will show that picture to you and ask +you if you can identify anybody in that picture with the exception of +Oswald, of course. [Exhibiting photograph to witness.] + +Mr. BRINGUIER. The only one that I could recognize here is Oswald. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And he is the person with the "Hands Off Cuba"? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. "Hands Off Cuba" leaflets in his hand, the first one in +front, just in the middle of the picture. + +Mr. LIEBELER. [Marking photograph.] I have marked the picture I just +referred to as "Exhibit No. 1" to your deposition. + +Mr. BRINGUIER. Do you want that I sign the picture? + +Mr. LIEBELER. Yes. Would you initial the picture for identification +purposes? + +(The witness complied.) + +Mr. LIEBELER. Thank you. + +Mr. BRINGUIER. You want that I sign these too? + +Mr. LIEBELER. No. We have identified those as Pizzo Exhibits 453-A and +453-B, and you have noted that they are---- + +Mr. BRINGUIER. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. I thought you mentioned that there were two different +people that appeared to you to be Latin people. + +Mr. BRINGUIER. Sure. This one that I see here [indicating], this is the +one looked like to me a Latin, but, if I am not wrong, somebody showed +me another picture where is another guy distributing the leaflets. I +believe so. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Do you think that was a Secret Service man or an FBI +agent? Do you know? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. I think that was a Secret Service man. Maybe I am wrong. +I saw those days a lot of pictures; but--let me tell you something +else: If my opinion is not wrong, if I am not mistaken this moment, I +think that the other man was maybe in some kind of Bermuda shorts or +something like that. + +Mr. LIEBELER. I don't have any pictures in my possession showing that. +The Commission has requested the actual film, the TV film itself, to be +delivered to it, and they will examine it, and if such a person does +appear in the films, I will send you a picture of it. + +Mr. BRINGUIER. Okay. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And I will also speak to the Secret Service about it and +see if we can find such a picture. According to the Secret Service, one +of these gentlemen has been identified as Mr. Charles Hall Steele, Jr. + +Mr. BRINGUIER. He was working in the Pap's Super Market here in New +Orleans. I believe so, that he was working over there. There was one +Cuban who, when saw his face in the television, called me to tell me +that, and I called the Secret Service and let them know. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Mr. Steele will be in the office here this afternoon, so +we will have an opportunity to determine if it is the same man that was +marked with the arrow in Pizzo Exhibit 453-A or not. + +So you went over to the International Trade Mart on this day in an +attempt to find Oswald, but you were not successful? Is that correct? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. That is correct. After that my friend showed to me +one of the leaflets that Oswald was handing out in front of the +International Trade Mart, the yellow leaflets, and I found something +interesting at this point. There was a difference among the leaflets +that he was handing out on August 16 in the International Trade Mart +and the leaflets that he was handing out on Canal Street on August 9. + +Mr. LIEBELER. What was the difference? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. The leaflet he was handing out on Canal Street August 9 +didn't have his name of Oswald, at least the ones that I saw. They have +the name A. J. Hidell, and one post office box here in New Orleans and +the address, and the leaflets that he was handing out on August 16 have +the name L. H. Oswald, 4907 Magazine Street. In the yellow leaflets +he was offering free literature and lectures, and he was asking to +the people to join the New Orleans Chapter of the Fair Play for Cuba +Committee, and at the end he said, "Everyone welcome." My friend asked +to me if I think that it would be good that he will go to Oswald's +house posing as a pro-Castro and try to get as much information as +possible from Oswald. I told him yes; and that night he went to +Oswald's house with the leaflets. + +Mr. LIEBELER. What day was this now? Do you remember? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. August 16. I believe so. I think that. I am sure. + +Mr. LIEBELER. That was the same day that---- + +Mr. BRINGUIER. That he was distributing the leaflets. + +Mr. LIEBELER. The second time? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. The second time. The first time was a Friday, August 9, +and the second time--I think that was another Friday, August 16. + +My friend went to Oswald's house and he was talking to Oswald for about +1 hour inside his house, in the porch of the house, and there was when +we found that Oswald had some connection with Russia, or something like +that, because the daughter came to the porch and Oswald spoke to her +in Russian, and my friend heard that language and he asked Oswald if +that was Russian, and Oswald told him yes, that he was attending Tulane +University and that he was studying language, that that was the reason +why he speak Russian. He give to my friend an application to become a +member of the New Orleans Chapter of the Fair Play for Cuba Committee. + +After the assassination my friend turned [over] to the Secret Service +one copy of the application. I have here one, one copy [producing +document]. This is a photocopy. My friend keep the original. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Do you have another copy of this? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. No; that is the only one that I have. He has the +original. If you want to keep that, for me it is no trouble, because +always I could take more copies. + +Mr. LIEBELER. I see. Your friend still has the original? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. The original; that is right. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Well, let's mark this one as "Exhibit 2" to your +deposition. Off the record. + +(Discussion off the record.) + +Mr. LIEBELER. Let the record show that we asked Mr. Bringuier to +initial a picture which we discussed before on the record, and +that picture, which is a picture of a street scene in front of +the International Trade Mart has been marked "Exhibit 1" to Mr. +Bringuier's deposition taken here in New Orleans on April 7, 1964. We +shall now mark as "Exhibit 2" to that deposition a photocopy of an +application to the Fair Play for Cuba Committee, New Orleans, La., +which Mr. Bringuier says is a copy of an application which was given +to a friend of his whose name we have agreed not to indicate on the +record, given by Lee Oswald on or about August 16, 1963. Is that +correct? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. I have initialed Exhibit No. 2 and I ask you to do the +same, if you would. + +[The witness complied.] + +Mr. LIEBELER. Please go ahead. + +Mr. BRINGUIER. At that conversation Oswald was defending Fidel Castro, +and he advised to my friend that the United States don't have the right +to invade or to overthrow any other government, and that if the United +States will do that to Cuba, he will fight defending Castro, because +Castro was right. + +I gave the copy of the transcription of the conversation with my friend +to the Secret Service the days after the Kennedy assassination. + +Mr. LIEBELER. That is the day that you and your friend discussed this +after your friend returned from Oswald's and you made a recording of +that conversation? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. Not a recording, not a recording exactly; but when my +friend came back from Oswald's house, he told me what happened over +there and he was trying to contact some authority to let him go deeper +inside the Fair Play for Cuba Committee here in New Orleans. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Your friend was? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. Yes; my friend was trying to contact some authorities, +because he didn't want to be involved in that matter without the +knowledge of the U.S. Government. We also discussed this conversation +in front of Ed Butler. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Who? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. Ed Butler, Edward Butler, for the Information Council of +the Americas, the day or 2 days previous to the debate when my friend +and myself went to Butler's office, and my friend was explaining to +Butler all the conversation and the point of view of Oswald, and the +matter that Oswald spoke in Russian, and at that moment my friend +had found that Oswald had been in Russia and that he was married to +one Russian girl. We gave all that information to Butler and he was +trying to contact some person, somebody in Washington, to get more the +background of Oswald before the debate. + +After that, the last day that I saw Oswald was August 21, the day of +the debate. I went to WDSU radio about 5:30, 30 minutes before the time +of the debate. When I went to the lobby, there were already there--Bill +Stuckey and Lee Harvey Oswald. I shake hands with Stuckey. Stuckey +indicate to me that Oswald was there. Oswald stand up and came to me +and shake hands with me. I was talking to Stuckey for a few minutes, +and after that Stuckey left the lobby and went inside the WDSU radio +station to check--I believe that was to check in what room we will have +the debate. I was talking to Oswald that day before the debate started. +I was trying to be as friendly to him as I could. I really believe +that the best thing that I could do is to get one Communist out of the +Communist Party and put him to work against communism, because he know +what communism mean, and I told to Oswald that I don't have nothing +against him in the personal way, just in the ideologic way. I told him +that for me it was impossible to see one American being a Communist, +because communism is trying to destroy the United States, and that if +any moment when he will be at bed he will start to think that he can +do something good for his country, for his family, and for himself, he +could come to me, because I would receive him, because I repeat to him +I didn't have nothing against him in the personal way. He smiled to me. +He told me--he answered me that he was in the right side, the correct +side, and that I was in the wrong side, and that he was doing his best. +That were his words at that moment. + +Before we went inside the room of the debate, he saw my guidebook for +Marines that I was carrying with me, because I did not know what will +happen in the debate and I will have to have that weapon with me to +destroy him personally as a traitor if he doing something wrong in the +debate. When he saw the guidebook for Marines, he smiled to me, and he +told me, "Well, listen, Carlos, don't try to do an invasion with that +guidebook for Marines, because that is an old one and that will be a +failure." That was his joke in that moment. + +After that we went to the debate, and I think that you have the whole +history of the debate, you have the transcription and everything, [so] +that I don't have to go inside that, because that is subjective, not +objective. You have the objective, and that is the debate. + +Mr. LIEBELER. That is right. We do have a transcript and we listened to +it on the tape last night over at the television station too. + +Mr. BRINGUIER. And there is something that I want to show you too. +I told to you about the training camp that were across the Lake +Pontchartrain. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Yes. + +Mr. BRINGUIER. [Producing newspaper.] At the beginning of August in the +Diario Las Americas from Miami for September 4---- + +Mr. LIEBELER. For September 4, 1963? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. That is right. [Indicating photograph.] This is the spy +who was inside the training camp. The Christian Democratic Movement +turned him over to the FBI, and the FBI was questioning him in Miami. +The Christian Democratic Movement found a letter, according to this +information, from this guy directed to Carlos Lechuga, former Cuban +Ambassador to Mexico and now Cuban Ambassador to the United Nations +in New York. In that letter the spy, Fernando Fernandez, was warning +Lechuga that they have to be alert from that date to August 8, and the +day that Oswald came trying to infiltrate my organization was on August +5. This sounds for me strange in all this matter. + +[Indicating.] Here is another interview from Fernandez here 3 days +later. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You are referring to a copy of the same newspaper but for +the date of September 6, 1963, on the front page of which---- + +Mr. BRINGUIER. [Indicating.] Here. "Fernando Fernandez is in favor of +coexistence with the Communist regime of Castro." That is the title in +Spanish. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Let me see if I can understand what you are saying. You +say that Fernandez wrote a letter to Lechuga? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. Fernandez wrote a letter to Lechuga in Mexico. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Lechuga is a member of the Castro government? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. Right. + +Mr. LIEBELER. He is now Ambassador to the United Nations? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. In New York; right. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Fernandez is the person who was the Castro spy who had +infiltrated the training camp in Louisiana? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. For the Christian Democratic Movement here in Louisiana. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Now the Christian Democratic Movement is--what? +Pro-Castro? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. Anti-Castro. + +Mr. LIEBELER. It is an anti-Castro organization? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. Yes; they were training Cubans over here to make a +commando action against Castro, but they find out that there was a +Castro spy inside the training camp, and they went back to Miami with +the people and with him, and they turn him over to the FBI. I think +that after that the leader for the Christian Democratic Movement--or +that the FBI didn't found nothing, because was not against the law +to spy inside an anti-Castro organization. It was against the law +to spy inside the U.S. Government but not inside the anti-Castro +organization. And my feeling--and this is the question that I am asking +myself--in New Orleans we are about 900 miles from Miami. In Miami +is where the headquarters of all the anti-Castro groups. I could not +find any reason for Oswald to come to me and offer me his service to +train Cubans in guerrilla warfare at the same moment when there was a +secret anti-Castro training camp in New Orleans and a Castro spy was +inside that training camp. That for me is--because, if he was willing +to infiltrate one active organization, he will go directly to Miami +and he will offer his service over there in Miami, but not in New +Orleans where it is not publicly known that there was something going +on at that moment. I believe that that was the only time here in New +Orleans that there was something like that, and it was a coincidence. +And there is another coincidence too for me, and that is that when +Oswald left the city he went to Mexico, and the letter from Fernandez +that was intercepted here was to Mexico too, and Oswald visit the +Cuban consulate in Mexico, and the Fernandez letter was to the Cuban +Ambassador to Mexico. For me, that is a big doubt. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Go ahead. + +Mr. BRINGUIER. You see, after the debate, the same night of the debate, +I went to the radio station here in New Orleans and the local papers +and the United Press International office, and I gave a press release. +If you want a copy, I could give you a copy. I gave a copy to the +Secret Service. + +The most interesting thing is the four things that I asked to the +Secret Service of New Orleans. I think that this is the second +one where I said, "Write to your Congressman asking for a full +investigation of Mr. Lee H. Oswald, a confessed Marxist" [producing +document]. And that was 3 months before the assassination. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Do you have another copy of this? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. I have the original of that. You can have that. + +Mr. LIEBELER. I have marked a copy of the press release distributed to +the various communications media here in New Orleans, on August 16, +1963---- + +Mr. BRINGUIER. No, August 21. + +Mr. LIEBELER. August 21, 1963? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. August 21, the night of the debate. + +Mr. LIEBELER. I mark it as "Exhibit No. 3" to your deposition, and I +have initialed it. Would you initial it? + +[The witness complied.] + +Mr. LIEBELER. Let me go over some of this testimony that you have just +given to see if I understand. Mr. Fernandez wrote to Mr. Lechuga a +letter in which Fernandez said that we--meaning the Castro people? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Must be on guard up until August 8? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. August 8, that is right. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Of 1963? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. That is right. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You indicated that Oswald had come to your store or +offices on August 5, 1963? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. That is right. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Oswald came to you offering to assist in the military +training of Cubans? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. That is right. + +Mr. LIEBELER. At that time, there was, in fact, a training camp near +New Orleans---- + +Mr. BRINGUIER. That is right. + +Mr. LIEBELER. For the training of people for military action against +Castro? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. Right. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And that was not public knowledge at that time? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. That is right. + +Mr. LIEBELER. So you are tying this up in your mind by considering the +possibility that Oswald was, in fact, a Castro agent? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. That is right. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And did know about the existence of this training camp, +because Mr. Fernandez had already himself infiltrated that training +camp? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. That is right. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And that Fernandez had told Oswald about the existence of +this camp and had asked Oswald himself to try to infiltrate that camp +for your organization? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. Excuse me. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Is that correct? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. Well, the only thing that I don't believe is that +Fernandez had told directly to Oswald. What I believe is that Fernandez +had informed some people outside the United States, and these people +had informed Oswald and had gave to Oswald the order to try to +infiltrate the Cuban group here in New Orleans. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And Mr. Fernandez was, on this theory, aware of that and +was aware of approximately the time Oswald would make this attempt, +and, therefore, indicated to Lechuga that there would be some danger of +Oswald being discovered as an attempted infiltrator? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. I beg pardon? I don't understand the words. + +Mr. LIEBELER. As I understand, part of the hypothesis here, the theory, +relates to the fact that Fernandez said to Lechuga, "We must be +careful, or we will be in danger,"--up until about August 8. Now does +that statement have anything to do with Oswald? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. Well, what I think is this: He send that letter to +Lechuga, and on August 5 Oswald came to me offering his service to +train Cubans, all in the same period of time. Something that never was +happening here in New Orleans, that there was a secret anti-Castro +training camp, and the chairman of the Fair Play for Cuba Committee +trying to join the Cuban group here in New Orleans. Those are the +facts. I don't want to tell something that I am not sure about. I just +want to show you that tremendous coincidence or that connection. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Now it doesn't seem likely, does it, that Oswald would +go around handing out literature in the streets like he did if he was +actually attempting to infiltrate the anti-Castro movement? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. Remember that that was after I turned down his offer +and after I told him that I don't have nothing to do with military +activities and that here there is nothing, and that I turned down +completely him. He didn't went openly to do that before the attempt to +infiltrate the training camp; he went openly to do that after he was +turned down. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Do you know of any conceivable association between +anybody in the pro-Castro movement and Oswald that could have acted as +a source of information to Oswald--conducted the orders to him? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. No. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Would you have any way of obtaining information of that +sort as a result of your anti-Castro activities and contacts? If there +were such a person as this, do you think you would be likely to know +about it? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. Beg your pardon? + +Mr. LIEBELER. If there were such a person, that is to say, some agent +of the Castro movement who had been working with Oswald, do you think +that you would have had access to that information or you would have +been likely to find out about it? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. You see, that is a hard question, because here in the +city you have a lot of persons. There are some who are pro-Castro, +there are many who are anti-Castro. Even among the Cubans you could +have some Castro agents here in the city and you could not have control +of everybody. + +But there is something else: The owner of the Havana Bar--the Havana +Bar is located in 117 Decatur Street, just two door or three door from +my store--the owner of the Havana Bar is a Cuban, and he and one of +the employees over there, gave the information to me after Kennedy's +assassination--not before--that Oswald went to the Havana Bar one time. +He asked for some lemonade. He was with one Mexican at that moment, +and when Oswald was drinking the lemonade, he start to say that, sure, +the owner of that place had to be a Cuban capitalistic, and that he +argue about the price of the lemonade. He was telling that that was +too much for a lemonade, and he feel bad at that moment, Oswald feel +bad at that moment--he had some vomits and he went out to the sidewalk +to vomit outside on the sidewalk. These persons here from the Havana +Bar told me that the guy, the Mexican, who was with Oswald, was the +same one that one time the FBI told them that if they will see him, +call them immediately because that was a pro-Communist. I remember +that was between August 15 and August 30 was that period of time. I +could not locate that because I start to find out all these things +after the Kennedy assassination, not before, because before I did not +found any connection. They did not told nothing of this before to me. +Between the 15th and the 30th the brother of the owner of the Havana +Bar came to my store asking me to call the FBI, because he already saw +one automobile passing by the street with two Mexicans, one of them the +one who had been with Oswald in the bar, and he told me that the FBI, +one agent from the FBI, had been in the bar and told them that if they +will see those two guy to call them. This person, the brother of the +owner of the bar, he gave to me at that moment the number of the plate +of the automobile, but he didn't get from what State. I called the FBI, +because this person don't know to speak English. That was the reason +why he came to me. I talked to the person in the FBI. I explained what +was going on, but looked like this person on the telephone didn't know +nothing about that matter and he took the--I believe that he took the +notes of what I was telling to him, and that was all. + +Mr. LIEBELER. When did this happen, before the assassination or after? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. I called before the assassination, but I didn't know +that that was any connection with Oswald, because they didn't told me +at the Havana Bar that one of them was the one that was with Oswald in +the Havana Bar, and even more they didn't told me Oswald had been in +the Havana Bar. After I learn that Oswald was one day over there with +one Mexican, the brother of the owner told me, "Yes. You remember those +two Mexicans? One of them was the one who was with Oswald in the bar." + +Mr. LIEBELER. Now, tell me approximately when you called the FBI about +this. + +Mr. BRINGUIER. Well, that was between the 15th of August and the 30th +of August, because that was when the owner of the Havana Bar was on +vacation. The brother was the one who was at the front of the business +at that moment, and we figure that the owner of the Havana Bar went on +vacation from August 15 to August 30 and that had to happen in that +period of time. + +Mr. LIEBELER. As I understand it, some time between August 15 and +August 30 the brother of the owner of the Havana Bar told you that he +had seen a man that had been formerly identified to him by the FBI, and +the FBI had asked this man, the brother of the owner of the bar, to +notify them if he saw this man? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And he had seen this man together with another man +driving in an automobile somewhere here in New Orleans? Is that correct? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. But the question is this: The FBI was according to the +information that the brother of the owner of the Havana Bar told me, +the FBI was looking for both men, not for one. + +Mr. LIEBELER. For both of them? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. For both of them, but just one of them was in the Havana +Bar with Oswald, not both. + +Mr. LIEBELER. What is the name of the brother of the owner of the +Havana Bar? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. Ruperto Peña, and the one who saw Oswald in the +bar--that was the one who served the lemonade to him--Evaristo +Rodriguez. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you report this to the FBI when you talked to them +after the assassination? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. After the assassination? + +Mr. LIEBELER. Yes. + +Mr. BRINGUIER. I report this to the Secret Service. I believe so. +[Producing document.] I have here a copy of the letter that I send +to the headquarters on November 27, 1963, informing here to the +headquarters the information that I gave to the Secret Service about +the man who was working in the Pap's Supermarket, that he was going to +Delgado Trades School, I believe with the name of Charles, and I have +here that I gave to the Secret Service this information during that day. + +Mr. LIEBELER. May I see that? + +[Document exhibited to counsel.] + +Mr. LIEBELER. It is in Spanish? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Off the record. + +(Discussion off the record.) + +Mr. LIEBELER. You have given me a draft of a document entitled "Open +Letter to People of New Orleans," which I have marked "Exhibit No. 4" +to your deposition taken here in New Orleans on April 7, 1964, and I +have initialed it in the lower right hand corner. Would you initial it, +please? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. [Complying.] And you agree to send me back the original? + +Mr. LIEBELER. Yes. I will take this and have a copy made, and I will +send the original back to you. I have your address on my copy here of +Mr. Rankin's letter, which is 107 Decatur Street, New Orleans, La. Is +that correct? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. That is correct. That is my store. You can send the mail +to there. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Correct. Now "Exhibit No. 4," as I understand it, is a +draft of a letter that you proposed to distribute here in New Orleans +some time after the debate that you had with Oswald on August 21, 1963. +Is that correct? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. That is correct. + +Mr. LIEBELER. It, in fact, was never distributed because you---- + +Mr. BRINGUIER. I went to the city hall, and they informed me--I think +the person that informed me--maybe I am wrong--is Mr. Diboll--I had +that name here wrote on the back--and he gave to me the information +that it had to be 3-1/2 by 5-1/2 and this was not possible to +distribute in that size, and I decided not to distribute. + +Mr. LIEBELER. But you prepared this some time during August in 1963? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. That is right, that is right. + +Mr. LIEBELER. That was done prior to the assassination? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. That is right. Do you have any information from Oswald +going to Cuba? + +Mr. LIEBELER. You mean--has it ever appeared that Oswald actually went +to Cuba? Not as far as I know. + +Mr. BRINGUIER. Well [producing magazine], there is here in this +magazine--this is Bohemia International--this is printed in +Venezuela--February 2, 1964--there is an article by Dr. Herminio +Portell-Vila. He is a professor of history of Cuba, Dr. Herminio +Portell-Vila, and an old diplomat from Cuba. I think he is living in +Washington, D.C. And he said here [exhibiting page] that in one speech +from Castro on November 27, 1963, in the University of Havana, Castro +said--and I quote: "The first time that Oswald was in Cuba"--and that +immediately he cut the speech, he changed and he talked of something +else. Maybe you have a record of that speech delivered from Castro in +the University of Havana and you could check if Castro said that 5 days +after the assassination or not. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And what kind of magazine is this Bohemia International? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. Bohemia was the biggest weekly magazine in Cuba. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Prior to the Castro regime? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. That is right. And during the Castro regime they were +defending Castro a lot of time, but in 1960 the director, the editor, +went into exile, and---- + +Mr. LIEBELER. And he now publishes this magazine from Venezuela? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. That is right. He was publishing that from New York +about one year, I believe, sir, and then at a later date moved to +Venezuela, but that is circulating here inside the United States. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You have referred to an issue of that magazine of +February 2, 1964, and to an article that begins on page 16. What is the +title of the article? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. Disfraz. That is mask, costume. That says "change of---- + +Mr. LIEBELER. Change of costume? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And this is an article about Lee Oswald and the Fair Play +for Cuba Committee. Is that correct? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. That is correct. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And the caption under the picture of Lee Oswald, as it +appears on page 17, reads what in English? Would you translate that for +us? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. "When Castro in his speech of November 27, 1963, at the +University of Havana said literally that 'the first time that Oswald +was in Cuba,' he went out of his tongue, that is literally, under the +influence of cognac--Peralta, that is a brand of cognac--'he told +something that is really important.'" + +Mr. LIEBELER. That is what it says? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. That is what it says here, and if you want to take the +name of the person who wrote it---- + +Mr. LIEBELER. Yes. The article was written by---- + +Mr. BRINGUIER. I don't know if you have a copy of---- + +Mr. LIEBELER. Off the record. + +(Discussion off the record.) + +Mr. LIEBELER. Do you want to put that on the record, that story you +told me just a minute ago? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. Last January I went to Miami, Fla., where I was +talking to Dr. Emilio Nunez-Portuondo, former Cuban Ambassador to the +United Nations, and he told me that just after the assassination of +President Kennedy he received a request from one of the biggest Mexican +newspapers asking him for some public declarations of opinion about +the assassination. He sent that day a letter with his press release +inside, addressed to one friend of him who is living in Mexico City and +his friend deliver that press release to the Mexico City newspaper in +Mexico. In that release, Mr. Nunez-Portuondo blamed Fidel Castro as the +"intellectual murderer of President Kennedy." + +Dr. Portuondo told me that the same day that that information appear +in the paper, his friend suffer an attempt to be kidnaped. There went +about eight men to this man house, and when they were trying to put him +inside one automobile, at the same moment pass a reporter--I believe +that was from the AP--and when the reporter saw what was going on, +he start to ask for help. At that moment the police came and started +to question the eight men, and, according to Nunez-Portuondo, they +identified themselves as members of the Secret Service of the Mexican +Government, and Mr. Portuondo's friend was beaten so hard that he had +to go to a hospital for 4 days with a broken leg, just because he +was the one who deliver Nunez-Portuondo's statement to the Mexican +newspaper blaming Fidel Castro for the murder of President Kennedy. + +Mr. LIEBELER. I want to go back briefly to the letter from Fernandez to +Lechuga which you indicated had been intercepted. + +Mr. BRINGUIER. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. What letter is this and who intercepted it? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. Well, I believe that that letter was intercepted here in +New Orleans when Fernandez was sending the letter to Mexico. I didn't +have too much contact with that deal, because that was for another +organization, not my organization, and I didn't want to be involved, in +that that maybe was against the law. I always try to be out of---- + +Mr. LIEBELER. You mean this letter was intercepted by some other Cuban +organization? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. Yes; for the same organization who had the training camp. + +Mr. LIEBELER. That was intercepted while it was in the U.S. mails? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. I think so. I think that he gave that letter to somebody +to drop in the mail, and that somebody that was suspicious about him, +they opened the letter and they found what the letter was telling. I +don't know what they do with the letter. I don't know nothing else. I +know about what is said in the paper. I know that they dismantle all +the training camp here in New Orleans. They went back to Miami. I paid +the trip for two of them to go back to Miami. Excuse me. I did not pay +the trip, I collect some monies among some Cubans, and we paid the +trip. I don't want to set something on the record that is not---- + +Mr. LIEBELER. Does it say something about the letter in these newspaper +stories that you have referred me to? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. Pardon? + +Mr. LIEBELER. Does it refer to the letter in these newspaper stories? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. That is right, is covering the whole history about it +[producing newspaper]. + +Mr. LIEBELER. These newspaper stories are, as we have indicated, in +the Diario Las Americas, issues of September 4, 1963, and September 6, +1963. Do you have copies of these or do you want to keep these? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. I think they are the only ones we have. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Yes. + +Mr. BRINGUIER. I will tell something else to you: This +information--they are taking this information from the Miami Herald. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You are referring now---- + +Mr. BRINGUIER. That was the one who interview Fernando Fernandez, the +Miami Herald made an interview to Fernando Fernandez. I already asked +to some person in Miami to send me the Miami Herald, from September 3 +to September 10 to try to get all the information directly from the +Miami Herald but at this moment I only have the Spanish publication +over there. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Do you know where Fernandez is now? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. No; I don't know where he is. He was telling in that +interview that he was willing to go to Cuba, to go back to Cuba. I +don't know whether he is in Cuba now or not. Excuse me. Did you check +any other trip from Oswald to Mexico previously to the trip 3 weeks +before the assassination? Because I think that you have to know sure +that Mr. Stuckey, Bill Stuckey, made another interview to Oswald, and +he had the tape of that interview. I have one tape of that interview. +I think that that interview was made on August 17, 1963, and at that +interview Oswald said, answering to one question, that he had been in +Mexico, and in all the magazines that I am reading they are talking +about Oswald was born in New Orleans, he went to New York, he came +back to New Orleans, he went to the Marines, he went to Russia, he +came back, he he went to Dallas, he came to New Orleans back, he went +to Mexico 3 weeks before the assassination, but I don't read in any +newspaper or any magazine talking about some other trip from Oswald to +Mexico, and if you have that tape, in Oswald's own voice, he admitted +that he had been to Mexico before August 17. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Well, Mr. Stuckey will be here this afternoon. We will +ask him about that. + +Mr. BRINGUIER. Thank you. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Going back briefly to this story of Mr. Peña telling you +that he had seen Oswald in the Havana Bar with this other Mexican, did +the FBI ever talk to Mr. Peña about this? Do you know? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. I don't know. I know that the owner of the Havana Bar, +in my opinion, is a good person, but he says that always when he talk +to the FBI in the bar or something like that, that he lose customers, +because, you see, to those bars sometime there are people, customers, +who don't like to see FBI around there, and he says that always he lose +customers when the FBI start to go over there, and sometime he become +angry and sometime he don't want to talk about. I am sure that the +brother, Ruperto--I am sure that he will tell everything that he knows. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you form any opinion as to whether the report that +Ruperto made about Oswald being in the bar was an accurate report? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. Well, the question is this: Was not only Ruperto told +me that Oswald went to Havana Bar. The one who told me that was +Evaristo Rodriguez, and I never saw Evaristo Rodriguez telling lies or +never--Evaristo is quiet person, he is young, married, but he is quiet. +He is not an extrovert, that is, not a---- + +Mr. LIEBELER. He wouldn't be likely to make this story up? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. No; I don't believe so. + +(At this point, Mr. Jenner entered the room to obtain photographs, and +there ensued an off the record discussion about the photographs.) + +Mr. BRINGUIER. I remember that when somebody--I believe that was the +Secret Service--showed to me the other picture that I tell you, that +they were--they had already identified one and they were trying to +identify the other one. I am sure that there were two, and no doubt +about that. + +Mr. LIEBELER. In any event, you didn't recognize any of the---- + +Mr. BRINGUIER. No. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Individuals in the pictures that we showed you +previously, Pizzo Exhibits 453-A and 453-B, and Exhibit No. 1 to your +own deposition? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. Pardon? + +Mr. LIEBELER. The only person you recognized in those pictures was Lee +Oswald? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. That is right, that is right, and the guy I showed you, +the one from Kasuga, the Japanese. + +Mr. LIEBELER. [Exhibiting photograph to witness.] Now I show you +Exhibit No. 1 to the affidavit of Jesse Garner, and I ask you if you +recognize the individual in that picture. + +Mr. BRINGUIER. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And who is that? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. Well, the picture look like that is Lee Harvey Oswald. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And it shows him handing out a leaflet? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. "Hands Off Cuba." + +Mr. LIEBELER. Reading off "Hands Off Cuba," does it not? Does that +leaflet look similar to the leaflet you saw Oswald handing out? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And you recognize that man obviously as Oswald, don't you? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. I don't think I have any more questions at this point, +but if you have anything else that you want to add, why, you can go +right ahead and do it. You have done most of the testifying without my +help and you have done very well. + +Mr. BRINGUIER. Thank you. I don't know if you had already the +information that the Cuban Student Directorate Headquarters in Miami +gave to the press on January 31 about Jack Ruby's second trip to Cuba +in 1962. + +Mr. LIEBELER. I am not familiar with it offhand. What is it? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. Well, you could check the name and the date of the +newspaper. It is the same "Diario Las Americas" from Miami, February 1, +1964, information from the Cuban Student Directorate Headquarters in +Miami telling that Jack Ruby went to Cuba at the end of 1962 through +Mexico, and he was in Cuba until the beginning of 1963. After that I +talked to them by long-distance telephone, long-distance call, and they +informed me that they already have turned over to the FBI all the proof +about this trip from Ruby going to Cuba. + +Mr. LIEBELER. What is the name of the person that you spoke to in Miami? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. The person to whom I spoke in Miami, his name is Joaquin +Martinez de Pinillos. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And he indicated that the information concerning Ruby's +trip had already been given to the FBI? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. To the FBI. That is right. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Can you think of anything else that you think we should +know about at this moment? + +Mr. LIEBELER. Off the record. + +(Discussion off the record.) + +Mr. LIEBELER. Back on the record. Going back briefly to the time at +which you and Oswald and your other friends were arrested and taken +to the police station here in New Orleans on August 9, 1963, were you +interviewed at the police station by any agent of the FBI? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. Well, there were two plain-clothing agents that +identified (themselves) as a member of the FBI, I believe, and they +were questioning us on the generalities of Oswald and all, and when +I was explaining to them and all, they had some kind of confusion +sometime because they didn't know if we were Communists, and I had to +explain to them three or four times that we were not the Communists and +that Oswald was the one that was doing that in favor of Castro. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Do you know whether they interviewed Oswald? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. I think. I thought that they interviewed Oswald, but not +in front of me. They were talking to him in front of me, but when they +were ready to interview Oswald, they moved to other place to interview +him. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You had to point out to them several times that it was +Oswald who was the Castro provocateur, so to say, and not you? Is that +correct? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. Yes, sir; because they were asking to us in one way +as if we were Communists or pro-Castro, and I had to explain to them +in three or four different times that we were Cubans but we were not +pro-Castro and that we were the ones in the fight against Oswald. + +Mr. LIEBELER. I have no more questions at this time, Mr. Bringuier. +If you can't think of anything else that you want to add now--can you +think of anything else? + +Mr. BRINGUIER. No, sir; I don't. + +Mr. LIEBELER. I want to thank you very much for spending the time that +you have with us and for cooperating with us the way you have. You have +been very helpful. On behalf of the Commission, I want to thank you +very much. + + + + +TESTIMONY OF FRANCIS L. MARTELLO + +The testimony of Francis L. Martello was taken on April 7-8, 1964, at +the Old Civil Courts Building, Royal and Conti Streets, New Orleans, +La., by Mr. Wesley J. Liebeler, assistant counsel of the President's +Commission. + + +Francis L. Martello, having been first duly sworn, was examined and +testified as follows: + +Mr. LIEBELER. My name is Wesley J. Liebeler. I am a member of the legal +staff of the President's Commission investigating the assassination +of President Kennedy. Staff members have been authorized to take the +testimony of witnesses by the Commission pursuant to authority granted +to the Commission by Executive Order No. 11130, dated November 29, 1963 +and joint resolution of Congress No. 137. + +I understand that Mr. Rankin wrote to you last week advising you that +we would be in touch with you concerning the taking of your testimony, +and that enclosed with the letter were copies of Executive Order No. +11130, and joint resolution of Congress No. 137, as well as a copy of +the rules of procedure adopted by the Commission governing the taking +of testimony of witnesses. Is that correct? + +Mr. MARTELLO. That is correct. + +Mr. LIEBELER. The general area of our inquiry of you, Lieutenant +Martello, relates to the information received by the Commission that +you interviewed Lee Harvey Oswald some time in August of 1963 after he +had been arrested by the New Orleans Police Department as a result of +his activities in connection with the Fair Play for Cuba Committee. +Before I get into the details of that testimony, however, would you +please state your full name for the record? + +Mr. MARTELLO. Francis L. Martello, lieutenant, New Orleans Police +Department. + +Mr. LIEBELER. What is your residence, sir? + +Mr. MARTELLO. 7921 Maple Street, New Orleans, La. + +Mr. LIEBELER. How long have you been with the New Orleans Police +Department? + +Mr. MARTELLO. Fifteen years and nine months. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Where were you born? + +Mr. MARTELLO. In New Orleans. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And you have resided in New Orleans basically all of your +life? Is that right? + +Mr. MARTELLO. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. What assignments have you had with the New Orleans Police +Department generally over the period that you have been---- + +Mr. MARTELLO. For 6 years I was assigned to patrol, precincts, and +districts. For the next 6 years I was assigned as an instructor at +the New Orleans Police Academy. For the following 2 years I was the +deputy commander of the Intelligence Division of the New Orleans Police +Department, and since that time I have been a platoon commander in the +First District Police Station. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did there come a time in August of 1963 when you heard or +heard of or became acquainted with Lee Harvey Oswald? + +Mr. MARTELLO. That is correct, sir. He was arrested on Canal Street on +a Friday, the Friday prior to my interview, and upon coming to work on +Saturday morning, as a routine matter I checked the arrest records, +noted the charge, observed some placards marked as evidence, saw that +they were signed by the Fair Play for Cuba [Committee], and decided to +interview the person who I later found out was Lee Harvey Oswald, the +subject who was arrested. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you subsequently interview Oswald? + +Mr. MARTELLO. That is correct, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Was this a part of an official investigation conducted by +the New Orleans Police Department? + +Mr. MARTELLO. Yes, sir; it was. It was to ascertain primarily that all +parties, all of us law enforcement agencies, that would be interested +would be notified; also to ascertain if the various agencies within our +department were notified, and also to obtain any information that would +be of value to the Department concerning any future demonstrations that +this person or persons affiliated with him may perform in the city, so +that we would be prepared for such eventualities. + +Mr. LIEBELER. At the time you interviewed Oswald, were you acting as +platoon commander of the first district? + +Mr. MARTELLO. At that time I was the deputy commander of the first +district, which was a position whereby I was to assist the captain in +all phases of police work involving the first district area. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And the first district of the New Orleans Police +Department was the district in which this difficulty in which Oswald +was involved occurred? Is that correct? + +Mr. MARTELLO. That is correct, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Do you have various headquarters of the New Orleans +Police Department broken down by district? + +Mr. MARTELLO. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And you have a station house for the first district and +for other districts? + +Mr. MARTELLO. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Was Oswald confined in the stationhouse for the first +district at that time? + +Mr. MARTELLO. That is correct, sir. He was confined in the first +district, which is located at 501 North Rampart Street. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you make any notes of your interview with Oswald at +the time you interviewed him? + +Mr. MARTELLO. Yes, sir; I did. I made a personal history background +investigation, which is a common practice and when dealing with any +person affiliated with any organization that demonstrates in the +city, and also to attempt to ascertain their ideologies and find out +in what area they would most likely demonstrate, on what side of the +fence, so to speak, as we call it, and see whether or not they were +potential agitators or troublemakers. This would assist the department +in planning for future demonstrations by these persons if they so +demonstrated. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Now after you interviewed Oswald and made these notes, +it is my understanding that while you did not prepare a memorandum +on your interview at that time, you subsequently, that is, after the +assassination, on the basis of the notes you did make at the time you +interviewed Oswald, you prepared a memorandum setting forth the results +of your interview with Oswald. Is that correct? + +Mr. MARTELLO. That is correct, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Can you tell us approximately when you did interview him? + +Mr. MARTELLO. [referring to notes]. I interviewed Oswald at 10 a.m. on +Saturday, August 10, 1963. + +Mr. LIEBELER. That would have been the day following his arrest? Is +that correct? + +Mr. MARTELLO. That is correct, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. August 9 would have been a Friday? Is that correct? + +Mr. MARTELLO. Yes; that is correct. The day of his arrest was on +Friday, August 9, 1963. + +Mr. LIEBELER. I also understand that you provided a copy of the +memorandum that you did prepare to the FBI? Is that correct? + +Mr. MARTELLO. Originally--wait--originally I was contacted by the U.S. +Secret Service on the morning after the assassination of the President +at approximately 3 o'clock in the morning, and I was interviewed +concerning what information I had developed at the time of the +interview. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Do you remember which agent of the Secret Service did +talk to you? + +Mr. MARTELLO. Yes; I remember something like Querie. No; I believe it +was Mr. Vial, V-i-a-l, who originally spoke to me, and since that time +there were numerous phone calls to my home and at work with various +members of the U.S. Secret Service who spoke to me concerning the +interview that I had with Harvey Oswald. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you also turn over to the Secret Service or to the +FBI the pamphlets and other materials that had been found in Oswald's +possession at the time of his arrest? + +Mr. MARTELLO. That is correct, sir. I turned that information over to +the Secret Service. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Then you subsequently prepared the memorandum to which we +have already referred, and you provided a copy of that memorandum to +the Secret Service or to the FBI? Is that correct? + +Mr. MARTELLO. That is correct, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. [Exhibiting document to witness.] I want to show you a +copy of your memorandum, and I will ask you if you yourself have a copy +of your memorandum with you. + +Mr. MARTELLO. No, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. I show you a copy of your memorandum and ask you +to examine it and tell me whether or not that is a copy of your +memorandum. I show you a copy in the form of a report of the Federal +Bureau of Investigation, and I call your attention to the fact that it +is the report of Special Agent John L. Quigley, which indicates that on +November 29, 1963, Agent Quigley did interview you, and he set forth in +the memorandum, starting at the bottom of page 1, what purports to be +the text of the memorandum which you prepared concerning your interview +of Oswald. Would you examine that portion of your report and tell me +whether or not that is or appears to you to be a correct copy of the +memorandum that you prepared? + +Mr. MARTELLO. Yes; it is. + +Mr. LIEBELER. At this point we will physically incorporate into the +record the memorandum of Lieutenant Martello, the report to which +Lieutenant Martello and I have been referring. I provide the reporter +with a copy for that purpose. + +(The report referred to by counsel is here made part of the record:) + +"About 10 a.m. on Saturday, August 10, 1963, I observed a placard +and handbills which had been placed into evidence against an accused +person. This placard contained information concerning the Fair Play for +Cuba Committee. I determined that a subject by the name of LEE HARVEY +OSWALD was arrested on Friday, August 9, 1963 when he was passing out +handbills on Canal Street and was carrying this placard about his +person. + +"Prior to being assigned to the First District, I had worked with the +Intelligence Unit for two years and since I was generally familiar +with various groups and organizations that demonstrate or picket in +the city, I decided I would question this individual to see if I could +develop any information which would be of value and to ascertain if all +interested parties had been notified. + +"I requested the doorman to bring LEE HARVEY OSWALD into the interview +room. I then took the material which was to be used as evidence into +this room. At the same time I reviewed the arrest record on OSWALD and +determined that while he was distributing Fair Play for Cuba literature +on the street he became involved in a disturbance with CELSO MACARIO +HERNANDEZ, CARLOS JOSE BRINGUIER and MIGUEL MARIANO CRUZ. + +"When OSWALD was brought into the office, I introduced myself to him as +Lieutenant FRANCIS L. MARTELLO and I was in uniform at the time. + +"I asked OSWALD if he had any identification papers. At this time +OSWALD produced his wallet. Upon my request, he removed the papers and +I examined them. He had in his wallet a number of miscellaneous papers, +cards and identification items. The only ones that I felt were of any +significance were the following, which I made note of: + +"1. Social Security Card bearing #433-54-3937 in the name of LEE HARVEY +OSWALD. + +"2. Selective Service draft card in the name of LEE HARVEY OSWALD +bearing #41-114-395-32, classification--4A. (I do not know what draft +board was registered with.) + +"3. Card bearing name LEE HARVEY OSWALD reflecting he was a member of +the Fair Play for Cuba Committee; address listed as 799 Broadway, New +York 3, New York; telephone #ORegon 4-8295, headquarters for Fair Play +for Cuba Committee. Card was signed by V. T. LEE, Executive Secretary; +card issued 5/28/63. + +"4. Card for the New Orleans Chapter of the Fair Play for Cuba +Committee in name of LEE HARVEY OSWALD signed by A. J. HIDELL, Chapter +President, issued June 6, 1963. + +"The notes of my interview reflect that OSWALD gave his date of birth +as October 18, 1938 at New Orleans, Louisiana; that he served three +years in the U.S. Marine Corps and stated he was honorably discharged +on July 17, 1959 from Santa Ana, California. His wife's name was +MARINO _PROSSA_, a white female, age 21. OSWALD stated he had one +daughter, JUNE LEE OSWALD, white female, 17 months of age, and he had +been residing at 4907 Magazine Street with his wife and daughter for +the past four months. OSWALD said that since 1959 he resided at 4709 +Mercedes Street in Fort Worth, Texas and had also lived in Arlington, +Texas. OSWALD said his mother's name was MARGARET OSWALD, his father, +ROBERT LEE OSWALD, being deceased. He told me he had two brothers, +ROBERT OSWALD, living in Fort Worth, Texas, and JOHN OSWALD, Arlington, +Texas. He also stated he lived somewhere on Exchange Place in New +Orleans but could not remember the address, and that he had attended +Beauregard Junior High School and Warren Easton High School, both in +New Orleans, and that he attended Riegeala West Elementary School in +Fort Worth, Texas. OSWALD told me he had moved to New Orleans from Fort +Worth about four months ago. + +"When questioned about the Fair Play for Cuba Committee, OSWALD stated +that he had been a member for three months. I asked how he had become +affiliated with the Fair Play for Cuba Committee and he stated he +became interested in that Committee in Los Angeles, California in 1958 +while in the U.S. Marine Corps. The facts as to just how he first +became interested in the Fair Play for Cuba Committee while in the +Marine Corps are vague, however I recall that he said he had obtained +some Fair Play for Cuba Committee literature and had gotten into some +difficulty in the Marine Corps for having this literature. + +"OSWALD was asked how many members of the Fair Play for Cuba Committee +were in the New Orleans Chapter and he stated there were 35. I asked +him to identify the members of the Fair Play for Cuba Committee in New +Orleans and he refused to give names of the members or any identifying +data regarding them. OSWALD was asked why he refused and he said that +this was a minority group holding unpopular views at this time and +it would not be beneficial to them if he gave their names. OSWALD +was asked approximately how many people attended meetings of the +New Orleans Chapter of the Fair Play for Cuba Committee and he said +approximately five attended the meetings, which were held once a month. +He was asked where and he said at various places in the city. He was +asked specifically at what addresses or locations were the meetings +held and stated that the meetings were held on Pine Street. He was +asked at whose residence the meetings were held and he refused to give +any further information. It should be noted at this time during prior +investigation conducted, while I was a member of the Intelligence Unit, +information was developed that Fair Play for Cuba Committee literature +was found in the 1000 block of Pine Street, New Orleans, which was +near the residence of Dr. LEONARD REISSMAN, a professor at Tulane +University. This investigation was conducted by me. + +"As I remember, Dr. REISSMAN was reported to be a member of the New +Orleans Council of Peaceful Alternatives which is a 'ban the bomb' +group recently established in the city and had conducted meetings and +two or three demonstrations in the city. Knowing that Dr. REISSMAN was +reportedly a member of the New Orleans Council of Peaceful Alternatives +I thought there might be a tie between this organization and the Fair +Play for Cuba Committee. + +"When OSWALD stated that meetings of the Fair Play for Cuba Committee +had been held on Pine Street, the name of Dr. REISSMAN came to mind. +I asked OSWALD if he knew Dr. REISSMAN or if he held meetings at Dr. +REISSMAN's house. OSWALD did not give me a direct answer to this +question, however I gathered from the expression on his face and what +appeared to be an immediate nervous reaction that there was possibly a +connection between Dr. REISSMAN and OSWALD; this, however, is purely an +assumption on my own part and I have nothing on which to base this. I +also asked OSWALD if he knew a Dr. FORREST E. LA VIOLETTE, a professor +at Tulane University. I asked him this question because I remembered +that LA VIOLETTE allegedly had possession of Fair Play for Cuba +literature during the year 1962. I cannot remember any further details +about this nor do I have any information that he is or was connected +with the Fair Play for Cuba Committee in New Orleans. OSWALD became +very evasive in his answers and would not divulge any information +concerning the Fair Play for Cuba Committee, where the group met, or +the identities of the members. + +"OSWALD was then asked what religion he practiced and he stated he was +a Lutheran and also that he was presently unemployed but had worked +at William B. Reily Coffee Company, New Orleans, about three months, +working on heavy machinery and earned $60 per week. He worked from May +to July 17, 1963 at that company. He further stated that he had worked +for Jax Brewery approximately 1-1/2 months ago. + +"I asked him again about the members of the Fair Play for Cuba +Committee in New Orleans and why the information was such a big secret; +that if had nothing to hide, he would give me the information. OSWALD +said one of the members of the Fair Play for Cuba Committee in New +Orleans was named 'John' and that this individual went to Tulane +University. He refused to give any more information concerning the Fair +Play for Cuba Committee in New Orleans. + +"Since he did not appear to be particularly receptive at this time, the +interview was concluded and he was returned to the cell block. Prior to +entering the cell block, OSWALD was again allowed to use the telephone. + +"Several hours later after OSWALD was interviewed by a Special Agent of +the Federal Bureau of Investigation, a white female came to the station +and identified herself as Mrs. _MURAT_, who stated she was a relative +of OSWALD and lived on France Street. She stated she wanted to know the +charge against OSWALD and I told her, explaining to her the procedure +whereby OSWALD could be released. She became very reluctant to become +involved in the release of OSWALD as she stated since he was involved +with the Fair Play for Cuba Committee, she did not want to get mixed +up with it in any way. I spoke to her concerning OSWALD's background +and she stated OSWALD had a hard time coming up insofar as his family +life was concerned and she felt that this had a direct bearing on his +actions and that he had gone to Russia and stayed over there for a few +years; he married while in Russia and came back to the United States +with his wife. She stated OSWALD did not allow anything but Russian to +be spoken in his home. She was asked why he did not allow English to be +spoken and she related she had spoken to OSWALD'S wife about this and +she said this was his desire. She further stated she had asked OSWALD'S +wife if she liked America and the wife answered 'Yes I do' but said +her husband (OSWALD) did not like America. I did not question her any +further. + +"After Mrs. _MURAT_ left, I decided to further question OSWALD and had +him again brought out of the cell to me. I then asked if he had given +me all of the needed information about his background and he said he +had. I asked him if he lived in Russia and he stated that somebody +had told me this. He then admitted he had lived in Russia for 2-1/2 +years, going there by 'slow boat to Europe.' I asked him how he got +over there and he related he left Fort Worth, Texas, stayed in New +Orleans a few days and then took the 'slow boat to Europe.' He took a +tour of Europe and wound up in Russia. He lived in Moscow and Minsk, +Russia and told me he lived there from October, 1959 to July, 1962. I +asked him if his wife was Russian and he said yes. He said her true +name was MARINO _PROSSA_ and that it was an abbreviation of her name, +MARINO PROSSAKAYA; he said she was an alien M-1. I then asked him if +he was a communist and he said he was not. I asked him if he was a +socialist and he said 'guilty.' We then spoke at length concerning the +philosophies of communism, socialism and America. He said he was in +full accord with the book, Das Kapital, which book was written by KARL +MARX. I know that this book condemns the American way of government in +entirety. I asked him if he thought that the communist way of life was +better than the American way of life and he replied there was not true +communism in Russia. He said that Marx was a socialist and although +communism is attributed to MARX, that MARX was not a communist but a +socialist. He stated this was the reason he did not consider himself +to be a communist. I asked him what his opinion was of the form of +communism in Russia since he had lived there for two years and he +replied 'It stunk.' He said they have 'fat stinking politicians over +there just like we have over here' and that they do not follow the +great concepts of KARL MARX, that the leaders have everything and the +people are still poor and depressed. I asked OSWALD why he would not +allow members of his family to learn English as this would be required +to educate his children and communicate with people. He stated the +reason why he did this was because he hated America and he did not want +them to become 'Americanized' and that his plans were to go back to +Russia. He stated he had already applied to the State Department for +a visa to go back by using the excuse that his wife was a Russian. I +asked him what he thought about President JOHN F. KENNEDY and NIKITA +KHRUSHCHEV. He said he thought they got along very well together. I +then asked him if he had to place allegiance or make a decision between +Russia or America, which he would choose and he said 'I would place +my allegiance at the foot of democracy.' I then asked him if he would +consider himself a 'student of the world,' explaining that I meant by +this a person who attempts to find a Utopia on earth and that he said +he could be classified as such an individual. I asked him if he had any +religious convictions and whether he believed in God since KARL MARX +did not believe in God. I was trying to find out if he was an atheist. +His answer to me was that he was christened as a Lutheran but that +he has not followed any religion since youth. I asked him if he was +an agnostic and he said he could be classified 'as a Marxist in his +beliefs.' I then spoke to him about the Fair Play for Cuba Committee +again and asked him if he knew that CASTRO had admitted that he was +a Marxist-Leninist and he said he did. He was then asked if he truly +believed CASTRO was really interested in the welfare of the Cuban +people and he replied that he was not going to discuss the merits and +demerits of CASTRO but was primarily concerned with the poor people +of Cuba and that if this country would have good relations with the +poor people of Cuba and quit worrying about CASTRO, that was his main +concern; he stated this was the reason he was interested in the Fair +Play for Cuba Committee. + +"OSWALD was then returned to the cell block. + +"I then took my notes, along with several copies of the literature of +OSWALD, and placed them in a file folder, in the file cabinet. + +"The day after the assassination of President JOHN F. KENNEDY, Mr. +ADRIAN G. VIAL, U.S. Secret Service, who had spoken to me earlier +at about 3 a.m. Saturday morning, November 23, 1963, wherein he had +obtained information regarding my interview with OSWALD, came to the +First District Station on Saturday, November 23, 1963 at about 3 p.m. +and told me the Secret Service was conducting an official investigation +regarding the assassination of the President of the United States. At +the outset of the interview I got out the original file folder on LEE +HARVEY OSWALD, opened it and gave Mr. VIAL all of the literature I had +obtained from OSWALD, which consisted of some pamphlets, leaflets and +booklets put out by the Fair Play for Cuba Committee headquarters. Upon +going through these pamphlets I discovered a photograph of LEE HARVEY +OSWALD which appeared to be a passport photograph, and a small piece of +white paper containing handwritten notes on same. This photograph and +paper had inadvertently become misplaced with the literature during the +interview I had with OSWALD. This piece of paper, which was folded over +twice and was about 2" by 3" in size, contained some English writing +and some writing which appeared to me to be in a foreign language which +I could not identify. Before I gave this paper to Mr. VIAL, I made a +copy of the information, which is as follows: [See Commission Exhibit +No. 827.] + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you form an opinion during the time that you +interviewed Oswald as to whether or not he was telling you the truth +about the matters that you questioned him about and reported in your +memorandum? + +Mr. MARTELLO. He did give me the impression that--in the majority of +the interview--that it was the truth. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Now specifically--off the record. + +(Discussion off the record.) + +Mr. LIEBELER. In your report you indicated that Oswald told you that +he had become interested in the Fair Play for Cuba Committee in Los +Angeles, Calif., in 1958 while in the U.S. Marine Corps. Is that +correct? + +Mr. MARTELLO. That is correct, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you have the feeling that he was telling you the +truth about that particular aspect of the interview, or do you have any +recollection as to that specific aspect of it? + +Mr. MARTELLO. I wouldn't know exactly, to my recollection, whether or +not he was being truthful in that particular area. + +Mr. LIEBELER. In the next paragraph--go ahead--are you through? + +Mr. MARTELLO. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. In the next paragraph of your report, you indicate that +Oswald told you that there were about 35 members of the Fair Play for +Cuba Committee here in New Orleans. Did you have any reason to question +that statement? + +Mr. MARTELLO. I didn't believe it was a true statement because of the +fact that there was very little activity, to my knowledge, of the +Fair Play for Cuba Committee in the city of New Orleans, and since +it was such a new organization, or which appeared to me to be a new +organization in the city, it didn't seem likely there would be 35 +members in the community. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you ever become aware of the existence of any other +member of the group in New Orleans---- + +Mr. MARTELLO. No, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Other than Oswald? + +Mr. MARTELLO. No; other than information that had been developed that +there were some possible connections. However, there was no basis in +fact that any other person, to my knowledge, was a member of the Fair +Play for Cuba Committee. This particular man, Oswald, was the first +person that I have come in contact with that I knew for a fact stated +he was a member of the Fair Play for Cuba Committee. + +Mr. LIEBELER. He is not only the first person you came in contact with +who indicated he was a member of the Fair Play for Cuba Committee, but +he is the only one that you ever saw or heard of in the city of New +Orleans? Is that correct? + +Mr. MARTELLO. That is correct. + +Mr. LIEBELER. After this affair with Oswald, as far as you know, there +was no other activity by the Fair Play for Cuba Committee in New +Orleans? Is that correct? + +Mr. MARTELLO. The only other activity that I could recall was a passing +out of leaflets. Again this was by Oswald, and that was the only other +time I have known of any activities by this group. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You know that Oswald appeared on a radio program +broadcast over WDSU and appeared briefly on a television broadcast over +the same station in connection with his activities? + +Mr. MARTELLO. I have read an account in the local newspaper to that +effect. However, I did not hear the radio broadcast or see the TV +program. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Was that account in the paper before or after the +assassination? Do you remember? + +Mr. MARTELLO. That was before the assassination. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Your report refers to a professor at Tulane University +by the name of Dr. Leonard Reissman. Did the department, to your +knowledge, conduct any investigation of Dr. Reissman in an attempt to +associate him with the Fair Play for Cuba Committee or to determine +whether or not he was associated with the Fair Play for Cuba Committee +here in New Orleans? + +Mr. MARTELLO. Not to my knowledge, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Do you have any personal knowledge of the background of +Dr. Reissman, other than as set forth in your memorandum? + +Mr. MARTELLO. No, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Do you know what he teaches at Tulane University? + +Mr. MARTELLO. No, sir; I do not. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Further on in your report there is a reference to another +professor at Tulane by the name of La Violette, and you indicate on +that you had some recollection that this professor allegedly had +possession of Fair Play for Cuba literature in 1962. Do you remember +any of the details of that? + +Mr. MARTELLO. No, sir; I do not. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Was there any investigation conducted of this particular +professor in an attempt to determine whether he was associated with +Oswald in any way? + +Mr. MARTELLO. No, sir; there was not. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did Oswald indicate to you in any way that he himself +knew either of these two professors or any other professor at Tulane +University, or had ever had anything to do with them or with other +professors? + +Mr. MARTELLO. He did not indicate by name, but there was a meeting +place on Pine Street, the 1000 block of Pine Street in New Orleans, +where there were meetings held. + +Mr. LIEBELER. This is meetings of the Fair Play for Cuba Committee? + +Mr. MARTELLO. No, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. What kind of meetings? + +Mr. MARTELLO. Just meetings by other groups. There was no indication of +any names, but I had asked him if he held his meetings on Pine Street, +and he reflected--only in gesture--that there was some, or appeared to +be some, connection between the two, but it is mere speculation upon my +part. + +Mr. LIEBELER. He didn't indicate one way or the other, directly or +indirectly, that this was the case? + +Mr. MARTELLO. No, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. From your memorandum it appears that Oswald told you that +he had worked for the Jax Brewery about 1-1/2 months prior to the time +of the interview. Did you make any check with the Jax Brewing Co. to +determine whether or not this was a true statement? + +Mr. MARTELLO. No, sir; I did not. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You are unable to state at this time whether it is true +or false that Oswald worked at the Jax Brewery? + +Mr. MARTELLO. That is correct, sir. I am unable to state that as a fact. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You also indicate that you terminated your interview with +Oswald, and he was permitted to use the telephone, apparently as a +result of which a Mrs. Murat--spelled M-u-r-a-t in the memorandum, but +I believe it is correctly spelled M-u-r-r-e-t---- + +Mr. MARTELLO. That is right. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Appeared at the station. Did you personally talk to this +woman who came to the station? + +Mr. MARTELLO. That is correct, sir; I did. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And you set forth in your memorandum the statements made +by Mrs. Murret and the position that she took with regard to this whole +thing, and that is a correct summary of the events that occurred with +regard to Mrs. Murret, is it not? + +Mr. MARTELLO. That is correct. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you form any impression of this woman's feelings +about Oswald or her attitude toward this whole event? + +Mr. MARTELLO. Yes, sir; I did. She gave me the impression that she +wanted to help him and she didn't want to become involved, due to the +affiliation, as he stated he was a member of the Fair Play for Cuba, +and she was leery on becoming involved in obtaining his release. I +explained to her the release procedure whereby, if she desired to +assist him in being released from jail by parole or bond and she didn't +want to become involved in the release procedure--but she did give +me the impression that she was interested in him, as a relative, I +imagine. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Do you know whether or not she subsequently did involve +herself in Oswald's release? + +Mr. MARTELLO. No, sir; I did not know if she did become involved in his +release. I don't think she did, because during the second interview +with Lee Harvey Oswald I allowed him to use the telephone in the +captain's office where he called someone, some male, white male, or +some male. I don't know who he spoke to, but obviously his attempt to +get any assistance from Mrs. Murret was unsuccessful. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Mrs. Murret also told you that Oswald had at one time +been in the Soviet Union, did she not? + +Mr. MARTELLO. That is correct, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And then you subsequently questioned Oswald concerning +this matter, did you? + +Mr. MARTELLO. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And in your memorandum you indicate that you had asked +Oswald what his opinion was of the form of communism in Russia, and he +replied that it stunk? Is that correct? + +Mr. MARTELLO. That is correct, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. That did in fact occur? Is that right? + +Mr. MARTELLO. That is correct, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did Oswald indicate to you any other attitudes that he +had toward the Soviet Union, or did he particularize or go into more +detail as to why he was dissatisfied with his stay in the Soviet Union? + +Mr. MARTELLO. Other than what I have in the memorandum where he stated +that the people were still poor and depressed and that the present form +of communism was not what it should be, the ideals, as he stated, were +not in fact the true conditions in Russia. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Now your memorandum also indicates that you asked Oswald +why he would not permit members of his family to learn the English +language, and the memorandum indicates that Oswald said the reason why +he did not so permit them was because he hated America and he did not +want his family to become Americanized since he planned to go back to +Russia. Is that correct? + +Mr. MARTELLO. That is correct, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And Oswald did tell you that, did he not? + +Mr. MARTELLO. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. We have down here a statement, on the one hand, that +as far as Oswald is concerned the system in Russia, to use his word, +"stunk," and, on the other hand, he said that he hated America and +had indicated a desire to return to Russia. Do you remember how he +presented these ideas, and did he seem to be equally convinced as to +both these propositions, or did he display any emotion concerning +either one of these propositions, or just what was his general attitude? + +Mr. MARTELLO. His general attitude was, he stated that he believed in a +socialistic form of government and that in choosing between America and +Russia, he gave me the impression that he would choose the lesser of +the two evils, in his opinion. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did he indicate which, in his opinion, was the lesser of +the two evils? + +Mr. MARTELLO. From the way he spoke, the impression I received, it +appeared to me that he felt that Russia was the lesser of the two evils. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did he express this idea with great forcefulness, or just +sort of a "pox on both your houses" fashion, that really it was just +too ridiculous, and that sort of thing? + +Mr. MARTELLO. With a nonchalant attitude. He was a very cool speaker. I +don't know too much of his formal education. I read an account in the +newspaper about it, but from the way he spoke, it was quite obvious +that he had done a heck of a lot of reading in his lifetime, and his +approach was academic, more or less theories but with no aggressiveness +or emotional outbursts in any way, shape, or form. It was just a very +calm conversation we had, and there was no emotion involved whatsoever. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did he show any hesitancy about expressing these ideas to +you as a member of the police department? + +Mr. MARTELLO. None whatsoever, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. He didn't seem to be bothered by you or afraid of you, or +anything like that? + +Mr. MARTELLO. No, sir; none whatsoever. I generally try to establish a +rapport with any group that would demonstrate in the city, which was +one of the objectives I had with Oswald. If in the future he would +demonstrate, why, I could speak to him. It is a lot easier when you +know somebody than when you don't, and they may comply with a request +rather than the ultimates of the law. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Now, your memorandum also indicates that you asked Oswald +what he thought about President Kennedy and Premier Khrushchev, and +the memorandum also indicates that Oswald said that he thought they +got along very well together. What was his attitude when he made that +remark? Tell us as much as you can remember of the background of that +aspect of your conversation. + +Mr. MARTELLO. The reason I asked that question was again to get his +feelings on where his loyalty would rest between America and Russia, +and it was just another way of asking the same question. He gave me +the impression that he seemed to favor President Kennedy more than he +did Khrushchev in his statement. This is unusual, and I couldn't quite +understand his reason for this reaction, as all of his thoughts seemed +to go into the direction of the Socialist or Russian way of life, but +he showed in his manner of speaking that he liked the President, the +impression I got, or, if he didn't like him, of the two he disliked, +he disliked the President the least. He is a very peculiar type of an +individual, which is typical of quite a few of the many demonstrators +that I have handled during the period of 2 years while in the +Intelligence Division. They seemed to be trying to find themselves or +something. I am not expert in the field or anything, not trying to go +out of my bounds, but quite a few of them, after lengthy interviews you +find that they have some peculiarities about their thinking that does +not follow logically with their movements or their action. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And this attitude that Oswald demonstrated toward the +President is an example of that sort of thing? Is that correct? + +Mr. MARTELLO. That is correct, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. It didn't seem to fit in with the rest of his statements? + +Mr. MARTELLO. Didn't seem to fit in. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Do you remember any more specifically or in any more +detail just what the conversation concerning Kennedy was? + +Mr. MARTELLO. It would only be vaguely at this time, but it was in +the general areas of leadership of the President in comparison to the +leadership of Khrushchev, how each was leading the various countries, +and again an analogy or comparison of the two forms of government, +which one he thought was running it the best, but we didn't go into +this at any great length. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Well, your recollection is quite clear that, in spite of +the fact that Oswald demonstrated a general inclination to favor the +Soviet Union and its institutions, he did in spite of that indicate a +preference for President Kennedy as opposed to Premier Khrushchev? + +Mr. MARTELLO. That is correct, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And that he in no way demonstrated any animosity or ill +feelings toward President Kennedy? + +Mr. MARTELLO. No, sir; he did not. At no time during the interview with +Oswald did he demonstrate any type of aggressiveness in any way, shape, +or form, other than his demonstration on Canal Street with the picket +sign. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you consider whether Oswald was prone to violence or +was a violent kind of person? + +Mr. MARTELLO. No, sir; I did not, for the simple reason that when he +had made the friendship of the people with the anti-Castro groups in +the city and offered them assistance, and when they saw him on Canal +Street with pro-Castro signs they became insulting and abusive to the +point of becoming violent toward him, and he never reacted to the +action that was being directed toward him. + +Mr. LIEBELER. These anti-Castro characters attempted to provoke Oswald +into some kind of physical conflict, did they not, as a matter of fact? + +Mr. MARTELLO. That is correct, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And he didn't respond? + +Mr. MARTELLO. That is correct, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you eventually learn what became of this case, how it +was disposed of in court? + +Mr. MARTELLO. Yes, sir; the next day, the following Monday. The +following Monday I went to court, Municipal Court, and I heard the +evidence in the case. He was charged--all of them were charged with +creating a scene, which is a typical municipal charge used in minor +disturbances. It expedites everything much nicer, and there was +no--there wasn't any detailed information given other than what he was +charged with. The judge found him guilty and gave him, I believe, $10 +or 10 days, or something like that. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Do you remember whether Oswald pleaded guilty or not +guilty? + +Mr. MARTELLO. I do not remember, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. The Cubans who were involved in it were released without +any fine or any punishment, were they not? + +Mr. MARTELLO. I do not remember, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You didn't have any occasion to discuss this thing with +Oswald after the case had been disposed of? + +Mr. MARTELLO. No, sir. That was all there was to it. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Is there any other reason that you didn't regard Oswald +as a violent kind of person, other than the one that you mentioned +concerning his failure to respond to the provocation of the Cubans? + +Mr. MARTELLO. He did not impress me at the time I interviewed him as a +violent person by any of the responses to questions, by observing his +physical makeup. Not in any way, shape, or form did he appear to me +as being violent in any way. He displayed very little emotion and was +completely unconcerned and aloof. Off the record? + +Mr. LIEBELER. Off the record. + +(Discussion off the record.) + +Mr. LIEBELER. When you subsequently heard that Oswald had been arrested +in connection with the assassination, were you surprised? + +Mr. MARTELLO. Yes, sir; I was, I was very much surprised. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Would you tell us---- + +Mr. MARTELLO. Because he did not give me the impression of being a +violent individual. He was a very passive type of an individual. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You have had experience with other pickets here in +New Orleans on several questions, and have you run into people who +demonstrated a passivity in the face of provocation before? + +Mr. MARTELLO. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did Oswald appear to be this kind of person? + +Mr. MARTELLO. Yes, sir; he did, with one extension of the incident with +the Cubans. Although he was passive in his demonstration, he seemed +to have set them up, so to speak, to create an incident, but when the +incident occurred he remained absolutely peaceful and gentle. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You just didn't think at the time you heard that Oswald +had been arrested in connection with the assassination that he would +have been capable of performing that act? Or did you have an opinion on +that question? + +Mr. MARTELLO. Well, as far as being capable of an act, I guess +everybody is capable of an act, but as far as ever dreaming or thinking +that Oswald would do what it is alleged that he has done, I would bet +my head on a chopping block that he wouldn't do it. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You just wouldn't have been able to predict that this guy +would have done something like that? + +Mr. MARTELLO. That is right. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And such an act would appear to you to be entirely +inconsistent with the attitude demonstrated to you while you knew him +here in New Orleans? Is that correct? + +Mr. MARTELLO. Absolutely correct, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You indicate in your memorandum that you went through +your notes and the other materials that were collected at the time +Oswald was arrested, and you found a photograph of Oswald and a small +piece of white paper containing certain handwritten notes, which is +attached to the report that we have. There is a photostatic copy of +a sheet of paper with handwritten notes, and I ask you whether or not +that is a photostatic copy of the paper that you found in the material +you have just described? + +Mr. MARTELLO. Yes; it is. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And the original of this was taken from Oswald at the +time of his arrest? Is that correct? + +Mr. MARTELLO. It wasn't actually taken from him. Due to the amount +of material he had in his possession, and upon Oswald taking various +credentials and identification cards out, it was left--it was +inadvertently picked up with the literature, and I put it in a file +folder and it remained there. I thought no more of it. He had already +been interviewed by the intelligence division of our department. It +was just by coincidence that I kept the notes. Normally I would have +discarded them. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You turned the original of the paper that was kept over +to the Federal Bureau of Investigation, did you not? + +Mr. MARTELLO. No, sir; I turned the original paper over to the United +States Secret Service along with the pamphlets, all of the pamphlets. + +Mr. LIEBELER. As far as you know, the Secret Service still has that +material? + +Mr. MARTELLO. That is correct, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Now did you become involved in any other questioning +of Oswald or investigation of Oswald, or did you become involved in +anything else having anything to do with Oswald back in August of 1963 +other than what we have already talked about? + +Mr. MARTELLO. No, sir; I did not see him but one more time, and that +was when he went to court, and that was the last time I saw him. The +only times I spoke to him was the times that we had mentioned during +the interview. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Were you present at any time when Oswald may have been +interviewed by other officers or personnel of the police department? + +Mr. MARTELLO. No, sir; I was not. I understand that he was interviewed +at the time of his arrest by members of the intelligence division of +the New Orleans Police Department. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you interview any of the Cubans that were arrested at +the same time Oswald was arrested? + +Mr. MARTELLO. No, sir; I did not. I believe the Cubans were paroled. +That is it, they were paroled. + +Mr. LIEBELER. After the assassination, did the New Orleans Police +Department, to your knowledge, engage in any investigation concerning +Oswald or his prior activities in New Orleans? + +Mr. MARTELLO. Not to my knowledge, sir. They may have, but at that time +I was in the First District, assigned to the First District, and I +wouldn't know if they had conducted any further investigations. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Can you think of anything that you think the Commission +ought to know about that is within your knowledge, that I haven't asked +you about or we haven't covered so far? If you can I would like to have +you indicate it so that we could have the benefit of it. + +Mr. MARTELLO. I think you did a very good job on me. I don't think +there are any questions that haven't been answered. + +Mr. LIEBELER. In view of that, I have no other questions at this point. +I do want to thank you, Lieutenant Martello, for the cooperation you +have shown to us, and on behalf of the Commission I want to thank you +very sincerely for your coming here and giving the testimony that you +have given. Thank you very much. + +Mr. MARTELLO. Thank you, sir. + + + + +TESTIMONY OF CHARLES HALL STEELE, JR. + +The testimony of Charles Hall Steele, Jr., was taken on April 7, 1964, +at the Old Civil Courts Building, Royal and Conti Streets, New Orleans, +La., by Mr. Albert E. Jenner, Jr., assistant counsel of the President's +Commission. + + +Charles Hall Steele, Jr., 1488 Madrid Street, New Orleans, La., after +first being duly sworn, testified as follows: + +Mr. JENNER. You are Charles Hall Steele, Jr., is that right? + +Mr. STEELE. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. And your address is 1488 Madrid Street here in New Orleans? + +Mr. STEELE. That's right. + +Mr. JENNER. And is that spelled S-T-E-E-L-E? + +Mr. STEELE. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. I am Albert E. Jenner, Jr., attorney on the legal staff on +the President's Commission, investigating the facts and circumstances +surrounding the assassination last November of President John +Fitzgerald Kennedy. Did you receive a letter from Mr. Rankin, general +counsel for the Commission? + +Mr. STEELE. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. And enclosed with that letter were Senate Joint Resolution +137, which authorized the creation of the Commission to investigate the +assassination of the late President; is that right? + +Mr. STEELE. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. And the Executive Order No. 11130 of President Lyndon B. +Johnson, appointing that Commission and fixing its powers and duties. +That was enclosed also in the letter? + +Mr. STEELE. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. And a copy of the rules and regulations under which we take +testimony, both before the Commission and also by way of deposition, +such as in this instance. You received that also? + +Mr. STEELE. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. Now, you have appeared here voluntarily today, is that +right? + +Mr. STEELE. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. From those papers that you received, did you become aware +of the purpose for the existence of the President's Commission, that +it is enjoined by legislation to investigate the circumstances and all +the facts relating to the assassination of President John Fitzgerald +Kennedy on the 22d of November 1963, and the subsequent death and +murder of Lee Harvey Oswald on the 24th of November 1963? + +Mr. STEELE. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. We of the legal staff are questioning various people, +sometimes before the Commission and sometimes in private depositions, +such as this one, who in the ordinary course of their lifetime touched +the life of Lee Harvey Oswald, or someone in his family, the facts of +which might help the Commission in its ultimate determination of this +tragedy, and we understand that you are one of those who came into +contact with Lee Harvey Oswald during the time he lived in New Orleans; +is that right? + +Mr. STEELE. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. First, are you a native born American? + +Mr. STEELE. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Here in New Orleans? + +Mr. STEELE. In New Orleans; yes. + +Mr. JENNER. And your father likewise is a native born American, is that +right? + +Mr. STEELE. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. In Louisiana? + +Mr. STEELE. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. And your mother? + +Mr. STEELE. From New Orleans, La. + +Mr. JENNER. How old are you? + +Mr. STEELE. Twenty. + +Mr. JENNER. Are you a student? + +Mr. STEELE. Well, that's hard to say. I haven't graduated or got my +diploma yet from Delgado. However, I finished a course up there, and +they let me out. + +Mr. JENNER. Delgado--is that a trade school? + +Mr. STEELE. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Are you working part time or what? + +Mr. STEELE. I was working part time and going to school. I was working +after school, and then after they let me out I started to work full +time. However, right now, I am waiting to go into the service. + +Mr. JENNER. Do you know a young lady by the name of Charlene Stouff? + +Mr. STEELE. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. Is she a friend of yours? + +Mr. STEELE. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. Do you recall an occasion when you accompanied her to the +employment service office? + +Mr. STEELE. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. When was that? + +Mr. STEELE. As to the date I couldn't say, but that's the date they +took films of me passing out leaflets. + +Mr. JENNER. On Canal Street? + +Mr. STEELE. Well, not on Canal Street; it was in front of the Trade +Mart Building. + +Mr. JENNER. What street is the Trade Mart Building on? + +Mr. STEELE. Well, I don't know the street offhand. I know where it is. +I have been there many times for different things; it's down the street +from Canal Street, just one block. + +Mr. JENNER. You say you have been there many times? + +Mr. STEELE. Yes; buying wholesale stuff for my father, and all. + +Mr. JENNER. How did you become involved in that passing out literature +business? + +Mr. STEELE. Well, she had to take this test for the school board +building. + +Mr. JENNER. She did? + +Mr. STEELE. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. You are talking about Charlene Stouff? + +Mr. STEELE. That's right. + +Mr. JENNER. For what purpose did she have to take this test? + +Mr. STEELE. Applying for a job. + +Mr. JENNER. What kind of a job? + +Mr. STEELE. Secretary of some sort; I don't know exactly what job that +was to be. + +Mr. JENNER. And you accompanied her? + +Mr. STEELE. Well, she asked me if I would drive her down there, and I +drove her down. + +Mr. JENNER. Was this the U.S. Employment Service? + +Mr. STEELE. I couldn't say. It's the one on Canal Street, approximately +in the 500 block, I think. + +Mr. JENNER. All right, proceed; tell me all about it, what happened, +and everything. + +Mr. STEELE. To tell you the truth, I never thought any more about it +until Mr. Rice came to see me, but I was just sitting around there +and had about an hour to kill more or less. I was there a good while +waiting for her. + +Mr. JENNER. You were waiting for her to take the test? + +Mr. STEELE. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. All right, what happened? + +Mr. STEELE. This gentleman came up and introduced himself to me. + +Mr. JENNER. What did he look like? + +Mr. STEELE. It was Oswald, he turned out to be. He introduced himself +and asked me if I would like to make a couple of dollars. + +Mr. JENNER. Did he introduce himself as Lee Harvey Oswald? + +Mr. STEELE. Well, I couldn't tell you that. I presume he did, but +that's only presumption on my part. I don't remember names too well; +just faces, and that's about all, so then after he asked me if I would +like to make some money, I asked him, "Doing what?" and he said, +"Passing out these leaflets in front of the Trade Mart Building," +and I said, "About how long will it take?" and he said, "About 15 or +20 minutes at the most." I figured $2 for 20 minutes, and I am going +on vacation next week, that could come in handy, and so I said, "All +right," that I would go over there and do it, and so in the meantime +Charlene had come back. She had finished her test, and she had to go +back to the school board building to see some guy that she saw before +about the job, so I brought her over to that gentleman, and then I +went back over to the Trade Mart Building, where he and another fellow +came up, and he handed me these leaflets, so I just started passing +them out. + +Mr. JENNER. Did you look at them before you started passing them out? + +Mr. STEELE. No; I didn't look at them. I have walked down Canal Street +myself a lot of times, and somebody has handed me a leaflet like that, +and I just take it, and most of the time I just throw it in the nearest +trash can; I don't read them. + +Mr. JENNER. Did you have a sign, or was anybody carrying a sign there? + +Mr. STEELE. No; but these pictures that Mr. Rice showed me, the FBI +agent, I saw myself on those, and there was a gentleman in the rear who +was also passing out leaflets, and I never saw him at the time I was +there, but he's in the pictures. + +Mr. JENNER. What did he look like, this man who was there also passing +out leaflets? + +Mr. STEELE. Well, I shouldn't say this, I guess, but he was sort of +Cuban looking, like that. + +Mr. JENNER. Olive skinned, do you mean? + +Mr. STEELE. Yes; olive skinned, but he was back in the rear, passing +out leaflets, and I never did even see him. + +Mr. JENNER. And this man, Oswald, who asked you to pass out the +leaflets for 15 or 20 minutes, was he also passing out the leaflets at +the same time? + +Mr. STEELE. I never noticed. + +Mr. JENNER. Did you notice whether he was there, or whether he remained +there after he gave you these leaflets? + +Mr. STEELE. Oh, he was there. In fact, he had leaflets in his hand. + +Mr. JENNER. Do you think he was passing them out? + +Mr. STEELE. I guess so, but, I mean, to say that he was just standing +there passing them out, I didn't pay any attention to that. I was just +trying to get mine passed out and get my $2 and leave. I didn't even +look at him after a few minutes. + +Mr. JENNER. Did you more or less walk up and down in front of the +building passing out these leaflets? + +Mr. STEELE. More or less. I figured the sooner I got rid of them the +sooner I could leave, so that's all I was interested in doing. + +Mr. JENNER. Did anybody talk to you about it, or say what the purpose +of this was? + +Mr. STEELE. No. + +Mr. JENNER. Did anybody protest that you were passing out leaflets of +which they disapproved? + +Mr. STEELE. Nobody. As a matter of fact, I didn't have any trouble +getting rid of them. The people just sort of grabbed them as they +passed by. It was just something free, you know, and I guess there's +always a feeling that when you get something free you might as well +take it. + +Mr. JENNER. What time of day did you go into the unemployment office +with your girl friend? + +Mr. STEELE. Before 12, possibly 11 or 11:30; I don't remember that. + +Mr. JENNER. Do you remember the conversation with your girl friend when +you told her that you were going to pass out these leaflets in front of +this building? + +Mr. STEELE. No; she was just saying she had to go back to the school +board building to see this guy. + +Mr. JENNER. Did you have any discussion with her as to whether she +would accompany you? + +Mr. STEELE. Accompany me where? + +Mr. JENNER. Accompany you to where you were going to pass out these +leaflets? + +Mr. STEELE. No. + +Mr. JENNER. Did you drive her somewhere before you went back to pass +out these leaflets? + +Mr. STEELE. To the school board building. + +Mr. JENNER. The Orleans parish school board? + +Mr. STEELE. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Did you return there and pick her up? + +Mr. STEELE. I returned there, but I didn't pick her up. I don't know +what happened, but I missed her somehow. + +Mr. JENNER. You say Lee Oswald told you it would take 15 or 20 minutes +to pass out these leaflets. What time did you get back to pass them out +after you had taken your girl friend to the school board building? + +Mr. STEELE. I don't know what time it was, but I figure I was in front +of the Trade Mart Building about 15 minutes--12 or 15 minutes; I think +it was about 25 after 12, maybe 20 minutes after, when I got there. It +only takes a few minutes to get from the school board building down to +the Trade Mart. I had to be to work for 2 o'clock. + +Mr. JENNER. You had to go to work that afternoon, that this happened? + +Mr. STEELE. Yes; I had to be at work at 2 o'clock that afternoon. +Later on that night she called me and told me that my picture was on +television. + +Mr. JENNER. Did you see her before she came to see you about your +picture being on television? + +Mr. STEELE. No; I saw her later. + +Mr. JENNER. You saw her later that night? + +Mr. STEELE. I don't think any more that night; I think it was the next +day. + +Mr. JENNER. Did you have a conversation with her about passing out +these leaflets. + +Mr. STEELE. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. What did you say to her and what did she say to you? + +Mr. STEELE. She told me that I was in trouble, that there was some kind +of a deal on television about passing out these leaflets or something, +and from what she had read before, it sounded like communism, or +something. Now, I had taken a course in high school on that, so I knew +a little bit about that, so I thought I had better tell my boss about +it, which I did. + +Mr. JENNER. You told your boss about it? + +Mr. STEELE. Yes; after I had that talk with her, when she told me I was +in trouble. + +Mr. JENNER. Do you remember what time it was she called you and told +you about this being on television? + +Mr. STEELE. Well, I know it was after 6 o'clock. + +Mr. JENNER. That same day, when this occurred? + +Mr. STEELE. Yes; it was that same night. + +Mr. JENNER. And then you told your boss about it? + +Mr. STEELE. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. That same night? + +Mr. STEELE. That same night. + +Mr. JENNER. Who was your boss? + +Mr. STEELE. Henry Muller. + +Mr. JENNER. Henry Muller? + +Mr. STEELE. Well, I think it was Alfred Muller. + +Mr. JENNER. Alfred Muller? + +Mr. STEELE. Yes, I think that's Henry's brother. + +Mr. JENNER. What did your girl friend say when you had this discussion +with her, to the effect that this literature might be communistic, or +whatever it was she said? Was she alarmed? + +Mr. STEELE. Yes, she was pretty excited, but we never really discussed +it. I just told her I didn't know a thing about it, that I just made $2 +by passing these leaflets out, but I didn't know what it was all about. + +Mr. JENNER. But she did think you were in trouble? + +Mr. STEELE. Well, from what she saw on television, she thought I was. + +Mr. JENNER. What was your reaction? + +Mr. STEELE. I got a little scared and worried, and so I called the FBI +and told them about it. + +Mr. JENNER. You called the FBI right away? + +Mr. STEELE. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. Do you recall some pictures being taken during that time +you were passing out this literature? + +Mr. STEELE. At the time, when I noticed the cameras, that's when I +looked down at the leaflets to see what I was passing out. + +Mr. JENNER. That's when you really took an interest in these leaflets? + +Mr. STEELE. Yes. That's when I looked at one of them and saw what it +was. + +Mr. JENNER. Did you go and call the TV station? + +Mr. STEELE. Yes; I called three of them. One of them didn't know +anything about it. + +Mr. JENNER. Why did you call the TV stations? + +Mr. STEELE. To get my picture off of the television. + +Mr. JENNER. Had you told your father in the meantime? + +Mr. STEELE. No; I called him, but they were out to dinner. They had +gone to Camp Leroy Johnson, I believe. + +Mr. JENNER. Was there any trouble during the time you were passing out +these leaflets? + +Mr. STEELE. No. + +Mr. JENNER. Nobody tried to interfere with your passing them out? + +Mr. STEELE. No. + +Mr. JENNER. Nobody was arrested? + +Mr. STEELE. No. + +Mr. JENNER. The police didn't come? + +Mr. STEELE. No. I think you are talking about a different occasion now. +I didn't know anything about that at the time, not until I was in the +Federal Building, and they said something about it. + +Mr. JENNER. You say somebody else was helping pass out these leaflets? + +Mr. STEELE. That's right. + +Mr. JENNER. Was it somebody that walked up with Oswald? + +Mr. STEELE. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. But when you arrived on the scene, he was not there, is +that right? + +Mr. STEELE. Do you mean Oswald? + +Mr. JENNER. Yes; and this man that walked up with him. + +Mr. STEELE. No; I waited for him. + +Mr. JENNER. For Oswald? + +Mr. STEELE. Yes; I waited for him maybe a minute, or a few seconds--I +don't know how long it was, but it wasn't long. + +Mr. JENNER. And then he came? + +Mr. STEELE. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. And somebody was accompanying him? + +Mr. STEELE. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. Did you know that man? + +Mr. STEELE. No. + +Mr. JENNER. Was he introduced to you? + +Mr. STEELE. He was introduced to me, but I don't remember him. + +Mr. JENNER. Did you eventually look at these leaflets? + +Mr. STEELE. Yes; after a few minutes. When I saw the cameras, I got +suspicious then and looked at one of them. + +Mr. JENNER. Did you have two supplies of these leaflets? + +Mr. STEELE. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. Tell me the circumstances. About how many had you given out +at the time you quit? + +Mr. STEELE. I had given out one supply and had gone back, and he had +handed me some more, and at that time I seen the cameras, and that's +when I looked to see what I was passing out. + +Mr. JENNER. Looked at these leaflets? + +Mr. STEELE. Yes; at the leaflets. + +Mr. JENNER. All right, and then what happened? + +Mr. STEELE. Well, it didn't sound right to me. I don't remember exactly +what it said, but it said something about keeping hands off of Cuba, or +something like that, and it just didn't sound right, and I knew that we +were on bad terms with Cuba. + +Mr. JENNER. What did you do then? + +Mr. STEELE. I told Oswald that I didn't want any more to do with it, +and I wasn't going to pass out any more leaflets, and he said, "Well, +all right," and he gave me the $2, and I left. + +Mr. JENNER. He didn't pursue it any further? + +Mr. STEELE. No. + +Mr. JENNER. But he went ahead and gave you the $2; is that right? + +Mr. STEELE. Yes; and then I walked off. + +Mr. JENNER. Did you have any leaflets left when you left the scene? + +Mr. STEELE. No. I got rid of the ones I had left. + +Mr. JENNER. Do you remember telling the FBI that you threw the +remainder of the leaflets in a trash can there at the scene? + +Mr. STEELE. Yes; I threw what I had left in the trash can. I mean, when +I left there, I didn't have any with me. + +Mr. JENNER. You threw the remaining leaflets away that you had? + +Mr. STEELE. Yes, sir; I threw them in the trash can around there some +place, but after leaving that spot, you know. I mean, the can wasn't +right there where I was passing them out. + +Mr. JENNER. Did you have any conversation with Oswald about whether +these leaflets were or were not communistic in nature? + +Mr. STEELE. I did ask him if they were communistic, and he said they +were not. He said they were from an organization affiliated with Tulane +University, or something to that effect, of somehow being connected +with Tulane. I believe I had asked him something about the leaflets +before, and he told me about them being connected with Tulane--some +connection there. I don't remember exactly what he said, but I do +remember him telling me about that, you know, the other time I asked +him, and so then I told him I didn't want any more to do with it, and +he gave me the $2. + +Mr. JENNER. He did persist in your continuing to pass them out? + +Mr. STEELE. No; he didn't. + +Mr. JENNER. Did he deny they had any connection with communism, in so +many words? + +Mr. STEELE. He denied that; yes, sir. He didn't really say what it was +for. + +Mr. JENNER. He just said it was from an organization connected with +Tulane University? + +Mr. STEELE. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. But that didn't reassure you, did it? + +Mr. STEELE. No: it didn't. It made me stop and wonder though if it was +or wasn't, but then I didn't think any more about it. + +Mr. JENNER. Anyhow, you didn't want any more to do with it once you saw +the cameras, did you? + +Mr. STEELE. No; I didn't. + +Mr. JENNER. And you got your $2, which was the price agreed on, and you +left, is that right? + +Mr. STEELE. That's right. + +Mr. JENNER. This man that came along with Oswald, have you ever seen +him since then? + +Mr. STEELE. No. + +Mr. JENNER. Had you ever seen him before that time? + +Mr. STEELE. No; I never did. + +Mr. JENNER. Was there any conversation between Oswald and the man he +brought along with him that you might have overheard? + +Mr. STEELE. No. + +Mr. JENNER. What was your impression of the connection between them, if +any? + +Mr. STEELE. The same as mine. He was getting them out of this +unemployment place, just like he did me. + +Mr. JENNER. When you first went into this unemployment place, did you +notice Oswald in there at that time? + +Mr. STEELE. No. + +Mr. JENNER. When did you first notice him? + +Mr. STEELE. When he came up to me and asked me if I wanted to make a +couple of dollars. + +Mr. JENNER. Tell me about that, when you first noticed him--when he +approached you, and what he said. First, how was he dressed, if you +remember? + +Mr. STEELE. He had on a white shirt and tie and black pants, and he had +a little briefcase with him, I think. + +Mr. JENNER. Probably containing a supply of these leaflets, do you +think? + +Mr. STEELE. Well, I don't know. + +Mr. JENNER. But he had a little briefcase that you saw, is that right? + +Mr. STEELE. Yes; he had a briefcase with him. + +Mr. JENNER. Have you ever heard of the name Hidell--A. J. Hidell? + +Mr. STEELE. No. + +Mr. JENNER. You have never heard of him? + +Mr. STEELE. No. + +Mr. JENNER. What did the FBI say to you after you talked to them? + +Mr. STEELE. That night? + +Mr. JENNER. Yes. + +Mr. STEELE. They told me they couldn't do anything about keeping my +picture off of television, and that the best thing for me to do would +be to call the stations and tell them about it, and ask them to keep my +picture off. + +Mr. JENNER. All right now; have you told me everything you know about +this incident? + +Mr. STEELE. As far as I remember. + +Mr. JENNER. And everything as far as your participation in this is +concerned? + +Mr. STEELE. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. Did Oswald ever contact you again to pass out any more +leaflets? + +Mr. STEELE. No, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Did anyone ever contact you on his behalf and ask you to +pass out leaflets at all? + +Mr. STEELE. No. + +Mr. JENNER. I'm going to show you some pictures that are marked Pizzo +Exhibits Nos. 453-A and 453-B, and Exhibit No. 1, Deposition, Carlos +Bringuier, April 7, 1964. Disregarding the various arrows and marks, +because they will serve only to confuse you, do you see the man known +as Lee Harvey Oswald on any of those pictures? + +Mr. STEELE. Yes; in all three. + +Mr. JENNER. All three? + +Mr. STEELE. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. Point to the one on your left, which is 453-A, which is +Oswald? + +(The witness has pointed to the figure of a man over whose head there +is a green cross.) + +Mr. JENNER. Now, the second picture, which is 453-B, do you see him on +that one? + +(The witness points to a man over whose head there is a green vertical +stripe.) + +Mr. JENNER. And do you see him on the third picture, which is the one +identified as Exhibit No. 1? Point to him. + +(Let the record show that the witness has indicated by pointing the +figure of the man identified as Lee Harvey Oswald.) + +Mr. JENNER. Put an "X" on his body, if you will. + +(Let the record show that the witness has put a red "X" mark on the +body of the man known to be Lee Harvey Oswald, and that he is the same +man shown in each picture, and so identified by the witness.) + +Mr. JENNER. Now, taking a look at 453-A, you see there is an arrow over +the head of a man to the left of the man over whose head you put the +green cross? + +Mr. STEELE. What's that? + +Mr. JENNER. You see that arrow over the head of the man to the left of +the man with the green cross over his head? + +Mr. STEELE. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. Do you recognize this man over the head of whom there is an +arrow? + +Mr. STEELE. No. + +Mr. JENNER. Was he there the day that you were passing out this +literature? + +Mr. STEELE. Not that I could see at the time, but from previous +pictures that I have seen, he apparently was though. + +Mr. JENNER. Previous pictures that you have seen from whom? + +Mr. STEELE. The FBI and the Secret Service. + +Mr. JENNER. Are you shown on any of these pictures now? + +Mr. STEELE. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. You are? + +Mr. STEELE. Oh, am I shown? + +Mr. JENNER. Yes. + +Mr. STEELE. No. + +Mr. JENNER. Do you see yourself on any of these pictures? + +Mr. STEELE. No, I don't; not on these. + +Mr. JENNER. Do you see anybody else on those pictures that you now +recognize as having been present on the first occasion, on the occasion +when you were there, other than Lee Harvey Oswald? + +Mr. STEELE. That I remember; no. + +Mr. JENNER. No one else? + +Mr. STEELE. No. + +Mr. JENNER. There was no incident on the day that you passed out this +literature? + +Mr. STEELE. No. + +Mr. JENNER. And the police didn't come? + +Mr. STEELE. No. + +Mr. JENNER. When was that, August 16? + +Mr. STEELE. I can't give the date on that; I don't know. + +Mr. JENNER. It was in August though, wasn't it? + +Mr. STEELE. It was in August all right, but I don't remember the exact +date. + +Mr. JENNER. Do you remember that some people were taking pictures? + +Mr. STEELE. Yes; I do. + +Mr. JENNER. And you remember your girl friend calling you that evening +and saying you were on television? + +Mr. STEELE. Yes; she came over. + +Mr. JENNER. She came over to your place? + +Mr. STEELE. Yes, sir. I remember now; she came over. + +Mr. JENNER. Where were you then? + +Mr. STEELE. I was at work. + +Mr. JENNER. Did you call the FBI then? + +Mr. STEELE. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. And the FBI said what? + +Mr. STEELE. I had asked them about getting my picture off of +television, and they said they couldn't do anything about it, that +there was nothing wrong with it--that it was news. + +Mr. JENNER. They couldn't interfere with the news media? + +Mr. STEELE. That's right. + +Mr. JENNER. That's what they told you? + +Mr. STEELE. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. Did you call the television stations? + +Mr. STEELE. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. What did you tell them? + +Mr. STEELE. I asked them if they would take my picture off of the +television screen. I told them who I was, and I told them about it, +that I was the gentleman that had passed out the literature, and I told +them that my father was with the sheriff's office, and it wouldn't be +too good with him, and at the time didn't know what I was passing out, +until I had seen the cameras, and then looked at them, and they said, +"Well, all right then," and it never came on television anymore, until +the President's death. + +Mr. JENNER. Describe this man who came along with Oswald. + +Mr. STEELE. Right now I haven't the slightest idea what he looked like. +I think, as I recall, he was about Oswald's height. + +Mr. JENNER. Oswald was 5 foot 9. You say he was the same height, or +taller, or what? + +Mr. STEELE. Well, he wasn't shorter. He was either the same height or +slightly taller. + +Mr. JENNER. Would it refresh your recollection if I told you that +when you were interviewed by special agents of the Federal Bureau of +Investigation on the 24th of November, 1963, that you told them that he +was aged 19 or 20 years, that he was about 6 feet tall, slender built, +dark hair, and olive complexion? + +Mr. STEELE. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. Was that the way you recall him? + +Mr. STEELE. Yes; he was slender built and about my complexion. + +Mr. JENNER. You have dark skin? + +Mr. STEELE. Caucasian, dark. + +Mr. JENNER. What would you say he weighed? + +Mr. STEELE. About 170, 175, I guess. + +Mr. JENNER. How tall are you? + +Mr. STEELE. Six feet. + +Mr. JENNER. Would this man have been about your height? + +Mr. STEELE. I guess so, but it didn't seem like he was quite as tall as +I am. + +Mr. JENNER. Do you think he was more slender than you? + +Mr. STEELE. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. How was he dressed? + +Mr. STEELE. Sport shirt, as far as I can remember. + +Mr. JENNER. White or colored, or what? + +Mr. STEELE. I don't even remember the man right now, to tell you the +truth. I just have a very vague recollection of what he looked like. + +Mr. JENNER. But you are sure he was slender built? + +Mr. STEELE. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Now, you have the right, if you wish to exercise it, of +reading over your deposition and signing it, or you may waive that +right and let the court reporter transcribe your testimony, and it will +be forwarded direct to Washington. What do you prefer to do? + +Mr. STEELE. Well, I will do what you consider best. + +Mr. JENNER. Well, you are willing to waive the necessity of reading +your deposition and signing it then? + +Mr. STEELE. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. All right. Is there anything else that occurred that you +haven't told me about, or that I haven't asked you about, that would be +of assistance to the Commission? + +Mr. STEELE. No; I can't think of anything else. + +Mr. JENNER. All right. Thank you for coming in voluntarily and +testifying. + + + + +TESTIMONY OF CHARLES HALL STEELE, SR. + +The testimony of Charles Hall Steele, Sr., was taken on April 7, 1964, +at the Old Civil Courts Building, Royal and Conti Streets, New Orleans, +La., by Mr. Albert E. Jenner, Jr., assistant counsel of the President's +Commission. + + +Charles Hall Steele, Sr., 1488 Madrid Street, New Orleans, La., after +first being duly sworn, testified as follows: + +Mr. JENNER. You are Mr. Charles Hall Steele, Sr., is that right? + +Mr. STEELE. Right. + +Mr. JENNER. And you have seen the letter received by your son from Mr. +Rankin, general counsel of the President's Commission, have you not? + +Mr. STEELE. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. You have read it? + +Mr. STEELE. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. Did you also read the documents that were enclosed with +that letter? + +Mr. STEELE. No, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Well, those documents, Mr. Steele, consist of Senate +Joint Resolution 137, authorizing the creation of the Commission to +investigate the assassination of President John Fitzgerald Kennedy; the +Executive Order No. 11130 of President Lyndon B. Johnson, appointing +that Commission and fixing its powers and its duties, and a copy of +the rules and regulations under which we take testimony before the +Commission and also by deposition, as in this case. + +The Commission is directed to investigate all the facts and +circumstances surrounding or bearing upon the assassination of our +late President Kennedy. I am Albert E. Jenner, Jr., one of the various +members of the legal staff of the Commission, and we are here today +taking depositions of witnesses who may have in some way touched the +lives of the Oswald family during their residence here in New Orleans. + +You have told us that you have some concern about your boy in this +matter, and you have also told me of your position in this community +both as a family man and a public official. I think it will be proper, +due to the circumstances of your situation, to put a statement from you +into the record of these proceedings before the Commission, and so, +with your permission, I will ask you some questions at this time. + +Mr. STEELE. All right. + +Mr. JENNER. Now, you are a native-born American here, and your wife is +a native-born American, and all your children were born here, is that +right? + +Mr. STEELE. Correct. + +Mr. JENNER. In and around this area? + +Mr. STEELE. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. You are how old now, sir? + +Mr. STEELE. I am 44, but I will be 45 the 15th of August, this +year--1964. + +Mr. JENNER. Do you have any children in addition to Charles Hall, Jr.? + +Mr. STEELE. I have a daughter Jacqueline; she's a twin to Charles, and +I have one boy Gerald, who is aged 13. + +Mr. JENNER. Jacqueline, what is she doing? + +Mr. STEELE. She is at Mercy Hospital, a student nurse. She will +graduate in August. + +Mr. JENNER. Now, tell me about yourself, Mr. Steele? + +Mr. STEELE. I am a deputy sheriff, attached to the Civil District +Court, and an officer of the court. I own a small business known as the +Liberty Coffee and Household Co. + +Mr. JENNER. You are a service man, are you? + +Mr. STEELE. 23 years on active National Guard status, subject to 24 +hours' notice. + +Mr. JENNER. Were you in World War II? + +Mr. STEELE. I was. + +Mr. JENNER. What was the nature of that service? + +Mr. STEELE. I was inducted right here in 1941, June or July; I don't +remember exactly, and I went on duty with the AFRTC, at Fort Knox, Ky. +That's the Air Force Replacement Training Center, at Fort Knox, and +then I was transferred to the 5th Armored Division, and that division +was sent to England, but I didn't go with them. I was in the cadre that +was sent to the Tank Destroyer Battalion at Camp Forest, Tenn., and we +pulled winter maneuvers, after which they found that our unit was not +ready to go overseas, so we were disbanded and I was then sent to the +631st Tank Destroyer Battalion at Camp Shelby, where I was a sergeant, +and then I was sent to the 773d Tank Destroyer Battalion, and I finally +ended up after 2 years in Charleston, S.C., in charge of a G.U. +ward, so I spent two lovely years living off of Uncle Sam, and I was +discharged as a staff sergeant, and then I went to Fort Sill, Okla., +in 1949, after being commissioned in the National Guard in 1948, and +received my field commission in artillery, and I have stepped my way +up to where I am now a major, general staff, assistant G-4. + +Mr. JENNER. All right; now tell me about your boy. Had he ever been in +trouble before this thing occurred? + +Mr. STEELE. He never had a police record, or anything like that. + +Mr. JENNER. Are you Catholic? + +Mr. STEELE. My family is; I am not. I am Presbyterian, but the children +are Catholic. + +Mr. JENNER. Then I take it your boy has never been in any serious +trouble? + +Mr. STEELE. He had better not be. + +Mr. JENNER. You heard his story, didn't you, Mr. Steele, about what +happened on this occasion? + +Mr. STEELE. I started that story off with him from the minute he hit +that front door, and I have been right with him on down through the +FBI, the Secret Service, and everybody, right on through, and this is +the only time that he has ever been questioned outside of my presence. + +Mr. JENNER. Well, he is your son, and I know you have his welfare in +mind all the time, and there is a possibility that fathers might become +prejudiced in matters of this kind, but knowing him as you do and being +his father, and knowing his weaknesses and so forth, do you think now +that he is telling the truth about this? + +Mr. STEELE. Well, let me put it this way. In my experience, being a +battery commander and handling 60 to 70 men at one time, and I have +been in court, and with my experience and all that, I have honestly +tried to trick him, using the same tactics that you might say the best +attorneys would use, and I feel that he is honestly telling the truth. +I feel he has told that story over and over again in exactly the same +way, so that's the only conclusion I can come to. In my own mind, I am +positive he didn't know what he was doing at the time. + +Mr. JENNER. You gave him a good cross examination, in other words, is +that right? + +Mr. STEELE. Believe me, because I was under a nervous tension over +this, I'll tell you. I was just promoted in August, to my present +position, and actually I am not a State officer; I am a Federal +officer, and at the same time I had been in the middle of a campaign, +running for the democratic nomination for committeeman, and I am a +member of the pledged electors' group, and I advocate that I as a +Democrat am pledged to the choice of the Democratic Party, and I just +couldn't stand by and let something like this come up and take that all +away from me, so I certainly did cross-examine him, and I got to the +bottom of it, and I'm satisfied that he was not at fault. He had a weak +moment in which he saw a chance to make a couple of bucks, but other +than that, he didn't have the slightest idea of what he was doing. I'm +satisfied of that. + +Mr. JENNER. Is there anything else that you would like to add to what +you have said, Mr. Steele? + +Mr. STEELE. No; I think that's about it. + +Mr. JENNER. Now, you have the privilege, if you wish, to read and +sign your deposition, or you may waive that, and the reporter will +transcribe the deposition, and it will be forwarded direct to +Washington. What is your preference on that? + +Mr. STEELE. I will waive it. + +Mr. JENNER. All right, Mr. Steele; thank you for coming in and +testifying voluntarily. I wanted your background in the record, in view +of the fact that your boy did have personal contact with Oswald and +particularly because of your position in the community, I wanted your +background in the record. Thank you very much. + +Mr. STEELE. I think I can promise you that he is not going to get into +any more trouble. We had that out over and over, and I don't think he +will be passing out any more leaflets. + +Mr. JENNER. I think we all believe that, Mr. Steele; well, thank you +again for giving your statement. It will be of help to the Commission +in evaluating the testimony of your son, by showing his family +background, and so forth. Thank you. + + + + +TESTIMONY OF PHILIP GERACI III + +The testimony of Philip Geraci III, accompanied by his mother, was +taken on April 7-8, 1964, at the Old Civil Courts Building, Royal and +Conti Streets, New Orleans, La., by Mr. Wesley J. Liebeler, assistant +counsel of the President's Commission. + + +(Reporter's Note: The witness, Philip Geraci, was accompanied into the +hearing room by his mother.) + +Philip Geraci, having been first duly sworn, was examined and testified +as follows: + +Mr. LIEBELER. My name is Wesley J. Liebeler. I am a member of the legal +staff of the President's Commission investigating the assassination +of President Kennedy. Staff members have been authorized to take the +testimony of witnesses by the Commission pursuant to authority granted +to the Commission by Executive Order No. 11130, dated November 29, +1963, and joint resolution of Congress No. 137. + +I understand that Mr. Lee Rankin wrote you a letter last week in which +he told you that I would contact you, did he not? + +Mr. GERACI. A letter? No. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You did not receive a letter from Mr. Rankin? + +Mrs. GERACI. Would you please give us one. We would like to have it to +keep. + +Mr. GERACI. Somebody said they sent one. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You didn't receive it? + +Mr. GERACI. No. + +Mrs. GERACI. We did not receive it. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Now I think in point of fact that is right. I think that +the decision to take your testimony was made subsequent to the time +that the letters were sent out to other witnesses. Now you are---- + +Mrs. GERACI. May I make a statement before we go any further? + +Mr. LIEBELER. Let the record indicate that Mrs. Geraci is in the +hearing room at her request to assist her son and give moral support. + +Mrs. GERACI. And we want no publicity at all, please. + +Mr. LIEBELER. We have already given to the reporters the names of some +of the witnesses who came in, but we have already been advised that +you did not want any publicity at this point, and we did not give your +name to the newspaper reporter or make any statement about Philip's +appearance here. + +Mr. GERACI. Does that mean I can't tell anyone about it? + +Mr. LIEBELER. That is something you can settle among yourselves. + +Mr. GERACI. I told everybody I went to a doctor's appointment this +evening. + +Mr. LIEBELER. [Handing documents to witness] Now I want to give you a +copy of the Joint Resolution of Congress and of the Executive order +that I have just referred to, and also of the Rules of Practice adopted +by the Commission concerning the taking of testimony of witnesses. +Those rules provide that technically you are entitled to 3 days' notice +before you appear to have your testimony taken, but you are entitled to +waive that notice, and I assume that, since you are here, you would be +willing to waive it with regard to the testimony. Is that right, Philip? + +Mr. GERACI. I don't know. + +Mrs. GERACI. Yes. Well, they did not notify us 3 days ahead of time, +but that is all right. We are here. They called yesterday. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You have indicated that you are willing to go ahead with +the testimony instead of waiting for the 3 days' notice? + +(Mrs. Geraci nodded assent.) + +Mr. LIEBELER. Philip, would you state your full name for the record, +please? + +Mr. GERACI. Philip Geraci, the Third. + +Mr. LIEBELER. What is your address? + +Mr. GERACI. 2201 Green Acres Road. + +Mr. LIEBELER. New Orleans? + +Mr. GERACI. Metairie. + +Mr. LIEBELER. When were you born? + +Mr. GERACI. February 21, 1948. + +Mr. LIEBELER. So you are now about 16 years old or 17 years old? + +Mr. GERACI. Yes. Well, I am 16. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Do you go to school? + +Mr. GERACI. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Where? + +Mr. GERACI. East Jefferson High School. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And you are--what?--a junior there now, or a senior? + +Mr. GERACI. No, sophomore, 10th grade. + +Mr. LIEBELER. 10th grade. Do you know a man by the name of Carlos +Bringuier? + +Mr. GERACI. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. When did you first meet him? + +Mr. GERACI. Well, this was summer, last summer, some place around the +beginning of it, and--you want me to tell you everything about it? + +Mr. LIEBELER. Yes. + +Mr. GERACI. Well, I was down there with a friend. [Addressing mother.] +Do you think I should give his name? + +(Mrs. Geraci nodded assent.) + +Mr. LIEBELER. Please do. You were down where? + +Mr. GERACI. Down there in New Orleans, I mean on Canal Street. We had +to go to some radio shop. It was Bill Dwyer. That is a friend. And we +were down there and we wanted to go in radio shops and everything, so I +saw--going down there I saw, looking to the side, that they had a sign +saying "Casa Roca," and I took Spanish in school, so I was interested, +and I went in there and--well, he was a little reluctant, but we went +anyway. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Your friend was a little reluctant? + +Mr. GERACI. Yes, a little bit. He didn't get mixed up in this or +anything. And then, well, when we were in there, we looked around a +little at everything, then I asked the man there--I didn't know it was +Carlos Bringuier then--I asked him was he a Cuban. He said yes, he +was an exile, and everything, you know. I asked him a few things, I +guess--I don't know exactly what--you know, just a little conversation +like. Then I ask him was there anything that I as an American could do. +He said, well, he didn't know, to come back later. You know, he acted +as though maybe--like--just like he just didn't want me to help or +something like that, I guess, so we left and went home, and that was it. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And when did you see him again, if you did? You did see +him again, didn't you? + +Mr. GERACI. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. When? + +Mr. GERACI. I don't remember when. I remember I saw him a few times, I +couldn't exactly say how many, but I went back another time when I was +in town, I stopped off and saw him, and I saw him another time. Then +I think it was about the fourth time that I was there that I saw Lee +Harvey Oswald. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Now before we get to that, did you ever raise any money +for Carlos' activities? + +Mr. GERACI. Not until the third time. + +Mr. LIEBELER. What happened? + +Mr. GERACI. No; wait. Come to think of it, I think it was about the +fifth time that I saw Oswald; something like that. I remember I went +back--it was about the third time--after asking him--I asked him, "Do +you think it is possible to raise donations?" And he said, "Well, yes; +it is possible." And he showed me these little yellow slips, sort of +like yellow, and they were like receipts if you paid, and he said I +could get them--you know--if I wanted to, I could, you know, go, and +he could give them to me, and go and get donations and give the people +this receipt and bring the money back to him. + +Mr. LIEBELER. So did you take some of the receipts? + +Mr. GERACI. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And did you get some money? + +Mr. GERACI. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And you gave it to Carlos? + +Mr. GERACI. Yes; it was about $10. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And you turned that money over to him? + +Mr. GERACI. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Now, is it correct that on the day that you came into the +Casa Roca to give this money to Carlos that you met Lee Oswald? + +Mr. GERACI. I don't know if I turned in the money or not. No; I don't +think I turned in money, but I couldn't be sure. I remember I went +there, and that is the time the last guy, Vance Blalock, came along +with me. It was his first time and everything. And we went in there--I +might have turned it in, I am not too sure. Maybe I did; maybe I +didn't. I can't remember too much, but I was in there anyway talking to +him and that is when I met him. + +Mr. LIEBELER. That is when you met Oswald? + +Mr. GERACI. Yes; you want me to tell all that? + +Mr. LIEBELER. Yes; tell me all the circumstances of how Oswald---- + +Mr. GERACI. Everything I know? + +Mr. LIEBELER. Met you and everything you know about it, what the +conversation was, who was there. + +Mr. GERACI. Well, we were--Vance and me went in there, Vance and I, +we went into there, I introduced Vance to Carlos, and Carlos started +talking to him about, you know, freedom and all that, democracy and +everything. Then later on while we were talking, Lee Oswald came in, +you know, while we were talking, and he came in a little while later. +He was by himself and he seemed a little nervous. I remember he was +dressed just like in that picture there shows. [Indicating photograph.] + +Mr. LIEBELER. You are referring to a picture here on the table? + +Mr. GERACI. Yes, sir; well he was dressed something like that. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Which has previously been marked as Exhibit 1 to the +affidavit of Jesse J. Garner. I show you that picture. [Exhibiting +photograph to witness.] You say Lee was dressed something like that +when you met him? + +Mr. GERACI. Yes; you know, he had on a tie and a shirt, short sleeved +shirt, and sort of like dress pants. I don't know the color of them, +but they were sort of like dress pants, just about as much as this. +[Indicating photograph.] + +Mr. LIEBELER. Do you recognize that individual in the picture as being +the man that you saw in the store that day? + +Mr. GERACI. Well, tell you the truth, when I first heard about it in +the papers and on the TV, I didn't recognize him. See, I forgot that I +met this guy over there, you know, I forgot about it, and I thought I +didn't meet him. It wasn't until the FBI man came to my house and he +showed me a picture of him when he was first under arrest, and he got +arrested in August, the 4th I think. + +Mr. LIEBELER. He showed you a picture that had been taken of Lee when +he had been under arrest here in New Orleans? + +Mr. GERACI. Yes; it was one of those things with three things, showing +him from the front, the side, and his face. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you then recognize the man in the picture that they +showed you as being the man that you met in the store that day? + +Mr. GERACI. Well, you see, I didn't exactly recognize him maybe, but +anyway I was pretty sure it was him though. He said--he showed me that +and said, "Do you ever remember an ex-marine--and then I remembered +there was a guy who was dressed something like that who was an +ex-marine who came in, and he did have a funny name, you know, like +Lee. It's a little unusual, it's kind of rare, and I remembered the +last name was a little hard, so it just fits that that was him. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Now what kind of conversations did you have with this +fellow or what did you talk about? + +Mr. GERACI. Well, first---- + +Mr. LIEBELER. As I understand it now, there were this marine, Lee +Oswald, and Carlos, and Vance Blalock and yourself. Is that right? + +Mr. GERACI. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Was there anybody else there? + +Mr. GERACI. Well, while we were talking, this man came up. He was in +a big truck, some big truck. I never looked at it closely. He came up +and stopped, and the man rushed in, and he was wearing--well, he was +wearing one of these--like a cap like you see them wearing over in +England. I don't know what kind it is, but anyway it is the kind that +truckdrivers wear, I guess, and he looked kind of Spanish. Maybe he +was a Cuban exile. He was kind of fat, and he came in and showed Carlos +this broken radio that he had, so Carlos left and he started fixing the +radio and left us to talk to ourselves, Lee and me and my friend. Well, +he is the only other person I know that came in. I don't know if he +knew what was going on. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Now tell us the conversation that you and Lee and Vance +and Carlos had, the best you can recall it. + +Mr. GERACI. Well, Carlos and me and Vance were kind of talking among +ourselves, and he came in and said, "Excuse me," and, you know, he +acted a little nervous and things like that. He asked, "Is this the +Cuban headquarters, Cuban exile headquarters?" And, "Are you a Cuban +exile?" You know, the way I acted when I first went in there. Just +asked him a few questions, was he a Cuban exile, and Carlos said yes. +He asked him some questions like was he connected with the Cosa Nostra, +La Cosi Nostra. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Who asked that? + +Mr. GERACI. Oswald; he asked that. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Of Carlos? + +Mr. GERACI. Yes; and Carlos said no, he wasn't. Oswald then asked where +was his headquarters--in Miami? And Carlos said yes; and he said--let's +see--and then Oswald asked, said something like, "It is kind of +exciting meeting someone"--I don't know if he said exciting--but he +expressed something like that. He said, you know, he expressed wonder +or something like that at meeting somebody who was a real Cuban exile, +you know, someone who is really trying to do something to help free +Cuba and all that. He didn't really say much. In the papers they said +he tried to join and all that. That must have been later, because this +was---- + +Mr. LIEBELER. He didn't do that when you were there? + +Mr. GERACI. No. This was his first visit. As far as I can make out, it +must have been, and he asked a few questions like that. Carlos just +answered real simply and all that, he didn't go into any big speeches, +you know, with them, like he did for me and Vance, just answered his +questions simply. Then when the man came in with the broken radio, +Carlos left, and that left Oswald, me, and Vance by ourselves. + +Then, well, we asked--you know, we were a little interested in +guerrilla warfare ourselves and things like that, and he said, well, +he was an ex-marine, said he was in the Marines once. He said he +learned a little bit about that stuff, and he said a few things about +guerrilla warfare I remember, like he said the way to derail a train +was to wrap chain around the ties of the track and then lock it with +a padlock and the train would derail. He said the thing he liked best +of all was learning how to blow up the Huey P. Long Bridge. He said +you put explosive at each end on the banks and blow it up, and that +leaves the one column standing. And he said how to make a homemade +gun and how to make gunpowder, homemade gunpowder. He just went into +those real simply. He didn't really, you know, tell us how to do it or +anything, just said like if you want to make a homemade gun, you know, +do something like--you know, the thing you pull back [demonstrating] +and it goes forward, like on one of the pinball machines. He just said +something like that. He didn't really go into detail or anything. We +didn't ask him. And by this time Carlos came back from the other guy, +and came back, and he was listening, and, well, that is about all. + +Oh, there was one important thing. Oswald said something like that he +had a military manual from when he was in the Marines, and he said he +would give it to me, and I said, "That is all right. You don't have +to. You can give it to Carlos." He said, "Well, OK, he will give it to +Carlos next time he comes." + +And after that--well, everybody left. That is as far as I can make out. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Do you remember---- + +Mr. GERACI. And he said he was going to come back later and give Carlos +this military manual from when he was in the Marines. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And was he going to give this to Carlos for Carlos' +benefit, or was he---- + +Mr. GERACI. For Carlos' benefit, I guess, Carlos' or the Cuban exiles'. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you hear any conversation about training guerrillas +to oppose Castro? + +Mr. GERACI. No. He didn't say anything about being an expert rifle +shooter, never said anything about going to Russia or joining or +training or anything like that. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Well, was there a conversation concerning the training of +anti-Castro troops or guerrillas to oppose Castro? + +Mr. GERACI. No; that must have been later, maybe when he came back some +other time. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Now were you present at all times while Oswald was there? + +Mr. GERACI. We got there before he did and we left at the same time he +did. + +Mr. LIEBELER. So, as far as you know, there wouldn't have been any +opportunity for Oswald and Carlos to talk among themselves where you +wouldn't have heard what they said? + +Mr. GERACI. That is right; because we were there all the time. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And you have no recollection that Oswald told Carlos that +he wanted to help train anti-Castro guerrillas to fight against Castro? + +Mr. GERACI. None at all; none that I remember. + +Mr. LIEBELER. All right. Now what was Oswald going to bring this marine +book back for? + +Mr. GERACI. Well, I guess to give to Carlos to help him out or +something. First he was going to give it to me and Vance. I guess he +wanted us to blow up the bridge or something. I don't know. We said no; +and so he said, "OK, I will give it to Carlos," you know, because after +all Carlos--I guess he could use it better than we could, you know, +blow up bridges in Cuba or something, and I guess he was just going to +give it to him so he could learn some stuff from it. I wouldn't know. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Now when you left the store did you try to follow Oswald +at all? + +Mr. GERACI. Well, we had some thought about it. When he left, he was +going to go down--he crossed Canal Street and he was--he kept on going +that way, I think on St. Charles or Claiborne--way down there near the +end--which one is closer to the river? St. Charles? + +Mr. LIEBELER. I am not familiar with New Orleans, so I get them mixed +up. + +Mr. GERACI. It must have been St. Charles he went down, and Vance said, +"Hey, let's follow him, see where he lives." He told us where he lived, +but the way he told us the address---- + +Mr. LIEBELER. You don't know what it was? + +Mr. GERACI. When the FBI man came by my house that day, he asked me, +and I could just barely remember it. I remember it was to the left of +Canal Street. It was Magazine Street. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Magazine Street? What number? + +Mr. GERACI. Well, I remembered the number a little. I couldn't remember +it altogether, but I remember---- + +Mr. LIEBELER. Do you remember that he had told you the number? + +Mr. GERACI. Yes; and I could--I had a few--I mean I had a little +recollection about what it was, like it was a big number sort of like +and had two zeros in it or something. I don't even remember. It seemed +that his number did have that. We decided--we thought maybe we can +follow him for fun, but we decided no, we had better not, you know, +because it was not good or anything, so we just went up Canal Street. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Do you remember whether Oswald said anything about having +been in Florida? + +Mr. GERACI. In Florida? + +Mr. LIEBELER. Yes. + +Mr. GERACI. I am not too sure about that. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You don't remember one way or the other whether---- + +Mr. GERACI. The only thing I remember about Florida is when he asked +was headquarters down there. He could have, but I don't know. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Now did you ever see Oswald after that? + +Mr. GERACI. No; that was the last time; first and last. + +Mr. LIEBELER. How about Carlos? Did you see him after that? + +Mr. GERACI. Yes. That time when we found out that it was Oswald +who killed him, well, then I went there, you know, to get things +straightened out and talk with Carlos a little about him, you know. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You went back and talked with Carlos, about this meeting +with Oswald, after the assassination? Is that right? + +Mr. GERACI. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Do you remember whether you saw Carlos between the time +that you met Oswald and the assassination? + +Mr. GERACI. Carlos? + +Mr. LIEBELER. Yes. + +Mr. GERACI. Not that I remember. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Can you tell us approximately when it was that you met +Oswald? Was it July or August? + +Mr. GERACI. Well, last time the FBI man came, I estimated around late +July. I couldn't remember now, so I will just stick with late July. +That seems to stick pretty good. Vance said the same thing himself when +the FBI man questioned him, so I am pretty sure it was between late +July--middle July to late July. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you form any opinion about Oswald when you met him? + +Mr. GERACI. When I met him? + +Mr. LIEBELER. Yes. What did you think of him? + +Mr. GERACI. Well, when he went in there, I noticed he was a little +nervous. + +Mr. LIEBELER. How did he show his nervousness? Do you remember? + +Mr. GERACI. Well, the way he talked, you know. Well, you know, the way +he talked I guess, kind of, you know, searching around for words and +all that, and I remember he leaned on the table, and I remember reading +once that, you know, if you exert some physical exertion, it kind of +helps you tend to calm down or something like that. Anyway, I could +tell by the way he was leaning on the table that maybe he was nervous. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Other than this nervousness, did you form any other +opinion about it? + +Mr. GERACI. Not particularly. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did he appear to be an intelligent person? + +Mr. GERACI. Intelligent person? + +Mr. LIEBELER. Yes. + +Mr. GERACI. Sort of. He didn't appear stupid or anything like that. He +seemed OK, you know. He didn't seem like a Communist. Seemed like he +just wanted to, you know, help out too, sort of. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you subsequently learn that Oswald was arrested by +the New Orleans Police Department for distributing Fair Play for Cuba +Committee leaflets? + +Mr. GERACI. I didn't know that until after he killed Kennedy and it was +in the papers. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You didn't hear it? + +Mr. GERACI. On the radio? + +Mr. LIEBELER. On the radio or television. + +Mr. GERACI. No. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Do you think you have now told us everything that you can +remember about this meeting you had with Oswald and Carlos? Is there +anything else that you can think of? + +Mr. GERACI. No. There might be one thing. Carlos, when he talked to me +and Vance and my friend, Bill Dwyer, the first time, you know, he made +speeches and all that. When he met him--I don't know--seemed like maybe +he didn't want him or something. I am not too sure. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Carlos didn't seem to open up to Oswald? + +Mr. GERACI. That is right. He opened up enough, you know, but he didn't +give him any speeches or anything like that. + +Mr. LIEBELER. If you can think of anything else that occurred, we would +like to have you tell us. + +Mr. GERACI. OK. + +Mr. LIEBELER. If you can't, I don't have any other questions. + +Mr. GERACI. He did seem like--I guess he did seem like the type who was +a little antisocial. + +Mr. LIEBELER. He didn't seem to be too friendly? + +Mr. GERACI. No. He seemed friendly. I mean, he seemed friendly, you +know, but he--maybe like he didn't have enough experience with people, +sort of. He seemed friendly though. That is one thing. + +Mr. LIEBELER. I don't have any other questions. + +Mrs. GERACI. Do you have a record of me reporting Carlos to the FBI? Do +you have that in the record anywhere where I found out--he told me he +was going to collect money for Cuba, but I didn't know he was giving +out these little tickets as he called them, and then when I found out +he had collected $10 and brought it down and I saw the receipts and he +had more tickets, we forbade him to go down there, and Carlos called +the house to try to get him a--what is it--a license or permit to go +from house to house and collect money. + +Mr. GERACI. He never called me. + +Mrs. GERACI. He did call me. + +Mr. GERACI. He called you? Carlos? + +Mrs. GERACI. I spoke with him on the phone. + +Mr. GERACI. That is because I told him--when I collected, a man told me +to do something like that, that I needed a license, so I went and told +Carlos, "You have to get a license." He said, "Don't collect any more +until I get one." Then he went to city hall and got some stuff he had +to fill out. + +Mr. LIEBELER. This wasn't Oswald who told you you couldn't collect? + +Mr. GERACI. No. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Oswald didn't have anything to do with this? + +Mr. GERACI. No; this was before I knew Oswald. This is a man works some +place--who works in a cleaner's, I remember. I went there and he said +I had to get a license to do that, so I called Carlos on the phone and +told him. + +Mrs. GERACI. Then when Carlos called the house, I realized he was still +involved in this. + +Mr. GERACI. I told you I was. + +Mrs. GERACI. I put my foot down and told him he couldn't do it any +more, and I called the FBI. + +Mr. GERACI. And the Better Business Bureau. + +Mrs. GERACI. They told me to call the Better Business Bureau, but the +man at the FBI told me he couldn't give out any information as to +whether this was a Communist organization or not, and the headquarters +were in Miami, and the best thing to do would be not to let him get +involved in it any more. Then I called the Better Business Bureau, and +they were supposed to check with Miami, but I never did get a report +back from him. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Was this before or after you met Oswald? + +Mr. GERACI. This was before. + +Mrs. GERACI. But he has the receipt at home with the date on it. When +he gave Carlos money, Carlos gave him a receipt. + +Mr. GERACI. I remember Carlos making out a check to give the money to +Miami too. When I gave him the money, he put the money in his bank and +made out a check to the headquarters. + +Mrs. GERACI. We met Carlos just now in the hall, and he told me the +best thing Philip could do would be listen to his parents and be a +good student. Right now that would be the way he could help combat +communism. And I told him I thought he was too young to get involved +in things like this, selling tickets for Cuba and all this stuff. Last +year he was only 15 and too young to be involved in all that mess. The +man at the FBI told me that an organization could be all right today +and next week it would be Communist-controlled and how was I to know. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Do you know who you talked to at the FBI? + +Mrs. GERACI. Gee, I may have his name at home with these slips of paper +that I took from him. + +Mr. LIEBELER. It is not really important. I just wondered if you +remembered. + +Mrs. GERACI. Well, I wanted his name cleared for getting mixed up with +Carlos, because I didn't know from beans about Carlos. He could be a +Communist. I don't know who is and who isn't. When I found out he met +Oswald, I nearly died. The week this happened he was camping with the +Boy Scouts and gone Friday, Saturday, and Sunday when the stuff was on +TV. + +Mr. GERACI. I was in school when he got shot. + +Mrs. GERACI. But you were in camp, but you didn't see a lot of the +funeral and all that stuff showing Oswald's picture. + +Mr. LIEBELER. How did you first become aware that Oswald was the fellow +you met? Did Vance talk to you about it? Do you remember? + +Mr. GERACI. The first time was when the FBI agent came to my house +and asked did I see an ex-marine and showed a picture and all that. I +didn't even know it before that. It was just then that I realized. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did the FBI man tell you how he---- + +Mr. GERACI. Got my name? + +Mr. LIEBELER. What prompted him, why did he come to your house? Did he +tell you? + +Mr. GERACI. Well, he said he couldn't tell me that. I asked him, and he +said, well, he couldn't tell me. Of course, I guess it might have been +because we--my mother called, you know, about this Cuban business--they +got my name on their list or something, I guess, and when they found +out that he tried to join that group, that must have been where it came +from. That is what I think. + +Mrs. GERACI. They probably had a list of people who were collecting +money for the organization. + +Mr. LIEBELER. OK, I don't have any more questions. I do want to thank +you very much for coming in and being as cooperative as you have, and, +on behalf of the Commission, I want to thank you very much. + +Mr. GERACI. OK. + +Mrs. GERACI. You are welcome, so long as we don't have any publicity. + +Mr. LIEBELER. That is something you never can guarantee. + + + + +TESTIMONY OF VANCE BLALOCK + +The testimony of Vance Blalock, accompanied by his parents, was taken +on April 7-8, 1964, at the Old Civil Courts Building, Royal and Conti +Streets, New Orleans, La., by Mr. Wesley J. Liebeler, assistant counsel +of the President's Commission. + + +Vance Blalock, having been first duly sworn, was examined and testified +as follows: + +Mr. LIEBELER. My name is Wesley J. Liebeler. I am a member of the legal +staff of the President's Commission investigating the assassination +of President Kennedy. Staff members have been authorized to take the +testimony of witnesses by the Commission, pursuant to authority granted +to the Commission by Executive Order No. 11130, dated November 29, +1963, and joint resolution of Congress No. 137. I understand, Vance, +that Mr. Lee Rankin, who is general counsel of the Commission, wrote +you a letter last week---- + +Mr. BLALOCK. That is right. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And told you that I would be in touch with you concerning +the taking of your testimony. I understand that Mr. Rankin enclosed +with that letter a copy of the Executive order and of the resolution of +Congress to which I have just referred, as well as a copy of the rules +of procedure adopted by the Commission governing the taking of the +testimony of witnesses. Did you receive that letter and those documents? + +Mr. BLALOCK. Yes; I did. + +Mr. LIEBELER. We want to inquire very briefly of you concerning an +event which occurred some time in the summer of 1963 here in New +Orleans. We understand that you were present at a meeting, a chance +meeting, between Lee Harvey Oswald and Carlos Bringuier. Before we get +into the details of that, however, would you state your full name for +the record. + +Mr. BLALOCK. Vance Douglas Blalock. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Let the record show that your mother and father are here +in the room with us. How old are you, Vance? + +Mr. BLALOCK. I am 16. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Where were you born? + +Mr. BLALOCK. Lake Charles, La. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Where do you live now? + +Mr. BLALOCK. Metairie, La. + +Mr. LIEBELER. How long have you lived there? + +Mr. BLALOCK. Less than a year. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Do you go to school? + +Mr. BLALOCK. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Where? + +Mr. BLALOCK. East Jefferson High School. + +Mr. LIEBELER. What grade are you in at East Jefferson High School? + +Mr. BLALOCK. Tenth. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Do you know Carlos Bringuier? + +Mr. BLALOCK. I have met him once. + +Mr. LIEBELER. How did it happen that you met him? + +Mr. BLALOCK. I went downtown with my friend, Philip Geraci. We went to +a store to return funds that Philip had collected for the organization +this man had had, and while I was there I met Carlos. That is how I met +him. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you have anything to do with these funds that were +collected by your friend Geraci? + +Mr. BLALOCK. No, sir; I didn't. + +Mr. LIEBELER. That was entirely his operation? + +Mr. BLALOCK. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Do you remember where you went that day with Philip? + +Mr. BLALOCK. Yes, sir; we went to Decatur Street, I believe it is. I am +not sure. The store is the Casa Roca. + +Mr. LIEBELER. What organization was it that Bringuier was running? Do +you know? + +Mr. BLALOCK. I couldn't say the Spanish name. The American name of it +is the Cuban Student Revolutionary Organization. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Can you tell me approximately when that was? + +Mr. BLALOCK. Last part of the summer. I couldn't---- + +Mr. LIEBELER. Late July or early August would it be, or some time in +August of 1963? + +Mr. BLALOCK. August would be the closest I could get. I don't remember +the exact date. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Tell me the conversation that you and Philip had with +Bringuier when you went into the store. + +Mr. BLALOCK. Oh, we entered the store and Philip introduced me to +Carlos, and I told him--I saw the funds Philip had collected for +him, and I told him I was curious about what it was for, and then he +explained for me how the organization worked and told me he received +the funds from people in New Orleans and sent it to Florida, and that +was his total business, and he explained that Communism was where the +kids are supposed to tell everything on their parents, to obey the +State and not their parents. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Present at this conversation were just you and Philip and +Carlos? Is that right? + +Mr. BLALOCK. No; there was another man--must have worked at the store. +He was present. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you know what his name was? + +Mr. BLALOCK. No, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Now while you were there in the store, did you notice +anybody else present? + +Mr. BLALOCK. Well, a man from a moving company or some trucking company +came in. He had a radio that needed to be fixed, a broken radio, and +Lee Harvey Oswald came in. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Tell us, to the best of your recollection, the things +that happened as far as Oswald was concerned. + +Mr. BLALOCK. He walked up to us and leaned against the desk and +listened to the conversation. Then he started asking questions about +the organization, and we were talking about guerrilla warfare, just in +case the country got in war how young students could help, something in +that nature, and then he started--then Oswald, Lee Harvey Oswald, asked +Carlos Bringuier all about the organization and what part it played in +the main movement in Florida. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did they say anything else? Was there more to the +conversation? + +Mr. BLALOCK. Let's see. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did this man who walked up introduce himself by name? + +Mr. BLALOCK. I believe so, but I don't remember what name he gave. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Are you now convinced that he was Lee Harvey Oswald? + +Mr. BLALOCK. Yes, sir. I know his face. I recognized his face. + +Mr. LIEBELER. But you don't remember that he mentioned the name Lee +Harvey Oswald at that time? + +Mr. BLALOCK. No. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did Oswald say anything about having been a Marine? + +Mr. BLALOCK. Yes, sir; he did, and he explained that he took training +in guerrilla warfare, and he told us how to blow up bridges, derail +trains, make zip guns, make homemade gunpowder. + +Mr. LIEBELER. He told you about this in detail? + +Mr. BLALOCK. He told us how to blow up the Huey P. Long Bridge. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Tell us just what he told you about that. I know you +can't remember the exact words, but you can remember the substance of +the conversation. We want you to tell us about it. + +Mr. BLALOCK. He told us to put powder charges at each end of the bridge +from the foundation to where the foundation meets the suspension part, +and to blow that part up and the center part of the bridge would +collapse. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did he talk about any other aspect of guerrilla warfare +that you can remember? + +Mr. BLALOCK. He said that if you don't have the materials you need +always available, you had to do without stuff. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did he give any specific example of that? + +Mr. BLALOCK. Gunpowder, high explosives. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did he tell you how to do without gunpowder in these +activities? + +Mr. BLALOCK. He told us how to derail a train without gunpowder. + +Mr. LIEBELER. What did he say about that? + +Mr. BLALOCK. He said put a chain around the railroad track and lock it +to the track with a lock. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And then when the train hit the chain it would derail the +train? + +Mr. BLALOCK. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did he say that he knew how to make gunpowder? + +Mr. BLALOCK. Yes, sir; he told us the formula, and I--saltpeter and +nitrate--some formula--I don't remember. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did he say anything about guns? + +Mr. BLALOCK. About zip guns, how to make them out of tubing and a +plunger. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did he say something to the effect that he knew all about +guns? + +Mr. BLALOCK. No; he told us he had a manual that explained all about +guns, a Marine manual, and that he had training in guns, trained with +guns. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Do you remember anything else that he said? + +Mr. BLALOCK. Not right offhand. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did he talk to Bringuier about helping Bringuier in +this organization, or just what was the general context of this +conversation? Was this just a general discussion of guerrilla warfare, +or did it relate to the activities of Bringuier's anti-Castro +organization? What can you remember? + +Mr. BLALOCK. He just asked him about the anti-Castro organization +and asked him to explain it to him, and he said he was interested +in finding out how it operated. He didn't say he wanted to join it: +He just said he was interested in it. Oh, and Bringuier gave him +literature, a Cuban newspaper and leaflets or booklets. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Was there any discussion of politics? + +Mr. BLALOCK. Not to my recollection. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Was there any mention of President Kennedy? + +Mr. BLALOCK. No, sir. I couldn't say for sure there was no mention of +President Kennedy. I don't think there was. + +Mr. LIEBELER. What did you think of Oswald? + +Mr. BLALOCK. He seemed like a very intelligent man to me, well spoken, +looked well dressed, well groomed. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you think anything else about him, or is that about +it? + +Mr. BLALOCK. That is the impression that I got right at the moment. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did he say anything about Florida? + +Mr. BLALOCK. Just mentioned the Cuban anti-Castro organization there. + +Mr. LIEBELER. What did he say about that? + +Mr. BLALOCK. I don't remember exactly, but I think he said he had been +there and he had looked into it. I couldn't say for sure on that. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did he mention the name of the organization? + +Mr. BLALOCK. No, sir. No, I don't recall any name. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Do you remember being interviewed about this subject by +an FBI agent? + +Mr. BLALOCK. Yes, sir; I do, during the Christmas holidays. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Do you remember his name? + +Mr. BLALOCK. No, sir; I don't. All I know is a Lieutenant or something +like that. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Do you think you would remember his name if I mentioned +it to you? + +Mr. BLALOCK. I might, or my mother might. She was present. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Your mother was present when you were interviewed by the +FBI? + +Mr. BLALOCK. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Would it refresh your recollection if I told you that the +report that I have of the interview that you had with the FBI agent +indicates that the man's name was Kevin J. Herrigan? + +Mr. BLALOCK. Herrigan? No. No; I don't remember that name. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Do you remember talking to the FBI agent about Oswald's +remark concerning having been to Florida? + +Mr. BLALOCK. No, sir; I don't remember what I told the FBI agent. I +don't remember anything about Oswald saying--only that I think he said +he had been there. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Well, the report that I have here says that you seemed +to remember Oswald mentioning something about having recently visited +something called the Casa Nostra, C-a-s-a N-o-s-t-r-a. Do you remember +saying anything about that to the FBI man? + +Mr. BLALOCK. Yes, sir; I remember mentioning the organization, but I +couldn't remember the name. That organization was mentioned in the +conversation with Carlos Bringuier and Harvey Oswald. + +Mr. LIEBELER. It was? + +Mr. BLALOCK. I believe so. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Do you remember that it was Oswald who mentioned it? + +Mr. BLALOCK. I don't remember which one mentioned it first. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And it was mentioned as being a Cuban organization in +Florida? Is that your recollection? + +Mr. BLALOCK. Yes, sir; I think that is the name they mentioned. It +could be something similar. I know I got this Mafia name mixed up with +a Cuban organization name. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Well, you know that that name that I just mentioned, Casa +Nostra, is very similar to the Cosa Nostra. Do you think you may have +been confused at the time you talked with him? + +Mr. BLALOCK. Well, I meant the Cuban organization. I may have said the +Mafia, the Cosa Nostra. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You may have used that name? + +Mr. BLALOCK. But I meant the Cuban---- + +Mr. LIEBELER. You meant some Anti-Castro Cuban organization? + +Mr. BLALOCK. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. So the best you can recall, Oswald didn't say that he had +recently visited someone in the Cosa Nostra? + +Mr. BLALOCK. No, sir. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. But you do recall sort of vaguely that Oswald did say +that he had been in Florida and he had visited an Anti-Castro Cuban +organization there? + +Mr. BLALOCK. Yes, sir; I do. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Can you remember anything else about this incident in the +store that day when Oswald came in? + +Mr. BLALOCK. Oh, he said he lived on Magazine Street. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did he give his exact address to you? Do you remember? + +Mr. BLALOCK. I don't believe he gave his exact address, but I couldn't +say for sure. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did he say anything about whether he was working or not, +whether he had a job? + +Mr. BLALOCK. I don't remember if he said anything about his job. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did he tell you anything about his background? Did he say +he was from New Orleans or anything about that? + +Mr. BLALOCK. No, sir; I don't remember anything about that. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Can you think of anything else that happened? + +Mr. BLALOCK. Philip Geraci and I started following him home after we +both left the store. Oswald, Philip and I both left the store about +the same time. We started to follow Oswald to his house just out of +curiosity, and I recollect that Oswald said he would give us his Marine +manual if we ever came back, if we contacted him. + +Mr. LIEBELER. That he would give you the Marine manual if you saw each +other at the store again? + +Mr. BLALOCK. At the store or just saw each other, if we would contact +him and get it, we could have it. If he saw us again, he would give it +to us. + +Mr. LIEBELER. How long did you continue to follow him home? Did you +just walk out and walk down the street with him, or did you sort of +shadow him or---- + +Mr. BLALOCK. No, sir. We walked out the door. We both started different +directions, and Philip and I said, "Why don't we follow him and get the +Marine manual now, nothing else to do." We started to go to the corner, +and we didn't see him, so we went on our way. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you ever see the Marine manual? + +Mr. BLALOCK. No, sir; I didn't. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you ever talk to Mr. Bringuier again after that? + +Mr. BLALOCK. No, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You never saw Carlos again until just today---- + +Mr. BLALOCK. No, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. When you saw him come out of this room and leave the +building? + +Mr. BLALOCK. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Are you and Philip good friends? + +Mr. BLALOCK. I wouldn't say real close friends, but we are friends. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you talk about this incident or talk about Oswald at +all after this time but prior to the assassination? + +Mr. BLALOCK. No, sir; I don't believe we did. We talked about the Cuban +Student Organization. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Were you aware of the fact that Oswald was subsequently +arrested here in New Orleans in connection with his activity on behalf +of the Fair Play for Cuba Committee? + +Mr. BLALOCK. No; I didn't know about that until after the assassination. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You didn't hear Oswald debate Carlos on the radio +program---- + +Mr. BLALOCK. No, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Or you didn't see Oswald on television? + +Mr. BLALOCK. No, sir. I might have. I just don't remember it. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did Philip say anything about having seen these things? + +Mr. BLALOCK. Not to me he didn't. + +Mr. LIEBELER. So you never had any real discussions, as far as you +remember, with Philip about Oswald until the time of the assassination? +Is that correct? + +Mr. BLALOCK. That is correct. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You must have talked to Philip about Oswald after the +assassination. + +Mr. BLALOCK. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you recall to each other and discuss with each other +the meeting that you had with Oswald in the store on Decatur Street at +that time? + +Mr. BLALOCK. I think I was the one that recognized him. I called it to +Philip's attention, and the next day at school he said, "Yes, that is +the man we met at the store." I recognized Oswald late one night when +I was just about going to bed. I told my Daddy, "I went uptown and met +that man up there." + +Mr. LIEBELER. This was shortly after the assassination? + +Mr. BLALOCK. Yes; during the time they didn't have any shows but the +funeral and---- + +Mr. LIEBELER. [Exhibiting photograph to witness.] Let me show you a +picture that has been marked as Exhibit 1 to the affidavit of Jesse +J. Garner taken at New Orleans, April 6, 1964, and I ask you if you +recognize the individual portrayed in that picture. + +Mr. BLALOCK. Yes, sir; I recognize him. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And do you recognize him as the man you met in the store +that day? + +Mr. BLALOCK. Yes, sir; Lee Harvey Oswald. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Can you think of anything else now about your contact +with Oswald, or can you think of anything else that you know about him +that I haven't asked you about and you think the Commission should know +about? + +Mr. BLALOCK. I can't think of anything else. + +Mr. LIEBELER. I don't have any other questions. If you can't think +of anything else, we will terminate the deposition. On behalf of the +Commission, I want to thank you very much. + + + + +TESTIMONY OF VINCENT T. LEE + +The testimony of Vincent T. Lee was taken at 1:30 p.m., on April 17, +1964, at the U.S. courthouse, Foley Square, New York, N.Y., by Messrs. +J. Lee Rankin, General Counsel, and Wesley J. Liebeler, assistant +counsel of the President's Commission. Vincent T. Lee was accompanied +by his attorney, Stanley Faulkner. + + +Vincent T. Lee, having duly affirmed, was examined and testified as +follows: + +Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Lee, this deposition is being taken by the Commission +under the authority of Executive Order No. 11130 and joint resolution +of the Congress No. 137. My name is J. Lee Rankin. I am general counsel +for the Commission. Mr. Liebeler is associated with me in this work. +You have a right to have a copy of your testimony if you wish to pay +for it and you may ask the reporters to make such arrangements. + +During the examination you have a right to have counsel, which you have +here, and counsel may object to any of the questions. At the close of +the examination by myself, if counsel wishes to ask you questions to +clarify or make clear any particular part of your testimony or correct +it, if you wish to call anything to his attention, why, he is free to +do that. + +Where do you live, Mr. Lee? + +Mr. LEE. 37-1/2 St. Mark's Place, New York City. + +Mr. RANKIN. You are entitled under the rules of the Commission to 3 +days' notice, and I assume since you are here you are willing to waive +that and go ahead with the deposition. + +Mr. LEE. Yes. + +Mr. RANKIN. Do you have an official connection with the Fair Play for +Cuba Committee? + +Mr. LEE. The Fair Play for Cuba Committee is no longer a functioning +organization. + +Mr. RANKIN. Did you at one time have such a connection? + +Mr. LEE. Yes; I did. + +Mr. RANKIN. During what period? + +Mr. LEE. From the year of 1963--yes, last year. + +Mr. RANKIN. When was it closed up? + +Mr. LEE. Officially the office went out of existence December 1963. + +Mr. RANKIN. In 1963? + +Mr. LEE. December 1963. Eviction notice was served and the office was +closed. + +Mr. RANKIN. Did you have some communications with Lee Harvey Oswald? + +Mr. LEE. Yes; I did. + +Mr. RANKIN. Have you made a search of your files for all communications +that you had with him? + +Mr. LEE. Upon being communicated with by the Federal agents, from the +Federal Bureau of Investigation, at their behest I made an exhausting +search throughout the whole Fair Play offices for any and all +communications which were there, and finding certain communications +I turned them over to the Federal agents, particularly Federal Agent +Kennedy, in early December 1963. + +Mr. RANKIN. When did you make that search? + +Mr. LEE. Within a day or two after being contacted by the Federal +agents. + +Mr. RANKIN. Can you tell us the approximate date of that contact? + +Mr. LEE. I believe it was the first week of December. + +Mr. RANKIN. 1963? + +Mr. LEE. 1963, yes. I am not positive. I am pretty sure it was +somewhere around that time. + +Mr. RANKIN. Was that search made by you personally? + +Mr. LEE. Yes, sir. + +Mr. RANKIN. Was it a thorough and complete search? + +Mr. LEE. Well, I went through every scrap of paper down to the last +little scrap behind the desk and under radiators and in cabinets and in +drawers and under desk blotters and every possible conceivable place +any piece of paper might have been stored or fallen to and laid down or +anything else. + +Mr. RANKIN. So you are satisfied---- + +Mr. LEE. As far as I know I went through every--to the best of my +knowledge I went through everything I could find and everything that I +found I turned over to the agents afterwards, after having copies made. + +Mr. RANKIN. Did you or anybody on behalf of your committee have any +oral communications with Lee Harvey Oswald that you know of? + +Mr. LEE. To my knowledge there was never any such communication. I +can't ever remember ever having such communication myself. I don't know +that anybody else did. Nobody that I have known has ever mentioned such +a thing to me. + +(Document marked Lee Exhibit No. 1.) + +Mr. RANKIN. I hand you Exhibit No. 1 and ask you if that is a letter +that you or your committee received from Lee Harvey Oswald? + +Mr. LEE. This looks very much like such a letter, sir. + +Mr. RANKIN. Did you receive it near the date that it bears? + +Mr. LEE. There is not a date--it is not dated. This particular letter +is not dated. Evidently here on the bottom is a notation which is made. +This letter requests that the organization send some literature which +the organization had published and there is a notation on the bottom +which says the material was sent. It says "Sent 4/19/63," which I +assume was quite some time ago. I can remember when people wrote in, we +had many, many communications from many parts of the country, and when +they asked for something we would send it to them and we would mark the +thing "Sent so and so," so we would know the communication had been +answered and what had been done about it. + +Mr. RANKIN. Do you know whether that notation "Sent 4/19/63" and also +the circling of the "50" was done by you? + +Mr. LEE. This is doubtful because at that time, let's see, at that +time I was not in the New York office. I was out on a national tour, +I believe I was on the west coast at that time. We have had other +people coming in to volunteer to, you know, wrap packages and address +envelopes and things like that, come in for an hour or two, and go on +about their business, whatever it is, and evidently somebody else did +this because at that time I was on the west coast. + +Mr. RANKIN. Would you be able to tell whether or not the letter, +Exhibit 1, was dated or sent to you, rather than dated, somewhere +around the time that this "Sent" recording was made? + +Mr. LEE. I have absolutely no reason to believe otherwise. I believe +there might have been an envelope which--some of the letters had +envelopes. I don't know whether this particular one did or not. I think +this is one of the first communications we would have, and it goes +back to the end of April 1963, and to the best of my knowledge all my +experience has been that these things, just so much of this was done; +it was an automatic thing that was sent or replied, a certain date, +which meant within that period of time, a week or so, sometimes it was +slow, sometimes it was done the same day, sometimes it was done, you +know, several days later, but within a week, around that area I would +imagine is when that thing was replied. + +(Lee Exhibits Nos. 2 to 5 marked.) + +Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Lee, in accordance with the practice on these exhibits, +when these exhibits are examined, the counsel doing the examining +initials them, and also the witness. Would you be kind enough to do it +under my initials. + +Mr. LEE. Well, I would like to know what my--I would like to understand +what my signature would imply. + +Mr. RANKIN. It only implies that this exhibit was presented to you at +the time, so there won't be any question about it. + +Mr. LEE. Yes. Where should I initial it? + +Mr. RANKIN. Just under mine, so it doesn't show anything except that +fact. + +(Witness complies.) + +Mr. RANKIN. Do you have any independent recollection, Mr. Lee, of this +Exhibit 1 coming to your own attention at any time, other than when you +went to search the files and find out what you had? + +Mr. LEE. No; I don't have. + +Mr. RANKIN. I hand you Exhibit 2 and ask you to examine that and see if +you recall if your committee or you received it on or about or near the +date that it bears. + +Mr. LEE. This looks precisely like such a communication received. + +Mr. RANKIN. You will notice that it bears the date May 26 at the top. + +Mr. LEE. Yes; and I have every reason to believe that it would be an +accurate---- + +Mr. RANKIN. And you are quite sure that you received Exhibit 1 before +you received Exhibit 2? + +Mr. LEE. Well, like I say, you see, this one here was, I believe--I +believe this probably arrived--I have every reason to believe that this +arrived particularly during the weeks that I was away from the office, +before this one. + +Mr. RANKIN. This one---- + +Mr. LEE. And in piecing the thing together to the best of my own +knowledge over a period of time like this and by using this to jog my +recollection, this one here would have come to my attention after this +one. + +Mr. RANKIN. When you say this one here---- + +Mr. LEE. This one dated--Exhibit No. 2, dated May 26, yes. + +Mr. RANKIN. Came to you after Exhibit No. 1? + +Mr. LEE. Yes. + +Mr. RANKIN. Did you do anything about the information that was in +Exhibit No. 2? + +Mr. LEE. Well, I cannot be sure what I did, because I have no--I never +bothered to keep records on these details. + +Mr. RANKIN. I see. + +Mr. LEE. But I had a general policy which I pursued, when somebody +addressed a communication which I received, I would write to them, +trying to present them with the information they requested or the +material which they requested in whatever way I thought best at the +time for the particular case, whatever it was. Like I said, not having +saved--not having made any copies of any of these things, I can't be +sure of what I did. I really don't know what I would have said, but I +always made it a policy to try and reply to these communications. + +Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Lee, I hand you Exhibit No. 3, which purports to be +a photocopy of a purported reply that you have made to Lee Harvey +Oswald's letter of May 26, Exhibit No. 3, purporting to be a letter of +May 29. Do you recall having sent that? + +Mr. LEE. Yes. It's dated May 29. + +Mr. RANKIN. Yes. + +Mr. LEE. This is a copy--this must be a copy of a letter--this looks +like my signature here, and I don't actually recall this--did I miss +something?--Oh, I see. I don't actually recall writing the letter, +but it looks like something which I might have written at the time in +response to the previous inquiry. + +Mr. RANKIN. Yes. + +Mr. LEE. But I can't say that I remember sitting down and writing it. + +Mr. RANKIN. We will try to secure the original and submit it to you for +your approval in substitution for this copy. + +Mr. LEE. Well, I am not actually questioning it. I am saying I can't +really remember. Actually, I have thought about this. I haven't a real +recollection of sitting down and writing, you know, letters to that +particular person. Like I said, I was answering as many communications +myself as possible to many, many inquiries which came into the office, +so it is hard for me to pick out such and such a person a year later, +even if something had happened in between to make the name prominent, +to go back then. The name wouldn't mean too much to me at that time +that I had written. + +Mr. RANKIN. And when you referred to his getting a post office box as a +must, what did you mean by that? + +Mr. LEE. Well, this is a recommendation which was made, an +organizational recommendation which had been made a long time before +I myself had gone into a position with the organization. Because +of the nature of the organization, people would come and go. They +would support it and then drop out, and sometimes they would move, +and if somebody--naturally most of the thing was just a small, +little local activity. People didn't maintain business offices for +such an organization, and if a person would move or drop out of the +organization and the activities, the communications between the +national office and the local area would get all tangled up because +we didn't know where the mail would be returned, where we would +write, whereas if there was a post office box, if one person in the +organization dropped out who was receiving mail, then the mail would +still be delivered to a post office box, where the other officials of +the chapter, if it still existed, would still have access to the mail +and be able to reply to communications from the national organization +concerning the activities of the organization. The purpose of the post +office box was purely to facilitate communications between areas and +maintain them on a permanent basis. + +Mr. RANKIN. I hand you Exhibit 3-A and see if you recall seeing the +original of which that appears to be a photocopy. It is dated May 22, +1963. + +Mr. LEE. It looks very much like a formal notice that I may have sent. +I mean, I was accustomed to sending many such communications, and that +looks very much like something I would have sent. Did I sign the other +one? + +Mr. RANKIN. No. I hand you Exhibit No. 4, which I don't find to be +dated, either, but it does show an address in New Orleans which helps +to make it possible for us to fix the general period. Do you recall +having seen that before? + +Mr. LEE. Yes. This was another one of the communications which were +sent to me. Obviously, not through recollection of having seen the +letters but piecing these things together, I conclude that this was +one of the letters which were sent after I had entered into direct +communications with this person, because he no longer addresses +it "Dear Sirs." Evidently he has received communications from us, +so he addresses us by name. I would say that evidently that was a +communication sent to me which I received. + +Mr. RANKIN. You will note it has four pages as a part of the letter and +has a membership blank for---- + +Mr. LEE. Yes. My recollection on this is that in previous letters--for +a moment I would like to go over this and make sure I don't get the +letters confused one with the other. This--yes, yes. This evidently +is a letter which was sent in reply, after I had--he had in one letter +asked for information about the possibilities of doing--setting up a +chapter, for which I had sent him the rules and regulations regarding +the functioning of our organization and copies of our constitution and +bylaws and things like that. This evidently is a letter which he wrote +in which he replies that he had gone ahead and acted on his own without +any authorization from the organization, and if I recall correctly this +was also a letter which was received by myself in my capacity, not +having any great happiness at somebody going off on their own and doing +something against the rules of the organization, under the name of the +organization, which is obviously what was done, because this set up +himself--this thing reads, "New Orleans Chapter, Member Branch." There +was no such thing, because he had just received--just previous to this +he had received the regulations, and my letter would give an indication +of what would be necessary to set up a chapter, which would certainly +consist of more than one person operating on his own, and this, if I +recall correctly, was such a letter which I received. + +Naturally, anybody in an organization position such as I was in any +other organization, you would always be interested in expanding and +getting your ideas across and reaching more people, and when somebody +writes to you and says they would like to help you, your immediate +response is, "Well, wonderful. Here is a new contact in a new part +of the hinterlands and, gee, I hope this works out." And then, when +somebody goes off like this, violating all the rules that you send +him, it comes as quite a disappointment, because you have had hopes. +Obviously this man was not operating in an official capacity for the +organization. As he states, he went off with his own innovations and +everything else. + +Mr. RANKIN. You will note that he refers in the letter to this throw +sheet. + +Mr. LEE. Yes. + +Mr. RANKIN. And the fact that he has established a charter in violation +of your instructions. + +Mr. LEE. Yes. I certainly do. + +Mr. RANKIN. And then he also refers to his membership blank. + +Mr. LEE. Yes, which is another complete violation. It has no---- + +Mr. RANKIN. Apparently both of those were enclosed with a letter, were +they? + +Mr. LEE. Evidently, yes. To the best of my recollection, they would be. +As I say, all of these details--I can't be positive of every little +thing, because it's been such a time and so much has transpired in +between. + +Mr. RANKIN. Exhibit No. 5 is apparently a letter of August 1 from Lee +Harvey Oswald. Do you recall that? + +Mr. LEE. There was a couple of letters here. I don't know whether it +was these two, Exhibits 4 and 5, but it's hard for me to determine, +they came so close together. They came, you know, almost on top of +each other, to the best of my recollection, that I don't know which +one--only by studying the text can you halfway determine which came +first. I remember vaguely receiving these communications in this order. + +You see here, another case where I mentioned, and I would recommend +not trying to get an office to start off with, particularly the--what +was being espoused by our organization wouldn't be the most popular +thing in the area of New Orleans, Louisiana, and I would automatically, +myself, personally, from my own experience, would say to anybody, "You +know, you better be way ahead before you start something like that," +and certainly he has gone ahead against all of that recommendation from +everybody else. But to the best of my recollection, these letters were +very close together, about the same time, the same issue. + +Mr. RANKIN. That was one of the letters, Exhibit No. 5, that you +supplied the FBI at the time? + +Mr. LEE. Yes. + +(Document marked Lee Exhibit No. 6.) + +Mr. RANKIN. Your Exhibit No. 6, which apparently is composed of a +letter and an affidavit in regard to a charge against Lee Harvey +Oswald, and a clipping in regard to the disposition of that charge, do +you recall that correspondence and the attachments? + +Mr. LEE. Yes, I have a recollection of this. I don't think the +clipping--as a matter of fact, I seem to remember that this clipping +was not attached to a piece of paper, though. I think this may have +been attached since I submitted it. That is the only difference I can +see. + +Mr. RANKIN. Apparently since you furnished the letter, Exhibit 6, and +the copy of the charge against Lee Harvey Oswald and the clipping, the +clipping has been stapled to a piece of paper? + +Mr. LEE. Yes. The reason I say that is simply because I never +paper-clip things; I always rubber cement them. + +(Document marked Lee Exhibit No. 7.) + +Mr. RANKIN. I hand you Exhibit 7, which consists of two pages of a +letter dated August 17, and an envelope attached by a clip, and ask +you if that exhibit in that form was one you received from Lee Harvey +Oswald and furnished to the Bureau as you described? + +Mr. LEE. I believe so; yes. + +Mr. RANKIN. Throughout this period of time you had no oral or personal +telephone conversations with Lee Harvey Oswald, did you? + +Mr. LEE. To the best of my knowledge, to the very best of my knowledge, +I can't ever remember speaking to this person. The only communications +I can recall or having heard of him was through these series of +letters, and I have subsequently seen photographs, and as a matter of +fact I was another one of the millions of TV witnesses, and I don't +recall ever having seen the man or having heard his voice. The only +thing I ever had at all, that I can ever remember, are purely these +communications. He is a complete stranger to me outside of this, and +even within the framework of this he wasn't very much more than a +stranger. + +(Documents marked Lee Exhibits Nos. 8A through 8C.) + +Mr. RANKIN. I hand you Exhibits 8A, B and C, respectively, which appear +to be change of address cards. + +Mr. LEE. Yes, these are post office cards. I have a recollection of +receiving these. Of course we always got scads of these too, but this +was a very normal thing. Usually people send these in with changes of +address, people who subscribe to our publications and things. Do you +want me to initial those? + +Mr. RANKIN. Would you initial those? + +(Witness complies.) + +(Document marked Lee Exhibit No. 9.) + +Mr. RANKIN. I hand you Exhibit 9 and ask you if you recall having seen +that before? + +Mr. LEE. It seems like there should be a letter to go with it. I +believe that each of the things that I turned in, where it was +available, there was an envelope with the letter. I don't recall that I +turned in any isolated envelope that wasn't with a letter. + +Mr. FAULKNER. This has a postmark, New Orleans, 4 Aug. 1963. + +Mr. RANKIN. I might ask you, Mr. Lee, if that envelope, Exhibit 9, +might be connected with the Exhibit 5. + +Mr. LEE. Well, now, it's possible. The letter is dated August 1, and +the thing is postmarked PM, August 4. I assume--it looks very much like +it would fit in there, the envelope and paper match up, and there is no +difference in the ink, the pen used, from what I can see. I do remember +specifically that when I turned over the material to the Federal agents +I did--I don't recall at any time having a loose envelope, it was with +one of the letters. + +Mr. RANKIN. It is apparently closer to any of the letters timewise. + +Mr. LEE. It is very likely that it goes with this letter, and from my +own experience there is a date discrepancy of a couple of days there, +but I have carried a letter around in my pocket for a couple of days, +too, and I can very well assume that somebody else would do the same. + +Mr. RANKIN. On the back of Exhibit 7 there is a penciled number. Does +that have anything to do with your organization? + +Mr. LEE. I haven't the faintest idea what this thing is, sir. There is +one on here too. I have never seen this before. It is certainly not my +hand on these things, and I very much--in fact I am pretty positive +that this material has been added to these letters since I turned these +things into the Federal agents. It is probably a filing code number or +something or other used by the Federal agents. + +Mr. RANKIN. The FBI, yes. + +Mr. LEE. It is not in my hand, and it certainly doesn't look like--in +fact I remember when I made copies of these things I was looking at +both sides of the papers to make sure that I had a complete copy when I +made the copy of these letters for my own personal file on the issue, +and these things were not on. I am sure that these things were not on +them when I turned them in. + +Mr. RANKIN. By "these things" you mean those pencil marks on the back? + +Mr. LEE. The penciled digits on the back of the letters. + +Mr. RANKIN. Such as on Exhibit 7 that I just referred you to, the mark +"62-109060-1845"? + +Mr. LEE. Yes, those things must have been added after I turned them in. + +Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Lee, I asked you about the circling of the figure 50 +and the notation "Sent 4/19/63" on Exhibit 1. As I recall, you said you +were out traveling over the country at that time, and you knew you were +not in the office so as to send that literature. Do you have any idea +what 50 copies were sent? + +Mr. LEE. Well, this is back in April of 1963, and he asks, I quote, +"I now ask for 40 or 50," and the circle is around 50, and this, the +normal procedure had always been to note it. When the circle was made +around the 50, I just assume, and I very much believe, that it was +50 items that were sent. Now, we have printed various leaflets, and +this is what was sent, these leaflets, such as, you know, calling for +the end of hostile relations, and so forth, between the Government +of the United States and the Government of Cuba, which we used for +distribution at various public affairs and public places. + +Mr. RANKIN. We had information from the Bureau that you had said that +notation was by you and that you sent the material. Is that incorrect? + +Mr. LEE. Well, I can't see how it could possibly be when I wasn't in +the area at the time. The 19th of April I was somewhere on the west +coast, I was somewhere between Los Angeles and Seattle, Washington. +I arrived on the west coast, I believe, on April the 1st or 2d of +1963, and I didn't return until the first week of May of 1963, and the +last point of departure to New York was from, I believe, the City of +Chicago. I was out on the west coast and the west and midwest during +that period of time, and I wasn't there. Now, I assume that at some +point along the line in my communications I had sent this gentleman +some material, which we always had in stock. This was part of our +activity, to print up leaflets and pamphlets and translations of +various things and provide them to the general public. + +But this particular item, assuming that all these dates are correct, +I can't possibly have sent it. But the point is that I would +authorize--to me it was a standard policy that if anybody asked for +anything that we had, we would give it to them, and that is the best I +can say. But as for myself, at that particular date, I was not in the +New York area. I was very far away at that particular time. In fact I +was definitely on the west coast of the United States at that time. + +Mr. RANKIN. So if they recorded that you said that, there was some +error? + +Mr. LEE. There was an error somewhere. Maybe they got confused in the +conversation over maybe something else, some other communication that I +mentioned, that I had felt that I had replied to, communications, and +sent him stuff like the constitution and bylaws. Maybe that might have +got confused. + +Mr. RANKIN. Was there any connection with you or your organization or +anyone from your organization that you know of with the acts of Lee +Harvey Oswald in connection with the assassination of the President? + +Mr. LEE. With myself or organizationally, to the best of my knowledge, +no; nor have I heard or know of any other person related to the +organization in any way. Definitely there would be no connection +between the act--acts of Lee Harvey Oswald. Whether or not he did +anything in relation to the assassination, I don't know. As I +understood, this is what is trying to be determined, and so forth, +with this hearing. But whether he did or did not in relation, we had +no--nothing to do with this. In fact I would feel very free to say +that this particular act by anybody would be the worst possible thing +that we could conceive of. Our idea was certainly not to engage in any +activities of violence or illegal actions of any kind. We try very +much to maintain a character of nonviolent participation in community +affairs. In fact we have organizationally held, in which I directed and +participated, demonstrations in which we made a very firm commitment to +peaceful assembly and demonstration, and even when attacked physically +did not respond to the attack but withheld and conducted ourselves +peacefully and legally. + +Mr. RANKIN. Was Lee Harvey Oswald a member of your organization? + +Mr. LEE. I have no record of this. You see, we never kept a membership +file. We never at any time maintained a membership file. If somebody +asked to join the organization, we made out a membership card for them +and the card was sent to the person, but there was no duplicate and +there was no special recording of it; it was just a simple formality, +and we just sent them the card. And so there is no way that I can tell +for sure that he was or he wasn't, because we never did maintain a file +in this direction. + +Mr. RANKIN. Do you recall anything about his being a member, as far as +your recollection? + +Mr. LEE. I am not sure on that score. I mean I don't know. It is +entirely possible. It is entirely possible. But I can't say that I +recall, you know, filling out a card for him. It is entirely possible. +I may very well have. But as far as saying absolutely I remember, +no, I don't, I can't say that, because I really don't remember, but +I will say it is entirely possible. In fact I would assume from the +communications--I would assume from the communications which were +conducted with this gentleman that it is very likely that he asked to +join, and our membership was the type of thing where it was open to +anybody who asked to become a member, was given membership. We had no +restrictions on membership. In fact we had one of the policy statements +of the organization, its constitution and bylaws, was that it was open +to all regardless of race, creed, color, religion, national origin or +political opinion. It was open to anybody, anybody at all could join, +and from the communications, since I was writing to him in connection +with--he was asking if he could start a chapter, well, I can't +conceive of my writing to a nonmember in the direction of starting a +chapter. It is very--I assume that he must have at some point along +the line asked to join as a member and met the simple requirements of +sending in a membership fee, which was really a subscription to any +of our publications, and I assume that he must have been, otherwise +I can't quite conceive of my having written to him about membership, +starting a chapter, replying to such a question without having--the +letters--evidently there would have been some communication saying, +well, "You can't do it unless you join," and from the letters you +showed me, which I assume are correct, he must have already at some +point in the communications decided to join the organization. + +Mr. RANKIN. I call your attention to the first paragraph, Mr. Lee, of +Exhibit No. 2. + +Mr. LEE. Oh, yes; sure, here it is, "I am requesting formal membership +in your organizations." Well, evidently at this point, at the end of +May, 1963, he requested formal--I don't--let's see, is there a note in +here of having sent him--well, anyhow, assuming that accompanying this +letter there was---- + +Mr. RANKIN. Let me call your attention to Exhibit 3, and there is in +the first paragraph there---- + +Mr. LEE. Oh, yes; evidently he did join, yes. I assumed that it was so, +because I can't conceive of having written him about a chapter unless +he had joined. One doesn't organizationally ask people to help the +organization who are not members. + +Mr. RANKIN. Do you know of any combination, conspiracy or common action +of any kind that worked with Lee Harvey Oswald in connection with his +acts concerning the assassination of President Kennedy? + +Mr. LEE. I have no knowledge of any such thing. + +Mr. RANKIN. Do you know of any members of Fair Play for Cuba Committee +in New Orleans that were working with Lee Harvey Oswald in connection +with anything he did there for the committee? + +Mr. LEE. No; I have no recollection of any such thing. In fact all I +can recall is that the man communicated I think to me that somehow in +these letters that he had nobody and that he was completely alone, +and that in fact I think one of the letters mentioned how he was out +somewhere all alone and that he had no--nobody at all, nobody working +with him or through him or for him or around him or anything else. +He gave me the impression that he was completely isolated in his +community, which became obvious to me from his actions which would +certainly isolate him in his community. I could see very well how he +would be. + +Mr. RANKIN. I call your attention to Exhibit 7 and the paragraph in +which he says he was working with three people in the demonstration. He +doesn't purport to say they are members. + +Mr. LEE. Demonstration of three. I wonder if he was one of the three, +or who it was. Somewhere in some of these letters, I don't know +where--I could check back--I got the indication that he had no support +and that he was completely isolated. Now, what this business of the +three people is, I have no idea. He doesn't seem to mention anything +more about this, and I don't even know whether he was one of the three +or whether there were three besides him or what. + +Mr. RANKIN. I call your attention to Exhibit 5, in which he refers +to the fact that he was attacked during one of the demonstrations, +and then the following page of that Exhibit 5, that robbed him of any +associates. + +Mr. LEE. "... the support I had, leaving me alone." Yes, I guess this +is what I had in mind, "This incident robbed me of what support I had, +leaving me alone." Now, what support he had, I don't know. + +If I recall correctly, at this incident which he mentions here, he had +sent me the things from his court, the arrest things, and the only +people that are mentioned in that are Oswald and the people who he +claims attacked him, and that is the only people, evidently, according +to the court records and the police, you know, who the police brought +charges on. There didn't seem to be anybody involved but this Lee +Harvey Oswald and the Cuban exiles who he became involved in a fracas +with down there. So I don't know how much validity--I really don't know +how much validity there is in these other people existing, whether they +did or not. + +Mr. RANKIN. Do you know of any members of the Fair Play for Cuba +Committee in Dallas? + +Mr. LEE. As I said, I never kept a membership file and I don't recall +who is a member and who wouldn't be a member. I know we received many +communications requesting literature of various types and things like +that from all over the country, and I don't know of any state of the +union which has not been sent some material at some time during the +3-1/2-year history of the organization. I would assume that somewhere, +at some time, in Texas some people wrote in and received something, +some communication, but as far as doing anything particularly about +Dallas, no. The only thing I know about Dallas is what I read in the +papers, which doesn't tell me too much. + +Mr. RANKIN. And that same situation about whether there were any +members of the committee in New Orleans would be true, would it? + +Mr. LEE. Well, it is like I say. As for membership, this is an almost +impossible situation in view of the fact that we didn't conduct a +membership file or a duplicate membership card system and we just +had mailing lists. In fact the mailing lists--even the mailing lists +wouldn't tell very much, if anything, and that was just a case, anybody +who thought somebody should receive a communication gave the name of +somebody, in fact for now deceased Governor Lehman was on that list, +Senators and Congressmen were placed on the mailing list, everybody +and his brother who we thought should be--well, we thought some reason +should receive the material which we sent out, we just sent material. +It could be anybody. And like I say, stuff went to all over the +country, just automatically, just did large mailings to every place +we could think of, dream of or hope for in any of our activities of +mailing. + +But as far as particularly--there was never an active organization of +the committee in these areas. We have had in the past--there was in +existence in the committee a series of chapters, committee chapters, +in various parts of the country, but there were never any chapters or +active participation on a local level, to my knowledge, in either Texas +or Louisiana at any time during the entire history of the organization. + +Mr. RANKIN. Is there any information, evidence or knowledge that you +haven't given us that would bear upon this assassination of President +Kennedy, that might help the Commission? + +Mr. LEE. No, sir; I have no information whatsoever. I have more than +personal, more than just curiosity, and I hope very much to know the +truth about this incident and hope very much that the truth is known, +particularly for my own personal reasons, as well as any other reasons, +because having been practically a victim of very serious slander in +this direction, both by individuals and by elements of the press and +various periodicals, I have very serious concern about developing +the truth. I have been threatened. People have tried to break into +my home, somehow connecting myself and my organizational activities, +quite falsely, with the assassination--I would like to see the truth +come up, because I am quite sure that any investigation will show that +this was not true, that I didn't have any part of this. I am as much +interested and probably more interested in my own way in having the +facts presented than many of the average people on the street. I have a +personal involvement in this. + +Mr. RANKIN. That is all. + +Mr. Faulkner, do you have anything? + +Mr. FAULKNER. I was just going to ask Mr. Lee one question with regard +to Exhibit No. 1, where the date in the lower right-hand corner appears +reading, "Sent 4/19/63" in his handwriting. + +Mr. LEE. Well, you see, the thing is, I don't think it is, because I +don't see how I could have written that if I wasn't there. That's the +whole thing. But it could be--like I said, that office was an open +door. Everybody used to come and go, and people would come in and say, +"I've got twenty minutes"--a kid from school, some kid would come in +and say, "I've got 20 minutes between classes. Can I do something to +help you?" And somebody would say, "Yes, wrap that package", and they +would be off 20 minutes later. So it could be anybody in the world. +Or perhaps the only possibility is when I returned, perhaps somebody +mentioned that it was taken care of, and I wrote it after my return. +But certainly not at that time, because I wasn't even present. + +Mr. RANKIN. Is it satisfactory, Mr. Lee, if we finally obtain the +originals from the Bureau and send them to you of these Exhibits 3 and +3-A, which purport to be copies or photocopies of your correspondence, +and on your verification substitute those for those copies? + +Mr. FAULKNER. If---- + +Mr. LEE. If you find it's necessary. Actually, as I say, I would assume +these very much--I mean, this looks very much like what I would expect +a duplicate, a duplication of the stationery which I used to look like. +I mean, just, you know, like I say, I assume---- + +Mr. FAULKNER. We would be satisfied. + +Mr. LEE. (Continuing.) I would be satisfied to make this---- + +Mr. FAULKNER. If you are satisfied when you see the original, compare +it with this, and if you are satisfied that they correspond, there is +no reason to call Mr. Lee. + +Mr. LEE. No; I am quite agreeable to verification. + +Mr. RANKIN. Fine. Thank you very much. + + + + +TESTIMONY OF ARNOLD SAMUEL JOHNSON + +The testimony of Arnold Samuel Johnson was taken at 9:30 a.m., on +April 17, 1964, at the U.S. Courthouse, Foley Square, New York, N.Y., +by Messrs. J. Lee Rankin, general counsel, and Wesley J. Liebeler, +assistant counsel of the President's Commission. Mr. Arnold Samuel +Johnson was accompanied by his attorney, John J. Abt. + + +Arnold Samuel Johnson, having been first duly sworn, was examined and +testified as follows: + +Mr. RANKIN. Will you give the reporter your name and address. + +Mr. JOHNSON. Arnold Samuel Johnson. My home address is 56 Seventh +Avenue, New York City. + +Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Johnson, my name is J. Lee Rankin. I am general counsel +for the President's Commission on the Assassination of President +Kennedy. + +We are here to take your testimony with regard to that matter, and we +have certain rules and procedures that the Commission has set up to be +followed in connection with the hearings and testimony that is taken +for the consideration of the Commission. Mr. Liebeler is here as my +assistant, and he is one of the several counsel of the Commission. + +The Commission acts in accordance with an Executive order of President +Johnson, No. 11130, and a Joint Resolution of the Congress No. 137. + +Under the rules you have a right to a 3-day notice of this examination. +I understand you are appearing voluntarily and do not require that? + +Mr. JOHNSON. That is right. + +Mr. RANKIN. You are also entitled to have counsel, and I understand Mr. +Abt is acting as your counsel in connection with this proceeding. + +Mr. JOHNSON. Correct. + +Mr. RANKIN. You also have a right to have a copy of the testimony made +available to you. However, it is at your own expense. We just tell the +reporter that you can get it if you pay for it. + +Your counsel has a right to make objections during the proceedings and +also at the close of the examination on behalf of the Commission to ask +you such questions as he may care to, that may clarify anything that +you say that he thinks either you desire to have clarified or he thinks +in his good judgment should be either clarified or elaborated upon or +require further questions from him to make clear what he thinks your +testimony is. + +Are there any questions which you have in regard to it? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Perfectly all right. + +Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Johnson, can you identify for us the position you +occupied at the time you received some communications from Lee Harvey +Oswald? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Yes; I was the director of the information and lecture +bureau of the Communist Party. + +Mr. RANKIN. I may ask you some questions trying to cover things which I +ordinarily would, and you wait for your counsel. Is it possible for you +to tell us whether you continue to occupy that position now? Is that +any problem? + +Mr. ABT. I think not. I think there is no problem. + +Mr. JOHNSON. No problem. + +Mr. RANKIN. And you do? + +Mr. JOHNSON. I do. + +Mr. RANKIN. Do you have anything to do with the subscription list of +the Worker? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Immediately, I do not. + +Mr. RANKIN. Would you know, then, whether Lee Harvey Oswald was a +subscriber to the Worker, of your own knowledge? + +Mr. ABT. Just say of your own knowledge, whether you actually know it +or don't. + +Mr. JOHNSON. I mean, not of my own knowledge; no. That's the point, I +would say. + +Mr. RANKIN. Did the fact that he was a subscriber come to your +attention at some time, through hearsay or otherwise? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Through hearsay only. + +Mr. RANKIN. Was that from him or someone else? + +Mr. JOHNSON. From him in one of the letters. + +Mr. RANKIN. Did you supply some correspondence that you had with Lee +Harvey Oswald to someone in connection with the consideration of the +assassination of President Kennedy? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Yes; I supplied all of it. + +Mr. RANKIN. About when was that that you did supply that information? + +Mr. JOHNSON. In the first week of December. + +Mr. RANKIN. What year? + +Mr. JOHNSON. 1963. + +Mr. RANKIN. How did you happen to supply that information? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Well, I supplied it in the office of John Abt to the +representative of the FBI at the time, in the presence of my attorney, +John Abt, and it was supplied to the FBI agent who came, and I assume +was conducting the investigation on behalf of the Commission at the +time. + +Mr. RANKIN. Now, before you supplied that material to this FBI agent, +did you make any search of files to determine what information, +correspondence or records you had in regard to Lee Harvey Oswald? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Oh, yes. Very extensive. We went through every bit of the +office. + +Mr. RANKIN. Did you do that yourself or have it done under your +supervision and direction? + +Mr. JOHNSON. I did it myself. + +Mr. RANKIN. How large a search was that? I would like to establish how +complete, if I can. + +Mr. JOHNSON. I will admit the files are not exactly in an organized +fashion. It's--it was material in which there were a lot of other +letters and things like that. So I went through these files several +times. + +Mr. RANKIN. Yourself? + +Mr. JOHNSON. All the files, back and forth. + +Mr. RANKIN. You did that yourself? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Yes. + +Mr. RANKIN. And those were all the files that you could find that might +show any correspondence between---- + +Mr. JOHNSON. Oh, yes. + +Mr. RANKIN. The Communist Party and Mr. Lee Harvey Oswald? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Yes; that would be the complete file, everything, all the +correspondence. + +Mr. RANKIN. About when did you make this search? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Frankly, I started right after the assassination was +announced. As soon as that name appeared, I started to make a search. + +Mr. RANKIN. Why did you do this? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Somehow the name struck my memory. + +Mr. RANKIN. Why did you supply the information to the FBI agent that +was investigating? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Oh, because I felt dutybound to cooperate in the full with +the Government in any investigation of this assassination. + +Mr. RANKIN. Do you know whether or not Lee Harvey Oswald was ever a +member of the Communist Party of the United States of America? + +Mr. JOHNSON. To my knowledge, he was never such, and I would know. + +Mr. RANKIN. You think you would know? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Oh, yes; I would, I am sure. + +Mr. RANKIN. I hand you an exhibit that has been marked---- + +Mr. LIEBELER. Exhibit No. 1 on the examination of Arnold Johnson, April +17, 1964. It has been our practice for the examining attorney and for +the witness to initial the exhibit for purposes of identification so +there is no confusion. + +Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Johnson, would you be kind enough to initial the +exhibit under my initials so we both certify one of the exhibits +offered. + +Mr. JOHNSON. Yes (witness complies). + +(Document marked Johnson Exhibit No. 1.) + +Mr. RANKIN. Will you examine that Exhibit No. 1 on your examination and +determine whether you have seen that before? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Yes; I have. + +Mr. RANKIN. About when did you receive it? + +Mr. JOHNSON. In late June or early July--I believe June--of 1963. + +Mr. RANKIN. Where did you receive it? + +Mr. JOHNSON. In my office. + +Mr. RANKIN. Is it in substantially the same form that it was when you +received it, except for some notations by you on it? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Yes. + +Mr. RANKIN. You recognize that there are some notations by you on that +Exhibit 1? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Yes; there are. + +Mr. RANKIN. Will you tell us about those, please? + +Mr. JOHNSON. The notations are "Send catalog and limited supply." + +Mr. RANKIN. What does that mean? + +Mr. JOHNSON. That is in reference to a request for literature, and I +stated to send a limited supply, I mean, which means usually a copy of +one, a single copy of several pieces at the particular time. + +Mr. RANKIN. I see. And what does the catalog reference mean? + +Mr. JOHNSON. The catalog is a---- + +Mr. RANKIN. A listing of your supplies and literature? + +Mr. JOHNSON. It is a listing of literature, which is a rather old +catalog, to tell the truth about it, of the International Publishers, +which usually is included in--which includes many other pieces of +literature that if the person was interested they could purchase. + +Mr. RANKIN. Will you explain the other notation? + +Mr. JOHNSON. The other notation is "lit sent," which means that the +literature was sent. + +Mr. RANKIN. That notation was made by you too? + +Mr. JOHNSON. That is my writing too. + +Mr. RANKIN. And the double line? + +Mr. JOHNSON. This double line refers to this particular point of +literature, and I made that double line. That is all. + +Mr. RANKIN. Does this Exhibit 1, as you received it, consist of two +handwritten pages apparently written by Lee Harvey Oswald on or before +the date they bear, together with a single printed sheet about "Hands +off Cuba"? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Yes. In the letter he refers to the leaflet "like the one +enclosed," and that accompanied the letter. It is also true on the +leaflet he refers to the term "free literature." + +Mr. RANKIN. Do you have any recollection of just what literature you +sent? + +Mr. JOHNSON. At the time when I turned this over I included copies of +what I would assume would have been the literature at the time. + +Mr. RANKIN. That is when you turned it over to the FBI? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Yes; I turned over copies of the literature at the same +time. That would be the normal thing for that particular period. I +think I could think through carefully---- + +Mr. RANKIN. Would that be four or five pieces? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Possibly more than that; about seven or eight. + +Mr. RANKIN. Could you briefly describe about what they were for the +record? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Well, they would be those pieces of literature which +somehow state what was being distributed around that time from our +offices, and I know it included a pamphlet "End The Cold War" by Gus +Hall; it included a pamphlet on the McCarran Act. I think it would have +included at that time another pamphlet on "Peaceful Co-existence." Then +the pamphlet that we usually sent by Elizabeth Flynn, something of the +history of the Communist Party, "Horizons of the Future." I am guessing +now, to tell the truth about it, from here on. + +Mr. RANKIN. Do you recall the reference in this Exhibit 1 to honorary +membership cards in the Fair Play For Cuba? + +Mr. JOHNSON. I know the reference is there; yes. + +Mr. RANKIN. Do you recall whether or not the cards were enclosed or not? + +Mr. JOHNSON. I really don't remember that. + +Mr. RANKIN. Did you ever have any oral communications with Lee Harvey +Oswald? + +Mr. JOHNSON. None whatsoever. + +Mr. RANKIN. Did you ever have any oral communications with anybody on +his behalf? + +Mr. JOHNSON. None whatsoever. + +Mr. RANKIN. Do you recall doing anything about the honorary membership +cards, giving them to Mr. Hall and Mr. Davis, or anything like that? + +Mr. JOHNSON. No. That is where I don't really recall about them. If I +would have done that, then I am sure that I would have remembered it. + +Mr. RANKIN. Do you recall doing anything else about the letter, Exhibit +1, and the printed sheet attached to it beyond what you have described? + +Mr. JOHNSON. I replied to it. + +(Document marked Johnson Exhibit No. 2.) + +Mr. RANKIN. I hand you Exhibit No. 2 on your examination and ask you +if you will identify that by stating whether or not you have seen that +copy and the original of that copy at some time. + +Mr. JOHNSON. Yes. This is my reply to the letter we have just been +discussing. + +Mr. RANKIN. Did you prepare that reply? + +Mr. JOHNSON. I did. + +Mr. RANKIN. Did you send it on or about the date it bears to Mr. Oswald? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Yes; I did. + +Mr. RANKIN. Would you kindly initial it. + +(Witness complies.) + +Mr. RANKIN. Thank you. What did you mean in Exhibit 2 by the statement +that "We do not have any organizational ties with the committee"? + +Mr. JOHNSON. That is in reference to the Fair Play for Cuba Committee. + +Mr. RANKIN. Yes. + +Mr. JOHNSON. And there are no organizational ties between the Communist +Party and the Fair Play for Cuba Committee; and since he was writing +on that subject, I wanted to make it clear that there is no such +relationship existing, so that literature that was being sent was not +being sent from the viewpoint of the Fair Play for Cuba Committee as +such, or anything like that. + +Mr. RANKIN. By "organizational ties" did you mean to distinguish +between that kind of a tie and some other kind of a tie; is that what +you were trying to do? + +Mr. JOHNSON. In the sense--well, in this sense, that while not being +responsible for what that committee may do, if there were activities +being done by a committee which would have our sympathy, well, there +would be that kind of relationship; but that is not any--not where we +would assume responsibility for it, nor could we indicate what its +policy would be, or anything like that. + +Mr. RANKIN. You are trying to distinguish between some official +relationship and mere sympathy? + +Mr. JOHNSON. That is correct. + +Mr. RANKIN. Is that it? You did recognize a sympathy or desire to +encourage the Fair Play for Cuba Committee, I take it, then? + +Mr. JOHNSON. That and other similar committees, whatever they may be, +but not exclusively that. + +(Document marked Johnson Exhibit No. 3.) + +Mr. RANKIN. I hand you Exhibit No. 3 and ask you if you recall having +received that from Lee Harvey Oswald? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Yes; I do. + +Mr. RANKIN. Is that one of the letters that you delivered to the FBI at +the time you described? + +Mr. JOHNSON. That is. + +Mr. RANKIN. Did you receive it on or about the date it bears? + +Mr. JOHNSON. I think so. I mean within those days; not on the day but +afterward. + +Mr. RANKIN. Do you recall receiving the honorary membership card of +esteem that he says he is sending to you? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Somehow I do not; at least I never kept it, and it wasn't +attached to the letter at all when I found it in the files, or anything +like that. I do not recall that. + +Mr. RANKIN. Will you kindly initial Exhibit 3 too, please. + +(Witness complies.) + +Mr. RANKIN. There is a reference in the second paragraph of Exhibit No. +3 to a clipping. Do you recall that at all? + +Mr. JOHNSON. I recall a clipping that had something to do with either a +distribution of literature or a--and I think that was it. I am not too +sure whether it also had something about an arrest or some altercation +that he had been in. I did not keep it. I did not regard it as of any +particular significance. + +Mr. RANKIN. Do you recall destroying it or do you know what happened to +the clipping? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Well, things like that I would just very likely throw in +the wastebasket; that's all. + +Mr. RANKIN. Do you recall whether or not you responded to the Exhibit +No. 3? + +Mr. JOHNSON. I responded to that together with other letters. + +Mr. RANKIN. At some later date? + +Mr. JOHNSON. At a later date. + +Mr. RANKIN. There is a request in Exhibit 3 for additional information +or literature. Do you recall whether you sent any additional---- + +Mr. JOHNSON. I don't recall exactly, but I would rather imagine not, +and for a very simple reason: If I would have, I would have made a +notation on here, "Literature sent." + +Mr. RANKIN. I see. I hand you what has been marked Johnson Exhibit No. +4 and ask you if you recall receiving that. + +Mr. JOHNSON. Yes; I do. + +Mr. RANKIN. About when compared with the date it bears? Do you remember? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Within just a few days after that. + +Mr. RANKIN. Will you please initial that below my initials. + +(Witness complies.) + +Mr. RANKIN. Is Exhibit 4 in the same condition as it was when you +received it, except the notations on it that---- + +Mr. JOHNSON. Yes; it is. + +Mr. RANKIN. Is it one of the papers that you supplied the FBI at the +time that you referred to? + +Mr. JOHNSON. That is correct. + +Mr. RANKIN. And does it consist of three pages, handwritten? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Right. Three full pages; yes. + +Mr. RANKIN. It is dated August 28, 1963; is that correct? + +Mr. JOHNSON. That's right. + +Mr. RANKIN. Now, will you tell us about the notations that you put on +Exhibit 4? Describe first each one as you tell about it. + +Mr. JOHNSON. The notations that I put on? + +Mr. RANKIN. Yes. + +Mr. JOHNSON. This one, "Fair Play is a broader comm." I put that simply +as a point to be emphasized in my reply. The two lines on page 2---- + +Mr. RANKIN. The top of the page? + +Mr. JOHNSON. At the top of the page--as a point to consider in making +my reply. Those are the only notations that I've got on it. + +Mr. RANKIN. Now, there is another notation in ink, "Arnold, please +reply," with the capital letter E, apparently. + +Mr. JOHNSON. Yes. + +Mr. RANKIN. Do you know who put that on? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Yes. + +Mr. RANKIN. Will you tell us? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Elizabeth Gurley Flynn. + +Mr. RANKIN. Who is she? + +Mr. ABT. Mr. Rankin, I have advised Mr. Johnson respectfully to decline +to give any further information on this subject. + +Mr. RANKIN. Will you tell us what you meant by that notation, that is, +"broader comm."? + +Mr. JOHNSON. That the Fair Play for Cuba Committee is a committee which +is inclusive of people of varied political viewpoints and backgrounds, +and it is not what we term a--a more limited committee, which would +have people more closely associated with us, but rather includes +people who vigorously disagree with us, and in this sense is a broader +committee. + +Mr. RANKIN. That is, it might consist of people who were sympathetic +with the Communist movement and also those who were in support of the +Cuban movement but not necessarily with the Communist movement? Is that +what you are saying? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Yes; and who may even be vigorously opposed to the +Communist movement. + +Mr. RANKIN. There is a reference to Lee Oswald trying to dissolve his +United States citizenship. Had you known of that before you received +this letter? + +Mr. JOHNSON. No; I did not. + +Mr. RANKIN. Did you discuss this Exhibit 4 with anyone else at the time +you prepared your answer? + +Mr. JOHNSON. When Elizabeth gave it to me, just that she indicated that +I should answer it. There was really no discussion of what the answer +would be. + +Mr. RANKIN. Did you give him an answer as to whether he should remain +in the background, i.e., underground? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Yes; I did. + +Mr. RANKIN. Did you do that in your letter? + +Mr. JOHNSON. In my letter; yes. + +Mr. RANKIN. There is on the last or third page, Mr. Johnson, a +notation, "Arnold," with a line above and below that. Do you know whose +handwriting that is? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Elizabeth Flynn's. + +Mr. RANKIN. I hand you Exhibit 4-A and ask you if that is a reply that +you prepared to Exhibit 4. + +Mr. JOHNSON. It is, but it is also to a further letter (indicating). + +Mr. RANKIN. I hand you Johnson Exhibit No. 6, dated September 1, 1963, +apparently in the handwriting of Lee Harvey Oswald and consisting of +a part of one page in handwriting. Is that the other letter that you +referred to, that Exhibit 4-A is a response to? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Yes. + +Mr. RANKIN. Did you receive Exhibit 6 on or about the date it bears? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Shortly after; yes. + +Mr. RANKIN. Is it in the same form? + +Mr. JOHNSON. It is. + +Mr. RANKIN. So by Exhibit 4-A you tried to answer both Exhibit 4 and +Exhibit 6? Is that what you mean? + +Mr. JOHNSON. And the one previous to that, too. There were three +letters that come in under this. + +Mr. RANKIN. By these three, you are referring to Exhibit 3---- + +Mr. JOHNSON. No. 3, 4, and 6. + +Mr. RANKIN. Will you initial those two as I have done, Mr. Johnson. + +(Witness complies.) + +Mr. RANKIN. In Exhibit 4-A, you speak about finding some way to get in +touch with Mr. Oswald in Baltimore. Can you tell us what you meant by +that? + +Mr. JOHNSON. In his letter of September 1, he refers that he is going +to come to the Baltimore-Washington area and asked for information +about how to reach somebody. It is not my practice to refer them to +people until a person comes into an area, and if there is any reason +to refer them to a person, then I do so under those circumstances. +Thus, this is a simple form of simply--of just saying that when such +a circumstance arises we can make a contact, that is, look him up +wherever he is at the time. + +Mr. RANKIN. After you received the letter, Exhibit 4, with regard +to Lee Harvey Oswald's trying to dissolve his American citizenship +while he was in the Soviet Union, did you make any inquiry to try to +determine whether he had taken such action? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Nothing further than was in the letter itself. + +Mr. RANKIN. And you said that it is often advisable for some people to +remain in the background, not underground. What did you mean by that? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Very simply that as an American citizen, whatever he +is doing should always be aboveground; that a person remains in the +background within any organizational activities, that he does not push +himself forward in whatever he is doing. + +(Document marked Johnson Exhibit No. 5.) + +Mr. RANKIN. I hand you Exhibit No. 5 and ask you whether that letter +dated August 31, 1963, consisting of two pages and an envelope, was one +of the pieces of correspondence you turned over to the FBI at the time +you described? + +Mr. JOHNSON. It is. + +Mr. RANKIN. Had you seen that Exhibit 5 at some time prior to the time +you turned it over? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Oh, yes; just within a couple of days before, I think it +was. + +Mr. RANKIN. It is addressed to a Mr. or M. Bert. I guess Mr. Bert. + +Mr. JOHNSON. Mr. Bert. + +Mr. RANKIN. Can you tell us who that is? + +Mr. JOHNSON. He is the managing editor of the Worker. + +Mr. RANKIN. How did that Exhibit 5 come to your attention? + +Mr. JOHNSON. I inquired specifically of the Worker as to whether there +was any other correspondence when I was assembling the material to turn +over, and I insisted upon a search of files, in an easy way, "Please +look through the files and see if there is anything." + +Mr. RANKIN. Who did you make that inquiry of? + +Mr. JOHNSON. I made that actually to Mr. Jackson. + +Mr. RANKIN. Can you tell us who Mr. Jackson is, enough so that we can +know how he may be acting or he may have the authority to search the +files? + +Mr. JOHNSON. He is the editor of the Worker. + +Mr. RANKIN. That was done shortly before you turned over the other +papers and this to the FBI? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Yes. + +Mr. RANKIN. Do you have any basis for believing that when you made such +a request it would be carried out? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Oh, yes. + +Mr. RANKIN. Can you tell us enough about that so we would know what +reason you would have to believe that it would be carried out? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Well, the relationship would be one, which was very +normal; the editorial policy of the Worker in relationship to the +assassination; and insistence upon cooperation in any fashion to +determine anything related to it that would be helpful in the work +of the Commission or Government agencies involved. There was no +resistance, and there was immediately a willingness and desire to do +so; that is all. + +Mr. RANKIN. Did you ask that there be a complete search for anything +that would show any correspondence? + +Mr. JOHNSON. I did. + +Mr. RANKIN. Or contact with Lee Harvey Oswald by either the Communist +Party in the United States or the Worker? + +Mr. JOHNSON. I did. + +Mr. RANKIN. Are you satisfied that that search was full and complete? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Yes; I am. + +Mr. RANKIN. And that whatever you turned over to the FBI was all that +either of those organizations had in their possession? + +Mr. JOHNSON. That is correct. + +Mr. RANKIN. Did you have any further conversation with Mr. Bert in +regard to Lee Harvey Oswald? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Only in the sense of asking whether he was sure that there +was no other communications, and I think that was really all. I mean I +didn't ask him what his reactions were or anything like that. + +Mr. RANKIN. And you did not discuss the correspondence in the sense of +what it contained? + +Mr. JOHNSON. No; I think I did discuss this, I asked him whether +there was any reply to it, and he said, no; that he did not reply. +And I asked him specifically as to whether--"Are you sure?" because I +wondered if there was anything further, and he said he was very sure +about that. + +Mr. RANKIN. Would you initial that too, please, Mr. Johnson. + +(Witness complies.) + +Mr. RANKIN. Do you know the Mr. Weinstock that is referred to in this +Exhibit 5? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Yes; I do. + +Mr. RANKIN. Can you tell us who he is or was at that time? + +Mr. JOHNSON. He was at that time the managing--the business manager of +the Worker. + +Mr. RANKIN. Would you tell us where he is now? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Right at the moment he is out of town. He had a heart +illness some time back. + +Mr. RANKIN. Is he somewhat disabled? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Yes. Well, he is not working at all now, and I--he was in +town a few days ago seeing doctors, and I told him about this request. +I asked him specifically whether he knew anything about--anything +further about this letter, and so forth. He did not recall a thing. + +Mr. RANKIN. Did you ask him whether he had any other contacts with Lee +Harvey Oswald except the one that is referred to in that letter? + +Mr. JOHNSON. He did not recall it. I asked him that. I also made a +search of his back files and found nothing. + +Mr. RANKIN. Did you make any inquiry as to whether he knew anything +else about Lee Harvey Oswald? + +Mr. JOHNSON. I inquired, I asked him that--this was all on the +telephone--and he said, no. And he went to this thing out in the +country some place, just to sort of recover from this illness. + +Mr. RANKIN. And there is a Mr. Tormey that is referred to in that +letter. Do you know him too? + +Mr. ABT. Mr. Tormey is here, and he is prepared to testify. + +Mr. JOHNSON. Yes; I do. + +Mr. RANKIN. Do you know what position he occupied about that time? + +Mr. JOHNSON. About that time he was the executive secretary of the +Hall-Davis Defense Committee. + +(Document marked Johnson Exhibit No. 5A.) + +Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Johnson, I hand you Exhibit 5A, which I was informed +was one of the works of Lee Harvey Oswald that you turned over to the +FBI at the same time. Do you recall having seen that? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Yes. + +Mr. RANKIN. Do you know whether or not that was one of the pieces of +Lee Harvey Oswald's purported works that he had sent to Mr. Weinstock? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Whether he had sent it to Mr. Weinstock or whether he had +sent it to Mr. Bert, I don't know. I got it at the same time as I got +the letter from Mr. Bert. + +Mr. RANKIN. But you do believe that it was sent to one or the other? + +Mr. JOHNSON. It was sent to one or the other. It could have been either +one. + +Mr. RANKIN. And do you understand that it was purportedly something +that Lee Harvey Oswald claimed to have made up himself? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Yes. + +Mr. RANKIN. Do you know whether or not Mr. Weinstock wrote any letter +back to Lee Harvey Oswald about that or other material that he had sent +in? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Not of my own knowledge, other than there is a reference +to it in that letter. + +Mr. RANKIN. Yes; and you have already testified that you asked Mr. +Weinstock about it, and he did not recall any answer; is that correct? + +Mr. JOHNSON. That is correct. + +Mr. RANKIN. I notice with Exhibit 5, the envelope shows considerable +difficulty in reaching the addressee. + +Mr. JOHNSON. That is correct. + +Mr. RANKIN. Do you know how it happened to get to Mr. Bert? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Well, the address is wrong in that on the envelope it is +26 West 23d Street, and the proper address would have been 23 West 26th +Street. That is the first mistake. Therefore it was apparently turned +back, and then the post office made the correction. + +(Witness initials Exhibit No. 5A.) + +(Document marked Johnson Exhibit No. 7.) + +Mr. RANKIN. I hand you Exhibit 7, which is a letter from Lee Harvey +Oswald, with the envelope. Do you recall having received that and +turning that over to the FBI? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Yes; I do. + +Mr. RANKIN. At the time you referred to? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Yes; I do. + +Mr. RANKIN. Do you know whether you received it near the date that +shows on the envelope? + +Mr. JOHNSON. I know when I received it. + +Mr. RANKIN. Oh, you do recall? + +Mr. JOHNSON. And it was not near the date. + +Mr. RANKIN. I see. When was it? + +Mr. JOHNSON. The envelope has a postmark of the 1st of November. I +received it on the 29th of November. That is the day after Thanksgiving. + +Mr. RANKIN. You were probably surprised to receive---- + +Mr. JOHNSON. I was. This was after the assassination date by a week. + +Mr. RANKIN. Did you answer that letter? + +Mr. JOHNSON. No. + +Mr. RANKIN. You did not? + +Mr. JOHNSON. No. + +Mr. RANKIN. You remember receiving it personally rather than someone in +your office at that time? + +Mr. JOHNSON. It was brought in by the mail carrier in the normal--in +the afternoon, and then was delivered to me within the office, yes. + +Mr. RANKIN. Will you place your initials under mine? + +(Witness complies.) + +Mr. RANKIN. Do you know any reason for the delay in the letter? + +Mr. JOHNSON. I really do not. That's an unusual delay. I could readily +see a delay occurring after the 22d, but to have a delay from the 1st +to that date seems to me to be beyond all normal procedure. Even when +mails are held and checked during a thing like that, they wouldn't +stand so long. I cannot understand. + +Mr. RANKIN. Did you make any examination at the time to determine +whether Exhibit 7 had been opened by anyone before you received it? + +Mr. JOHNSON. No; except that the envelope has the unusual line on the +back which indicates that there was possibly an opening and return. But +that could also be the way it was folded or something like that. But +you can see the line here [indicating]. + +Mr. RANKIN. Will you mark that---- + +Mr. JOHNSON. You see that. It looks that to me, anyway, as if this was +the line where it had been opened and then put back. Then if you look +at the envelope itself, as an airmail envelope, normally this part +would be turned down, and instead it's open like this. Now, it's true +that, folded that way, it fits in only when it is this way, but then +this line should not have been here. There is something odd about the +whole letter as far as the delivery itself is concerned. + +Mr. RANKIN. Would you make a pen line on the place on the back that you +find that unusual marking, please. + +Mr. JOHNSON. (Witness complies.) I will admit I was very much surprised +when I received that letter. I was bound to look at it. + +Mr. RANKIN. Did you discuss it with anyone at the time? + +Mr. JOHNSON. I guess I just made comments all over the place about +getting a letter from him at that time. + +Mr. RANKIN. Do you have any question about whether Exhibit 7 was +prepared and sent by Lee Harvey Oswald? + +Mr. JOHNSON. I never studied his handwriting too carefully. There are +several things that looked a little bit odd about it. It's a little +hard to say. For instance, you have a different kind of ink in two +places here. It seems that way to me. But that's pretty hard to say +with modern pens. The way he signs his name and the way--that could be +a problem, because he didn't always sign it the same--or he has "Mr. A. +Johnston" up here, and it starts "Mr. Johnson" up here. I don't know +what all the confusing elements are, but I would just as soon leave +that to someone who is more--who is a handwriting expert, and I am not. + +Mr. RANKIN. Did you ever have a conversation---- + +Mr. JOHNSON. It may be worthwhile to check it with a handwriting expert +on that. + +Mr. RANKIN. A conversation with V. T. Lee or any others in regard to +the Fair Play for Cuba matter and Lee Harvey Oswald? + +Mr. JOHNSON. At no time. + +Mr. RANKIN. Did you have any conversation with anyone about the effect +of the assassination by Lee Harvey Oswald and his connection with the +Fair Play for Cuba effort in New Orleans on the Communist Party? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Will you state that again? + +Mr. RANKIN. Read the question, please. + +(Question read.) + +Mr. JOHNSON. Not in that sense, no. Not in relationship to Fair Play +for Cuba et cetera. + +Mr. RANKIN. In some other sense, did you? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Well, normally, just within our own--among our own people, +I would naturally discuss it and say that somebody could try to make a +false charge against us in some fashion, and that we of necessity would +have to react quickly to it so as to make clear that he was never a +member of the Communist Party, never associated with us in any fashion +of a political or organizational character. + +Mr. RANKIN. Did you make any inquiry to determine whether or not any +members of the Communist Party of the United States were involved in +any conspiracy with Lee Harvey Oswald about the assassination? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Oh, I would say very definitely that they were not. There +was never any such relationships at all. There was nobody that I know +of who had any contact whatsoever, and I think I would have known. + +Mr. RANKIN. By nobody, do you mean---- + +Mr. JOHNSON. No Communist of any character, at any time. + +Mr. RANKIN. Have you made sufficient inquiry or have sufficient +knowledge so you were satisfied that that would be true? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Oh, yes. There was no relationships whatsoever. I would +say definitely I would know if any Communist would have had any +conversation, and I know of none, no communication or conversation. + +Mr. RANKIN. By any conversation, you mean with regard to the +assassination of President Kennedy? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Yes. + +Mr. RANKIN. Did you have any contacts with the---- + +Mr. JOHNSON. That's so flagrantly against anything about the Communist +viewpoint that it's---- + +Mr. RANKIN. Will you explain that, Mr. Johnson? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Communists just do not believe in assassination as a +method of social change, and---- + +Mr. RANKIN. You mean that as far as the Communist Party of the United +States is concerned? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Definitely. + +Mr. RANKIN. Or generally? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Definitely and generally. I mean that very specifically. +It has nothing to do with it. We would say that anybody who harbors +such a thought is not only not a Communist but an anti-Communist +basically. + +Mr. RANKIN. Would you extend that to cover the activities of various +groups in the Soviet Union? + +Mr. JOHNSON. As far as assassination is concerned, yes. + +Mr. RANKIN. I thought there was information that they had people +connected with the government who were engaged in trying to understand +and be able to use methods of assassination. + +Mr. JOHNSON. No. + +Mr. RANKIN. You don't think that's true? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Oh, no. That's not true. That's dissident groups, groups +like that, not Communist groups. + +Mr. RANKIN. You don't think that is a part presently of the Soviet +Union---- + +Mr. JOHNSON. Definitely not. + +Mr. RANKIN. And you don't think it is any part of the plans of the +Communist Party of the United States? + +Mr. JOHNSON. I know that a thousand percent. We have for years made it +a point if anybody has such viewpoints they cannot ever be a member of +the party. They are expelled et cetera. We specifically speak against +any acts of terrorism or individual violence et cetera. + +Mr. RANKIN. Did you have any contact with Columbia Broadcasting System +in regard to news matters relating to Lee Harvey Oswald? + +Mr. JOHNSON. That's what I was referring to before, that as soon +as--yes, on the--I was trying to say the date, on the 23d, the day +after the assassination, I called and issued a statement to all the +news media in which I made it clear that Lee Harvey Oswald was not +associated with us in any way and so forth, and they carried this on +the radio or on television, I think one of them did. But it was also +carried on the front page of the New York Times and through other +papers. That was called in to all the stations, not just to Columbia. +There was a seven-sentence statement. + +Mr. RANKIN. Did you ever say that Lee Harvey Oswald was not given +citizenship in the Soviet Union because they considered him a Fascist, +or words to that effect? + +Mr. JOHNSON. I don't recall that. I don't recall that. + +Mr. RANKIN. Was that your belief? + +Mr. JOHNSON. I never got involved in the reason, as I recall, as to why +he was not given citizenship there. I assumed they had good reasons. + +Mr. RANKIN. Did you ever see any writings or communications or anything +to indicate that he had a Fascist philosophy? + +Mr. JOHNSON. The only feature within that would be, within one of these +letters, when he refers to the fact that he attended the Walker meeting +down there in Dallas; another reported story of his volunteering to be +on both sides as far as Cuba was concerned, and then the further point, +and this is a matter of political orientation maybe as to why he was in +contact with Senator Tower instead of Senator Yarborough; that is just +pure speculation, it doesn't mean very much. + +Mr. RANKIN. Most of his expressions in his correspondence that you +produced indicated an interest and sympathy with the Communist Party +rather than any Fascist group, didn't they? + +Mr. JOHNSON. But the main point would be that this act is so +contradictory to anything in the Communist viewpoint, and that would be +the essential test, that any person who has that kind of a mentality +could just as well be covering up in communications, and that would +be one of the difficulties of it; but the act itself, you see, would +be an act, that kind of act of terrorism based upon the climate and +everything there which would have been an act from a Fascist-minded +person instead of from a Communist-minded person. + +Mr. RANKIN. Do you have any evidence or know of any evidence to +indicate that this assassination was a rightist or extreme right plot +of any kind, conspiracy? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Not of evidence in that sense, no. If you draw conclusions +from the materials that were being circulated in Dallas, that ad in the +newspaper that morning, and the various communications of people, of +the added hate atmosphere, the warnings that were made of that hatred, +that was all of a rightist character. + +Mr. RANKIN. But that wouldn't necessarily mean that there was any plot +or conspiracy to assassinate President Kennedy, would it? Or does it to +you? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Well, I would rather think not. I mean I would rather +think that nobody would proceed from any of this to the point of +assassination. And there it is a matter I think where a person may have +an opinion and not necessarily have evidence that could substantiate +the opinion. + +Mr. RANKIN. Or you could speculate easily? + +Mr. JOHNSON. That is speculation. + +Mr. RANKIN. Whether it was a rightist plot or there was a leftist plot? + +Mr. JOHNSON. If there was a plot, it was only a rightist plot. + +Mr. RANKIN. And you say that because you consider the act of +assassination to accomplish political ends is not within the Communist +Party philosophy; is that right? + +Mr. JOHNSON. That is basically true. The second basic point would be +the attitude of the Communist towards President Kennedy was one of high +regard and respect, even though sharply differing on many things, but +it was always that. + +Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Johnson, do you have any other papers or knowledge +bearing upon the assassination of President Kennedy that you haven't +related here? + +Mr. JOHNSON. No, I do not. + +Mr. RANKIN. That is all I have, Mr. Abt. Do you have anything? + +Mr. ABT. I have nothing. + +Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Abt, may we ask you to be so kind as to be sworn and +act as a witness for a brief moment? + +Mr. ABT. Surely. + + + + +TESTIMONY OF JAMES J. TORMEY + +The testimony of James J. Tormey was taken at 11:30 a.m., on April 17, +1964, at the U.S. Courthouse, Foley Square, New York, N.Y., by Messrs. +J. Lee Rankin, general counsel and Wesley J. Liebeler, assistant +counsel of the President's Commission. James J. Tormey was accompanied +by his attorney, John J. Abt. + + +James J. Tormey, having been first duly sworn, was examined and +testified as follows: + +Mr. RANKIN. Give the reporter your name and your address. + +Mr. TORMEY. James J. Tormey, T-o-r-m-e-y, 215 Willoughby Avenue, +Brooklyn, N.Y. + +Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Tormey, you received some correspondence from Lee +Harvey Oswald, did you? + +Mr. TORMEY. I received--a letter was referred to me from him. + +Mr. RANKIN. Who referred the letter to you? + +Mr. TORMEY. I don't know who it was, but apparently the letter which +is addressed on the upper right-hand side to 23 West 26th Street was +referred, and I don't remember who referred it. + +Mr. RANKIN. Will you tell us what your position was at the time you +received this referral? + +Mr. TORMEY. Yes; I was the executive secretary of the Hall-Davis +Defense Committee. + +(Objects marked Tormey Exhibit No. 1.) + +Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Tormey, will you examine Exhibit No. 1 on the +deposition that you are giving today, which consists of several +placard-type pieces of material, together with some plastic pieces, and +tell us whether or not you have seen those before? + +Mr. TORMEY. I have seen them before. + +Mr. RANKIN. That Exhibit 1, I did not fully describe as I asked you to +examine it. It also includes a little note purportedly from Lee Harvey +Oswald, addressed to "Dear Sirs," with an address, 23 West 25th Street, +apparently, New York. + +Mr. TORMEY. I imagine that is 26th Street. I am not sure. + +Mr. RANKIN. Twenty-six; yes. And that was a part of the Exhibit 1 that +included these other materials that I have described, was it, when you +received it? + +Mr. TORMEY. That is right. + +Mr. RANKIN. After you received Exhibit 1 with those various materials +and that note on yellow paper, what did you do? + +Mr. TORMEY. Well, after reading it over I answered to the person who +signed the letter, stating that I would put it on file, expressing +appreciation for sending them, that I would put it on file in the event +that we would have any occasion to use his services. + +(Document marked Tormey Exhibit No. 2.) + +Mr. RANKIN. I hand you Exhibit No. 2 and ask you if that is a carbon +copy of the answer that you prepared and sent. + +Mr. TORMEY. Yes; it is. + +Mr. RANKIN. Under our practice, the examining attorney is asked to +initial the exhibit, and the witness too, so it will be established +that we both---- + +Mr. TORMEY. Examined it? + +Mr. RANKIN. Examined it; yes. Would you kindly do that? + +(Witness complies.) + +Mr. RANKIN. And kindly do the same for Exhibit 2. + +(Witness complies.) + +Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Tormey, we have initialed Exhibit No. 1 on the back +of one of the placards, which appear to be the same, reading "The Gus +Hall-Benjamin Davis Defense Committee," below that the words "End +McCarranism" in large letters, and there are two of those, apparently +identical; and then two plastic sheets, with the same legend on each of +them, one of them apparently a negative and the other a positive, and +then the little note headed "Dear Sirs" and signed "Lee H. Oswald," and +message on the back, instructions, and so forth; is that correct? + +Mr. TORMEY. Yes. + +Mr. RANKIN. Did you have any other communications with Lee Harvey +Oswald except Exhibits 1 and 2? + +Mr. TORMEY. I have no recollection of any. + +Mr. RANKIN. Have you made any search of your files to determine whether +or not there is anything else that you have? + +Mr. TORMEY. I did, sir. + +Mr. RANKIN. When did you do that? + +Mr. TORMEY. Well, it was--it would be sometime in the latter part of +November or the early part of December of 1963. + +Mr. RANKIN. How did you happen to make that search? + +Mr. TORMEY. Well, I had been told that a letter had been received from +me by him, and I decided to conduct a routine check. + +Mr. RANKIN. What was the nature of that search? Will you tell us so we +can know how complete it was? + +Mr. TORMEY. Yes; well, first I kept copies of all communications that I +had with anyone. + +Mr. RANKIN. Yes. + +Mr. TORMEY. So I would assume in advance that there was a copy, and I +asked the person who was managing the office at the time that I was +there to look into the files to see if it were possible that such a +communication did exist. I found that copy of communication. + +Mr. RANKIN. Was the person that you asked to make that search a person +under your control and direction? + +Mr. TORMEY. At the time I was with Hall and Davis. + +Mr. RANKIN. But at the time you requested this search, this person was +not under your control and direction, I take it? + +Mr. TORMEY. Well, not control and direction. + +Mr. RANKIN. I see. But there was a sufficient relationship so that you +are satisfied that the search was made, and it was a thorough search? + +Mr. TORMEY. I am perfectly satisfied. + +Mr. RANKIN. And you are able to assure us that there is nothing else +so far as you know in regard to any communication of any type with Lee +Harvey Oswald? + +Mr. TORMEY. I give that assurance. + +Mr. RANKIN. Do you know of any effort in regard to any conspiracy or +common action between any people associated with this Gus Hall-Benjamin +J. Davis Defense Committee that were involved with Lee Harvey Oswald in +the assassination of President Kennedy? + +Mr. TORMEY. I have no such knowledge. + +Mr. RANKIN. Do you have any information that would cause you to believe +that there was any such association? + +Mr. TORMEY. No; I have not. + +Mr. RANKIN. Did you ever use any of the material in Exhibit 1 in +connection with your work on the committee? + +Mr. TORMEY. No, sir. + +Mr. RANKIN. Do you have any other knowledge in regard to the +assassination of President Kennedy that you have not related to us? + +Mr. TORMEY. No, sir. + +Mr. RANKIN. Thank you very much. + + + + +TESTIMONY OF FARRELL DOBBS + +The testimony of Farrell Dobbs was taken at 11:45 a.m., on April 17, +1964, at the U.S. Courthouse, Foley Square, New York, N.Y., by Messrs. +J. Lee Rankin, general counsel and Wesley J. Liebeler, assistant +counsel of the President's Commission. Farrell Dobbs was accompanied by +his attorney, Rowland Watts. + + +Farrell Dobbs, having been first duly sworn, was examined and testified +as follows: + +Mr. RANKIN. In this examination, Mr. Dobbs, we are proceeding in +accordance with the procedures that the Commission has set out and by +reason of the Executive order of President Johnson No. 11130 and the +joint resolution of Congress No. 137. + +The examination will be done by myself, J. Lee Rankin, general counsel +for the Commission. Mr. Liebeler is associated with me in that regard. + +You are entitled to a 3-day notice of this examination. I assume, since +you are willing to come here, you are willing to waive that 3-day +notice and proceed with the hearing at this time; is that right? + +Mr. DOBBS. That's right. + +Mr. RANKIN. You are also entitled to have your counsel here, as you +have, and during the examination, if he has any objection to any +questions or wants to have a recess so that he may talk with you, of +course, he may. At the close of your testimony, if there is something +that he would like to examine you about so as to clarify anything that +you said or give you an opportunity to correct or to change it, that is +provided for, too. Do you have any questions before we start? + +Mr. WATTS. Mr. Rankin, I think that it should show on the record +that this is a voluntary appearance, that Mr. Dobbs volunteered what +information he had and offered to come if you chose to have him. + +Mr. RANKIN. Yes; we wish to have that on the record. + +Did you produce the information that was requested of you? + +Mr. DOBBS. Yes; I turned it over to Mr. Watts, and he forwarded it to +you. + +Mr. RANKIN. Do you have from the Militant files the 4-month +introductory subscription blank stamped September 17, 1962? + +Mr. WATTS. Yes; we offer it. + +Mr. RANKIN. Will you mark that as Exhibit 1. + +(Marked Dobbs' Exhibit No. 1.) + +Mr. RANKIN. Do you have the 4-month renewal blank stamped May 28, 1963? + +Mr. WATTS. Yes; we offer that. + +Mr. RANKIN. Mark that Exhibit 2, please. + +(Marked Dobbs' Exhibit No. 2.) + +Mr. RANKIN. Do you have the Addressograph plate for Lee H. Oswald? + +Mr. WATTS. Yes; we offer that. + +Mr. RANKIN. Mark that Exhibit 3, please. + +(Marked Dobbs' Exhibit No. 3.) + +Mr. RANKIN. And from the Pioneer Publishers' files--I failed to ask you +for the change of address notice postmarked June 12, 1963, and November +12, 1963. Do you have those? + +Mr. WATTS. Yes; I offer them. + +Mr. RANKIN. Mark those Exhibits 4 and 5 respectively. + +(Marked Dobbs' Exhibits Nos. 4 and 5.) + +Mr. RANKIN. Do you have from the Pioneer Publishers' files an order +for the Teachings of Leon Trotsky and a cash memo dated May 8, 1962, +indicating that 25 cents had been received? + +Mr. WATTS. Yes; we have that, and with them is a carbon copy of a +letter from Pioneer Publishers, dated September 28, 1963, and a +canceled envelope postmarked January 2, I believe, 1963, to Pioneer +Publishers from Lee Oswald, and we offer all of those. + +Mr. RANKIN. Thank you. + +Mr. WATTS. In addition, from Pioneer Publishers, we have a letter from +Lee Oswald with a date January 1, the year not identified, ordering +"The Coming American Revolution," "The End of the Comintern," and "The +1948 Manifesto of the Fourth Internationale," indicating that 35 +cents is enclosed and requesting the English words of the song "The +Internationale," and attached is a receipt or a cash memo of Pioneer +Publishers, indicating that 35 cents was received. + +Mr. RANKIN. Mark that No. 7. + +(Marked Dobbs' Exhibit No. 7.) + +Mr. WATTS. We also have a carbon copy of a letter dated April 26, 1963, +to Mr. Oswald, setting forth the English words of The Internationale. I +believe that is all we have from Pioneer Publishers. + +Mr. RANKIN. Do you have any document from the files of the Socialist +Workers Party? + +Mr. WATTS. Yes. + +Mr. RANKIN. Will you describe those, please? + +Mr. WATTS. We have a letter dated August 12, 1962, signed Lee H. Oswald +to the Socialist Workers Party, asking for information concerning the +nature of the party and expressing an interest in finding out all he +can about the program. We have a coupon dated as having been received +October 31, 1962, signed Lee H. Oswald, indicating that he would like +to join the Socialist Workers Party, and we have a carbon copy of a +letter dated August 23, 1962, apparently in answer to the first letter, +thanking Mr. Oswald for his request for information and indicating that +a pamphlet concerning the Socialist Workers Party was being enclosed +and inviting further inquiry if he had any more questions. + +Mr. RANKIN. The last material you have described, Mr. Watts will be +marked Dobbs' No. 9. + +(Marked Dobbs' Exhibit No. 9.) + +Mr. WATTS. We have, in addition, a letter dated September 1, 1963, +signed Lee H. Oswald. Attached to it is what appears to be its envelope +from New Orleans, postmarked August 31, 1963. This letter requests +information concerning SWP representatives in the Washington-Baltimore +area and states that Mr. Oswald expects to be moving into that area in +October. That is all I have. + +Mr. RANKIN. Thank you. The last letter and envelope are marked Dobbs' +Exhibit No. 10. + +(Marked Dobbs' Exhibit No. 10.) + +Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Dobbs, do you have some occupation at the present time? + +Mr. DOBBS. I am secretary of the Socialist Workers Party. + +Mr. RANKIN. Have you been in that position for some time? + +Mr. DOBBS. Since 1953. + +Mr. RANKIN. Did you have some correspondence with Lee Harvey Oswald? + +Mr. DOBBS. We have nothing in our files other than what we have turned +over to you. I might add that I feel certain that we would have +responded to his--the coupon that he sent indicating a desire to join +the party. It's not surprising we wouldn't have kept a file copy, +because our interest in cases of this kind is an established thing. It +is our policy not to take anybody into membership in the party unless +we have a branch of the party in the area where they are resident. In +such case we would--we would have replied to him to that effect. We +would have suggested to him that he interest himself in the circulation +of The Militant and Socialist literature and would have expressed a +desire for continued fraternal contact with him on that basis. + +Mr. RANKIN. Do you recall having seen Dobbs' No. 1 at some time? + +Mr. DOBBS. I recall that only in the sense that I assisted in the +search of the files after November 22 to find everything we could. + +Mr. RANKIN. Will you describe to the Commission what happened at that +time, what you did? Did you do something to try to find out if there +was any contact or communication between your organization and Lee +Harvey Oswald? + +Mr. DOBBS. Yes. I received a telephone call from one of the newspaper +reporters asking me if Oswald had ever been a subscribed to The +Militant. I told him not to my knowledge. I then, however, went and +checked the files, discovered he had been, and with that I decided to +check every file that I could, and find whatever information was in the +files, and get it together. + +Mr. RANKIN. About when did you do that? + +Mr. DOBBS. This would have been done, I believe, about Monday following +the assassination. I think it was on Monday morning I received the +call. + +Mr. RANKIN. What kind of a search was made at that time; can you +describe that for the Commission, please? + +Mr. DOBBS. Yes. We went through all the files that we had, and, well, I +guess that is about all I can say. + +Mr. RANKIN. Who do you mean by "we." + +Mr. DOBBS. Myself and members of the organization who work as my +voluntary office assistants, and I cooperated with the people in charge +of The Militant business office, and the Pioneer Publishing business +office. + +Mr. RANKIN. And how complete was that search? + +Mr. DOBBS. We made it as thorough as we could, to our best knowledge. +We have given you everything we had in the files. + +Mr. RANKIN. As a result of that search, you discovered Dobbs' No. 1, +did you? + +Mr. DOBBS. Yes. + +Mr. RANKIN. That is a subscription for the 4 months' introductory +subscription of The Militant---- + +Mr. DOBBS. Yes, that is correct. + +Mr. RANKIN. By Lee Harvey Oswald, or Lee H. Oswald? + +Mr. DOBBS. Yes, that is correct. + +Mr. RANKIN. It is a practice in taking these depositions, Mr. Dobbs, +for the counsel that is examining to initial whatever exhibits are +presented, and also for the witness, so that it can be recognized as +official. + +(Witness complies.) + +(Document marked Dobbs' Exhibit No. 2.) + +Mr. RANKIN. Did you at that time also discover Dobbs' No. 2? + +Mr. DOBBS. Yes. + +Mr. RANKIN. And what is that? + +Mr. DOBBS. It is a renewal of the trial subscription, and it is stamped +May 28, 1963. + +Mr. RANKIN. Will you kindly initial that too? + +(Witness complies.) + +(Addressograph plate marked Dobbs' Exhibit No. 3.) + +Mr. DOBBS. Yes. + +Mr. RANKIN. Will you please initial that? + +Mr. DOBBS. Yes. + +(Witness complies.) + +(Document marked Dobbs' Exhibit No. 4.) + +Mr. RANKIN. Do you recall at that time discovering Dobbs' No. 4? + +Mr. DOBBS. Yes. + +Mr. RANKIN. What is that? + +Mr. DOBBS. It is a notification of change of address sent by Lee H. +Oswald and stamped "Received" on June 17, 1963. + +Mr. RANKIN. Will you please initial that? + +Mr. DOBBS. Yes (witness complies). + +(Document marked Dobbs' Exhibit No. 5.) + +Mr. RANKIN. Then did you discover at that time Dobbs' No. 5? + +Mr. DOBBS. Yes. + +Mr. RANKIN. That is also a change-of-address notice? + +Mr. DOBBS. It is a change of address notice from Lee H. Oswald stamped +"Received" November 14, 1963. + +Mr. RANKIN. Changing the address from New Orleans back to Dallas? + +Mr. DOBBS. Yes. + +Mr. RANKIN. Will you kindly initial that? + +(Witness complies.) + +(Document marked Dobbs' Exhibit No. 6.) + +Mr. RANKIN. Do you recall receiving Dobbs' No. 6? + +Mr. DOBBS. Yes. + +Mr. RANKIN. What does that consist of? + +Mr. DOBBS. A cash receipt for 25 cents received from Oswald. + +Mr. WATTS. Correction, Mr. Rankin. It is not really a cash receipt; it +is a cash office memo. + +Mr. RANKIN. Thank you. Is that correct? + +Mr. DOBBS. That is correct, yes, under date of August 31, 1962. And the +second item is an order blank requesting a book, The Teachings of Leon +Trotsky, signed by Lee H. Oswald, stamped "Received" August 28, 1962. +A third item is a letter under date of September 29, 1962, to Lee H. +Oswald from Pioneer Publishers, acknowledging receipt of the order and +indicating that the book ordered is out of print and that he will be +given a 25-cent credit on the money he sent in. + +Mr. RANKIN. The last item is the envelope? + +Mr. DOBBS. The last item is an envelope postmarked Dallas, Tex., +either January 2 or January 21, it is difficult to discern, 1963, with +Oswald's name in the upper left-hand corner. + +Mr. RANKIN. Would you kindly initial that? + +Mr. DOBBS. Each separately. + +Mr. RANKIN. No, just the first one. + +(Witness complies.) + +Mr. RANKIN. Did you handle any part of the transactions involved in +Dobbs' No. 6 yourself? + +Mr. DOBBS. No, not personally. + +(Document marked Dobbs' Exhibit No. 7.) + +Mr. RANKIN. Will you examine Dobbs' No. 7 and tell us what it is, +please? + +Mr. DOBBS. An office cash memo acknowledging 35 cents received from L. +H. Oswald, dated January 11, 1963, and a letter to Pioneer Publishers +from Lee H. Oswald under date of January 1, 1963. + +Mr. RANKIN. Will you initial that, please, Mr. Dobbs? + +(Witness complies.) + +(Document marked Dobbs' Exhibit No. 8.) + +Mr. RANKIN. Will you examine Watts' No. 8 and tell us what that is. + +Mr. DOBBS. It is a letter to Lee H. Oswald from Pioneer Publishers +under date of April 26, 1963. + +Mr. RANKIN. Will you initial that? + +(Witness complies.) + +(Document marked Dobbs' Exhibit No. 9.) + +Mr. RANKIN. And Dobbs' No. 9, tell us what that is, please. + +Mr. DOBBS. A coupon signed "Lee H. Oswald," received under date of +October 31, 1962, in which he indicates, by placing a check in an +appropriate place, that he would like to join the Socialist Workers +Party. + +Mr. RANKIN. That is what you have referred to in your prior testimony +when you said that you would have responded to it in the way you have +described if you knew that there was no organization in that locality? + +Mr. DOBBS. That is correct. + +Mr. RANKIN. Was there a Socialist Workers Party organization in the +Dallas area at that time? + +Mr. DOBBS. No, no; there was not. + +Mr. RANKIN. You haven't discovered any copy of a communication to Lee +Harvey Oswald along the lines that you have described, have you? + +Mr. DOBBS. No, sir; I have not. + +Mr. RANKIN. But you know it is a standard practice, and that is the way +you would have responded? + +Mr. DOBBS. That is correct. + +(Document marked Dobbs' Exhibit No. 11.) + +Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Dobbs, we have what has been marked as Dobbs' No. 11, +which purports to be a copy, photocopy, of a carbon of your response as +of November 5, 1962, to Mr. Oswald's letter. Will you examine that and +see whether or not it is? + +Mr. RANKIN. I would like to correct the record to show that this is a +typewritten copy of the original, apparently not the carbon. + +Mr. WATTS. Clarify that. You are saying that it is a typewritten copy +of the original of the letter---- + +Mr. RANKIN. Purportedly. + +Mr. WATTS. Purportedly received by Mr. Oswald? + +Mr. RANKIN. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Off the record. + +(Discussion off the record.) + +Mr. RANKIN. Will you first respond, Mr. Dobbs, to whether or not +this Dobbs' No. 11 appears to be a typewritten copy of a letter that +you wrote to Lee Harvey Oswald in response to his inquiry about the +Socialist Workers Party? + +Mr. DOBBS. Yes, it appears to be the type of letter I would have +written. + +Mr. RANKIN. Do you understand that we are going to secure the original +and submit it to you to see if it is in fact the letter that you did +write, and if you find that it is, then it will be offered as a part of +this deposition? + +Mr. DOBBS. Yes. + +Mr. RANKIN. Will you initial now Dobbs' No. 9, please? + +(Witness complies.) + +Mr. WATTS. Mr. Rankin, in his responding he did not get past that +coupon. + +Mr. RANKIN. Yes. Will you describe the balance of Dobbs' No. 9? I +understand you completed with the coupon but not the other two pieces. + +Mr. DOBBS. The second item is a letter from Lee H. Oswald, addressed +apparently to the Socialist Workers Party and marked "Received" under +date of August 13, 1962, in which he requests information about the +nature of the party and its policies. The third is a letter to Lee H. +Oswald from the Socialist Workers Party under date of August 23, 1962, +indicating that a pamphlet is being enclosed for him entitled "The +Socialist Workers Party--What It Is, What It Stands For." + +Mr. RANKIN. I asked you whether or not the Socialist Workers Party had +any organization in Dallas. What is the fact in regard to Fort Worth +and New Orleans at that time? + +Mr. DOBBS. No, we had no organization anywhere in that area. + +(Document marked Dobbs' Exhibit No. 10.) + +Mr. RANKIN. Will you examine Dobbs' No. 10 and tell us what that +exhibit consists of. + +Mr. DOBBS. A letter signed "Lee H. Oswald" to the Socialist Workers +Party, dated September 1, 1963, stating that he would like to know +if he could get in direct contact with SWP representatives in the +Washington, D.C.-Baltimore area. + +Mr. RANKIN. Will you please initial that? + +Mr. DOBBS. Right on the envelope? + +Mr. RANKIN. That is right. + +(Witness complies.) + +Mr. RANKIN. I notice that Dobbs' No. 9 refers to a Sherry Finer signed +on the letter, copy of which is dated August 23, 1962. + +Mr. DOBBS. Yes. + +Mr. RANKIN. Who is Sherry Finer? + +Mr. DOBBS. She is one of the volunteer assistants that helps me +occasionally with office work. + +Mr. RANKIN. And No. 11 is a typewritten copy of the original, +purportedly an answer to Lee Harvey Oswald that we have already +referred to, and you have said you thought it would be the type of +letter at least that you would write in answer? + +Mr. DOBBS. That is correct. + +Mr. RANKIN. And we have said that we would get the original and submit +it to you for your examination. If you find that the original is the +original of Dobbs' No. 11 when it is submitted to you, will you then +initial it and return it to us so we can make it a part of the record +here? + +Mr. DOBBS. I will do so. + +Mr. RANKIN. Thank you. + +(Document marked Dobbs' Exhibit No. 12.) + +Mr. RANKIN. I hand you Dobbs' No. 12 and ask you if you know anything +about the person Bob Chester that purportedly signed the original of +that letter. + +Mr. DOBBS. Yes. + +Mr. RANKIN. Who is that Bob Chester? + +Mr. DOBBS. It is an associate of mine, works in collaboration with me, +a day volunteer here in the party office. + +Mr. RANKIN. Do you know anything about the blowups, reversal and +reproduction work that he refers to there? + +Mr. DOBBS. I can only assume that he would have written about---- + +Mr. WATTS. Excuse me. You should answer what you know, Farrell; and if +you want to express an opinion, it is all right, but make it very clear +whether or not you have any knowledge. + +Mr. DOBBS. Would you ask me the question again; perhaps I did not +understand. + +Mr. RANKIN. I am interested in your knowledge about that material that +is referred to in the letter, the blowups and reproductions and the +other things that are referred to in the first paragraph. + +Mr. DOBBS. So far as I can perceive, it refers to a technical process. +I wouldn't know anything beyond that. + +Mr. RANKIN. And you don't know whether there was anything of that kind; +at least you did not find it when you made the search? + +Mr. DOBBS. I have no indication of such information in our search. + +Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Chester is still with your organization? + +Mr. DOBBS. He is. + +Mr. RANKIN. And you don't recall this Exhibit No. 12 or the original or +copies or anything of that kind? + +Mr. DOBBS. No; I do not. + +Mr. RANKIN. You did not find it when you made your search? + +Mr. DOBBS. That's right. + +Mr. RANKIN. Would you kindly make a search to see if there is such a +letter and such materials in your files? + +Mr. DOBBS. Yes; we will look for that. + +Mr. WATTS. Mr. Rankin, you are requesting Mr. Dobbs to make a further +search to see if he can find the letter and reproductions referred to; +is that correct? + +Mr. RANKIN. Yes, both; and if he does find them, to forward them to us +so they can be incorporated after they are initialed as a part of the +record in this deposition. + +(Document marked Dobbs' Exhibit No. 13.) + +Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Dobbs, do you recall seeing Dobbs' No. 13? + +Mr. DOBBS. No; I do not. + +Mr. RANKIN. Do you recognize the signature? + +Mr. DOBBS. Yes; that would have been one of my associates that helps me +in volunteer office work. + +Mr. RANKIN. And you recognize the stationery, I suppose? + +Mr. DOBBS. Yes; that appears to be on our letterhead. + +Mr. RANKIN. When you made a search of the files, you did not find any +letter like Dobbs' No. 13? + +Mr. DOBBS. No; I did not. + +Mr. RANKIN. Did you have any information as to whether or not such a +letter was sent? + +Mr. DOBBS. No, no. I would assume, in view of the fact that it does +appear to be an official party letterhead, that the letter would have +been sent, but we would not have kept a file copy of it. + +Mr. RANKIN. I see. And you do recognize the signature? + +Mr. DOBBS. Yes. + +Mr. RANKIN. Would you kindly initial that, please. + +Mr. DOBBS. (Witness complies.) + +Mr. RANKIN. Do you have any recollection of any other correspondence or +communications of any kind? + +Mr. DOBBS. No; I do not, sir. + +Mr. RANKIN. With Lee Harvey Oswald? + +Mr. DOBBS. I do not. + +Mr. RANKIN. You will note that Dobbs' No. 13 refers to a communication +from Lee Harvey Oswald of March 24, presumably 1963. Do you recall ever +having seen that? + +Mr. DOBBS. No; I do not, and obviously it was not in our files or we +would have included it in the material we turned over to you. + +Mr. RANKIN. While you are making further search for this last item, +would you kindly make another search to see if you do have any copy of +Dobbs' No. 13 and also the letter from Lee Harvey Oswald of March 24? + +Mr. DOBBS. That's referred to here? + +Mr. RANKIN. Yes. + +Mr. DOBBS. Yes. We will make a recheck. + +Mr. RANKIN. We should also like that clipping that is referred to as +being enclosed with Mr. Oswald's letter, if you find it. + +Mr. DOBBS. Yes. + +Mr. RANKIN. I was not quite clear, Mr. Dobbs, about your response in +regard to that. Is that the type of letter you would not expect to have +a copy of in the files? + +Mr. DOBBS. Yes. + +Mr. RANKIN. Because it is a general form that is followed? Is that the +reason? + +Mr. DOBBS. Yes. The reason--I can explain to you, however, our basic +procedure in matters of this kind. We receive quite a few inquiries, +and we have more or less an established policy of reply along the +lines I have indicated to you, so we do not keep an accumulation of +the--all the letters received and all the replies sent. As I told +you, our office work is done essentially by volunteer help. We are a +small organization with meager resources, and we have to adjust our +proceedings accordingly. + +Mr. RANKIN. Do you have any knowledge of any collaboration, association +or combination of any of the people in the Socialist Workers Party, +Pioneer Publishers, or The Militant, with Lee Harvey Oswald and his +action in connection with the assassination of President Kennedy? + +Mr. DOBBS. None whatever. So far as I know, nobody in any of the +categories mentioned by you ever knew anything about him other than the +written material that we have made available to you. + +Mr. RANKIN. With your position in connection with these organizations, +would you have such material? Would such information be available to +you if it existed? + +Mr. DOBBS. Yes. If anybody in the organization would know, I would +know. I am the central executive officer of the party. + +Mr. RANKIN. You are satisfied that no one had such an association with +Lee Harvey Oswald from those organizations? + +Mr. DOBBS. Absolutely so. + +Mr. RANKIN. Do you know of any other communications, either orally or +in writing, between any of those organizations and Lee Harvey Oswald, +other than what has been produced here? + +Mr. DOBBS. No; I do not. + +Mr. RANKIN. We have some information, Mr. Dobbs, that when Lee Harvey +Oswald was about 16 years of age, he communicated with the Socialist +Party of America and the Socialist Call. I would like to know whether +or not those have any relationship with the organizations that I have +just described that you have some connection with? + +Mr. DOBBS. No, sir; it is an entirely different organization. Our +organization didn't come into being until 1938. + +Mr. RANKIN. And these organizations, the Socialist Call and the +Socialist Party of America, were not predecessors of your organization? + +Mr. DOBBS. No. + +Mr. RANKIN. Or associated in any way? + +Mr. DOBBS. No. + +Mr. RANKIN. Do you have any knowledge of any conspiracy or association +with Lee Harvey Oswald by anybody with regard to whatever he did in +connection with the assassination of President Kennedy? + +Mr. DOBBS. No; I do not, and I would add that it's a matter of historic +record, long established, that our organization's philosophy is opposed +to individual acts of political terrorism. + +Mr. RANKIN. Do you have any additional information beyond what you have +supplied here that might be of assistance to the Commission in regard +to the assassination of President Kennedy? + +Mr. DOBBS. No; we do not. We have sought voluntarily to provide you +everything we have in the spirit of giving you whatever cooperation we +could, and we have given you all the information we had. + +Mr. RANKIN. And that includes anything, either oral or in writing? + +Mr. DOBBS. Correct. + +Mr. RANKIN. Thank you very much, Mr. Dobbs. + + + + +TESTIMONY OF JOHN J. ABT + +The testimony of John J. Abt was taken at 9:30 a.m., on April 17, 1964, +at the U.S. courthouse, Foley Square, New York, N.Y., by Messrs. J. Lee +Rankin, general counsel, and Wesley J. Liebeler, assistant counsel of +the President's Commission. + + +John Abt, having been first duly sworn, was examined and testified as +follows: + +Mr. RANKIN. Will you state your name? + +Mr. ABT. John J. Abt. + +Mr. RANKIN. Where do you live? + +Mr. ABT. 444 Central Park West, New York City. + +Mr. RANKIN. You are a practicing attorney in the city of New York? + +Mr. ABT. I am. + +Mr. RANKIN. How long have you been practicing law? + +Mr. ABT. A long time, Mr. Rankin, since 1927. You do the mathematics. + +Mr. RANKIN. You have been informed, I am sure, that Lee Harvey Oswald, +after his arrest, tried to reach you to request that you act as his +counsel. I don't know how you were informed, but I have seen it in the +newspapers. When did it first come to your attention? + +Mr. ABT. May I tell you the story, Mr. Rankin? Perhaps that is the +simplest way. + +Mr. RANKIN. Yes. + +Mr. ABT. On Friday evening, the 22d, my wife and I left the city to +spend the weekend at a little cabin we have up in the Connecticut +woods. Sometime on Saturday, several people phoned me to say that they +had heard on the radio that Oswald had asked that I represent him, +and then shortly after that the press--both the press, radio, and TV +reporters began to call me up there. I may say we have a radio but we +have no TV there. And in the interim I turned on the radio and heard +the same report. + +I informed them--and these calls kept on all day and night Saturday +and again Sunday morning--I informed all of the reporters with whom +I spoke that I had received no request either from Oswald or from +anyone on his behalf to represent him, and hence I was in no position +to give any definitive answer to any such proposal if, as and when it +came. I told them, however, that if I were requested to represent him, +I felt that it would probably be difficult, if not impossible, for +me to do so because of my commitments to other clients. I never had +any communication, either directly from Oswald or from anyone on his +behalf, and all of my information about the whole matter to this day +came from what the press told me in those telephone conversations and +what I subsequently read in the newspapers. + +Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Abt, did you learn that Lee Harvey Oswald was +interested in having you represent him apparently because of some prior +connection of yours with the American Civil Liberties Union? + +Mr. ABT. No. My assumption was, and it is pure assumption, that he +read about some of my representation in the press, and, therefore, it +occurred to him that I might be a good man to represent him, but that +is pure assumption on my part. I have no direct knowledge of the whole +matter. + +Mr. RANKIN. You have told us all that you know about it? + +Mr. ABT. Yes. I may say that I have had no prior contact with Oswald, +knew nothing about him, did not know the name, and this request came as +something entirely new and surprising to me when it came. + +Mr. RANKIN. None of your clients had ever communicated to you about him +prior to that time you heard about it over the radio? + +Mr. ABT. No; I had no recollection of even having heard the name, his +name, before that time. + +Mr. RANKIN. Thank you. + +Mr. ABT. Right. + + + + +TESTIMONY OF MRS. HELEN P. CUNNINGHAM + +The testimony of Mrs. Helen P. Cunningham was taken at 5:20 p.m., on +April 1, 1964, in the office of the U.S. attorney, 301 Post Office +Building, Bryan and Ervay Streets, Dallas, Tex., by Mr. Albert E. +Jenner, assistant counsel of the President's Commission. Robert T. +Davis, assistant attorney general of Texas, was present. + + +Mr. JENNER. Would you state your full name? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Helen P. Cunningham. + +Mr. JENNER. And would you rise and be sworn. Mrs. Cunningham, in your +testimony that you are about to give, do you swear to tell the truth, +the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. I do. + +Mr. JENNER. I am Albert E. Jenner, Jr. I am a member of the legal +staff of the President's Commission. The President's Commission was +created by U.S. Senate Joint Resolution 137. That Commission under that +legislation is appointed to investigate the assassination of our late +President, John Fitzgerald Kennedy. The President of the United States, +Mr. Lyndon B. Johnson, did act pursuant to that legislation and under +Executive Order 11130, he appointed the Commission and brought it into +legal existence. Its duties, as I have indicated, are to investigate +the assassination of the late President, John Fitzgerald Kennedy, and +in the course of that work, which has now been going on for some time, +we find many people, especially people here in Dallas, who had some +kind of contact in the normal and usual and regular course of business, +most of them, whether State agents or otherwise, with Lee Harvey Oswald +and some of them with his wife, Marina. We understand from others of +your fellow employees of the Commission that you had some contact with +Lee Harvey Oswald and I would like to ask you some questions about that. + +Am I right in my assumption that you did have some contact with him? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. And it was in your capacity, in the due course of your work +with the Texas Employment Commission, that office being located here in +Dallas? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Where do you reside, Mrs. Cunningham? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. 1046 North Winnetka. + +Mr. JENNER. In Dallas? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Are you a native of Dallas? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. What is your definition of "native"--born here, sir? + +Mr. JENNER. Well, say--born or lived most of your life in Dallas? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. No, sir; my speech indicates that I was not. + +Mr. JENNER. I detected that. + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. I was born in St. Louis, Mo., and resided in Missouri +in various portions of it. + +If my voice is low, young lady, if it doesn't come to you, well please +call my attention to it. + +We came to Dallas in 1951 and we have resided here since then. + +Mr. JENNER. How long have you been employed by or associated with the +Texas Employment Commission? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Since August of 1957, if I am remembering my dates +properly. + +Mr. JENNER. And your duties with the Commission, say, the last 3 years +have been what? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. As an employment counselor. + +Mr. JENNER. Explain what that is, please? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. We are a small group of workers that are set into our +operation, who are given more time to deal with applicants, who for one +reason or another had difficulty in finding jobs or in holding jobs, +and we used the best techniques that are available to us to be helpful, +primarily to the applicant, but also preparing him for what he finds in +the labor market, and what working conditions are, and what employers' +requirements are. + +Mr. JENNER. Tell me, in general, how does the Texas Employment +Commission function? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. As a quasi-Federal-State operation under the U.S. +Department of Labor and you undoubtedly know that there is a Bureau of +Employment Security office here. + +Mr. JENNER. That's the Federal Bureau? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Or agency? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Yes, sir; which represents the U.S. Department of +Labor and serves a region in which we are. I am by my paycheck an +employee of the State of Texas, however. It works, in general, however, +as all the public employment offices do, in the 50 different States. +Now, do you want more detail than that, or was that helpful. + +Mr. JENNER. Well, probably, that is sufficient, with a little +supplementation. Let me put to you a couple of hypotheticals. Someone +comes into this State who has had no connection with any employment +in the State of Texas and that hypothetical person comes to the Texas +Employment Commission and said he is seeking employment--does the +Texas Employment Commission do anything, or would it do anything about +seeking employment for him? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Certainly. We have, you know, what is commonly known +as a clearance procedure, which is an interchange of orders and +applicants among the States and it is an interlocked operation among +States. + +Mr. JENNER. And that particular person, I take it from what you say, +you would inquire of him as to his past employment? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. In the other States, and would seek the information from +the other States by way of confirmation, or would you go that far? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. No, sir; we generally accept the applicant's statement +as to what his previous employment is, and in general, the employer +checks references if he is considering hiring that individual. + +Mr. JENNER. Now, the second hypothetical I would like to put to you--I +anticipate the answer is obvious--he is employed by someone in Texas, +let's say, in this county, that employment terminates, he then comes +to the Texas Employment Commission, I take it you would undertake upon +review of his record and make it a necessary recording of that record; +to also seek to obtain him employment if he sought it? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Yes, sir. We are a public agency and our doors are +open to the public. + +Mr. JENNER. Is it coordinated in anyway with unemployment compensation? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Tell us how that operates? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Well, you know the legislation better than I do, +because I am assuming that your profession is a lawyer? + +Mr. JENNER. Yes; I am a lawyer, but don't presume I know anything. + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Well, I would hate to be talking to the table +[laughing]. + +Mr. JENNER. Mrs. Cunningham, the person who reads the record may not be +a lawyer. + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. I see. + +Mr. JENNER. And may not understand this and my purpose is to record how +the Commission functions. + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. The original legislation established the employment +service and the unemployment compensation program under one law, +and until about 1 year ago in Dallas, applicants for unemployment +compensation applied at usually the same office for recording their +availability for work and making a claim for unemployment compensation, +as where the employment services were housed in the last year in +this particular area, and it is not true throughout all the public +employment service offices--not even in this district. We have split +out the employment services from the unemployment services, but +there is a coordination between the offices and in the procedures on +unemployment compensation, I know the general law and the necessity for +being able and available for work, while being a claimant, and I make +no pretense of knowing the up-to-date details of that. + +Mr. JENNER. No; I wasn't seeking that. I just wanted the general +picture of how they are coordinated. + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. And you see, one of the necessities for a person +filing a claim for unemployment compensation is that he be registered +in a public employment office. + +Mr. JENNER. And be available? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Be available and be able to work. Those are basic +requirements and I think those are the same throughout the States. + +Mr. JENNER. Now, in the performance of your duties, your particular +function with the Texas Employment Commission, did you have occasion to +counsel, talk with, or examine a man by the name of Lee Harvey Oswald? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Tell us about that please, ma'am. If you need any of these +records to refresh your recollection, please use them, and as you +refer to them, would you hesitate so I can identify the exhibit to +which you make reference? You may use those documents to refresh your +recollection. You did have a direct contact with Lee Harvey Oswald +and I would like to have you give me the time, when it commenced, and +relate it to us. + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. As Mr. Statman has probably told you, a photostat of +the counseling record is not here. The record I am now looking at is +the application form. + +Mr. JENNER. Excuse me, it is the form that I described in the record, +the top line of which reads, "Describe your longest and most important +jobs, including Military Service. Begin with your most recent job." It +is also the application form called E-13. + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Yes; it is E-13. + +Mr. JENNER. We will mark it Cunningham Exhibit No. 1. Now, I take it +you were at the Texas Employment Commission and Mr. Oswald came in; is +that correct? [The original of Cunningham Exhibit No. 1 is in evidence +as Cunningham Exhibit No. 1-A.] + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. No, sir. I'm on the record. I got a call from an +acquaintance of mine, as I recall it, it was from Mr. Teofil Meller, +M-e-l-l-e-r (spelling). + +Mr. JENNER. That is T-e-o-f-i-l M-e-l-l-e-r (spelling)? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. You can be right--I was recalling it with an "H" in +it, but I believe that's the way he does spell it--asking me if I would +see Lee Harvey Oswald or Lee Oswald, as it was known, as they were +giving assistance to his wife and infant child, and they were saying, +"If you can help him, it will help the family and relieve us of this +burden." + +Mr. JENNER. You understood, then, from Mr. Meller, that the wife, at +least, was residing with him? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. At or had previously resided there for a brief time. I +can't be certain of that. + +Mr. JENNER. In any event, that the Mellers were under obligation to +assist or they had volunteered to assist? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Volunteered to assist. + +Mr. JENNER. They had volunteered to assist the Oswalds or at least Mrs. +Oswald? + +Mr. JENNER. Did Mr. Meller say anything to you at this time as to who +Mrs. Oswald was and who Mr. Oswald was? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. As I recall, he said that Oswald was a Fort Worth boy +who had lived in Russia and had married a Russian girl, and it was she +who was in their residence and it was their offspring. + +Mr. JENNER. That is, they had a child and the child was the offspring +of this marriage? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. All right. Go ahead. + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. I cannot be certain whether I gave an appointment at +that time or not, or simply said, "Well, ask him to come in and see +me"; that would be normal procedure, or usually we look up any records +that we may already have, you see, sir, and if you will excuse me, I +will see what I have on some little scratch notes here when Mr. Odum of +the FBI called me from the district office. + +Mr. JENNER. You use anything you wish to refresh your recollection. + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. All right, sir. I am uncertain whether the 10-9-62 +dating on this application form is my handwriting or not. I know that +the 10-10-62 is. + +Mr. JENNER. That's October 10, 1962? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Yes, sir--that is my dating of the application card +and I would suspect that that was the first day on which I saw him, but +I could have seen him on the 9th. + +Mr. JENNER. All right. + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Part of the application appears to be in Lee Harvey +Oswald's own handwriting or printing. + +Mr. JENNER. Was this application filled out in your presence? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. That, I cannot recall, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Was it filled out as part of your interview that you then +conducted? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. That would depend whether I saw him on the 9th and the +10th, also, and I cannot be sure of that at this time. + +Mr. JENNER. Does it indicate that the form at least was commenced to be +filled out on the 9th, and that in any event, most of the information +thereon was recorded on the 9th and the 10th of October 1962? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Or thereabout, because our practice is--if we have a +current date that we did not redate every day--the individual is in--on +the application form, you see. + +Mr. JENNER. Would it indicate at least reasonable certainty in your own +mind that he was in your own office on the 10th day of October 1962? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Yes, sir; and that I talked with him. + +Mr. JENNER. Yes. + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. The greater part of the information concerning his +reputation and training is in my handwriting. + +Mr. JENNER. And that would indicate that you obtained that from him +when you interviewed him on the 10th of October 1962? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Yes; it also indicates that I used one of our +counseling tools, an interest checklist. + +Mr. JENNER. Explain what that is. + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. It is a form which asks for quick decisions about a +person's interests, like or dislike or question about sample jobs or +work and it is the relationship of the individual's interest to groups +of jobs. It would further indicate that on the 10th of October in 1962, +I learned from him that he had taken our general aptitude test battery +in the Fort Worth office. + +Mr. JENNER. Now, your general aptitude test battery is something +distinct from the short form of test you just a moment ago mentioned, +is it? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Yes, sir; it is a correlated tool--the interest check +list delves into interest. The general aptitude tests battery is a +measure of aptitude. + +Mr. JENNER. Now, would you tell me what the results of the inquiries as +to the interests tests were? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. There is no indication on this form, and I would not +have detailed recollection of it, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Do you have any kind of recollection, detailed or otherwise? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. To tell you the truth, unless I saw it--I saw I.C.L. +here--I would have been uncertain whether I used this counseling tool. + +Mr. JENNER. Mrs. Cunningham, this is Mr. Robert Davis of the attorney +general's office of the State of Texas. + +Mr. DAVIS. Thank you so much for coming today, Mrs. Cunningham. + +Mr. JENNER. Do you have any recollection of the subject of his interest +tests? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. I recall that there was some in the writing area. + +Mr. JENNER. This was an aptitude, a particular aptitude? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Interest, sir; I am speaking of. + +Mr. JENNER. He had an interest in doing some writing? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. Do you recall your inquiries of him on that subject, how +did you probe him in that connection? He had an interest, but the fact +that somebody says he has an interest in doing something, that isn't +sufficient for you, is it? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. No, sir; but usually I use the aptitude test results +along with the interests check list, and I could well have said +something--"Yes, you have the capabilities for writing, but this is in +a job area where you are not likely to get a job quickly," and I did +not probe, as you are saying, as to what he wrote about or anything of +that kind, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. And you did not undertake a probing to determine whether +it was merely an interest to go on to determine whether there was an +aptitude coupled with it? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. The aptitude test indicates that there is some because +the verbal score is high and the clerical score is high, but my concern +was primarily to meet this family's need. + +Mr. JENNER. The immediate need? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. The immediate need for income, and the young man's +apparent need for employment, and in the counseling service, I +attempt to do two things. First of all, to help young people to find +a vocational choice which may not be an immediate thing that they can +get into, but then, secondly, basically--applicants come to us for a +job and I use the interest check list and the general aptitude test +battery in working toward both purposes, and if the job can be in line +with their vocational choice--fine and good--but if it is an immediate +need for employment, then the emphasis is toward what can you get with +immediacy? What is available? Where are your qualifications as of today +likely to be used in the present labor market? + +And, basically, that is what I did with Oswald, because as he was +presented to me, that was the immediate thing--was at least to get this +young man into work where he could support a family and himself, and I +didn't even--I would at--I would say--attempt a vocational choice with +him nor give that much time to Lee Harvey Oswald. + +Also, the test results can be used in exploring what are the most +likely possibilities and can be helpful to our placement staff in +knowing at least where this individual has the potential for serving an +employer well, and that's what some of these indications at the lower +part concerning the test data indicates. + +Mr. JENNER. Now, would you please interpret that for me? What the tests +indicate? + +Now, you are interpreting here the tests made by the Fort Worth +District office, are you? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. And you obtained those results by communicating with the +Fort Worth office? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. Either on or prior to October 10, 1962? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Subsequent to 10-10-62. + +Mr. JENNER. And when you got those results, what did you find in +interpreting them? + +You see, the reader of this transcript will look at these forms and see +nothing but figures. + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. What do they mean? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Have you identified this form? + +Mr. JENNER. Yes; the form you now hold in your left hand, which +I have marked as Cunningham Exhibit No. 2, we have identified as +"Individual Aptitude Profile" and we have read into the record the +figures sequentially occurring at the bottom, beginning with figure 109 +and ending with 126. [The original of Cunningham Exhibit No. 2 is in +evidence as Cunningham Exhibit No. 2-A.] + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Have you used this data here at all? + +Mr. JENNER. Mr. Statman said you would be better able to interpret than +he, and he suggested that when you testified that I ask you to do that. + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Very well, sir. To the right of the form we were just +speaking of---- + +Mr. JENNER. In the vertical column? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Under the headings "OAP". + +Mr. JENNER. Meaning? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Occupational Aptitude Pattern--the numbers of the +patterns which are circled are the ones in which the applicant has made +the minimum scores or above, and are indicative of strength for various +patterns of occupations. + +Mr. JENNER. Now, various patterns--aptitudes for various occupations? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Yes, sir. You will see that if I copied correctly, the +entries on the face of the application card are those which are circled +on the test record, and are the ones that he had potential in those +patterns--"Jobs for occupational patterns." + +Mr. JENNER. And in which did he have potential and which were indicated +as deficiencies or weaknesses, if any? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Of the 23 patterns, then being used by the employment +service, there were only three in which he did not meet the minimum +requirements. + +Mr. JENNER. And those three? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Or 4, 1, 3, 5, and 20. + +Mr. JENNER. You have just called off numbers that are encircled on the +exhibit "Individual Aptitude Profile"? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. No, sir; they are struck off. + +Mr. JENNER. And they are stricken off for what reason? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Because the applicant's scores did not meet the +minimum standards to qualify for those occupational aptitude patterns. + +Mr. JENNER. What occupational aptitude patterns are indicated by the +numbers you have read which in turn were stricken off on that exhibit? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. I'm sorry, sir; I cannot at this point answer that +because we are using a new manual with new occupational patterns and +there are a number of the detailed jobs in these patterns, and I could +not even expect to carry the whole matter in my head. + +Mr. JENNER. All right. + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. If you like--I shall talk a little about this. + +Mr. JENNER. Now, before you go to the bottom line, there are numbered +aptitude patterns that are encircled. That means that the applicant had +the minimum aptitude for each of those that are encircled? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Since you were not able to tell me what the aptitudes were +in which there was an indicated deficiency by the striking of the +number, I assume you are not able to tell me what the aptitudes were +that are encircled, in which he did score in them. + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Not in detail. + +Mr. JENNER. Are you able to do some interpreting? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. Would you do so? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Perhaps I should talk about the next two columns to +the right here. + +Mr. JENNER. You are still talking about the same exhibit? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Yes--note that the date on this is 10-11-62. + +Mr. JENNER. That's October 11, 1962. + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. And these are three specific tests which are set into +the testing program in the Dallas clerical and sales office. Comparing +the standards of those specific tests with the report as given from the +Fort Worth office, I chose three of them--the B-400, which is a general +clerical--a general office clerk is the designation of it; by BX-1002, +and a B-493. + +If my recollection serves me properly at the time of this interview, +the B-493 was aptitude for entering drafting. The BX-1002 is an +experimental test for claims examiners in the insurance industry. On +each of these three specifics, he scored high. + +Mr. JENNER. What led you to select those, as to this man? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Basically, it's usually done in relation to his +interests, and because of jobs available in this labor market or +possibly available. For instance, the Clerk General office cuts across +all industry, and strength in it can be used in a number of industries, +and in a number of work situations. + +Mr. JENNER. Yes. + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. We have a lot of insurance and insurance firms here. +The claims examiner is not usually a beginning job, but it is some +indication that a young person can start in the clerical field and +perhaps move in this direction in the insurance industry. + +I would assume that there was a relationship to some discussion of +this experience and training in the Military Corps in the electronics +and radar that suggests the drafting or because I knew of some +possibilities in that area. + +I see nothing in what I have recorded about the high school training +which would so indicate that. + +Mr. JENNER. All of these records that have been placed before you, +being three in number, do you interpret them indicating anything other +than--I do not mean to be deprecatory here, that this man had about a +high school education. + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Sir, I accepted his statement that at some time and +some place, usually when the young man is in the armed services, he +had taken the high school equivalency test and had passed it. There +is nothing from the aptitude scores that would lead me to believe +otherwise. In fact, there are some things in it that would tend to say +that he could do college work. + +Mr. JENNER. Indicate that, please--what leads you to say that? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Well, the "G" score, which is a general ability and +not an IQ score, is above 100. We have certain standards that we carry +in the back of our head that that says--yes. + +Mr. JENNER. It says--yes--what? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. College capabilities. + +Mr. JENNER. All right. + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Other factors being equal, of course. The verbal is +quite high--this is one of the learning tools, exact knowledge of words +and word meanings. + +Mr. JENNER. And his score in that connection was? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. 127. + +Mr. JENNER. You say this is quite high--what is an average? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. We are told that about 50 percent of the people +who take this test score 100 and below, and the other 50 percent of +necessity 100 and above--the break point is. We are warned against, +however, looking at any one of these items and considering it alone, +except as we were talking of possibility for college training +altogether. + +Mr. JENNER. His score in the first category you have mentioned was what? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. 109. + +Mr. JENNER. That is close to the minimum? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. No, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Explain that. + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. You said "the minimum"? + +Mr. JENNER. The minimum necessary--is there a minimum standard? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. A necessary for what, of course, is the immediate +question. + +Mr. JENNER. Well, for you to decide, for example, "Well, this man does +have capability for college study." + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. I have not reviewed these figures that are in our +manuals recently, but if I recall correctly, 100 is thought sufficient +to do a junior college or possibly in some--a 4-year course; that about +125 is required on the "G" score for professional schools, and 110 is +quite good for finishing a 4-year college. As you see, this score is +close to that, and we consider the test only about 15 percent of the +total in making decisions about vocation and it is not the biggest +factor. + +Mr. JENNER. Off the record a minute. + +(Discussion between Counsel Jenner and the witness, Mrs. Cunningham, +off the record.) + +Mr. JENNER. Now, I think we had better be on the record on this. + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. None of our tests are personality tests. + +Mr. JENNER. You see, I want you to tell me what these are, and if I +misinterpret them, I want you to correct me. It is important that we +know what testing was done and that we don't misinterpret it ourselves. + +Now, is any of this a personality test? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. No, sir; none whatsoever. It is aptitude--it is an +interest checklist and I am an employment counselor only, and that +is why you got part of the answers from me a while ago, was that I +was limiting it to that segment of counseling which presumably is my +specialty, and for which I am paid by the Texas Employment Commission. + +In general, I would say that the tests indicate potential for quite +a broad number of jobs--certainly in the semiskilled and skilled +occupations. + +Mr. JENNER. Would these be a potential with training? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Yes, sir. Certainly I have indicated the areas in the +clerical field by the tests that I selected and most of the drafting +jobs, of course, are semiprofessional. I did not apparently think that +these others were important at the time or I would have given other +classifications. + +Mr. JENNER. Other classification tests? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. No, sir; I'm sorry--I am throwing you on terminology. +This indicates where the application is held. + +Mr. JENNER. Would you tell us what you mean by "this"? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. The words "Routine Clerical Work--1-X4.9" is a +classification of the application in the area where the application +will be held by the placement interviewers for referral on jobs. + +Mr. JENNER. This represents an entry based on your judgment in +interviewing? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. And that is your personal entry and your handwriting? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. And what does that job classification mean and what degree +of aptitude, if any, does it indicate? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. On the entry level. + +Mr. JENNER. Just the entry level? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Into routine clerical work--it covers a lot of jobs +and a lot of work circumstances. + +Mr. JENNER. Now, I ask you this--there is a surface inconsistency +between that particular classification you gave him and your testimony +with respect to his capabilities to do college work. I say there is a +surface inconsistency, would you explain that? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Yes, sir. To enter professional jobs, usually the +employers require more training or experience in the area of the +profession. The availability in this labor market of clerical jobs +to a newcomer into the labor market area is very much greater and, +therefore, the job opportunities for this young man in a clerical entry +job would be much brighter than in an entry for a professional job. + +Mr. JENNER. So, I take it, then, in that classification as dictated by +your knowledge of the available labor market, this was an area which +at the time seemed to afford greater opportunity for placement of this +young man immediately. + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Having in mind the information related to you by Mr. +Meller, that there was dire need for financial assistance here. + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. And the other aptitudes you recorded on his ability you +thought to do college work--those are not inconsistent with the +classification you gave when you considered the whole problem that was +facing you at the immediate time. + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Then I was talking about the potential only for the +future, he had not even started college--a college training, by the +record as I was giving it, sir, and because there is nothing as +presented in the work history when I first worked with him which would +indicate that he had ever worked at a professional or semiprofessional +level that would give strength to a professional classification, and +remembering, too, that the aptitude test is really only about 15 +percent of the decision as to where this individual shall seek as of +this time in this place---- + +Mr. JENNER. The other factors being for one instance--one, the ready +labor market, and two, the immediate need, if there is an absolute +immediate need, and what other factors? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Previous work experience--a good work record within +the present labor market can be a big factor. Any employer, as you +well know, would much prefer to pick up the phone and call for a +reference than to write to Podunk and maybe get a communication and +maybe not, and they don't know really what that firm is or with whom he +is communicating, and I would say in general, and this is a personal +judgment, that the incoming person to a labor market has to take the +lower pay, the less desirable job, until he gets a work record in the +community, unless he is highly qualified and in one of the shortage +occupations. + +Mr. JENNER. And from your visit with this young man, he had not much of +a work record, do I fairly state that? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. The work record when he came to me was limited in +length of time as indicated on the application. It was mixed, as far +as occupation was concerned in the semiskilled, in the sales, in the +clerical. + +Mr. JENNER. That is, he had a semimixed work record involving one or +more of the three major groups you have now mentioned. + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. Your answer was "Yes"--when you nod your head, we can't get +it on the record. + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. I thought I had said it was broken and limited, so, +"Yes" is the answer. + +Mr. JENNER. All right, you go right ahead, you are doing fine. + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Please note that in the work record there is an +entry subsequent to when he was counseled, and that is in the +semiprofessional or professional, if anyone would look at it. + +Mr. JENNER. You say "subsequent," does that mean a later time or +subsequently during the course of the interview you had with him? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. No, sir; at a later time. + +Mr. JENNER. When? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. As indicated on the record it is 4 months to July of +1963 in photography. + +Mr. JENNER. And he had the experience for that length of time somewhere? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. It indicates that it was in New Orleans with William +B. Reily Co. + +Mr. JENNER. And he reported that as having been experienced in what +connection? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Looking at the subsequent dating of the application +card, it would appear that this was recorded in October 1963. + +Mr. JENNER. Now, that is important and I am interested in that. In +October 1963, which was a year subsequent to your interview, which had +commenced at least on October 10, 1962, does it appear from those forms +that he again returned to the Dallas office to make a work application? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. And did you again counsel with or see him? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. No, sir. I did not know until after the President's +assassination that he had recontacted the office after these October +1962 interviews of which we have been talking. + +Mr. JENNER. Is there a record on any one of those exhibits of the +number of applications that he made and when those applications were +made in the sense of his personal appearance for the application? You +have mentioned one, that is your own, that was generated by Mr. Meller? +Do your initials appear there, or do you just happen to recall that? Is +there something on the form in the way of your initials or signature +that indicates to you that you did that? + +There appears on the reverse side of the form, E-13, (Cunningham +Exhibit No. 1) in the handwriting, the word "Cunningham." Is that in +your handwriting? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. There appears above it, and also is a signature--are you +familiar with that signature? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. Whose is it? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. It is of a counselor, at least presently a counselor, +in the industrial office. + +Mr. JENNER. Of the Texas Employment Commission? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Of the Texas Employment Commission in Dallas. + +Mr. JENNER. Is there any significance in the fact that his name appears +above yours or yours below his? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. All right, tell us about it. + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. This brings to mind that in seeking the records for +this applicant, because--I guess the Mellers must have said "He has +already been down to the Texas Employment Commission office and has not +gotten a job," then, I started trying to find the records, so I did +not duplicate, and I am uncertain whether this is the record that Mr. +Brooks transmitted to our office or not. + +Mr. JENNER. Who is Mr. Brooks? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. The counselor in the industrial office. + +Mr. JENNER. Here in Dallas? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Here in Dallas. + +Mr. JENNER. And you are in what office here in Dallas? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Clerical and sales. + +Mr. JENNER. So that your counseling and your examination is directed +primarily to clerical and sales? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Sir, I would not agree fully with that. We take the +public as it comes to our door and it is entirely possible for me to +have an applicant arrive where I could decide that he was better served +in another office and would transmit records and suggest that the +applicant call at that office. In the Dallas organization we have our +offices organized around occupations basically, and in our particular +building, as you may have been told, we have a professional office and +the clerical and sales office. We also have an industrial office. + +Mr. JENNER. In the same building? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. No, sir; at 1206 Ross Street, and this original +application card could have come from there to our files. + +Mr. JENNER. And is the fact that your signature appears under Mr. +Brooks' signature indicative of that likelihood? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Yes, sir; by location it would be. These comments that +are above Mr. Brooks' are in my writing. + +Mr. JENNER. They are? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. And those comments are under the classification headed +or entitled, "Applicant's characteristics--well groomed and spoken. +Business suit. Alert replies. Expresses self extremely well." That's in +your handwriting? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. And you made that record after you had interviewed Mr. +Oswald? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Perhaps after at least the second interview when I had +had the tests results. Usually, I try to hold it until I more or less +synchronize the information that I get. + +Mr. JENNER. In any event, that records your reaction of him at that +time? After you had the interview or interviews with him? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Now, above that, under the heading, "Conditions affecting +employment," there appears--would you read each line, and as you read +it, is that in your handwriting? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Yes, sir; "bus transportation." + +Mr. JENNER. Bus transportation meant what? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. That he did not have a car and driver's license, and +so consequently, he would have to use public transportation in seeking +a job. + +Mr. JENNER. You interest me; you say he did not have an automobile or +driver's license. Did you make inquiry on that subject--did he have a +driver's license? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. The front of the card--there are entries above the +word "car--no" the license that we usually use here is a driver's +license; then the word "none" is in front of it. Now, I didn't know who +made these entries. They could have been made by Oswald or they could +have been made by Mr. Brooks, if this is a photostat of the card which +Mr. Brooks first worked with. Can you see that? + +Mr. JENNER. Yes; I see what it is. That's what Mr. Statman said in his +testimony and in any event, from examining the card and your interview, +it was your impression on that day that he did not have a driver's +license? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. Is that correct? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. But you don't recall you made a specific inquiry on the +subject? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. No, sir; what is on the card would tend to indicate +that I took it as it was recorded and that I did ask whether he had to +use the bus to get to and from work--to--yes. + +Mr. JENNER. Now, the next line in your handwriting reads---- + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. "Wife and child" and in parenthesis "8 months" which +indicates the information I was given about the age of the child as of +that date. + +Mr. JENNER. The child was 8 months old? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. When did you make the entries about which I am now +examining you? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. In October 1962. + +Mr. JENNER. At that time this child was more than 8 months old? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. I could have recorded it wrong. I could have been +informed wrong. + +Mr. JENNER. Let me see--I will withdraw that--I may be wrong. + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. I don't even know enough to check on it. + +Mr. JENNER. That's what you recorded, in any event? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. And you would have received that information from him? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. The next line? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. "Outstanding verbal and clerical potential." That +comes from what I was seeing on the test scores. It is to alert the +placement worker of where the counselor finds his greatest potential to +be through the testing. + +Mr. JENNER. All right. Next line. + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. "Financial position necessitates immediate employment." + +Mr. JENNER. And that in turn affected what I might describe as being +your immediate classification of him? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. And has a bearing on that--is there another line in your +hand? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. What is it? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. "Brother--junior executive, Acme Brick" and the second +line entry---- + +Mr. JENNER. That would have been information you received from him? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Yes. "Brother--Staff Sgt. Air Force." + +Mr. JENNER. Does that indicate to you two separate brothers? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. And that is information that he afforded you? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Yes, sir. + +The next entry is "10-10-62." + +Mr. JENNER. All right, that is 8 days later? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. It sounds like to me the first day I saw the boy, or +the second day. + +Mr. JENNER. Yes; you are right. + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. "HPC" for my initials, and a "B" with a circle in it. + +Mr. JENNER. Meaning what? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. I'm sorry--I'm not certain as to why that "B" was +recorded there. We do use or did use, an A, B, C, D, E, F, for the +kinds of problem and it could have been that, but I am unsure of what +that entry means. + +Mr. JENNER. What were your A-B-C problems? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. This gentleman is going to ask me to remember the +whole manual this afternoon. + +"A" is little or no work experience, and entry into the labor force +basically, with no vocational choice. + +"B" is an entry into the labor force or relatively so, or re-entry with +a questionable choice. + +Mr. JENNER. You mean questionable choice in what sense? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. That the applicant says, "I want to be a lawyer," +and you say, "Are you ready, what training do you have, what is the +indication?" + +Mr. JENNER. Your questionable choice, therefore, is a question on your +part as to his capability to attain that which he desires? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Which is an expressed desire, but you see, sir, I do +not have my basic counseling record among these papers and this is part +of the reason that I am uncertain here. If I had the comparable and +complete record, I could better answer the present question. + +Mr. JENNER. What is your best recollection? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. I have no definite recollection of what the boy asked +for, as far as an occupation is concerned. + +Mr. JENNER. He wanted work immediately, you were also attempting to +determine what he was seeking ultimately and your judgment of his +capabilities to accomplish that which he sought ultimately; am I +correct? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Yes--but I again remind you that I did not attempt +with Oswald the full counseling service, because I placed emphasis on +the immediate with him. + +Mr. JENNER. Well, that's important to me. + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Yes, I'm sure it is. + +Mr. JENNER. What is "C"? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. "C" is expressed change of occupation for a variety of +reasons. + +Mr. JENNER. A desire to change whatever occupation he had been pursuing? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. And in that case it is presumed that the person is +fully qualified in an occupation from his work experience. + +Mr. JENNER. If a counselor reached the conclusion that he was not +qualified or needed further training or you had any question about it +as to the other occupation or the change of occupation the applicant +desired, would you then classify him under "B" rather than "C"? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. No, sir; because as a counselor, I am +applicant-and-individual oriented, and I guess as a counselor also, I +work under the philosophy that the individual has some choices of his +own and the best that I can do is give him information, use what tools +and what knowledge I have gotten out of training and experience to +help him to make the best choices, but the decisions basically are the +applicant's. + +Mr. JENNER. Did you say there was a "D" classification? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Yes; there is a "D". + +Mr. JENNER. What is that? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. I'm sorry, I cannot bring it to mind at the moment. +There is an "E" and an "F" and a "G". + +The "F" is emotional problems, which were not apparent in this young +man to me in the few times that I saw him. He was well contained, well +spoken, and did not give any information, as I recall, except what I +referred to. + +As I see his mother on television, this interviewee seems to me, and I +have to use that verb, that there is a certain same kind of firmness in +the individual there, and certain capabilities there, and to use words +well. + +Mr. JENNER. On the part of Mrs. Marguerite Oswald? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Do you notice any personality quirks or qualities or +attributes in Marguerite Oswald as you observed her on television and +her son, Lee Harvey Oswald? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. There is a driving in the woman that I did not see +in the son. There is a strident of voice in the mother as she comes +through to me on television that was not in the son. He was very +self-contained. + +I didn't probe for information because I was trying to meet the +immediate need and to deal with the employment problem, only, sir, and +then we also have workload and time pressures on us, as you well know +in any job there are that. + +We have applicants who are waiting to be interviewed and I guess now, +with hindsight, I'm sorry that I didn't--but that's hindsight. + +Mr. JENNER. Do you have capabilities in that area? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Sir? + +Mr. JENNER. Do you have capabilities in the area of inquiry into +personality--when I said "capabilities"--first, do you have any +training in that area? You necessarily have some experience, I am +sure--formal training, let me put it that way. + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. I'm going to get into your overall training in a little bit. + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. I hesitate to say this, because the pressures are +with us in the Texas Employment Commission, to do a limited job on the +vocational employment thing, because that is our emphasis and that is +as right, but I have to say that I think a life is a unit and that +you can't take a slice out of it and look at it alone and be very +effective, nor that a human being can cut away from all his past, nor +his associates, nor the other things that are affecting him and so I +try to approach an individual, when time permits and when it seems like +it might be effective in his vocational life, to get some information +about other parts of his life. + +Mr. JENNER. All right. Now, I got you off on this because I asked you +what the "B" in the circle meant--may we go back to that? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. I thought I had answered completely. + +Mr. JENNER. I think you have, but as I say, I got you off on it when we +reached that point--I interrupted you. + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. The entries on the application form, E-13 (Cunningham +Exhibit No. 1) below "do not write below this line"--none are in my +handwriting and they are not counseling records. They are referral +placement records. + +Mr. JENNER. Now, does the recording there indicate a reference of a job +to the applicant and the result of that reference--what happened after +the reference was made? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. The record is not absolutely complete, but in +general--yes--and some line entries--yes. + +Mr. JENNER. Would that form necessarily indicate if the applicant +refused the position as distinguished from the possibility, for +example, that the employer, when he interviewed the applicant, +concluded that he did not wish to employ him? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. There is some indication of each, yes. + +Mr. JENNER. Now, taking those entries, would you comment on each of +them in that respect, taking them seriatically and tell us about it. + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. On the first line entry, in the column headed "Call" +there is a dash. That indicates to me that the applicant was not called +in, that he was in the office and referred to the placement section. On +the same line, under the word "referred" there is a date--10-8, which +is struck through, and above that is written "10-10" and then under the +heading, "Employer or agency," I am reading the entry there, "Harrel +and Harrington, architects;" under job title or purpose, the word +"Messenger"; under the abbreviation for duration, the letter "P" which +indicates a permanent job; under "pay", I am reading $1.50. + +Mr. JENNER. Per hour? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. The hour is not indicated--that is inferred. There +is no entry under "results". On the same line under "remarks" are the +initials "LL". + +Mr. JENNER. Whose initials are those? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Placement worker who was with us formerly, whose name +is Louise Latham. + +Mr. JENNER. She was with you until yesterday? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Well, I knew it has been an off again and on again +situation--so you are more current than I about even in my own agency. + +Shall I begin on the next line? + +Mr. JENNER. Now, as far as that reference is concerned, there is +nothing recorded as to what the result of that reference was? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. That is right. After having seen it, my recollection +was that the boy was not hired. + +Mr. JENNER. That was the decision of the employer? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Yes, sir; and that is the information that would have +come through me, either from talking to the placement worker or to +Oswald on a second interview, you see? + +Mr. JENNER. The cause for that doesn't appear--of course, it may be +that when he got there the job was filled or anyone of a number of +reasons? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Since it is a blank entry, the applicant could not +have reported, or the employer had rejected him, or he had seen other +applicants and chose from them. + +Mr. JENNER. All right. Let's go to the next line. + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Under the column "Call"--10-26-62. + +Mr. JENNER. That indicates what? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. That he was called by telephone message, because there +is a "TM" above the date. + +Mr. JENNER. That means "telephone message"? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. I think that I am correct that that is the meaning +there. Under the "referred"--NRO. + +Mr. JENNER. What does that mean? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. No referral offered. + +Mr. JENNER. What does that mean? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. That in trying to fill an order of an employer, the +placement interviewer called in a given number of applicants, in +trying to find one who would meet his specifications after reviewing +application cards (referring to Form E-13; Cunningham Exhibit No. 1), +and I would read it that the applicant replied that he came to the +placement worker, that in the discussion the placement worker made the +decision not to refer him. + +Mr. JENNER. Is there a recording there of what the prospective +reference would have been? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Yes--employer agency: The Dallas Transit. + +Mr. JENNER. For what position? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Messenger, and I cannot read something in parentheses +after that--"permanent duration"--I judge it to be $175 a month. + +Mr. JENNER. All right. + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. There is nothing in the result column. + +Mr. JENNER. Whose initials? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. I'm sorry, I cannot distinguish them. + +Mr. JENNER. All right. + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. However, there is the date--10-30, and I can't read +what is above the date--10-30. + +Mr. JENNER. Is that on the same line? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Yes; I think. + +Mr. JENNER. Let me see if I can read it--could that first word be +"working" and then there is some initial following 10-30, the first of +which appears to be "W", the next is "T", and the next is "F". + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. I wouldn't risk a guess at either one of those, sir, +because I am not acquainted with this handwriting and it is not mine. + +Mr. JENNER. All right. Go to the next line, please. + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. The next line--there is a dash under the word "Call", +"referred"--there is a date 10-12, there are no other entries on that +line. + +Mr. JENNER. So, what does that mean to you? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Well, it can mean a number of things. + +Mr. JENNER. All right. + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. There is no indication on the front of the card to +indicate that the applicant was in the office at that time. It can be +that someone started an entry and never completed it, and I am sorry, I +just don't know. + +Mr. JENNER. Okay, let's get to the next line. + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Under "called"--the change of the year is indicated by +1963 having been written. + +Mr. JENNER. Let's---- + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Under that is May 3 and the letter "M" which indicates +a call in by mail. We use a form. + +Mr. JENNER. Does that mean the applicant called in? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. No, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. That means the agency called him in by mail? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Yes, just as the 10-26-62 "TM" meant telephone message. + +Mr. JENNER. All right. + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. There is no entry under "referred". Under +"Employer--Agency" is Texas Power & Light Co. The job title or +purpose is "Meter reader." The duration is permanent, the pay is +$250. A runover item in the "Results" column is an E-19. That is one +of our form numbers which the employment service uses to inform the +unemployment compensation office that an applicant who is a claimant +was called but did not report or did not accept--or at any rate appears +not to be available for referral to jobs. + +Mr. JENNER. Could it be that there was no response to the mail notice? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Yes, sir; it does mean that because there is no entry +in the referred column, you see. + +Mr. JENNER. All right. + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Under the remarks are the letters "NR" which means +"nonreport"--just what you were asking, and there is a repetition, if I +am reading it correctly, of E-19, which is the same entry we just spoke +of and the date---- + +Mr. JENNER. One, which is a similar entry meaning the same thing as the +previous one? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Which is a duplicate entry--E-19? + +Mr. JENNER. I wanted to make clear that you weren't merely reading the +same entry you read before. + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. No, sir; on the same line is written the date 5-8-63, +which is 5 days subsequent to when the card was mailed, wasn't it? + +Mr. JENNER. What was the date--May 8, 1963? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. All right. + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. And then in parentheses are written the words +"Moved--left no address" and there are two initials there that I cannot +decipher. + +Mr. JENNER. I don't think I need to ask you to interpret that. + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. All right. + +Mr. JENNER. Is there another line? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Under the word "Called" is 10-7-63--TM, indicating a +telephone message under the column headed "Referred" is 10-8-63. + +Employer-agency--I read--"Solid State Electric; job title or +purpose--sales clerk; duration--permanent; pay--$350 a month; under +"Results"--"NH"--meaning, "Not hired." + +Under "Remarks" is printed the word "direct," which I interpret to mean +that our staff member did not make an appointment for the applicant but +asked him to go directly to see the employer. + +Mr. JENNER. The "not hired" entry indicates what to you as to whether +the employer rejected the applicant or whether the applicant declined +their employment or any other reason. What did that indicate to you in +this area? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Ordinarily it means that the employer rejected the +applicant and I am seeing that there was an erasure in this "NH" which +looks as if it could have been "ARJ". + +Mr. JENNER. What does that mean? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. That means "Applicant rejected job," and frequently +these kind of changes are usual happenings with us because we can +always call an employer and check too quickly and he will say one +thing, or if you talk to another person in staff they will say, "No; +we didn't hire him." Can you see how that would happen, sir? + +Mr. JENNER. Yes; that combination with the erasure leads you to +interpret that, that while there was initially a report that the +applicant refused the job, on a further check it was ascertained that +he was not hired, meaning that the prospective employer did not hire +the applicant, rather than that the applicant rejected the position? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Is there another entry? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. I think I got into the column under "Remarks" and had +explained the word "Direct" before. + +Mr. JENNER. All right. + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. I'm sorry--I cannot read the entry under the word +"Direct." I can read the initials "RLA", who is our Mr. Robert Adams. + +Mr. JENNER. That is the man I examined this morning? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. That means that Robert Adams handled that particular item? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Yes, sir; and that he saw the applicant on that day +and gave the referral. + +Mr. JENNER. All right. + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. In the next line under the word "Called" is a +dash, which indicates that the applicant was not called in, but +probably appeared at the office and was routed back to the placement +interviewer, and the date is the next day--10-9-63; "Employer agency is +Burton-Dixie"; job title or purpose is "Clerk Trainee"; the duration +is permanent; the pay is $1.25, the results are "NH", which means "not +hired." + +Under "Remarks" is "direct" and the initials RLA which is our Mr. Bob +Adams. + +Mr. JENNER. All right. + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Under "Called"--10-15, with a "T," which means +that he was called by telephone, under "Referred" is 10-15, +which would indicate that he reported the same day, and under +"Employer-agency--Trans-Texas"; under "Job Title or Purpose--cargo +handler"; under "Duration" is "P"--under "Pay" is $310. + +Mr. JENNER. That's a month? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Yes, sir; "result" is "NR". + +Mr. JENNER. What do you mean by that? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. "Nonreport." + +Mr. JENNER. That in turn means what? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. That the applicant accepted the referral, led the +placement interviewer to assume that he would see the employer, +and that when the placement interviewer checked with the employer, +he reported to him that the applicant had not reported. Under +"Remarks"--working--I think it is 10:30 a.m., 10-16. There is no +indication of where working. + +Mr. JENNER. Are there any initials there? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. "RLA." + +Mr. JENNER. That's the same Mr. Adams? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. That would indicate that when that reference was made, it +was found that Mr. Oswald was already working somewhere else? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Yes, sir; it would indicate that Mr. Adams very likely +checked the following day in some fashion or it could be that Oswald +called Mr. Adams and reported that he was working. + +Mr. JENNER. This reference was made on what day, according to that +record? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Are you using the word "reference" as we use the word +"referral," sir? + +Mr. JENNER. Yes. + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. 10-15. + +Mr. JENNER. And then there is an indication that Mr. Adams made a check +on that reference the following day or the same day? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. I am uncertain which it is referring to, whether he +left the entry there--let me go back--"NR" that he called the employer +on the 16th and recorded the "NR," or whether there was a conversation +between him and Oswald on 16th, from where he got the information he +was working--I do not know whether he ever worked at Trans-Texas from +this. + +Mr. JENNER. Does this complete the entries under that section of the +form? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Now, give me your impression of Lee Harvey Oswald, as you +recall him, doing your best to transport yourself back to the time that +you had contact with him. + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Self-contained, able, perhaps not giving any more +information than he was asked for, entirely presentable as far as +grooming and appearance was concerned; there was nothing at all that +I recall that was argumentative in my contacts with him. The general +appearance was of, and what these records indicate to me, was of a +young applicant with capability, not any sound or extensive work +experience, the longest period of the training and experience was in +the Marine Corps---- + +Mr. JENNER. And a limited education? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. A limited education, but he had done something about +it before he came to me or he wouldn't have a high school equivalency +certificate, if he did have. At least, I had no reason to question +that he did not have, after I got the test results from the Fort Worth +office. + +Mr. JENNER. Mrs. Cunningham, would you tell me, please, your education +qualifications for the work you are doing and your experience +qualifications and what brought you into this field? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. I have a master's degree from the University of +Missouri, which was granted in 1938. It is a B.S. in educational and +vocational guidance. + +Mr. JENNER. You have a master's--and you have a B.S.--did you say? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. I have the B.S. and the master's subsequent to it and +I have a B.S. in education from Southeast Missouri College in 1928, +which you see comes before this master's work. + +Mr. JENNER. Yes. + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. I have taken some subsequent courses at night classes +as I could at a variety of universities, St. Louis University, +Washington University, in St. Louis, at SMU--a summer subsequent to the +master's at the University of Minnesota. + +Mr. JENNER. All in what areas? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. The B.S. was education. + +Mr. JENNER. That was in 1928? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. And at Southeast Missouri, did you say? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Yes; Cape Girardeau. And my undergraduate majors are +math and science, I guess I've got one in English, too, that I picked +up. + +Mr. JENNER. You graduated from college, then what did you do--there's +10 years there I wanted to cover. + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. I taught school and went to school some summers, I did +some social work during the depression days in the Southeast Missouri +area. + +Mr. JENNER. I remember them--I was practicing law then. + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. You should have been down where they have good land +and poor people, down in the Boot Heel of Missouri. + +Mr. JENNER. In the Wood River country? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. In the Boot Heel of Missouri where the Mississippi and +Ohio come together. + +Mr. JENNER. I was down in the area where the Mississippi and Ohio come +together forming the tip of Illinois--down at Little Egypt. + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. In Cairo? + +Mr. JENNER. Yes, in Cairo. + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. And part of the time I was a housewife. In 1938 I went +to Jefferson City where my husband was employed--this was Jefferson +City, Mo. + +Mr. JENNER. That is the State capital? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Yes. I was with the Missouri Employment Commission +and I worked in the central office there and he was a teacher in the +public schools of the city and I went from there to the St. Louis +metropolitan office in the spring of 1940, I think. + +Mr. JENNER. Was that the OPA? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. No; that was the War Manpower Commission--really +during the war period. You know, we moved from State to Federal and +then back to State--it was much easier going in than coming out--with +the stroke of a pen--we were in. + +I moved with that agency, I guess, from interviewer to labor market +analyst for that metropolitan area and then I taught awhile. There may +have been a period where I was not employed, because Mr. Cunningham and +I have had heavy family responsibilities on the other end of life from +1940 to the death of his mother this past Christmas at 89, the same as +Churchill, and in 1951, we came down here. + +I have basically worked for A. Harris as an accounting clerk. In 1957 I +had qualified under the Texas law and had taken the examinations, and +in August 1957--I was employed by the Texas Employment Commission as an +interviewer of some variety. + +Mr. JENNER. And you have been at it ever since? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. Mrs. Cunningham, does anything occur to you that you think +might be helpful to the Commission in these areas about which I have +inquired of you which, due to my lack of knowledge of the facts or +for any other reason I have not brought out, that you would like to +volunteer and which you regard as pertinent to our investigation? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. I've never really been into the investigation--of +course, have never been into any kind which was of such grave +importance as this, sir. I couldn't really make a judgment of what +would be important to you. + +Mr. JENNER. Well, I don't want you to try to make a judgment as to +what would be important--all I said, is there anything you think is +pertinent? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Yes. I would like to say this: As I said to the +gentlemen from the FBI who called me. + +I have not been close to the Mellers recently. You see, this +acquaintance came through our both working for A. Harris. + +Mr. JENNER. For whom? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. A. Harris & Co. + +Mr. JENNER. What business is A. Harris? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. A retail trade--it is now Sanger-Harris, one of the +major department stores here, but I have no reason to believe otherwise +that the Mellers were good citizens and very grateful for American +democracy. + +I rather suspect that the records show that I was a sponsor of Mr. +Meller for his citizenship, and I think, having been one made me value +my own greater, because I came down and sat in the courtroom and saw +what it meant to incoming people. + +I also recounted to him that one time when we were playing tennis--Mr. +Meller came to the court, and he said, "I have a letter I want to +show you," in a state of excitement, and I said, "You have?" And he +got it out and it was from the U.S. Department of State, saying "You +registered as an alien" at such and such address. "We have a request +from Australia of a sister or a woman who purports to be your sister, +and she is asking for your address. Do we have your permission to give +it to her?" + +And then Teofil said, "Nowhere else in the world would any Government +be this considerate of me. I am only an alien." + +Now, I haven't seen him because our paths haven't crossed very much +in the recent years, but I think that that incident sticks with me +because, again, I'm a stick in the mud--I have been in Missouri and I +have been to Texas, and I just have to get some experience by reading +and by studying and by talking with people, and other experiences, +but when I worked at A. Harris, I talked with some of the displaced +people who had been through World War II and through the horrors of +that period and it was a broadening of my own experience. There was +some gaining of some firsthand knowledge of the Jewish people and +their history. I read some in the area. I helped them a bit with their +use of English in the trade and they were all apologetic to me for +involving me, you see, and I said--well, I just accepted the boy as +another applicant. + +Mr. JENNER. It was the normal course, as far as you were concerned? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. And you saw nothing that would lead you to believe it was +other than the normal course as far as the Mellers were concerned and +they were activated by charity in their hearts and desire to help out? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. That's right, and out of their own suffering. It is my +observation that people who have suffered and who have helped to share, +tend to do it a little more, probably, than those who have never known +what it is to starve. + +Mr. JENNER. Do you ever recall a conversation of whether the subject +of Mr. Oswald's loss of these positions arose, and whether he said +anything on that subject? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Which positions, please, sir? + +Mr. JENNER. You interviewed him 10-10--he had been employed prior +thereto by Leslie Welding Co., I think? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. Doing sheet metal work, he says, "Made ventilators, cut +sheet metal--4 months"? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. That is a Fort Worth employer, is it not, sir? + +Mr. JENNER. Yes; it is. All I am seeking to do is to stimulate your +recollection--if you have one--as to whether the subject ever arose +in which he said he was having difficulty obtaining a position or +retaining, either way, and whether he made any comments in that area? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. No, sir; the entry which is on the application card in +"Reason for leaving" is "Laid off." I do not know whose handwriting it +is in, and I did not delve into that. + +Mr. JENNER. You didn't delve into that? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. No, sir--that says, "Dallas" doesn't it--10-62. I was +thinking it was a Fort Worth employer--I did not go into that, as I +recall, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. I think it was a Fort Worth employer, as a matter of fact. + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. I don't know--why it seemed to stick in my head that +that Leslie Welding was Fort Worth, whether he told me he had worked +briefly in Fort Worth or how it got there. + +Mr. JENNER. You have no entries in any of those papers to refer to the +fact that he had been in Russia and that he returned from Russia with +his Russian wife--why is that? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. I think that in the kind of job we are in, sir; we +never know who is sitting beside us. We are, as I say, a public agency +and there is a certain amount of information that is supplied us by +the applicant, and ours is not an investigative procedure. There is +a certain amount of information that one accepts and works from, and +I think that I would not have thought this a pertinent entry on this +employment. + +He was back in the United States. I would work on the assumption that +the Federal Government would know why he was back and had given him +permission to be back. Sometimes, with noncitizens, we ask for some +kind of an emigration card or a visa and make that kind of an inquiry. +This young man came to me, presented as an American citizen, the record +indicated that; he had served in our Armed Forces and I guess that I +would also add, rightly or wrongly, that in my judgment this could have +blocked his getting employment here and if the employer learned it by +questioning him when he was an applicant, he would make use of the +information as he saw fit. + +Basically, I try to assume that the other guy is telling me the truth +and unless it is apparent that some things don't stack up, I don't +probe and say, "Now, what were you doing between so and so and so," +or if there is a big gap which could indicate a prison sentence or +hospitalization or what have you, I would probe there. If he has his +dates befuddled, I may work with him to help him to recall or suggest +to him that maybe some home work--he ought to write all this down so +that when he is filling an application form out for work so that he can +get it accurate. + +As you well know, this is not too cosmopolitan an area, with people +with a lot of backgrounds in it, and you see "Oswald" is not again +a name that would indicate anything but an American background--the +appearance of the American, his speech, and so I just give those two +basic reasons. + +Mr. JENNER. Did you inquire of him as to whether he spoke Russian with +a view in mind possibly of recording that as a job qualification? + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. No, sir; I did not. If he had been apparently a +Russian citizen or of Russian derivation, I could well have done it, +as I enter Spanish, or Polish, or German, and I would not think that +Russian would be very helpful because all of this background doesn't +say--translator--or again any of the rare jobs or professional, does +it, and that in our classification is professional work. + +Mr. JENNER. I can think of nothing else that has stimulated me to +inquire further of you. I appreciate very much your coming over and +this has been a helpful interview and at some inconvenience to you, I +appreciate. You have been very helpful and very cooperative. Now, you +may read your deposition, make any corrections in it you wish, sign it +and Miss Oliver will have it ready sometime next week. If you will call +Mr. Barefoot Sanders' office and speak with his secretary, she will let +you know when it is ready to be read. + +Mrs. CUNNINGHAM. Let me make a note as to when and where. + +Mr. JENNER. All right--she will have it for you, and thank you again +very much. + + + + +TESTIMONY OF R. L. ADAMS + +The testimony of R. L. Adams was taken at 1:55 p.m., on April 1, 1964, +in the office of the U.S. attorney, 301 Post Office Building, Bryan and +Ervay Streets, Dallas, Tex., by Mr. Albert E. Jenner, Jr., assistant +counsel of the President's Commission. Robert T. Davis, Assistant +Attorney General of Texas, was present. + + +Mr. JENNER. Mr. Adams, would you rise and be sworn, please? + +Mr. ADAMS. Surely. + +Mr. JENNER. Do you solemnly swear in the testimony which you are about +to give on deposition that you will tell the truth, the whole truth, +and nothing but the truth? + +Mr. ADAMS. I do. + +Mr. JENNER. For the record, I am Albert E. Jenner, Jr., one of the +members of the legal staff on the President's Commission, which, as +I believe you know, was authorized to be created by Senate Joint +Resolution 137, and President Johnson added to that legislative +authority by an Executive Order 11130 appointing the Commission and +fixed its powers and duties. In general its duties are directed towards +investigating all of the facts and circumstances surrounding the +tragic event of November 22, 1963, the assassination of President John +Fitzgerald Kennedy. + +This has brought us as members of the staff and the Commission itself +to inquire into a rather wide range of circumstances, including running +down a lot of things that have arisen by way of rumor and otherwise, to +sort out the wheat from the chaff. + +One of the people towards whom our particular inquiries have been +directed is Lee Harvey Oswald, and we have testimony from a host of +people who had some contact with him during his lifetime. + +The particular assignment of our division, Mr. Liebeler and I and +others helping us, is of Mr. Oswald's life from the day he came on this +earth until his death on the 24th of November 1963. + +If I may ask you some questions--I understand you had some contact with +him or in your official capacity in the Texas Employment Commission, +you in turn have people under your supervision and direction at least +who had contact with him? + +Mr. ADAMS. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. You are Mr. R. L. Adams of the Texas Employment Commission, +and is that located at 1025 Elm Street? + +Mr. ADAMS. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. If you would, would you state your official position with +the Texas Employment Commission, please? + +Mr. ADAMS. I am employed as a placement interviewer. + +Mr. JENNER. And do you have persons under your supervision and +direction? + +Mr. ADAMS. No; I do not. + +Mr. JENNER. Tell me what is the Texas Employment Commission? + +Mr. ADAMS. The Texas Employment Commission is the Texas version of +the Federal-State Employment Service. As such, it is operated and +jointly federal-state funded, and seeks to assist those people who are +unemployed primarily through finding employment for them and in the +event that we are unable to do so, to provide them with unemployment +compensation for such time as they may be eligible. + +Mr. JENNER. I happen to be an Illinoian myself. I practice law in +Chicago--it's tied in with the Unemployment Compensation Commission? + +Mr. ADAMS. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. And those who had suffered unemployment seek the assistance +of the Texas Employment Commission to obtain for them new employment? + +Mr. ADAMS. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. How does that operate, do you--do the employers register +with you or they call you up--I would like to have you give me a normal +operation so that we can compare that background on normalcy against +what might have occurred with respect to Lee Harvey Oswald. + +Mr. ADAMS. Normally, employers in all categories of business and +industry will use many avenues to obtain suitable employees. One +of them, hopefully used by most of them, is the Texas Employment +Commission. + +Mr. JENNER. I said to you that my impression from the depositions we +have taken is that your commission does have and is held in reasonably +high regard by employers and the ones I have interviewed have indicated +that they may resort to the commission rather frequently. + +Mr. ADAMS. I am delighted to hear it. It is a selling job--this is not +your main thing, but because it is a State-Federal organization, it +has been subjected to a lot of unpleasant publicity which was formerly +known as the Texas Unemployment Commission, which did nothing to +enhance it. + +I worked on the street for a while calling on businesses and more +often than not I ran into people who were very dissatisfied with the +commission because of previous poor service, or alleged poor service, +and in the time that I have been with the commission, 2 years, I think +we have striven to improve the quality of service, both to employers +and to applicants and so employers do call us. Some of them have +standing orders with us. Some of them use us once and they don't get +what they want and that's the last we hear from them, but by the same +token we hope that all people unemployed would come to us in the course +of their efforts to find jobs. I think many people mistakenly assume +that TEC exists to find them jobs. This is not true. TEC exists to help +them find jobs and in the course of their job seeking, they, I suspect +75 percent of them, will register with TEC and with other agencies. + +Mr. JENNER. Other like agencies or private employment agencies? + +Mr. ADAMS. Private agencies and, of course, we have the continuing +battle of the public versus private activities. + +Mr. JENNER. The scope of employment, that is the work, is of great +variety, is it, the jobs that are being served? + +Mr. ADAMS. Yes; all the way from laborers up through doctors of +philosophy in varying fields. + +Mr. JENNER. Do you ever seek, for example, let's use a hypothetical +day--you mention a doctor of philosophy--let's say he had a Ph. D. in +geology, and he came to the commission. You do not have at the moment, +let us say, with respect to this hypothetical Ph. D., an inquiry from a +prospective employer. Do you mean that the TEC would in that kind of an +incident--a man of quite high education, would you seek a position for +him by calling possible employers? + +Mr. ADAMS. Yes; we would do this and we refer to it either as job +development or the projection of a highly qualified applicant to +selected employers who might be in need of such a man. + +Mr. JENNER. When did you become employed by or connected with the TEC, +as you call it? + +Mr. ADAMS. Well, I retired from the United States Air Force in January +of 1960, and attempted to be a salesman for about a year and thereby +losing my hat and shirt, and I decided I had misused the talents that I +had mastered in the service and returned to Government service. + +Mr. JENNER. That was when? + +Mr. ADAMS. I joined TEC on March 9, 1962. + +Mr. JENNER. Are you a native of this area? + +Mr. ADAMS. No, I am a Chicagoan. + +Mr. JENNER. You are--so am I. I think I mentioned that. How old are you? + +Mr. ADAMS. I am 47, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Was there an occasion when in your position with TEC you +had some contact with Lee Harvey Oswald? + +Mr. ADAMS. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. Would you relate that and give all the circumstances as you +now recall, in the chronology that you recall? + +Mr. ADAMS. I can't, except that my memory was refreshed by my office +manager subsequent to the events of November 22. + +Mr. JENNER. Having refreshed your recollection, do you now have a +recollection? + +Mr. ADAMS. Vaguely. + +Mr. JENNER. Well, give us your best recollection--your best present +recollection of this event and relate it. + +Mr. ADAMS. At the time that I--in September, beginning the second +week in September of 1963, I was brought in from employment service +representative duties, which is going out and calling on businesses to +gain some experience on a placement desk. + +After I had been there, well, when November the 22d rolled around and a +couple of months--when this happened, the following Monday morning when +I came to work, I said, "I'll bet that boy is in my files." + +I went to check and I couldn't find any record of it and the office +manager said, "What are you looking for?" And I said, "You know what I +am looking for." And he said, "I've found it." + +Mr. JENNER. Who is the office manager? + +Mr. ADAMS. Mr. A. K. Sayre [spelling] S-a-y-r-e. + +Mr. JENNER. Is he still with the TEC? + +Mr. ADAMS. He is still the office manager--yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. By the way, then, is there a lady there by the name of +Louise Latham? + +Mr. ADAMS. She resigned from the Texas Employment Commission effective +yesterday, but she lives in the local area. + +Mr. JENNER. That is Mrs. Louise Latham? + +Mr. ADAMS. Yes; but in any event, I was concerned, quite frankly, that +I might have referred him on a job, Mr. Oswald, on a job with the Texas +Depository and my office manager assured me that I had not, but he +said, "You did talk to him several times, what do you remember about +it?" "Did I make any written comments, good or bad about him?" And he +said, "No, you didn't." And I said, "Then my only recollection about +him was he was a nonentity, just another applicant who was neither +outstanding or, I mean--inadequate." + +Mr. JENNER. He made no impression on you? + +Mr. ADAMS. No. + +Mr. JENNER. What kind of records are kept with respect to job +applicants, those who are seeking positions, and they are placed or not +placed, what kind of record would I expect to find if I looked? + +Mr. ADAMS. Well, there are several--one a Lindex strip is at the +receptionist which purportedly has a listing of all of the applicants +who are currently registered with our office. Then, for each applicant +there are one or more application cards covering a primary code, an +occupational code which is that code in which we feel he is best +qualified, the additional cards being for secondary codes for other +jobs for which he might be qualified for or which he may have +performed in the past, so that there would be one or more application +cards, a Lindex strip, and the counseling records if the individual had +been counseled. + +Mr. JENNER. Now, assuming Mrs. Latham assisted Lee Oswald in obtaining +a position, a record of some kind--some kind of a recordation of that +fact would be made? + +Mr. ADAMS. Yes, on the application--on the individual's application +card, the face gives essential information as to names, address, +telephone number, birthdate, height, weight, education, the job code to +which he has been assigned, the high school from which he graduated, +the college which he attended and/or which he graduated, special +skills which he may possess in the use of business machines, and any +hobbies which might be job oriented, such as skin diving and things of +that sort, and the back side shows the jobs the individual has held, +beginning with the most recent and going back to the most significant +job he has held. + +Inside the folded card, one-half of the upper half is for comments +concerning availability of public or private transportation, the +minimum salary the individual is willing to accept, any restrictions or +qualifications the individual may place on employment. + +The other half of the upper portion indicates whether or not the +individual has been counseled. It may include pertinent information +such as the individual has been under psychiatric care, has a Police +record, anything which might be necessary in discussing this individual +intelligently with an employer. + +The bottom half lists the referrals or attempted referrals of this +individual for employment. + +Each time an attempt is made to contact the individual, an entry will +be made indicating the date when the contact is attempted, the method, +that is, whether by telephone, by telephone message or by mail, the +date on which he was referred, if he was referred, or if he was not +referred, whether he refused the job or whether he was found not +qualified; if he was referred, whether or not he was hired; if he was a +claimant, whether or not--if he rejected the job--that information was +sent to the claims office indicating that he had rejected employment or +rejected an offer of employment, anything pertaining to this particular +job offer is shown on a given line or lines, as it might be. + +Mr. JENNER. And are they now in the possession of TEC, records of that +character relating to Lee Harvey Oswald? + +Mr. ADAMS. I don't know from my own knowledge, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Would Mr. Sayre know that? + +Mr. ADAMS. It is my belief that these records are in the hands of the +FBI or Secret Service, but he would know. + +Mr. JENNER. Were photostatic copies made, do you know? + +Mr. ADAMS. That, I don't know, sir. Apparently, I did talk to him on +the phone several times, because the card indicates that I had done so +and I do not recall. + +Mr. JENNER. Well, do you recall when you were interviewed by Mr. Odum +of the FBI on the 27th of November 1963? + +Mr. ADAMS. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. At that time you appeared to have a recollection of a +telephone call from Oswald on October 8, in response to a message of +your own of October 7, 1963. Do you recall that incident? + +Mr. ADAMS. No, sir; I couldn't say that I positively do. If the record +says I did, I did. + +Mr. JENNER. Then, I take it, that a record of the transaction was made? + +Mr. ADAMS. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. If it occurred? + +Mr. ADAMS. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. And you have no recollection independent of that record? + +Mr. ADAMS. No, sir--if I might clarify that, sir, by saying that in +the case of an applicant with whom one has repeated dealings, whether +good or bad, these would stick. Otherwise, one talks to anywhere to +10 to 30 applicants a day, day in and day out, personally and by +telephone and with the exception of those applicants with whom I have +had extensive dealings either because they are problem cases or because +they are really outstanding good applicants, I don't remember that. If +confronted by one, I could be able to say, "Yes; I have talked to that +man," but otherwise I couldn't. + +Mr. JENNER. You apparently indicated to Mr. Odum, a reference on your +part on October 8, to Solid State Electronics Co. of Texas, do you +recall referring him to the Solid State Electronics Co. on or about the +8th of October 1963? + +Mr. ADAMS. I can recall having had that order because it was unusual +in the sense that I had not dealt with an order of that type before +from a company engaged in the sale of electronics parts who wanted an +individual who had had some knowledge of electronics or electronics +parts. Presumably, if I referred to--Mr. Oswald, it was because his +military or civilian background indicated he had had training in this +field. + +Mr. JENNER. Do you recall any more about that incident? + +Mr. ADAMS. No; I can't say I do, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Do you recall what the nature of the job was? + +Mr. ADAMS. As best I can recall, it was where--it was loosely what we +called a parts counterman. + +Mr. JENNER. Parts counterman? + +Mr. ADAMS. A sales clerk. + +Mr. JENNER. A sales clerk? + +Mr. ADAMS. Yes; in sales. + +Mr. JENNER. Do you recall what the salary was? + +Mr. ADAMS. It seems to me it was quite good for the Dallas area. I +would guess it was in the neighborhood of in excess of $75 a week, it +seems. + +Mr. JENNER. I take it that that reference was made to Oswald then by +telephone rather than his coming into your office? + +Mr. ADAMS. My policy as a placement interviewer, sir, is this: If I +have once met an applicant and then there is not a long lapse until +such time as I have an opening to discuss with him, or on which to +refer him, I will refer him by telephone if I think he is otherwise +qualified. + +Mr. JENNER. Do you recall his coming into the office the 8th or the 9th +of October? + +Mr. ADAMS. I couldn't honestly say that I do; no, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Would this registration card have some entry in that +respect, if he came in? + +Mr. ADAMS. Well, possibly. The policy in our office is that each month +an individual should be contacted either by phone or in person. If a +person is contacted more than once, either by phone or in person, only +the initial date for that month is shown. It is repetitive and takes up +a lot of unnecessary space. + +Mr. JENNER. Does Burton-Dixie Co. awaken or refresh your recollection +in this connection? + +Mr. ADAMS. Only to the extent that they are one of the employers with +whom I have dealt. + +Mr. JENNER. Yes? + +Mr. ADAMS. And, in making these referrals, I have found in my short +time with the Commission that it is not too wise to be bound entirely +by the employer's stated requirements. I can best explain this by +saying that as recently as yesterday I referred a young man on an order +which I had had for a week and on which I had made prior referrals of +individuals who, in my opinion, were at least as well-qualified and +certainly made a better appearance and yet this last individual was +the man who was hired. So, when I first determined this, I decided +that I would not certainly make wholesale referrals without regard to +the employer's requirements, but on the other hand, in any case where +I thought the individual was such that the employer might see in him +something that I did not see, I wouldn't take a chance. I would refer +him if I felt he met any or many of the employer's basic requirements. + +Mr. JENNER. Do you recall any incidents of any others in the agency who +sought to assist Oswald, of which you have any knowledge? + +Mr. ADAMS. Yes, sir; subsequent to these incidents, I am aware that +other people in the Commission had talked to Mr. Oswald prior to +November 22d. + +Mr. JENNER. But what you have stated is the extent of your contact with +him? + +Mr. ADAMS. Yes, sir; to the best of my knowledge. + +Mr. JENNER. I take it, and am I correct, that he was not employed or +hired by the Solid State Electronics Co. of Texas on your reference? + +Mr. ADAMS. To the best of my knowledge he was not hired on any of the +jobs to which I referred him. + +Mr. JENNER. And does the name Trans-Texas stimulate your recollection +as to any possible reference? + +Mr. ADAMS. Yes, sir; about--in late October or early November, +Trans-Texas Airways called Mr. Roy---- + +Mr. JENNER. Who is Mr. Roy? + +Mr. ADAMS. He is not the station manager, he is the--I really don't +know what his title is, but anyway, he deals with the people who are +more concerned with servicing the aircraft than with passengers. +Anyway, he advised me that the company was contemplating expansion and +he would need possibly as many as 12 or 14 ramp agents and--as they are +called by the airline industry--we call them baggage, cargo handlers, +and he gave me qualifications, minimum qualifications, to send out +those who met the qualifications. + +Mr. JENNER. Was Lee Harvey Oswald one of those you sent out? + +Mr. ADAMS. If the record indicates, he was. + +Mr. JENNER. But here again you have no recollection beyond what the +record shows? + +Mr. ADAMS. No, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Do you have any recollection as to salary, for example, as +compared with that that you mentioned--you mentioned some kind of a +figure, with respect to Solid State Electronics Co? + +Mr. ADAMS. I think that the going rate of Trans-Texas then was $210 a +month plus overtime. + +Mr. JENNER. Did Oswald report on that reference? + +Mr. ADAMS. I don't know, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Would it refresh your recollection if I told you that he +did not, and that he became employed by the Texas State Book Depository +on the 16th of October 1963? + +Mr. ADAMS. No, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. The incident to which you refer occurred the latter part of +October or the first part of November, that is with Trans-Texas? + +Mr. ADAMS. As best I recall it; yes. + +Mr. JENNER. I would like to talk to Mr. Sayre--what is the telephone +number over there? + +Mr. ADAMS. It is Riverside 7-2071. + +The unfortunate thing about it, as I said, about being a placement +interviewer is that unless there is something outstanding about the +individual or something appears in the record it is just another +applicant. + +Mr. JENNER. You interview a good many people every day, day after day, +and unless something strikes you out of the ordinary with respect to a +particular job applicant or unemployed person, that makes it stand out +in your mind, you are unable to sort out or recall specifically? + +Mr. ADAMS. Right. I could rattle off the names of half a dozen +applicants who are ex-convicts, alcoholics, or either recovered from +psychiatric treatment or who are presently undergoing psychiatric +treatment, or when I look at their record I see consistent "No hire" or +"Failed to accept employment," but these people will stick with me, but +if I recall, Mr. Oswald had not been registered too long or, beginning +with my contact--my contact with him renewed his relationship with our +placement office. In other words, as I try to visualize his card, I +don't see a whole card full of entries--just a few up at the top. + +Mr. JENNER. There is one card for each job applicant? + +Mr. ADAMS. Yes, sir; at least. + +Mr. JENNER. And if he has been back and forth a couple, of times there +might be more than one card? + +Mr. ADAMS. If he was coded. For instance, suppose he said, "I have been +a truck driver for 2 years." I will say, "Fine, you get an additional +code for truck driving," which is a 7 code, and this card, we would +either send with him to the industrial office for placing in their +files, or we would send it--he might say, "I will accept labor work," +and we would say, "Fine, we will send a card up to Forrest Avenue or +to Irving," whichever is the closest to where he lives or to Dallas +West. + +Or, he might say, "I have a degree in Economics," and we would say, +"Good, we will give you an "0" code and send it upstairs to the +professional office." So, conceivably, depending on the individual, he +could have a half a dozen cards. + +In addition, if he had been job counseled, they would have a counseling +record. + +Fortunately, or unfortunately, the employment commission, the Texas +Employment Commission, and presumably, the other 49 states, is not +in position to do any checking on people. The only way we get any +information, derogatory information, is either through the individual's +disclosing it voluntarily, or through an employer saying, "I sent this +man down for a truth verification test, and he busted it," and then we +would say, "Would you mind telling us what the information was, so that +we may not use this against the individual and try to find out what his +problem is and see if we can't help him with it." He might say, "No; I +don't care to do that," and then we would say, "Does it involve felony +or is it a matter of personality, or what?" And they might say, "There +is something odd about his personality," and we would say, "Thank you." + +This is the only way we get any information and, of course, it +sometimes backfires unfortunately. Employers will assume mistakenly +that anybody we send is as pure as the driven snow, and they may or may +not be. + +Mr. JENNER. Do you think of anything else at this time that might be +helpful to the Commission in this connection--what I am anxious to get +is the history of this man at the Texas Employment Commission. + +Mr. ADAMS. Yes; I believe Mrs. Helen Cunningham counseled him. I +believed she counseled Mr. Oswald. + +Mr. JENNER. Is she still employed by the Commission? + +Mr. ADAMS. Yes. Mr. Sayre is also her boss. + +Mr. JENNER. Maybe I can get both of them over here this afternoon and +take their deposition. + +Mr. ADAMS. It is my personal opinion that Mrs. Marguerite Oswald is +more to be pitied than censored, because if she had only taken the kid +to the psychiatrist when they asked her to--of course, this might still +have happened, but then again it might not. + +Mr. JENNER. And, of course, in a situation like this, Mr. Adams, there +are all kinds of "ifs": if somebody had done this, if only this had +been done. + +Mr. ADAMS. Well, even the little contact that I had with him, I +thought--was there something there I should have noticed and if I start +letting this get on my back, I will start examining every applicant who +comes in--he may be a potential fiend, "I'll have to watch you," and +pretty soon I'll be talking to myself. + +Mr. JENNER. Yes; you are always subject to the accusation of being a +meddler. It is pretty hard to say just where the scope of your probing +should go--a reasonable amount of probing should go and where you have +to hold down the gate. + +Mr. ADAMS. The first I knew about it was when it came out in the paper +that he had been a claimant. + +Mr. JENNER. Yes; for unemployment compensation? + +Mr. ADAMS. Right, from this district or Fort Worth, I don't know which +one exactly. + +Mr. JENNER. By the way, do you have an office over in Fort Worth? + +Mr. ADAMS. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. Do you have an office similar to this one, that is, that +aids persons to obtain employment? + +Mr. ADAMS. Yes; the State is divided into districts. The Dallas +district is unique in that it encompasses only Dallas County. Out in +West Texas, I guess, the districts encompass maybe 20 or 30 counties. + +Mr. JENNER. But Fort Worth's district--who is the general manager there? + +Mr. ADAMS. I don't know, sir. I have heard his name, but I can't recall +it. + +Mr. JENNER. Do you recall the telephone number? + +Mr. ADAMS. No, sir; I sure don't. Whenever we have dealings with them +at my level it is simply paperwork. You send a notice to them that we +have these jobs available and employers ask us to start signing out +from Dallas to find--to try to find someone, we'll say, in a 50-mile +radius, or in a 100-mile radius, as the case may be--it's all done by +paper, you see. I'm sure Mr. Sayre would know the people to contact +with them. + +Whenever we do uncover any derogatory information, well, anything +which leads us to believe that the applicant is not--does not appear +to be the type of person that we should refer, we have no way--we are +precluded from making any written comment. I would just say, "See Adams +before it is turned over." + +Mr. JENNER. And that means if an occasion arises to refer this man +or he makes an inquiry subsequently, then anybody reading the card +realizes that there might be something derogatory or at least something +special, and they should come to you and talk to you about it? + +Mr. ADAMS. That's right; for instance, an employer will report that +he thinks an individual is a sex deviate or something of that sort. +Now, in the naivete of the Texas Employment Commission, I have made +an entry, "Employer reports that this individual appears to have +undesirable traits of character," and they say, "Oh, you can't put that +in." + +Mr. JENNER. Off the record. + +(At this point Counsel Jenner conversed by telephone to Mr. Sayre of +the Texas Employment office.) + +Mr. JENNER. He said he turned over those records to the district office +and he is going to run them down for me this afternoon and call me back. + +Mr. ADAMS. I remember reading the paper that on account of his having +applied for unemployment compensation, he made a trip to Corpus and +then to Mexico and came back--it was none of my business and I never +did pursue it with the Commission, but if he had nothing to draw on, he +would certainly have applied for his unemployment compensation and it +would have been recorded, whether here, Corpus Christi, or Fort Worth +or where--the Lord only knows--I don't know. + +Mr. JENNER. That's all that occurs to me, sir, and I appreciate your +coming in and your help. + +Mr. ADAMS. I'm sorry I couldn't be more helpful. + +Mr. JENNER. Well, sometimes you people think you are not more helpful, +to use your expression, when, as a fact you are. + +Mr. ADAMS. I hope so. + +Mr. JENNER. It's hard to tell from your vantage point whether you are +or aren't, but the fact you appear here and tell us what you know is +always helpful. I appreciate it very much. + +Mr. ADAMS. I know it is like the intelligence business in the service, +you take all the little pieces and piece them together, and you make a +picture. + +Mr. JENNER. You have a right to read your deposition and to sign it, if +you see fit, and you also have the right to waive that privilege if you +wish. + +Mr. ADAMS. I would like to see it and I will sign it. + +Mr. JENNER. We will have it ready toward the end of this week or early +next week, and if you will call the U.S. attorney, Barefoot Sanders, he +will know whether it is ready for you to read and sign. Thank you very +much, sir. + +Mr. ADAMS. Thank you. + + + + +TESTIMONY OF DONALD E. BROOKS + +The testimony of Donald E. Brooks was taken at 2 p.m., on April 2, +1964, in the office of the U.S. attorney, 301 Post Office Building, +Bryan and Ervay Streets, Dallas, Tex., by Messrs. David W. Belin, +Albert B. Jenner, Jr., and Wesley J. Liebeler, assistant counsel of the +President's Commission. + + +Mr. JENNER. Would you rise and be sworn, Mr. Brooks. Do you solemnly +swear that the testimony you are about to give will be the truth, the +whole truth, and nothing but the truth? + +Mr. BROOKS. I do. + +Mr. JENNER. Mr. Brooks, I am Albert E. Jenner, Jr., a member of the +legal staff of the Warren Commission. + +The Warren Commission was appointed pursuant to Joint Resolution 137, +which authorizes the Commission to investigate the circumstances +surrounding the assassination of our late President, John Fitzgerald +Kennedy, on November 22, 1963, and then President Johnson, pursuant to +that resolution and Executive Order 11130, appointed the Commission and +outlined its powers and duties and authorities. + +We have a legal staff authorized by the Commission to come here, and +other places in the nation, and make inquiry of persons who had some +direct connection, or indirect, or whatnot, with the events, and also +those who did, or might have had, some contact with one Lee Harvey +Oswald. + +Mr. BROOKS. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. In the performance of their official duties or otherwise, +which we think might be relevant or pertinent to the inquiry we are +making. It is my understanding that you had such a contact. Do you +reside here in Dallas? + +Mr. BROOKS. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. What is your address? + +Mr. BROOKS. 2836 Dyer. + +Mr. JENNER. Are you a native Texan? + +Mr. BROOKS. No; I was born in Wichita, Kans. + +Mr. JENNER. You came here when? + +Mr. BROOKS. When I was about 4 years old. + +Mr. JENNER. But since, you have been a resident in and about Dallas? + +Mr. BROOKS. I have been a resident of Dallas since 1935. + +Mr. JENNER. You are a married man? + +Mr. BROOKS. Yes; I am. + +Mr. JENNER. Have a family? + +Mr. BROOKS. Yes; I have two children. + +Mr. JENNER. What is your business, occupation, profession, and with +whom are you associated? + +Mr. BROOKS. Associated with the Texas Employment Commission, and I am +an employment counselor. + +Mr. JENNER. Employment counselor? + +Mr. BROOKS. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. How long have you held that position? + +Mr. BROOKS. About a year. It will be 2 years in July, actually, in this +position. + +Mr. JENNER. So you became one in July of 1962? + +Mr. BROOKS. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. At the Dallas office? + +Mr. BROOKS. Yes, sir; I have been in the Dallas office. + +Mr. JENNER. Do you function in any particular division of the Dallas +office of the Texas Employment Commission? + +Mr. BROOKS. Yes; counseling department in the industrial office. + +Mr. JENNER. In the industrial office? + +Mr. BROOKS. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Now there are counseling departments, are there not, and +divisions or offices other than the industrial? + +Mr. BROOKS. There are people assigned to be employment counselors in +the other offices. + +Mr. JENNER. In the course of that employment, did the occasion arise in +which you met officially a man by the name of Lee Harvey Oswald? + +Mr. BROOKS. Yes; he was referred to me by the placement division. + +Mr. JENNER. Now give us the circumstances, first, so that someone +reading the transcript will be able to comprehend the circumstances +under which this young man was referred to you. + +Mr. BROOKS. As I remember it, he was referred to me because he had +shown reluctance to accept employment in the industrial field, and +therefore, this is one of the reasons they send a man to the counseling +division, and this is how he came to me. + +Mr. JENNER. Came to your division? + +Mr. BROOKS. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. I take it then that the Texas Employment Commission--let's +use a hypothetical now at the moment: Assume there has been an +applicant for employment. There appear to be positions open in the +industrial field. The applicant indicates some reluctance to accept, +to seek, at least, employment in the industrial field, but mentions +preference for some other field. The fact that there is a reference to +you does not necessarily mean, does it, that the applicant is one who +is inclined to "gold brick" and is not really looking for a job? + +Mr. BROOKS. Nothing in conference like that. + +Mr. JENNER. Tell us what the industrial field is? + +Mr. BROOKS. The industrial field, of course, is primarily jobs with +factories, actually. That includes skilled and semiskilled jobs, and +also in our industrial office, truck driving and service station work +is also included in this field. But primarily it is an office where the +factory employer calls in for factory laborers, whether they be skilled +or unskilled. + +Mr. JENNER. All right, now, yesterday Mr. Adams, Mr. Statman, and Mrs. +Cunningham provided some records from the Texas Employment Commission, +and I notice that on one of them appears your name, Don Brooks, and +that is what is referred to generally as an applicant card. + +Mr. BROOKS. E-13. + +Mr. JENNER. E-13 (Cunningham Exhibit No. 1), and that the other +witnesses generally refer to that as an E-13 card? + +Mr. BROOKS. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Now would you please examine that E-13 card, particularly +the inside face which bears your signature. By the way, does that bear +your signature? + +Mr. BROOKS. Yes, sir; that is my signature. + +Mr. JENNER. It says interviewer. Where it says interviewer, there is a +signature on the card opposite the word interviewer, and that signature +in longhand is Don Brooks, and that is the witness' signature. There +appears below that signature, the word "Cunningham." She was in +yesterday. That is a fellow counselor, also? + +Mr. BROOKS. Yes, sir; in the clerical and professional office. + +Mr. JENNER. Professional and clerical? + +Mr. BROOKS. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Can you explain to us the coincidence of each of you having +signed that form? + +Mr. BROOKS. Probably because this card was transferred over to the +other office, actually. + +Mr. JENNER. From your office back over to Mrs. Cunningham? + +Mr. BROOKS. And she signed below because--I wouldn't swear to this but +evidently she made some more comments in here. + +Mr. JENNER. When an interview is held, do you interviewers make +notations on this card? + +Mr. BROOKS. What sort of notations? + +Mr. JENNER. The sort of notations that appear on the card now? + +Mr. BROOKS. Sure. We give applicant's characteristics usually, and then +if there is any special information, we put it in on condition that it +might affect employment. + +Mr. JENNER. Is any of that writing that appears above your signature +yours? + +Mr. BROOKS. No, sir; I can't see any of my writing. + +Mr. JENNER. Now examine--examining the bottom half of that application +(Cunningham Exhibit No. 1), is there any writing of yours on it? + +Mr. BROOKS. No, sir; I don't recognize any of my writing on this at +all in this section, where we send them out on the job. This is where +usually the placement interviewer sends them on. + +Mr. JENNER. You are not a placement interviewer? + +Mr. BROOKS. No, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. You are a counselor. So that on the inside of the card when +folded, there is nothing in your handwriting on that card other than +your signature, is that correct? + +Mr. BROOKS. That is all I see, sir. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Now would you turn the exhibit over. Would that be the top +portion when folded that you are now looking at? + +Mr. BROOKS. Yes; this is the face. + +Mr. JENNER. Now on the face, which is the bottom half of the exhibit, +is there any handwriting of yours? + +Mr. BROOKS. Yes, sir; I see some. Looks like up in the left corner: I +see high school, 8 years in the area. Service dates also. Also a date +over here, 10-9-62. + +Mr. JENNER. 10-9-62? + +Mr. BROOKS. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. What does that indicate? + +Mr. BROOKS. That means that he was in on that date, October 9, 1962. + +Mr. JENNER. And that you interviewed him? + +Mr. BROOKS. Me; yes. + +Mr. JENNER. These notations that you have now identified, was that +information he furnished you on that occasion? + +Mr. BROOKS. Yes; this is usually the primary interview. First day, +actually. + +Mr. JENNER. Now does this refresh your recollection as to what occurred +after the interview of October 9, as to whether you had further contact +with him, for example? + +Mr. BROOKS. This evidently--I wouldn't want to swear to this. + +Mr. JENNER. You aren't certain? Go ahead, but you say you aren't +certain? + +Mr. BROOKS. I know that he was referred to me, and that is all. I was +the one that changed his occupation code. + +Mr. JENNER. Would you explain that? + +Mr. BROOKS. We assign an occupational code to our applicants, and these +occupational codes refer to specific work, whether it is a trainee job +or a semiskilled job or skilled job. And he had a previous code, I +don't know what it is now, but this 1-X4.9. + +Mr. JENNER. Now that is written in whose handwriting? + +Mr. BROOKS. That is not my handwriting. + +Mr. JENNER. That looks like Mrs. Cunningham's. I think I can tell you +that is Mrs. Cunningham's writing. That was an assignment of code made +by whom? + +Mr. BROOKS. I don't recognize her number. It was made by someone else +other than me, actually. I had thought I gave him a code number but +that is not my handwriting there. I am not sure about what code, I know +I put him in the other office, which was our clerical. + +Mr. JENNER. After interviewing him you determined he should be +classified in the clerical? + +Mr. BROOKS. Yes, sir; because he was interested. + +Mr. JENNER. And not classified in the industrial division? + +Mr. BROOKS. Yes; this was because of interests, primarily? + +Mr. JENNER. Whose interests, his? + +Mr. BROOKS. Yes; his interests. + +Mr. JENNER. Did you determine his interests after you had examined +him and your judgment as to where best he might be able to obtain +employment, having in mind those interests? + +Mr. BROOKS. Was not in the industrial office; yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Did he express an aversion to factory work? + +Mr. BROOKS. I can't tell you the words, but I got this general +impression, as far as I remember; yes, sir; and he did not want to +do factory work. Of course, we try to place an individual where he +wants--will be exposed to his job. + +Mr. JENNER. Do you have any recollection of who put on that same side +of the folded card, the face, "Lee Oswald, 2515 West Fifth Street, +Irving, Tex."? + +Mr. BROOKS. Right here, this Lee Oswald is, as far as I can tell, +my handwriting, his name. 2515 West Fifth Street is someone else's +handwriting. Just like Irving, Tex. Blackburn 3-1628 is somebody else's +handwriting. 433-54-3937. + +Mr. JENNER. That is the social security number? + +Mr. BROOKS. Yes; as far as I can determine. This carbon makes it +a little difficult. And the service date, and this where it says +none, referring to driver's license. And car, no. Those two are my +handwriting, I am sure. + +Mr. JENNER. Could I stop you there. The word "none," opposite or to the +left of the word, "license," before which there also appears a square, +directing your attention to that, is that "none," in your handwriting? + +Mr. BROOKS. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. What does that signify? + +Mr. BROOKS. That he didn't have a driver's license. + +Mr. JENNER. That he didn't have a driver's license? + +Mr. BROOKS. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. Is that a square that you make normally? + +Mr. BROOKS. Yes. This is of importance especially in the industrial +office because a lot of times a person working in a factory office +might be required to sub in as perhaps a driver of machinery, and we +always ask--pay attention to this, not because of Texas, but because of +commercial operator's license. + +Mr. JENNER. Let me inquire of you a little further on that. Does your +inquiry go beyond asking whether he has a driver's license? That is, do +you go on and ask whether he is able to operate a motor vehicle? + +Mr. BROOKS. Yes, sir. Well, not necessarily. I mean, if he doesn't have +a driver's license, he is not supposed to be driving, actually. + +Mr. JENNER. But he could get one the next day, couldn't he? + +Mr. BROOKS. Yes. Sometimes I have gone further and asked, are you able +to drive a car. I have done this on occasion. + +Mr. JENNER. Do you have any recollection of whether you did that on +this occasion? + +Mr. BROOKS. No, sir; I might have and I might not have. I wouldn't want +to swear that I did either one. + +Mr. JENNER. But your entry does indicate for certain that he did not +have a driver's license, and you made inquiry on that subject? + +Mr. BROOKS. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. All right, go on. Maybe there is something else that you +have written there to stimulate me to ask you something. + +Mr. BROOKS. We have not covered my handwriting. Unfortunately, my +handwriting is pretty easy to see. I write big. Now this--I am on the +back of the card now. Now this Leslie Welding Co. in Dallas, 4 months, +10-62, $1.25 an hour, sheet metal worker, mild ventilators, is in my +handwriting. + +Mr. JENNER. Is that something he told you? + +Mr. BROOKS. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. By the way, was this form E-13, made up in your office or +made up in some other office? + +Mr. BROOKS. The original must have been made up in my office. That is +usually the procedure, actually. + +Mr. JENNER. Do you recall whether you made inquiry of the Fort Worth +office as to whether they had what you call this ATB? + +Mr. BROOKS. This is something--oh, you mean, test records? + +Mr. JENNER. Yes. + +Mr. BROOKS. No, sir; I didn't, I am sure of this. The other office, +Mrs. Cunningham, might have, but I didn't. + +Mr. JENNER. Do you have a Mrs. Louise Latham? + +Mr. BROOKS. Yes. She works for the commission. She works in C&S. I am +not too familiar. I believe she is a placement interviewer. + +Mr. JENNER. I notice on the bottom below your signature the last two +lines appear the initials RLA. Is that probably Mr. Adams, the RLA? + +Mr. BROOKS. It might be and might not be. I am not too familiar with +the person. I know who is over there. + +Mr. JENNER. Do you recall anything about this young man? + +Mr. BROOKS. No; I wouldn't want to say. The only thing I recall vaguely +now--at the time when I was asked, I was surprised that I had taken +his application. I had not remembered it at the time, actually. I +had vaguely remembered the name Oswald, but then--when I saw about +it, I remembered that vaguely he was somebody referred to me from +the placement, actually, and he didn't want, evidently did not want +industrial work and he had an interest in clerical, and I gave him a +clerical code, although the code number is not in my handwriting. + +Mr. JENNER. It is the classification you gave him? + +Mr. BROOKS. I think that is the one I gave him. I am not certain, but I +think that is the one I gave him; yes. I mean, to say anything further, +I would have to perhaps look in the E-41. + +Mr. JENNER. In whose handwriting are the entries appearing on the +back of the card in the squares relating to summary of other work +experience. Shoe salesman, 4 months, New Orleans, La. General office +work, 1 year, New Orleans, La., 1961. + +Mr. BROOKS. This is my handwriting. Shoe salesman, 4 months, Louisiana, +central office. General--excuse me, 1 year, New Orleans, 1961. That is +my handwriting. + +Mr. JENNER. Did he supply that information? + +Mr. BROOKS. Yes; probably on the initial interview. + +Mr. JENNER. Do you recall conversing with him or going back into his +history when he was in the service or was married and where he had been? + +Mr. BROOKS. I would not want to say if I did. I usually do. But, of +course, I inquired evidently about the service or I have--I wouldn't +have put the service date. + +Mr. JENNER. Those service dates, where are they? + +Mr. BROOKS. They are on the front of the card here; right here. + +Mr. JENNER. Oh, yes. Under the heading "Entry on Active Service," +October 23, 1956. "Released from Active Service," September 11, 1959. + +But you do recall, or you wouldn't have made the entry "General office +work, 1 year, New Orleans, La., 1961"? + +Mr. BROOKS. That is my handwriting. + +Mr. JENNER. That was made in the usual regular course of your business +and in having an interview with this man? + +Mr. BROOKS. Yes; that is right. I put those dates there. + +Mr. JENNER. The back of the card, which is Exhibit E-13 (Cunningham +Exhibit No. 1), when we look at that address, that is, Lee Oswald, 2515 +West Fifth Street, Irving, Tex., that appears to have been written over +something that had been erased first. + +Mr. BROOKS. This is probably due to the fact that he probably moved. + +Mr. JENNER. Moved? + +Mr. BROOKS. Yes, sir. We have to keep, we try to keep up our address +dates as current as possible, because if we don't, there was no way to +get in contact with the applicant. + +Mr. JENNER. I see another entry of 10-9-62, and then Mrs. Cunningham of +10-10-62, and then an entry or series of entries in October 1963. + +Would I be correct in supposing that when you interviewed him on the +9th of October 1962, and put in whatever address he had at that time, +and then later on in October 1963, when he was again interviewed, he +had a new address, and the old address was erased and the new address +put in? + +Mr. BROOKS. Yes; that is the way it usually happens. + +Mr. JENNER. I will have to get the original to bring out that latent +address. Mr. Brooks, you have been very helpful to us. + +Mr. BROOKS. I wish I could remember more, actually. + +Mr. JENNER. You have added to our fund of knowledge, so don't you be +regretful. There are one or two things here that neither Mr. Statman +nor Mr. Adams nor Mrs. Cunningham could enlighten us about and you have +done so, so you have been helpful and I appreciate it. + +I know you are anxious to be more helpful as we all are, but all we can +do is get the basic facts. + +Mr. BROOKS. I want to be certain if I say something. But I wish I could +remember more about the applicant Oswald, himself, but it is hard to +do, actually. + +I was surprised actually at the time, of course, when they had told +me I had taken his application. Actually, I didn't remember it at the +time, but I thought about it. + +And the Marine Corps probably brought in back a little, and like +everyone else, I read the papers a lot. + +But I can't remember anything specific about him, just general things. + +Mr. JENNER. By the way, Mr. Brooks, you have a right to read over your +deposition if you so desire. And you have a right to sign it if you so +desire. And you also have a right to waive that if you wish. It is your +choice, one way or the other. If you desire to read it and sign it---- + +Mr. BROOKS. Did you want me to sign it? + +Mr. JENNER. Well, as a matter of fact, it would be more convenient for +us to have the reporter certify the accuracy in transcribing and just +send it to Washington so we don't have to go to the trouble of calling +you in and asking you to read it, but it is your option. + +Mr. BROOKS. No; if you don't want me to, I won't. + +Mr. JENNER. I would just as soon be relieved of it, but I don't want to +press you on it. + +Mr. BROOKS. To the best of my knowledge, that is all I remember. I +could have been confused about some issues, but I don't think so. + +Mr. JENNER. As far as you are concerned, you waive the signing of the +deposition? + +Mr. BROOKS. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. If you think of anything hereafter, there will be members +of the legal staff here next week, and if they are not, call Barefoot +Sanders and he will relay the information to us. Thanks for coming +over. We appreciate it. + + + + +TESTIMONY OF IRVING STATMAN + +The testimony of Irving Statman was taken at 4:20 p.m., on April 1, +1964, in the office of the U.S. attorney, 301 Post Office Building, +Bryan and Ervay Streets, Dallas, Tex., by Mr. Albert E. Jenner, Jr., +assistant counsel of the President's Commission. Robert T. Davis, +assistant attorney general of Texas, was present. + + +Mr. JENNER. Mr. Statman, would you rise and be sworn, please? + +Do you solemnly swear that in the deposition you are about to give, you +will tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so +help you God? + +Mr. STATMAN. I do. + +Mr. JENNER. I'm Albert E. Jenner, Jr., of the legal staff of the Warren +Commission. The Commission was authorized by Senate Joint Resolution to +provide a body to investigate the assassination of our late President, +John Fitzgerald Kennedy, and pursuant to that legislation, the +President, Lyndon B. Johnson, appointed the Commission under Executive +Order 11130, and we of the staff are enjoined by the Commission +and the Commission itself to inquire into all the circumstances, +especially that we find pertinent data, regarding Lee Harvey Oswald, to +investigate his life and a good many people, you included, either in an +official capacity or friends with other people who touched his life in +some fashion or other. + +Your employment is what? + +Mr. STATMAN. The assistant district director of the Dallas district of +the Texas Employment Commission. + +Mr. JENNER. And just tell us generally what your duties are in that +respect? + +Mr. STATMAN. Well, we have the unemployment compensation of this and +the placement office, and research and statistical branch, and an +office in Garland and in Grand Prairie. They are separate entities and +it is my duty to assist the district director in any functions there +are, and to assist in any problems that there are in any of the offices. + +Mr. JENNER. Is there any office of the Commission in Fort Worth? + +Mr. STATMAN. Yes. We are the Dallas district. Now, also, he was +registered in the Fort Worth district too. + +Mr. JENNER. He was? + +Mr. STATMAN. Yes; but our connection with him was in actually three +capacities--number one, as an applicant for a job, and as an applicant +for a job, we had him counseled. In other words, if there are any +reasons to believe that employment might be difficult for a person to +obtain due to, maybe inexperience or due to change in occupation or +some problem, we have a counseling setup that will counsel this person +to the point where we feel we can help place him. + +In other words, now, we are not equipped to give him psychological +counseling or give him home therapy. Our job is placement counseling +and we are trying to counsel them to the point where we can facilitate +placing him onto a job and counseling duties then are through. + +He was also referred to the counselor due to some apparent counseling +needs, and he also filed a claim for unemployment insurance, so those +are the three areas that he touched in the Dallas district. + +Mr. JENNER. You learned of those three areas--his touching those areas +from books, records and documents of the Commission? + +Mr. STATMAN. Well, that's true. When this FBI man came in, and I can't +think of his name--I've got his card, but I probably cleaned my nails +with it, but anyway, he came in and asked for a copy of, or the actual +documents, and we told him that we had a certain amount of documents +here and there were others in Austin, due to that interstate claim +situation, and so we gave him all of our records, and also he contacted +an FBI agent in Austin, and our Austin State office gave him some +records. + +Now, in preparing these records, then, I saw the documents that we had +on him. Now, what I have with me here is a copy of his application card. + +Mr. JENNER. Could I describe that on the record first? + +Mr. STATMAN. Yes; I think it is an E-13, let me make sure what this +number is, and--it is his application card. + +Mr. JENNER. Excuse me, sir, Mr. Statman has handed me a form +entitled--what? + +Mr. STATMAN. It's an E-13--it's an E-13 application. + +Mr. JENNER. Now, you have handed me two sheets. + +Mr. STATMAN. Now, this represents the front. + +Mr. JENNER. The top sheet I have is the front of the card and the +second sheet is the inside or reverse side? + +Mr. STATMAN. No; the inside--this is a folded affair and, let me me +fold it for you properly. In other words, this is the way the card +would look. + +Mr. JENNER. It's a foldover card. + +Mr. STATMAN. Right--like this. Now, this is an exact replica. + +Mr. JENNER. It is letter size when opened fully, and it is folded in +half. + +The bottom of the top sheet reads, "Application card E-13" (1261) and +for purposes of identification of the record what would be the back of +the card when folded, but which is the top of the sheet as I hold it +in my hand, it reads, "Describe your longest and most important jobs, +including Military Service, beginning with your most recent job." + +The second sheet which would form the reverse side of the card, +portions of which I have read and which in turn would be the inside +of the card when folded, has no form number on it, but it reads at +the top, "Do not write below this line," and then in the next line in +printing. "Conditions affecting employment," in the left-hand side, and +"Handicap description," on the right-hand side. + +Mr. STATMAN. Do you want me to interpret on that? + +Mr. JENNER. Yes; I do. [The Exhibit is Cunningham Exhibit No. 1.] Now, +this card--I will turn it now back to the front or top of the folded +card. Will you state for the record what this is and does it relate to +Lee Oswald, first? + +Mr. STATMAN. This is his application card. + +Mr. JENNER. Now, folding it in half, so that I understand it, as +folded in half--what now is facing us with the form number at the +bottom, would be top of the folded card. [The original card, of which +Cunningham Exhibit No. 1 is a copy, is in evidence as Cunningham +Exhibit No. 1-A.] + +Mr. STATMAN. Right. + +Mr. JENNER. That means that Lee Oswald had a contact with the Texas +Employment Commission and this is a record made. + +Mr. STATMAN. On 10-9-62. This card indicates that he came in. + +Mr. JENNER. That he came in on the 9th of October 1962? + +Mr. STATMAN. That was his first contact with us. + +Mr. JENNER. And what is done, then, in the normal course of this sort +of thing, when an applicant comes in for the first time? + +Mr. STATMAN. The first is--this card is filled out, and the number one +thing is to get the pertinent facts, and do you want me to give what we +have on him? + +Mr. JENNER. Yes. + +Mr. STATMAN. We have his name and his address. + +Mr. JENNER. And what address is that? + +Mr. STATMAN. 2515 West Fifth Street, Irving, Tex., and a telephone +number that indicates an Irving number--BL-3-1628, social security +number was given--433-54-3937. Now, under this is his military service +to ascertain if he is a veteran, because veterans get preference. In +other words, I don't know if you need to know that, but that pink card +indicates a veteran, and by law we are to give veterans preference, and +the information here is to again ascertain if he is to get veterans +preference. In this he listed the entry of his service date--10-23-56, +and he was released from active service 9-11-59. + +Then, underneath--another category, "If needed for work, do you have--" +and it indicates "License, trucks, uniforms, car, tools," and he stated +that he had none of these. In other words, some companies before they +will hire you, like a mechanic has to have his own tools and some don't. + +Mr. JENNER. He answered he had none of those; is that correct? + +Mr. STATMAN. Yes--none. Now, he gave his educational background--do you +want to go into that? + +Mr. JENNER. Yes. + +Mr. STATMAN. He stated that he went to Arlington Heights, Fort Worth, 2 +years, 5/56 and in that---- + +Mr. JENNER. What is 5/56? + +Mr. STATMAN. Apparently, that is when he left school--I don't know--I'm +guessing at that. + +Mr. JENNER. But that card does indicate that he told the interviewing +official of the Commission that he attended Arlington Heights High +School in Fort Worth for 2 years, terminating in May 1956. + +Mr. STATMAN. I think you can figure out, if that would be the +start--let me see--in 1956, how old would he have been--he would have +been 17 years old, so it seems more plausible that he left in 1956 than +he started, wouldn't it to you? + +Mr. JENNER. Yes. + +Mr. STATMAN. All right. He indicated courses that he took--2 years +English, 1 year general math, 1 year algebra, 1 year general science. + +Now, he indicates he has gotten a high school equivalency. That could +have been obtained either through taking a G.E.D.---- + +Mr. JENNER. What is that? + +Mr. STATMAN. General education--something--anyway, you can take a test +here and they will give you what is know as a high school equivalency, +or he might have obtained that in the Army or in the Marine Corps, but +this is tantamount to having a high school education without completing +the 4 years. + +Mr. JENNER. But indicating he did not complete 4 years? + +Mr. STATMAN. Not 4 years formal education. He is, as the name +indicates, it is an equivalent--it's a certification that the man has +an equivalency of a high school education. + +Mr. JENNER. All right. + +Mr. STATMAN. Then, he had 2-1/2 months of electronic fundamentals, +2-1/2 months radar operator. + +Mr. JENNER. Does he have some dates? + +Mr. STATMAN. That's 1957--that was prior to when he was in the Marine +Corps. Now, I can't tell you whether those dates run concurrently or +not. + +He might have had a training first and then the radar operation next. + +Mr. JENNER. By the way, in whose handwriting or hand printing is that +document? + +Mr. STATMAN. I can't be sure--some of these are self applicants. In +other words, they take it themselves, and others are prepared by the +interviewer. Now, this Don Brooks could tell you. Here is his signature. + +Mr. JENNER. Here is whose signature? + +Mr. STATMAN. Lee Harvey Oswald's. This is on a different document. + +Mr. JENNER. We will get to that in a minute. + +Mr. STATMAN. I would guess that Don Brooks did this, because it is +fairly consistent, I mean, you don't see a change of handwriting. +Usually the applicant, if he is making the application will show a +different handwriting. + +Mr. JENNER. Is Mr. Don Brooks still employed by the Commission? + +Mr. STATMAN. Yes. Usually, if the applicant makes the application and +the interviewer completes it, you can see a change in the handwritings +and you don't here. Again, I am guessing that this was prepared by Don +Brooks. + +Now, up on the top is identifying information. + +Mr. JENNER. Now, this is up on top of the exhibit as folded in half? + +Mr. STATMAN. Yes, adjacent to the identifying information--there is a +block--marital status, widow, single, and divorced, and he has checked +"Marital status." Underneath that is a block for number of dependents, +and he has indicated that he has two dependents. + +Mr. JENNER. That would indicate a wife and child? + +Mr. STATMAN. Not necessarily--it would just indicate he has two +dependents. I couldn't say he had a wife and child--knowing a little +bit about him you could say that. + +Birthday 10-15-39. + +Mr. JENNER. Is that 10-15 or 10-18-39? + +Mr. STATMAN. I'm sorry, you are right, it is 10-18-39. Height 5 feet 9 +inches, weight, 150 pounds, education--he has listed high school with +an asterisk, and the asterisk indicates he has a high school equivalent +as opposed to 4 years formal education. + +Now, in the block showing his test results, which refer to this general +aptitude test battery and which I have a document on that, and if you +want to wait, we will come to that later. + +Mr. JENNER. I do want to go into it and we will hold that off. + +Mr. STATMAN. That indicates--no, let's do go into this. In the general +aptitude battery--you have certain cutoff scores, and these scores +indicate a propensity or an aptitude in the certain occupational areas, +which are totaled by numbers. + +Now, the aptitudes that he has proficiency in or propensity in has been +indicated in the test results. + +Mr. JENNER. And those in turn you will discuss in connection with +another document? + +Mr. STATMAN. Well, you've got Helen Cunningham, who is a counselor and +she can give you a lot better information on that. + +Mr. JENNER. All right. + +Mr. STATMAN. Now, on the front in the date column--we do not always +indicate when an individual is in, only when we see his card might +become inactive, we will put it, so this doesn't necessarily mean that +these are the only times he has been in, but this does indicate, as we +previously stated, that he originally came in 10-9-62, he was in on +10-10-62, and he was in on 4-8-63, he was in on 4-12-63, he was in on +10-3-63. This R.I. indicates a reinterview. That means that he has been +previously registered and we are reinterviewing him to bring his card +up to date. + +Mr. JENNER. And the R.I. appears to the left of the entry--October 8, +1963; correct? + +Mr. STATMAN. Yes, sir. + +Now, there is just one more bit of information on this. Is your wife +employed--and he indicated "no". + +Now, we are turning this document on the back. + +Mr. JENNER. That is--it would be the back when folded? + +Mr. STATMAN. Right. Now, this is the information on the back--this is +the job history, the chronological job history, including military +service, and we are starting chronologically backwards, with the latest +job first. + +On this is indicated that he worked for Leslie Welding Co., length of +job--4 months; date ended--10/62; rate of pay, $1.25; the duties--he +has sheet metal works, and I think it says, "Made ventilators and cut +sheet metal." + +Mr. JENNER. That's correct. + +Mr. STATMAN. Okay. The next job chronologically was [reading] the +William B. Rilly Co. Do you want that address? + +Mr. JENNER. If you please. + +Mr. STATMAN (reading). 640 Magazine Street, New Orleans, La. This Rilly +is R-i-l-l-y (spelling), William B. Rilly, and this was typographical +and that was the nature of the business; length of job--4 months; date +ended--7/63; rate of pay--$1.50. + +As far as job descriptions, he just said "Photography." + +Now, the reason for leaving on both of these jobs was, "laid off." + +Then, he gives the U.S. Marine Corps, radar--April--2 years--1959. That +was his discharge. + +Then, also, we have a summary of other work history. But this is a work +history that might be pertinent, but he hasn't spent too much time on. + +Let's go back up on the fold, under "identifying information," and +there is an occupational title and a code. The occupational title +listed, "Routine clerical work." The code is 1X49. + +This "X" indicates that he has not had any experience, and this type +of work is an entry work. In other words, it is work that he might be +interested in and proficient in if he could get training in it. In +other words, they deemed that he was not really qualified for anything, +and when you have somebody without any apparent qualifications you try +to determine some sort of entry job. + +Mr. JENNER. Therefore, I conclude--do I correctly--that from this, +the interviewer concluded this man had no particular skills or +qualifications. + +Mr. STATMAN. No; this interviewer ascertained that this individual did +not have a definitive type occupation, so he was sent to the counselor +and after the counselor counseled and tested Oswald, then it was +ascertained that this area of work would probably be the most conducive +for him. + +You see, that's why he was sent to the counselor, because the +interviewer could not make a definitive description or a judgment on +his work. That's where our counselor comes in. + +Now, we are on the back. Under "miscellaneous" we had--shoe salesman, +4 months, New Orleans, La.; general office work--1 year, New Orleans, +La., 1961. + +That concludes the information on the back. + +Mr. JENNER. Now, we turn to the inside. + +Mr. STATMAN. Right. On the inside are his "conditions affecting +employment?" That would be anything that in any way could, as the +statement says, affect employment adversely or benignly. On this is +first listed, "Bus transportation." It indicates that if a job required +a car, he couldn't go. + +Mr. JENNER. Now, I am interested in that--that is a normal inquiry +made, is it, of persons seeking employment? + +Mr. STATMAN. Yes; because there are certain geographical areas in +Dallas that are not accessible by bus transportation, so when we get +an order in this area we know that the applicant has to have his own +transportation or he wouldn't be readily available for the job. + +Mr. JENNER. Does it mean not only that he does not have an automobile +to drive, but that he is unable to drive one, even if one is furnished? + +Mr. STATMAN. No. + +Mr. JENNER. It means only that he does not have that type of +transportation available? + +Mr. STATMAN. No; this bus transportation means only that in the event +that he would get a job, he would have to get to the job by bus +transportation. + +Mr. JENNER. All right. + +Mr. STATMAN. There is no indication that he can't get a car at a later +date? + +Mr. JENNER. There is no indication by that in what I am interested, of +whether he is able or not able to drive an automobile. + +Mr. STATMAN. No; it just describes the motor transportation that he +would have to employ in commuting to his work. + +Now, the next remark is "Outstanding verbal and clerical work." Now, +that was taken off of the G.A.T.B., which we will get into in a minute. + +In other words, it indicated that he had a great aptitude for +vocabulary and also for clerical type work. This is ascertained off of +his tests. + +Mr. JENNER. All right. + +Mr. STATMAN. The next is "financial position necessitates immediate +employment." + +In other words, that would indicate that even though he might be +qualified for a certain level of work, financially exigencies would +force him into taking the first thing that came along. + +Mr. JENNER. The important thing then was to get a job right away? + +Mr. STATMAN. Right. + +Mr. JENNER. And after he has gotten it, he might be able to entertain +getting some other job? + +Mr. STATMAN. Right--in other words, I might be a civil engineer, but +I've just come into town and I will wash dishes until I can get enough +money to get my immediate needs taken care of so I can hunt for a job. + +Underneath here, "Brother, junior executive, Acme Brick Co.; +brother--Staff Sergeant, Air Force," and the initials of the +interviewer that talked to him--it is 10-10-62 and it has H.P.C., which +is Helen P. Cunningham. + +Mr. JENNER. That is the lady I am about to interview? + +Mr. STATMAN. That's right. Now, as I say, this document was prepared by +two people, by Don Brooks, acting as the initial application taker, and +by Helen Cunningham in her capacity as a counselor. + +"Applicant's characteristics," this is just a word picture of the +interviewer's or counselor's idea on this applicant. We use that +in order to, when we are looking through to call in somebody for +jobs, you can kind get an idea of what impression they have made on +our personnel. Now, their impression was "well groomed and business +suit"--something. + +Mr. JENNER. I think it reads, "Well groomed and spoken, business suit, +alert replies--expressed self extremely well." + +Mr. STATMAN. Right. + +Mr. JENNER. In whose handwriting is that? + +Mr. STATMAN. Well, I don't know; it's either Don Brook's or Helen +Cunningham's, so Helen can verify that. Now, the lower half of this +inside card indicates any placement action we have taken with this +person. + +Mr. JENNER. All right. + +Mr. STATMAN. Now, we referred him on 10/10 to Harrel Huntington--I +can't read this. + +Mr. JENNER. Let me give it a try--H-a-r-r-e-l [spelling] and +H-a-r-r-i-n-g-t-o-n [spelling]. + +Mr. STATMAN. You are better at that; you must have had hieroglyphics in +school. The job was a messenger job. + +Mr. JENNER. Yes; it looks like they are architects--that Harrel and +Harrington--it looks like Exchange "Exch"; is that correct? + +Mr. STATMAN. That's probably where the job was--at Exchange Park, +the job was messenger at $1.50 an hour, and no indication of what +disposition was made. They should have posted probably "not hired" in +there and then they called him in about a job for Dallas Transit as +messenger and no referral was offered. + +Mr. JENNER. What does that mean? + +Mr. STATMAN. That means that after he got there, either the job was +filled or they decided that maybe he wasn't qualified for it. + +Mr. JENNER. What is the date of that? + +Mr. STATMAN. He was called in 10-26-62 by telephone message, so +apparently they talked to him on the phone and decided not to refer +him. Then a call-in card was sent to him--this was a message card by +mail 5-3-63. + +Mr. JENNER. That would be May 3, 1963? + +Mr. STATMAN. Yes. Now, he didn't respond to this, so we issued an E-19, +which inactivated his card. In other words, after 3 working days, if he +doesn't respond, we deem this person not available. Then, a telephone +message on 10-7-63 was sent and then on 10-8-63 he was referred to +Solid State Electronics. + +Mr. JENNER. Does it indicate the kind of job? + +Mr. STATMAN. Yes; as a sales clerk and it paid $350 a month and he +was not hired. On 10-9-63 he was referred to Burton-Dixie as a clerk +trainee at $1.25 an hour. He was not hired. On 10-15 he was called +on the phone and referred direct on the same day to Trans-Texas as a +cargo handler, and he did not report. In other words, he just didn't +show up, and then they have a notation here that looks like--it says, +"Working 10-16 R.L.A." In other words, Robert Adams in some manner of +fashion---- + +Mr. JENNER. Ascertained that he was working? + +Mr. STATMAN. Ascertained or received word that he was working. Now, our +next document--let's take the easiest one--E-40(A) (961), which is the +test record card, and that indicates the different types of tests we +give. + +Mr. JENNER. Is that on a 2-sided card? + +Mr. STATMAN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. It does not fold? + +Mr. STATMAN. Yes, sir; I'm sorry; it's like this. + +Mr. JENNER. It is 2-sided but just one sheet? + +Mr. STATMAN. Right, and then on the front is also the individual---- + +Mr. JENNER. It is half the size of a letter-size sheet of paper? + +Mr. STATMAN. Right; it is the information on the individual aptitude +profile. + +Mr. JENNER. All right, may I identify it a little further for the +record? It is marked as Cunningham Exhibit No. 2. [The original of +Cunningham Exhibit No. 2 is in evidence as Cunningham Exhibit No. 2-A.] + +Mr. STATMAN. Yes; start it this way [indicating]. + +Mr. JENNER. All right. Looking at the face of the card at the top there +is a blank for "name," which is not filled in. At the bottom of the +card, an aptitude score appears the figures sequentially: 109, 127, 99, +97, 117, 120, 97, 116, 127. + +Mr. STATMAN. Those indicate his scores in his tests. + +Mr. JENNER. On the face of the card appears in bold face caps +"Individual aptitude profile." + +Mr. STATMAN. Okay. Now, again, as I say, a complete battery of tests is +given to make up this G.A.T.B., which stands for General Aptitude Test +Batteries. + +Now, certain parts of these tests when converted, give you scores in +general intelligence, verbal, numbers, special conception, perception, +clerical, motor coordination, finger dexterity, and manual dexterity. + +Now, by a combination of some of these parts of tests, it will give +you an occupational aptitude in certain areas, which are numbered and +circled. + +Now, these occupational aptitudes or proficiencies are circled, and +these are used---- + +Mr. JENNER. The ones that are circled are what? + +Mr. STATMAN. Are the ones he has some proficiency in. In other words, +"2" means he had some writing ability. Now, I'm not that conversant +with these cards. + +Mr. JENNER. Will Mrs. Cunningham know that? + +Mr. STATMAN. She will know and she can tell you, and also he has taken +some other tests--a B-400 and a B-49. + +Mr. JENNER. What are those? + +Mr. STATMAN. I think they are clerical; you better ask her for sure. +I'm fairly sure they are clerical. Now, that's all this is. + +Mr. JENNER. What is that bottom line there that I read before? + +Mr. STATMAN. Those are the scores he made in these different parts. + +Mr. JENNER. I see. + +Mr. STATMAN. In other words, you see, he made 109 in general +intelligence, 127 in verbal; you remember she indicated he did good on +verbal and you remember she did indicate that he did good on clerical. + +Now, they have a cut-off sheet with certain numbers and you run this +down, let's say, in order to be good in occupational pattern "2," you +have to have 100 on your G, and 100 on your P, and 100 on your F, which +he did. + +Let's say, to be good--he missed five. Let's say you have to have +a 100, 100, and 100. He only has 99 on this and 97 on this, so he +wouldn't pass this pattern. So, actually, the different cut-off scores +would indicate which patterns you pass, and the patterns you pass +indicate an aptitude or propensity in certain occupational patterns. + +Mr. JENNER. Mrs. Cunningham will be able to give us that? + +Mr. STATMAN. Yes; I have been away from this a while, but they go into +automobile mechanics and maybe clerical, and the first one is literary, +art, design, and so forth and so on. As you go down, it takes less +proficiency or less mental acuity to pass a test. + +Mr. JENNER. While I am thinking about it, who is in charge of the Fort +Worth office. I can call on there tomorrow? + +Mr. STATMAN. Krizan, he is the District Director, K-r-i-z-a-n +[spelling]. That is his last name. Wayland is his first name. Now we +might have the same thing in Fort Worth that we are doing here. I think +we had some dealings with him in Fort Worth. + +Now, along with this should be his counseling card, which would +indicate the type of counseling and any responses. I can't find that; I +don't know--I know the FBI man has it. We might not have made a picture +of it or it might have gotten lost, but again, Helen remembers enough +about it to give you the pertinent details of it. Ask her about the +E-41 or the counseling card. All right, now, here is where it gets a +little complicated. + +Mr. JENNER. Now, we are going to a third document? + +Mr. STATMAN. The third document is---- + +Mr. JENNER. Is that a card also? + +Mr. STATMAN. Yes; this a card. + +Mr. JENNER. It is a folded card? + +Mr. STATMAN. Yes; it folds. + +Mr. JENNER. It is a letter-size sheet. It is marked Cunningham Exhibit +No. 3. Would you put the two sheets in the position they would be in +with the card? [The original card, of which Cunningham Exhibit No. 3 is +a copy, is in evidence as Cunningham Exhibit No. 3-A.] + +Mr. STATMAN. I'm trying to. This isn't one of our normal documents, as +I said, this is an interstate document. You know, there is a different +address on the test-record card than on the application card and you +may want to bring that out. + +Mr. JENNER. I do want to bring that out; the address on the aptitude +test card, I see, is 3519 Fairmount in Dallas. + +Mr. STATMAN. Okay. I'm sorry; I should have mentioned that to you +before. + +Mr. JENNER. Opposite the word "comments" on the face of the card---- + +Mr. STATMAN. That's G.A.T.B. in Fort Worth, June 1962, so that +indicates that he had had this complete G.A.T.B. given in Fort Worth in +1962, and maybe in order not to be redundant, they might have sent and +gotten; yes, in fact, I know they did because you see--you don't have +any indication here of the make-up, so these scores and patterns were +obtained from the Fort Worth office. + +Mr. JENNER. The date, October 10, 1962, appearing on the reverse of the +card lettered "individual aptitude tests" would, I take it, in view +of what you have now said, be the date on which the information was +obtained from the Fort Worth office? + +Mr. STATMAN. Well, no; the G.A.T.B. in Fort Worth, June 1962--that's +when he took it. + +Mr. JENNER. There is another date below that. + +Mr. STATMAN. No; you see, all this dealings has been in 1963, hasn't +it? This 1962 would probably indicate the Fort Worth action, wouldn't +it? + +Mr. JENNER. Well, what I was trying to attempt to do was bring it out. + +Mr. STATMAN. Well, everything else we have done is in 1963, so we would +have to ascertain here or assume that this 10-10-62 was the date that +the G.A.T.B. was administered to him in Fort Worth. No; that couldn't +be right either, because June wouldn't be 1962. + +Mr. JENNER. He came to this country on June 12, 1962. + +Mr. STATMAN. Well, maybe this is a mistake and it should have been +10-10-63. That would be more than likely the dates, wouldn't it? + +Mr. JENNER. Possibly. + +Mr. STATMAN. You see, everything else we have on the application +that indicates 10-10-63, wouldn't it? In other words, we have had no +dealings with him back in 1962, have we? + +Mr. JENNER. Not in the Dallas office. + +Mr. STATMAN. No, no; again, I guess you would have to postulate that +that should be 10-10-63. In other words, on 10-10-63, they recorded +this information from the Fort Worth records. + +Mr. JENNER. Taking you back to the previous exhibit, I direct your +attention to a date of 10-10-62, appearing---- + +Mr. STATMAN. No; you are right--okay--they contacted Fort Worth on +10-10-62, and received this information from them. + +Mr. JENNER. This aptitude information from them? + +Mr. STATMAN. Right. In other words, the test was not administered in +the Dallas office, it was administered in Fort Worth. Have I got you +confused, finally? + +Mr. JENNER. No; you don't have me confused; you are doing splendidly. +You are very helpful. + +Mr. STATMAN. Now, this document [Cunningham Exhibit No. 3] is a claim +document, B-3(a). + +Mr. JENNER. Excuse me, may I have this described a little more for the +record? + +Mr. STATMAN. Well, I want you to note that there is an original date on +there indicating a New Orleans address and then a Dallas address. + +Mr. JENNER. You are going to explain that--all I'm going to do at the +moment is to identify the document for the record. + +Mr. STATMAN. It is a B-3(a), Cunningham Exhibit No. 3. + +Mr. JENNER. It is a document in typing opposite the printed +designation--the name is "L. H. Oswald" and to the right of that in +printing is "SS Number," which I take it is his social security number? + +Mr. STATMAN. Right. + +Mr. JENNER. It is 433-54-3937. In longhand above that line, I have just +read, appears P.O. Box 30061. + +Mr. STATMAN. All right--now, to go on with that and also in longhand is +the Irving address, 2515 West Fifth, Irving. + +Mr. JENNER. I see there are some strike-outs. + +Mr. STATMAN. Right. Now, the original document was typed giving L. H. +Oswald, 757 France Street, New Orleans, La. + +Mr. JENNER. Is it French? + +Mr. STATMAN. France--it looks like France. + +Mr. JENNER. French, F-r-e-n-c-h [spelling]. + +Mr. STATMAN. It looks like "a" to me. + +Mr. JENNER. F-r-a-n-c-e [spelling]. We'll let Mr. Davis look at it. + +Mr. DAVIS. I think it is French, F-r-e-n-c-h [spelling]. It's French in +the writing. + +Mr. STATMAN. I'm talking about the typing now--the typing is "a." + +Mr. DAVIS. Well, the typing is "a," but it looks like the writing is +French. + +Mr. STATMAN. I was just talking about the typing. I'm just discussing +the typing with you now. + +Mr. JENNER. Okay, it is 757 France Street in typing. Following that +is French Street, stricken out, that is in longhand, and above the +strike-out is 2515 West Fifth, in longhand, and below that is "Irving, +Texas." + +Mr. STATMAN. The reason I am making a differentiation between that, is +that the typing of it was done in New Orleans because that is where +this document was originally issued. + +Mr. JENNER. Why was it originally issued in New Orleans? + +Mr. STATMAN. Because he was in New Orleans filing an interstate claim +against Texas. + +Mr. JENNER. The interstate claim being a claim of an applicant who has +been residing in a State other than Texas and he is making a claim +against the State of Texas. + +Mr. STATMAN. Well, it is a claim where a person has earned his wages +in one State and is filing in another State against the State in which +he has earned his wage credits. So, he has earned his wage credits in +Texas. He was filing in New Orleans against the State of Texas. That's +where this original document was made. + +Mr. JENNER. Does it appear from this document as to when that claim was +filed in New Orleans? + +Mr. STATMAN. I am just trying to figure out something here--the initial +claim in New Orleans was filed on 4-29-63. + +Mr. JENNER. That's the 29th day of May, 1963, when he filed the claim +in New Orleans? + +Mr. STATMAN. Then, in Texas on 5-8-63 it was determined that he was +entitled to $33.00 a week. + +Mr. JENNER. On 5-8-63 or 6-8-63--he filed a claim May 29. + +Mr. STATMAN. No; 4-29-63. + +Mr. JENNER. Oh; 4-29-63--the date of filing the claim was April 29, +1963, and action was taken on that claim by the Texas Employment +Commission on---- + +Mr. STATMAN. They made a monetary determination on it on 5-8-63. + +Mr. JENNER. On what date? + +Mr. STATMAN. On May 8, 1963. In other words, what they do is check his +wage credits, and then ascertain how much weekly amount he is entitled +to; that is, the weekly benefit amount, and how much total amounts he +is entitled to. + +Mr. JENNER. And what was the total? + +Mr. STATMAN. The weekly benefit amount was $33 a week, a total of $369; +in other words, he could draw for about 11 weeks. His BYE that's the +Benefit Year Ends on 5-28-64. All that means is that the claim is in +force to this date. + +Mr. JENNER. He would receive that amount of money per week until that +date? + +Mr. STATMAN. No; until he received a total of $369, but he had that +whole year to draw that money. Let's say he went to work for 6 months +and let's say he drew 10 checks--that would be $330, and then he went +to work for 6 months; well, between the 6 months and this 4-28-64, he +would still be entitled to draw, if he were unemployed, $69 more. + +Now, for some reason or other, he was filing in New Orleans--on these +dates, and that is indicated by the I-B-2, that means he is filing an +interstate correspondence. This information is sent to Texas and Texas +posts it on its card. Do you want all these dates that he filed? + +Mr. JENNER. Well, they are on the record. + +Mr. STATMAN. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. But what I do want to know is--he filed claims when in New +Orleans on the dates listed. + +Mr. STATMAN. Up until this point. + +Mr. JENNER. He filed those up to and including line 11, is that correct? + +Mr. STATMAN. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. So, that would mean he filed claims on 11 separate +occasions? + +Mr. STATMAN. Yes; in New Orleans. That is indicated by the I-B-1 and +I-B-2 symbols, indicating that that is an interstate claim. In other +words, he is residing in one State and filing against another. + +Mr. JENNER. Excuse me, for the record, those 11 claims--the first is on +May 7, 1963, and the 11th is on September 17, 1963, am I correct? + +Mr. STATMAN. Right. Now, the last two claims, if you will notice---- + +Mr. JENNER. Those are on lines what? + +Mr. STATMAN. Lines 13 and 14, so he filed through line 12. + +Mr. JENNER. Through line 12 rather than through line 11? + +Mr. STATMAN. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. And line 12, the date is September 24, 1963? + +Mr. STATMAN. Now, on the last two dates that he filed a claim--10-3-63 +and 10-10-63, the symbol changes to C.C., which indicates "Continued +Claim," which in turn indicates that it is an intrastate claim. In +other words, he is now filing in Texas against Texas. + +Mr. JENNER. Now, if he had not exhausted his interstate claim, that is +the amount due him, and he returned to Dallas---- + +Mr. STATMAN. He didn't exhaust his interstate claim--you know, once you +set up a claim, that's all the money you get, regardless of which State +you are in. He just happened to return to the State in which he had +earned his wage credits, so his claim reverted from an interstate claim +to an intrastate only due to geographical location, not due to any +monetary consideration. + +Mr. JENNER. Then, the explanation is--although the classifications +changed from interstate to intrastate, it was the same claim. + +Mr. STATMAN. Right--it was the same claim, it's just a matter of +changing geographical locations. + +Mr. JENNER. Of the claimant? + +Mr. STATMAN. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. Back to the State of Texas? + +Mr. STATMAN. Back to the State of Texas. You see, he could have started +his claim in Texas and moved to New Orleans and that would have gone +from an intrastate claim to an interstate claim. I had trouble with +that FBI man on that. + +Mr. JENNER. You did? + +Mr. STATMAN. Well, I mean, it can be confusing, because each State +has their own set of regulations, and actually, we have an interstate +unit in Austin that pays claims from people outside of Texas who are +filing against Texas, and we also have interstate claims the other way. +We have people who have earned their wage credits in New York and are +living here in Dallas, so, when they file a claim, they are filing an +interstate claim against New York. You see, what has happened, this +originated--this interstate claim filed against Texas, and when he +returned to Texas it became an intrastate. + +Mr. JENNER. Does that cover that side of the card? + +Mr. STATMAN. That covers everything. So, according to this, it would +indicate that he filed, now, you notice he had no signatures here. We +have these individuals, when they come to our office, sign their names +once, because they sign their individual cards, and we want to compare +their each weekly signature with a card here to make sure that the +person who is signing this claim for unemployment insurance is the one +that filed the card. + +Mr. JENNER. Whose signature appears on the inside of the card when +folded? + +Mr. STATMAN. Right; you see, here we had not his signature because he +was in New Orleans. + +Mr. JENNER. Now, when you say "here" you are referring to lines 1 +through 12, isn't that correct? + +Mr. STATMAN. 1 through 13. In other words, in the space for remarks, 1 +through 13, his signature does not appear. + +Mr. JENNER. If he were here in Texas when those claims were made, his +signature would appear on each of those lines? + +Mr. STATMAN. No; just one time. + +Mr. JENNER. At the top--meaning line 1? + +Mr. STATMAN. No; at different offices--some offices make them sign it +every time he goes in. Again, it's redundant. Actually, all you want +is a true signature to compare the continued claim card he signs each +week, to make sure this individual's signature checks. Then, when he +came in on 10-10-63 he signed this card in our office, to establish a +signature for us to be able to check future documents with. + +Mr. JENNER. All right, and to pay him any balance due on his claim, or +had it been paid out by that time? + +Mr. STATMAN. Well, he drew, actually, I can't tell you how much money +he drew, because of a lot of times an individual might file for his +unemployment and for some reason or another he might be ineligible so +he won't get any money. These records do not indicate the amount of +money he has collected. You will have to get that out of Austin--the +chief of the insurance claims. + +Mr. JENNER. Mr. Davis is an expert at that and anyhow it is his home +town. Is that right, Mr. Davis? + +Mr. DAVIS. That's right. + +Mr. STATMAN. In other words, I could go in and file for my unemployment +and they might have phoned me for a job Wednesday and I said, "My wife +is working and I have got to stay here with my kids," and I wasn't able +and available for work that week. So, even though I filed for a claim +that week, I would be ineligible, so just the mere signing of these +cards would not indicate the payment to an individual. + +Mr. JENNER. You have been extremely helpful. + +Mr. STATMAN. I hope so. I hope I didn't confuse you too much. + +Mr. JENNER. You didn't confuse us at all. + +Mr. STATMAN. Now, do you want to keep all of those records? + +Mr. JENNER. Oh, yes; very much so. I offer the three documents in +evidence as Cunningham Exhibits Nos. 1, 2, and 3, respectively. [The +original copies of the cards marked Cunningham Exhibits Nos. 1, 2, and +3 are in evidence as Cunningham Exhibits Nos. 1-A, 2-A, and 3-A.] + +Mr. STATMAN. Okay, I guess that's all right--I don't know. Actually, +our records are supposed to be confidential and we are supposed to have +a court order before we release them, but I will just leave them with +you and if I get in trouble I'll come to see you. + +Mr. JENNER. If you get in any trouble about them, we will see that they +are returned and we will make copies for you, but, of course, you can +see they are hard to duplicate. + +Mr. STATMAN. Are you going to be in town for a few days? + +Mr. JENNER. I'll be in town tomorrow and I'll be back next week. There +will be members of the legal staff here all the time. + +Mr. STATMAN. Fine. All right, I'm just going to leave these with you. +If something comes up I might have to solicit your aid. + +Mr. JENNER. You've got a certified record of the fact you left them +here. + +Mr. STATMAN. No; I don't mean that. I might should not have released +these to you without authorization from Austin, but if that comes up, +you look like a pretty good lawyer and you might be able to bring us +out of it. + +Mr. DAVIS. Yes; if you get locked up, we will spring you out. + +Mr. JENNER. Mr. Davis is from the Texas attorney general's office. + +Mr. STATMAN. I'm not trying to be negative about this, but you know, +when you deal with the State, sometimes if you don't follow the +protocol there is difficulty. + +Mr. DAVIS. If you have any question on it I would be glad to talk with +them and tell them that we have made a formal request of you to leave +them with us. + +Mr. STATMAN. All right, fine. Is that all? + +Mr. JENNER. That's all. Thank you very much. If you want to read this +over, you may. + +Mr. STATMAN. No; that's all right. + +Mr. JENNER. And you waive signature too? + +Mr. STATMAN. Right. + +Mr. JENNER. All right, thank you very much. You have been very helpful. + +Mr. DAVIS. Thank you very much. + +Mr. STATMAN. All right, I'm glad I could help. + + + + +TESTIMONY OF TOMMY BARGAS + +The testimony of Tommy Bargas was taken at 11:35 a.m., on March 30, +1964, in the office of the U.S. attorney, 301 Post Office Building, +Bryan and Ervay Streets, Dallas, Tex., by Mr. Albert E. Jenner, Jr., +assistant counsel of the President's Commission. Robert T. Davis, +assistant attorney general of Texas, was present. + + +Mr. JENNER. Mr. Bargas, do you swear that in the deposition I am about +to take of you that you will tell the truth, the whole truth, and +nothing but the truth? + +Mr. BARGAS. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Will you state your name, please? + +Mr. BARGAS. Tommy Bargas, B-a-r-g-a-s [spelling]. + +Mr. JENNER. And where do you live? + +Mr. BARGAS. 301 East Drew, Fort Worth, Tex. + +Mr. JENNER. Mr. Bargas, did you receive recently a letter from Mr. +Rankin, the general counsel for the Commission? + +Mr. BARGAS. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Is the letter asking you if you would appear and permit +your deposition to be taken, with which was enclosed copies of +Executive Order 11130, creating the Commission, and of Senate Joint +Resolution 137, authorizing the President to appoint and create the +Commission, and also a copy of the rules of procedure of the Commission +for the questioning of witnesses by members of the staff of the +Commission? + +Mr. BARGAS. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. I am Albert E. Jenner, Jr., one of the counsel on the legal +staff of the Commission, and Mr. Robert Davis is here, who is a special +assistant attorney general of the State of Texas, and is cooperating +with us and we with him and the attorney general, in the investigation +that the State of Texas is carrying on. Now, you appear voluntarily? + +Mr. BARGAS. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. And the Commission, as you know, from these papers enclosed +is investigating the tragedy of the assassination of President John +F. Kennedy, and many people have had some contact with various +circumstances and incidents involving persons who may or could have +been involved in turn in that assassination, and we have information +that you had some contact with a man known as Lee Harvey Oswald, and +we would like to inquire of you about that contact. You live in Fort +Worth--how long have you resided in Fort Worth? + +Mr. BARGAS. I have lived in Fort Worth all my life. + +Mr. JENNER. All of your life? + +Mr. BARGAS. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. You are a native Texan? + +Mr. BARGAS. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. And born and reared in Texas? + +Mr. BARGAS. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. And did you, during his lifetime, come to know a man by +the name of Lee Harvey Oswald? + +Mr. BARGAS. I only knew him when he went to work for Louv-R-Pak Weather +Co. + +Mr. JENNER. But you did have a contact--you came to know him? + +Mr. BARGAS. Yes; I did. + +Mr. JENNER. At some contact you came to know him, whatever the case +might be? + +Mr. BARGAS. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. How long have you been employed by Leslie Welding Co.? + +Mr. BARGAS. I been employed with them ever since 1962. + +Mr. JENNER. And does that include the year 1962? + +Mr. BARGAS. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. By whom were you employed during the year prior thereto? + +Mr. BARGAS. Louv-R-Pak. + +Mr. JENNER. L-o-u-v-R-P-a-k [spelling]. I take it, then, that somewhere +along the line a company known as Louv-R-Pak merged into or associated +with Leslie Welding Co.? + +Mr. BARGAS. That's right. + +Mr. JENNER. And you, as an employee of Louv-R-Pak then became +automatically an employee of Leslie Welding Co.? + +Mr. BARGAS. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Is Louv-R-Pak a division of the Leslie Welding Co.? + +Mr. BARGAS. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. And tell us, at least in general, what is the business of +Leslie Welding Co.? + +Mr. BARGAS. Leslie Welding Co. manufactures louvers and ventilators for +attics, houses--commercial and residential. + +Mr. JENNER. What was the business of Louv-R-Pak? + +Mr. BARGAS. Louv-R-Pak is the same line. + +Mr. JENNER. It was the same line? + +Mr. BARGAS. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. I use the present tense when I refer to Leslie Welding Co., +that is, what is its business--was that that you have described its +business in 1962? + +Mr. BARGAS. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. And thereafter as well, to the present time? + +Mr. BARGAS. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Now, tell me, if you will, your particular connection with +first--Louv-R-Pak and then Leslie Welding Co.? + +Mr. BARGAS. Well, I was at Louv-R-Pak just a regular employee, and +then in Leslie Welding, after it was purchased by Leslie Welding +Co.--Louv-R-Pak was--then, after a short time I became foreman down +there. + +Mr. JENNER. Foreman in the Louv-R-Pak division of the Leslie Welding +Co.? + +Mr. BARGAS. Right, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. What kind of work was under your supervision and direction +as a foreman? + +Mr. BARGAS. As a foreman it was total supervision of the plant. In +other words--assign men to their jobs and see that they carried them +out. + +Mr. JENNER. Did you do any hiring of people? + +Mr. BARGAS. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. And discharging of people? + +Mr. BARGAS. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. I take it that the making of these louvers involves welding +and sheet metal work? + +Mr. BARGAS. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. What kind of work is that--is that forming, and cutting and +stripping and punching? + +Mr. BARGAS. Spot welding and resistance welding was all they use. + +Mr. JENNER. Spot welding and resistance welding? + +Mr. BARGAS. Resistance welding and spot welding is the same thing. + +Mr. JENNER. Does the sheet metal come in size or do you have to form it +in some fashion? + +Mr. BARGAS. We have to form it in various different sizes to +specifications called for. + +Mr. JENNER. And then, the louvers are spot welded and placed--they are +moved up and down in various directions, are they? + +Mr. BARGAS. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Does Leslie Welding Co. have any plants other than in Fort +Worth? + +Mr. BARGAS. It has one in Atlanta, Ga. + +Mr. JENNER. Is its home office located here or in Atlanta, Ga.? + +Mr. BARGAS. No, sir; it is located in Chicago. + +Mr. JENNER. In Chicago proper or some suburb of Chicago? + +Mr. BARGAS. In a suburb. + +Mr. JENNER. Is that Melrose Park or Franklin Park? + +Mr. BARGAS. Franklin Park. + +Mr. JENNER. Have you ever been up there? + +Mr. BARGAS. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Are there any production facilities there at Franklin Park? + +Mr. BARGAS. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. That's near O'Hare Field? + +Mr. BARGAS. It is near to O'Hare Field. + +Mr. JENNER. And, near Mannheim Road--I think Mannheim Road bisects +Franklin Park, doesn't it? + +Mr. BARGAS. I'm not too familiar with it, but I did travel on Mannheim +Road. I remember that, but I'm not too familiar with the area. + +Mr. JENNER. Did someone by the name of Lee Harvey Oswald ever work for +Leslie Welding Co. here in Fort Worth? + +Mr. BARGAS. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Did you have anything to do with that? + +Mr. BARGAS. In what manner? In what respect? + +Mr. JENNER. Well, did you hire him, for example? + +Mr. BARGAS. Well, he came down--we called in for men at the Texas +employment office and they sent him down and naturally he was +interviewed. + +Mr. JENNER. Did you do the calling in? + +Mr. BARGAS. I don't do the calling in, no. + +Mr. JENNER. You told somebody working for you or under your direction +to call the Texas Employment Agency? + +Mr. BARGAS. Well, the secretary called. + +Mr. JENNER. At your direction, however? + +Mr. BARGAS. Right. + +Mr. JENNER. And what did you tell her you wanted in the way of an +employee? + +Mr. BARGAS. I wanted a suitable employee that we could train that had +some sheet metal experience, that we could train--that was willing to +learn, starting at a low grade. + +Mr. JENNER. When was this? + +Mr. BARGAS. I do not know exactly the date. + +Mr. JENNER. I have a date in my notes of July 17, 1962, does that +approximate it? + +Mr. BARGAS. That's approximately right. + +Mr. JENNER. It was in 1962? + +Mr. BARGAS. I believe it was. + +Mr. JENNER. And it was in July sometime? + +Mr. BARGAS. Sometime in July. + +Mr. JENNER. Along about the middle of July? Is that correct? + +Mr. BARGAS. Yes; somewhere around in there. + +Mr. JENNER. In response to this message that had been transmitted to +the Texas State Employment Agency, somebody by the name of Lee Oswald +came to your place of business, to the factory, and you had made it +clear through your secretary, who called on your behalf, that you were +seeking somebody who was going to start at the bottom, to be trained, +that if he had some sheet metal experience that would be fine? + +Mr. BARGAS. That's right. + +Mr. JENNER. But, whoever this employee or prospective employee would +be, would start at a low rate and it would be contemplated that he +would be trained? + +Mr. BARGAS. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Now, Lee Oswald came on the scene--do you recall your +meeting with him? + +Mr. BARGAS. No--not very distinctly--no. + +Mr. JENNER. Do you relatively frequently have occasion to seek new +employees? + +Mr. BARGAS. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. This was not out of the ordinary? + +Mr. BARGAS. No, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. It was just in the regular course of business? + +Mr. BARGAS. Right. + +Mr. JENNER. And neither the nature of the employment, nor the man +himself in either respect--was there anything unusual or particular +about it? + +Mr. BARGAS. No--none whatever. + +Mr. JENNER. And tell us about that meeting, to the extent you can +recall it. + +Mr. BARGAS. Well, it's pretty hard because I meet so many people that's +come in and out. + +Mr. JENNER. I appreciate that--it may be important to us, Mr. Bargas, +that your recollection is exactly what it is, that this employment was +just the usual, ordinary sort of thing and that he didn't impress you +greatly--don't you be embarrassed at all--all we want to find out from +you is what your personal recollection is and what you remember, that's +all. + +It may be just as important to us that you remember very little, +because it was not extraordinary, as your remembering something +particular about it. Give us what you now recall took place. + +Mr. BARGAS. Well, the only thing that I remember taking place was him +coming into the plant. + +Mr. JENNER. And he came to see you--or he was directed to you? + +Mr. BARGAS. He was directed to me, and he came in and I gave him an +application to fill out and we talked and I gave him instructions of +what I expected of the men when he came to be employed there. + +Mr. JENNER. Would you tell us as best you can now recall that +conversation--what you told him--what did you expect, what did you say +to him that you expected? + +Mr. BARGAS. Well, I have three basic rules that I go by--one, is that I +expect a man to be there on time and I expect him, when he punches in +in the morning to be prepared to work, and if he is going to be absent +for any reason at all, I expect him to call in in the morning before +10 o'clock which is one of our company rules, and then I went along +stating what he would be doing, where he would be working---- + +Mr. JENNER. All right, tell us what you said to him, in substance. + +Mr. BARGAS. What I said to him in substance probably was--I usually +tell them, "You will be working in this department," and---- + +Mr. JENNER. Which department? + +Mr. BARGAS. The turbine department. + +Mr. JENNER. The turbine department? + +Mr. BARGAS. The turbine department, and that's another ventilator which +we make, and this ventilator requires a little cutting to do with the +shears, and he told me that he had had sheet metal experience while he +was in the service. + +Mr. JENNER. All right, go ahead. + +Mr. BARGAS. And so---- + +Mr. JENNER. What kind of cutting--you say with the shears--is it a +power-operated shears? + +Mr. BARGAS. A power-operated shears. + +Mr. JENNER. Go ahead. + +Mr. BARGAS. And then after that, I put him to work. + +Mr. JENNER. Now, I would like to stick to that beginning a little +bit--do you recall what inquiries you made of him as to his immediate +history, that is, did you inquire of him as to past positions, if any, +he had held? + +Mr. BARGAS. No. + +Mr. JENNER. When you talked with him, I take it from your answer that +you did inquire of him as to what sheet metal work experience he had +had, if any? + +Mr. BARGAS. If any. + +Mr. JENNER. And his response was--what did he say? + +Mr. BARGAS. Well, he said he had had some when he was in the service +and that's all, and he didn't give no full detail as to what he was +doing or how he was doing it. + +Mr. JENNER. And you didn't inquire? + +Mr. BARGAS. No; I didn't. + +Mr. JENNER. I take it, then, at that stage of the game it was your +impression or your thought, since this was to be a low hourly rated +employee, that you would soon find out if he had any experience? + +Mr. BARGAS. Right, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. And you intended to train him in any event? + +Mr. BARGAS. Right. + +Mr. JENNER. Now, do you have any recollection of his appearance on that +occasion, how he was attired with respect to cleanliness, did he have a +suit coat on, a jacket, or a T-shirt, or if you have no recollection, +then just say you don't? + +Mr. BARGAS. No. + +Mr. JENNER. This was just an employment in the ordinary course of +business that you do frequently? + +Mr. BARGAS. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. And nothing with respect to this man impressed you or now +stands out? + +Mr. BARGAS. No. + +Mr. JENNER. At this initial interview? + +Mr. BARGAS. No. + +Mr. JENNER. Do you recall inquiring of him as to where he lived? + +Mr. BARGAS. No. + +Mr. JENNER. As to whether he had a telephone or not? + +Mr. BARGAS. No. + +Mr. JENNER. Was he married--did he have a family? + +Mr. BARGAS. The only thing--he was married but he never stated--he +never said what nationality his wife was or anything like that. As a +matter of fact, he never--we never communicated that much. In other +words, we didn't talk--we didn't communicate between each other that +much. + +Once or twice I tried to talk with him, you know, we usually try to +find out how the employees are getting along, whether they like their +jobs they are working at and if not, then we try to place them in a +different position, and I make them satisfactory and that way I feel +that a man can put out more. + +Mr. JENNER. That's right. + +Mr. BARGAS. And so, I tried to talk to him once or twice and all I +would get "yes", "no" and that was it, and as long as I gave him the +job he went and done it as everybody else in the plant, so I didn't +have no grudge on him or nothing at all. I assigned him a job and he +done it and I was satisfied. + +Mr. JENNER. He was a somewhat uncommunicative person? + +Mr. BARGAS. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. But this did not interfere with his work? + +Mr. BARGAS. No, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. As far as you were concerned, even though he was +uncommunicative, he was doing his work and he wasn't causing any +trouble, so as far as his personality was concerned, you let that pass? + +Mr. BARGAS. It was satisfactory with me. + +Mr. JENNER. What kind of an employee was he, or what is your impression +and present recollection? + +Mr. BARGAS. Well, as much as I can remember of the short time he was +there, it was a very short time he was there--he was a good employee. I +imagine if he pursued that trade, he might have come out to be a pretty +good sheet metal man--I don't know. + +Mr. JENNER. But at least that's your impression? + +Mr. BARGAS. That's my impression. + +Mr. JENNER. I take it he did not volunteer anything with respect to his +past or his family or his current activities outside the plant? + +Mr. BARGAS. No. + +Mr. JENNER. What were his relations, if any, with respect to other +employees? + +Mr. BARGAS. None whatever. + +Mr. JENNER. Do you mean by that that he kept to himself? + +Mr. BARGAS. Totally. + +Mr. JENNER. Totally--what about lunch times--employees usually get +together at lunch time? + +Mr. BARGAS. Well, everybody used to get together over there except +himself. He would take his lunch and move over to the side there and +eat his lunch by himself and he didn't talk to nobody about nothing, so +nobody ever even messed with him, I mean as far as that's concerned. + +Mr. JENNER. What impression did you have as to whether he was +indifferent to his work, happy with his work--what impression do you +have as to his reaction to his work? + +Mr. BARGAS. None that I can remember. + +Mr. JENNER. Nothing stands out? + +Mr. BARGAS. No. + +Mr. JENNER. Do you have any impression as to whether he ever sought to +be particularly industrious or tried to impress you? + +Mr. BARGAS. No; the only thing I can remember--he just done his +job--that's all. + +Mr. JENNER. He was prompt, was he, in the mornings? + +Mr. BARGAS. As far as I can remember he was there every day. + +Mr. JENNER. And he had a good attendance record, as far as you can +recall? + +Mr. BARGAS. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. Do you have any recollection of anybody employed at the +plant with whom Oswald did or might have associated after work hours or +on weekends? + +Mr. BARGAS. No. + +Mr. JENNER. And as far as you observed, during the days of employment, +he kept pretty much to himself anyhow? + +Mr. BARGAS. That's right. + +Mr. JENNER. Did you ever observe anything with respect to his +temperament--was he quick tempered, was there any incident that +occurred that would give you a basis for an opinion? + +Mr. BARGAS. No. + +Mr. JENNER. How long did he work there, to the best of your +recollection? + +Mr. BARGAS. I believe it was up until September, if I'm not mistaken, +somewhere right along in there. + +Mr. JENNER. Would this serve to refresh your recollection, that he +worked until on or about October 8th 1962? + +Mr. BARGAS. No; I don't remember. + +Mr. JENNER. Could he have worked until October 8th? + +Mr. BARGAS. It is possible. + +Mr. JENNER. But your present recollection is more like sometime in the +course of September when his employment was terminated? + +Mr. BARGAS. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. What were the circumstances respecting the termination of +his employment? + +Mr. BARGAS. Well, what happened is--he went home one day, not during +working hours, but it was right after the regular working hours. + +Mr. JENNER. After the regular quitting time? + +Mr. BARGAS. After quitting time at 4:30, and he went home and he didn't +give any indication of whether he was going to quit or he was going to +leave or anything like that. + +Mr. JENNER. You expected him back the next day? + +Mr. BARGAS. I expected him back the next morning and if I'm not +mistaken, it was Friday, and Monday he didn't show up, I believe it +was; if I'm not mistaken--I can't place it, and so he didn't call in +and he didn't have a phone, as far as I can remember, so I never tried +to get in contact with him or anything like that, and I figured he may +have someone to call in or something like that, so I just let it ride, +and then he didn't show up the second day after that, so all I said +then was, "Well, I imagine he quit because a line of guys had done the +same thing." + +In other words, a lot of them just never did show up and that's +all that happened. They would come back on the following Friday or +something like that and say, "I quit, I've got another job." That's +what the other guys would say. + +Well, he was different--when he left the only thing he done was he +wrote in to the plant and told us where to send his check to. He said +he was up there in Irving somewhere--I don't remember the address or +exactly what place it was, but as far as I know that was it. I never +had seen him since then and the last time I heard of him was when his +name sounded off on the radio. + +Mr. JENNER. Where were you then? + +Mr. BARGAS. I was there at the plant. + +Mr. JENNER. This was in the afternoon of November 22d? + +Mr. BARGAS. Right. + +Mr. JENNER. Of 1963? + +Mr. BARGAS. Right. + +Mr. JENNER. And you heard his name broadcast on the radio? + +Mr. BARGAS. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. And that awakened your memory? + +Mr. BARGAS. Well, it come to me--in other words--the name right +there, it rang a bell--in other words, because I remember some of the +names--in other words, when they say them, I can more or less remember +them, and then I even said to myself, well, I wasn't too sure of it +then, you know, because there are so many Oswalds, so when I got home +that afternoon, I was watching the television and there they came with +a flash picture of him and I remembered him. + +Mr. JENNER. On the television? + +Mr. BARGAS. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. And the flash picture you saw was Lee Harvey Oswald who had +been an employee under your supervision and direction? + +Mr. BARGAS. Yes--he was the one that had been employed there. + +Mr. JENNER. You recognized him? + +Mr. BARGAS. I recognized him. + +Mr. JENNER. And, did that excite you to look at other television +showings to confirm your recollection that the man under arrest by the +Dallas City Police was Lee Harvey Oswald, a former employee of Leslie +Welding Company? + +Mr. BARGAS. Well, I followed the whole thing pretty well. I mean--it +wasn't that I was interested in knowing whether I knew the man, because +it didn't impress me very much of having known the man that done the +deed that he did, but I did follow it pretty close and as I said, as I +followed him more and more, I remembered him more and more. + +Mr. JENNER. During the period of his employment, that was approximately +a couple of months or a little more--more or less--did he evidence any +disposition toward physical violence, quick temper, arguments with +fellow employees, or anything of that nature? + +Mr. BARGAS. None that I can remember. + +Mr. JENNER. I show you Commission Exhibits 451 and 453 through 456, +inclusive, and ask you to examine those photographs and tell me if +the man depicted on those photographs, in your opinion, bears any +resemblance to Lee Harvey Oswald? + +Mr. BARGAS. [Examining exhibits referred to.] None of them. + +Mr. JENNER. He does not? + +Mr. BARGAS. No. + +Mr. JENNER. What about his skills, did he do a reasonably satisfactory +job? + +Mr. BARGAS. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. Mr. Bargas, I think that's about all the questions I have. +I would like to ask you, however, this general question as to whether +anything has occurred to you, any incident or anything else that has +come to your mind that you think might be helpful to the Commission in +its investigation of the assassination of President Kennedy? + +Mr. BARGAS. No. + +Mr. JENNER. All right. You are privileged to read your deposition, if +you wish to, and to sign it, if you wish to. It isn't required and you +may waive it if you see fit--that is--forego it. + +Miss Oliver will have it ready sometime during the week if you want to +call in to Mr. Sanders' office, the United States Attorney's office, +and come in and read it, you have a right to have a copy of your +deposition if you wish to purchase one, and Miss Oliver will be quite +willing to sell you one at whatever her rates are. + +Do you have any preferences in this connection? + +Mr. BARGAS. I would like to have one of those depositions--yes. + +Mr. JENNER. When you call into Mr. Sanders and he will put you in touch +with Miss Oliver and you can make arrangements with her for a copy, and +I appreciate your coming in and regret any inconvenience to you, but +you have been helpful to us. + +Mr. BARGAS. Well, I'm glad I have. As far as I know--I don't know--as +much as I knew about the man, I don't think I can tell you enough--as +much as I thought I knew the man. If I had known anything like that +about the man, he would have never been employed there. + +Mr. JENNER. Well, so say we all. + +Mr. BARGAS. But it's just one of those things. + +Mr. JENNER. Thank you very much. I appreciate it. + +Mr. BARGAS. All right. + + + + +TESTIMONY OF ROBERT L. STOVALL + +The testimony of Robert L. Stovall was taken at 3:30 p.m., on March 30, +1964, in the office of the U.S. Attorney, 301 Post Office Building, +Bryan and Ervay Streets, Dallas, Tex., by Mr. Albert E. Jenner, Jr., +assistant counsel of the President's Commission. Robert T. Davis, +assistant attorney general of Texas, was present. + + +Mr. JENNER. Mr. Stovall, would you please rise and be sworn. Do you +swear in your testimony that you will tell the truth, the whole truth, +and nothing but the truth? + +Mr. STOVALL. Yes; I do. + +Mr. JENNER. You are Robert L. Stovall? + +Mr. STOVALL. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. That's [spelling] S-t-o-v-a-l-l? + +Mr. STOVALL. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. You are president of Jaggars-Chiles-Stovall, 523 Browder, +here in Dallas, is that right? + +Mr. STOVALL. Right. + +Mr. JENNER. Mr. Stovall, my name is [spelling] J-e-n-n-e-r, Albert E. +Jenner, Jr., and I am a member of the legal staff of the Commission +appointed to investigate the assassination of President Kennedy. You +received from Mr. Rankin, the general counsel of the Commission, a +letter in which he enclosed, three documents--Joint Resolution 137 +authorizing the creation of the Commission, Executive Order 11130 of +President Johnson, creating the Commission, and then the Rules of +Procedure of the Commission itself. + +Mr. STOVALL. Right. + +Mr. JENNER. And you appear voluntarily in an effort to assist the +Commission in its work? + +Mr. STOVALL. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. We are investigating as you notice in those papers all the +possible pertinent facts and circumstances surrounding that horrible +event, to see if we can enlighten the citizenry of the country and at +least get all of the facts recorded, and in the main, as a matter of +fact, get rid of a lot of rumors that keep cropping up here and there, +and since Lee Oswald was employed by your company, we would like to +make some inquiries of your company, if we may. + +Mr. STOVALL. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. Are you a native of Dallas, Texas? + +Mr. STOVALL. Dallas; yes. + +Mr. JENNER. How old are you, by the way? + +Mr. STOVALL. Forty-three. + +Mr. JENNER. And is this your company--is it a corporation or a +partnership? + +Mr. STOVALL. It is a corporation. + +Mr. JENNER. Are you the principal shareholder? + +Mr. STOVALL. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. Did you organize the company? + +Mr. STOVALL. No; this is the second generation of the company. The +original founders disposed of their holdings about 3-1/2 years ago. + +Mr. JENNER. Disposed of them to you and your family? + +Mr. STOVALL. And several of our employees. + +Mr. JENNER. And you have been with the company how long? + +Mr. STOVALL. Twenty-five years. + +Mr. JENNER. That has been, I gather then, considering your age--your +entire business career has been spent with Jaggars-Chiles-Stovall? + +Mr. STOVALL. Well, except while I was in the Navy and I worked summers +while I was going to college. + +Mr. JENNER. Where did you attend the university, by the way? + +Mr. STOVALL. I went to Texas Tech and SMU. I attended SMU at night and +worked in the day. + +Mr. JENNER. What does your company do? + +Mr. STOVALL. We are in the typographic services. We serve advertising +agencies, advertising departments, and the graphic arts industry as a +middle supplier for type services. We also produce newspaper mats for +duplication throughout the United States. + +Mr. JENNER. Do you do any work for any federal agency? + +Mr. STOVALL. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Is it secret or confidential work or classified work of any +kind? + +Mr. STOVALL. On occasion we do. Most of it is not, but we do on +occasion. We are cleared through the Navy Bureau Materiel here, +although I believe it now has been incorporated under the Department of +Defense as a single unit. + +Mr. JENNER. Without disclosing any secrets in that connection or +classifications, what is the nature of that work? + +Mr. STOVALL. Generally speaking, the nature of the work is charting +and mapping, and actually all we do is set words, letters, and +figures. We have no correlation of what they refer to. + +Mr. JENNER. It's charting of coastal areas, sea bottoms, and some land +areas or what? + +Mr. STOVALL. Yes; and some foreign areas, too. + +Mr. JENNER. That is, other than continental United States? + +Mr. STOVALL. Yes; right. + +Mr. JENNER. Was any of this work done in the department or area to +which Lee Oswald had access while he was employed by your company? + +Mr. STOVALL. Not in the department at all. Whatever secret work we +might have been performing, we do it with the persons who had been +cleared by the regular procedures and they are the only eyes who view +this. + +Mr. JENNER. So, anything that is classified is done only by employees +of yours who have been cleared by an appropriate Federal agency? + +Mr. STOVALL. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. And then, I gather that as far as Lee Harvey Oswald is +concerned, he had no part in it nor access to any of this work? + +Mr. STOVALL. This is correct. + +Mr. JENNER. And that your company is at pains to see that no one other +than those who are cleared have access to it? + +Mr. STOVALL. That is correct. + +Mr. JENNER. And that was true while he was working for you? + +Mr. STOVALL. Yes. In fact, at such times as we have any secret work +going, even at the point of being rude, we see that no one has access +to any of this material. I won't say--rude--but we strictly enforce it. + +Mr. JENNER. Well, you make it pretty firm, which is right? + +Mr. STOVALL. Right. + +Mr. JENNER. Do you do any lithography work? + +Mr. STOVALL. No. + +Mr. JENNER. Do you do any printing of advertisements, papers, +newspapers, periodicals? + +Mr. STOVALL. No. + +Mr. JENNER. You set type, of course? + +Mr. STOVALL. We set type. The only printing we do is a proving process, +and that should we do an ad, let's say some of the Savings Bond +Committee and ship one hundred mats, we would also ship one hundred +proofs. + +Mr. JENNER. You pull off proofs but your presses are proof presses, and +that's all? + +Mr. STOVALL. Right; we have no printing presses in this regard. + +Mr. JENNER. I take it you do a lot of camera work? + +Mr. STOVALL. Considerable; yes. + +Mr. JENNER. But it is commercial camera work? + +Mr. STOVALL. Right; it isn't even photography. It is only the part of +reducing and enlarging printed material that we set in our type shop. +It has to be re-sized and we also make screen veloxes. + +Mr. JENNER. Explain for the record what that is. + +Mr. STOVALL. A velox is a photographic print that has been screened +by a dot press to separate the tone values in order that a camera can +shoot them in black and white or in any group of colors, but it breaks +it down into minute units that a camera will recognize. + +Mr. JENNER. That's like half tones for newspaper printing? + +Mr. STOVALL. Right. + +Mr. JENNER. Do you do any plate work other than the mats? + +Mr. STOVALL. No. + +Mr. JENNER. Is the term "microdot printing" or lithographing familiar +to you? + +Mr. STOVALL. Lithography is--microdot printing is not. + +Mr. JENNER. And you don't do any work of that nature and character? + +Mr. STOVALL. No. + +Mr. JENNER. Other than the preparation of or use of dot work as you +have already described it? + +Mr. STOVALL. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. You personally have no familiarity with microdot reduction +of some image? + +Mr. STOVALL. No; we have no equipment and I have no experience in that. +I am familiar with the microfilm as to the advantages of it from the +standpoint of storage and so forth, but as to participating in any +microfilming operation, we don't. + +Mr. JENNER. Or any microdot in printing? + +Mr. STOVALL. No, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. For example, taking a 24 by 24 printed sheet and microdot +reducing it to less than the area of a postage stamp. + +Mr. STOVALL. There are several specialty houses here and this is all +done by Recordak and it is a specialty with them and they have the +equipment. + +Mr. JENNER. But you have none and you have never done it? + +Mr. STOVALL. No. + +Mr. JENNER. Do you recall the circumstances under which Lee Harvey +Oswald was employed by your company? + +Mr. STOVALL. I know the circumstances only from the statement made +by John Graef, the fellow you interviewed this morning. He made the +interview himself. We were in the market for a trainee to learn this +simple photoprint process. He has had a connection with the Employment +Commission and the State Employment Commission for a quite a few years +in that we use their services. That's what they are for. + +Mr. JENNER. You personally had nothing to do with Oswald's initial +employment? + +Mr. STOVALL. No. + +Mr JENNER. That was Mr. Graef? + +Mr. STOVALL. Yes; he is the head of that department. + +Mr. JENNER. Were you aware of his progress or lack of it? + +Mr. STOVALL. Yes--through their information. + +Mr. JENNER. Through reports from Mr. Graef? + +Mr. STOVALL. Right. + +Mr. JENNER. And he kept you advised from time to time? + +Mr. STOVALL. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. And you were personally aware of Oswald's progress or lack +of it? + +Mr. STOVALL. Right. + +Mr. JENNER. And were there any incidents that came to your attention +with respect to Oswald's relations with other employees? + +Mr. STOVALL. Not that I personally know of--on occasion one or two +fellows would mention that they didn't have any real liking for him +because he was such an oddball, but as far as I'm concerned, I never +spoke to the fellow. + +Mr. JENNER. You saw him in and about the premises, however? + +Mr. STOVALL. Yes, sir; I have seen him in and about the premises. + +Mr. JENNER. Did any occasion arise in which the subject of his +conversation or his talking about Russia arose or was reported to you? + +Mr. STOVALL. Only after he left our employ was any mention made of it. + +Mr. JENNER. Tell us about that. + +Mr. STOVALL. He sought employment at another company here in town, a +printing company. + +Mr. JENNER. Do you recall the name of that company? + +Mr. STOVALL. Padgett Printing Co.--Padgett Printing and Lithographing +Co., and the superintendent over there called me and he gave us as a +reference. + +Mr. JENNER. Do you know the superintendent's name? + +Mr. STOVALL. Ted Gangel. + +Mr. JENNER. Would you spell it, please? + +Mr. JENNER. G-a-n-g-e-l [spelling], or G-a-n-g-l--I won't be sure. + +Mr. JENNER. They are here in Dallas? + +Mr. STOVALL. Yes--he's their superintendent. He called me and asked me +and I told him I did not know, but I would check, so I asked John Graef +and they said this fellow was kind of an oddball, and he was kinda +peculiar sometimes and that he had had some knowledge of the Russian +language, which--this is all I knew, so I told Ted, I said, "Ted, I +don't know, this guy may be a damn Communist. I can't tell you. If I +was you, I wouldn't hire him." So, he didn't, but he did come out of +the Marines and supposedly he had a discharge that was satisfactory but +I did not ever see this discharge. + +Mr. JENNER. Was anything said in connection with your inquiries at that +time about his having had a Russian language newspaper around your +place of employment? + +Mr. STOVALL. One of the fellows mentioned that he thought he might +have, but in further discussion he was unable to pinpoint whether he +was positive of this or whether he just thought it was. This fellow +Ofstein--I think he made mention of it, the fact that he thought he +might have seen one. + +Mr. JENNER. Well, he said not only did he see it, but that he read it. +He had some command of the Russian language himself. He was a student +at the Service Language School in Monterey, Calif., when he was in the +service. + +Mr. STOVALL. Actually, when I was talking to this fellow Padgett, I was +really just shooting off my mouth, but it seemed the way it turned out, +that maybe there was a little bit of founding to it. + +Mr. JENNER. Was there anything that came to your attention about his +discharge from the Marines? + +Mr. STOVALL. No; I really didn't know any particulars on it until this +incident happened. + +Mr. JENNER. It was subsequent to November 22, 1963? + +Mr. STOVALL. No, previous to that. + +Mr. JENNER. Did it ever come to your attention of Oswald having any +contact with any of your employees subsequent to the termination of his +employment? + +Mr. STOVALL. Not that I know of. + +Mr. JENNER. I have here Commission Exhibit 427, which purports to +be the original of an employee identification questionnaire of your +company, with respect to Lee Harvey Oswald, and would you look at it, +please? + +Mr. STOVALL. (Examining instrument referred to.) + +Mr. JENNER. And are you familiar in fact with what it purports to be? + +Mr. STOVALL. Yes; this is the employment card that we had on him. + +Mr. JENNER. And that is part of your original books and records of your +company, kept in the usual and regular course of business? + +Mr. STOVALL. Right--this was picked up by the Secret Service and +somewhere I have a receipt from them, well, there is a negative--I +destroyed the positive. + +Mr. JENNER. Now, you are showing me a receipt and if I could read +backwards, I would be able to read this. + +Mr. STOVALL. If you have a mirror, you can look at it and read it. + +Mr. JENNER. Off the record. + +(Discussion between Counsel Jenner and the witness, Mr. Stovall, off +the record.) + +Mr. JENNER. Are you able to tell me whose handwriting that is in the +extreme upper right-hand corner of Exhibit 427? + +Mr. STOVALL. That is one of the personnel--in our bookkeeping and +payroll department, and I could not tell you who it would be, but it +would be one of three people. + +Mr. JENNER. But it is an entry by an employee of your company made in +the usual and regular course of business, is it? + +Mr. STOVALL. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. And it records the date of termination of Oswald's +employment? + +Mr. STOVALL. Right. + +Mr. JENNER. The sixth day of April 1963? + +Mr. STOVALL. He was given notice the latter part of March, and our +company's procedure is to give a fellow a week or 10 days notice prior +to the termination. + +Mr. JENNER. Was his termination prospectively or otherwise discussed +with you prior to it? + +Mr. STOVALL. Oh, probably it was--I would not say for sure whether it +was or wasn't. I'm pretty much of a dog around there when things don't +go right I'm the one that has to do all the yelling, and if a guy +doesn't produce, I say, "Let's do something," and from this basis I +feel the responsibility to say that I probably had something to do with +this termination, not as an individual, but only on his performance as +far as the work standards were concerned. + +Mr. JENNER. What was this man's skill to the extent that you recall, in +these areas in which you sought to train him? + +Mr. STOVALL. He had no skill. He had no training whatsoever. You see, +we employed him only as a trainee and I think we probably started him +at $1.25 or $1.35, or something like that, and automatically we give +a youngster a 10- or 15-cent raise quarterly, but within 6 months, if +they have shown no aptitude, we give up on them and have a parting of +the ways. + +Mr. JENNER. And that is what happened here? + +Mr. STOVALL. Yes; because we give them a raise doesn't mean that the +person is competent, it means that it is just a system of employment we +have when we start someone on minimum, or generally a 90-day basis, and +we give them a nickel or dime, and then within a maximum of 6 months, +if they have shown no aptitude, we just have to terminate them. + +Mr. JENNER. That's in fairness to them as well as to your company? + +Mr. STOVALL. Right. + +Mr. JENNER. You also turned over to the Secret Service the application +for employment that Oswald made with Padgett Printing Co.? + +Mr. STOVALL. Yes. I do not have that receipt with Padgett. + +Mr. JENNER. How did you come to have that, by the way? + +Mr. STOVALL. The Secret Service on Saturday--I made contact with +them--Mr. DePrato--this is his signature and I don't recall the other +gentleman's name, and in our discussion, I mentioned the fact that I +thought this fellow had sought employment with another company, but I +didn't know what disposition had been made of it, and they asked would +I call there, so while they were in my office I called, but there was +no one there and I knew this fellow and I called his home and he is an +astronomer as a hobby and he was giving a lecture to some students, +so I made a contact with the person who was on the phone out here at +the Astronomy Auditorium at the Fair, and he called me and I asked +him could I get hold of this application for the Secret Service and +he said "Yes," he would get it and bring it by, and in the meantime +these fellows had gone somewhere else and I told them I would meet them +Sunday in my office, so I did and gave it to them. The reason I had +it--they asked me to secure it for them. + +Mr. JENNER. And you did? + +Mr. STOVALL. And I did. + +Mr. JENNER. The expression "microdots" does that mean anything to you? + +Mr. STOVALL. No; we have never gotten any microfilming processes +whatsoever. + +Mr. JENNER. Mr. Stovall, your able employee, Mr. Graef, has given me +a good deal of detail and has been very helpful and likewise you have +been. Is there anything that I have failed to bring out here because I +don't know about it or haven't been stimulated to do so that you think +might be helpful to the Commission in its investigation? + +Mr. STOVALL. I don't believe so. There was such a short period of time +this fellow worked for us and he was a constant source of irritation +because of his lack of productive ability, that---- + +Mr. JENNER. Would you elaborate on that, please? + +Mr. STOVALL. We would ask him to reduce a line to 4 inches in width, +that happened to be 6, and he might make it 4-1/4 or 3-7/8, and this +was a loss in labor and materials both, and it had to be redone. + +Mr. JENNER. Did this occur with greater frequency than you +thought--than your people thought was permissible, having in mind the +progress which you would expect of him or a man in his position to have +attained? + +Mr. STOVALL. Yes; that's true. + +Mr. JENNER. What about his relations with others in the company--other +employees--how did he get along, or did that come to your attention? + +Mr. STOVALL. I don't think anyone liked him or disliked him either +one. He was just one of those people you don't know. If you don't know +a guy, you can't know if you don't like him. That's probably the main +reason we don't like him. Someone made mention in one instance that he +bumped them in a dark room, which is a walkway area, and if a guy's +bent over a tray and somebody else is coming by--he will get bumped, +and it depends on who is doing the bumping, whether you get upset about +it or not. + +Mr. JENNER. Well, it can be done without taking offense to one another? + +Mr. STOVALL. There's nothing at all wrong in it. There's no pain at all +in saying "Excuse me." + +Mr. JENNER. Yes; and apparently he was not inclined to do that. + +Mr. STOVALL. It seems that that's so--yes. + +Mr. JENNER. Have you had an impression as to whether he was an outgoing +person or a reserved person--keeping to himself? + +Mr. STOVALL. I think he must have been reserved, because the fellows +who worked right with him, no one seems to have had any particular +conversation with him. One guy invited him to go to church and he had +such an unpleasant reception to it that that was the end of that. + +Mr. JENNER. What incident was that--tell us about that. + +Mr. STOVALL. Well, the fellow asked him what his religion was, and he +asked him if he would like to go to church and I don't know what he +said, but that was the end of that. + +Mr. JENNER. He made it pretty clear he didn't want to go? + +Mr. STOVALL. It seems that's the way it was. + +Mr. JENNER. And he didn't want to be bothered by anyone? + +Mr. STOVALL. He didn't want to discuss it either. + +Mr. JENNER. All right; does anything else occur to you? + +Mr. STOVALL. Not that I know of--the fellow had a good record of being +on the job, I mean, he didn't have any absenteeism. + +Mr. JENNER. He was prompt and worked every day and had little in the +way of absenteeism? + +Mr. STOVALL. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. Mr. Graef said that he sought overtime employment; do you +recall that? + +Mr. STOVALL. Only by his statements that he made it known that he was +available to work on Saturday and he simply had a wife and kid and +needed the money and I'm sure that he did, as far as that goes, because +of the rate of pay he was working, living in these times, it didn't go +very far. + +Mr. JENNER. Your overall impression is that he was an industrious +person? + +Mr. STOVALL. He was inefficient--I wouldn't say he was industrious--if +he would have maybe applied himself at least--he was inept in this +particular craft. + +Mr. JENNER. All right. We appreciate this very much. Now, you have the +right to read your deposition, and make any corrections in it you wish +and to sign it. + +Miss Oliver ought to have it ready sometime this week, if you wish to +do that. You may obtain a copy if you wish by arrangement with her and +she charges 35 cents a page. + +Mr. STOVALL. Well, is it part of your procedure that I sign your copy? + +Mr. JENNER. No; you may waive it. + +Mr. STOVALL. I don't have any use for it. + +Mr. JENNER. You don't have any use for it and you don't care to come +back and read it for purposes of correction, at least your curiosity +might bring you to read it sometime--other than that you have no desire +to come back? + +Mr. STOVALL. I suppose it is for the corporation--I should put it with +our papers. That is my only reason for wanting it. That--the same as we +are keeping these. + +Mr. JENNER. You have two employees here--Mr. Graef and Mr. Ofstein--do +you want her to write all three depositions or just your own? + +Mr. STOVALL. Well, is the writing she does--is this the only reason it +is for us? + +Mr. JENNER. No; we have it written up for ourselves and that is why you +can obtain a copy at 35 cents a page. + +Mr. STOVALL. If there is some means of getting a copy of it--the only +reason I was wanting it is for the record. I don't care anything about +it otherwise--I suppose it might be of use. If this is out of order or +anything, as far as I am concerned--that's all right. + +Mr. JENNER. It's nothing out of order at all--all she does is for the +small price of 35 cents a page is just a matter of preparing an extra +copy, so, you go ahead and prepare a set, then, and I would suggest +that you deliver it under seal to Mr. Stovall. Do you want all three or +just your own? + +Mr. STOVALL. If you don't mind I would just put the others in there, +too. + +Mr. JENNER. Yes, I understand; some people under the circumstances you +are in do obtain copies, so that they can keep them in the corporate +records. + +Mr. STOVALL. Well, it's from the standpoint of corporate records of all +the interviews and questions and so forth that we have been through on +this--we have nothing other than three receipts and somewhere down the +line in the years to come I would like to have it. + +Mr. JENNER. You will find along the line in these depositions that they +have covered everything that has been covered before and some more. We +are able to probe a little more than those boys. They knew what they +were after but they didn't have all the information that we have now. + +Mr. STOVALL. Well, the men whom I have been in contact with have been +nothing but nice. + +Mr. JENNER. Oh, yes; the Secret Service men are always nice. + +Mr. STOVALL. They are gentlemen of the first degree. + +Mr. JENNER. Well, I can certify to that--they are very fine and very +helpful, and greatly grieved over this as everybody else is. + +That's all and thank you very much for coming. + +Mr. STOVALL. All right. Thank you. + + + + +TESTIMONY OF JOHN G. GRAEF + +The testimony of John G. Graef was taken at 9:20 a.m., on March 30, +1964, in the office of the U.S. attorney, 301 Post Office Building, +Bryan and Ervay Streets, Dallas, Tex., by Mr. Albert E. Jenner, Jr., +assistant counsel of the President's Commission. Robert T. Davis, +assistant attorney general of Texas, was present. + + +Mr. JENNER. Would you rise and be sworn, please, Mr. Graef? + +Mr. GRAEF. Certainly. + +Mr. JENNER. Do you solemnly swear in your testimony to tell the truth, +the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? + +Mr. GRAEF. I do. + +Mr. JENNER. Mr. Graef, I am Albert E. Jenner, Jr., and I am a member +of the legal staff of the Commission appointed to investigate the +assassination of President Kennedy, our President, and I think Mr. +Rankin of the Commission sent you, or you have received from Mr. +Rankin, a letter together with copies of the Senate Joint Resolution +137, creating the Commission, authorizing its creation, and President +Johnson's Executive Order 11130, appointing the Commission and fixing +its power and also a copy of the procedural regulations adopted by the +Commission with respect to the taking of testimony. + +Mr. GRAEF. That's correct. + +Mr. JENNER. And you appear here voluntarily? + +Mr. GRAEF. Yes; I do. + +Mr. JENNER. The Commission, as you know from those documents, +is appointed to investigate the circumstances surrounding the +assassination of President Kennedy, and particularly any facts and +circumstances respecting the involvement of Lee Harvey Oswald, and that +tragic event, and seeks to gain information from those who had some +touch with his life, and we understand you had some connection with +him with respect to an early employment, in 1962, by Mr. Oswald, in +your company--Jaggars, J-a-g-g-a-r-s [spelling], Chiles, C-h-i-l-e-s +[spelling], Stovall, S-t-o-v-a-l-l [spelling]. + +Mr. JENNER. Off the record. + +(Discussion between Counsel Jenner and the witness, Graef, off the +record.) + +Mr. JENNER. Our information is that Lee Oswald was an employee of +Jaggars-Chiles-Stovall in October 1962; is that correct? + +Mr. GRAEF. That's correct. + +Mr. JENNER. Now, you lived at 522 Browder, B-r-o-w-d-e-r [spelling]? + +Mr. GRAEF. No; that is the address of the firm--Jaggars-Chiles-Stovall. + +Mr. JENNER. You reside where? + +Mr. GRAEF. At 7304 Turtle Creek. + +Mr. JENNER. Here in Dallas? + +Mr. GRAEF. That is correct. + +Mr. JENNER. And you have been a resident here in Dallas for about how +long? + +Mr. GRAEF. Approximately 18 years. + +Mr. JENNER. And you are a married man and have a family, I assume? + +Mr. GRAEF. That's correct. + +Mr. JENNER. And how long have you been employed or associated with +Jaggars-Chiles-Stovall? + +Mr. GRAEF. About 10 or 11 years; perhaps a little longer. + +Mr. JENNER. Since your earlier answer that Oswald was employed at +one time in October 1962, by this company, do you have knowledge or +reasonably direct information as to the circumstances leading up to his +employment, and what kind of an employee he was? + +Mr. GRAEF. Yes; I do. + +Mr. JENNER. Would you, in your own words, just tell us about it? + +Mr. GRAEF. Certainly. + +Mr. JENNER. Start at the very beginning, as best you can, so I can get +the whole story of the matter. + +Mr. GRAEF. Fine. About that time--it was, I believe, October, I don't +have any written information in front of me that I recall---- + +Mr. JENNER. This is 1962? + +Mr. GRAEF. That's correct--I'll have to recall as best I can. + +In about October 1962, as director of our photographic department we +found ourselves in need of another man, so at this time I called the +Texas Employment Commission and spoke to them about sending me someone +having as close as possible the abilities that might work out in our +photographic department. + +Mr. JENNER. Would you tell us what you told her in that connection, as +best as you can reconstruct it, giving us her name--it was a her? + +Mr. GRAEF. I believe I remember--yes--Louise Latham. + +Mr. JENNER. What your normal practice is in that respect? + +Mr. GRAEF. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. And, particularly what you did on this occasion? + +Mr. GRAEF. Being the director of the photographic department for some +time, on numerous occasions it has been necessary for me to call and +ask the Texas Employment and other sources for help in the normal +turnover of employees that come up in any business. + +Mr. JENNER. Could you tell me something about those normal sources, +because we may wish to look to them and see if we can find anybody else +who had any possible contact with this man? + +Mr. GRAEF. Surely. I can't name other employment agencies, but I will +say, private employment agencies who occasionally have called us and +told us that they had someone they thought had ability along our line, +but this hadn't been as successful to us as the Texas Employment +Commission. They seem to have a bigger repertoire of personnel needing +jobs. + +Mr. JENNER. Is that a public agency? + +Mr. GRAEF. Yes; it is. + +Mr. JENNER. State or local? + +Mr. GRAEF. State; it is a State agency. + +Mr. JENNER. It is here in Dallas? + +Mr. GRAEF. It is here in Dallas. + +Mr. JENNER. The office you called? + +Mr. GRAEF. The office I called--that's correct. + +Mr. JENNER. I assume it has offices in other cities in Texas? + +Mr. GRAEF. I believe so; so I called--but to reiterate--mainly our best +source of employees has been the Texas Employment Commission. They have +a larger pool to draw from, so I called--in the course of my dealing +with them--they have various departments and in the course of dealing +with them, I became familiar with one person. + +Our particular photographic department is not one that we find +experienced personnel readily, and the work we do is, I would say, +quite different in various ways from ordinary photography, as most +people know it. I will enlarge on that slightly by saying we do many, +many things with letters. For example, we can take a straight line of +type and we can curve it or bend it or twist it or put it in a circle, +for example, and so, rather than just taking pictures of people as +ordinary photographers do, this work which we perform for advertising +agencies and artists in this area is a matter of training, learning +first to use the equipment we have which takes some time, and then the +differences in the material that we use. + +For example, the characteristics of photographic paper, the +characteristics of chemicals that we use, and it is only after learning +and becoming familiar with the equipment and the materials that then +you find out whether an employee will produce the work properly, on +time, and well, and so, it is usually some time before an employee +develops into or either becomes the kind of employee you want. + +In other words, after this training period, and you have spent time +with him teaching him the equipment and the material, perhaps at this +late date, many months by now may have gone by--perhaps he can't--he +isn't careful enough in the job--he begins producing, but perhaps we +will say he doesn't work as hard as you would like, so quite often we +spend a great deal of time teaching someone, only to find out after +some months have passed that he isn't a desirable employee, but is just +one of those things. + +We must, of course, in order to find out if they will do the job, +go through the process of teaching him the equipment and about the +materials, so I've gone into this because it will help later on in +explaining the termination of Lee Oswald with us, but because of these +various facts that I have mentioned, I became familiar with one person +in particular down at the employment office, the Texas Employment +Commission--the agency. + +I, of course, had never met this person, but through phone +conversations I explained after many times what I needed, the type +person I was looking for--perhaps with an artistic background, perhaps +with photographic experience somewhere, in the Army or elsewhere, and I +told her the various attributes that I thought a person should have in +order to make a success of our work. + +Mr. JENNER. Would you try to reconstruct this now--just assume you are +on the telephone now. + +Mr. GRAEF. Okay. + +Mr. JENNER. And carry yourself back out there to a year and a half ago? + +Mr. GRAEF. Yes; I'll try to do that. So, I called this person +repeatedly--after the first call or two--this has gone on now over +several years and she knew the type person I was looking for and the +type of experience that I was looking for, so I called her, and her +name was Louise Latham. + +Mr. JENNER. Is she still employed by the Texas Employment Agency, do +you know? + +Mr. GRAEF. I don't know--I really don't know--a very charming person +over the phone. + +Mr. JENNER. And, had you put in this call, let's say--how long before +she sent, if she did, Lee Harvey Oswald over to see you--when did you +start out to seek this employee, is what I am getting at? + +Mr. GRAEF. Let me refer to this employee questionnaire. + +Mr. JENNER. Does that have an exhibit number on it? + +Mr. GRAEF. Yes, No. 427. + +Mr. JENNER. Commission Exhibit No. 427. + +Mr. GRAEF. Now, it says here he was employed October 12, 1962, so I +would say probably 2 weeks prior to that time, roughly about the 1st of +October was when I placed the call. + +Mr. JENNER. Do you recall whether anybody other than or in addition to +Lee Oswald had been sent you before he came? + +Mr. GRAEF. Yes. I don't remember the sequence--whether Lee was first or +whether Lee was last. As I recall, there were about two or three--all +of them young men, average young men--Lee Oswald was average. + +Mr. JENNER. Would you have in your files--what do you call that that is +marked "Commission Exhibit 427"? + +Mr. GRAEF. I am holding in my hand this same Commission Exhibit No. +427, and it's an employee identification questionnaire of our firm +Jaggars-Chiles-Stovall. + +Mr. JENNER. Would you have had a card, would it still be retained in +your files for the other people you might have interviewed? + +Mr. GRAEF. No. No--I wouldn't. Normally, when the Texas Employment +Commission sends someone over for an interview, I meet them and we sit +down, of course, and discuss their past history, employment history, +and the various personal histories of that person. The Texas Employment +Commission sends a card over from them, telling who the bearer is and +it also has a space on it that says "Was this employee hired?", which +you will mail back to them and "Not hired," and the reason why you +didn't hire them, and in every case, as I recall, the people whom I did +not hire, I would just mark it in the appropriate space and drop it in +the mail and it is returned to them. + +So, of these two or three young men who came to me after--at this +period, about October 1, Lee was one of them and seemed to me to be the +most serious and a shade--I'm searching for the right word--when I say +"serious" and just a shade more determined, perhaps--he seemed like he +had had a slight edge on the other one or two fellows that came there, +and I thought--well---- + +Mr. JENNER. I take it that you personally did the interviewing of all +of these? + +Mr. GRAEF. That's correct. + +Mr. JENNER. Including Lee Harvey Oswald? + +Mr. GRAEF. That's correct. I had talked with this Mrs. Louise Latham, +it's Mrs.--also--each time she would call. Of course, I would notify +her that I could use another employee and perhaps 3 or 4 days would go +by until she saw, knowing these various things that I needed--she would +call me and say, "I believe I have a young man who looks like a pretty +good prospect," and so I would say, "Thank you." And she would send him +over. + +Mr. JENNER. Have you now recited all of the things you indicated to her +in connection with this particular employment or in employment need? + +Mr. GRAEF. I---- + +Mr. JENNER. As to what you were looking for. + +Mr. GRAEF. Yes; I believe so. + +Mr. JENNER. Right. + +Mr. GRAEF. So, Lee came over and I met him in the outer office. He +handed me the employment card from the Texas Employment Commission. +This, as I remember, just has a name and address and who sent him, and +then was he hired or was he not hired. + +Mr. JENNER. Do you recall how he looked--how he was attired, for +example, on that occasion--that's a pretty big order? + +Mr. GRAEF. Yes--my memory fails me a little here, but it seems to me +he wore a suit, a dark gray suit, modestly dressed and he was very +businesslike and likeable. + +Mr. JENNER. You say your recollection doesn't serve you well as to his +attire on this particular occasion? + +Mr. GRAEF. That's correct. + +Mr. JENNER. It could be that he did not have a suit--gray? A collar, or +otherwise? + +Mr. GRAEF. It could have been, yes, but that's just an impression that +hits my mind, but I could very easily be wrong. + +Mr. JENNER. Could he have had a white T-shirt and one of these +lightweight zipper jackets on? + +Mr. GRAEF. No--no, definitely not. + +Mr. JENNER. Definitely not? + +Mr. GRAEF. No. + +Mr. JENNER. You have a definite recollection that he had a suit coat on? + +Mr. GRAEF. Yes, his appearance was as most young men would appear in +applying for a job--tend to look nice and he made a nice appearance. + +Mr. JENNER. All right. + +Mr. GRAEF. So, he came in---- + +Mr. JENNER. Excuse me, did he have a tie? + +Mr. GRAEF. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. He did have a tie? + +Mr. GRAEF. Yes; I'm pretty certain he had a tie. + +Mr. JENNER. He gave you a reasonably fair impression? + +Mr. GRAEF. That's correct. + +Mr. JENNER. At first blush? + +Mr. GRAEF. That's correct--he came in and I met him in the outer +office, and we sat down in the outer office. + +Mr. JENNER. I take it you had never seen this man before? + +Mr. GRAEF. No; that's correct. + +Mr. JENNER. Had you ever heard of him before? + +Mr. GRAEF. No. + +Mr. JENNER. Did anything occur during the course of that interview +which triggered any thought in your mind that you might have, or could +have heard about him before? + +Mr. GRAEF. No. + +Mr. JENNER. As an individual? + +Mr. GRAEF. No. + +Mr. JENNER. He remained throughout a complete stranger except to the +extent of your questioning, which elicited some knowledge of him? + +Mr. GRAEF. That's right. He was at that time a complete stranger. I +had never seen him before or heard of him before. He was just another +applicant for a job, is what it amounted to. + +Mr. JENNER. All right. Go ahead. + +Mr. GRAEF. So, we sat down and he gave me the card and he told me +his name was Lee Harvey Oswald, and we went through the normal job +interview that we give most young men. I know--I don't, of course, +remember--because of the time it has been, the exact extent of our +whole conversation, but I do remember various phases of it. + +Mr. JENNER. Reconstruct it to the extent that you can and avoid to +the extent you can assumption--that something must have happened and +finally give us, to the best of your ability, what you do recall, even +though you don't recall it on the button, so to speak. + +Mr. GRAEF. Well, certain parts of it I remember almost word for word, +and then, of course, other, I think less important parts, I have +forgotten completely. I do remember that--I believe that Mrs. Latham in +the Texas Employment Agency--at the time that she called me, she said +that he had recently been discharged from the Marines. + +When he came in, I found this--that I was just slightly embarrassed +that I had forgotten it, and among the other duties, of course--these +things will happen, and when he sat down and introduced himself as Lee +Harvey Oswald, I asked him where his last position was, and he said, +"The Marines," and I recovered slightly, remembering that I had already +been told this and, to cover up my embarrassment slightly, I laughed +and I said, "Oh, yes." + +I said, "Honorably discharged, of course," as a joke, and he said, "Oh, +yes," and we went on with other facts of the interview. I remember +him--I don't believe he gave me an address. I think he said it was just +temporary where he was staying, or something to that effect. I also +believe at the time he told me he had a wife and a child or a child +coming. I don't remember exactly about that, because I, of course--any +employer is looking for someone dependable and a family man offers +perhaps a little more dependability, needing a position, than a single +person. + +So, that I think is about--I think I did ask him where--when he +mentioned the Marines, where he had served, and I believe he told +me Korea, and I didn't go into it any further. I felt reasonably +sure because he had come through the Texas Employment Commission--I +didn't even think of checking on his honorable discharge--honorable +or dishonorable or questionable discharge. I somehow had just assumed +being through a State agency, that they perhaps had a much larger +file on him, that my going into various details would just be going +over--plowing up ground again, so I just figured--I never even thought +about checking into his discharge or when he had been discharged. +I think he had been discharged sometime prior to this--I don't at +the moment remember exactly when he got out of the Marines or was +discharged, but the impression that was left with me and I suppose he +told this to Mrs. Latham--was that it had been a very recent thing, +because I recall that that's what she told me, and that's what he told +me when he came to me--when I asked him. + +Mr. JENNER. That it had been very recent? + +Mr. GRAEF. Oh, yes; it had been very recent, because when I asked him +about his last employment he said, "The Marines," he had just gotten +out of the Marines, and then I recovered, you know, and said, "Oh, +yes," because Louise Latham had already told me this. At any rate, he +seemed the applicant with the best chance of success that had been sent +over. + +Mr. JENNER. Would you go back a little bit? + +Mr. GRAEF. Certainly. + +Mr. JENNER. What inquiries did you make of him with respect to your +qualifications for this position--his prior experience, if any? + +Mr. GRAEF. None--none. I assumed that--now, he was sent over, if I +remember right--I was also told by this Mrs. Latham, something about +that he had perhaps some photographic experience in the Marines or +there was some--there was some quality there that helped. And I believe +it was that he had had a little bit of photograph experience in the +Marines that might be helpful. In other words, he was a little familiar +with the processing of film and so forth and, of course, this would add +a little weight to his becoming a successful employee. + +Mr. JENNER. I take it from your recital up to this moment that you are +primarily interested at this point, having in mind the nature of the +business, that this man would embrace ultimately what you were looking +more for--let's say--general character, whether he seemed like a man +who was going to be in this community a while? + +Mr. GRAEF. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. Whether he was sincerely interested in obtaining +employment that you expected to rely upon your teaching--I mean your +company--under your supervision and direction--the teaching and +training of this man for the position which you ultimately would seek +to fill. + +Mr. GRAEF. Yes; very well put. + +Mr. JENNER. And it might even have been that if this man had no +photographic experience whatsoever, but seemed--well, let's say clean +cut and eager and intelligent, just out of the Marines and seeking to +obtain employment and settle down, that that might have been sufficient +qualifications for you? + +Mr. GRAEF. Yes--if, of course, there was no one with any better promise +that came along. + +Mr. JENNER. Yes. + +Mr. GRAEF. There have been several times when we have needed someone, +when they would send two or three people over, and it was necessary +for us to pick someone who had practically no experience in this work +because you don't find anyone who is experienced in the type work we +do. It is a very highly specialized trade. + +The best you can hope to find is perhaps, and I'll tell you as I told +this Mrs. Latham, the person that stands the best chance of success is +perhaps someone who is industrious, willing to work, and not afraid +of work, who perhaps has some artistic ability, because the area is +opaquing of negatives with brushes and so forth, and possibly has some +photographic experience, where they may know about paper and at least +there will be some processes that they may have already learned or +become familiar with and we won't have to begin from the very beginning. + +Mr. JENNER. You are talking about photographic paper? + +Mr. GRAEF. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. For example, some young man who has had an abiding interest +in amateur photography, in developing his own film---- + +Mr. GRAEF. That's correct, and so you see he would become familiar with +quite a few things in his hobby that he would know about when he came +to work for us. We wouldn't have to start from the very beginning and +say, "Now, this is film, and this is paper," and the difference between +the two and start from the very beginning. So, to explain a little bit +about why I didn't make any inquiries, I didn't frankly feel that any +were necessary. + +The fact that he had--that the employment agency had said--told +me--that he had recently been discharged from the Marines, or had +gotten out of the Marines, and the fact that he had backed up that +statement immediately when he came over and said that he had been +recently discharged from the Marines, and I asked him if he had been +honorably discharged, more as a joke, and he said "Yes," he had. To me, +what background was there to check into? Was I going to go through his +commanding officer or his sergeant, for example? + +Mr. JENNER. Well, it was a half truth--he had been honorably discharged +and then dishonorably discharged. + +Mr. GRAEF. I wish I had--but the whole thing, of course, seemed so on +the level that I just hoped that he would be a person that could fill +the job. + +Mr. JENNER. Was this interview in the ordinary course of business? + +Mr. GRAEF. Oh, yes. + +Mr. JENNER. And having in mind the particular position you desired +to train the man for whom you were looking, and having in mind the +work--the background of work of the Texas Employment Agency, you +made, I take it, the inquiries you would normally make under the +circumstances? + +Mr. GRAEF. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. There was nothing extraordinary about this? + +Mr. GRAEF. No. + +Mr. JENNER. Out of the ordinary pattern? + +Mr. GRAEF. No--he came in for this interview sometime in the morning, +10:30 or 11:00, and we perhaps talked for 15 minutes. Of course, I took +down his name and whatever information I could get on a piece of paper, +just for my own record, as I did with the other two or three boys that +had come previously or after him, and finally there was no one else, +and so then I had to make a decision, and, of course, I think I threw +this piece of paper away because they were just personal notes that +I had made about the interview, so that I could look back and remind +myself who was who. So, I believe, in fact I am very certain that Lee +called me back--I told him--at the time I interviewed him, I thought I +knew that he had the best chance of the other fellows of doing the job, +and usually I call them and would tell them that they are hired, but I +think in this case that there was no phone and that when I asked him +could I call him and let him know whether he had been hired or whether +he had not been hired--he said, "No, there is no phone" where I could +call him, and I said, "Well, I'll be making a decision perhaps tomorrow +and if you would care to call, I can let you know then." + +Mr. JENNER. Didn't that excite any wonder on your part that there was +no telephone at which he could be reached? + +Mr. GRAEF. No, not really. It's surprising how many of the young men +are in transit or moving--in many, many cases the people that have +applied for the job--it may just be circumstantial, but the people +that have applied for work with me don't have phones. They may have a +neighbor somewhere who they might give, but usually that's reluctant +because the neighbor doesn't want to be bothered and many, many of +them won't have phones, and many, many of them have very temporary +addresses. I mean, it may be a room somewhere where they are residing +for 2 or 3 or 4 days and they are in the process of finding some +other place to live, so this didn't excite any curiosity at all on my +part. The fact that he had again said he had been discharged recently +from the Marines--it seemed entirely plausible that he was trying to +find--he said he had a wife and either a baby--like I say, I don't +remember whether the baby was coming or already here--I think she was +here at that time. I think he said he had a wife and baby. I could +easily see how he would be looking or could have been looking for a few +weeks for better quarters and would not have a phone and would not have +a permanent address. So, this didn't excite any particular curiosity on +my part and I was intent, of course, on finding a dependable employee. +That was my main concern, so, I at this interview felt that he had the +best chance of making a go of this than the other applicants and so I +told him, "I'll be deciding definitely in a day or two. Call me back," +which he did and I said, "Okay, come on in to work." + +Mr. JENNER. So that you were not looking for any special skill. If +the gentleman whom you were interviewing had it, that would be a plus +factor? + +Mr. GRAEF. Correct--correct. + +Mr. JENNER. Do you recall inquiring of him the extent, if any, of +his skills with respect to photography and his experience in that +connection, if any? + +Mr. GRAEF. I don't recall; no. I believe I may have--because this would +be one of the normal things I would do in an interview. I think that he +exhibited enough, as I recall--I think he exhibited enough knowledge +that there again--about photography, that there was no curiosity raised +on my part that he didn't know about it. + +I'm almost certain that I generally just asked him one or two things +about it and he answered them satisfactorily, or I would have, because +that's the usual thing--I asked them about these things--artistic +ability, any photographic experience, are you handy with your +hands--they work with their hands a good deal, and all these things +combined, would combine to make a topnotch man provided he worked. + +Mr. JENNER. Yes. + +Mr. GRAEF. Provided he was industrious and wanted to do a good job. +We'll say he wasn't lazy--at the same time--so the various qualities +I'm looking for in our type of work, in our department, are pretty hard +to find all of them in one man. So, Lee came to work for us--I don't +remember the exact salary; but it was about, oh, somewhere, I think +about $1.35 or $1.50 an hour; somewhere in there. + +Mr. JENNER. Was that for a 40-hour week? + +Mr. GRAEF. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. Looking at Commission Exhibit No. 427 again, would you +identify the handwriting and block printing on this Exhibit 427, if you +can? + +There appears the word "terminated" with the date 4-6-63, which I +assume is April 6, 1963? + +Mr. GRAEF. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. In whose handwriting is that notation; do you know? + +Mr. GRAEF. I don't know; I don't know. Now, this is my handwriting--the +date employed--October 12, 1962. I am almost positive that this is +Lee's block printing. + +Mr. JENNER. That is the name "Lee Harvey Oswald"? + +Mr. GRAEF. "Lee Harvey Oswald," and the various data on this card--the +social security number and the phone number. + +Mr. JENNER. In view of your testimony, I'd like to ask you about that. +Now, there is a phone number there--is that LA-1-0692? + +Mr. GRAEF. That's correct. + +Mr. JENNER. In view of what you said that he responded to your inquiry +that he didn't have a phone number, how do you account for how that +phone number got into the blocks there? + +Mr. GRAEF. Into this box here--at the time that I interviewed him, it +was probably--then, I--after this card was written, he may have been +employed here at our place, oh, perhaps a week or two before this card +was brought in to him to sign. + +Mr. JENNER. I see. + +Mr. GRAEF. In other words, I think because of the busy way the +department runs, sometimes days will elapse before we get around to +getting one of these to him and getting his social security number +and so forth. In other words, he came to work and some days may have +elapsed from the time, for example, that we had the interviews, there +may have been some days passed before he actually came to work. Now, at +this time, when I took this information down on my notes, my personal +notes of the interview, there was no phone number, as I recall. + +Mr. JENNER. Yes. + +Mr. GRAEF. Now, at the time I didn't notice this at all, but at the +time that this was written, of course--here the phone number is, so +he obviously had a phone number at this time, but he didn't, as I +remember, he didn't, because I didn't call him--I don't believe. + +Mr. JENNER. Now, do you recognize the handwriting in which that phone +number and the social security number are? + +Mr. GRAEF. Yes; I am pretty sure that that is Lee's printing. + +Mr. JENNER. Then, to the left under the heading "Name in full," and +above that is Lee Harvey Oswald, you have testified to that, and the +next line is "Present address." + +Mr. GRAEF. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. There appears immediately above those printed words "3519 +Fairmount," and that is lined out. Do you recognize that handwriting? + +Mr. GRAEF. The "3519 Fairmount," I am certain is Lee's also. + +Mr. JENNER. And above that is 602 Elsbeth Street? + +Mr. GRAEF. Yes; now, I don't recognize that handwriting. Now, this card +would ordinarily be kept in the front office; it would not be in my +possession, and so for some reason this is probably one of the office +personnel who wrote this and crossed that--Lee's writing--out and wrote +in this at the top for some reason or other. + +Mr. JENNER. Wrote in 602 Elsbeth Street? + +Mr. GRAEF. That's correct. + +Mr. JENNER. And the next line there appears the word "permanent home +address," and above that is P.O. Box 2915. + +Mr. GRAEF. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. You don't know that handwriting? + +Mr. GRAEF. I don't know that handwriting; I don't recognize that. + +Mr. JENNER. You don't recall his having advised you that he had a post +office box? + +Mr. GRAEF. No--no. + +Mr. JENNER. You were about to refer to a figure number, "Number of +dependents." + +There appears to have been a "2" written in there, and an overlay on +top of that is a "3"? + +Mr. GRAEF. The "3" is mine. Now, I don't know why--I can almost +remember writing that "3" but whether he changed his mind and wanted +it put "3"--that sometimes happens with income tax the way it is--that +may have happened because he first was going to take two dependents and +then decided to change it to a "3"--it was probably about the time that +this was brought in. It looks like my "3" but I'm not sure about it. +I've looked at it and it looks like a "3" that I might make over it, +but I can't recall. I thought I might help a little there but I don't +think I can. Whether he wrote down "2" on the number of dependents and +then decided--when the card was in my possession, when I was going +to turn it into the front office to make it "3", and then I changed +it--that may have happened, but I do not recall. + +Mr. JENNER. Well, it is obviously either a different handwriting or +certainly a different instrument. + +Mr. GRAEF. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. That's a different signature. + +Mr. GRAEF. I was just comparing the pen I used to--used up here and +this may be pencil. No, I believe it is a ballpoint pen. + +Mr. JENNER. Now, that card is signed "Lee Harvey Oswald." Do you recall +whether the card was signed in your presence? + +Mr. GRAEF. No; it may not have been. In other words, generally, we hand +this card to an employee and he fills out the whole card and then I +would take it and turn it up to the front office, so I could have been +back in the department working when he filled the whole thing out and +signed it. + +Mr. JENNER. Now, is Commission Exhibit 427 part of the books and +records of Jaggars-Chiles-Stovall kept in the usual and regular course +of business? + +Mr. GRAEF. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. And prepared in part by you and the remaining part under +your general supervision and direction? + +Mr. GRAEF. Yes; I would say. In other words, I turned the card over to +the employee and asked him to fill it out with the information it has +on the card. He returns it to me and I turn it into the front office. + +Mr. JENNER. And this particular card, with respect to Lee Harvey +Oswald, to the best of your recollection was made and thereafter +maintained among other books, files, and records and documents of +Jaggars-Chiles-Stovall as they ordinarily are? + +Mr. GRAEF. Yes; they are. + +Mr. JENNER. There is nothing unusual, extraordinary or out of line? + +Mr. GRAEF. No. + +Mr. JENNER. With respect to the manner in which and the circumstances +under which Commission Exhibit 427 came into existence and was +maintained? + +Mr. GRAEF. That's correct. + +Mr. JENNER. And to the best of your knowledge, information and belief, +is this card now in the same condition it was as of the date of +termination of employment of Lee Harvey Oswald, except for the pencil +notation in the extreme bottom right hand portion of the card on its +face and in which appeared in an encirclement, the letter "D" and the +figure "11"? + +Mr. GRAEF. To the best of my knowledge, it is. I haven't seen the card +since I turned it into the office at the time that he was employed, +so the handwriting that says, "Terminated," there, and that date--I +haven't seen--I mean whether the card has been altered or not I don't +know, because, of course, I didn't see it at any time after that date. + +Mr. JENNER. You mean after the date terminated 4-6-63? + +Mr. GRAEF. Yes; after "terminated" was written there. I haven't +actually seen the card since the time that he was employed, roughly, +since he wrote the card out and handed it to me and I turned it into +the front office. To the best of my recollection that's the last time I +have seen that. + +Mr. JENNER. Now, you do recall that this card, at least to the extent +of the name, Lee Harvey Oswald, in block printing and your handwriting +of the date October 12, 1962--that was filled out to that extent at +least in your presence? + +Mr. GRAEF. Mainly, yes. I mean, I may have been in the department and +doing some other tasks, but he sat down and filled it out. I gave it +to him and he sat down somewhere and filled it out and I may have been +moving around somewhere. I didn't actually watch him write it out +word for word and line for line. The reason this October 12 is in my +handwriting--ordinarily the employee fills that out. + +Mr. JENNER. That appears opposite the printed words, "Date Employed"? + +Mr. GRAEF. Yes; ordinarily, the employee will go ahead and fill that +date in also, but he had forgotten to and this was probably filled out +a few days after he was employed. + +Mr. JENNER. But that is in your handwriting? + +Mr. GRAEF. But that is in my handwriting. I vaguely recall that he had +not filled that in and I said something, "I'll save you the trouble," +and then I wrote that in. + +Mr. JENNER. All right. I offer in evidence as Commission +Exhibit No. 427, the employee identification questionnaire of +Jaggars-Chiles-Stovall Co. which has now been identified. + +How long have you been employed by Jaggars-Chiles-Stovall? + +Mr. GRAEF. Approximately 11 or 12--I've almost forgotten--it seems it +was either 1952 or 1953, I came with them. + +Mr. JENNER. Is this an old Dallas firm? + +Mr. GRAEF. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. By reputation, how long has it been around here? + +Mr. GRAEF. I believe about since 1922. + +Mr. JENNER. Does this company do any lithography? + +Mr. GRAEF. No. + +Mr. JENNER. Tell us in general, apart from your particular interests +and work in the company, what in general does the company do? + +Mr. GRAEF. We set type. We have an enormous inventory of all kinds of +type faces, all designs, for example, scripts--roman letters, sans +serif faces--an enormous repertoire of styles from which advertising +agencies and artists can choose to make up advertisements for headlines +or body copy. This basically is our biggest function. We don't do any +printing. + +Mr. JENNER. Do you make mats? + +Mr. GRAEF. Yes; it's a rather complete service. We can take an +advertisement from the very beginning and actually carry it all the +way through to the end, to the point where we mail the mats to the +newspapers for insertion, but we don't do any printing as such, of any +kind. + +Mr. JENNER. Are you a native of Dallas? + +Mr. GRAEF. No. + +Mr. JENNER. Just tell me in a few words something about yourself? + +Mr. GRAEF. Oh, golly--I was born in Chicago, Ill. + +Mr. JENNER. So was I. + +Mr. GRAEF. I went to Lane Tech. + +Mr. JENNER. I went to Lindblom High School, and that's where I +practiced law and have done for 30 years. + +Mr. GRAEF. Well, I haven't been back there for quite some time. I left +there about 1940, after graduating from high school, took commercial +art at Lane Tech, and I went down to Tennessee and worked at the +Kingsport Press designing book covers and also the Holston ordnance +works, and during the very beginning of the war, this was the last--the +Second World War--then I was drafted into the service and served as an +airborne engineer for 3 years. + +Mr. JENNER. In the Army? + +Mr. GRAEF. Yes; I spent 2 years overseas and came back to Kingsport, +Tenn., and then the wife and I decided to head west, and while I was +away, she had written various chambers of commerce around the country +and the Dallas Chamber of Commerce did the best job, so we decided to +take a short vacation here and see if I could find work, which I did, +and which we did and I did, and this was in 1946, so we have been here +ever since. + +Mr. JENNER. You were each native born Americans? + +Mr. GRAEF. That's correct. + +And honorably discharged--period. + +Mr. JENNER. Now, this man is employed--carry on. + +Mr. GRAEF. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. Was he regular in his arrival at work? + +Mr. GRAEF. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. Were his work habits in that connection satisfactory? + +Mr. GRAEF. Yes. I would say he was very punctual in his arrival to +work. He began working under me and I began the process of teaching him +how to use our equipment. + +Mr. JENNER. All right. Now, he worked directly with you or under you or +under your supervision and direction? + +Mr. GRAEF. That's correct--that's correct. He was with me a great part +of the time. Of course, there are various times when I couldn't be +with him, but for the better part of the first 3 or 4 months of his +employment--he worked for us approximately 6 months. + +Mr. JENNER. Tell us what you taught him and how you attempted to train +him and in what, and give me also, when you are doing that, his skills +and aptitudes, as you recall them at the beginning? + +Mr. GRAEF. Well, as I have explained, the most we hope for in a +person is that perhaps any past skills they have will help them in +learning our work, but basically our work is so different that there +is no experienced help, and everyone who comes into the department is +automatically a trainee. + +Mr. JENNER. And he fell into that category? + +Mr. GRAEF. That's correct. All our cameras are different from the +ordinary cameras you find in commercial printing shops or printing +establishments. + +Mr. JENNER. Are these portable cameras or fixed cameras? + +Mr. GRAEF. No, fixed cameras--dark room cameras. + +Mr. JENNER. When I used the expression "fixed," I had in my own mind +that they would be these large-size cameras, fixed in the sense that +they would be adjacent to a wall or a bench or a table. + +Mr. GRAEF. Or the floor? + +Mr. JENNER. Or the floor. + +Mr. GRAEF. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. And be so heavy as not to be portable or so firmly secured +as not to be removable? + +Mr. GRAEF. Yes; that's right. + +Mr. JENNER. Would you indicate their size? + +Mr. GRAEF. I would say approximately 8 feet long total length, with 6 +or 7 feet of the front of the camera projecting through a wall, which +on the outside of that wall have the exposure lights to light whatever +you are going to shoot. Then, the back of the camera sticks through +the wall in the darkroom and on the back of the camera, of course, you +place your light-sensitive film and make your exposure this way. + +Mr. JENNER. And do you use light-sensitive film plates? + +Mr. GRAEF. No; ordinary commercial Litho film or Ortho film that are +generally available from large companies. + +Mr. JENNER. Indicate the size of the frames? + +Mr. GRAEF. Approximately 20 by 24 inches. The difference in these +cameras--they are commonly known as modification cameras. As I said +previously, you could take a line of type and twist it or curve it +or stretch it out of proportion. As they are different compared with +ordinary cameras that are used in most places throughout the country +in that they do not have any scales on them. Ordinarily you measure +a piece of copy and you set the cameras on a certain number, and for +example, the same size--if you wanted to make the same size shot, you +would set your copy board on No. 1, and you would set your film carrier +on No. 1, put your film in and make your exposure, and you get a same +size shot, but our cameras have no scales and you have to find visually +and manually your sizes, everything is flexible on the camera. The +boards move---- + +Mr. JENNER. What boards? + +Mr. GRAEF. The copy boards can twist. The film carrier can twist. + +Mr. JENNER. When you say "twist" do you mean twist the image? + +Mr. GRAEF. On its axis--actually twist on its axis. + +Mr. JENNER. You mean "twist" as distinguished from "turn"? + +Mr. GRAEF. Well, let me say "turn"--then. Can turn on its axis. The +lens camera can be shifted up or down or to the right or left. There +are various devices that are supplied with the camera, consisting of +prisms through which you can make distortions, various other forms +which can be used to make various complicated bends and waves in type +or illustrations, or what have you. + +Mr. JENNER. Now, the bends or waves--when you say bends or waves in +type, you mean you do not bend or twist the copy itself--that is, the +thing to be photographed, but by use of prisms and other distortion +devices, the image implanted on the film is a twist or distortion of +the copy or photograph? + +Mr. GRAEF. Yes; except we do both. + +Mr. JENNER. You do straight photographing as well as distortion +photography? + +Mr. GRAEF. Well, many times, we will take the actual copy and twist +it. Anything goes to get the final results, whatever has to be done, +for example if we want to make a curved shot of a label, a flat +two-dimensional label, a printed label, and we wanted to curve that +label, we might take an empty tin can and paste that on the tin can and +tip the tin can so that the lens looking at it would pickup the curve. +We would tilt the can to such a degree that the lens in its position +would pickup this curve of the label, and, of course, we would make an +exposure, so anything goes in camera modification. + +You start with the fundamentals of learning film and paper; the +characteristics of them--we have many grades of paper, many contrasts +of paper; we have several different varieties of film; the time +developing these various papers--all of these have to be learned by +an applicant before he can go on to beginning the camera, so it is a +progression of a trade that takes time. + +Mr. JENNER. Does this include color work? + +Mr. GRAEF. No; all black and white. + +Mr. JENNER. Oh, all black and white? + +Mr. GRAEF. All black and white. We shoot color copy occasionally, but +we don't do color work. + +Mr. JENNER. That is, when I say color work, I intended two +things--first, color film and secondly, colored ultimate product. + +Mr. GRAEF. Colored film, no; we do not develop colored film and +we don't shoot colored film. We might, in black and white, make a +two-color a set of two-color negatives or something, for example, we +might shoot part of a label and furnish a negative that would print the +black on something and we might furnish an additional negative that +would register with the first, that would print a color. For example, +a colored border around the black copy and we would furnish these two +negatives to a customer and he might print it in two colors, choosing +whatever colors he wanted. + +Mr. JENNER. Yes; he could use whatever ink he wished to employ on the +mat? + +Mr. GRAEF. That's correct. + +Mr. JENNER. Or, do you sometimes use lead slugs? + +Mr. GRAEF. Never. + +Mr. JENNER. Of course, the customer would make a lead slug from the mat +and then print it? + +Mr. GRAEF. Yes. Or, have a plate made, for example, in offset printing +from our negatives--he could burn in plates and which would run two +colors. He could burn his black plate and he could burn his red plate, +for example. + +Mr. JENNER. Well, I got you to digress a little bit from telling +us your teaching of Mr. Oswald from his gradual development or +undevelopment? + +Mr. GRAEF. Of course, Oswald was not the first one that has come into +our department, because his wasn't an unusual case. He was just another +employee among many whom I have trained during these years--through +these years. + +Mr. JENNER. Were there others you were training at this time? + +Mr. GRAEF. No. + +Mr. JENNER. Of substantially like experience? + +Mr. GRAEF. No. There were others in various stages of training, but +none who was starting from the very beginning, we'll say, so, of +course, even though he had had--he said he had had experience in +photography, we started from the very beginning because the papers that +you ordinarily use in amateur photography are somewhat different from +the papers that we use in our work. The film that you would use in +amateur photography is different than the film that we use in our work, +so we start from the beginning in every case and this was the situation +with Lee Oswald. + +I began--we'll say for the first 3 or 4 days--he probably followed me +around just to see what went on, learned how to make a print on the +contact frame the way that our customers require, and became familiar +with the routine of the department and little by little he was allowed +to do various things to begin his training. + +This period is rather indistinct because all this was going on--it +isn't a case of being able to devote all of one's time to a training, +at the same time that he was being trained, there was other work that +had to be produced, so he didn't receive--the full benefit, shall I +say, of all of my time. I would say rather, he received just the time +that I could allow him, which I always wanted to give him more time but +never seemed to find that time, so little by little, as I say, this +period is very indistinct, but little by little he learned to handle +the various papers and the films and then we began teaching him how to +work the modification cameras beginning with straight shooting. + +In other words--normal sizing of flax copy and also how to build jobs. +Each man is more or less an integrated supply of the work. The normal +thing in our department is for a man to pick up a job or jobs, go back +and shoot them, develop them, print them, dry them, bring them back up, +cut them out, and bring them back up to the front of the department. + +Mr. JENNER. When you say "print them," you mean make prints from the +negatives? + +Mr. GRAEF. Make prints from the negatives on photographic paper, bring +them back up to the front, reorganize them with their proper job +tickets, and then take those finished jobs up to the front delivery +desk. So, Lee began straight shooting--normal enlargement and reduction +of straight copy. + +Mr. JENNER. Now, you mean by straight copy--do you distinguish that +from the--from distortion photographing? + +Mr. GRAEF. Distortion work; yes. Now, the time that it took to bring +him up to this point may have been 2 or 3 months, at any rate. It was +at this time that we began, or he began to make a few mistakes on +sizing. He would take a job back and it might be that his orders were +to make it 4 inches wide and when the final print came up it might be +4-1/4 inches wide or 4-1/8 inches wide and this would have to be done +over. + +Mr. JENNER. Now, as much a difference as one-eighth of an inch on +sizing as against an order for, let's say, exactly 4 inches or for +one-eighth of an inch, as the case might be, would make that particular +work unusable? + +Mr. GRAEF. Correct. + +Mr. JENNER. This has to be exactitude? + +Mr. GRAEF. Right. This didn't mean that every job was wrong, but +little by little as the days passed and we got into--we'll say--into +the fourth and fifth month of his employment, more and more he was +being relied upon to produce this exact work and there were too many +times--it was his mistakes were above normal--he was making too many +mistakes. Of course, we helped him as much as we could to do a better +job. + +Mr. JENNER. Was it your impression along about this area that the +errors were ones of lack of skill, or do you have a recollection now of +any attributing on your part of those errors to lack of interest, lack +of industry, dissatisfaction with the position--would you give me your +impression in this connection, please? + +Mr. GRAEF. Well, my impression of his mistakes were somehow that he +just couldn't manage to avoid them. It wasn't that he lacked industry +or didn't try. Whenever he was asked to do a job over, he would do it +willingly for me, with no--he would be more perturbed at himself that +he had made an error, so I think he just couldn't--he somehow couldn't +manage to handle work that was that exact. It wasn't that he wasn't +trying or didn't work hard to do the job, but somehow he just couldn't +make it, and now, like I said, it wasn't every job that this happened, +but it was too frequent to allow. There were too many times that these +things had to be made over and they added to the final reason for +dismissing him. + +Mr. JENNER. You carry on--I want this in your own words without +prompting on my part. + +Mr. GRAEF. Sure. Now, this was approximately the fourth month that he +began to be given the responsibility for making these jobs, and it +began to become evident then that he was making these mistakes. We +kept, of course, trying to train him--now, by this time he was working +under other people, and many times he was going through the processes +of doing these jobs by himself and carrying the whole job through as I +have outlined previously. + +Mr. JENNER. This work didn't, I take it, require his creating any +copies? + +Mr. GRAEF. I beg your pardon? + +Mr. JENNER. Did you prepare copy--I'm talking about you personally? + +Mr. GRAEF. No; very, very seldom. + +Mr. JENNER. Do you have a department in which advertising copy is +prepared? + +Mr. GRAEF. If you mean by that--like pasting up advertisements? + +Mr. JENNER. No; I mean preparing them. + +Mr. GRAEF. Actually working on layouts and ideas to be used--creative +ideas and things like that? + +Mr. JENNER. Yes; the body of copy. + +Mr. GRAEF. No; we do for our own firm create small ads and so forth. + +Mr. JENNER. What I am getting at, he never reached the point which he +had to do any creating of copy in the sense that I am talking about, +which would then lead you to have some experience with him as to his +use of grammar? + +Mr. GRAEF. No. + +Mr. JENNER. Or his skills along those lines? + +Mr. GRAEF. No; now, in the course of his carrying these jobs through +and back in the darkroom, I began to hear vague rumors of friction +between him and the other employees. The nature of our business is such +that we are under pressure a good deal of the time to meet deadlines. + +Mr. JENNER. Time pressures? + +Mr. GRAEF. Yes; in the interest of teamwork and getting a job out, we +try to tend to overlook things like that. + +Mr. JENNER. Things like what? + +Mr. GRAEF. Flareups of temper or an ugly word or something like that +that someone who may be under particular pressure at the time, and +someone says the wrong thing--it might set them off a little bit, so +I began to hear rumors of some of these things happening with Lee, +but it has happened with other fellows also, but little by little, +I mean other fellows who have had these flareups--I have had them +myself--something will happen that will just be the straw that broke +the camel's back, and you will spout off, you know, but this began +happening--I began to hear rumors--I began, and of course, sometimes +the boss is the last to know, and I began hearing that--or began +noticing--that very few people liked him. He was very difficult to +get along with. Other people that worked with him, with whom I had +conversations and Lee's name came up or something came up about Lee, +they wouldn't speak kindly toward him, to say the very least, and +something might have happened between them and Lee that they hadn't +mentioned it to anyone--some word that had been said in an unfriendly +way, that they just overlooked or passed off, but it didn't leave +a good impression with them from then on. Lee was not one to make +friends. I never had any words with him at all. He never countered any +order that I gave him, he always did what I told him to do the way I +told him to do it. It might have been wrong sometimes, but he never was +antagonistic. + +Mr. JENNER. In other words, he might not have been able to carry out +your directions, but he tried to do so? + +Mr. GRAEF. That's so. + +Mr. JENNER. You didn't mean your directions to him might have been +wrong? + +Mr. GRAEF. No; he was not belligerent to me. Anything that I told him +to do, he did, or tried to do to the best of his ability. + +Mr. JENNER. But you began having the impression, with the increased +intensity, that he was not getting along with employees at his level? + +Mr. GRAEF. Right. I was a witness to one of these flareups which I +had, up to this time, taken not lightly, but passed it off as one +of those things that happen in our department quite frequently, but +I was quite close to one of Lee's flareups. I don't know who was +responsible--whether it was Lee or one of the other workers, so at the +time I couldn't actually reprimand anyone, so I didn't, but tried to +pacify and laugh the whole thing off and make some remark that "Well, +we are all under pressure. Let's get down and let's get on with the +job." Something to that effect. + +Then, the two people went their separate ways but it was quite a +flareup, a sudden flareup of temper--a quick chip on the shoulder thing +that I don't know--I have a hard time understanding people that lose +their temper so quickly. + +Mr. JENNER. Is that the impression you had of him? + +Mr. GRAEF. Yes; at that time--from that time on I did have that +impression. + +Mr. JENNER. Now, was this more an impression you gained from several +incidents rather than one isolated incident? + +Mr. GRAEF. No; of course, I have to take into account the evidence of +all the other people--some of the things that they said and the way +they didn't get along with him and then I saw the way he acted at this +particular time, and I had never been particularly close enough to the +boy so that I knew his personality. He was strictly a worker who was +training and he did the job, or tried to do the job, and so I wasn't +very close to his personality at all until this particular incident. +It was only when he began--after, we'll say, he got out from under my +wing as a trainer and began up to that time--he was following me around +and was doing what I told him and there was very little chance for him +to be alone with anyone and we didn't have any friction for about the +first 2 or 3 months that he was employed, but he then began to be given +the responsibility of doing these jobs himself. + +Mr. JENNER. Himself and with others? + +Mr. GRAEF. And with others. + +Mr. JENNER. But not under your very immediate supervision? + +Mr. GRAEF. Not under my immediate supervision; no. + +Mr. JENNER. Did this call for him, then, to work and cooperate with +others? + +Mr. GRAEF. Right + +Mr. JENNER. And this was really the first time---- + +Mr. GRAEF. Then, we'll say his personality began to come out. In +the moving around the darkroom, the way you have to be congenial, +cooperative in turning the light on and off as the various stages of +the work progress, you may be developing film and someone may be coming +out of one of our rooms and need the light on and there has to be a +certain amount of give and take in these relationships and it began to +become evident--some of the passages--passageways through our darkroom +aren't particularly wide and everyone has learned to manage. You +can't--you can pass one another, but not without each of you sort of +squeezing by a little bit as you go, and it began to be evident that he +wasn't congenial or cooperative in working with the rest of the people +and moving about the darkroom and so forth. + +Let me see, there was an incident about a Russian newspaper deal--I +was working at my desk one time and I looked over and it was probably +a slack time in our business, and I looked over and Lee was reading a +newspaper, and I could see--it was from a distance of about 8 to 10 +feet, I suppose, something like that, and it was just far enough away +that I could see it was not a usual newspaper, and I asked him what he +was reading, and he said, "A Russian newspaper." I said, "A what?" And +he said, "A Russian newspaper." I said, "Let's see it, and he brought +it over and I said something like "What is the action on this?" And +he said, "I studied Russian in Korea." This fit in with his previous +statement when we employed him about being in Korea, when he was a +marine, and he said, "I like to keep up--keep in practice being able +to read the Russian language and study it or something to that effect, +and I said, "Well, Lee, I wouldn't bring anything like that down here +again, because some people might not take kindly to your reading +anything like that." + +Mr. JENNER. Did you ask him the source of this newspaper? + +Mr. GRAEF. No; no. + +Mr. JENNER. Whether it was printed in Russia or whether he had +subscribed to it? + +Mr. GRAEF. It seems to me it was the "Crocodile." Now, it might not +have been, but it just seems to me at the time that it was, but, of +course, that too didn't seem particularly odd to me because a great +many people in the country are studying that language these days and +the fact that he had been a marine and been in Korea, according to the +report, it seemed reasonably plausible that he would have learned that +language, or studied it and to me, certainly, of course, I know how +people are and that there might be some--he might be making trouble for +himself by causing suspicion and so forth, by having that newspaper or +at least running around with it, flaunting it, we'll say. + +Mr. JENNER. When did this occur with respect to his period of +employment--this incident? + +Mr. GRAEF. I can't really say for sure, but it must have been about the +fourth or fifth month that he was there. + +Mr. JENNER. Was it a factor in his ultimate discharge? + +Mr. GRAEF. Let me say that didn't help. Taken with the other--his +personality, his not being able to do the job the way he should--when +I say, "His personality," I mean the friction between the other +employees. I didn't--it didn't actually weigh heavily, but it didn't +do his case any good, let's put it that way. I didn't fire him +specifically because he had the newspaper in his hand. + +Mr. JENNER. Now, I put words in your mouth that he was discharged? + +Mr. GRAEF. Yes; he was discharged. + +Mr. JENNER. Did you discuss this with him? + +Mr. GRAEF. I did. + +Mr. JENNER. Would you tell us about that, please? + +Mr. GRAEF. His record, as all this has brought out was--adding up to +where he was not a desirable employee. His relationships with other +employees had reached the point where no one that I know of was +really friendly or liked him. His work as we progressed into the more +intricate details of our production, didn't improve and it began to be +evident after all the training that we had given up to this point that +now that he was in a position where he should be able to produce jobs, +actually he was not able to do so, and after a reasonable---- + +Mr. JENNER. Was there ever any thought in your mind as to his ability +ultimately to be able to do so? + +Mr. GRAEF. Yes; I reached the opinion that he would not have--he would +never be the kind of an employee that I was looking for, giving him +every chance, you can make a mistake on one job or two jobs, and you +always feel like you must--"Let's try it one more time," and this was +my thought, because after all, there had been several months passed +where we had brought him up to this point and I feel we gave him every +chance or tried to give him every chance to make a success, and still +he was falling down and making these mistakes--sizing errors--and +camerawork. + +When he had to make these things over, he would be mad at himself. He +would go back and shoot it again, but it is obvious that he was taking +twice as long when these things happened to produce one job because he +was having to do the whole thing over again to get it right, that it +couldn't be tolerated for much longer. + +About this time, I think it was in April, we had a fluctuation in +business--it dropped and I thought, "Well, this is the time to let Lee +Harvey Oswald--to let him go," so I called him back into the darkroom +one day and I said, "Lee, business is"---- + +Mr. JENNER. When you say this conversation took place in the darkroom, +was the room dark? + +Mr. GRAEF. There were dim red lights. + +Mr. JENNER. Why did you call him back in the darkroom rather than some +other place? + +Mr. GRAEF. At the time it was the--I didn't want to embarrass the boy. + +Mr. JENNER. This was a private talk? + +Mr. GRAEF. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. Out of the presence of anyone other than yourself and +Oswald? + +Mr. GRAEF. Out of the presence of anyone else--yes. + +Mr. JENNER. And that was one of the reasons for your calling him back +there? + +Mr. GRAEF. Yes. I don't have a private office. My desk is with the +other people in the production of work, and I don't have any private +facilities where I can talk to someone, and back in the corner of the +darkroom, it is illuminated by red lights. + +Mr. JENNER. Are these infrared lights? Is that what you mean? + +Mr. GRAEF. No; they are just red neon lights that provide dim +illumination, but at this particular spot in the darkroom, I can see +when anyone is within 15 or 20 feet of me, and, of course, I could +lower my voice and not embarrass him when I released him, so I said, +"Lee, come on back, I would like to talk to you." So, we went back, and +I said, "Lee, I think this is as good a time as any to cut it short." +I said, "Business is pretty slow at this time, but the point is that +you haven't been turning the work out like you should. There has been +friction with other people," and so on. + +Mr. JENNER. What did he say when you said that? + +Mr. GRAEF. Nothing. And I said, "This is, I think, the best time to +just make a break of it." I believe I gave him a few days, and I said, +"Feel free, of course, to make any calls of the Texas Employment +Commission where you came from originally," and I told him, "I think +you tried to do the work, but I just don't think that you have the +qualities for doing the work that we need." + +And, there was no outburst on his part. He took this the whole time +looking at the floor, I believe, and after I was through, he said, +"Well, thank you." And he turned around and walked off. + +Mr. JENNER. Have you had occasion in your career to discharge other +employees? + +Mr. GRAEF. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. And recalling the reaction of other employees, could you +tell us your present view or opinion as to your experience--comparing +your experience with the discharge of Lee Harvey Oswald with the +discharge of other employees--was it usual and normal? + +Mr. GRAEF. Yes; I think it was just about the usual. He might have been +perhaps a shade more quiet. There were no questions asked about why I +thought he wasn't qualified. + +Mr. JENNER. Do you think he was aware of it? + +Mr. GRAEF. I think he was aware of it; yes. + +Mr. JENNER. No outbursts of any kind? + +Mr. GRAEF. No. + +Mr. JENNER. Anything said about what might happen if he sought +references in any future employment? + +Mr. GRAEF. Yes; I told him--I volunteered the information. I said, +"Lee, if there is another job that you find, I'll be glad to give +you a recommendation, a good recommendation," because--I told him, +"I think you have tried," and I think he had. It would have been, of +course, with reservations--any new employer that had called me for a +recommendation, I would have had to say something about his relations +with other employees. + +Mr. JENNER. And that would have been somewhat negative? + +Mr. GRAEF. That's correct; but he did try to become a worker. It wasn't +that he wasn't industrious--he was not lazy. He, to the best of his +ability, tried but the ability was not there. + +Mr. JENNER. Now, I take it then from your recital that his discharge +was for the reasons you have given and not because of any past history +that you discovered with respect to him? + +Mr. GRAEF. No. + +Mr. JENNER. And, throughout all of this employment, you had no +information with regard to his past history other than you have related +to us? + +Mr. GRAEF. No. + +Mr. JENNER. Does Jaggars-Chiles-Stovall do any highly secret work of +any character or highly confidential work? + +Mr. GRAEF. Yes, yes; we do some work for, I think, the Army Map +Service. We do a certain type of work for the Engineers, I believe, but +I couldn't be sure about that. + +Mr. JENNER. Is that in your department or under your supervision or +direction? + +Mr. GRAEF. No. + +Mr. JENNER. Would he have had any contact with that? + +Mr. GRAEF. No. + +Mr. JENNER. Did there come to your attention any scuttlebutt among +employees as to any past history of his? + +Mr. GRAEF. No; I think if it had, I would have in fact--I am very +positive I would have investigated that. + +Mr. JENNER. Did any of the reports to you, which you have detailed to +me, include anything with regard to any political theories or arguments +or positions that he took as with respect to other employees? + +Mr. GRAEF. No; none. None that came to my attention. There was never +any political conversations that I heard about him or between him, or +that I heard him talking with the people or anything like that. + +Mr. JENNER. I think I have no more questions. I would like to put, +however, the general question that I do put in all these depositions. +Is there anything that might occur to you that I have not stimulated +to ask you but that you think--any incident that occurred or any +circumstance that you think might possibly be of help to the Commission +in their investigation of this man and of the overall incident we are +investigating? + +Mr. GRAEF. No; I really don't think so. Of course, the whole thing is +just a tragic, unbelievable thing. + +Mr. JENNER. Yes. + +Mr. GRAEF. That you rub shoulders with someone who did such a thing is +just fantastic. + +Mr. JENNER. If he did it? + +Mr. GRAEF. It's just unbelievable--it's still hard to believe that you +were in such close contact with anyone that took part in the events. + +Mr. JENNER. Now, is there anything in my off-the-record discussion +we have had, and there have been substantially none, that took place +during that interlude that I have failed to bring out? + +Mr. GRAEF. I might add this--I'll let you repeat that question in a +moment. + +Mr. JENNER. All right. + +Mr. GRAEF. This thought occurred--I was trying to think a moment ago +what I was going to do, because there was something that I wanted to +make mention of for what it's worth, is that at this point during his +employment with us, he was very anxious for overtime work. + +Mr. JENNER. Is this the 4- or 5-month period you are talking about now? + +Mr. GRAEF. Yes; that's correct, which if I may assume, he needed the +money. It was invariably Friday afternoon--and Saturday, of course, is +an overtime day to us and quite frequently we run Saturday and Saturday +work we do at time and a half, which comes into play, and in fact, +invariably Friday afternoon he would volunteer and ask if we needed him +the next day. Then, unfortunately, of course, as I have mentioned, his +work didn't come up to the quality that we needed so it was very, very +seldom that we ever brought him in unless we were in a real bad--had an +urgent work that absolutely had to go, but he desperately wanted to be +called in on Saturday for overtime work. + +Mr. JENNER. Did any of his work, or was there any occasion when his +ability to operate an automobile arose? + +Mr. GRAEF. No; as far as I know, he never had one. + +Mr. JENNER. And there was no occasion in his work when he might have +been called upon to drive an automobile? + +Mr. GRAEF. No. + +Mr. JENNER. So, you have no impression--I gather--as to whether he +could or could not drive an automobile or how well he might do so? + +Mr. GRAEF. No. The only impression that I have is that he rode the bus +almost everywhere. + +I know--I'm pretty sure he did not have a car and he used to ride the +bus. + +Mr. JENNER. I show you Commission Exhibits 451, 453, 454, 455, and 456, +and ask you to examine those and tell me if the man who is depicted in +those photographs bears any similarity or likeness to the man you knew +as Lee Harvey Oswald? You might spread them out and it would give you a +better view. + +Mr. GRAEF. Very slight; but to anyone who knew Lee, they would +immediately say "No." + +Mr. JENNER. Did you ever see him attired in the fashion that the man +shown on those photographs is attired? + +Mr. GRAEF. No; I don't think I ever did. Now, toward the end of his +employment, most of the time he used to wear a white T-shirt to work. I +think he might have had a dark jacket over it. + +Mr. JENNER. A zipper jacket--lightweight? + +Mr. GRAEF. Something perhaps--but it was rather dark, I think, but not +like this. + +Mr. JENNER. Is there in any discussion we have had possibly off the +record which you regard as inconsistent with any testimony you have +given here, and if so, what? + +Mr. GRAEF. Like what, for example? Now, when you say "inconsistent with +any testimony," what do you mean? + +Mr. JENNER. Well, for example, that you might have said off the record +that you were uncertain as to whether--when you first interviewed him +he was, in fact, with a suit coat with a shirt and tie, whereas, when I +asked you on the record you were pretty firm about that sort of thing? + +Mr. GRAEF. Yes; I am pretty firm. No, no; all of this testimony that I +have given you is factual and true. + +Mr. JENNER. There is nothing you have said on the record that is +inconsistent with anything you have said off the record? + +Mr. GRAEF. No--it hasn't been--anything that I have said has been an +opinion or formulations--it has just been--it is just strictly as I +remember it. + +Mr. JENNER. And to your best recollection, I have brought everything +that was said off the record that is pertinent here and have got it on +the record. + +Mr. GRAEF. Yes; I believe so. + +Mr. JENNER. Mr. Davis, do you have any questions? + +Mr. DAVIS. No. + +Mr. JENNER. Thank you very much, sir. + +Mr. GRAEF. Well, you are certainly welcome. + +Mr. JENNER. You have a right to read your deposition, if you wish to, +or you may waive it. You have that right, and you may waive it if you +wish. The reporter will let you know one way or the other. + +Mr. GRAEF. What is the machinations of getting a copy? + +Mr. JENNER. When Miss Oliver has prepared a copy, you may call in and +find out from Mr. Sanders and come down and read it, as you see fit and +sign it. + +Mr. GRAEF. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. Or, you may waive that. If you wish a copy of your +testimony, you may obtain by arrangement with Miss Oliver. She will +furnish you one at whatever her usual prices are. + +Mr. GRAEF. I think--I don't see any need for it--for signing it. There +it is. + +Mr. JENNER. Mr. Graef, as these reports reached you from your +employees, arousing your attention to the fact that some friction +had arisen and was continuing as between him and other employees, +what, if anything, did you do to acquaint yourself better with those +circumstances and in that connection, tell us whether you talked with +others, whether you talked with Lee--in general, just what did you do +in that connection? + +Mr. GRAEF. The rumors of these flareups, we'll say, I heard about them +going back--we'll say, to some 3 months. He was employed with us for a +total of 6 months. For about the first 3 months he was in training and +it was only after this 3 months' period that he began to be in a close +association with the other employees, so about this time, we'll say, +the friction began between him and the other employees. + +Now, several weeks went past--I'm sure--when these things came to pass +and when I heard about them, and this flareup that I witnessed, and I +don't know who was to blame, whether it was Lee or whether it was the +other fellow. I happened to be on the other side of the darkroom at the +time and the two people were both, as I recall, trying to develop film +in the same pan, and one was getting in the way of the other one, and +ordinarily there is no--we don't have any trouble about this. All the +jobs are rush, and you just make allowances and move over a little bit +and both of you get in there together. + +This, I think, is what caused this particular thing, but Lee was quick +to--he had a chip on his shoulder, and he made--who spoke first, I +really don't recall, but somebody said something about, "How about +moving over a little bit?" And the other fellow said, "What do you +mean, I have been here first," and one thing led to another, but it +was over just about as quickly as it began, so this was the first time +that this became evident, but as I said, couldn't actually lay it as it +being Lee's fault. Now, these rumors come to me quite frequently. In +the whole department we may have 18 or 20 people. + +Mr. JENNER. How many people work under you? + +Mr. GRAEF. Directly under me, the day shift is seven or eight, and we +have a few on the night shift also. We work quite close to this other +department--which does photographic work also, and we have a sink on +our side for camera work and then there is a developing sink back to +back, at which this other department develops their work. + +Mr. JENNER. What do they do? + +Mr. GRAEF. Setting type photographically. So, out of these many +people, some of them are more prone to carry tales and others, of +course, and you have to weigh the evidence, we'll say, and some of the +people that had come to me during this time and just mentioned, or +we'll say, scuttlebutt that went around about Lee being hard to get +along with, where, in fact, some of the people are hard to get along +with themselves, so you just had to more or less try to get along +with everyone. We all have to do that and it wasn't until this scene +happened that I saw how Lee's temper worked, but the--the overwhelming +mass of evidence--everyone it seemed no one liked him. + +Mr. JENNER. He had no friends? + +Mr. GRAEF. No friends. + +Mr. JENNER. And he didn't appear to you to seek to cultivate any? + +Mr. GRAEF. By this time, you see, this 6 months had elapsed and at this +time work was suffering and he at this time--it was definite that he +had no friends. Everyone couldn't be wrong, and so all of this evidence +weighed against the decision to keep him on as an employee. + +Mr. JENNER. It culminated in his discharge. + +Mr. GRAEF. In his dismissal? + +Mr. JENNER. All right, I guess that's about it. Thank you. + +Mr. GRAEF. Well, I hope I have been of whatever help I have been. + +Mr. JENNER. I am sorry to inconvenience you in this matter. + +Mr. GRAEF. If I can be of further assistance, please call me and I will +be glad to do what I can. + +Mr. JENNER. All right, thank you very much. + + + + +TESTIMONY OF DENNIS HYMAN OFSTEIN + +The testimony of Dennis Hyman Ofstein was taken at 2 p.m., on March 30, +1964, in the office of the U.S. attorney, 301 Post Office Building, +Bryan and Ervay Streets, Dallas, Tex., by Mr. Albert E. Jenner, Jr., +assistant counsel of the President's Commission. Robert T. Davis, +assistant attorney general of Texas, was present. + + +Mr. JENNER. I am Albert E. Jenner, Jr., counsel for the Commission, and +this is Miss Oliver. Would you rise and be sworn? + +Do you promise on this deposition which I am about to take of you to +tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Miss Oliver, this is Dennis Hyman Ofstein [spelling] +D-e-n-n-i-s H-y-m-a-n O-f-s-t-e-i-n. Is that correct? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. And Mr. Ofstein, you received, did you, a letter from Mr. +Rankin? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. General counsel for the Commission, with which were +enclosed three documents, a copy of Executive Order 11130 creating the +Commission to investigate the assassination of President Kennedy. + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. That is an order of the President of the United States, +Lyndon B. Johnson. + +There is a copy of Senate Joint Resolution 137, authorizing the +creation of the Commission and a copy of the rules of procedure of the +Commission which we adopt. + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. And you appear voluntarily? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. The Commission, as you have learned, from those documents, +is investigating all of the facts and circumstances surrounding the +assassination of President Kennedy, and to give particular attention to +Lee Harvey Oswald and anybody who had any contact with him during his +lifetime. It is our information that you had some contact with him, or +with people who had contact with him. The Commission is interested in +that contact, and I would like to ask you questions about it, if I may. + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Very well, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. First, tell me a little bit about yourself. Are you a +former serviceman? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. And what branch of service did you serve? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. I was in the Army, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. And when did you go in and when were you discharged? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. I went in in August, I believe, in 1957, and I was +discharged November 1960. + +Mr. JENNER. That was an honorable discharge, I assume? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. And do you reside in Dallas or Fort Worth? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. I reside in Dallas at the present time. + +Mr. JENNER. Are you a native of Dallas? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. No, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. What is your home town? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. I reside in Dallas at the present time; I was born in St. +Louis and I have lived in Florida for the most part of my life. + +Mr. JENNER. And are you a married man? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. How long have you lived in Dallas? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Approximately 3 years. + +Mr. JENNER. That would take us back into 1961--in any event? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. And what has been the nature of your business, occupation, +employment, profession or vocation? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. For the past 2 years I have been with +Jaggars-Chiles-Stovall as a cameraman. + +Mr. JENNER. As a cameraman? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. What was your work immediately prior to that, by whom were +you employed? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. I was working for Sinclair Refining Co. at a local service +station. + +Mr. JENNER. Here in Dallas? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Did you become acquainted with Lee Harvey Oswald at any +time during his lifetime? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Here in Dallas? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Start at the very beginning, and in your own words tell the +circumstances under which that acquaintance arose. + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Well; it was when he became employed by +Jaggars-Chiles-Stovall as a cameraman trainee and he was in the same +department I was and due to the fact that I had worked there and knew +a little bit about the job, I was--as well as everyone else down +there--expected to help him and more or less--not supervise, but kind +of keep my eye on him and help him along. + +Mr. JENNER. What is your age, by the way? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. I am 24. + +Mr. JENNER. You were born in 1940? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. 1939, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. 1939, and Mr. Oswald's birth date was October 18, 1939, +you--so you were the same age? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. You were already employed by Jaggars-Chiles-Stovall when +Lee Oswald came there, were you? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Give me your best recollection as to when that was? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. It seems like it was October or November 1962. + +Mr. JENNER. I have his employment card here--October 12, 1962--does +that sort of square with your recollection? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Yes, sir; roughly. + +Mr. JENNER. Had you had any prior experience as a cameraman when you +became employed by Jaggars-Chiles-Stovall? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. No, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. You are still employed by them? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. You were initially a trainee as well as Oswald? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. And how did you become employed there? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. I was laid off by Sinclair Refining Co. and I registered +with the Texas Employment Commission. + +Mr. JENNER. Did anybody in particular handle that over there at the +Commission? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. I don't recall who the person was at the time. + +Mr. JENNER. A lady or a gentleman? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. I'm fairly certain it was a young lady and they sent me to +Jaggars-Chiles-Stovall. + +Mr. JENNER. Does the name Latham--Louise Latham trigger any +recollection? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. The name is familiar--whether she was there or not--I +don't know. + +Mr. JENNER. Is that name familiar in connection with the Texas +Employment Commission? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. All right. I interrupted you--go ahead. + +Mr. OFSTEIN. I was sent there---- + +Mr. JENNER. And with whom did you talk when you came there? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. I was there early for the appointment and I talked to +Leonard Calverly, who was the daytime foreman in the camera department, +and he showed me around the place, and he talked to me and told me the +final decision would be up to Mr. Graef. + +Mr. JENNER. That's G-r-a-e-f [spelling]? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. He is head of what? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. He is a supervisor in charge of the camera department, +and I talked with him at approximately 9 o'clock and he seemed +satisfied--he would give me a try as a trainee, and wanted to know when +I could come to work, and I told him that morning and I went to work +immediately. + +Mr. JENNER. Had you had any experience in the use of cameras? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Not in the same type of camera--no, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. What experience had you had in camera work? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. It had been strictly pleasure photography with smaller +cameras. + +Mr. JENNER. Had you done any developing work? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. You had had some darkroom experience? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Very much? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Not a whole lot--no, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Did either of these gentlemen inquire of you as to your +experience in that direction? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Both of them? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. I don't recall--I know that Mr. Graef did. + +Mr. JENNER. What kind of photography work does Jaggars-Chiles-Stovall +do? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. It's strictly commercial--advertising type of photography. +We make posters and poster effects and different types of effects +for different advertising media--newspaper, magazines, and so +forth--billboards. + +Mr. JENNER. What kind of cameras are employed? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. I'm not sure of the brand names we have. + +Mr. JENNER. I'm thinking more of the size, weight, whether they are +portable or aren't portable, or whether they are fixed or aren't fixed. + +Mr. OFSTEIN. They are fixed, they move on a track to determine the size +of the copy that is photographed, and they have fixed mounted lenses in +the walls. + +Mr. JENNER. And you move from one lens to another, is that the way? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. No, sir; you mount the copy to be photographed on the +board and you move that board, and the board that you put your film +on--to get it different sizes. + +Mr. JENNER. What is the character of the training? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Mainly they start you out with doing small jobs--just +normal--what we call straight shots. It amounts to getting a size and +photographing it and developing it, opaquing the negatives, and making +nice clean prints, and then as you progress you do more difficult type +work. + +Mr. JENNER. Do you know what lithography is, lithographing? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. No, sir; I have heard the term--that's all. + +Mr. JENNER. Making metal plates? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Or reproductions? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Is there any lithographic work done by that company? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. I'm not certain--I don't believe so. + +Mr. JENNER. Do they do any printing themselves? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. What is the nature of that kind of work? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. They have the photosetter machine which does the printing +on film usually for a transfer to some other surface. They have hot +metal, they have linotype and monotype, and, of course, they have +reprint presses. + +Mr. JENNER. And you were trained to do what? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Strictly camera work. + +Mr. JENNER. Did your work extend beyond the taking of the photographic +imprint on a film? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Yes, sir; we were taught also to set filmotype, which is a +process of writing out on a sheet of paper from a film negative that's +already been put into a roll and making words and sentences and so on +and photographing that, also, distortion of negatives and different +types of copy. + +Mr. JENNER. What do you do to the distortion work? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Well, they have different processes--they have what they +call perspective, which entails turning the copy board and the film +mounting board at different angles from each other to make one end +look smaller going off at a distance, and they have what is known as +stretches and squats, which entails putting mirrors before the copy +board to make a character or letter taller or smaller and doing circles. + +Mr. JENNER. They would have a magnifying or contracting mirror? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Yes, sir; and circles which is done with a circle device +using a film positive to curve a straight line around and, of course, +they have their different reproduction effects, such as the screens and +the halftones. + +Mr. JENNER. Do you know whether this company has done any confidential +or secret work for any agency of the United States? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. I don't know the nature of the classification. I do know +that they do work for the U.S. Government. + +Mr. JENNER. Have you ever participated in any of that work? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Only during strike--approximately 2 weeks. + +Mr. JENNER. Do you know whether Lee Oswald did? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. No, sir--I'm sure he didn't. + +Mr. JENNER. Is that work confined to those in the plant who are +particularly skilled or trained to do that particular kind of work? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Had Lee Oswald at the time his employment there was +terminated reached that degree of skill? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. No, sir; that is handled by a different department +altogether. + +Mr. JENNER. And how long had you been employed there when Lee Harvey +came with the company? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. I was hired in March, 2 years ago, 1962--I would say +approximately 9 months. + +Mr. JENNER. Do you recall when he came--about approximately when? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. October 1962. + +Mr. JENNER. You became acquainted with him when he became employed? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Did you have any social contact with him during all the +period of his employment? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. No, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Were you in contact with him because of the employment you +had and the work you were doing and the work he was doing? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Did you ever become sufficiently acquainted with him that +you either sought to visit him or invite him to visit you, or did an +occasion arise ultimately in which you thought your acquaintance was +sufficient or your interest in him or his wife or both of them was +sufficient that you sought to have some social contact? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. When was that? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. On the day that his employment terminated, I told him +that I hoped he found another job and we would have to get together +sometime, being he was married and I was, and I believe it was +approximately a week later when I wrote a letter to him inviting him +and his wife to come and visit us some Saturday evening and have social +activities. + +Mr. JENNER. Was there any response to that letter? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. No, sir; none whatsoever. + +Mr. JENNER. From the day his employment terminated to the present, have +you seen him in person? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. No, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. From that day until the present, had you had any contact at +all with him? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. No, sir; only my attempt at inviting him and his wife to +the house. + +Mr. JENNER. Other than that circumstance? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. No, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. How did you know where to write him? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. He gave me his address--post office box. + +Mr. JENNER. Do you recall the number? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. I have it with me. + +Mr. JENNER. You made a note of it, I take it? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Yes; I wrote it down. + +Mr. JENNER. And you still have it? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. I believe so--yes, sir; Post Office Box 2915, Dallas, Tex. + +Mr. JENNER. Did he give you a telephone number? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. No, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. What, if anything, do you know about Oswald's ability to +operate a motor vehicle? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. None whatsoever. + +Mr. JENNER. Did your acquaintance reach the point at which he talked +with you some of his past history? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Let's start back to the time he became employed in October +1962, and you start in your own words and tell us your acquaintance +with him, how that acquaintance ripened, if it did ripen, the nature of +your work with him at the Jaggars-Chiles-Stovall plant. + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Well, after he became employed, we worked more or less +side by side while he was training and everything, and the contact I +had with him--it was necessary to teach him how to operate the cameras +and how to opaque negatives and make clean prints and just the general +work around there. + +Mr. JENNER. Now, sticking right at that point--what was his skill and +acquaintance in that connection when he first started? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Well, he seemed to take a great interest in it as far as +skill went--it was, I would say, at the beginning approximately the +same as anyone else's would have been. + +Mr. JENNER. Little or none? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Little or none; yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. All right, proceed. + +Mr. OFSTEIN. He did improve somewhat, as far as I could see, but never +turned out extreme quality work such as is required to leave the plant, +and, of course, that is what caused the termination of his employment. +It must have been about January of 1963, that--of course--at the time, +he was having trouble getting along with people. He wasn't the outgoing +type who tried to make friends. You had to more or less stick with him +and be with him constantly to even talk to him freely. He would shove +his way in places, he wouldn't wait his turn at certain machines, and +the reason I got along with him as well as I did, possibly, is because +I am outgoing and I try to get along with everybody, and I believe that +their own disposition is theirs. If I don't like it, I don't exactly +have to put up with it, but I feel that there are people who don't like +me for things I do, so I overlooked most of his bad traits and things +that most of the other fellows got upset about and mad about. And, +we talked occasionally and he wanted to know at one point if it was +possible to make an enlargement of a normal negative there such as is +taken in a small camera and I told him, "Yes," and showed him how to do +it, and he had one picture that he wanted to enlarge. It showed a river +of some sort, with a fairly nice looking building in the background, +and I asked him if that was in Japan because he had been stationed in +Japan. + +Mr. JENNER. He told you he had? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Yes, sir; and he said, "No, it wasn't in Japan," but he +wouldn't elaborate on it, and I found out later that it was in Minsk. + +Mr. JENNER. How much later did you find that out? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Possibly the latter part of February, or the middle part +of February 1963. + +Mr. JENNER. How did you find that out? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. He came down with some Russian literature one day. + +Mr. JENNER. Russian literature--what was the form of this literature? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. It was a newspaper, I believe, at the time. + +Mr. JENNER. English or Russian? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Russian. + +Mr. JENNER. Printed in Russian hieroglyphics? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Yes, sir; yes. + +Mr. JENNER. In other words, it was a Russian language publication? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Yes, sir; published in the Soviet Union. + +Mr. JENNER. Did he show it to you? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. He didn't exactly show it to me, but it was in plain view. + +Mr. JENNER. Did you look at it? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Do you remember anything about it that would tend to +identify it? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Not extremely clearly--it was possibly a copy of the +Soviet White Russian, I believe is what the title of it is, but I +noticed that there--we had a conversation about the paper. + +Mr. JENNER. Was anybody present in addition to yourself and Oswald? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. I don't believe so; no, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. What was the substance of the conversation, first? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Well, he saw me looking at the paper and he wanted to know +if I understood anything that was written there, as I had written down +a couple of characters and I told him I read a little and understood a +little, and therefore I asked him if he could read the paper, and he +said, "Yes," he understood Russian very well, and that was possibly the +thing that brought our friendship or acquaintanceship closer to being a +friendship than anyone else's down there. + +Mr. JENNER. You discovered a common interest other than your work? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Where had you learned to decipher Russian characters? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. I learned this while I was in the service. + +Mr. JENNER. Where were you stationed? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. I was stationed in Germany for the active part of my tour. +I was stationed in California for my training and at the various and +sundry other little towns for basic training and temporary status. + +Mr. JENNER. Did you take any work in the language school out in +California at Monterey? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. What language did you study there? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Russian. + +Mr. JENNER. Tell me how that came about? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Well, when I went in the service I was interested in +radio--I was a disc jockey at the time, and the closest thing my +recruiting sergeant said that I could get to radio would be possibly +with the Army security agency, so I signed up, and after basic training +I went to Fort Devens, Mass., and was held there on a temporary status +while the agency determined what type training I should have, and I was +given a language ability test and passed that and had a choice of three +languages to take, and Russian was my first choice and I was sent to +Monterey to study. + +Mr. JENNER. And how long were you at Monterey? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. One year. + +Mr. JENNER. And was that entire year spent in the study of the Russian +language? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. And I assume, with an entire year's study at that special +school of Monterey, you acquired a facility with the language, did you? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Not as well as I should have; no, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. And why was that? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Well, I was a little on the young side then and I was +interested in other things and the freedom to leave the post and go to +town and the availability of recreation there deterred my studies. + +Mr. JENNER. I see. You acquired some facility in reading Russian? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. And some facility in speaking Russian? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. Was this conversational Russian? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. What about writing Russian? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Yes, sir; all that was covered. + +Mr. JENNER. And at the end of the 1 year what happened? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. I was sent to an oversea duty station in Germany and +completed my tour there. + +Mr. JENNER. Did you pursue your study of the Russian language at +anytime from the time you left Monterey until the present? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Only in little--what you might say, self study in spurts. + +Mr. JENNER. All right. I interrupted you--you told him you could handle +a few characters? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. Did you then tell him about your study of the Russian +language when you were in the Army? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. No, sir; he asked me where I had learned it and I told him +I had picked it up during the time I was in the service, as well as the +German language, which I picked up while I was stationed in Germany, +and I asked him where he had learned to read Russian and he wouldn't +elaborate on it at first, and after a period of time--I don't know how +long--he did admit to me that he had been in the Soviet Union and my +assumption was possibly that he had worked as an agent of the United +States at the first. + +Mr. JENNER. What did he tell you, if he ever did, as to where he +acquired his knowledge of and facility with the Russian language? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. He never did elaborate on whether he learned it in the +Soviet Union or before or just how he had picked it up. + +Mr. JENNER. He was uncommunicative on that subject? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. More or less; yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. But you did ask him directly? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. And he did not respond? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. No, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Did you attempt to converse with him in Russian or he with +you? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. We said a few words in Russian to each other--I would +more or less ask him or tell him, "Good morning" and ask him how he +was feeling or some other things like that, and he would respond and +usually make a criticism on my ability to speak the language. + +Mr. JENNER. He would make criticism--was that a friendly criticism on +his part? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. It wasn't ridicule? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. No, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. All right; go ahead. + +Mr. OFSTEIN. And he seemed very happy of the fact that I was able to +speak a little Russian, and he seemed to enjoy that more than any of +the other things down there. + +Mr. JENNER. With regard to your facility with the language, did you +have a greater facility to understand it when spoken by someone else +than you did with reading it or speaking it yourself? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. And did he speak to you in Russian from time to time? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. From time to time--very seldom. + +Mr. JENNER. You say he asked you to help him make an enlargement of a +print or of a film? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. It was a print and he wanted a negative on it, so I +got him a continuous tone negative, which is the type required for +reproduction. + +Mr. JENNER. Could you tell us what you mean by that--somebody has a +positive print? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. And that's what he had? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Right. + +Mr. JENNER. And it showed a river and a nice building in the background? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. And he wanted it enlarged? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. What did you do? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. I shot a negative of it from a masking film, which is the +type film required to reproduce a photograph such as is used by most +people of children or their houses or their cars, and showed him how to +put it in the enlarger and blow it up and the type of paper to use, the +different contrasts of paper, and he made the enlargement of the print. +It was a pretty rough print--it had been torn at one time. + +Mr. JENNER. You mean his print had been torn? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Was it a photograph or a postcard, or was it something that +you were under the impression he had taken? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Himself? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Right. + +Mr. JENNER. With a camera--what I would call a Brownie camera? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. That sort of thing? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Right. + +Mr. JENNER. All right; go ahead. + +Mr. OFSTEIN. After I showed him how to do that, he experimented with it +a little bit and got what he thought was possibly the best reproduction +he could have gotten of it, and several times thereafter he made +enlargements of pictures that he had while he was in the service, +pictures that he said were taken in Japan, showing snow on the ground +in bivouac areas and so on with himself in several of them. + +Mr. JENNER. Were there any more pictures of Russia, taken in Russia? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Not that I noticed. If he had any, he didn't show them. + +Mr. JENNER. But he did not have the facility himself to make these +enlargements, you had to show him how to do it? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. About what period of time was this with respect to when he +started working and when his employment was terminated? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. I would just make a guess that it was about 1 month after +he started, because he seemed interested in whether the company would +allow him to reproduce his own pictures, and I told him that while they +didn't sanction that sort of thing, that people do it now and then. +They do it occasionally and end up reproducing a couple of pictures +that wasn't anything out of the way. + +Mr. JENNER. He did reach a point where he told you something of his +background? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. His past history? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Tell us about that. + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Well, he said that he was in the Marine Corps and that +after he disclosed that he had been in the Soviet Union, he told me +that that had been after his tour of service with the Marines, and +again he wouldn't elaborate on how he was there or why he was there, +and as I say, at that time I presumed he was possibly with the U.S. +Government or on a scholarship basis or some other basis and just +didn't want to talk about it, so I didn't pursue it any further, and I +discarded this idea after I learned that he had a Russian wife. + +Mr. JENNER. When did that develop? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. That must have been about the middle or the latter part of +February of 1963. + +Mr. JENNER. How did you learn that? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. He brought it up one day when we were speaking of the +Russian language and I was talking to him about it--or we were talking +together, I should say, about the Soviet Union, and he was telling me +various things about their way of life over there and he mentioned that +he had married a Russian girl, a White Russian. + +Mr. JENNER. Can you tell us now what he said about what his life over +there and his reactions to it--what did he say in that whole area in +substance? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Well, the main thing--he dwelled on their difference of +life--mainly to do with their food and the habits of the people and the +military installations and the disbursement of the military units. + +He mentioned that they used caviar over there on bread the way we use +butter, because of the lack of butter and dairy products, and how you +would find things like loaves of bread on the tables in the cafes and +restaurants the way we would find salt and pepper over here. He also +mentioned about the Russian guards. At this time he disclosed that the +building in the photograph was some military headquarters and that the +guards stationed there were armed with weapons and ammunition and had +orders to shoot any trespassers or anyone trying to enter the building +without permission. + +He also mentioned about the disbursement of the military units, saying +that they didn't intermingle their armored divisions and infantry +divisions and various units the way we do in the United States, that +they would have all of their aircraft in one geographical location and +their tanks in another geographical location, and their infantry in +another, and he mentioned that in Minsk he never saw a vapor trail, +indicating the lack of aircraft in the area. He also said about the +Russian people that they were sentimental or serious people and +somewhat simple, that---- + +Mr. JENNER. Excuse me; I just wondered if you misspoke--you said they +were sentimental and serious, did you intend both of those words? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Well, I was more or less searching for the right words. I +remember he said they were simple and more or less serious minded. They +were more mindful of world events than he thought the American people +were, but that they didn't have the war hysteria, as he called it, that +the people in the United States did. + +He said whenever you saw any indication in the Russian newspapers of +war, that the Soviet people thought it was relatively close because of +the lack of publication about it, such as at the Lebanon crisis and he +mentioned that he had been in Moscow, I believe, and a couple of other +cities other than Minsk. + +Mr. JENNER. Did he name any others besides Moscow and Minsk, did he +name any others? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. He possibly did, but I don't recall what they would have +been. + +Mr. JENNER. Is it your recollection that he did mention some others, +though you cannot recall the names; or, are you uncertain that he did +mention any others at all that he had been in? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. I'm not extremely certain at all; it's possible that he +did. + +Mr. JENNER. All right; when you were speaking freely without any +prompting on my part, you mentioned Minsk and Moscow and others--now +that I have pressed you a little, what is your present recollection on +that score now? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. That he had mentioned them, but exactly what they were, +whether they were large towns or whether they were small towns--I don't +recall--whether he just visited them or had some purpose in being +there, he never did mention that at all. + +He mentioned that he was in Moscow for the May Day parade at one time +and that the Soviets made a big show of power of their latest tanks +and planes and so forth, and I asked him at one time about his freedom +of movement, and he said that he had complete freedom of movement over +there, that the MVD, I believe it was, had inquired of his neighbors +about him and had talked to him on one occasion or two, but that they +didn't put any holds on him or restrict him from any areas or anything +like that, and I believe it was about this time that he mentioned he +had married the White Russian girl. + +Mr. JENNER. Did he say anything about where the Russian girl he married +was? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. No, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. What was your impression as to where she was? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. My impression was that he was living with her--that he had +her here in the United States. + +Mr. JENNER. But he didn't say anything that would lead you now to think +or recall the statement on his part that she was with him in the United +States, or is that an assumption on your part? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Yes; he did mention it. He mentioned that he had gotten +several books from the library at times to take home for him and his +wife to read. + +Mr. JENNER. In his discussions of life in Russia, to the extent you can +relate them, did he ever voice any political doctrine or theory? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. No, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Did you get any impression as to how he regarded his life +in Russia? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Only that he didn't think it was the type of life that he +wanted to lead. + +Mr. JENNER. Did he expand on that to any extent? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Well, he said that the people there were poor, they worked +and made just about enough to buy their clothes and their food; that +the only ones who had enough money to buy anything else, any of the +luxuries in life, were those who were Communist Party officials or high +ranking members in the party, and I asked him at one time if he were a +Communist and he said, "No." + +Mr. JENNER. Did he voice any criticism of the Communist Party +members--did he make any negative remarks? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. No; only that he didn't think that he would enjoy the +Communist way of life. + +Mr. JENNER. Did he express any views to you with respect to his +reaction to the Government of the United States? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. No; he mentioned the last day he was with +Jaggars-Chiles-Stovall--I asked him what he was going to do, where he +would go to work, and he said he didn't know. He liked the type of work +at the company and that he would like to stay with this type of work +and he would look around and if he didn't find anything else he could +always go back to the Soviet Union, and sort of laughed about it. + +Mr. JENNER. Do you think that comment of his with respect to returning +to the Soviet Union was jocular? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Yes; it was sort of a flippant remark--"If I don't get +a job here, I can go someplace else," and I mentioned at the time to +him of a couple other shops around town that did that kind of work and +suggested that he go see them. + +Mr. JENNER. What was his response, if any, to that? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. He said he might give them a try. + +Mr. JENNER. This was at the tail end of his employment with this +company? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Yes; this was the last day. + +Mr. JENNER. How did he appear that day or react to the news which he +received that his employment was being terminated? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. He seemed like he was calm, just like any other day except +that he told me this was his last day with the company and more or less +like it was just the end of the job and he was going to try to find +another one. + +Mr. JENNER. Did he say anything of whether he had been let out or +whether he had quit? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. He just said he had been relieved from his duties as +cameraman. + +Mr. JENNER. Did he express any resentment in that connection? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. No, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. When he first came with the company, how did he get along +with his fellow employees? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Not very well--just enough to talk to the people who were +working alongside of him to learn what he had to do. + +Mr. JENNER. Did those conditions or relations improve as the months +went along? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. No, sir; they worsened. + +Mr. JENNER. They worsened? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Did they worsen before this Russian language newspaper +turned up, or did they really begin to worsen when the Russian language +newspaper turned up? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. They worsened before this. + +Mr. JENNER. You saw him every day that he worked? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. And that you worked? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. And you had some interest in him as a person? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. What was the reason for the difficulties he had with +respect to fellow employees, and why did those relationships worsen? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Well, we work in a rather tight area. There is little room +to move around in the darkroom, just about enough room for a man to +stand by the developing trays and allow one person to squeeze behind +him and get by, and he would make it a habit of just bursting through +there head-on with no regard to who was in the room if anyone was +there, and also we were required to get proofs of the work we had done +on a Bruning machine, which is somewhat like a Thermofax--it works on +the same principle of making a proof of it or a copy of it. + +Mr. JENNER. I tried a patent case against the Bruning Co., so I know +what their machines are. + +Mr. OFSTEIN. But the other department with which we shared the Bruning +machine requires a little more delicate work with the machine, as their +proofs are proofread. Ours are just for further use in case a job comes +back and we need to know what was on the job. He would burst in there +and if someone else was on it, didn't make him any difference, he would +go ahead and put his work through and, of course, this made people mad +about it. + +Mr. JENNER. How would you describe all this, that he was inconsiderate? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. And selfish and aggressive with respect to himself and +impatient with the rights of others? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Yes; I think he thought he had the right of way in any +case, either that or he was just in a hurry to get through, and through +his hurrying be made no regard for anyone else's well-being or anyone +else's jobs. + +Mr. JENNER. Go ahead. + +Mr. OFSTEIN. I never heard him ask anyone to go to lunch with him, or +no one, including myself, that I recall, asked him to go to lunch. I +believe I might have asked him at one time and he always ate alone. + +Mr. JENNER. Did he eat with you? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. No, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Even though you asked him? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. No, sir; not a bit. + +Mr. JENNER. But you did ask him? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. I believe I did; yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. And he declined? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. And at least he didn't accept the invitation? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Right. + +Mr. JENNER. Did you notice in particular, since you mentioned this +without my prompting, that he did eat all by himself? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. I noticed that he didn't eat with anyone in the shop. + +Mr. JENNER. He was not a friendly person, then? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. He wasn't an outgoing person. I thought he could be +friendly if, as with the Russian language incident--there was something +in common, something that he would take an interest in. + +Mr. JENNER. But he made no effort to develop things in common with +others; is that right? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. No; that's right. + +Mr. JENNER. Did you have any impression that he had an attitude of +resentment toward anybody or anything or his lot in life? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Not extremely or exactly resentment. I would say he didn't +get along with people and that several people had words with him at +times about the way he barged around the plant, and one of the fellows +back in the photosetter department almost got in a fight with him one +day, and I believe it was Mr. Graef that stepped in and broke it up +before it got started, but he was also offered rides by Mr. Graef, and +I offered him a ride a couple of times either to his home or wherever +he wanted to catch a bus, and I know that he always declined my offer +of a ride. + +Mr. JENNER. What did he say? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. He said; no, he would go ahead and walk, and usually in +the evening when he would leave he would say, "I am going up to the +post office to pick up my mail," and a couple of times I would offer to +give him a ride up this way, as it wasn't much out of my way and I have +to come in this direction anyway to Live Oak before I turn, which is +only about a block difference, and he always declined to ride and would +walk. + +Mr. JENNER. Did the subject matter of his experience with firearms ever +arise? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. I don't believe so. + +Mr. JENNER. Was there any discussion at any time in which he indicated +or in which there was discussion of his ability in the use of firearms? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. It seems that he said while he was in the Marines that he +qualified as a marksman. + +Mr. JENNER. By the way, what is that rating; do you know? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. I'm not certain in the Marines--it differs from the Army, +I am sure. + +Mr. JENNER. What is a marksman in the Army, what level of skill is that? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. If I remember correctly, marksman is just barely +qualifying, and "expert," of course, is the top you can go. + +Mr. JENNER. I have read about snipers--are they "experts", is that +their classification? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. I'm not certain, but I'm sure they have to be fairly handy +with a weapon. + +Mr. JENNER. Your recollection is a little uncertain in this area, is it +not? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. That is, with respect to what Oswald might or did say to +you on the subject? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. I know he said he qualified and I'm almost certain that he +said as a marksman. + +Mr. JENNER. Did your discussion go beyond that, did he elaborate on it +in other words? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. No, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. And that's about the only instance in your recollection in +which there was a discussion on the subject? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. What about his industry, his promptness, his attendance? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. He seemed to usually arrive on time and expressed a +desire to work overtime if he was needed, except during the week at +times there were periods when he said he had to go to school and he +would leave with some books, I believe they were typing books from the +library, and he mentioned that he was going to Crozier Tech at night, +and I believe this was one night a week or two at the most. Other than +that, he was there every day, the best I recall, and he did work one +Saturday. + +Mr. JENNER. Did he have difficulty obtaining Saturday work from the +company? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Why? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Well, they go on an experience and seniority basis as to +overtime. The people with more seniority have a choice as to whether +they want to work or not and usually they do. + +Mr. JENNER. To make that extra money? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. And also, does skill have anything to do with it--you +mentioned experience--you meant to include in that experience--his +skill for the level of attainment? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. And he had not reached the point at which all of these +factors combined enabled him to command or be reasonably fortunate in +respect to having overtime work? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Right. + +Mr. JENNER. Had your skills reached the point at which you had overtime +work on Saturday when you sought it? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. What about his aptitudes with respect to the work for which +he was being trained? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. He always strived to try to do good. It seemed like he was +fast, but I noticed that quite a few of his jobs that he did perform +did come back within a normal working day. + +Mr. JENNER. More than the normal? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Yes, sir; I would say so. + +Mr. JENNER. There are errors always made, I suppose, by everybody? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. But your impression is that his percentage of error was +above average? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Was there any discussion of that in and among your fellow +workers and with Mr. Graef? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Yes; it was battered around for quite awhile--exactly how +long, I don't know. About the way that he was turning out a lot of +work, because it had to be redone, therefore wasting company materials. + +Mr. JENNER. And time? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Yes, sir; and they had decided, I believe, it must have +been a month before they finally let him go--to dismiss him. + +Mr. JENNER. Was that the general scuttlebutt around the place? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. That he was reaching the end of his employment? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Did ever the occasion arise when you learned anything with +respect to whether he was ever able to operate an automobile or ever +owned one or got in one to drive it? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. No, sir; every time I saw him on the street coming down +this way after work he was walking. + +Mr. JENNER. Did he ever bring any of these books to work--books as +distinguished from newspapers? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. I don't recall if he did or not, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Was it a Russian newspaper that elicited this discussion +between you as to the use of the Russian language, or was it a book? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. It was a newspaper. + +Mr. JENNER. Not a book? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. No, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Did you tell him where you had learned Russian? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. No, sir; I just said while I was in the service I had +picked it up. + +Mr. JENNER. Did he at any time ever say or did you ever get the +impression that he had studied Russian while he was in the service? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. No, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Your impression was what in that connection? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Well, that he could either have learned it while in the +Soviet Union or at a school. + +Mr. JENNER. At a private school? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Yes; private or public school. + +Mr. JENNER. But not while he was in the service? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. No, sir; he never led me to believe that. + +Mr. JENNER. The information he gave you with respect to the disposition +of military units in Russia--that information was of the character you +have already related--that the tanks were in one area? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. And the other types of equipment in another, and did he +tell you where these various units were? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. The best I recall, he mentioned that, as I say, that he +never saw a vapor trail of a plane around Minsk, and he mentioned the +location of the tanks, but I am not sure whether he mentioned whether +it was north or south. + +Mr. JENNER. Of what? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. In the Soviet Union. + +Mr. JENNER. In relating this to you, was it in terms of his having seen +these units? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. That was the impression I got, though he never directly +said so. + +Mr. JENNER. Did he say anything about--after you learned that he was +married to a Russian woman--did he say anything to you about how he had +met her and courted her or any of the circumstances with respect to his +marrying her? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. No, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. It was just that he had married a Russian citizen? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Right. + +Mr. JENNER. And brought her to this country? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. Did he say anything about his military career? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Only that he had served in the Marines and that he had +served in Japan. + +Mr. JENNER. Did he say anything about his discharge from the Marines? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. No, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. By the way when you first met this man, had you ever heard +of him before or anything about him to your then recollection? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. No, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. What else did he say about the military dispositions? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. He said he felt it was a rather poor way to distribute the +military because of the fact that support needed by one type of unit, +such as the infantry, needs tanks--took such a long delay because they +had to move it from another segment of the country and that he thought +this was a rather poor situation. + +Mr. JENNER. Did he say anything about the location of the--these +units--were they widely disbursed, that is, let's take a tank unit--did +you get the impression that the tank unit would be located far away +from Minsk or near Minsk? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. I believe he said the tanks were in the north and I'm not +familiar whether Minsk is in the north of Russia or not? + +Mr. JENNER. Did you get the impression they were not in Minsk, however? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. What did he say, if anything, about units that were located +in and about Minsk? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. The only thing he mentioned along that line was the +military headquarters and to the best of my recollection, it was a +secret police. + +Mr. JENNER. You mentioned in the--is that what you mean by the secret +police, the NVD? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. And, that they had a headquarters there in Minsk? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Did he make any comment about the MVD? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Only that they had inquired about him several times and +that they didn't follow him around. He said they were somewhat like our +own Federal Bureau of Investigation. + +Mr. JENNER. Did he ever make any comparison that was, you thought, an +attempt at being invidious with respect to the FBI as against the MVD? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. No, sir; he just said that their operations were somewhat +similar in checking out people they wanted to check on. + +Mr. JENNER. Other than that, did he ever say anything about the FBI? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. No, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Did he say anything about his observations that regarded, +for example, an area in which he could see jet contrails, whether he +would also find nearby, or even at a distance, any other military units? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. No, sir; he said if he saw tank treads of tanks, that +he wouldn't see aircraft or infantry units nearby, and that if he +saw contrails, it was the same as the infantry units, that they just +wouldn't intermingle them. + +Mr. JENNER. Did he say anything to you about what had led him to make +these observations? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Well, as I said earlier that he had never seen any +contrails, he said, in the Minsk area and that he had been in Moscow +and I presumed he had seen the type units that were stationed at Minsk +and possibly at Moscow. + +Mr. JENNER. Is there any work done at Jaggars-Chile-Stovall with the +use of microdot? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. No, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Do you know what a microdot is? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. That was explained to me by Lee Oswald. + +Mr. JENNER. Tell us about that. + +Mr. OFSTEIN. He asked me one day if I knew the term "microdot", and I +told him, "no", I wasn't familiar with it and he told me that that was +the method of taking a large area of type or a picture and reducing +it down to an extremely small size for condensing and for purposes, +such as where you had a lot of type to photograph to confine them into +a small area, and he said that that is the way spies sometimes sent +messages and pictures of diagrams and so on, was to take a microdot +photograph of it and place it under a stamp and send it. I presumed +that he had either read this in a book or had some knowledge of it from +somewhere, but where, I didn't know. + +Mr. JENNER. When did this conversation occur with respect to the +termination of his employment? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. This was possibly 2 or 3 months before. + +Mr. JENNER. So, this was after the time that the Russian newspaper had +shown up? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. I believe it was; yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Was it after the time you learned that he married a Russian +girl and brought her to this country? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. No, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. That occurred afterwards? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. What reaction did you have when Oswald talked about--raised +the subject of microdots and their use or possible use in espionage? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. I just thought that as far as he was concerned, it was +possibly another phase of photography and that he was interested in +it. It has since, come up down at the company--the use of microdots +and the different techniques, but we are still not employing those +techniques and I thought possibly that he might have also, as I have +several times, come to read things about microfilm and, of course you +see it in these science fiction movies of space travel and so--the use +of microfilm, and I presumed this was along the same lines. + +Mr. JENNER. Did it ever arouse in you any alarm or any doubt? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. No, sir; I just thought it was possibly a passing piece of +conversation. + +Mr. JENNER. Here again you didn't become suspicious or concerned? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. No, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Did you speak to anybody about that incident? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. No, sir. After Oswald was released from employment, I +did ask the recruiting sergeant for Army security here in town, who I +was stationed with overseas, about the possibility of getting the FBI +to run a routine check on him because of the fact that I have done +security work, and the fact that I also--this was just before I wrote +the letter to Oswald inviting him and his wife over--due to the fact +that I wanted to keep my record clean. Well, I didn't suspect him as +being a spy or anything like that--I just wanted to make sure I was +with the right company, and he told me that it was probably nothing. + +Mr. JENNER. You wanted to inquire not only with respect to him but also +whether you were with the right company? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Well, sir, I wouldn't jeopardize losing any chance of +getting a security clearance at anytime I needed it. + +Mr. JENNER. And, Sergeant Crozier, did you say his name was--I believe +it is Sergeant Geiger. + +Mr. OFSTEIN. His first name is Tom--I can't remember his last name now. + +Mr. JENNER. Or, is it Kriegler? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Kriegler--yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. He had been in the service with you, you had served +together? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. And, he reassured you? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Yes, sir; he said that it was probably nothing to worry +about. + +Mr. JENNER. When you discussed this Russian language newspaper with +Oswald, was there anything said as to the source of the paper? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Not immediately. I believe it was possibly about 2 months +before he left--I asked him where he got the paper and I said that +I wanted to find a little more up-to-date material to study Russian +with, than what you find in the library, and that I had looked around +town and on the newsstands that I saw handling them--Russian language +newspapers and he mentioned that he got it from a firm in New York or +Washington--Victor A. Kamkin. + +Mr. JENNER. That's K-a-m-k-i-n [spelling]? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. And, he gave you the address in New York City? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. It was New York or Washington--I don't know for certain. I +made an error in my report to the FBI to that respect. + +Mr. JENNER. The fact is you were uncertain, but you indicated to the +FBI more positively? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Yes, sir; whenever the agent came to my home and picked up +the materials, the address was there and we clarified that. + +Mr. JENNER. What materials did he pick up? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Well, Lee Oswald had given me a Russian newspaper, "The +Soviet White Russian," and a couple of magazines--the one being a +magazine newspaper type thing and one a magazine, and the FBI agent +wanted these--one of them had his handwriting on the back. + +Mr. JENNER. And, those were turned over to the FBI? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Did the FBI approach you or did you approach the FBI? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. They approached me. + +Mr. JENNER. When was that? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. I believe it was sometime in December of last year. + +Mr. JENNER. Of 1963? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. It was after the assassination? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. Did any FBI agent to your knowledge ever speak to you about +Oswald anytime prior to November 22, 1963? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. No, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. And, other than your talk with the recruiting sergeant, +Sergeant Kriegler, had you drawn the matter to the attention of any +Government agent or agency? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. No, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Do any of these names refresh your recollection as to the +newspapers or magazines that he had--"Soviet White Russian"? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Do you recall that as being what? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. A local newspaper from the White Russian portion of the +Soviet Union? + +Mr. JENNER. And "The Crocodile"? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Yes, sir; that was a--it would be hard to say whether that +would be a newspaper or a magazine. It seemed like it was thick and +stapled as a magazine, but in the form of a newspaper. + +Mr. JENNER. And, then "The Agitator"? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. That was a magazine. + +Mr. JENNER. Now, did he speak of these or did he have one or more of +these off and on during his employment, or was there just one occasion +that you saw them? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. I believe the only time he had them down there was one +incident when I picked them up and the other time later on when he +brought these to me with the address of Victor Kamkin. + +Mr. JENNER. After the specific instance about which you have testified, +there was a subsequent instance in which he brought you for possible +ordering purposes, some additional either periodicals or newspapers? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Right. + +Mr. JENNER. Among which were the names of which I have related to you? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Right. Now, he did mention that "The Agitator" was a +political magazine and that I probably wouldn't want to order. + +Mr. JENNER. He did say that it might well be something you wouldn't +want to order? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Had you heard of "The Agitator" up to this point? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. No, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. At no time while you were at Monterey did "The Agitator" +come to your attention? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. No, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Do they use Russian language newspapers and periodicals, +that is, printed in Russia? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. In the Monterey language school? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Did he surrender these papers and these periodicals to you? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Yes; he gave them to me and I told him--I thanked him for +them and told him I would bring them back within a couple of days and I +was going to glance through them and he said that would be all right, +that I could keep them. + +Mr. JENNER. That you could keep them and you didn't have to return them? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Right. + +Mr. JENNER. You surrendered them to the FBI, did you? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. On those--it seems to me you said earlier there was some +handwriting on one or more of these newspapers or periodicals? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Whose handwriting? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Lee Oswald's. + +Mr. JENNER. Was the handwriting on those newspapers or periodicals +placed on those items in your presence? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. I believe they were--I believe that was the address of +Victor Kamkin on the back of one of them. + +Mr. JENNER. That is, Oswald in your presence wrote the address of +Kamkin on some one of these documents? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Did you seek to have him help you with your Russian beyond +what you have now related to us? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Yes, sir; I asked him if he knew any other people who +spoke Russian, and he indicated that he did, that he knew several +Russian immigrants and I asked him at the time if he would be able to +give me anyone's address so that I could speak with them and build up +my vocabulary, and my ability to speak it, and he just kept putting me +off and saying, "In time you'll meet them, in time you'll meet them" +and I never did meet any of them. + +Mr. JENNER. Did he give any reason for his apparent putting you off? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Yes, sir; he said that these people liked to speak with +Americans who had an interest in their language, but they wouldn't want +to take just anyone who went down to the library and picked up a book +and sputtered off a few words. He said they enjoyed having someone +around who could more or less keep up a running conversation with them. + +Mr. JENNER. You thought he was classifying you as one who had a fairly +poor command of the language? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. And that he had some hesitation about throwing you in with +a group that spoke fluently? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. This was not a derogatory attitude on his part? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. No, sir; he said with a little bit of study that I could +possibly get in with the groups and speak with them. + +Mr. JENNER. And your feeling is fairly firm that his reluctance in that +connection was along the lines you have indicated rather than a desire +on his part to keep you from that group? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Do you feel that had you had a better command of the +Russian language he would have been willing to introduce you into that +circle? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. I believe he would have; yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Do you know whether he had any social contact with any of +the people in the plant? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Not to my knowledge; no, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. What is your impression as to whether he did or didn't? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Well, I feel that he possibly got along with me better +than anyone else down there and we had no social contact. + +Mr. JENNER. He had none with you and you rationalized from that he had +none with anybody else? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. That judgment was affected by the fact also that he +appeared not to be getting along very well with others in the plant? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Did he say anything about being a Marxist? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. No, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Was the subject ever mentioned? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. No. + +Mr. JENNER. You mentioned the secret police, did any conversation ever +occur with respect to any contact of his with, or any contact by, the +secret police with him? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. He said that they talked to him once or twice while he was +there and that was all, but that mainly it was just like the FBI would +be running a check on someone here--they would speak with people who +knew them or who were located around them. + +Mr. JENNER. Was there anything ever discussed during the period he was +employed about any particular problems of his in Russia, first, let me +say this--any attempt on his part to defect from the United States and +become a Russian citizen? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. No, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Any illnesses on his part? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. No, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Any difficulties he may or did or might have encountered in +connection with his return to the United States? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. No, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Or of his getting his wife out of Russia? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. No, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Was the subject of his getting out of Russia discussed at +all? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. No, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Was the problem with the Cuban nation or with Mr. Castro or +any of Castro's activities ever discussed? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Yes, sir; at one time when they were having a little +difficulty down there. I don't recall just what the difficulty was at +the time, but I made a rather derogatory remark about Fidel Castro's +ancestry, and he never seemed to get upset about it. + +Mr. JENNER. You just got no response out of him at all on that? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Just a sort of a shrug of the shoulders. + +Mr. JENNER. I noticed there was a discussion between you or he with +you, at least, about keeping to yourself the fact that he had been in +Russia? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Was there such an incident? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Will you tell us about it--how it arose, what the +circumstances were, and what he said and what you said? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. I believe it was the same time that he informed me that +he had been in the Soviet Union--he mentioned that he didn't want it +to get around, at this time--this was the time I got the impression +that possibly he had been an agent--what was a fleeting impression--and +I remarked later that apparently he had told someone else down there +because someone mentioned it to me about his having a Russian wife. + +Mr. JENNER. Was this before he told you he had one? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. No, sir; this was after--in fact, I believe it was +after he had been released from employment, but at the time that he +did ask me to keep the fact that he had been in Russia to myself, I +presumed that I was the only one that knew anything about his Russian +activities, that he had even been in the Soviet Union or had a Russian +wife. + +Mr. JENNER. I wonder if this would sort of refresh your +recollection--Victor Kamkin Bookstore, Inc., 2906 14th Street NW., +Washington 9, D.C.? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. No, sir; that seems like it, that seems like it. + +Mr. JENNER. That sparks your recollection--with Washington, D.C., as +distinguished from any other city? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Did you ever write Kamkin? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Yes; I got several catalogues from him. + +Mr. JENNER. Did you ever order any Russian literature from him? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. No, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Is there anything that occurs to you that you think might +be pertinent to the subject matter of the Commission's investigation, +which I haven't prompted up to the moment? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. As directly related to the assassination? + +Mr. JENNER. Well--either way--you feel free to say. + +Mr. OFSTEIN. No, sir; to the best of my knowledge--no. + +Mr. JENNER. Is there anything on the subject matter along the lines +that I have questioned you that is in your contacts with Lee Oswald +which have not been brought out, that you would like to tell us about, +which you think might be helpful? + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Nothing that I can recall. As I say, most of the things +that he did tell me--I thought were mainly in the lines of conversation +and nothing more, and that he never made any political advances one +way or the other or gave his own political views. I mean, he never +told me anything derogatory about the United States or about the Soviet +Union--just that he had resided there. + +Mr. JENNER. All right, if you wish, you may read your deposition and +make any corrections in it and sign it, or you are of liberty to waive +that if you wish. You can do whatever you want--either way, but you +have the right to read it and correct it if it needs correcting or +additions and to sign it. I would like to know either way so that in +case you decide to waive it, the reporter has a kind of a certification +different from the kind that is put on when you elect to sign it. + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. And you are entitled to a copy of the deposition if +you wish to purchase one from this young lady, and you can make +arrangements with her in that respect. + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Fine. I will waive the right to sign. + +Mr. JENNER. And if at anytime you want a copy of your deposition, call +Miss Oliver and if you happen to forget her name, talk to the U.S. +attorney and he will give you her name. + +Mr. OFSTEIN. Fine. + +Mr. JENNER. Thank you very much for coming. + +Mr. OFSTEIN. All right. Thank you. + + + + +TESTIMONY OF CHARLES JOSEPH LE BLANC + +The testimony of Charles Joseph Le Blanc was taken on April 7-8, 1964, +at the Old Civil Courts Building, Royal and Conti Streets, New Orleans, +La., by Mr. Wesley J. Liebeler, assistant counsel of the President's +Commission. + + +Charles Joseph Le Blanc, having been first duly sworn, was examined and +testified as follows: + +Mr. LIEBELER. My name is Wesley J. Liebeler, I am a member of the legal +staff of the President's Commission investigating the assassination +of President Kennedy. Staff members have been authorized to take the +testimony of witnesses by the Commission pursuant to authority granted +to the Commission by Executive Order No. 11130, dated November 29, +1963, and Joint Resolution of Congress No. 137. + +I understand that Mr. Lee Rankin, General Counsel of the Commission, +wrote you last week advising that we would be in touch with you +concerning the taking of your testimony, and that he included with his +letter a copy of the Executive order and the joint resolution to which +I have just referred, as well as a copy of the rules of procedure of +the Commission governing the taking of testimony of witnesses. Is that +correct? + +Mr. LE BLANC. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. I understand, Mr. Le Blanc, that you were employed by the +William B. Reily Coffee Co., the William B. Reily Co. more precisely, +and still are. + +Mr. LE BLANC. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. That you were employed by that company during the time +that Lee Harvey Oswald was also employed by it. Is that correct? + +Mr. LE BLANC. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Before we get into the details, would you state your full +name for the record, please. + +Mr. LE BLANC. Charles Joseph Le Blanc. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Where do you live, Mr. Le Blanc? + +Mr. LE BLANC. 2824 South Roman. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Is that here in New Orleans? + +Mr. LE BLANC. New Orleans. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Where and when were you born, sir? + +Mr. LE BLANC. November 1, 1929. New Orleans, La. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Have you lived here in New Orleans all of your life? + +Mr. LE BLANC. Well, I lived in Metairie for--oh, I would say all but +the last 10 years. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Then you moved to New Orleans? + +Mr. LE BLANC. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. By whom are you employed? + +Mr. LE BLANC. William B. Reily Coffee Co. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And how long have you worked for them? + +Mr. LE BLANC. Nine years. + +Mr. LIEBELER. In what capacity are you employed by them? + +Mr. LE BLANC. What do you mean? What I---- + +Mr. LIEBELER. What do you do? + +Mr. LE BLANC. Maintenance man. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You work as a maintenance man? + +Mr. LE BLANC. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. What do you do in that job? + +Mr. LE BLANC. General maintenance. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You keep the machinery in running order? + +Mr. LE BLANC. The machinery and different office equipment that needs +to be fixed. + +Mr. LIEBELER. What kind of machinery do they have over there? + +Mr. LE BLANC. Packaging machinery for the coffee. + +Mr. LIEBELER. For packaging coffee? + +Mr. LE BLANC. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Do they grind the coffee up too and mix it and blend it? + +Mr. LE BLANC. They roast it, grind it, and then it goes into these +hoppers, and then down to the packaging machinery. + +Mr. LIEBELER. It is packed in cans or in paper sacks or---- + +Mr. LE BLANC. Cans and bags. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Or both? + +Mr. LE BLANC. Cans and bags. + +Mr. LIEBELER. How many maintenance men, approximately, do they have +working over there? + +Mr. LE BLANC. Let's see; four. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Four? + +Mr. LE BLANC. Yes, four. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Is that the usual number that they have? + +Mr. LE BLANC. Yes, that is about it mostly. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Do you remember that Lee Oswald was employed by the Reily +Company? + +Mr. LE BLANC. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Tell us, as best you can recall, when you first met +Oswald and what your relationship with him was, what kind of a person +he was, what he did. + +Mr. LE BLANC. Well, when they first hired him, well, they brought him +to me, because I was to break him in on his job, so I started the +procedure of going--start from the fifth floor on down, work a floor +each day with him to take and get him broke in on the job and start +showing him the routine, how to go about greasing. The first day, I +mean when I was showing him, it look like if he caught on to it, all +right, if he didn't, it was still all right. He looked like he was just +one of these guys that just didn't care whether he learned it or he +didn't learn it. And then after I took and--we usually go by the week, +because usually after a week anybody with any mechanical knowledge, +there is nothing to it, because all it is is finding the grease and +oil fittings and we put him on his own. I put him on the fifth floor +and told him to take care of everything on the fifth floor and I would +be back shortly to check. I would take and put him up there, and about +a half hour or 45 minutes or so, I would go back up and check how he +is doing. I would go up there and I wouldn't find him. So I asked the +fellows that would be working on the floor had they seen him, and they +said yes, he squirted the oil can a couple of times around different +things and they don't know where he went. So I would start hunting +all over the building. There is five stories on one side and four on +the other. I would cover from the roof on down and I wouldn't locate +him, and I asked him, I said, "Well, where have you been?" And all he +would give me was that he was around. I asked him, "Around where?" He +says, "Just around," and he would turn around and walk off. On one +occasion when I was in the shop and I was working on some sort of piece +of machinery--I can't recall what it was at the present time--and he +come in the shop and he was standing there by me and watching me, and I +asked him, I says, "Are you finished all your greasing?" He said yes. +So he asked me, said, "Well, can I help you?" I said, "No, what I am +doing I don't need no help." So he stood there a few minutes, and all +of a sudden he said, "You like it here?" I said, "What do you mean?" +He says, "Do you like it here?" I says, "Well, sure I like it here. I +have been here a long time, about 8-1/2 years or so." He says, "Oh, +Hell, I don't mean this place." I said, "Well, what do you mean?" He +says, "This damn country." I said, "Why, certainly, I love it. After +all, this is my country." He turned around and walked off. He didn't +say any more. And then after that a lot of times I would be looking for +him and the engineer would be looking for him, and on quite a number +of occasions when it would get to be a coffeebreak time, we usually go +next door to the Crescent City Garage to get a Coke, and there he would +be sitting in there drinking a Coke and looking at these magazines. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you have a regular break time? + +Mr. LE BLANC. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. In the shop? + +Mr. LE BLANC. We had 9 o'clock in the morning and 1:30 in the evening. +Each one of them was a 10-minute break. + +Mr. LIEBELER. What time did you usually start work in the morning? + +Mr. LE BLANC. Well, I started on different hours there for awhile. For +awhile when he was there, I think I was around 8 to 5, and I pretty +well stayed those hours as long as---- + +Mr. LIEBELER. Oswald was there? + +Mr. LE BLANC. While Oswald was there. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Except for the break periods, you were supposed to be at +your job---- + +Mr. LE BLANC. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. In the plant? + +Mr. LE BLANC. In the plant. That is right. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Now what kind of supervision did Oswald have in his work? +You said that you took him around and tried to teach him how to do +the job, but then after you finished breaking him in, at least as far +as the fifth floor is concerned, he would be pretty much on his own, +wouldn't he? + +Mr. LE BLANC. No. I mean from the--I started him on the fifth, and +then he would work his way on down to the first floor. See? The way I +broke him in, I told him, "Make sure that you have got everything on +that one floor," and I said, "If it takes you a day to do it, let it +take you a day," I said, "but make sure that you have got everything +greased and oiled and cleaned." And that is what he was supposed to do, +and I told him, I said, "Then if you get finished the fifth floor, or +whatever floor you are on, you can always work to the next floor." And +then in the evening at 3:15 when the lines were shut down, we had these +three machines that had to be cleaned, oiled and greased every day and +sometimes twice a day--it all depends on how they ran--and he had to +see to it that each evening at 3:15 they was cleaned and greased. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Now did he have anybody keeping track of him as a general +proposition? He really didn't, did he? I mean, he was just---- + +Mr. LE BLANC. Well, the majority of the time he had somebody over him, +but as a practice, I mean after you got broke in on your job, well, +they wouldn't look after you, keep looking after you. They figured, +well, you knew your job and you would go ahead and do your job. But +after awhile, well, they seen he was drifting off. Right to the last +day before they let him go, why, we kept an eye on him, because we seen +then that he wasn't doing the work that he was supposed to be doing. + +Mr. LIEBELER. He really wasn't doing the work? + +Mr. LE BLANC. No. + +Mr. LIEBELER. He wasn't greasing the machines? + +Mr. LE BLANC. No. And you see, we have a greasing log that when you +grease the machine you log it the day that you grease it, and actually +a lot of times I think he might have put stuff down in the log that he +didn't even get to sometimes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Just so I can get an idea of what kind of work he was +doing, how were the machines greased? Did he have a grease gun or cups +and---- + +Mr. LE BLANC. Yes; well, we have an air grease gun and we also have +these hand-type grease guns. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And you used just regular Alemite fittings and grease +guns? + +Mr. LE BLANC. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. So I would imagine from time to time he ended up with the +grease on his hands and it was a greasy job? + +Mr. LE BLANC. Yes; it was a dirty job. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did he ever complain about that? + +Mr. LE BLANC. Well, he would complain now and then. I would tell him, +well, that goes in with the job of oiling and greasing. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Now was he just basically an oiler and greaser, or was he +classified as a maintenance man? + +Mr. LE BLANC. No. + +Mr. LIEBELER. That is a different thing? + +Mr. LE BLANC. He was hired as an oiler and greaser and helper. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did he seem to have any kind of mechanical proficiency +at all? I mean, could you tell? Did he seem to know his way around +machines? + +Mr. LE BLANC. It didn't look like he had. I think--I mean I don't +know--I think he had that in his application, that he was mechanically +inclined, but it didn't show up that way. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you have any other conversations with Oswald that you +can remember? + +Mr. LE BLANC. No; I tell you, he was a boy of very few words. He would +walk past you and wouldn't even ask how you are doing, or come and +talk, like a lot of us, we would stop and maybe pass a few jokes or +just talk a little with each other, but him--I think it was 3 months +that he was with us--still, I think if he said 100 words to me, it was +plenty, because even when I was breaking him in he wasn't the type boy +that would ask you different things about the machines. I was doing all +the talking and he was just looking. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did these absences of his occur pretty much all the time, +or did it get worse as he stayed there? + +Mr. LE BLANC. Well, toward the last it begin to get pretty regular, and +that is when I think they decided to let him go. And another thing I +recall: He had this habit, every time he would walk past you he would +just [demonstrating] just like a kid playing cowboys or something--you +know, he used his finger like a gun. He would go, "Pow!" and I used to +look at him, and I said, "Boy, what a crackpot this guy is!" + +Mr. LIEBELER. That is what you thought? + +Mr. LE BLANC. Yes. Right off the bat I said, "This is a crackpot"; +right off. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did he seem to just use his fingers like that, as a gun, +as a joke, you mean, or---- + +Mr. LE BLANC. Well, I didn't know what to think of it, you know, +because he--on quite a number of times he would do that, you know. If +you would walk past him, he would do that. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did he smile or laugh, or what? + +Mr. LE BLANC. No. When he would do it, he wouldn't even crack a smile. +That is what used to get me. If somebody would be doing something in +a joking manner, at least they would smile, but he was one that very +seldom would talk or would smile either, and that is why I could never +figure him out. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did Oswald have any other associates or people that +worked with him closely in the plant, or would you say that you +probably worked with him as closely as anybody else? + +Mr. LE BLANC. Well, I imagine I was about the closest, myself and the +other maintenance man. + +Mr. LIEBELER. The other maintenance men? There were three more? + +Mr. LE BLANC. Well, there is the engineer, and they had this other boy. + +Mr. LIEBELER. What is his name? + +Mr. LE BLANC. Well, the engineer is Emmett Barbe--I think you all have +a statement from him--and then the other boy was Arturo Rodriguez. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Of Mexican or Puerto Rican background? + +Mr. LE BLANC. He is Mexican, I think. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Do you know whether Oswald was associated with Rodriguez +outside of the plant at all? + +Mr. LE BLANC. No, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You don't have any way of knowing? + +Mr. LE BLANC. No. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did Oswald ever talk to you about his family? + +Mr. LE BLANC. No; that was something he very seldom talked about, and +myself and the engineer, Emmett Barbe, we always were talking about +our families. He had quite a bit of sickness and I had quite a bit of +sickness, and a lot of times we would be talking about our families +and kids and Oswald, he never would bring in his family, and it was a +good while after he was employed with us that I actually found out he +was married, because I didn't think he was married because he never did +talk about his wife or kids or nobody. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you have a lunch break---- + +Mr. LE BLANC. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. During the day, you had a lunch break? + +Mr. LE BLANC. We had 11 and 11:30. Now at that time I don't know +whether we just had the 11:30 or we had two breaks--I can't recall--but +I think it was two breaks, lunch breaks, 11 and 11:30. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did Oswald eat lunch with anybody? Do you remember? + +Mr. LE BLANC. Not that I know of. He had never eaten with me, I know. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Where do you usually have lunch? + +Mr. LE BLANC. Well, myself, I bring mine; but most of them that don't +bring their lunch, they usually go down to the corner restaurant. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did Oswald bring his lunch, or did he eat in the +restaurant? + +Mr. LE BLANC. Well, no; I think he went down to the corner restaurant a +lot of times. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Is that Martin's Restaurant? + +Mr. LE BLANC. Martin's; yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Do you have any idea what he used to have for lunch? + +Mr. LE BLANC. No, sir; I don't. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Do you have any idea how much he spent for his lunch? + +Mr. LE BLANC. No, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. What kind of a place is Martin's, a pretty inexpensive +place or---- + +Mr. LE BLANC. It is a reasonable place for regular factory--most all +the factory workers around there eat there. It is pretty reasonable. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you ever form any opinion of Oswald? You mentioned +that you thought he was probably a little bit of a crackpot or somewhat +of a crackpot for playing this game with his fingers like he was +shooting a gun, but just generally what did you think of this guy? + +Mr. LE BLANC. I just--I used to always think--I didn't know whether +he was right or whether he had troubles on his mind or what. I mean, +I couldn't actually figure what was actually wrong with him, because, +I mean, we would go on break and sit on the driveway on the bench. +Usually among the maintenance--we always usually a lot of times sit +together and we would talk over the job or something, but he would sit +on the bench, and he looked like he would be staring into space, and +sometimes you would think he was looking right at you, and if you would +happen to go to say something, he wouldn't answer you. Looked like that +is how far his mind was. + +Mr. LIEBELER. He seemed to be thinking about something else? + +Mr. LE BLANC. Yes; and looked like his mind was far away at all times. + +Mr. LIEBELER. There weren't any of the men there that, as far as you +knew, he ever really talked to---- + +Mr. LE BLANC. No. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Or anyone he ever opened up to in anyway? + +Mr. LE BLANC. No. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you talk about Oswald with the men over there since +the assassination? + +Mr. LE BLANC. What is that? + +Mr. LIEBELER. Have you talked about Oswald with the other maintenance +men or the other men at the plant? + +Mr. LE BLANC. No; I tell you, we hadn't talked very much, because we +just--we left things as was. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You never had any conversations with anybody that you can +remember, speculating as to whether Oswald really did this or whether +he was capable of it, he was that kind of a guy? + +Mr. LE BLANC. Well, the most talk was around the plant a lot of times, +that they thought he was actually too stupid to actually pull something +like that. They didn't think he even had enough brains to pull a +foolish thing like that, because that is just the kind of a person he +looked to be. + +Mr. LIEBELER. He didn't seem to be particularly intelligent or---- + +Mr. LE BLANC. No. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did he seem to be interested in his surroundings or just +sort of a---- + +Mr. LE BLANC. Like in his greasing records, one time something could +be spelled right, and just a little ways away he might have to use +the same word and it would be all misspelled. I don't know whether he +didn't know how to write or he just didn't care how he put it down. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you ever question him about that or indicate to him +that he was misspelling words? + +Mr. LE BLANC. Well, on a couple of occasions I told him if he could +write plainer, it would be a lot better for me to check, because a +lot of times if something would go wrong with a machine, we would go +to that greasing log and check when is the last time it was greased, +and when you would look at his writing, it would be like Greek, you +couldn't hardly understand it. + +Mr. LIEBELER. What did he say about that? + +Mr. LE BLANC. Well, he would look at you and turn around and walk off. + +Mr. LIEBELER. He wouldn't say anything? + +Mr. LE BLANC. Wouldn't say nothing. That is what used to get me. I used +to--if I bawled him out about not greasing something, ordinarily a man +would tell you, well, I will try to do better, or, that is the best I +could do, or something like that, but that is what used to get me so +mad when he would give me no answer whatsoever, and that is when I told +him one day, I said, "You are going to end up driving me crazy if I am +going to have to keep up with this guy, because he don't give me no +answer whatsoever if I bawl him out about his job or anything." + +Mr. LIEBELER. Who did you tell that to--Mr. Barbe? + +Mr. LE BLANC. Well, I think it was Barbe I told that to. + +Mr. LIEBELER. He is a sort of a--what--engineer, plant engineer? + +Mr. LE BLANC. Yes; he is the plant engineer. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You never mentioned to Oswald the misspellings in the +words that---- + +Mr. LE BLANC. No; I didn't mention misspelling. I figured, well, maybe +the boy can't spell so good, and I figured, well, as long as it was +close, I might be able to understand it, but there was a couple of +occasions he would put things down and I would have to actually ask him +what it was, because it wasn't nowhere near the name that the machine +would actually be. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And you noticed that sometimes he would spell things +right and sometimes he would just spell them wrong? + +Mr. LE BLANC. Sometimes he would spell them wrong and sometimes he +would spell them right. That is what I couldn't understand about him. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you ever discuss that with Mr. Barbe or anybody? + +Mr. LE BLANC. No; when Mr. Barbe noticed it was the day after the +assassination when the agent was there and we were trying to get all +the possible information we could get off of it, you know, and that is +when we got the greasing records of when he was there and went through +them, and that is when he seen a lot of misspelling. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Do you know whether those records were turned over to the +Secret Service or the FBI? + +Mr. LE BLANC. Yes; they were turned over. + +Mr. LIEBELER. The greasing records were? + +Mr. LE BLANC. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Can you think of anything else that you can remember +about Oswald that you think might be helpful? I am about out of +questions myself. Do you have anything else that you remember---- + +Mr. LE BLANC. No. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Or that you think I should have asked you about? + +Mr. LE BLANC. No. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Well, in that case, I want to thank you very much for the +cooperation that you have shown us and for your patience. + +Mr. LE BLANC. Any way I could help. I was glad to. + +Mr. LIEBELER. I want to thank you very much, Mr. Le Blanc, both +personally and on behalf of the Commission. We appreciate it very much. + +Mr. LE BLANC. Because before he was killed, I told the investigators +that if there was any way that I could help them to solve this +thing--because we was pretty well shook up about it to think that +somebody at our place, that worked at our place, had to pull a stunt +like that, and we were out to get down to the bottom of it. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you ever hear Oswald talking politics with anybody, +or did you ever talk politics to him yourself? + +Mr. LE BLANC. No; around election time or anything like that, sometimes +a conversation or something would come up, but he never would bring up +a conversation about any politics. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You never heard him say anything about President Kennedy? + +Mr. LE BLANC. No, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You never had any question come up as to racial problems +or integration problems? He never expressed himself on that? + +Mr. LE BLANC. No. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Are there any Negro employees over there at the plant? + +Mr. LE BLANC. Oh, yes; there is a number of them, quite a number of +them. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did Oswald demonstrate any particular animosity toward +them, or did he seem to treat them differently from the rest of the men? + +Mr. LE BLANC. No; he went along just like if they was white, I mean +just the way he went about with us, not saying anything. That was the +same way with them, looked like. + +Mr. LIEBELER. He didn't think that he was either--that he felt +particularly differently about the Negro employees than the other men? + +Mr. LE BLANC. No; it didn't look like it. You know what I mean, with +his attitude. + +Mr. LIEBELER. I think we have covered it. Thanks a lot. + + + + +TESTIMONY OF ADRIAN THOMAS ALBA + +The testimony of Adrian Thomas Alba was taken on April 6, 1964, at +the Old Civil Courts Building, Royal and Conti Streets, New Orleans, +La., by Mr. Wesley J. Liebeler, assistant counsel of the President's +Commission. + + +A witness, having been duly sworn by Mr. Wesley J. Liebeler to testify +the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help him God, +testified as follows: + +Mr. LIEBELER. Mr. Alba, my name is Wesley J. Liebeler. I am a member +of the legal staff of the President's Commission investigating the +assassination of President Kennedy. The Commission has authorized +staff members to take the testimony of witnesses pursuant to authority +granted to it by Executive Order 11130, dated November 29, 1963, and +Joint Resolution of Congress No. 137. + +I understand that Mr. Rankin wrote to you last week and told you that +I would be in touch with you concerning the taking of your testimony, +and that he enclosed with his letter a copy of the Executive order and +the resolution referred to, together with a copy of the Commission's +rules of procedure governing the taking of the testimony by the +Commission? + +Mr. ALBA. That is correct. + +Mr. LIEBELER. We want to inquire of you concerning any knowledge you +might have of Lee Harvey Oswald which you might have gained as a result +of, as we understand it, his habit or practice of coming into your +garage, which is, we understand, located right next door to the Reily +Company on Magazine Street, is that correct? + +Mr. ALBA. That is correct. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Before we go into detail, will you state your full name +for the record? + +Mr. ALBA. Adrian Thomas Alba. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Where were you born? + +Mr. ALBA. In New Orleans. + +Mr. LIEBELER. When? + +Mr. ALBA. January 20, 1931. + +Mr. LIEBELER. What is your employment at the present time? + +Mr. ALBA. Crescent City Garage, auto garage. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Are you owner of the garage? + +Mr. ALBA. Yes, part owner. + +Mr. LIEBELER. I beg your pardon? + +Mr. ALBA. I am an officer in the garage. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Are you regularly located at the garage itself? Do you +work out of the garage? + +Mr. ALBA. No, right there. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Right there? + +Mr. ALBA. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. What is the nature of the garage? + +Mr. ALBA. Auto storage garage primarily. + +Mr. LIEBELER. The address of the garage is 618 Magazine Street? + +Mr. ALBA. That is correct. + +Mr. LIEBELER. It is right next door to the William B. Reily Coffee Co.? + +Mr. ALBA. That is correct. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you ever become acquainted with or observe in your +garage Lee Harvey Oswald? + +Mr. ALBA. Through conversations and Outdoor Life magazines in the +office--I have a coffee pot there, and a coffee table, and some chairs, +and a magazine rack, where he frequented the magazines quite often and +drank coffee. And I have a coke machine there. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did this fellow, did you tell us what his name was? + +Mr. ALBA. All I knew him was as "Lee." + +Mr. LIEBELER. Just Lee? + +Mr. ALBA. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. I understand that you are a gun enthusiast, is that +correct? + +Mr. ALBA. That is correct. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And that you kept in your office in the garage various +magazines relating to outdoor life and guns? + +Mr. ALBA. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did Oswald ever discuss guns with you? + +Mr. ALBA. Yes, he did. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Can you tell us what he said, and what you said on the +subject? + +Mr. ALBA. He pursued the issue of ordering guns, and how many guns had +I ever ordered, and how long did it take to get them, and where had I +ordered guns from---- + +Mr. LIEBELER. Go ahead. What did you tell him? Just tell us the +conversation that you had with him. + +Mr. ALBA. I told him that I had a gun on order at the present time, +a U.S. .30 caliber carbine, and he asked had I received the gun, on +several occasions, after that. I told him no, that I hadn't. And he +asked me would I consider selling him the gun if and when I got it. I +told him no. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Was there anything peculiar about this particular rifle +that made Oswald want it? Or why did he want you to sell this rifle? Do +you know? + +Mr. ALBA. He told me he had a couple of guns, and he would like to +have the carbine. He was familiar with the carbine from the service, I +believe. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And this was the regular M-1 carbine? + +Mr. ALBA. Regular M-1 carbine, yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. From whom had you ordered that carbine? Do you recall? + +Mr. ALBA. Through the National Rifle Association. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did Oswald indicate to you what other kind of rifle or +weapons that he had? + +Mr. ALBA. No; he didn't. He did make a remark that he had--I think he +said he had several rifles and several pistols, but he did not go into +the nature of the arms, or how much, or what they were. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did he ever express any interest in any rifle that you +indicated that you had, other than this M-1 carbine that you told him +you had ordered? + +Mr. ALBA. One 30.06 Springfield rifle that I had. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you have that? + +Mr. ALBA. I was in the process of sporterizing that at the garage at +the time---- + +Mr. LIEBELER. What did he say about that particular weapon? + +Mr. ALBA. He said what was it worth to me, and I told him it was worth +over $100 to me. There was no followup on that. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Was this particular rifle that you have referred to, a +Japanese rifle? + +Mr. ALBA. No; it wasn't. I had a Japanese rifle down there that was +not for sale, and he was more partial to the Japanese rifle than the +Springfield and the carbine put together. + +Mr. LIEBELER. He was really interested---- + +Mr. ALBA. He was more interested in the Japanese rifle. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Had you already sporterized that? + +Mr. ALBA. That was completely sporterized. + +Mr. LIEBELER. What do you do to a rifle when you sporterize it? + +Mr. ALBA. Alter the stock, eliminate some of the weight, and the length +of the stock, because it is a military piece to start with, and you +glass-bead the stock. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And what does that mean? + +Mr. ALBA. To accurize the stock, and you put this where you have all +metal to wood contact in the stock. It is referred to as accurizing, +and sporterizing, and customizing a piece. + +Mr. LIEBELER. What did Oswald say about this particular Japanese rifle? + +Mr. ALBA. Nothing other than his desire to possess the gun, or to +purchase the gun from me. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Do you recall being interviewed by an agent of the FBI? + +Mr. ALBA. Yes; I do. + +Mr. LIEBELER. How many times were you interviewed by the FBI? + +Mr. ALBA. Twice, I believe. Let me retract that--the FBI came to the +office, I think, three different times. I was never up in their office +or contacted---- + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you discuss this Japanese rifle with them? + +Mr. ALBA. Yes; I did. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And do you recall telling them that Oswald was interested +in the number of inches that had been cut from the barrel of the gun? + +Mr. ALBA. I believe I did; yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Do you recall what Oswald said about that? + +Mr. ALBA. No; not other than a general discussion of the trajectory +and the feet per second, and et cetera, and the general accuracy +elimination--I mean elimination of the accuracy of the gun cutting the +barrel off. + +Mr. LIEBELER. What is the effect of cutting the barrel? + +Mr. ALBA. On the accuracy of a rifle; none. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you tell Oswald that? + +Mr. ALBA. I did. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did he seem surprised? + +Mr. ALBA. Not that my memory would--if my memory would serve me +correctly; no. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did he seem to have a fairly good knowledge of a rifle? + +Mr. ALBA. He did of the military pieces, the M-1 and the Garand. He +was asking questions about the Japanese rifle and the Springfield, the +1903-A, the A-3 Springfield, inquiring questions about those pieces, +but he seemed to have a very thorough knowledge of the M-1 and the +Garand. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You just mentioned two different rifles, or three +different rifles that he showed a real familiarity with? + +Mr. ALBA. Two. + +Mr. LIEBELER. This was the straight M-1 gas-operated rifle that has +been used by the military services? + +Mr. ALBA. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And the other was the Springfield? + +Mr. ALBA. No, no; the other was the Garand M-1. The Garand M-1 and you +have the M-1 carbine. Both are gas-operated. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Those are the only two weapons that he showed any +particular or real familiarity with, is that correct? + +Mr. ALBA. That is correct. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did he tell you how he became familiar with these? + +Mr. ALBA. No; he didn't. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you ever give it any thought as to how he became +familiar with these weapons? + +Mr. ALBA. Yes; I did. I assumed that was through the Armed Forces +training. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did he ever tell you anything about that? + +Mr. ALBA. No; he hadn't, other than he had the service behind him. + +Mr. LIEBELER. He didn't tell you what branch of the service he had been +in? + +Mr. ALBA. No; he didn't. + +Mr. LIEBELER. The Japanese rifle that you said you had completely +sporterized, can you tell us approximately how long that weapon would +be when it is put together? + +Mr. ALBA. Prior to sporterizing or after sporterizing? + +Mr. LIEBELER. Both? + +Mr. ALBA. I took approximately 4 to 4-1/2 inches off of the barrel, and +I think it was left with a 22-1/2-inch barrel, and it had approximately +a 28- or a 29-inch barrel to start off with. + +Mr. LIEBELER. When you fastened the barrel to the stock, can you tell +us approximately how long that rifle would be? + +Mr. ALBA. I can take a guess--I never really measured it, or any of my +pieces, for that matter, but I would say approximately 55 inches. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Can these rifles be readily broken down, taking the stock +and removing it from the barrel? + +Mr. ALBA. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. How long would the stock be separate from the barrel in +this Japanese rifle? + +Mr. ALBA. From the butt of the stock to the extreme end of the forearm +would be approximately 20 inches, I imagine, or about 2 feet. + +Mr. LIEBELER. When you say that the barrel was 22 inches long, do you +mean that the entire length of the action and the barrel? + +Mr. ALBA. The barrel only, from the breech to the muzzle. + +Mr. LIEBELER. About how long is the action? + +Mr. ALBA. About 6 inches, 5 or 6 inches. You are asking me questions +now that I have never pursued before for my own information and +satisfaction. These are only approximate guesses. + +Mr. LIEBELER. So the effect of sporterizing a rifle generally is to +shorten the overall length of the rifle, is that not right, by removing +a portion of the barrel itself? + +Mr. ALBA. That is correct, and the weight. + +Mr. LIEBELER. In addition to shortening the overall length of the +rifle, also when you sporterize a rifle you shorten the stock itself so +that when you break the rifle down into two pieces, the action and the +barrel is one piece, and the stock the other piece, and the length of +the rifle broken down, or the two pieces laid together, would be less +also, isn't that correct? + +Mr. ALBA. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Because of the tendency to shorten the stock? + +Mr. ALBA. But that is not the main motive behind it---- + +Mr. LIEBELER. No; the motive behind it is to reduce the weight of the +rifle? + +Mr. ALBA. The weight; yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did Oswald indicate to you whether the weapons that he +had or weapon was a military piece, or whether it had been sporterized, +or anything about it? + +Mr. ALBA. If my memory serves me, he told me he had a few rifles and a +few pistols, and never pursued the issue any further to name what they +were or what they weren't. I don't know whether it is an assumption on +my part or not, and if I am not mistaken he said they were military +arms. + +Mr. LIEBELER. He didn't indicate whether he sporterized them or not? + +Mr. ALBA. No, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did he display familiarity with the whole proposition of +sporterizing a rifle? + +Mr. ALBA. No; he didn't. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did he display, or did you draw any conclusions as to +whether he was familiar with this process or not? + +Mr. ALBA. No. And yes; I would say that I had drawn an opinion that he +was not familiar with the sporterizing of arms. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Do you remember any other conversations that you and +Oswald had about rifles or weapons? + +Mr. ALBA. None other than he asking permission to borrow some magazines +from time to time. And as far as I knew, they were all returned. + +Mr. LIEBELER. What kind of magazines were these? + +Mr. ALBA. Outdoor Life and Field and Stream, Argosy, and hunting and +fishing magazines, and National Rifle Association magazines. And guns +and ammo magazines. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did he ever have discussions with you about the relative +merits of a small calibre as opposed to large calibre bullets? + +Mr. ALBA. None. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You are very clear about that in your mind? + +Mr. ALBA. We discussed the wounding effect of combat guns of the small +calibre versus the large calibres, yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. What was that discussion? + +Mr. ALBA. Well, the small calibre in the field would tend to disable +a man and require two men to cart him off, versus the larger calibre +which would knock out a man permanently. + +Mr. LIEBELER. I am looking at an FBI report which indicates that on +November 25, 1963, you were interviewed by two agents of the FBI, Mr. +Lester G. Davis, and John William Miller---- + +Mr. ALBA. I remember that. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And the report indicates that you recalled an additional +conversation that you had with Oswald in which you and Oswald discussed +the merits of small calibres and larger calibre bullets, and the report +said that you recall that Oswald mentioned that a small calibre bullet +was more deadly than the larger one, to which point you agreed. + +Mr. ALBA. Having been left with a wounding effect you would survive a +larger calibre wound, your chances of survival from a larger or large +calibre wound would be greater than the smaller calibre. We went into +the discussion of basing the thing in the ice pick versus the bread +knife--I don't think I mentioned this part to the FBI--reflecting on +the whole picture that you would be better off receiving a wound from +a 10-inch bread knife than you would be being gigged once with a 2- or +3-inch ice pick, and that reflecting the difference between the large +calibre wound and the small calibre wound. + +Mr. LIEBELER. What led you and Oswald to agree that you would be better +off being hit with a bread knife than with the ice pick? + +Mr. ALBA. Internal bleeding. + +Mr. LIEBELER. There would be more internal bleeding from the ice pick? + +Mr. ALBA. Small calibre or the ice pick; yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. So that you both agreed that the small calibre bullet +would be more deadly than the larger one? + +Mr. ALBA. Being left with a wounded effect; in other words, if it was +my intention to destroy an animal I would prefer the large calibre, +but if an animal was wounded with a large calibre, or a small calibre +bullet, I would say that the smaller calibre bullet would be more +deadly in the end than the large calibre wound, and he might survive +the large calibre with an open wound. + +Mr. LIEBELER. During the course of this conversation, did Oswald +indicate in anyway whether the rifles that he had were large calibre or +small calibre weapons? + +Mr. ALBA. None other than the weapons were of the military, and I don't +know--that part is an assumption on my part or whether he actually said +it. He went to no length at all in discussing his firearms. In fact, +it was my experience with Lee Oswald that you had to ask Lee Oswald +questions. Either Lee Oswald was talking to you, or he wasn't talking +at all. And I may have asked him what he had in the way of firearms. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did he mention that he had a pistol, or pistols? + +Mr. ALBA. If I remember correctly, I think he said he had a few, or a +couple, or two. I am not definite. + +Mr. LIEBELER. A couple of pistols? + +Mr. ALBA. Pistols--he said he had a few rifles, and a few pistols--or +it was a couple, or it was two. I am not clear. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You were discussing this question of whether or not +Oswald had any pistols with the FBI, and do you remember discussing it? + +Mr. ALBA. If I made any mention of it, I am sure it would be as I +have just represented it to be. I have no recollection of my definite +discussions with the FBI at the time. I do remember, however, meeting +the gentlemen and discussing Lee Oswald with them. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Do you remember whether Oswald seemed more interested or +was disposed more in favor of rifles than pistols? Or did he seem---- + +Mr. ALBA. Very definitely toward the rifle side. + +Mr. LIEBELER. He was more interested in rifles? + +Mr. ALBA. Very little interested in the pistols. I had as many as +three or--I think at one time four pistols down there, and Lee Oswald +was very, very keen toward the rifles that were among my sporterizing +projects, and so on; other than the pistols, he had very, very little +interest in the pistols. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Do you do the sporterizing work on these weapons right +there in your garage? + +Mr. ALBA. That is correct. And what I didn't do, I jobbed out, that is, +I gave out to gunsmiths. + +Mr. LIEBELER. To what? + +Mr. ALBA. To a gunsmith. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did Oswald ever tell you that he had fired these rifles +or this rifle that he owned? + +Mr. ALBA. None other than to ask me if I knew of a place where you +could discharge firearms, that is, close by, without getting in the car +and riding for hours. + +Mr. LIEBELER. What did you say when he asked you about that? + +Mr. ALBA. My reply was that I joined the National Rifle Association, +and I have been able to shoot on the rifle range. It had been some +years since I had done any shooting along the River Road or the levy, +or anything else like that, and that I am sure that if you attempted +that today, they either would run you off or arrest you for discharging +firearms. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you mention specifically a rifle range where you had +discharged your firearms? + +Mr. ALBA. I believe I did, and I am sure that if I did I told him that +he would have to be a member in order to be able to use the range. + +Mr. LIEBELER. What range was it? + +Mr. ALBA. Crescent Gun, Claiborne Avenue, owns the range, and if you +are a National Rifle Association member, then you have the privileges +of belonging to the rifle range across the river, which belongs to +Crescent Gun. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did Oswald ever indicate an intention to join the +National Rifle Association? + +Mr. ALBA. None. + +Mr. LIEBELER. In connection with this carbine that you had ordered from +the National Rifle Association, you indicated that he had expressed an +interest in buying that weapon from you? Is that correct? + +Mr. ALBA. He had an interest very much, and after I told him that I +wouldn't sell the gun, and I had mentioned that I was getting the gun +for approximately $35 through the N.R.A., and that this same gun on the +market would sell from $75 to $100, and he had made the expression that +if and when "you get the carbine, should you decide to sell it, I would +make it worthwhile for you to sell the gun." + +Mr. LIEBELER. But he never spoke of joining the N.R.A. in order to +obtain a carbine such as this himself? + +Mr. ALBA. No. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did he ask you how much it cost to join the National +Rifle Association? + +Mr. ALBA. No; he didn't. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You didn't tell him? + +Mr. ALBA. No. + +Mr. LIEBELER. How much does it cost? + +Mr. ALBA. $5. + +Mr. LIEBELER. $5? + +Mr. ALBA. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you go through these various gun magazines and +sporting magazines that Oswald had looked at? You went through them +after the assassination, is that correct? + +Mr. ALBA. Had I gone through these magazines that Lee Oswald had +borrowed from me? + +Mr. LIEBELER. Yes. + +Mr. ALBA. And had I gone through them since the assassination? + +Mr. LIEBELER. Yes. + +Mr. ALBA. Since the assassination the FBI and the secret service took +the magazines off, and I have not received them since. + +Mr. LIEBELER. But you had read these magazines or gone through them +prior to the time that Oswald looked at them? + +Mr. ALBA. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Then you left them in your office and Oswald borrowed +some and brought them back? + +Mr. ALBA. Well, we have a coffee urn and a coke machine and some chairs +in there, and a coffee table, and on the coffee table I would say that +I had approximately anywhere from 80 to 120 magazines. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And you didn't go through them after the assassination +and prior to the time that the FBI and the Secret Service removed them +from your office? + +Mr. ALBA. Would you repeat the---- + +Mr. LIEBELER. You didn't go through any of these magazines that Oswald +had looked at after the assassination and prior to the time that the +FBI and the Secret Service had removed them from your office, is that +correct? + +Mr. ALBA. None other than my most current issues that I had recently +received in the mail, such as the National Rifle magazine or "Guns and +Ammo" edition---- + +Mr. LIEBELER. Those magazines wouldn't have been at Lee Oswald's +disposal because they would have come in after the time he had been +there? + +Mr. ALBA. That is correct. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Can you tell whether or not the magazines that Oswald +read, or borrowed and read and returned, were still there in the garage +at the time of the assassination, or at the time the FBI came and took +the magazines from you? + +Mr. ALBA. Lee Oswald borrowed the magazines and requested permission to +take one or two off at a time, and kept them anywhere from 3 days to a +week, and would make the point of letting me know that he was returning +them. And then a few days later he would ask that he borrow another +magazine or two magazines. I would say that there were anywhere from +three to five definite occasions I do remember of Lee Oswald asking to +take this and that magazine and letting me know that he returned the +magazines. + +Mr. LIEBELER. So as far as you know there was nobody else that would +have removed them from your office, and they would have stayed there +after Oswald brought them back? + +Mr. ALBA. Some of them do disappear from time to time. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And you have no way of knowing whether all the ones +that Oswald looked at were in your office when the FBI and the Secret +Service came and picked them up? + +Mr. ALBA. No. + +Mr. LIEBELER. When was the last time you saw Oswald? + +Mr. ALBA. The last time I saw Lee Oswald was when he told me that he +was leaving for Michoud. He had put in an application at Michoud, where +he was going to make the big money, in this town here. He mentioned +that prior or about 3 weeks prior to leaving. + +When he did leave, he came in the office and he says, "Well--" this +was approximately 10 o'clock in the morning, he said, "Well, I will be +seeing you." I said, "Where are you headed?" He said, "Out there, where +the gold is." I said, "Where is that?" He said, "I told you I was going +out to Michoud, and that I had an application out there." He said, +"Well, I have heard from them, and I have just wound up things next +door at the coffee company, and I am on my way out there now." That +again, was approximately--I may stand to be corrected on my timing--but +that was approximately some weeks before the assassination. + +Mr. LIEBELER. What is this "Michoud" that he mentioned to you? How do +you spell it? + +Mr. ALBA. That's the national air space program, the rockets, out in +Gentilly. That's NASA. + +Mr. LIEBELER. What kind of an operation do they have there? Is it a +manufacturing operation? + +Mr. ALBA. It is the rocket, the Atlas rocket, I believe. + +Mr. LIEBELER. They construct them there, is that correct? + +Mr. ALBA. That is correct. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did he tell you what kind of work he was going to do for +the organization? + +Mr. ALBA. No; he didn't. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You mentioned "Michoud," and is that the name of a city +here? + +Mr. ALBA. Michoud, that's this particular section of Gentilly, Gentilly +section, where the plant is located. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Is that part of New Orleans proper? + +Mr. ALBA. It is part of New Orleans, part of Orleans Parish. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Part of New Orleans itself? + +Mr. ALBA. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did Oswald tell you what kind of work he was doing for +Reily Co.? + +Mr. ALBA. I don't think he ever did, but it was--it was obvious that he +was in the electrical end of the maintenance end of the factory at W. +B. Reily Coffee. + +Mr. LIEBELER. What did he say? Or why do you say it was obvious? + +Mr. ALBA. He was just like the others there in the maintenance and +the electrical end, and they would wear the electrician's belt with a +bandoleer, screwdriver, pliers, and friction tape, et cetera. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did he wear that? + +Mr. ALBA. Yes, he did. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you ever discuss this fellow Oswald with anybody at +the Reily Co.? + +Mr. ALBA. Not prior to the assassination, no. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Have you discussed it with people at the Reily Co. after +the assassination? + +Mr. ALBA. Yes, I have. People were coming up to me at that time and +asking me about what had happened to my friend Lee Oswald that used to +hang around the office all the time, as an opening to discuss what had +taken place in Dallas. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Can you remember the name of the people at the coffee +company that you discussed Oswald with? + +Mr. ALBA. The people in general that would come in the office during +the day, as Lee Oswald himself would do. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did the people that did come in that way indicate they +also had known Oswald while he worked at the coffee company? + +Mr. ALBA. I hadn't realized anyone that knew Lee Oswald, or that that +was the man who worked with them prior to the assassination, but after +the assassination, which might be expected, it seems that anyone you +would talk to knew who he was and had seen him, and so forth. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Do you remember any particular people who did, in fact, +seem to know him, or that you think did know him that you talked to +about him? + +Mr. ALBA. None in particular, no. + +Mr. LIEBELER. What was the general substance of these conversations? + +Mr. ALBA. Half kidding and half general conversations about, "Isn't it +something, what happened?" And that it happened to be someone that was +right here at work "With us at Reily, and that you knew from over here, +next door." + +Several people, employees at Reily, would tell me that employees at +Reily had told them after the assassination, of course, that Lee Oswald +spent as much time "Over at Alba's Garage as he did over here in the +plant." + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did that seem to be the case to you prior to the +assassination? + +Mr. ALBA. Yes and no; if that is any kind of an answer. Lee Oswald was +sent for and called from the office on several occasions. Lee Oswald +would come to the office, put a nickel in the coke machine and start +paging through magazines and just lost track of time. Lee Oswald was +not talkative unless he was more or less pursuing the conversation +himself. In fact, if that makes any sense to you---- + +Mr. LIEBELER. So it seems to you then that he spent more time in your +place than he should have been spending, is that correct? + +Mr. ALBA. That is correct, but certainly not more time at my place +than at Reily Coffee, as some might have tried to indicate to me in a +conversation. But I am sure that it was intended only as a phrase of +kidding. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you ever hear of complaints from the coffee company +that Oswald wasn't on the job over there? + +Mr. ALBA. None other than from the men themselves that were working +with Lee Oswald. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You heard these complaints after the assassination, is +that correct, didn't you? + +Mr. ALBA. That is correct. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You said that he was called from your garage to go back +to the coffee company from time to time? + +Mr. ALBA. There were anywhere from two to four different occasions that +I can remember that someone would come in there and tell him, "Now, +Lee Oswald, they are looking for you over there. If you keep this up, +you are going to get canned." And Oswald would say, "I'm coming. I'm +coming." + +Mr. LIEBELER. And then he would go back to the coffee company? + +Mr. ALBA. He would. + +Mr. LIEBELER. How did this fellow impress you? + +Mr. ALBA. He certainly didn't impress me as anyone capable or anyone +burdened with a charge of assassinating the President of the United +States, let alone any individual, for that matter. Our conversations +were purely the gun magazines, the firearms themselves, and little of +anything else. Lee Oswald wasn't very talkative, not to be repeating +myself, unless, of course, he was pretty much leading the conversation +or doing the talking himself, on the same conversation level all the +time--about the firearms. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did he strike you as being peculiar in any way? + +Mr. ALBA. Yes; he did. He was quiet. + +Mr. LIEBELER. He was quiet? + +Mr. ALBA. He was quiet. You could ask Lee Oswald two or three +questions, and if Lee Oswald wasn't apparently interested in the course +of the conversation, he would just remain paging through the book and +look up and say, "Did you say something to me?" I hesitate putting the +conversation back to Lee Oswald pursuing it first, but all you had to +do was mention guns and gun magazines and Lee Oswald was very free with +the conversation. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did he seem to have an interest in firearms that was +abnormal or extremely great, or anything like that? + +Mr. ALBA. None. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Other than the fact that he was quiet, was there anything +about him that struck you as being odd or peculiar? + +Mr. ALBA. No. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You didn't suspect he was a violent kind of person, or +anything like that, the time that you knew him, did you? + +Mr. ALBA. I would answer that indeed not. I had never gotten the +impression from Lee Oswald that he was capable of any plot or +assassination, or what have you, of that nature. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And were you surprised when you heard he had been +arrested in connection with the assassination? + +Mr. ALBA. I was very much surprised. + +Mr. LIEBELER. After you heard he had been charged with the +assassination, did it seem to you then that he could have been capable +of such a thing? Or did you hold to your former opinion? + +Mr. ALBA. I think I held to my former opinion. Things I have seen on +television, of course, and read in the newspapers, and so forth, has +laid out some suggestive pattern that Lee Oswald was a subversive, et +cetera, toward the country, and maybe even the President, or something; +but prior to that assassination he gave me no indication at anytime +that he was burdened with such a charge, or that he was concerned or +involved with anything of that nature. He had never at anytime spoken +against the President or the country. He had never at anytime, prior to +the assassination, of course, mentioned communism to me, or anything +suggestive or leading to it, or otherwise. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Do you remember whether he mentioned the President at +all, one way or another? + +Mr. ALBA. I think I might answer that with a definite answer--I can't +remember anytime that Lee Oswald had ever mentioned the President, the +country, foreign countries, et cetera. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Is it customary, or the usual sort of thing for people in +this area to discuss politics, or discuss the President? People that +come into your garage or---- + +Mr. ALBA. Well, the usual trend of conversation in the garage, other +than the garage business or the personal customers' cars or neighbors +that walk in the garage that want change for the coke machine, et +cetera, would be either politics--I would say mostly politics more than +anything else. + +Mr. LIEBELER. What was the attitude of most of the men toward President +Kennedy? Was he well liked down here, or was he not highly thought of? + +Mr. ALBA. He was very highly thought of for his convictions, for his +stand on his convictions, but he wasn't too well thought of for his +stand on the integration program to the South. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Was it common for the people to complain about that sort +of thing? + +Mr. ALBA. That is correct. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And you never heard Oswald discuss that? + +Mr. ALBA. Not once. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Was he ever present when the subject was discussed by +others, as far as you can recall? + +Mr. ALBA. I really wouldn't know, or be able to comment whether he was +or not. It's very possible that he was, and maybe on several occasions, +but not to my recollection. + +Mr. LIEBELER. He never responded in any way? + +Mr. ALBA. No. + +Mr. LIEBELER. I am going to show you some pictures that have been +marked in other proceedings, five different pictures marked "Commission +Exhibits 451, and 453 through 456," and ask you if you recognize the +person or persons depicted in these pictures? + +(Photographs shown to the witness.) + +Mr. ALBA. No. + +Mr. LIEBELER. I show you another picture marked "Pizzo Exhibit 453-A," +and ask you if you recognize any of the people on that picture? + +Mr. ALBA. Lee Oswald only. [Viewing photograph.] + +Mr. LIEBELER. Which one is he? + +Mr. ALBA. Right here [indicating], and this looks like Jack Ruby +[indicating], but I would only recognize him from the television +pictures and pictures in the papers. + +Mr LIEBELER. The picture that you indicated as being Oswald is the man +marked with an "X" over his head, is that correct? + +Mr. ALBA. That is correct. + +Mr. LIEBELER. I show you another picture which has been marked "Pizzo +Exhibit 453-B" and ask you if you recognize anybody in that picture? + +Mr. ALBA. Lee Oswald only. [Viewing photograph.] + +Mr. LIEBELER. And that is the man marked with a "green mark," is that +correct? + +Mr. ALBA. That is correct. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Do you recognize the street scene, by any chance? + +Mr. ALBA. No. + +Mr. LIEBELER. I show you another picture marked "Pizzo Exhibit 453-C," +and ask you if you recognize that man? + +Mr. ALBA. That's Lee Harvey Oswald. [Viewing photograph.] + +Mr. LIEBELER. Do you have anything else that you think that the +Commission would be interested in that I haven't asked you about, +concerning your knowledge of Oswald, and your relations with him? + +Mr. ALBA. I wouldn't think. The source of conversations was of a nature +of a neighborhood acquaintanceship, nothing more. He has never been +suggestive toward any other things other than what I have already +discussed with you, as far as his interest in guns and gun magazines +and gun conversations. + +Mr. LIEBELER. He never indicated any interest in Cuba or Cuban affairs? + +Mr. ALBA. Never. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you know that he had been arrested by the New Orleans +Police Department in connection with the distribution of "Fair Play for +Cuba Committee" literature in New Orleans? + +Mr. ALBA. No; I hadn't, but I found out after the assassination. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you know that he appeared on WDSU television and +debated with some Cubans? You don't know that? + +Mr. ALBA. No. + +Mr. LIEBELER. If you can't think of anything else, anything else you +would like to add at this point, I have no further questions. + +Mr. ALBA. I would feel free if there was, but I don't think there is +anything further that I would like to add that can be of any help to +you. + +Mr. LIEBELER. In view of that, on behalf of the Commission I want to +thank you very much for the cooperation you have shown. + +Thank you very much. + + + + +AFFIDAVIT OF CHESTER ALLEN RIGGS, JR. + +The following affidavit was executed by Chester Allen Riggs, Jr., on +May 20, 1964. + + + AFFIDAVIT + + PRESIDENT'S COMMISSION + ON THE ASSASSINATION OF + PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY + + STATE OF TEXAS, + _County of Tarrant, ss_: + +Chester Allen Riggs, Jr., being duly sworn says: + +1. I am Vice President of Orbit Industries, Inc., 250 Carroll, Fort +Worth, Texas. I reside at 836 Edgefield in that city. + +2. I am and have been prior to July 1 of 1962, the owner of a duplex +house located at 2703 Mercedes Street, Fort Worth, Texas. That duplex +contains two furnished apartments. + +3. Sometime in July, 1962, I rented one of the apartment units to Lee +Harvey Oswald. While I do not keep precise records of the tenants of +the above apartments, since there is a fairly high rate of turnover +amongst them, to the best of my recollection, Lee Oswald and his wife +lived in the apartment from some time in July of 1962 until early +October of that year. + +4. I do not keep records of the rental payable on each of the +apartments. My records reflect only the total rental paid on a number +of apartments which I own in the vicinity of 2703 Mercedes Street. As +a result I am not able to state precisely the rental which Lee Oswald +paid for the above apartment, but my recollection is quite clear that +it was $59.50 a month. + +5. The utilities in the apartment are in my name and are not changed +with the movement of tenants through the apartment. The tenants are, +however, responsible for the payment of the utility bills. Whenever I +receive a bill in respect to any of the apartments I forward it to the +tenants for payment. I recall that the utilities in the apartment at +2703 Mercedes averaged about $12.00 a month during the time that it was +occupied by the Oswalds. To the best of my knowledge Oswald paid those +utility bills directly. + +6. I recall that when Oswald rented the apartment he gave me the +impression he would have no difficulty in handling the arrangements for +the payment of the utilities and other incidental arrangements that had +to be made in connection with his occupancy of the apartment. + +7. To the best of my recollection Oswald did not have a telephone in +the apartment. + +8. Either at the time that Oswald rented the apartment or shortly +thereafter, he asked me to install new curtains in the apartment, +which I agreed to do. While I had no difficulty with Oswald in this +connection he was quite definite in stating that he wanted the new +curtains installed. + +9. I subsequently called at the apartment to consult with Oswald or his +wife concerning the color of the drapes or curtains to be installed in +the apartment. Oswald was not present at the time and when I attempted +to discuss the matter with his wife I could obtain no response from +her. It appeared to me at the time that she was not interested in +having the new curtains. Subsequently I have learned that Marina Oswald +had a limited command of the English language and it now appears to me +in fact that she simply did not understand what I was talking about. + +10. Oswald never mentioned the new drapes or curtains after that time +and they were never installed in the apartment while he lived there. + +11. I do recall that when Oswald asked about the curtains I told him +that I would be willing to install them if he was planning to stay in +the apartment for some period of time. I mentioned this because, as I +have said, there was quite a high rate of turnover amongst the tenants +because of the nature of the housing, which was of a low-income type, +and I did not want to put new curtains in and then have Oswald move out +shortly thereafter. Oswald told me that he had a job with a welding +company nearby and was planning to stay in the apartment for some time. + +12. My own business office is located near the apartment at 2703 +Mercedes Street and I recall seeing Oswald walk to work from the +apartment. To the best of my knowledge Oswald did not have a car while +he lived in the above apartment. + +13. Oswald appeared to spend a considerable amount of time reading. +From time to time I observed him doing that on the steps of the +apartment and he was usually reading when I called at the apartment for +the rent payment. + +14. When Oswald moved out sometime early in October he owed some rent +and had not completely paid for the utilities which he used. I do not +recall exactly what the amount was but it was not very large. + +15. The Oswalds left the apartment in good clean condition. + +16. I do not know where Oswald moved after he left the apartment at +2703 Mercedes Street and I do not know where he lived prior to the +time he moved there. There was no adverse condition in the relations +between Oswald and myself which could have prompted Oswald to leave the +apartment. + +Signed on May 20, 1964, at Fort Worth, Tex. + + (S) Chester Allen Riggs, Jr., + CHESTER ALLEN RIGGS, Jr. + + + + +TESTIMONY OF MRS. MAHLON F. TOBIAS + +The testimony of Mrs. Mahlon F. Tobias was taken at 3 p.m., on April +2, 1964, in the office of the U.S. attorney, 301 Post Office Building, +Bryan and Ervay Streets, Dallas, Tex., by Mr. Albert E. Jenner, Jr., +assistant counsel of the President's Commission. + + +Mr. JENNER. Mrs. Tobias, would you rise and take the oath? + +Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you will give before this +Commission will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the +truth, so help you God? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. I do. + +Mr. JENNER. You are Mrs. M. F. Tobias? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. That's right. + +Mr. JENNER. Of 602 Elsbeth? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. That's right. + +Mr. JENNER. Dallas, Tex. + +Mrs. TOBIAS. That's right. + +Mr. JENNER. What does that "M" stand for? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Mahlon [spelling] M-a-h-l-o-n, and the "F" is Forrest +[spelling] F-o-r-r-e-s-t. + +Mr. JENNER. Mrs. Tobias, I am Albert E. Jenner, Jr., a member of the +legal staff of the President's Commission. My file indicates that you +and Mr. Tobias received a letter from Mr. Rankin, the general counsel +of this Commission? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Yes; we did. + +Mr. JENNER. With which was enclosed a copy of the Senate joint +resolution authorizing the creation of the Commission and of President +Lyndon Johnson's Executive order creating the Commission, and also a +copy of the rules and regulations of the Commission? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. That's right. + +Mr. JENNER. I'm sure you have noted from those documents that the +Commission is appointed to investigate and look into circumstances +surrounding the assassination of our late President, John Fitzgerald +Kennedy? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. That's right. + +Mr. JENNER. And this leads us from time to time to seek information +and help from people who had some contact here and there with persons +who went across the scene, so to speak, the stage--one of whom was Lee +Harvey Oswald, and we understand that in the ordinary course of your +own life you had some contact with him--you and Mr. Tobias. + +Mrs. TOBIAS. With Mr. Oswald--that's right. We are managers of the +apartment house--that's right. + +Mr. JENNER. And we would like to ask you a few questions about that, if +I may? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Okay; I will be glad to help you all I can. + +Mr. JENNER. That is wonderful and I appreciate that very much. Would +you give me just a little bit of your history? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. My history--what do you mean? + +Mr. JENNER. Are you a native American, and where were you born and so +forth? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Yes; I was born in Arkansas. I have lived in Dallas, Tex., +12 years, but I have been all over the United States. I raised my +family in Michigan. I married in Michigan. + +Mr. JENNER. What town in Michigan? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Battle Creek--my husband is from Michigan and I went +there as a bride and I raised my family in Michigan, and we have been +back here 12 years. We have been in Dallas--back in Dallas about 12 +years--well, we have been back about 14 years, but in Dallas, Tex., you +mean, for 12 years. + +Mr. JENNER. Your husband is retired now? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Yes; my husband was in construction and during the war +he worked for the government. We were just all over, but, of course, +he broke his back--it will be 14 years ago in August, and he worked +up until 5 years ago, so he had to give up 5 years ago, and he is on +social security, of course, and that's why we manage these apartments. + +Mr. JENNER. And you have been primarily a mother raising a brood of +five boys and a housewife and also help your husband manage some +apartments? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. That's right. + +Mr. JENNER. And in connection with the management of the apartments, is +that how you had your contact with Mr. Oswald? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. With Mr. Oswald--that's right--he had one of the +apartments. + +Mr. JENNER. Located where? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Now, he was in 604--602 and 604--just like--this is 604 +over here and 602 is down here and there is one down and one up. Mr. +Oswald lived in 604 and we live over here in 602 and it faces Elsbeth. +Do you want a description of it? + +Mr. JENNER. Let me get a piece of paper and let's draw a picture of it +so I can orient myself. + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Are you familiar with those apartments? + +Mr. JENNER. No; I'm not, I don't know a thing about them. + +Mrs. TOBIAS. We'll say now that this is Elsbeth--this side runs down +like this and then across. + +Mr. JENNER. Which is north and which is south? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Let's see--this is west. + +Mr. JENNER. Put a "W" there. + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Let me see now, I want to make sure--there is West Davis, +but we are just on the corner of West Davis and Elsbeth, you see, that +would be west, wouldn't it, still--I don't know my directions. + +Mr. JENNER. All right, we will do it this way--is this Elsbeth +[referring to map drawn by the witness]? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. This is Elsbeth. + +Mr. JENNER. All right, write Elsbeth in there. + +Mrs. TOBIAS. All right. [Spelling] E-l-s-b-e-t-h, and this is--Elsbeth +and that side over here is Davis. + +Mr. JENNER. Now, where is Davis Street? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. This would be Davis right there. + +Mr. JENNER. Why don't you draw a line there for Davis? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. There's one apartment down and one up over that one--this +would be Davis over here. + +Mr. JENNER. All right, write "Davis" there. + +Mrs. TOBIAS. All right--right here is Davis. Now, Davis faces west, so +what would this direction be--this is direct west and east--Davis is. + +Mr. JENNER. Davis runs east and west? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Yes--east and west--and let me see--Elsbeth would be north +and south, wouldn't it? + +Mr. JENNER. That's right. + +All right, let's put the directions on here--put an "N" up here and an +"S" down at the bottom. + +Mrs. TOBIAS. All right; I will put an "N" and an "S" down here. + +Mr. JENNER. And then put an "E" for east and a "W" to your right for +west, and the "E" is to your left. + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Okay. + +Mr. JENNER. Now, how many apartments do you have in this building? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Ten. + +Mr. JENNER. There are 10 apartments? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. And what are they--two-room, three-room, four-room? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Three. + +Mr. JENNER. They are a three-room apartment and they are all three-room +apartments? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. All three room. + +Mr. JENNER. And you and Mr. Tobias occupy one? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Yes; we do--we have apartment 7 over here on Davis. You +see, we live on Davis and this is Davis, like I drew it out here, you +see, and we live on Davis. He lived over here--he lived over here at +602, and do you want me to put 602 there? + +Mr. JENNER. Yes; put 602 there--is it 602 Davis? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. No; it's Elsbeth, but--shall I mark that out--this side is +602 over here, and this is 604 over here. + +Mr. JENNER. All right, put the 604 right under the apartment No. 2. + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Do you want me to strike over that? + +Mr. JENNER. No; no, you are fine--604 is an entrance into apartment +604, is that right? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. That's correct. + +Mr. JENNER. And they occupied apartment 604? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. They had No. 2 right on the front. + +Mr. JENNER. They had two apartments? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. No; No. 2. + +Mr. JENNER. All right, No. 2, right on the front. + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Right on the front. + +Mr. JENNER. That's Elsbeth Street, and is that the first floor or the +second floor? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. First--apartment 2 is downstairs and ours is the same +across the front on the ground. + +Mr. JENNER. Is yours on the first floor also? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. How many floors in this building? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Two floors--this one has one down and one up--you see, one +comes down like this and one is up like this. + +Mr. JENNER. What do you mean "one down and one up"? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Well, you see, up over these now, this is a 2-story +building. + +Mr. JENNER. There are apartments above each of the apartments Nos. 602 +and 604? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. That's right. + +Mr. JENNER. That is not true at the opposite end, the west end? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Here, you mean? + +Mr. JENNER. Yes. + +Mrs. TOBIAS. This one right here is No. 6 and over it is No. 10. Do you +know what I am talking about? + +Mr. JENNER. Well, I will figure it out in a minute. I take it the +entrances to the apartment building are on Elsbeth Street? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. And there are some apartments in the rear that go all the +way through, do they? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. We have a back entrance and a front entrance. Now, my back +entrance goes out on Davis and my front entrance comes out into this +patio, and also would Mr. Oswald's come out into the patio. + +Mr. JENNER. Now, I am interested in that. + +Mrs. TOBIAS. He has two entrances, remember now, that he could use. + +Mr. JENNER. I'll tell you what we will do--I'm going to mark this +"Tobias." + +May the record show that Mrs. Tobias has been drawing a plat of +the apartment building on Elsbeth Street which I have now marked +"Tobias--No. 1." + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Yes--okay. + +Mr. JENNER. Now, she has drawn a rectangle, and the north side is Davis +Street, the east side of the rectangle is Elsbeth Street. Now, Mrs. +Tobias, you correct me if I am wrong. + +Mrs. TOBIAS. This would be south, wouldn't it--yes--that would be +south--he lived on this south side. + +Mr. JENNER. Mrs. Tobias is pointing to the area of the plat which is +marked "S" or the side opposite to that which is marked "N." + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. The figure 604 underneath the word "Elsbeth" appearing on +the east line of the rectangle is the apartment occupied by the Oswalds. + +Mrs. TOBIAS. 604--apartment 2. + +Mr. JENNER. Apartment 2. + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. And that was on the ground floor? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. That's right. + +Mr. JENNER. And that's on the southeast corner of the building? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. That's right. + +Mr. JENNER. And you live in a similar three-room apartment on the +northeast corner of the building? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Yes--602--that's right. + +Mr. JENNER. So, we will draw a little square in there, representing +those apartments. + +Mrs. TOBIAS. That's right. + +Mr. JENNER. Now, there are altogether how many apartments in the +building? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Ten. + +Mr. JENNER. I'm going to write 10 apartments on there. + +Mrs. TOBIAS. All right. + +Mr. JENNER. Now, those apartments run back from interiors, or one after +another, back from Elsbeth Street. + +Mrs. TOBIAS. That's right. + +Mr. JENNER. They have front entrances and rear entrances? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. That's right. + +Mr. JENNER. The rear entrance to your apartment is from Davis Street? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Davis Street; that's right. + +Mr. JENNER. The rear entrance from the Oswald apartment is from where? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. From the driveway, and that would be south, wouldn't it? + +Mr. JENNER. There is a driveway that runs along this way [indicating]? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. That's right. + +Mr. JENNER. It's a private driveway? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Yes, it is; it's private, it goes to the apartments. + +Mr. JENNER. All right, we'll call that "private driveway." + +Mrs. TOBIAS. That's right, and they are not allowed to park, you know, +for any length of time--just for moving in and moving out, and here is +a back door out here that is into that driveway. + +Mr. JENNER. So, his rear entrance was from the driveway? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. That's right. + +Mr. JENNER. Which I have so marked. + +Mrs. TOBIAS. That's right. + +Mr. JENNER. Now, you spoke of a court, did you not? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. No, I didn't--I said a patio. + +Mr. JENNER. A patio? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. A patio--in between--this side and this side (indicating). + +Mr. JENNER. In between the south side and the north side? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. That's right. We call it a patio, you know, there is a +front entrance with each having their own and then, of course, we have +cement there in that entrance and there's lots of shrubbery. + +Mr. JENNER. Is this open to the sky? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. No; oh, sure, it's open. These buildings are all solid, +what I mean, there is nothing like--what do you call these--a +breezeway--there's nothing like that. It's just open in between 604 and +602, if I am making it clear? + +Mr. JENNER. Yes, you are. Between your apartment on the north side of +the building and their apartment on the south side--it is open? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. That is right. + +Mr. JENNER. There is no roof over that area? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. No; there isn't. + +Mr. JENNER. And you call that a patio? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Well, that's what they call it--I guess that's what it is. +I think it is a patio. + +Mr. JENNER. Well, I'm just trying to locate it. + +Mrs. TOBIAS. That's what it's called--a patio. + +Mr. JENNER. Of course, I'm not trying to make any comment about it. + +Mrs. TOBIAS. That's what they do call it, though. + +Mr. JENNER. All right, we'll call it a patio--does the patio run from +where? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. From Elsbeth back to this. + +Mr. JENNER. All right, we will make that a dotted line--back to the +rear of the building, which is the west end of the building, correct? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Right. Now, there is no entrance for them to go out here. +They got out over here--they come out into the hallway and into 602, +and then, they have a back entrance. This one apartment--there's a back +entrance only for that No. 10--no one else has a private but that No. +10. + +Mr. JENNER. How private is that patio? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Well, it's just an entrance leading out to each house--an +entrance. + +Mr. JENNER. If a man were in that patio with a firearm or a weapon or a +rifle and he were dry sighting--do you know what that is--dry shooting +it? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. I think so. + +Mr. JENNER. That is, holding it up, not loaded, but practicing the +trigger and sighting, and what not, would he be noticed? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Well, it's visible--that's what you meant? + +Mr. JENNER. Yes. + +Mrs. TOBIAS. There's an awful lot of shrubbery out there in front of +our window, the front window, and also--there's just an awful lot of +shrubbery. It would be noticeable--sure, if you were up in the front, +you would see it, but sad to say, I don't see very much from my front +window because it's just loaded with shrubbery and the trees are quite +tall--quite high. + +Mr. JENNER. Now, this patio area which runs the length of the building +from Elsbeth Street back west--that is an open space and it's open +right up to the sky? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. That's correct. + +Mr. JENNER. During any of the time that the Oswalds occupied Apartment +604 and were your tenants, did you ever see Mr. Oswald in the patio +area with a weapon? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. No; I never did. + +Mr. JENNER. A firearm? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. No; I haven't. + +Mr. JENNER. Whether in the patio or elsewhere? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. No; I never seen him appear out there--I never seen him +with any gun. + +Mr. JENNER. Did you ever hear that he had one while he was there? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. No; I didn't. I didn't hear that. I suppose we would +have been real frightened, but we didn't--he did have an awful lot of +trouble with his wife. + +Mr. JENNER. Now, it is true, then I gather, from that chance remark +that you made that if you saw him with a weapon that would have alarmed +you? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. I think it would have because he was kind of an odd kind +of a person. + +Mr. JENNER. Now, were you in the office when that apartment was rented, +did you have the first contact with him? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Yes; he came in our house. + +Mr. JENNER. Why don't you tell me about that? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Well, the night he came over to rent the place---- + +Mr. JENNER. It was at night? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. In the evening--yes, and then he didn't take it, but he +wanted to look around. He asked my husband if he might look around. + +Mr. JENNER. Your husband was home? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. And you were home? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. It was in the evening? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. Was anybody accompanying him? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. No; just Oswald, my husband and I. + +Mr. JENNER. How was he dressed? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Well, he always seemed to wear slacks and just a T-shirt. + +Mr. JENNER. Is it your recollection that on this occasion he was so +dressed? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Just a jacket and slacks and I just can't remember if he +had on a T-shirt or if he had on a sports shirt or a dress shirt that +night, but he wanted to see the apartment. My husband took him over, +because we don't like to rent the apartments in the evening--we don't +have to, but just a lot of times my husband will go ahead and show +them, because they said we don't have to after 8:30 or 9 o'clock. My +husband took him over and showed him the apartment and then he asked my +husband if he could look around and my husband said, "sure." + +Mr. JENNER. Mr. Oswald wanted to look around the apartment or look +around the building? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. He wanted to look around the building. He wanted to go +around the building. So, he looked at the back entrance, the way he +could get out the back entrance--now, that back entrance will go out, +like I told you, this driveway--it will take you out onto Davis. + +Mr. JENNER. The back entrance? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. The side entrance--his side entrance, we'll say. + +Mr. JENNER. He was looking at the back entrance of his apartment? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Yes, he went all through the back. + +Mr. JENNER. His apartment, which came in from the driveway? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. This is a driveway and down here in the hallway is the +door. He wanted to see around in the back, he wanted to see the +arrangement of the building, and how it was. There is a driveway that +comes up off of Davis and back in here of the slab that they can park +on. Of course, Mr. Oswald never had a car, and it just goes off onto +Davis, but that is that driveway where I told you--this driveway goes +all the way around onto Davis. + +Mr. JENNER. Now, the driveway, which up to the moment I have limited +from Elsbeth Street--it turns and goes out into Davis? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. That's right. The driveway completely goes around. + +Mr. JENNER. I'm going to mark the west end of the driveway also--is +that correct? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. The driveway goes out into Davis--that's correct. So, it +was a week later before he came back to rent it. + +Mr. JENNER. He waited a week? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. You told him what the cost was? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Yes, my husband told him that. + +Mr. JENNER. Did he say anything about money at that time--did you make +any inquiry as to whether or not he was working, where he worked? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. No; Mr. Oswald was very quiet. He had very little to say, +so when he came back, he told my husband he had a wife and child. + +Mr. JENNER. Were you present? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Yes, I was there when he rented it. + +Mr. JENNER. Were you there when he made this statement that he had a +wife and child? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Yes, and when they came in--I didn't see anyone for quite +some time, perhaps 10 days or 2 weeks, and I said to my husband, "I +thought he told us he had a wife and child?" He said, "Well, he did." + +We don't know when he moved in because he could have used that driveway +to the back door--you understand what I mean? + +Mr. JENNER. Yes. + +Mrs. TOBIAS. And then, I suppose it was about 2 weeks and then he got a +phone call. + +Mr. JENNER. If you will pardon me, I would like to stay with a few of +your earlier statements at the moment. + +Mrs. TOBIAS. All right. + +Mr. JENNER. When he first came and made the inquiry about the apartment +and made this short tour around the place--it was at night? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. When he wanted to see the back door. + +Mr. JENNER. Was anything said about his prior history then, whether he +was married, not married, whether he had children--whether he had been? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Yes, he had a wife and a little girl. That's all we ever +learned. We didn't know whether they came from Fort Worth or anywhere. +We didn't know where he came from because he was very quiet mouthed. + +Mr. JENNER. Didn't you ask about whether he was working? Whether he had +some money that he could pay the rent with? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. I tell you what--there is a card--the FBI picked the card +up sometime ago, but they got to fill this rental card out and he is +supposed, my husband slipped up on that, to give reference of where he +has last worked and where his business place is, and so all he put on +there was Service. + +Mr. JENNER. Meaning military service? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. I don't know--that's all they had--"Service". + +Mr. JENNER. Just the one word "Service"? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Just the one word "Service" and he signed it and then, of +course, he slipped up on that--of course, we didn't have any idea there +was anything like this. + +Mr. JENNER. Of course not. + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Like--since that happened, the people that own it have +asked my husband to make sure that he examines those cards and then +make them give a signature over on the side. + +All Oswald did was just to give his, fill it in like it should have +been filled in, and sign it and that's all he put. And they picked that +card up some time ago. + +Mr. JENNER. The FBI did? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Yes, we had to sign it, my husband and I had to release it. + +Mr. JENNER. Yes; that's all right. + +Mrs. TOBIAS. They picked that up some time ago and now that's where +we slipped up, and that's all we ever knew, and I never knew where he +worked. + +Mr. JENNER. He moved in in due course? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Yes; he moved in. + +Mr. JENNER. About how long after he had made this initial inquiry? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. You mean before he came in? + +Mr. JENNER. He came in on what date? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Well, the 3d of November--here's the books when you get +ready for them--he moved in November 3, 1962. + +Mr. JENNER. He moved in the 3d of November 1962? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Yes: but let me say--he rented it November 3--that's the +day he paid his first rent and as we said, we never knew when he moved +in. + +Mr. JENNER. When he paid his rent, that was about a week after this +initial incident, was it not? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. No; you mean to look around? + +Mr. JENNER. Yes. + +Mrs. TOBIAS. He looked around a week before he came back and rented it. + +Mr. JENNER. Yes; so that he was there November the 3d and that would be +approximately a week--that would make it the 26th of October? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. When he was there the first time--it would have been, +because it was close to a week before he came back. + +Mr. JENNER. November 3 would be a Saturday and if it was about a week, +then the previous occasion was on a Saturday. + +Mrs. TOBIAS. When he rented it, you mean? + +Mr. JENNER. No; when he first came to talk to you. + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Well, I just don't remember--really to tell you the truth. + +Mr. JENNER. It was about a week? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. It was--it was a week in between--a week elapsed there +before he came back. + +Mr. JENNER. Did he leave a deposit on that occasion? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Yes; a $5 deposit for the key, which we asked to be +deposited and he did; you mean on the apartment when he left, when he +moved out? + +Mr. JENNER. No, no. + +Mrs. TOBIAS. No; he didn't that time. + +Mr. JENNER. When he rented the apartment, did he make an advance +payment of rent or did he make a deposit? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. No; when he came back the 3d of November he paid a month's +rent and which would have been a $5 deposit--$68 for the month and the +$5 deposit. + +Mr. JENNER. Or $73 altogether? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Yes; I thought you meant did he ask for his deposit +back--he never. + +Mr. JENNER. Well, I will get to that in a minute. + +Mrs. TOBIAS. I was getting mixed up--excuse me. + +Mr. JENNER. No; you weren't mixed up. They moved in--you don't know +when they moved in? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. I honestly don't, and my husband said he didn't either, +but they could use that side. + +Mr. JENNER. The driveway? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Yes; they could have pulled the car in there. + +Mr. JENNER. Eventually you became aware that they were in the apartment? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Oh, yes; because after--we got a phone call. I didn't even +know she was up there then, because she hadn't started coming out until +they got this phone call. + +Do you want me to tell you about that? + +Mr. JENNER. Was that the first thing that aroused your attention of the +fact that they were there? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Of her and the child--no, I had seen Oswald, I think, +in and out, but he just went real fast, but like I said, Mrs. Oswald +didn't appear. It must have been maybe a week or 10 days before I had +seen Mrs. Oswald. + +Mr. JENNER. A week or 10 days after you saw him--after they moved in? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. After he rented that; yes. + +Mr. JENNER. He received a telephone call? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Yes; and I answered the phone and they wanted to talk with +Mr. Oswald, and I said, "Well, I'm sorry but we don't make it a habit +of calling our tenants to the phone." He said, "Well, this is very +important--I would like to get ahold of Mr. Oswald." I said, "Would you +like to give me a number?" He said, "Just tell him George called and +they will know what you are talking about." + +Mr. JENNER. He said, "Just tell him George called"? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Yes; and my husband went over and got them--he thought, +well maybe he should go get them. + +Mr. JENNER. Did this man have an accent? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Well, he didn't talk like a southerner, I tell you that, +because there's a difference there, isn't there? Anyway, when he +came--let me tell you this--she came with him and he used the phone. + +Mr. JENNER. You advised Oswald that a call had been received? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. My husband went and told him. + +Mr. JENNER. The man was named George? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Then, he wanted to come back and use the phone. + +Mr. JENNER. He did come back and use the phone? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Yes; he came back and wanted to know if he could use the +phone. + +Mr. JENNER. Was anybody with him? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Mrs. Oswald came with him. + +Mr. JENNER. Had you met her before? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. No; I hadn't--that's what I started to tell you. + +Mr. JENNER. Had your husband? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. No; he said that was the first he had seen of Mrs. Oswald. + +Mr. JENNER. What did she look like? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. I think she was real cute then, of course, she had that +pony tail and she wasn't fixed up in those days. + +Mr. JENNER. She had a pony tail? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Oh, yes; she had long hair pulled back and she was +very plain. I have seen pictures of her now since and she is really +different. + +Mr. JENNER. She has a different hairdo now? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Yes; she's real cute now. Anyway, he talked. + +Mr. JENNER. On the telephone? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Yes; and he didn't talk in English at all. + +Mr. JENNER. He talked in Russian over the telephone? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. I don't know what it was but they never spoke a word of +English. + +Mr. JENNER. Was it your impression that he was calling the man who had +called in and asked your husband to tell Oswald that George had called? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. He just said to me--I was the one that answered my phone +and I sent my husband over with the message and when he came back--when +he called he did not talk in English--he never spoke a word in English, +he did not, not one--Mr. Oswald didn't. + +Mr. JENNER. You mean on this occasion? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. At this time. + +Mr. JENNER. Over the telephone? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Over the telephone that very time that my husband went +over. + +Mr. JENNER. Did she say anything? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. She got on the phone later and said something, but she +spoke in another, you know, a foreign language. + +Mr. JENNER. She also spoke in a foreign language? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. She didn't speak in English, no. Well, she went home---- + +Mr. JENNER. Before we got home with her--were you introduced to her on +that occasion? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. He didn't introduce her at all--you mean Mrs. Oswald? + +Mr. JENNER. Was Mrs. Oswald introduced to you? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. No. + +Mr. JENNER. Did she say anything to you? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. No--I was going to tell you what happened. After she went +home, I said, to Mr. Oswald---- + +Mr. JENNER. Would you wait a minute? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Sure. + +Mr. JENNER. Did she say anything to you while she was in your apartment? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Just smiled. + +Mr. JENNER. She just smiled? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. That's all--when she came in she just smiled. + +Mr. JENNER. Did he say, "This is my wife?" + +Mrs. TOBIAS. No; he did not. + +Mr. JENNER. He didn't introduce her at all? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. They just wanted to use the phone. + +Mr. JENNER. She was neatly dressed? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. And she was a nice young lady and you had a good impression +of her? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. She was always very nice. + +Mr. JENNER. All right. Now, you go ahead. + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Well, she went back home and I had visions that she went +to see about the youngster. + +Mr. JENNER. She went back to the apartment and he stayed? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Yes--I said to him, "What nationality are you folks?" +Because I knew he had talked to us in English. He said, "Oh, we are +Czech." + +Mr. JENNER. He said they were Czech? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Yes; so that's all I got out of him that night--just Czech +and when she came back she smiled again real cute and nice, but she +never ever, ever made any effort to talk around him whatsoever, and +that's what I found out that night. + +Mr. JENNER. And during all the time they were tenants in the apartment +at 604 Elsbeth, did she ever use English at all in his presence while +you were present? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Not to my knowledge--no, but when she came back--he +called--he made another call and it was the same thing. + +Mr. JENNER. He spoke in a foreign tongue? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Yes; he did. + +Mr. JENNER. On the second occasion? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Yes--he didn't use English. + +Mr. JENNER. Did she speak to that person also? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Well, if it's the one that called, she did, she talked for +a second. + +Mr. JENNER. You have told me that she talked at the time of the first +telephone call? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Yes--no; not the second time, I don't think she talked the +second time. + +Mr. JENNER. Now, I'll ask you some technical things--was he a good +tenant in the sense that he paid his rent? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Yes; he paid his rent in advance. + +Mr. JENNER. Did he pay it promptly? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Yes; now, you'll have to look here--my husband has got all +that marked--later you can see that, but the last month---- + +Mr. JENNER. Which was when? + +Mr. TOBIAS. It would have been--he paid--he moved in +November--December, January, February, and he stayed until March the 3d. + +Mr. JENNER. March the 3d, 1963? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. That's right and then he lacked, I think, $8 because I +have heard him check it so many times. + +Mr. JENNER. He lacked $8? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. I think that is what it is--I would have to look in here. +My husband has it marked. + +Mr. JENNER. Go ahead and look. When you say you are looking in +here--you are looking in your records of receipts? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. That's your original record? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Yes; this is the first one. + +Mr. JENNER. Excuse me--may I ask you a few questions about that--you +keep a record of all receipts? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Oh, yes; we have one--they get one and the owner gets one. + +Mr. JENNER. When a rent payment is made, you make an entry in the book +you have before you of having received a certain amount of money. It's +in duplicate or triplicate--the tenant gets a copy of the receipt, you +retain one in your book and you send one to the owners of the building? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Well, she gets the name of it and I think this is the +other one--my husband has it marked here, so that every time they would +come out they would have a lot of trouble looking and let me see, +now--yes, he paid--he lacked $8--the balance. + +Mr. JENNER. Explain to me what you mean by his lacking a balance? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Well, he paid the $68 when he came at the regular date, +and then the 8th--that would be the 2d and the 8th he came back and +paid the other $8 and here is the beginning--if you would like to check +them. + +Mr. JENNER. I take it, then, is what you mean is that for the month of +February, he paid first $60? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Yes--right. + +Mr. JENNER. So, he was $8 in arrears at that time? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. And he made that up--he paid the $8 at a later date? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Yes; that's the receipt there. + +Mr. JENNER. In fact, on the 8th of February 1963? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. That's right. + +Mr. JENNER. That's receipt number 7611, which I have before me, is the +receipt which you gave for that final payment--the second installment? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Yes, sir; that's right. + +Mr. JENNER. Now, you have the initial receipt, do you? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. The beginning--you mean? + +Mr. JENNER. Yes. + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Yes; here's where--when he moved in up here. + +Mr. JENNER. And that is receipt number 0125, it is dated November 3, +1962, and it recites that it was received from Lee Oswald--the amount +of $5, and that's the deposit? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Yes; that's the deposit. + +Mr. JENNER. On number 2--that means apartment number 2 at that +entrance--604? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. That's right. + +Mr. JENNER. Then, I see here a second receipt dated the same date +number 0126, in the sum of $17, apartment 2, marked "void." What was +the circumstance on that receipt being marked "void?" + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Let me see--then you have another one? + +Mr. JENNER. Yes. + +Mrs. TOBIAS. My husband perhaps thought he was going to be paid by the +week and that's why he voided that one. + +Mr. JENNER. And that was voided on the same occasion? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Yes--a lot of them pay by the week, you see? + +Mr. JENNER. Ascertaining that he was going to pay by the month, a third +receipt was made out, number 0127 in the name of L. H. Oswald for $68? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. So, at this moment, he has now paid $68 plus $5 deposit? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. That's correct. + +Mr. JENNER. So, his payment is altogether $73? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. That's right. + +Mr. JENNER. And the $5 deposit is for what? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Well, that's the key deposit. + +Mr. JENNER. And when the tenant surrenders the key, he gets his $5 back? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Well, if they leave the apartment clean or half way +decent, she will refund it. + +Mr. JENNER. Now, in your record here that you keep, this is kept in the +usual, regular and ordinary course of business? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. You mean--my husband keeps this--we keep these books. + +Mr. JENNER. You keep these books regularly? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. And they are your permanent records? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. That's right--we have them from the time we moved in. + +Mr. JENNER. And these entries are all true and correct? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. That's correct. + +Mr. JENNER. And they are entries of receipts of rental payments for +your tenants, including Mr. Oswald? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. That's correct. + +Mr. JENNER. The first of those payments consists of the ones I have +recited on the 3d of November 1962, and the last of which was the $8 +payment on February 8, 1963? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. That's correct--that's the last one. + +Mr. JENNER. That paid his rent for the month of March? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Through the 3d or to the 3d. + +Mr. JENNER. It paid it for the month of February and to and including +the 3d day of March 1963? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. Did he vacate the premises on the 3d of March? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Yes; he did. He moved out and that was on a Sunday that he +moved out and we note when he moved out. + +Mr. JENNER. Go right ahead. + +Mrs. TOBIAS. They moved on this baby stroller. We thought that was so +funny, because they just--now, you see, you perhaps have already talked +to these people where they moved over on Neely. + +Mr. JENNER. They moved to where from your place? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. On Neely--like this is Elsbeth, right down here on the +corner---- + +Mr. JENNER. Excuse me, why don't we use our little plat here, Tobias +Exhibit No. 1? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. This is his apartment--right down here on Neely Street. + +Mr. JENNER. On what street? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. On Neely--now, this is Elsbeth. + +Mr. JENNER. And Neely also runs north and south? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Yes--no; wait a minute, it runs east and west. Well, it's +right behind an apartment building on Elsbeth, just one building +behind that apartment building on Elsbeth. + +Mr. JENNER. About how far away from where you are? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Oh, it wouldn't be a block, it wouldn't be a good +block--probably about half a block. + +Mr. JENNER. Was there any conversation with you or your husband as to +why they were moving? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. May I tell you? + +Mr. JENNER. Yes; please do. + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Well, they fought so much. + +Mr. JENNER. They fought so much. + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Yes--they seemed to disagree and they didn't get along +so good and the tenants would come and tell my husband that they kept +them awake and the baby cried so much and that he could hear them +falling down as if Mrs. Oswald was hitting the floor, so my husband +went over and he said he was sorry but there was nothing going on and +that everything was okay and we had one tenant over him--nobody has +been able to contact her either--and she came over, and she said, "Mr. +Tobias, I think he has made a new opening down there." She said, "I +think he's put her right through there." And he did break a window--my +husband had to fix that. + +Mr. JENNER. This was a pane of glass in the back door? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. In there--going out into the hall, out of their back +kitchen, going into that little hall going outside. + +Mr. JENNER. Your husband ascertained what? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. He had to put in a new pane. + +Mr. JENNER. Why? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Well, they knocked it out--I guess from fighting--we don't +know. + +Mr. JENNER. You weren't there? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. No. + +Mr. JENNER. And your husband wasn't there? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. They had come after us---- + +Mr. JENNER. You mean the tenants had come after you? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Oh, yes; they said they could hear glass falling and +evidently they had put a baby blanket there--a baby blanket was all +over it, tacked down over the window. + +Mr. JENNER. The pane of glass in the door was broken and they had +tacked a baby blanket over the broken glass? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Yes, all the way around it--they had quite a large blanket +and they put that around it, so my husband told them if they didn't +straighten up or, you know, they were so annoying that the other people +had to rest too, that he was sorry but they would have to find another +place. + +Mr. JENNER. And it was shortly after that that they left? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Yes; shortly after that they moved in over on Neely. + +Mr. JENNER. During this period that they lived there from the 3d +of November 1962, to the 3d of March 1963, did you become better +acquainted with Mrs. Oswald? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Yes. Now, Mrs. Oswald would come in my house quite +frequently. + +Mr. JENNER. She would? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Yes; she seemed very lonesome, and she would be standing +out in the patio we were talking about, and right up at my walkway into +the hallway, and I asked her if she didn't want to come in and she +would say "Yes," and so she and the baby came in, but she always would +just smile. + +Mr. JENNER. Did she speak with you? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Well, I was going to tell you--the first time she came in +I said, "Your husband says you are Czech," and she began to shake her +head--no. + +Mr. JENNER. She shook her head in the negative? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. She said, "No," and then she told me that. + +Mr. JENNER. What did she say? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. She said she was Russian. + +Mr. JENNER. She said that in Russian? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. No; she said that in English, but she said, "My husband +said it was bad and my husband told me if I said I was Russian people +would be mean to me." + +Mr. JENNER. She made it known to you with her limited command of +English--she said what you have now related? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Oh--yes; she said it. I understood her real well. + +Mr. JENNER. You did? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. And she said, "My husband thinks people will be mean to +me," and I said, "Nobody will be mean to you," and I said, "You are +always welcome to come into my house." I am always nice to the tenants, +but I don't run back and forth, but I try to be nice to them. A lot of +them do seem lonesome when they come in. She came in lots of afternoons +and would just set this little girl down on the floor and she was 9 +months old when they moved in there and she would crawl around over on +the rug and she would stay in there sometimes an hour, and she did that +lots of afternoons--just lots of afternoons she would come up. + +Mr. JENNER. And during that--with all of this period of time, you had +many opportunities to observe her? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Yes; and then she came in the evening and wanted to know +if she could use the phone. She said, "I don't know where my husband +is." She told me that. + +Mr. JENNER. About when was that? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Well, that was just maybe a short time before they moved +out of there--that could have been a short time, because they weren't +there too much longer after that. It was in the evening and I had such +a hard time talking to her myself, it seemed to be harder for her to +grasp or to understand English than it was for me to her, so I said to +her, "Mrs. Oswald, Marina, can you read English?" She said "Yes"--and I +went and got a tablet of paper. + +Mr. JENNER. You got a tablet? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Yes; I did. I went over to the desk and I got a tablet +and on this sheet of paper, you know, I took a pencil and I put on +there, "When he gets home give him a good kick in the shin." And she +just started laughing. She read that--she could read that, and she read +that, and she thought that was real funny, and she said she would, so +she came back the second time. + +Mr. JENNER. That evening? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Yes--she never did find him. She called--she must have +called lots of places, but, of course, spoke not in English. + +Mr. JENNER. When she made these telephone calls, she always spoke in +the foreign language? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. She never spoke in English. + +Mr. JENNER. You never heard her use English over the telephone? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. No; only when she would try to talk to me and I would see +Mrs. Oswald every day. She would have a handwashing, you know, and +there were lines in the back. + +Mr. JENNER. What kind of housekeeper was she? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Well, I never was in there but once, and I'll tell you why +I was in there then--this fellow came over and he said to my husband, +"I think that he's really hurt her this time." + +Mr. JENNER. Now, this was another tenant? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. A tenant--yes, and we didn't hear her and I didn't see +her out at the clothesline, and my husband said, "Why don't you and I +go over and rap on the door and see if she will come to the door and +see if she's okay." He said, "We can tell her that the sweeper is over +here--she hasn't found the sweeper--she doesn't know anything about it." + +Mr. JENNER. That would be the sweeper to use in the apartments? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. A vacuum sweeper. + +Mr. JENNER. I take it this was sometime in 1962? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Yes; because that could have been sometime in December, +but I just don't have no dates. That's the worst part of it. If we +had had any idea--but anyway, she came to the door and she had her +housecoat on and she had marks on her face. + +Mr. JENNER. Where--what portion--the left cheek or the right cheek? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. It would be like this [indicating]. + +Mr. JENNER. That's her right cheek? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Yes; she was facing me. + +Mr. JENNER. Up near her eye? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Yes. And her eye was dark and we told her that--we spoke +to her. + +Mr. JENNER. What did she say? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. We told her what we had come for, that over in the other +building in the closets there was this vacuum cleaner and if she ever +wanted to use it, she could come over and my husband told her--he said, +"If you don't know where it is, come to my door and I will show you." + +Mr. JENNER. Did she understand what you were saying? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Yes, she did. She understood--we made her understand, so I +don't know when they came for the sweeper, but they always would come +together and get that sweeper--you could hear them in the hall--they +were right at my door. He would always come with her when she come to +get the sweeper. He never seemed to want that woman to be out of his +sight when he was around, but that's the only marks. Now, she seemed to +be okay and I just looked in her door--I never was in her house. + +Mr. JENNER. How did you find her apartment on that look in? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. My husband doesn't clean--he said it wasn't very clean. + +Mr. JENNER. It was not? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Not too clean, my husband said it wasn't too clean. + +Mr. JENNER. And was there anything out of the ordinary? I assume +tenants leave your premises and the apartments are not too clean, and +this is not an extraordinary experience, is it? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Well, it's just not picked up and cleaned up and swept up +like it should be. We require them to use the vacuum and leave it like +they find it. + +Mr. JENNER. But there was nothing in the way of broken furniture or +gouged out walls? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. No, just that door. + +Mr. JENNER. Just the pane in the door? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Yes; that pane in the back door had to be replaced. + +Mr. JENNER. Did this man drive an automobile? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. No, he didn't own one while he was there? + +Mr. JENNER. Did he drive one? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. No; I never seen him with one. + +Mr. JENNER. You never saw him drive one in your life? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. No; I never saw him drive an automobile in my life. He +was always walking when I've seen him and they would go for a walk and +maybe for groceries, and she would always be carrying that baby. He +never carried that baby. She would always carry that child. That baby +was real frightened. Now, my husband is just real fond of children and +they take up with my husband real easy, but this child was always too +frightened and it always seemed to be so frightened and never seemed to +want anyone near it. It always seemed to be such a frightened child. + +Mr. JENNER. Did Mrs. Oswald occupy this apartment with her husband +during all the period, November 3, 1962, to and including March 3, 1963? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Well--do you want me to tell you something that happened? + +Mr. JENNER. Yes. + +Mrs. TOBIAS. We had gone out for a ride on a Sunday afternoon and when +we came back, there was a car in the driveway. + +Mr. JENNER. Excuse me, this is Mr. Davis from the State of Texas +attorney general's office. + +Mr. DAVIS. How are you--nice to see you. + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Okay. + +Mr. JENNER. Now, go right ahead. + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Well, when we came up---- + +Mr. JENNER. This was on Sunday? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Sunday afternoon. + +Mr. JENNER. How long after they moved in? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Well, I just don't know--but that's what I told those +gentlemen, but it was before my husband was in that accident, I know. + +Mr. JENNER. And your husband was in the accident when? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. The 27th. + +Mr. JENNER. Of what month? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Of November--the same month he moved in, because we still +was driving our car, and our car was wrecked. + +Mr. JENNER. So, this occurred to the best of your recollection shortly +before the accident? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Well, it would occur between the 3d and the 27th, because +my husband had his accident on the 27th. + +Mr. JENNER. Well, that's over 3 weeks--was it at the tail end of the +three weeks or the forepart of it? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. I don't remember that--I really don't. + +Mr. JENNER. They had been in the apartment for awhile? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Yes, and here is Elsbeth and we parked here---- + +Mr. JENNER. The witness is again referring to the Tobias Exhibit No. 1. + +Mrs. TOBIAS. We parked here. + +Mr. JENNER. You parked on Elsbeth Street? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Yes, we don't have garages, so we just parked around over +here, and over here in this driveway was this big convertible. + +Mr. JENNER. There was a convertible in the driveway which is located to +the rear of the Oswald apartment--you saw a convertible--what kind was +it--are you familiar with automobiles? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Well, I don't drive--my husband and I have a different +opinion on that, too. + +Mr. JENNER. Did your husband see it on that occasion? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Well he did--he said he had seen it, but I thought it was +a light car, a cream color. + +Mr. JENNER. A cream-colored car? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. I thought it was. + +Mr. JENNER. Was it a sedan, two-door or four-door? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. It was a convertible is what it was with the top back--the +top was back and there was a baby bed in that convertible and then +there was some clothing in there, and when we stopped up there, I said +to my husband, "I think someone is moving out." Now, he went over +home--I thought he did and I said, "I think I'll go over and check." + +Mr. JENNER. Did you do so? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. I walked in the hallway and as I walked in the hallway a +fellow came out---- + +Mr. JENNER. What did he look like? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Well, my husband and I have a different opinion on that. + +Mr. JENNER. I just want your view. + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Well, he was a pretty-good-sized fellow--he was larger +than Oswald. + +Mr. JENNER. A big man? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. He was larger than Oswald. + +Mr. JENNER. What would you say he weighed? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Well, I'm poor judging that, too. + +Mr. JENNER. Well, I'm going to stand up. I'm 5 foot 11 inches and I +weigh about 153 pounds. + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Well, he could have been a little heavier than you. + +Mr. JENNER. A little taller? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. He could have been a little taller and a little heavier. + +Mr. JENNER. As tall as 6 foot 6? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. I doubt if he was--you are how much--5 what? + +Mr. JENNER. I am 5 feet 11 inches--one inch shorter than 6 feet. + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Well, he could have been right around there. + +Mr. JENNER. But heavier than I am? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Well, I believe he was heavier than you. + +Mr. JENNER. What color hair did he have? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Well, he had dark hair--kind of brown, I guess, and when +I walked in the hallway, he walked out. I said, "What's coming off?" +He said, "Mrs. Oswald is going away for awhile--or moving out" or +something like that--that's the way he said it. + +Mr. JENNER. How old was this man? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Gee, I don't know. + +Mr. JENNER. What is your judgment? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Well, perhaps 50--50 I would say or even in his late +fifties. + +Mr. JENNER. Well, 50 and late fifties is a big difference. + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Well, maybe he was a little over 50 and maybe he was right +around 50--he wasn't an old man. + +Mr. JENNER. He was 50 more or less? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Yes--it would have been--that's what I thought. + +Mr. JENNER. All right. How was he dressed? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. With a brown--he had on a brown suit. + +Mr. JENNER. Was he neatly dressed? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Yes; he was. + +Mr. JENNER. He didn't have slacks on? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Well, I think that was a suit--I think that was a suit. + +Mr. JENNER. He didn't wear shorts? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Oh, no. + +Mr. JENNER. How did he act? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Well, what he said--he walked out in the hallway, and I +said, "What's coming off?" because I knew somebody was moving so, I +didn't see Mrs. Oswald at all, now, but Oswald walked out the door and +this fellow walked out in the hall and he was the one that met me and +he said, "Well, Mrs. Oswald is going away for awhile--moving out for +awhile." + +Mr. JENNER. Did he say anything about whether Mr. Oswald was going to +remain? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. That's all that was said and I went on home. + +Mr. JENNER. Did you see her? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. No, I didn't see Mrs. Oswald at all, and I don't know when +they moved out. + +Mr. JENNER. Did they all move out or just Marina? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. That's all he said--he just said, "Mrs. Oswald is going +away for awhile or moving out for awhile." + +Mr. JENNER. Did it come to your attention that she had moved? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. I didn't see her around--that's true, I didn't see her +around. + +Mr. JENNER. Did you see him around, that is, Mr. Oswald? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. No; because I think he used that back entrance because--I +really do think he must have used that back entrance because you didn't +see him much, not even when Mrs. Oswald was there, only when you see +them go out together. + +Mr. JENNER. Now, this was in the month of November? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. It would have to have been. + +Mr. JENNER. And it was something up to November 27--did he pay his rent +for the month of December? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Oh, yes; it's all here. + +Mr. JENNER. All right; let's look at it. + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Which one do we have now--which one is this? + +Mr. JENNER. That's November. + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Well, you want all the way down--don't you? + +Mr. JENNER. Give me the next one--that would be December--maybe I can +help you with this. + +Mrs. TOBIAS. This is the deposit and the rent there. + +Mr. JENNER. This is the initial payment--now, I will look for December. + +Mrs. TOBIAS. All right, here it is--starting here. + +Mr. JENNER. You have a receipt No. 0154 in your book of original +receipts here, dated December 6, 1962, reciting, "Received from L. H. +Oswald--$68 for rental of apartment No. 2, from December 3, 1962, to +January 3, 1963. Paid in cash. Signed by Mrs. M. F. Tobias, Sr." + +Mrs. TOBIAS. That's when I had to take over. + +Mr. JENNER. That's your signature? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. That is right--after my husband was sick. + +Mr. JENNER. Did he pay that to you in cash? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Yes; he did--he never gave checks. + +Mr. JENNER. And he handed it to your personally, so you knew on that +occasion, which was the 6th of December 1962, that he was there? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Oh, yes. + +Mr. JENNER. And he was paying his rent for the month of December? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. Was Mrs. Oswald still absent? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Now, I don't know how long she was gone. Now, we really +don't--my husband said he didn't--he didn't see her around. + +Mr. JENNER. What is your recollection as to when you first saw her? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. After she came back? + +Mr. JENNER. Yes. + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Well, it could have been another week or 10 days. + +Mr. JENNER. So that would be in the month of December 1962--she was +absent a week or 10 days? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. She would have had to been because I didn't see her +around, and they always kept their blinds down, you know, the shades +was always pulled. + +Mr. JENNER. They were? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Oh, yes--day and night, you never seen any shades up over +there, their shades was always down. + +Mr. JENNER. Wasn't that strange? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Well, a lot of my tenants do--we don't think nothing about +it. We've got so many of them that keeps them down. I always think +there must be something wrong when they keep them down, but we don't +bother our tenants. + +Mr. JENNER. Now, he paid his rent for the month of January 1963, did he +not, and he paid it to you? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. If it's on there. + +Mr. JENNER. Well, there is a receipt here No. 0178, dated January 4, +1963, "issued to L. H. Oswald for $68 for the rent of Apartment No. 2 +from January 3, 1963, to and including February 3, 1963," and it is +signed M. F. Tobias, Sr. + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Well, now, he signed that one. + +Mr. JENNER. Is that his signature or yours? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. No; that's his--that's his. + +Mr. JENNER. That rent was paid in cash, was it? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Yes; he gave cash. + +Mr. JENNER. To him; to your husband? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Yes; he always gave cash. + +Mr. JENNER. And as of that time she was back in the apartment? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Oh, yes; she was--you see this was later after she had +come back and when she got friendly and would come over, and she would +come over nearly every afternoon later, but she didn't come around--I +didn't see her so much when they first moved in. You see, I told you, +when they first moved in, I said to my husband, "I thought this was +the man with the wife and child?" He said, "Yes, he told me that", but +perhaps she wasn't around at the beginning for awhile. + +Mr. JENNER. Did they have any guests, any callers? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Well, one lady came to my door one evening. + +Mr. JENNER. About when? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. In the evening--you mean? + +Mr. JENNER. Yes. + +Mrs. TOBIAS. It was beginning to get dark. + +Mr. JENNER. When was it--was it the evening of the weekday or weekend? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Yes; it must have been a weekday because she said she had +had a call. She came to my door and knocked. + +Mr. JENNER. The lady did? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. And what month was it. + +Mrs. TOBIAS. I don't even know that. She said she had been trying to +contact Mrs. Oswald. + +Mr. JENNER. Describe her please--age, weight--short or tall. + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Well, I let her come in, I was going to tell you, and she +was, oh, a dark lady. She said she was Russian. I talked to her awhile. + +Mr. JENNER. Was she dark-skinned or light-skinned? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Well, she wasn't a blonde, she was a brunette--she was a +real nice looking woman. + +Mr. JENNER. She was white-skinned, however? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Oh, yes. + +Mr. JENNER. About how old? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Oh, perhaps 35 and maybe a little older. + +Mr. JENNER. How tall was she? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Oh, about 5 foot 3 or 5 foot 4 inches. + +Mr. JENNER. And what did you judge she weighed? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Well, she had a coat on--I don't know--I just don't really +know. She wasn't real large but she wasn't real small and she said Mrs. +Oswald had called her earlier in the day and said that the baby was +sick and she didn't have any money to take the baby to the doctor, and +she couldn't get them to the door, she sat in there and talked to us a +while and my husband says he just doesn't remember this--this was after +he had his accident, because his memory was pretty bad after he had +had this accident and I asked her if she would like to have me go over +with her and see if we could get in, and she said, "I would, because I +rang the doorbell and I rang the doorbell, and I can't get them to the +door." And, I said, "Okay, I'll go over with you." I didn't rap on the +door, I just kept ringing the doorbell. Well, now, he didn't come out +the front door. + +Mr. JENNER. Which door were you rapping on? The rear or the front door? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. I was ringing in the hallway, the front--I didn't rap on +the door--I just rang the doorbell. We have doorbells. Now, he didn't +come out in the hall entrance, he came around. + +Mr. JENNER. Who did? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Mr. Oswald. + +Mr. JENNER. He came around from the back? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Yes; he came out of the back door and around and jumped +in the hall, and I said, "Mr. Oswald, this lady is trying to find you +people. You didn't answer." He said, "Oh, I'll take care of it." And he +ushered her right inside and that's the last I seen. + +Mr. JENNER. Did she recognize him? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. I guess she did, because he just took her--they had +nothing to say to each other in the hall. He just said, "Oh, I'll take +care of it." + +Mr. JENNER. No words passed between them? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. No; he just came from around. + +Mr. JENNER. When she came to your place, did she identify herself +as--who she was and where she worked--did she work in the Dallas area? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. She worked downtown in an office. + +Mr. JENNER. She said she worked downtown in an office? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Yes; and she said she was going to see if she could help. + +Mr. JENNER. Did you ever see that lady again? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. I never seen her again and then, as I say, I seen a +blonde-headed girl come there. + +Mr. JENNER. Was this later? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. This was after she was there and she wanted to know which +apartment, and I showed her, and that's all I ever seen of her. + +Mr. JENNER. Describe that lady, please; she was a blonde? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Well, she was pretty slim. + +Mr. JENNER. She was slender, was she? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Yes; she was kind of thin. + +Mr. JENNER. How tall was she? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Oh, perhaps 5 foot 1 or 5 foot 2--maybe 3 inches. + +Mr. JENNER. Not as tall as the first lady you described? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Well, they could have been somewhere near the same height, +but she was a different type. + +Mr. JENNER. She was a different type person? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Yes; she was a blonde. + +Mr. JENNER. Did she identify herself? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. No; she just asked which apartment Mr. Oswald lived in and +I showed her and that's all I knew about it. + +Mr. JENNER. Did she speak English? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Yes; she did--she talked to me in English. + +Mr. JENNER. About when was that, with respect to the other incident you +have described? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. You mean between the two of them? + +Mr. JENNER. Yes. + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Well, I don't know whether it was a week later or 2 weeks +later, I just don't know. Just like I said, that if we had had any idea +about all this, we might have put down dates. + +Mr. JENNER. Oh, sure. + +Mrs. TOBIAS. But I don't--I really don't know. When they don't find the +party, they usually come to the manager, you see, and we try to help +them if we can. + +Mr. JENNER. Now, going back to these conversations you had with Mrs. +Oswald about her being Russian, was there an occasion when she talked +to you about the fact that her husband didn't want people to know that +she spoke Russian? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. She didn't say "speak". She said, "He doesn't want me to +tell that I am Russian." + +Mr. JENNER. Why? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. She said, "Because people would be mean to me,"--she said +they wouldn't be nice to her and they would be mean to her, and that +was all said about that. + +Mr. JENNER. You reassured her? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Well, I told her I didn't think that was true. I said, +"I don't think that's true. I don't think anyone would be mean to you +because I don't know why anyone should be." I don't. + +Mr. JENNER. Did she say anything about her husband saying that he +didn't want it known that they spoke Russian or that she was Russian, +because men would come around? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. No, no; that was the only occasion--the only time that +ever anything was spoken. She was pretty quiet herself. + +Mr. JENNER. Did they make any long distance calls? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. No; they didn't on our phone. They asked us--these were +all local, but they were very quiet people. They seemed to stay to +themselves, that is, they didn't mix with no tenants and the tenants +said they never even cared to speak with them. They never seemed to +want to speak. + +Mr. JENNER. That is the Oswalds? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Didn't care to mix. + +Mr. JENNER. They didn't care to mix with other people--they made no +effort to become friendly? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. No; I guess my house was the only one in the building she +was ever in. + +Mr. JENNER. And as far as he was concerned, he had little contact with +you, did he, other than pay the rent? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. No; my husband went over and got after them about the +noise. I didn't go with him. You could speak to him and he would look +at you so funny--he just didn't have anything to say. I heard a lady +describe him in an interview on TV and that was him exactly. I told my +husband, she couldn't do a better job--because he was tight, you know. + +Mr. JENNER. He was tightlipped most of the time? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Just as if his chin--just like that lady--I said to my +husband, "isn't that something how she described him?" + +Mr. JENNER. Did you ever see either of the Oswalds after they left your +building? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Oh, yes; they used to come back by, you see. I think I +told you that my husband had had this accident. We have chairs--lawn +chairs and we were sitting in the yard and she would come back by with +the baby in her stroller and she would come up to the walk and smile. + +Mr. JENNER. Did she talk to you? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Well, she never tried to have a conversation. I walked out +to the car and I said, "You moved away and left us." + +Mr. JENNER. You walked out to the car? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. She was standing by a car--you see, those cars were parked +there and I knew where she went, my husband and I would take walks and +I said, "Where did you go?" And she made "214" on the car and then I +knew it was Neely--I said, "Neely." + +Mr. JENNER. Did she nod her head? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Yes; she was a real sweet little girl as far as I was +concerned and she was a lonely person. I think she was very lonely. + +Mr. JENNER. Is there anything you would like to add that I have not +brought out, either because I don't know about it or for any reason, +that you think might be helpful to the Commission? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Well, they said to me that they thought this fellow +that moved her out might have been this George, but they brought +pictures--do you have pictures of the other men? + +Mr. JENNER. Moved her out? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. You know--that day when they moved her out. + +Mr. JENNER. Do I have pictures of a man by the name of George? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Yes; they brought some out but now, that did not look like +the man to me. + +Mr. JENNER. Do you recall them showing you a picture and telling you +what the man's name was? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. No; is it Paden? + +Mr. JENNER. The FBI agent? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Yes; I think he came to see us twice. + +Mr. JENNER. Well, there are so many of them. + +Mrs. TOBIAS. And he was about one of the second groups that came and +then later he came back with these pictures and he asked me if I +thought that was the man I had seen in the hallway. + +Mr. JENNER. That would be the man who came to help her out of the +apartment on that Sunday? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Yes; he asked me if I thought that was him and I said, +"Well, it does not look like him to me." But, there has been a +different opinion on that--my husband and I have had a different +opinion on that all along about what we thought he looked like, but +that did not look like the man to me. + +Mr. JENNER. Well, I want your view. + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Well, it didn't to me--it didn't look like the same man to +me, but I couldn't swear who it was because I've only seen the picture, +and I have seen pictures of Mr. Ruby, but the day they apprehended +Oswald, of course, we were looking on the TV. + +Mr. JENNER. Did it look like pictures of Mr. Ruby you have seen? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Well, the one that he had didn't, but what I was going to +tell you--after all that happened, and I seen pictures of him, on the +TV---- + +Mr. JENNER. Who--of Ruby? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Yes; I told my husband, I said, "Back in my mind that +resembles the man more than anybody I have ever seen in my life," +but now I wouldn't swear it because there was no resemblance of the +pictures they brought out there to me, and the day that they arrested +Mr. Oswald, Lee Oswald, we had TV on and I said to my husband, "Look +who they've got." + +He said, "What do you mean?" I said, "That's the guy that shot the +President." He said, "Who is it?" I said, "That's Lee Oswald." He +said, "How do you know?" And I said, "Don't you see him on there?" I +recognized him right off and my husband's memory was kind of shook and +he's just not the same person after he had this concussion. + +Mr. JENNER. I'm sorry to hear that. + +Mrs. TOBIAS. This big oil truck hit my husband, and you know, just +almost got the car ahead and his nerves are just not the same--they +haven't been the same. He says he's just not as stable--he's--he just +don't seem to do what he should--it's coming gradually. The doctors say +it will come, but he's kind of shook from the accident. I wasn't with +him. + +Mr. JENNER. When you saw Oswald around your home during those months, +how was he dressed generally? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Well, he always just had slacks and a T-shirt or a jacket +on, you know, a sport jacket--I don't mean a sport coat like a jacket. + +Mr. JENNER. A zipper jacket? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Yes and a T-shirt. He most always had on a T-shirt--you +didn't see him very many times without a shirt. + +Mr. JENNER. I take it he got into no discussions with you or your +husband about politics? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. No; Lord, no. + +Mr. JENNER. As a matter of fact, he got in discussions with you about +nothing? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. No, no; we had no contact with him. He just paid the rent +and out he would go. He didn't make an effort to make a conversation +even when he came to use the phone. + +Mr. JENNER. This is a furnished apartment? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. Three rooms--do your three rooms consist of a living room, +bedroom, and kitchen? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Yes; with the kitchen and dining room combined. + +Mr. JENNER. A kitchenette? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. And it is all in one and then there is a bed in the wall +in the living room. + +Mr. JENNER. That opens into the living room. + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Yes; the living room is real large, but the bedrooms are +small. Now, the kitchen that he had is smaller than the one I have, +some of them are smaller, but that's the eating area, the dining area +in the kitchen. + +Mr. JENNER. Well, Mrs. Tobias, I can't think of anything else. I +appreciate your coming up very much. + +These depositions are written up and you have the right, if you wish, +to exercise it, to read the deposition and to sign it. We don't insist +on that at all and you may waive the signing of the deposition if you +wish, and it's your option, to do either way you would prefer--if you +would prefer to read the deposition and sign it and you say so, the +U.S. attorney will get in touch with you in due course and you may come +in and read it and sign it. + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Well, now, it doesn't matter to me because we would like +to help you if we can and if we have been helpful and I tried to tell +you exactly just what I know, which isn't very much help. I don't +think we have been too much help because he moved out before all this +happened. + +Mr. JENNER. Well, you never can tell how much help you have been. You +have been of help to me and I appreciate it very much. + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Well, my husband and I have been willing--we have had a +lot of people there. + +Mr. JENNER. If you wished to waive the signing of the deposition, we +can just send it right into Washington without troubling you to sign it. + +Mrs. TOBIAS. No; it is all right with me, because I have told you the +truth. + +Mr. JENNER. Oh, sure. + +Mrs. TOBIAS. All that is there is the truth and I have told you all I +know. + +Mr. JENNER. Well, thank you very much, and I will have your husband in +now, if I may? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Okay. Now, I couldn't swear that that was who the guy was. +Now, do you want me to leave the books with you? + +Mr. JENNER. Yes; leave the books and we will give them to your husband. +Tobias Exhibit No. 1 is offered in evidence. + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Okay. + + + + +TESTIMONY OF M. F. TOBIAS, SR. + +The testimony of M. F. Tobias, Sr., was taken at 4:15 p.m., on April +2, 1964, in the office of the U.S. attorney, 301 Post Office Building, +Bryan and Ervay Streets, Dallas, Tex., by Mr. Albert E. Jenner, Jr., +assistant counsel of the President's Commission. Robert T. Davis, +assistant attorney general of Texas, was present. + + +Mr. JENNER. I understand you suffered an injury in an automobile +accident? + +Mr. TOBIAS. Yes; I ain't as young as I used to be since that. + +Mr. JENNER. This is Mr. M. F. Tobias, Sr.? + +Mr. TOBIAS. That's right. + +Mr. JENNER. And he lives at 602 604 Elsbeth Street, Dallas, Tex.? + +Mr. TOBIAS. Six two and six four. + +Mr. JENNER. And he lives with Mrs. Tobias and you manage an apartment +building at that address? + +Mr. TOBIAS. That's right; the wife and I together. + +Mr. JENNER. Would you stand and be sworn, sir? + +Mr. Tobias, in your testimony you are about to give, do you swear to +tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you +God? + +Mr. TOBIAS. I do. + +Mr. JENNER. Thank, you, sir. + +Mr. Tobias, I am Albert E. Jenner, Jr., and I am a member of the legal +staff of the President's Commission. I understand from Mrs. Tobias that +you and she received a letter from Mr. Rankin, the General Counsel? + +Mr. TOBIAS. That's right. + +Mr. JENNER. With which was enclosed a copy of the Senate Joint +Resolution 137 authorizing the creation of the President's Commission? + +Mr. TOBIAS. That's right. + +Mr. JENNER. And of President Johnson's Executive Order 11130, creating +the Commission and appointing it and fixing its powers and duties and +obligations, and also a copy of our rules and regulations for the +taking of testimony. From those papers, I assume you are aware of the +fact that at least our general direction is to investigate all the +facts and circumstances surrounding the assassination of President +Kennedy on November 22, 1963? + +Mr. TOBIAS. That's right. + +Mr. JENNER. In the course of doing that, there are many people who, in +their pursuit of their livelihoods, came in contact with a man by the +name of Lee Oswald, and we understand you folks did and I would like to +ask you a few questions about it. + +Mr. TOBIAS. Go ahead; I'm willing to answer all I can. + +Mr. JENNER. You are aged what? + +Mr. TOBIAS. Sixty-seven. + +Mr. JENNER. You are a native-born American? + +Mr. TOBIAS. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. Born in Battle Creek, Mich.? + +Mr. TOBIAS. That's right. + +Mr. JENNER. And your family--you raised two or three boys, as I +understand it? + +Mr. TOBIAS. I've got two boys and two girls. + +Mr. JENNER. You have two boys and two girls and they are all adults and +married now, I assume? + +Mr. TOBIAS. That's right. + +Mr. JENNER. And you are retired at the moment? + +Mr. TOBIAS. That's right. + +Mr. JENNER. And you and Mrs. Tobias manage this building on Elsbeth +Street here in Dallas? + +Mr. TOBIAS. That's right. + +Mr. JENNER. And in the course of your managing that building, you came +in contact with a person by the name of Lee Oswald; is that so? + +Mr. TOBIAS. That's right. + +Mr. JENNER. Tell me the circumstances? + +Mr. TOBIAS. Well, I can tell you one thing, he was a funny duck. He +came up there--maybe 3 weeks before he rented it. + +Mr. JENNER. He rented it on November 3, 1962? + +Mr. TOBIAS. Yes; but he came there maybe 3 weeks before that. + +Mr. JENNER. That would be in October. He was alone, was he? + +Mr. TOBIAS. Yes; and looked at the apartment. I told him what I wanted +for it and I told him what the score was--we didn't allow no drinking +or no parties, which I don't, and he says, "My wife isn't here"---- + +Mr. JENNER. Off the record. + +(Discussion between Counsel Jenner and the witness, Mr. Tobias, off the +record.) + +Mr. JENNER. Okay; now, that's what we want to get on the record. Repeat +that. + +Mr. TOBIAS. I tell them like this--what they drink in their apartment +is their business, but when they get noisy that's mine. My business. +Then, he came back---- + +Mr. JENNER. Was he alone? + +Mr. TOBIAS. Yes; and he wanted to look at the apartment again, which +happened to still be vacant, and then he wanted to go around the house. + +Mr. JENNER. Around the apartment itself? + +Mr. TOBIAS. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. Before you is Tobias Exhibit No. 1, and that is Mrs. +Tobias' conception of a plat of your building. Now, is there anything +wrong with that? + +Mr. TOBIAS. Well, it ain't the way I would have drawed it, because this +building is kind of in a---- + +Mr. JENNER. Well, now, Mrs. Tobias has drawn that green and I hand you +now a red pen and ask you to draw one. + +Mr. TOBIAS. Do you want me to drawn another one? + +Mr. JENNER. Yes; let's mark it "Tobias Exhibit No. 2," first. + +(The witness marks the instrument referred to as requested by Counsel +Jenner.) + +Mr. JENNER. All right; draw me a plat of the building on the ground +floor, that is the bottom surface. + +(Witness Tobias drew the plat requested by Counsel Jenner.) + +Mr. JENNER. Now, Mr. Tobias has drawn a =U=-shaped outline. + +Mr. TOBIAS. This is all trees and shrubs in here. + +Mr. JENNER. In the =U= portion, that is a court or a patio, is it? + +Mr. TOBIAS. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. And that's trees and shrubs? + +Mr. TOBIAS. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. Which is Elsbeth Street? You are now writing "Elsbeth +Street" and this court faces on Elsbeth Street, does it? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. That's right; yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. All right. + +Mr. TOBIAS. This is a private driveway through here. + +Mr. JENNER. Does the private driveway swing around to the rear? + +Mr. TOBIAS. And this is a line back here, a property line. Now, this is +Davis Street here. + +Mr. JENNER. All right, write Davis Street on there lengthwise, will you? + +Mr. TOBIAS. Like that. [Complied with request of Counsel Jenner.] + +Mr. JENNER. Now, does this private driveway enter on Elsbeth Street? + +Mr. TOBIAS. The private driveway comes off from Elsbeth. + +Mr. JENNER. Put an arrow there, will you? + +Mr. TOBIAS. That's it. + +Mr. JENNER. And that's the private driveway? + +Mr. TOBIAS. Now, his apartment was this one here. + +Mr. JENNER. Draw a line across there, and put in the apartment number. + +Mr. TOBIAS. No. 2. + +Mr. JENNER. And at what address? + +Mr. TOBIAS. This is 604. + +Mr. JENNER. All right; write that in there, and now we've got that +located. + +Mr. TOBIAS. [Witness complied with request of Counsel Jenner.] He had +an outside entrance--this is another apartment here, No. 1. + +Mr. JENNER. Also on the ground floor? + +Mr. TOBIAS. Also on the ground floor. They both used the same entrance +here. + +Mr. JENNER. Put an "X" there. + +Mr. TOBIAS. All the rest of the apartments--of course, there is an +apartment here, and the same here [indicating]. It's two-story and the +same thing upstairs. + +Mr. JENNER. What is the apartment number that is right in back of that +patio? + +Mr. TOBIAS. This is No. 6. + +Mr. JENNER. And the one to the right? + +Mr. TOBIAS. This is No. 5. + +Mr. JENNER. And the one in front of that? + +Mr. TOBIAS. This is my apartment here. + +Mr. JENNER. Number what? + +Mr. TOBIAS. No. 7. + +Mr. JENNER. And what address is that on Elsbeth? + +Mr. TOBIAS. This is 602. + +Mr. JENNER. All right. Write that in and now we're got it. Now, what I +want you to tell me about--is--tell me about that patio, how big is it? + +Mr. TOBIAS. Oh, let's see, that must be 25 to 30 feet deep. + +Mr. JENNER. How far across? + +Mr. TOBIAS. About the same thing across. + +Mr. JENNER. Does it have shrubbery and trees? + +Mr. TOBIAS. You see, you have a front door--this is our front entrance +here. + +Mr. JENNER. Will you put a little square there? + +Mr. TOBIAS. For these two apartments and for these three apartments +here---- + +Mr. JENNER. I asked Mrs. Tobias, and I'm going to ask you this, because +you are more accustomed to this sort of thing. Could a man stand in +that patio and dry sight a firearm or a weapon and not be noticed? + +Mr. TOBIAS. In the summertime--yes; because along here is shrubbery and +along here is shrubbery. [Indicating.] + +Mr. JENNER. Now, would you put a figure in there, because we need it +for the record and let's call that your first figure here--let's put an +"A" in there, and the other one "B". Now, those are shrubs or shrubbery? + +Mr. TOBIAS. That's right; and there is a brick wall across here. + +Mr. JENNER. How high is that brick wall? + +Mr. TOBIAS. That's about 18 inches. + +Mr. JENNER. Just a low wall? + +Mr. TOBIAS. Yes; and there are shrubs on the outside of that wall and +on the inside of the patio area here and in here in the center I have a +round circle dug out and have got some kind of grass that grows right +on there but that wouldn't amount to nothing. + +Mr. JENNER. That shrubbery that is facing on Elsbeth Street, how tall +is that? + +Mr. TOBIAS. This shrubbery, now, faces these buildings here and it +faces this apartment here. + +Mr. JENNER. The "A" shrubbery faces the 604 address bank of apartments, +and the "B" shrubbery faces your apartment? + +Mr. TOBIAS. Yes; No. 7. Now, this shrubbery is about 3 to 4 feet high. + +Mr. JENNER. That's the "A" shrubbery? + +Mr. TOBIAS. Yes. This shrubbery over here is not so high because some +of it died on me and I had to dig it up, but here now I have a big tree. + +Mr. JENNER. When you say "here," you are pointing to the center? + +Mr. TOBIAS. Up here I have two pieces of shrubbery on each side of that. + +Mr. JENNER. The tree is what kind of a tree? + +Mr. TOBIAS. It's a fir tree. + +Mr. JENNER. It's solid right down to the ground? + +Mr. TOBIAS. That fir is up there maybe 25 feet high. + +Mr. JENNER. So, somebody could stand behind the tree, and dry sight a +rifle and not be seen from Elsbeth Street? + +Mr. TOBIAS. That's right. + +Mr. JENNER. Now, pursuing this same subject--first, Elsbeth Street runs +in what direction? + +Mr. TOBIAS. North and south. + +Mr. JENNER. Which is the north end--the 604 side or your side? + +Mr. TOBIAS. Let me see, now. I get confused in directions. + +Mr. JENNER. Well, let's put an "N" there for north and put an "S" up +there for south and then over this way is to the east. + +Mr. TOBIAS. And this is west. + +Mr. JENNER. And if that is west, then this must be south and this must +be north. + +Mr. TOBIAS. This is just exactly the way the apartment sets; this is +west here. + +Mr. JENNER. Put a "W" there and put an "E" up at the top for east. + +Mr. TOBIAS. I get confused with this direction myself here. + +Mr. JENNER. Calling your attention to the rear entrance from the +parkway, the driveway, what is there to the north of that, another +building? + +Mr. TOBIAS. There is a house here. + +Mr. JENNER. A single-family dwelling? + +Mr. TOBIAS. Yes; an old lady 80 years old lives there. + +Mr. JENNER. And is that all open except for that house? + +Mr. TOBIAS. That's right. This is a regular driveway. We have our +driveway here and she has her driveway too, you see. + +Mr. JENNER. All right; put another driveway in there. I'm going to +mark that second driveway, if I might. [Counsel Jenner marked the +instruments as stated.] There is a single-family dwelling, then? + +Mr. TOBIAS. She keeps--this old lady there keeps roomers. + +Mr. JENNER. She does? + +Mr. TOBIAS. What I mean, she just has just a room. + +Mr. JENNER. Is that house about in here? + +Mr. TOBIAS. Yes; that would be on the other side of the driveway here. + +Mr. JENNER. The other side of where I have marked this second driveway? + +Mr. TOBIAS. Yes; facing Elspeth. + +Mr. JENNER. What is the open space, say, between your building line and +the single family dwelling? + +Mr. TOBIAS. Oh, that must be--that can't be more than 25 feet because +there are 2 driveways there. + +Mr. JENNER. Could a man dry sighting a weapon, holding a rifle outside +that rear entrance, do so without being detected and without people +noticing it? + +Mr. TOBIAS. Well, you've got the streets on Elspeth and people in that +house might see it, because her roomers are right there by that door. + +Mr. JENNER. Now, people who are passing by or looking out of your +window or looking out from this rooming house could see that? + +Mr. TOBIAS. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. Did anybody ever say anything to you about Oswald having a +weapon? + +Mr. TOBIAS. No. + +Mr. JENNER. A firearm? + +Mr. TOBIAS. No. + +Mr. JENNER. Using it--sighting it? + +Mr. TOBIAS. No. + +Mr. JENNER. Was there ever an occasion when you noticed that there had +been brought near the premises or on it or in his possession a package? + +Mr. TOBIAS. No; I never did see it because he always used his back door +and I was over on the other side. + +Mr. JENNER. If you will pardon me--a package that to you you would +recognize as a rifle? + +Mr. TOBIAS. No. + +Mr. JENNER. That possibly was a rifle? + +Mr. TOBIAS. No. + +Mr. JENNER. Or, a bunch of curtain rods or window shades or something +of that nature? + +Mr. TOBIAS. No. No; I've never seen nothing like that. I don't even +remember the parcel post man ever leaving anything there--a package or +anything. I never was in his apartment but twice, I don't think, while +he lived there. I went in there with the exterminators twice, once a +month, and we exterminated the place for cockroaches, that's one thing +we don't like around here, and, of course, I had to get her permission +to go in there. + +Mr. JENNER. Did you speak with Marina? + +Mr. TOBIAS. Yes; and she was an awful nice girl. + +Mr. JENNER. She was? + +Mr. TOBIAS. Yes; she was. + +Mr. JENNER. Did she understand you when you spoke to her? + +Mr. TOBIAS. Well, she was--would come out in her front yard--I sat in +her front yard a lot and she would come out and bring the baby out and, +of course, I think she could talk more English than what she put on she +could, because he didn't want her to anyway. + +Mr. JENNER. How do you know that? + +Mr. TOBIAS. Because she told the wife that he didn't want her to learn +it. + +Mr. JENNER. Did she give any reason? + +Mr. TOBIAS. Yes; she said people will be mean to her. She got +acquainted with them. She got acquainted with them and she used to come +over to the house and sit with the wife a lot and the wife would talk +to her. + +Mr. JENNER. And you moved in and around a lot, did you? + +Mr. TOBIAS. Do you mean me--I was out around a lot? + +Mr. JENNER. Yes; I mean you--you were around and you saw her with the +child and you saw her in the apartment? + +Mr. TOBIAS. Yes; I was around all the time--there is no night that goes +by before I got to bed that I don't make a trip around the house. + +Mr. JENNER. You had an accident; when was that? + +Mr. TOBIAS. In October, I think it was. + +Mr. JENNER. And were you confined in your apartment for quite a while? + +Mr. TOBIAS. Yes; I was there a week before I went to the hospital and I +was in the hospital a week or better, and then I come home and I didn't +do much but lay around--I had an awful concussion. + +Mr. JENNER. That's what I understand--are you feeling better now? + +Mr. TOBIAS. Oh, I'm getting along all right now, only lost the hearing +out of this ear. + +Mr. JENNER. But you did see Marina in and around your apartment and you +saw her out in the walk, walking the baby and she was friendly, was she? + +Mr. TOBIAS. She was always friendly. + +Mr. JENNER. A very nice girl? + +Mr. TOBIAS. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. Clean and neat? + +Mr. TOBIAS. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. And attended to her child? + +Mr. TOBIAS. Well, she took care of her baby, that's for sure, and it +was always clean. + +Mr. JENNER. And she attempted to be pleasant and talk to you people to +the limited extent she was able to do, is that a fair statement? + +Mr. TOBIAS. I didn't hear you. + +Mr. JENNER. I mean, she would say a few words to you--she had a limited +command of English? + +Mr. TOBIAS. That's right. + +Mr. JENNER. But you tried to communicate with her and she with you? + +Mr. TOBIAS. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. At least to a limited extent? + +Mr. TOBIAS. Well, I talked to her and, of course, she wouldn't say +nothing back and Oswald, I tried to talk to him several times and all I +could get of him was a grunt. He was a kind of a guy that wouldn't talk +to you at all. + +Mr. JENNER. Is that right? + +Mr. TOBIAS. Yes; and he was a peculiar duck. + +Mr. JENNER. How did your other tenants feel toward Oswald? + +Mr. TOBIAS. Well, they didn't like it. + +Mr. JENNER. They didn't like what? + +Mr. TOBIAS. They didn't like the way he beat her all the time. + +Mr. JENNER. They complained to you that he manhandled her? + +Mr. TOBIAS. Yes; there was one man that came over there one night and +he told me, he said, "I think that man over there is going to kill that +girl," and I said, "I can't do a darn thing about it." I says, "That's +domestic troubles and I don't jump into a man and a woman's fighting," +which I don't. If he hurts her bad, then I'll have to take it up, but +not until, so he knocked a window out of the back door. + +Mr. JENNER. When was that, when did that occur? + +Mr. TOBIAS. Sir? + +Mr. JENNER. When did that occur? + +Mr. TOBIAS. While he was living there--along toward the last. I think +it was the last month he was there. + +Mr. JENNER. How did that come to your attention? + +Mr. TOBIAS. Well, I was going by there--and I cleaned the halls, and I +was sweeping out the hall and I seen the window was broken and I spoke +to him about it and he said, "I'll get it in" and he never did get it +in. + +Mr. JENNER. Did he tell you how it happened? + +Mr. TOBIAS. No. + +Mr. JENNER. Did he have any covering up over it? + +Mr. TOBIAS. He got to fighting so much around there that I told the man +that owned it, Mr. Jurek, so him and his wife went over there one night +and told him that he was making too much noise with their fighting and +they had to quit or move, so they moved. + +Mr. JENNER. You found this fellow pretty close-mouthed and laconic? + +Mr. TOBIAS. Yes; he was--he didn't say nothing to nobody. + +Mr. JENNER. On the other hand, you found her to be pleasant, neat and a +delightful young lady? + +Mr. TOBIAS. That's right. + +Mr. JENNER. A good mother? + +Mr. TOBIAS. She came over too, when he came over to use the telephone. + +Mr. JENNER. When was that--do you remember a particular incidence? + +Mr. TOBIAS. Oh, well, one time--yes--somebody by the name of George +called. + +Mr. JENNER. Did you answer the phone on that occasion? + +Mr. TOBIAS. No; mother answered it and I don't hardly ever answer the +phone because I can't hear good and this fellow wanted Oswald and she +asked him, I understand, who it was and she said it was George and I +went over and told Oswald that he was wanted on the phone and they came +over there and they both talked and they both talked in their language. + +Mr. JENNER. You heard his end of the telephone conversation, did you? + +Mr. TOBIAS. No; you couldn't--because they talked in their language. + +Mr. JENNER. You heard him, is all I asked you? + +Mr. TOBIAS. All I could hear--I could hear him talking but I didn't +know what they were talking about. + +Mr. JENNER. You were present in the room, is all I mean. + +Mr. TOBIAS. Yes; we were there. + +Mr. JENNER. And you heard him speak over the telephone? + +Mr. TOBIAS. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. And he spoke in some foreign tongue? + +Mr. TOBIAS. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. Which you couldn't understand? + +Mr. TOBIAS. That's right. + +Mr. JENNER. And the whole conversation was in this foreign tongue? + +Mr. TOBIAS. Yes; they both talked. + +Mr. JENNER. You didn't hear the other fellow on the other end? + +Mr. TOBIAS. Oh, no. + +Mr. JENNER. You assumed that he was likewise talking in the same +language? + +Mr. TOBIAS. I imagine so--yes. + +Mr. JENNER. Were you curious about that? + +Mr. TOBIAS. Yes--I didn't like it, because when anybody says anything, +I like to know what they are talking about. + +Mr. JENNER. Did you say anything to him about it? + +Mr. TOBIAS. No; because it's a private phone and I pay my own phone +bill, and I don't figure it's up to the people in the apartments to be +using my phone all the time, and we let him understand that. + +Mr. JENNER. You did? + +Mr. TOBIAS. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. Did you ask him what language that was he was speaking in? + +Mr. TOBIAS. Well, he came over--when he first came in he told us he was +Czech. + +Mr. JENNER. When was this--this 3 weeks other time? + +Mr. TOBIAS. No; that was after he moved in, and my landlady is +Czechoslovakian. + +Mr. JENNER. Your landlady is Czechoslovakian? + +Mr. TOBIAS. My landlady is Czechoslovakian herself, and so one day when +Marion was over at the house, Mrs. Oswald was in there--she had come in +there and sat down. + +Mr. JENNER. This was an occasion when Marina, or do you mean the +landlady, Marion came in? + +Mr. TOBIAS. I say Mrs. Jurek was there. + +Mr. JENNER. Mrs. Jurek was in your apartment? + +Mr. TOBIAS. Yes; she came to collect the rent and Mrs. Oswald was in +there. + +Mr. JENNER. She was visiting? + +Mr. TOBIAS. And my wife says. "Mrs. Jurek, Mrs. Oswald is +Czechoslovakian." Mrs. Jurek says, "All right, speak something. I'm +Czech too." She says, "No, we're not Czech, we're Russian, but my +husband doesn't want us to say that because people will be mean to us." + +Mr. JENNER. How do you know she said that? + +Mr. TOBIAS. I was there. + +Mr. JENNER. Did you hear Marina say, "No; I'm not Czech, I'm Russian." + +Mr. TOBIAS. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. "And my husband doesn't want people to know that because +people will be mean to me?" + +Mr. TOBIAS. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. She said that much in English so that you would understand +it? + +Mr. TOBIAS. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. That's quite a bit of English. + +Mr. TOBIAS. Well, I know. That's what I'm trying to tell you--she knew +more English than she let on she did. + +Mr. JENNER. That's of interest to us--she was able to communicate that +whole idea to you in English? + +Mr. TOBIAS. That's right. + +Mr. JENNER. And did she speak some Russian then to this lady? + +Mr. TOBIAS. No--after she told Mrs. Jurek she was Russian, that was it, +because Mrs. Jurek didn't--she was Czech and she didn't know no Russian. + +Mr. JENNER. I take it that Marina visited in your apartment rather +frequently? + +Mr. TOBIAS. Oh, she come over there very seldom--she came over there. + +Mr. JENNER. Very seldom? + +Mr. TOBIAS. Yes; she come over there a couple of times a week. + +Mr. JENNER. She did come over that often, though? + +Mr. TOBIAS. Yes; she would come over there and sit and the wife would +talk to her, because my wife is a great hand to sew, and she would +watch the wife and the little baby would play, but what burned me +up--I'm a great lover of children, and when I tried to get next to that +little baby sitting in a wheelchair---- + +Mr. JENNER. In a stroller? + +Mr. TOBIAS. In a stroller and as I would walk up to it and try to talk +to it, she just acted as if she was scared to death. + +Mr. JENNER. Is that so--was that unusual? + +Mr. TOBIAS. Well, it is to me. + +Mr. JENNER. I mean, in your experience? + +Mr. TOBIAS. Yes; because I haven't found a baby yet that I couldn't +take over. + +Mr. JENNER. Did you finally win the baby over? + +Mr. TOBIAS. No--they didn't stay there that long. That's why he +moved--he moved in that trailer, in that stroller. + +Mr. JENNER. When was that? + +Mr. TOBIAS. That was after--when he left my place. When he moved from +my place up around the corner around a block and a half and he moved +everything in that stroller. + +Mr. JENNER. Was that after the owners of the building had come and told +him that he was making too much noise or too much trouble and that they +suggested he might find another apartment? + +Mr. TOBIAS. That's right. + +Mr. JENNER. Let's see, this was on a Sunday, wasn't it, March 3? + +Mr. TOBIAS. Well, now--I think that he stayed there, a couple of days, +if I'm not mistaken over his rent period. + +Mr. JENNER. He had paid his rent, though? + +Mr. TOBIAS. Yes; he had paid his rent. You see, the last month that he +paid, the books will show you that he come in there with $60 and that's +all he had, he said, and then he would come back later with the $8, +which he did do. + +Mr. JENNER. Mrs. Tobias has furnished your rent receipts and we have +recited that into the record, so we have a record of that. He didn't +move out on the 3d, he lacked a couple of days, is that right? + +Mr. TOBIAS. Well, there might have been a day or two in there in his +getting out. + +Mr. JENNER. Did he pay for those extra days? + +Mr. TOBIAS. No. + +Mr. JENNER. Did you ever ask him to pay? + +Mr. TOBIAS. No--I didn't. We asked him to pay for the window, but he +didn't pay for it either. + +Mr. JENNER. Did he ever come back and ask you for his $5 deposit, the +key deposit? + +Mr. TOBIAS. No, he never did--not to me. + +Mr. JENNER. Did he surrender the key? + +Mr. TOBIAS. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. What was the appearance of the apartment when he moved out? + +Mr. TOBIAS. I didn't understand it. + +Mr. JENNER. What was the appearance of the apartment when he moved out? + +Mr. TOBIAS. Well, it was in pretty good shape. + +Mr. JENNER. It was? + +Mr. TOBIAS. It was pretty clean--there was one thing I noticed and that +was when I went in there with the exterminator--we have beds in there, +the beds that we have in there has these kind of bookshelves at the top +of them, and he had worlds and worlds of books. + +Mr. JENNER. He did? + +Mr. TOBIAS. They were all Russian--you would see this Russian and this +Russian and this Russian and that, but I didn't touch one of them. + +Mr. JENNER. But they were either Russian language books? + +Mr. TOBIAS. Well, that I don't know. + +Mr. JENNER. Well, they were books about Russia? + +Mr. TOBIAS. They were on Russia, because the headline on the side of it +here was Russian. + +Mr. JENNER. On the heel of the book? + +Mr. TOBIAS. And it would just be Russian I or Russian II or something +like that and that was to me kinda--looked kinda odd to me; of course, +I didn't think nothing of it. + +Mr. JENNER. Were they subscribers to newspapers? + +Mr. TOBIAS. I think he took the Morning News, if I'm not mistaken. + +Mr. JENNER. He paid the rent promptly? + +Mr. TOBIAS. Yes; by the month. + +Mr. JENNER. By the month and in cash? + +Mr. TOBIAS. That's right, and the only time he got behind was that one +month--that one time there with the $8 and then he made that up. + +Mr. JENNER. Did you ever discuss with him where he was working? + +Mr. TOBIAS. No. + +Mr. JENNER. How he was making his money? + +Mr. TOBIAS. No; you didn't discuss nothing with that boy. + +Mr. JENNER. He didn't volunteer it and even if you tried, you couldn't +have gotten anything--is that about it? + +Mr. TOBIAS. His card--when he made out his card--when he made out his +card, that's where I slipped up a little, I guess. He made out his card +that he was in the service. Of course, I should have questioned him +more, which I didn't do, but in the business in the apartment house you +get so darned many jokers in there. + +Mr. JENNER. I wouldn't doubt it--was there an occasion when Marina +moved out for a short time? + +Mr. TOBIAS. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. Describe that, please. + +Mr. TOBIAS. Well, now, this is when I was goofy-headed. + +Mr. JENNER. You mean that followed your accident? + +Mr. TOBIAS. I hadn't been home from the hospital very long, but we came +back from somewhere--I don't know where, and we seen a car out there +and they were loading it up and the wife jumped out of the car and she +said, "Well, I guess the Oswalds are moving. We'll find out." + +She goes around and goes in the front door and back down to the +door and she meets a man and she says. "What are they doing--moving +out?" And he tells her that he's moving Mrs. Oswald away for a short +time. So, I don't know whether it was the same guy or another guy, +but anyway, there was a fellow that came around to the front with an +armload of stuff--but the man I seen was a tall man, about 6-foot tall +and dark complected and a slight mustache. That was the man that I saw. + +Mr. JENNER. How big a man was he? + +Mr. TOBIAS. He was a tall man--6-foot tall. + +Mr. JENNER. At least 6-foot--he might have been taller? + +Mr. TOBIAS. He could have been taller. + +Mr. JENNER. How tall are you, Bob? + +Mr. DAVIS. Six foot four inches. + +Mr. JENNER. Mr. Davis will stand up and he is 6 foot 4 inches. + +Mr. TOBIAS. He was about like him--maybe a little shorter, but just +about that height. + +Mr. JENNER. About that build? + +Mr. TOBIAS. Yes--just about the same build. + +Mr. JENNER. What did he weigh--a couple of hundred pounds or a hundred +and ninety? + +Mr. TOBIAS. Well, probably a hundred ninety to two hundred pounds. + +Mr. DAVIS. I weigh about 195. + +Mr. TOBIAS. That's what I weigh. + +Mr. JENNER. What did this man say? + +Mr. TOBIAS. He said he was moving Mrs. Oswald for a few days--he told +the wife that. He never said nothing to me. + +Mr. JENNER. Did you see the automobile they were in? + +Mr. TOBIAS. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. What was it? + +Mr. TOBIAS. It was a convertible--a red one. + +Mr. JENNER. Red? + +Mr. TOBIAS. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. Do you know what make it was? + +Mr. TOBIAS. No, I don't--I had seen it there before. + +Mr. JENNER. When did this occur? + +Mr. TOBIAS. Well, I guess maybe she moved out in March. + +Mr. JENNER. Was--with respect to your illness, was it before your +illness or after--before your accident or after? + +Mr. TOBIAS. That was after my accident. You see, I was goofy-headed +right around in that period of time. + +Mr. JENNER. From your concussion? + +Mr. TOBIAS. Yes; in fact, I have been goofy-headed all of my life, but +I was worse then. + +Mr. JENNER. You said you saw this red convertible around the apartment +on prior occasions? + +Mr. TOBIAS. Well, I had seen the car there once before. + +Mr. JENNER. At least once? + +Mr. TOBIAS. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. It might have been more? + +Mr. TOBIAS. Well, no, I won't say any more than that, but I know I have +seen it there once before that time. + +Mr. JENNER. Had you seen this man there before? + +Mr. TOBIAS. No; I never seen him before. You see, they can drive right +down that driveway and park in front of this door here, and I couldn't +see them. + +Mr. JENNER. Well, they could come in from the rear, couldn't they, they +could come in off of Davis Street? + +Mr. TOBIAS. Well, they could come up around off of Davis and come up +through here too. + +Mr. JENNER. Did they have anybody visit there, in addition to this man? + +Mr. TOBIAS. Well, there was a lady came there to see about the baby one +day and she said she had got a call that the baby was sick and they +didn't have no money to buy it any medicine and my wife took her over +there and she said she had been trying to get in, but there wouldn't +nobody answer the door and my wife went over there and she hammered on +the door and Oswald, instead of him coming to the front door, he goes +out this back door and comes all the way around to the front. + +Mr. JENNER. That's kind of strange. + +Mr. TOBIAS. That's right--that's the kind of guy he was, and then there +was a blonde headed woman there one time. + +Mr. JENNER. A blonde? + +Mr. TOBIAS. She was looking for Oswald--for the Oswalds, too. + +Mr. JENNER. Describe her? + +Mr. TOBIAS. She got in and she went in the house. + +Mr. JENNER. Would you describe her, please? + +Mr. TOBIAS. Well, I imagine she weighed around 120 pounds and was +around 5 foot 3 inches or 4 inches. + +Mr. JENNER. A slender woman? + +Mr. TOBIAS. Yes; she was a slender, blonde headed--a pretty woman. This +other woman that came there wanted to see about the baby, and she was +kind of a dark-haired woman and I imagine she would weigh around 100 +pounds or 110, but she was rather short, she was about 5 feet tall. + +Mr. JENNER. She was 100 pounds and 5 feet what? + +Mr. TOBIAS. She was around 5 foot--she wasn't too large. + +Mr. JENNER. She was kind of slender too, then, a little heavier than +the other one? + +Mr TOBIAS. Yes, she was a little heavier. + +Mr. JENNER. Did either of these ladies identify themselves in any way? + +Mr. TOBIAS. No. + +Mr. JENNER. Did either of them say they lived in Dallas or worked in +Dallas? + +Mr. TOBIAS. Well, let me see--there's one of them, I think this +dark-headed woman, said she worked here in Dallas. + +Mr. JENNER. Is that the one you described first? + +Mr. TOBIAS. No; the dark-headed woman--the blonde--I don't know about +her, the wife talked to her. + +Mr. JENNER. Did you see the Oswalds after they left, after they moved +out of the apartment? + +Mr. TOBIAS. Yes; I don't know that I ever seen him, but I seen her as +she went by the house a couple of times wheeling the baby and I didn't +even know where they moved to until one night my car was in a wreck and +I didn't have nothing and the wife and I walked a lot and I went around +the corner and I seen her upstairs in an apartment window and that was +where they moved to. I don't know how long they stayed there. She went +by the house not more than 3 or 4 weeks ago here and she had a bunch of +men in the car one night and waved--she knew me. + +Mr. JENNER. She waved to you 2 or 3 weeks ago? + +Mr. TOBIAS. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. Did you get a good look at her? + +Mr. TOBIAS. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. You recognized her? + +Mr. TOBIAS. Oh, yes--she was sitting in the back seat. She had the +little girl with her. + +Mr. JENNER. Was that a convertible? + +Mr. TOBIAS. No, no; that was a big car--I don't know what kind of car +it was. + +Mr. JENNER. You have seen some pictures of Jack Ruby posted in the +newspaper and on television? + +Mr. TOBIAS. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. This man that came to move Marina out of there for a +temporary visit, did he look like Jack Ruby? + +Mr. TOBIAS. No. + +Mr. JENNER. How long was she away? + +Mr. TOBIAS. Oh, she wouldn't have been away, well, I imagine she was +gone about 2 weeks. I never did know when she came back. + +Mr. JENNER. She was gone temporarily, a week to 2 weeks, or something +of that kind? + +Mr. TOBIAS. She was gone longer than that--she was gone a couple of +weeks at least. + +Mr. JENNER. Did she ever talk to you about that sojourn of hers? + +Mr. TOBIAS. No. + +Mr. JENNER. Did you ever ask her? + +Mr. TOBIAS. No. + +Mr. JENNER. Did your wife? + +Mr. TOBIAS. I didn't ask her nothing. + +Mr. JENNER. Do you know whether your wife did? + +Mr. TOBIAS. No--I don't know whether she did or not. + +Mr. JENNER. At least your wife never reported it to you? + +Mr. TOBIAS. If my wife said anything, or if she had said anything to my +wife, she would have told me. My wife and I been together 43 years. + +Mr. JENNER. Give me your observations, I know you have already done it +to some extent, but give me your observations as to the personality of +this man. + +Mr. TOBIAS. Ruby? + +Mr. JENNER. No. + +Mr. TOBIAS. You mean Oswald? + +Mr. JENNER. Yes--you saw him off and on for about 4 months. + +Mr. TOBIAS. Well, now, he was the kind of a guy that went around with +his lips tight and if you did say anything to him he would answer you +just as darn quick as he could and just be sharp as he could and so he +didn't have to do that to me only a couple of times and I didn't say +nothing more to him. + +Mr. JENNER. You got the message? + +Mr. TOBIAS. And I figured that if he didn't want to talk to me, I +didn't want to talk to him. He come over and paid his rent, he paid his +rent and I give him a receipt, and that was all there was to it. + +Mr. JENNER. You never had any pleasantries on that occasion? + +Mr. TOBIAS. No, no; there was no good morning or no good night or +nothing about it, and he would get up and go to the store to get the +groceries and she would carry the groceries and he would lead the way. + +Mr. JENNER. You saw that on more than one occasion? + +Mr. TOBIAS. I saw it a lot of times. + +Mr. JENNER. She did the lugging? + +Mr. TOBIAS. Yes--sure. + +Mr. JENNER. Did he have an automobile? + +Mr. TOBIAS. No. + +Mr. JENNER. Was there ever any conversation with him or conversation +occurred in your presence as to whether he could drive an automobile? + +Mr. TOBIAS. No--no. + +Mr. JENNER. And when they moved away, they moved away in the +perambulator? + +Mr. TOBIAS. They moved away in that stroller. + +Mr. JENNER. They couldn't have had very much in the way of household +equipment? + +Mr. TOBIAS. They didn't have very much--all he had was books and what +little dishes they had and that wasn't very many and the baby bed. + +Mr. JENNER. You did see Marina from time to time after they moved out +of the apartment? + +Mr. TOBIAS. Well, I have seen her maybe, I'll say three or four +times--that's all I've seen her. She would go by and she would always +wave a hand at me and she would go down--I don't know to where to heck +she ever went to, but she always--when she was even living there, she +would go out onto Davis and I would watch her as she would go on up +to Zangs Street going towards town. Whether she was going to go see +somebody or just going for a walk, that, I don't know. + +Mr. JENNER. Mr. Tobias, is there anything that occurs to you that you +think might be helpful to the Commission? + +Mr. TOBIAS. No; I told you just like I told the FBI--I have tried to be +honest with all them and I have sat down and studied it and after the +FBI had come out there and see if I could think of anything else and I +told you just like I told the other 10--there has been 10 of them out +there. I even had one guy from the Detroit Times down there. Of course, +I was raised in Michigan and I told him to keep my name out of it and +he did and he didn't put it in there. All my people are up there and I +didn't want them to get tangled up in it. + +Mr. JENNER. Well, I have concluded my questioning. If there is nothing +further you want to add, we appreciate this very much, your coming in, +and you might think that you are not furnishing us anything, but there +are kernels, you know, and pieces of the puzzle--there are small ones +and big ones. I offer Tobias Exhibit No. 2 in evidence. + +Mr. TOBIAS. Well, like I told my wife--anytime we can help out we will +and if you want us again, we are willing. + +Mr. JENNER. I appreciate your cooperation. These are your original +receipt books and we have recited them in the record and now return +them to you and thank you very much for bringing them. + +Mr. TOBIAS. I have one of these I keep ever since I been in that +apartment and I been there for 3 years and a half and I have got every +receipt I ever wrote and I keep it on records and lots of times I have +to go back to them and there's only one person that doesn't get into +them and that's the credit department. + +Mr. JENNER. By the way, Mr. Tobias, this deposition will be written up +in due course and you may read it and sign it. If you wish, you may +waive that--it's a privilege and a right you have if you want to sign +it, and if you want to waive it that's all right. + +Mr. TOBIAS. It would be sent to me? + +Mr. JENNER. You would have to come in here to read it. + +Mr. TOBIAS. Okay. + +Mr. JENNER. If you want to come in and read it you call Barefoot +Sanders' office, that's the U.S. Attorney's Office, and they will tell +you when it is ready to be read. Mrs. Tobias decided she would forego +that privilege--she didn't want to come in and read it. + +Mr. TOBIAS. Well, I'll talk to her too. + +Mr. JENNER. Okay; you'll call in and Mr. Sanders will probably call +you, but you will hear from him. + +Mr. DAVIS. Thank you very much. + +[At this point Mrs. Tobias, the wife of the deponent, entered the +deposing room.] + +Mr. TOBIAS. The wife wants to talk to you about something. + +Mr. JENNER. All right. + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Now, you said something about signing this; how is that +going to be? + +Mr. JENNER. Well, your husband decided he would like to see his and you +might like to see yours, so you might as well see yours? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. You will call us--you will let us know? + +Mr. TOBIAS. We will come in here, mother, and if you want to sign it, +and if you don't want to sign it we won't sign it. + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Okay. + +Mr. JENNER. Now, wait a minute--you come down and read it and if there +are any errors in it, that you want to correct, you correct them, but +you aren't going to refuse to sign it, are you? + +Mr. TOBIAS. No; I don't imagine I will. + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Do you know what he said, Mr. Jenner? + +Mr. JENNER. What? + +Mrs. TOBIAS. We got this letter and he said, "I thought we was going to +get around this Warren Commission--I didn't think we were going to have +to go before the Warren Commission." + +Is this going to be the end of it or is there still going to be some +more? + +Mr. JENNER. Well, I can't tell you whether it will be the end of it or +not. + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Well, we may go from here--that letter said any place in +the United States and if it did we would have to go; okay? + +Mr. JENNER. That's right. If you have to come to Washington, your +transportation will be paid. + +Mr. TOBIAS. That's all right, but just make it summertime. + +Mrs. TOBIAS. Well, of course we will be glad to come. + +Mr. JENNER. All right, thank you both for coming. + + + + +TESTIMONY OF MRS. JESSE GARNER + +The testimony of Mrs. Jesse Garner was taken on April 6, 1964, at +the Old Civil Courts Building, Royal and Conti Streets, New Orleans, +La., by Mr. Wesley J. Liebeler, assistant counsel of the President's +Commission. + + +Mrs. Jesse Garner, 4911 Magazine Street, New Orleans, La., after being +sworn by Mr. Wesley J. Liebeler, examiner, testified as follows: + +Mr. LIEBELER. My name is Wesley J. Liebeler. I am a member of the legal +staff of the President's Commission investigating the assassination of +President Kennedy. Staff members have been authorized to take testimony +from witnesses by the Commission pursuant to authority granted to the +Commission by Executive Order No. 11130 dated November 29, 1963, and +joint resolution of Congress No. 137. + +I understand, Mrs. Garner, that Mr. Rankin wrote to you and your +husband last week advising you I would contact you concerning the +taking of your testimony. + +Mrs. GARNER. Yes; he did. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And that he enclosed with the letter a copy of the +Executive order and of the joint resolution to which I have referred, +as well as a copy of the rules of procedure adopted by the Commission +relating to the taking of testimony of witnesses. Is that not correct? + +Mrs. GARNER. That's right + +Mr. LIEBELER. We wish to inquire of you today, Mrs. Garner, concerning +your knowledge of Lee Harvey Oswald which you may have gained as +a result of your being the manager or one of the managers of the +apartment building in which Oswald lived while he was in New Orleans +from approximately May through September 1963. Before we get into the +details of that, however, would you state your full name for the record? + +Mrs. GARNER. Mrs. Jesse Garner. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Where do you live? + +Mrs. GARNER. 4911 Magazine. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Where were you born? + +Mrs. GARNER. Vacherie, La. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Have you lived all of your life in Louisiana? + +Mrs. GARNER. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Can you tell us when you were born? + +Mrs. GARNER. March 16, 1919. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Am I correct in understanding that you and your husband +are the managers of the premises known as 4905-11 Magazine Street here +in New Orleans? + +Mrs. GARNER. Yes; we are. + +Mr. LIEBELER. How long have you been the managers of those premises? + +Mrs. GARNER. Four years. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Will you describe briefly for us the nature of the +premises? + +Mrs. GARNER. The house, do you mean? + +Mr. LIEBELER. Yes. + +Mrs. GARNER. Well, it is a double house. I live in one side, and the +other side has two apartments, and I have two apartments in the back, +unattached to the house upstairs and downstairs. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Am I correct in understanding that the half of the house +in which you and your husband live is known as 4911 Magazine Street? + +Mrs. GARNER. Right. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And the front apartment, which I understand is one-half +of the rest of the house---- + +Mrs. GARNER. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. That is 4907 Magazine Street? + +Mrs. GARNER. Right. + +Mr. LIEBELER. In the rear of the other side of the house is a separate +apartment numbered 4905 Magazine Street? + +Mrs. GARNER. Right. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did there come a time in the spring of 1963 when you made +the acquaintance of Lee Harvey Oswald? + +Mrs. GARNER. When I talked to them, or what? + +Mr. LIEBELER. Yes. + +Mrs. GARNER. Or when I rented him the place? + +Mr. LIEBELER. How did you first come in contact with him, and what was +your conversation with him, and what was the result of the conversation +you had? + +Mrs. GARNER. The only thing was when he come to rent the apartment, +there was another lady that brought him but they were in the car, but +I didn't notice the car. I didn't pay attention, and when she came to +the door to ring the bell, she told me he was looking for an apartment +and his mother and her was good friends, and she knew him from a +baby. Little Lee she called him, and that she had two places, I don't +remember exactly where she said--I think somewhere on Prythania, and +he went there first and they never had nothing empty, and she took him +riding and they saw my sign and stopped. I showed him the apartment, +and she took him through it, and she said it was very nice. She looked +at the screen porch and said it would be very nice for the baby. We +stood on the screen porch, and he asked me did I have any table lamps, +they didn't have any and his wife was going to come later, and we stood +on the porch talking and she was telling me how long she knew him, +since he was a little boy, and she was friends with his mother and he +had gotten married overseas, and she hadn't met his wife and hadn't +seen him for a long time, and that is when he took a picture out of his +wallet and showed a picture of his wife and baby. Not the baby, I don't +think he had a picture of the baby. Maybe he did, I don't remember. +Well, I told him, I said, well, that is nice, overseas girls make nice +wives at times, because I had one living upstairs not too long before +that, and I said they were real nice. He said, "Yes, one thing, they +don't give you no lip." I will never forget that. That is one thing he +said, and that's all I can really remember he said, and he paid me the +month's rent. + +Mr. LIEBELER. How much was that? + +Mrs. GARNER. $65. + +Mr. LIEBELER. How did he pay that to you? Was it in cash? + +Mrs. GARNER. Cash; and he said that his wife would be coming in that +Sunday, the weekend you know. I think it was, it must have been on the +ninth. I don't remember exactly when the ninth was. What day was it? + +Mr. LIEBELER. The 9th of May, according to the calendar with which the +reporter has graciously supplied us, was a Thursday. + +Mrs. GARNER. Thursday. That weekend, that is when she came in. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Do you remember the name of this woman that was with +Oswald? + +Mrs. GARNER. No; she never said her name and I didn't ask her, but I +know she was a middle-aged woman in about her middle fifties or late +fifties, well kept, reddish looking hair with a ball in the back, and +she wore glasses; a well kept woman. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did they say specifically they had stopped at your place +because they had seen the sign advertising the apartment for rent? + +Mrs. GARNER. Yes; the sign, yes. She took him riding and seen the sign +out. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Do you remember any other conversation with either Oswald +or this lady that first time you met Oswald? + +Mrs. GARNER. No; that is about all, because then they left. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did Oswald move back to the apartment, or move into the +apartment, before his wife came or did they come together and move in +together? + +Mrs. GARNER. No; he was in there a couple of days before she came. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Do you remember exactly when he moved in? Did he come +back later on the 9th, or did he come on the 10th? + +Mrs. GARNER. The next day, the next evening. + +Mr. LIEBELER. The next day. He moved in the next evening? + +Mrs. GARNER. The next evening. + +Mr. LIEBELER. That would have been Friday the 10th? + +Mrs. GARNER. I don't know if he stayed there, but he was there. + +Mr. LIEBELER. He did move some of his belongings in; is that correct? + +Mrs. GARNER. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you notice anything about his belongings, what kind +of stuff he had? + +Mrs. GARNER. I didn't see that. I didn't see anything of that. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You didn't see any suitcases he might have had? + +Mrs. GARNER. No. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Do you remember when his wife came? + +Mrs. GARNER. That weekend; on that Sunday. That was a Sunday. + +Mr. LIEBELER. How did she arrive? + +Mrs. GARNER. In this station wagon, that lady from Texas, that it had a +Texas license, blue and tan station wagon or blue and white, something +like that, and she also stayed a few days then when she brought the +wife in, she stayed at least a week. + +Mr. LIEBELER. This was a woman from Texas? + +Mrs. GARNER. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Whom you later learned was named Mrs. Paine? Is that +correct? + +Mrs. GARNER. Right. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Now, did you notice how many people there were in the +station wagon when it arrived? + +Mrs. GARNER. No; I really didn't. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you notice how many---- + +Mrs. GARNER. In fact, I didn't see the station wagon when it arrived; +I didn't see it until the next day. I saw it parked out there with the +Texas license and figured, you know, she had come in, his wife, because +that is where he told me she was coming from, Texas. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you later learn how many people were in the +apartment, or came in the station wagon? + +Mrs. GARNER. Yes; when my husband talked to Mrs. Paine outside, he told +me she had two little girls. I didn't know it, I didn't see them. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And did Oswald himself have a little girl? + +Mrs. GARNER. A little girl, June. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And Oswald's wife? + +Mrs. GARNER. Yes. I didn't know she was in a family way. I didn't know +she was going to have another baby when she rented the apartment, +because when I first saw her she didn't look that way to me. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You say Mrs. Paine stayed in the apartment about a week. +Did you have any conversation with her during that time? + +Mrs. GARNER. No; I never even saw the lady. I never saw her. I couldn't +tell you what she looked like. My husband saw her. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You say your husband had talked to her. Did he tell you +what she had said? + +Mrs. GARNER. No; I never asked him and he never said nothing. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you ever have any direct contact with either Oswald +or his wife after they moved into the apartment? + +Mrs. GARNER. Well, the first thing, they was there a couple of weeks +and I have a window fan in the kitchen, and I take the screen down to +hose it and clean it, and I didn't put the screen back up. I just set +it on the screen porch, and a couple of weeks later he come to me and +asked me if I had a ladder and hammer, he was going to put the screen +up. + +Mr. LIEBELER. This was the screen that belonged on the window---- + +Mrs. GARNER. The screen belonged on the outside of the kitchen. I have +a window fan and it gets dirty, and I take it off and hose it and clean +it, but I didn't put it back. I left it on the porch, and he wanted to +put it back. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Was this a window fan in Oswald's kitchen? + +Mrs. GARNER. It was in Oswald's kitchen, and he wanted to put the +screen up and asked me was it all right to put the screen up, and asked +me would I loan him a ladder and a hammer. The hooks belonged to the +screen to hook the screen, they was off, but I loaned him two nails and +told him to tack the screen on so far, so I could take the nails off, +and that would be it, so his wife come outside in the meantime with the +baby, and they was talking Russian and I couldn't understand what they +were saying. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you know it was the Russian language then? + +Mrs. GARNER. No; I don't know. I just put two and two together when +they come out with that Russian, but I knew she was Russian. He told me +she was Russian when they came to rent the apartment. I don't know what +made me say it, but I told him, I called him Lee, I said, "Lee, why +don't you talk English to your little girl and your wife? That way she +could learn to talk English, and when the little girl goes to school it +wouldn't be as hard on her." + +He said, "She has time enough to learn that," and he never had a nice +word to say to me after that. I think that must have made him hate me +or something like that, because he just passed me up all the time too, +and never turned his head to look. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did he get the screen back up? + +Mrs. GARNER. Yes; he tacked it back up, and I got my ladder and hammer +back, and he never even said thank you or nothing. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did he tell you any specific reason why he didn't speak +English to his wife and girl? + +Mrs. GARNER. No; that's all he said, they had plenty time enough for +that, something like that. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you ever try to talk to Marina Oswald? + +Mrs. GARNER. Yes; I did when she would be outside hanging clothes. I +tried to talk to her and to the baby, I talked to both, and she would +put her hands over her eyes and start crying. I asked her how she felt, +and she would just do like this with her shoulders. + +Mr. LIEBELER. She shrugged her shoulders? + +Mrs. GARNER. Yes; and when she would see you she would not try to say +hello, and she always wore little pedal pushers around the house with a +little shirt, and her hair was straight pulled back and pinned down. + +Mr. LIEBELER. This was Marina? + +Mrs. GARNER. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did she have long hair? + +Mrs. GARNER. Yes; long enough, about here. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Down to her shoulders? + +Mrs. GARNER. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you have any other contact with Oswald yourself, +personally? + +Mrs. GARNER. Yes. One time I went for my rent, it was a few days past +due, the rent, and I mean, you know, when you let them go they wait too +long and they don't ever get it. It was a few days later, I was going +around the drive to see about my rent and he was starting out the drive +to catch a bus on the corner, and when he saw me he turned around and +looked, figured I was coming after the rent. I said, "Oswald, you got +the rent? The landlady is coming for the rent." He said, "Yes, I have +it." + +He was fixing to go to the bus, so he turned around to walk up the +drive to go get the money, and I said, "Go on where you have to go; I +will get it later," and he just pushed me aside and went by me and went +and got the money and handed it to me. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did he actually push you aside physically? + +Mrs. GARNER. Yes, just like that, and I called to him and I said, +"Never mind; go where you have to go and I will get it later," and he +just took me like this and pushed me aside and just went, you know, +just went by me like that. + +Mr. LIEBELER. He actually laid his hands on you? + +Mrs. GARNER. Put his hands on me just like that, and pushed me. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did he say anything? + +Mrs. GARNER. He didn't say a thing. He come back and gave me the money +and that was it. + +Mr. LIEBELER. When was the next time you had any---- + +Mrs. GARNER. Well, I didn't talk to him any more than that, because I +noticed how he was, wouldn't answer you when you say good morning or +good evening, hello or good morning, so I just never bothered. The only +thing, at night he used to come past behind the house and always wore +trunks, yellow trunks with thongs, no top shirt, and he used to stuff +all my garbage cans and all the garbage cans on the street, and never +would talk to anybody, pass right by the door of the apartment of the +other people and never did talk to anybody. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You never had any conversation with him after this time +when you asked him about the rent? + +Mrs. GARNER. No, that's about it. The most I talked to him was when he +rented the apartment, that is the day he took it, and that lady done +most of the talking. In fact, she had given me her phone number to let +me call and let her know how Oswald was doing, and the wife when the +wife would come in. I figured what in the world I want that for and I +just threw it away and didn't bother with it. I didn't think anything +like this was going to come up. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did Oswald ever have any visitors to his apartment, do +you know? + +Mrs. GARNER. Yes. As I said, I never did see anybody else around there +myself except this middle-aged man and middle-aged woman like I said +that come and picked him up one weekend on a Saturday and come back +that Sunday after, because I happened to be sitting on the box and saw +them come up. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Would this have been in July? + +Mrs. GARNER. About in July, I imagine. I know there was a lot of +mosquitoes around that time; I think it was July sometime. I am really +not sure. It was hot. + +Mr. LIEBELER. How many times did these people come to see Oswald? + +Mrs. GARNER. That is twice I seen, once I seen both of them come in the +evening one night, and they didn't stay very long, but I was sitting +outside. And that weekend, it was just him come to pick him up. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You saw the man come to pick up Oswald on two different +occasions? Is that right? + +Mrs. GARNER. One occasion they came. + +Mr. LIEBELER. The man was with a woman on one occasion? + +Mrs. GARNER. At night one time, and then when he come to pick him up +for the weekend he was by himself. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Altogether, he was there twice? + +Mrs. GARNER. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Once by himself? + +Mrs. GARNER. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And once with a woman; is that right? + +Mrs. GARNER. Yes. If they was there before that, I didn't see them. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You only saw him come twice? + +Mrs. GARNER. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Approximately how old was this man? + +Mrs. GARNER. I don't know. Like I say, I am not too good at judging +ages. I would say in his late fifties or early sixties, something like +that. He had a high forehead, a high peak right here, and kind of +greyish. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Could you describe him for us, please? Was he a white man? + +Mrs. GARNER. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did he appear to be Spanish or Cuban extraction to you? + +Mrs. GARNER. No, no, no. + +Mr. LIEBELER. He was fair complected? + +Mrs. GARNER. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Are those the only two people you ever saw visit Oswald? + +Mrs. GARNER. Well, there was that Cuban or Spanish looking guy one time +rang my bell in the late afternoon, kind of short, very dark black +curly hair, and he had a stack of these same pamphlets in his hand he +was spreading out on Canal Street there on the porch, and he had a +stack of them in his hand and he asked me about Oswald, and I said he +was living around on that side where the screen porch is, and I saw +those things in his hand and I said, "You are not going to spread those +things on my porch," and that was all, and I closed the door and went +on about my business. I don't know, but I guess he went over there. + +Mr. LIEBELER. How many pamphlets did this man have in his hand? + +Mrs. GARNER. I don't know. You know how thin those things are, and he +had a stack about that high. + +Mr. LIEBELER. About 5 inches or 6 inches, maybe? + +Mrs. GARNER. About that high. + +Mr. LIEBELER. About the width of your hand? + +Mrs. GARNER. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. What color were they, do you remember? + +Mrs. GARNER. That I can't remember. They looked like yellow and pink, +all different colors. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Approximately how old was this fellow? + +Mrs. GARNER. Well, he was young. I don't believe he was young as +Oswald, but he was young, in his thirties I guess. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Was he as tall as Oswald? + +Mrs. GARNER. No, he was shorter. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Shorter than Oswald? + +Mrs. GARNER. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did he wear sunglasses, if you remember? + +Mrs. GARNER. No, he didn't have sunglasses on because it was so late in +the evening, just about dark. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Was he of a light build, or was he heavy set? + +Mrs. GARNER. No, I wouldn't say. He wasn't light, wasn't heavy; he was +in between that. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did he have an accent, do you remember? + +Mrs. GARNER. Yes. That's why I said he was either Spanish or Cuban. I +don't know. He speaks broken English, like. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you tell the FBI about this gentleman coming there? + +Mrs. GARNER. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you mention to the FBI that this man had---- + +Mrs. GARNER. The pamphlets? + +Mr. LIEBELER. The pamphlets. + +Mrs. GARNER. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You told that to the FBI? + +Mrs. GARNER. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Do you remember approximately when this fellow came to +see Oswald? + +Mrs. GARNER. That I don't remember. I know it was around that time, +just right after he was picked up on Canal Street for distributing +them. It was a few days after that. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you learn about his arrest? + +Mrs. GARNER. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. On Canal Street? + +Mrs. GARNER. Yes, I read it in the papers. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You read about it in the newspaper? + +Mrs. GARNER. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you have any conversation with Oswald about that +incident? + +Mrs. GARNER. No, I don't think I did myself. No, I didn't talk to him +about that, because it was just before that happened on Canal Street +he had put them on the screen and I had my husband take them down, and +after that, that is when he was picked up on Canal Street. + +Mr. LIEBELER. What was this incident with the screen? Would you tell us +about that? + +Mrs. GARNER. Those pamphlets, "Hands off Cuba," or something like +that. He had pamphlets on the screen porch in the front, and I told my +husband go take those things down, I didn't like them there. He went +and told him to take them down, and he said who suggested that, and he +said I did and he took them down and never gave us no trouble about it. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Let me show you a picture that is marked Exhibit No. 1 +to the affidavit of your husband Jesse J. Garner, and I ask you if the +leaflet that you see in that picture is a picture of a leaflet like the +one Oswald put on the screen? + +Mrs. GARNER. Yes, that's it. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And do you recognize the person in that picture? + +Mrs. GARNER. Yes, that is Lee Oswald. I would recognize him from the +back of his head. + +Mr. LIEBELER. It appears to be a picture of him handing out pamphlets +or sheets of paper on which appears the language, "Hands off Cuba," and +some other writing that can't be read. + +Mrs. GARNER. They had some other writing on the bottom, but I never +read it. I saw this "Hands off Cuba," and I didn't like it on the porch +and I made him take them down. That must have been taken on Canal +Street; it looks like it. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Do you recognize the surrounding area, the background of +the picture? + +Mrs. GARNER. That's what I said, it looks like it. It is either Canal +or Royal somewhere. I don't know. It might not be here; I don't know. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You don't recognize the background for sure? + +Mrs. GARNER. No. + +Mr. LIEBELER. When this incident---- + +Mrs. GARNER. Let me get my glasses. Maybe I can see better. + +Mr. LIEBELER. When this incident concerning the leaflet on the screen +of the porch occurred, was that before or after Oswald had been +arrested? + +Mrs. GARNER. That was before. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Before he was arrested? + +Mrs. GARNER. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. How long before? + +Mrs. GARNER. That I don't remember. I don't remember exactly all that, +but I know--I can't very well see, but it looks like around here +somewhere. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Aside from the two different people you have previously +mentioned as having visited Oswald, one the Cuban or Spanish fellow and +the other two for a total of three people you saw come to visit Oswald, +did you ever see anybody else come to visit in his apartment? + +Mrs. GARNER. Not that I know of. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Late in September sometime, as I understand it, this +station wagon that brought Oswald's wife to the apartment in the first +place returned? + +Mrs. GARNER. Yes; it did. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did it not? + +Mrs. GARNER. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you see who was driving the station wagon at that +time? + +Mrs. GARNER. No; I didn't see who was driving it. All I saw was the +station wagon. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You never saw the person who came in the station wagon +that time? + +Mrs. GARNER. I did not. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did your husband see that person? + +Mrs. GARNER. Yes; my husband. + +Mr. LIEBELER. At this time. + +Mrs. GARNER. Yes; my husband saw her and spoke to her. I never did see +her. + +Mr. LIEBELER. He told you it was a lady, did he not? + +Mrs. GARNER. Right. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And the lady, from reading the newspapers, you and your +husband assumed that this was Mrs. Ruth Paine of Irving, Tex.? + +Mrs. GARNER. That's right. + +Mr. LIEBELER. But you yourself never met or talked to Mrs. Paine? + +Mrs. GARNER. I never did. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you become aware of the fact that Oswald was employed +during the time that he lived in your apartment? Did you know anything +about his job? + +Mrs. GARNER. When he rented the apartment he told me he was working +at Reily Coffee Co. on Magazine, whatever you call it. It is a coffee +company, and as far as I know I didn't think he worked there as long as +he did, because he was always home, unless he worked at night. + +Mr. LIEBELER. When did you learn that Oswald had been dismissed from +the job, or no longer worked at Reily Coffee Co., if you ever learned +that? + +Mrs. GARNER. I said, it seemed like when he rented the apartment, I +didn't think he worked 2 or 3 weeks. Well, but I learned later he +didn't get laid off until July 19, something like that, unless they +changed shifts, because he was working in the day at first and I used +to see him get off the bus in the evening coming home, but then after +that I didn't see him any more. He was always sitting on the screen +porch reading. He must have been working at night. He was always on the +side porch, probably reading all the time. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You say he read a lot? + +Mrs. GARNER. He sure did. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you see at any time what he was reading? + +Mrs. GARNER. Well, it always was books, like those pocket books and +papers, real big books, regular books. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You never saw the names of any of the books? + +Mrs. GARNER. No; you couldn't get that near him. + +Mr. LIEBELER. What else did he do with his spare time besides reading? + +Mrs. GARNER. That's all I ever saw him do. To say if he ever went out +or anything like that, he would go back and forth, catch the bus and +go, and didn't stay long and come back. How many times he went out +at night or anything like that, I don't know. I really couldn't tell +you because I wasn't on that side. The few times I did see him I just +happened to be out there. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You mentioned something about him wearing a bathing suit. + +Mrs. GARNER. That's all he always wore, all the time. Always he had +thongs on and yellow shorts, bathing trunks, and nothing on top walking +around the yard like that. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Also the Commission has been informed that Oswald spent +a considerable amount of time spraying bugs or insects of one sort or +another. + +Mrs. GARNER. He did. He done that, yes. He was always around the back +of the house where the bathroom window was, spraying some sort, and the +screen porch he would spray. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you ever talk to him about this spraying activity of +his? + +Mrs. GARNER. No; I never did. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Do you know whether your husband did? + +Mrs. GARNER. No; he didn't. I don't guess he did; he never said +anything about it, but there were plenty of ants and I guess that is +why he was spraying. They always had a lot of ants, you know, and +roaches. I know they had a lot of roaches. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Cockroaches? + +Mrs. GARNER. In that apartment, when they left. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did he ever complain to you about them? + +Mrs. GARNER. No. We never had them before he moved. Whenever we used to +spray, we had the pest control, but when he moved out they had plenty +of them. They left the place filthy, too. + +Mr. LIEBELER. The place was dirty when he left? + +Mrs. GARNER. Was it? The icebox was broken, the freezer door was broken +off, the stove was broken, the mattress was ruined. + +Mr. LIEBELER. What was wrong with the mattress? + +Mrs. GARNER. I guess the baby. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Do you know whether his wife, Marina, liked the apartment? + +Mrs. GARNER. I don't know. She never did say anything about it. + +Mr. LIEBELER. She never did say anything about it? + +Mrs. GARNER. I never did talk to her about any apartment. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you yourself personally see when this station wagon +left? + +Mrs. GARNER. No; I didn't see it. + +Mr. LIEBELER. It arrived late in September 1963? + +Mrs. GARNER. I didn't see when it left; no. + +Mr. LIEBELER. When was the last time you saw the station wagon, please? + +Mrs. GARNER. Well, whatever day that was, Sunday or Monday, whenever +they left. It was about that morning. Like I said, early that morning +they was packing it up, and then later on through the day between 10 +and 11 I looked out there and it was gone. + +Mr. LIEBELER. This would be either Sunday or Monday, September 22 or +23? Is that right? + +Mrs. GARNER. That's right. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You are not exactly positive which it was? + +Mrs. GARNER. I am not sure whether it was Sunday or Monday. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Your husband is pretty sure it was Monday. + +Mrs. GARNER. He is sure it was Monday; yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. The 23d of September. + +Mrs. GARNER. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And you have no recollection that is contrary to that; is +that correct? + +Mrs. GARNER. No; I haven't. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you see Oswald leave, when he finally left the +apartment? + +Mrs. GARNER. No. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Do you know when he left? + +Mrs. GARNER. Well, I figure he left that same night, whatever day that +wagon left, myself. I don't think he come back. He might have come back +in that apartment to get his stuff, whatever he had. I don't think he +stayed there that night at all, that's what I believe. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Your husband said in the discussion we had with him +previously that he heard some noise in the apartment the night the +station wagon left. + +Mrs. GARNER. He might have heard him packing up stuff getting ready to +leave. I don't think he come back after he left that night; I think he +left that night. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Your husband did say he thought he heard these noises +about 7 or 7:30 in the evening. Is that right? + +Mrs. GARNER. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You say you think the noise he heard was just the noise +of Oswald getting his stuff and leaving? + +Mrs. GARNER. Yes; getting his stuff to get moving. + +Mr. LIEBELER. In any event, you never saw Oswald around the place at +all after the day the station wagon left; is that right? + +Mrs. GARNER. No; I didn't. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you discuss with anybody who lived in the +neighborhood or in the apartment house when actually Oswald did leave? +When we think about this question, let's first of all confine ourselves +to the period of time prior to the assassination. Were you concerned +about when Oswald left or how he left, prior to the time of the +assassination? + +Mrs. GARNER. You mean how he left? + +Mr. LIEBELER. That is, did you talk to any of the neighbors or anybody +in the building? + +Mrs. GARNER. When they seen him leave? + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did they see him go? + +Mrs. GARNER. Yes. I don't remember asking anybody, just figured that he +had skipped and left that night. I didn't bother asking anybody about +that, but later I was talking to Mr. Rogers, one of the tenants, and he +said yes, he seen him leave about that time that evening, the bus was +coming and he ran out with his suitcase. + +Mr. LIEBELER. That was after the assassination, you talked to Mr. +Rogers? + +Mrs. GARNER. Yes; definitely after. + +Mr. LIEBELER. After you had been interviewed by the FBI and Secret +Service? + +Mrs. GARNER. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Mr. Rogers--what is his full name; do you know? + +Mrs. GARNER. Eric Rogers; is all I know. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Does he still live there? + +Mrs. GARNER. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Mr. Rogers told you he saw Oswald the same evening that +the station wagon left? Is that right? + +Mrs. GARNER. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And he saw Oswald come out of the apartment house and run +to catch a bus? + +Mrs. GARNER. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Is that right? + +Mrs. GARNER. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And it was about dark? + +Mrs. GARNER. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did Mr. Rogers say how many suitcases Oswald had in his +hand? + +Mrs. GARNER. He just said with his suitcases or suitcase. I don't +remember exactly what he said. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You are not able to tell us whether Oswald had one +suitcase, two suitcases with him when he left, or what? + +Mrs. GARNER. No. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And Mr. Rogers didn't tell you? + +Mrs. GARNER. No; I didn't ask him. I don't remember. I don't remember, +really if it was the same day the station wagon left or not he told me, +and I don't think he even said that day it was, but it must have been +right after that, you know, what night or the next day. I feel like it +was that night. It must have been, because I know he didn't have any +reason to stay around there any longer. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Mr. Rogers didn't specifically say it was the same day? + +Mrs. GARNER. No. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did he ever say what kind of luggage Oswald had? + +Mrs. GARNER. No. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You never saw Oswald with any suitcases of any kind? + +Mrs. GARNER. I never was in the apartment. After they rented the +apartment, I never went in the apartment. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And you never saw him outside with any luggage? + +Mrs. GARNER. No. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And you never saw what kind of luggage they were packing +in the station wagon? + +Mrs. GARNER. I saw boxes, but I never did see any luggage. I saw boxes, +and baby beds and playpens and stuff like that. + +Mr. LIEBELER. But you don't remember noticing any specific suitcase of +any kind? + +Mrs. GARNER. No. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you form an opinion as to whether Marina Oswald could +speak English or not? + +Mrs. GARNER. Well, I didn't think she could speak English at all. When +I heard her on television say a few words, something like that, I was +surprised because at home she never said anything. And another thing, +she would nod, try to tell you hello when he wasn't there, but if he +was there like they was sitting on the steps or something, or they +would go through the drive and he was there, she wouldn't even look at +you. + +Mr. LIEBELER. She was more friendly and outgoing when Oswald wasn't +there? + +Mrs. GARNER. Yes; when he was there, she wouldn't have nothing to say. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you ever see a rifle or gun of any kind in the +apartment, or around the apartment? + +Mrs. GARNER. No. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Or the station wagon, or just anywhere? + +Mrs. GARNER. No, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You never had any reason to believe that Oswald had a +rifle in his possession? + +Mrs. GARNER. No; I never knew about that, never saw anything looked +like a gun or anything like that. Like I said, they have asked me that +so many times before, and they just packed this station wagon and if +he had a gun I don't guess he put it where anybody could see it, and +whatever was in the station wagon could have been, I mean anything with +value, because they took a few days packing it to leave and it sat out +there at night on the street. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Without locking, or do you know whether they locked the +station wagon? + +Mrs. GARNER. I don't know whether they locked it, but that don't do +much good in this city. It don't do any good to lock your doors; what +good does it do? I nail mine; that is better yet. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you discuss with anybody besides Mr. Rogers whether +or not Oswald left on the same day his wife did, or how he left? + +Mrs. GARNER. Do you mean in the neighborhood? + +Mr. LIEBELER. Yes. + +Mrs. GARNER. I never talked too much to them, you know, unless I might +be talking to Miss Eames next door and said he might have left that +same night or something like that, but that's about all. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Was that Mrs. Eames? + +Mrs. GARNER. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Mrs. Doris E. Eames? + +Mrs. GARNER. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. She lives at 4907 Magazine Street? + +Mrs. GARNER. Yes; right next to Oswald's apartment, in other words, and +their kitchen windows was even to each other, across from each other. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did Oswald get any mail that you know of while he lived +in the apartment 4907 or 4905 Magazine Street? + +Mrs. GARNER. Not that I know of. I never went around the mailboxes to +find out that, never went around the mailbox to see what kind of mail, +and after he left I checked the mailbox and my husband found a light +and gas bill and sent it back to the company. + +Mr. LIEBELER. I believe you said Oswald actually owed you about 2 +weeks' rent when they left. Is that right? + +Mrs. GARNER. Fifteen days, something like that, 2 or 3 weeks. I think +it was 3 weeks' rent, because the last time when I sent my husband to +see about the rent, I told him it was going to be 3 weeks, and, "You +know he isn't going to catch up with that and pay another month's rent +and stay here by himself." + +Mr. LIEBELER. He moved in on the 9th of May; is that right? + +Mrs. GARNER. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And he left about the 22d of September or the 23d? + +Mrs. GARNER. About the 22d or 23d. + +Mr. LIEBELER. So he would have had to pay up the rent through the 9th +of September? + +Mrs. GARNER. Through the 9th, the 9th of September; that was when. + +Mr. LIEBELER. That was when the rent came due again? + +Mrs. GARNER. Right. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And he paid his rent for the month? + +Mrs. GARNER. You see, he was paid up to the 9th of September. + +Mr. LIEBELER. He was paid through the 9th of September? + +Mrs. GARNER. Right; and after the 9th he started on another month but +never paid me. + +Mr. LIEBELER. He left owing rent for the period from September 9 until +the time he left? + +Mrs. GARNER. The 24th or 23d, whatever date it was. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Do you know Mr. Louis N. Rico? + +Mrs. GARNER. Yes; I think that is my tenant in the back in the detached +apartment, away in the back downstairs, Louis Rico. + +Mr. LIEBELER. They don't live there any more? + +Mrs. GARNER. No; they moved. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Do you know whether they had anything to do with Oswald? + +Mrs. GARNER. No; he never did talk to him. Oswald wouldn't bother with +nobody. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you ever see Oswald drive a car? + +Mrs. GARNER. No. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Do you know whether he could drive? + +Mrs. GARNER. No; I couldn't answer that. I don't know. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You had no way of knowing where Oswald went when he left +your apartment house, do you? + +Mrs. GARNER. No; I sure don't. + +Mr. LIEBELER. As far as you know, Oswald intended to stay on in the +apartment, at least that is what he had told your husband? + +Mrs. GARNER. That's what I figured all the time, and every time I +passed he was sitting on the porch, or either sitting by the lamp +inside of the living room when it was dark, reading. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Can you think of anything else you remember about Oswald? +Is there anything else you know about him that the Commission ought to +know that I have not asked you about? + +Mrs. GARNER. Well, like I say, every time I talk, I tried to think, and +there is really nothing. I just usually always stay by myself and never +go to the door unless I have to. The only thing is--I did hear a couple +of times like they were arguing and she would be crying. I guess they +were arguing, I couldn't understand the Russian language and she would +be crying, and that went on a couple of hours at a time, and I figured +that was family trouble. I couldn't even understand what they were +saying. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did they seem to have more family trouble than most +people, or do you think they got along fairly well? + +Mrs. GARNER. It is just about twice I heard it in the months they were +there. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You didn't have the impression---- + +Mrs. GARNER. I didn't think they was arguing, because when they talk +that language it sounds like they are arguing all the time to me, but +those two times she happened to be crying, and I could hear her raising +her voice higher and him too. He was just abrupt. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You didn't have the impression they were having any +particular difficulty with their marriage, did you? + +Mrs. GARNER. No. + +Mr. LIEBELER. They didn't seem to have---- + +Mrs. GARNER. It didn't seem that way to me. You never did see them +together in the daytime. I saw them once when they left for that +weekend, and that is the only time they had left there together. + +Mr. LIEBELER. She stayed at home pretty much? + +Mrs. GARNER. She stayed home all the time, and I see her coming from +the grocery store once in awhile. + +Mr. LIEBELER. I don't believe I have any more questions at this time, +Mrs. Garner, if you can't think of anything else you would like to add. +I think we can terminate the deposition. I do want to thank you for +the patience that you and your husband have shown to me and for the +cooperation you have given us in coming down here and testifying. On +behalf of the Commission I want to thank you both very much. + +Mrs. GARNER. I am only too glad to do it. Anything else we can do, it +would be all right. + + + + +AFFIDAVIT OF JESSE J. GARNER + +The following affidavit was executed by Jesse J. Garner on May 5, 1964. + + + AFFIDAVIT + + PRESIDENT'S COMMISSION + ON THE ASSASSINATION OF + PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY + + STATE OF LOUISIANA, + _Parish of Orleans, ss_: + +Jesse J. Garner, being duly sworn says: + +1. My name is Jesse James Garner. I was born July 17, 1908, in +Hattiesburg, Mississippi. I have resided in New Orleans for the last 52 +years. + +2. I am presently employed as a cab driver for Toye Brothers and have +been so employed for the last twenty years. + +3. My wife and I reside at 4911 Magazine Street, New Orleans, +Louisiana, where we have resided continuously for the last four years. + +4. Number 4911 Magazine Street consists of one-half of a house located +at 4905-11 Magazine Street. The other half of the house is divided into +two apartments which go by the number 4905 and 4907 Magazine Street. + +5. Lee Harvey Oswald occupied the apartment known as 4905 Magazine +Street from May 9, 1963, to on or about September 23, 1963. He paid a +rental of $65.00 per month for the apartment, which was furnished, and +was directly responsible to the utility company for payment of gas and +electric bills. + +6. I first talked to Oswald about a month after he moved into the +apartment. I spoke to him about payment of the rent, because he was a +few days late in paying his rent for the second month he lived in the +apartment. He told me he would have the rent in a few days. I later +learned that he did pay the rent to my wife shortly thereafter. + +7. Oswald appeared to be a quiet sort of man and I did not talk to him +about anything other than the rent that first time that I met him. + +8. Sometime after that, my wife called to my attention that Oswald +had attached to the screen of his porch two hand circulars which read +something to the effect that the United States should lay hands off +Cuba. These circulars were about 4" by 6". + +9. I have examined a photograph which has been marked as Exhibit No. 1 +to this affidavit and state that the photograph shows Oswald handing +out a circular which is of the same kind he had attached to the screen +of his porch. + +10. I asked Oswald to remove the circulars and he asked me who +"rejects" to them. I told him that I objected to them and that I was +the only person who had to object to them. Oswald then took them down +without further comment and the subject was never mentioned between us +again. + +11. The next and last time I talked to Oswald was on Sunday morning, +September 22, 1963, when I noticed he had almost finished packing a +station wagon with his family's personal belongings. I asked him if he +was moving, since I was concerned that he then owed about 15 days rent. +Oswald told me that he was not leaving but that his wife was going +to Texas to have her baby after which she was going to return to New +Orleans. + +12. I did not see the station wagon leave, but I believe it left for +Texas sometime on Monday morning, September 23, 1963, but it could have +left sometime on Sunday morning. + +13. I didn't pay too much attention to the station wagon or to what +Oswald was doing, because I thought he was going to remain in the +apartment, as he had said. + +14. I never saw Oswald again after my conversation with him on Sunday +morning, but I thought I heard him in his apartment during the evening +(about 7:00 to 7:30 p.m.) of the day on which the station wagon had +left, i.e., either Sunday or Monday, September 22 or 23, 1963. + +15. I did not see or hear any activity in the apartment on the day +after the station wagon left for Texas. The next day which I believe +would have been Wednesday, September 25, 1963, I entered Oswald's +apartment and found that he had left and taken all of his belongings +with him. + +16. I never personally observed anyone visit Oswald or his family +during the time they lived at the above address. + +17. Oswald never seemed to respond to greetings from me and seemed to +be an unfriendly type of person. + +Signed on May 5, 1964, at New Orleans, La. + + (S) Jesse J. Garner, + JESSE J. GARNER. + + + + +TESTIMONY OF RICHARD LEROY HULEN + +The testimony of Richard Leroy Hulen was taken at 10:50 a.m., on April +1, 1964, in the office of the U.S. attorney, 301 Post Office Building, +Bryan and Ervay Streets, Dallas, Tex., by Mr. Albert E. Jenner, Jr., +assistant counsel of the President's Commission. Robert T. Davis, +assistant attorney general of Texas, was present. + + +Mr. JENNER. Will you please stand up and be sworn? + +Mr. HULEN. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. Do you swear that in the testimony you are about to give +you will tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? + +Mr. HULEN. I do. + +Mr. JENNER. State your name, please. + +Mr. HULEN. Richard Leroy Hulen. + +Mr. JENNER. And you are connected with the YMCA? + +Mr. HULEN. Correct. + +Mr. JENNER. In what capacity? + +Mr. HULEN. I am the associate director of the health club. + +Mr. JENNER. And you are appearing in lieu of whom? + +Mr. HULEN. Mr. John F. Campbell. + +Mr. JENNER. And he is the head of the health club, I take it? + +Mr. HULEN. Correct. + +Mr. JENNER. And at present he is out of the city? + +Mr. HULEN. Correct. + +Mr. JENNER. The YMCA that we are talking about is located where? + +Mr. HULEN. At 605 South Ervay in Dallas, Tex. + +Mr. JENNER. We are in the Federal Court House. How far away is that +from here? + +Mr. HULEN. Two blocks. + +Mr. JENNER. I should say to you, Mr. Hulen, that I am Albert E. Jenner, +Jr., a member of the legal staff of the President's Commission, that +the Commission was authorized pursuant to Senate Joint Resolution +137, as the group to investigate the tragedy of November 22, 1963, of +the assassination of the late President John Fitzgerald Kennedy, and +President Johnson in Executive Order 11130, shortly after the adoption +of the Senate joint resolution, appointed the Commission and authorized +it to proceed and to take testimony and swear witnesses. + +We have been engaged in this investigation now for sometime and we are +particularly interested in a man known as Lee Harvey Oswald. It is our +understanding that he was a guest on some occasion at the YMCA that +you have identified. Would you describe your duties and those of Mr. +Campbell and describe the health club, and I should also add we are +interested in a man by the name of Jack Ruby or Jack Rubenstein, and I +may ask you some questions about him as well. + +Mr. HULEN. Well, of course, Mr. Campbell is in charge of the +department. He does the hiring and the firing of the employees, orders +supplies and supervises the operation in general and I take my orders +from him. + +Mr. JENNER. You are his assistant? + +Mr. HULEN. I am the assistant. + +Mr. JENNER. How long have you been associated with the YMCA? + +Mr. HULEN. Well, since 1945. + +Mr. JENNER. And during--you were doing this work at the downtown YMCA? + +Mr. HULEN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. And the health club is what sort of activity? + +Mr. HULEN. The health club is a businessmen's club. We have seven +masseurs, we have a steam bath, we have a dry heat bath, we have +ultraviolet lights and infrared lights, bar bell equipment and a lot of +gymnasium equipment, such as jumping ropes and bicycles and bar bells +and medicine balls and stall bars and check weights and I could go on +and on. + +Mr. JENNER. I think that's enough. You have businessmen who come in, do +they join the club or pay a fee? + +Mr. HULEN. Yes; we have a yearly membership fee. + +Mr. JENNER. If some guest who is a guest of the YMCA, wants to have a +rubdown, let us say, or he wants to exercise, is it possible for him to +use the facilities of the health club without paying the yearly fee? + +Mr. HULEN. Not without paying a fee. He is a member if he lives in the +dormitory--he is a member of the YMCA, but not of the health club. +So, if he uses our facilities, he pays for them, whatever it might +be--ultraviolet; steam bath or massage, and would you want the prices? + +Mr. JENNER. Off the record. + +(Discussion between Counsel Jenner and Mr. Davis off the record, +pertaining to facilities and services at the YMCA.) + +Mr. JENNER. All right. Back on the record. Referring to these yearly +members, do you become acquainted with them? + +Mr. HULEN. Most of them. + +Mr. JENNER. Did you become acquainted during your history with the YMCA +with a man in town here known as Jack Ruby or Jack Rubinstein? + +Mr. HULEN. Yes, sir; I did. + +Mr. JENNER. Was he a member of your club? + +Mr. HULEN. Yes; he was. + +Mr. JENNER. And you have produced here for me a photostatic copy +of what is entitled and identified for the record, "Membership +application," and it appears to be on its face a photostatic copy of +a membership application for one Jack Ruby. From where did you obtain +that exhibit? + +Mr. HULEN. From the membership office. + +Mr. JENNER. And this card, of which the document I have in my hands is +a photostatic copy, is a record which is kept in the usual and regular +course of business? + +Mr. HULEN. Yes; that's correct. + +Mr. JENNER. Do you know of your personal knowledge that this is a photo +copy of the original of the membership application and card which is +maintained and is presently in the possession of the YMCA? + +Mr. HULEN. Yes; I do. + +Mr. JENNER. Now, I would like to have you explain some of the things +here for me--on the form, which has been marked Hulen Exhibit No. 1, +under the printed designation, "Firm name," appears as typed, "Club +Vegas," sir. Would you explain what that is? + +Mr. HULEN. I think if you will look at it a little closer, that is his +business address. + +Mr. JENNER. That is the business address of Jack Ruby or Jack +Rubinstein. Club Vegas is some kind of a club here in Dallas? + +Mr. HULEN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. All right, or at least it was at the time this application +was made out? + +Mr. HULEN. Yes, sir. And is still operating, incidentally. + +Mr. JENNER. And it says opposite, "Type of membership,"--there appear +two initials, "SH" what do they signify? + +Mr. HULEN. Special health. + +Mr. JENNER. What does that mean? + +Mr. HULEN. That means all of the facilities will be available to that +member except the massages. + +Mr. JENNER. On the reverse side of the card there appears the heading, +"Membership account," and then there are columns in which there are +long hand entries. These columns are headed, "Date due, amount, +payments, card," and some entries. For example, for purposes of +explanation, the first entry on the reverse side on this form I have +described under "date due," appears 9-10-58. I take it that is a date +meaning September 10, 1958? + +Mr. HULEN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. In the next column which is headed "Amount," there appears +$65. Then under "Payments," that column is split in two--the left hand +one reads and is headed by the word "Date," and the entry there is 9-2. +I assume that is September 2, but no year, and then under the column +headed, "Amount," appears $30. Would you explain that type entry? + +Mr. HULEN. Well, at the time, in 1958, our membership fee for the +special health club membership was $67, and there is a $2 cash saving +if a member pays cash, which would indicate that that's where we get +our amount $65, and to receive benefit of the cash payment, that is, +the interest or penalty, it is supposed to be paid in 30 days, but +apparently this wasn't paid in 30 days, but he still received benefit +of cash payment. + +Mr. JENNER. Does that form indicate that the health fee was paid? + +Mr. HULEN. Oh, yes; yes, indeed. + +Mr. JENNER. It was paid--on what date? + +Mr. HULEN. It was 11-12-62, the last payment. The first payment was +made on 9-10-58, wait a minute, I am wrong. It was then when he joined, +the first payment was 9-20. In other words, that 9-10 was their billing +date and he joined on 9-2 and they billed him on 9-10, and his second +payment which was supposed to have been paid in 30 days was paid on +11-12-58. I'm sorry, but I'm not too familiar with this. I'm just +groping here myself. This is handled in another office. You will notice +that the date due here was 9-10-59, again, you see, and this will +denote what happened and his next is--there are several periods that he +wasn't active, as you will notice there. + +Mr. JENNER. Yes; I noticed it. Now, it would appear that the first two +columns, the date due and amount represent entries of sums to be paid? + +Mr. HULEN. Correct. + +Mr. JENNER. And the second set of columns under the heading "Payments," +indicates payments that were made? + +Mr. HULEN. That's correct. + +Mr. JENNER. Now, as to this initial fee, it was due on the 10th of +September 1958, in the amount of $65, and then in the next two columns +that he paid on September 2, $30, and he paid on November 12, $35 or +a total then by that time of $65, that had been billed or was to have +been paid by September 10? + +Mr. HULEN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. He actually completed his payment on November 12? + +Mr. HULEN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Then, the next entry appears to be one of $65 for the +following year, that is for 1959, due on November 1, 1959, and then +there is an entry under the "Payments," column of the receipt of $65, +on the 22d of October, that is, there was a prepayment there in 1959. + +Then, for 1962, the "Due Date," was April 20, 1962--$74. Apparently +your fee went up? + +Mr. HULEN. Yes; it did. + +Mr. JENNER. And there are entries of two payments, one a $25 on the +18th of April 1962, and the second of $49, on the 3d of August 1962, so +he was then paid up? + +Mr. HULEN. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. And for 1963, there is an entry of a payment due on the 1st +of June 1963, of $30 and there is an entry of apparently a prepayment +on the 23d of May 1963, of $60. + +What does that indicate, that is, here for 1962, he was a $74 member +and in 1963, he appears to be only a $30 member? + +Mr. HULEN. Oh, I've got it now. If a person for some reason cannot take +out the yearly membership and he has been a member in the past, we +would let him have a 3-month membership which would explain the $30. At +that date he was on the 3-month membership. + +Mr. JENNER. I see. + +Mr. HULEN. A short-term membership, we call it. + +Mr. JENNER. At the bottom of this form there is written, "Do not +renew," 11-28-63, meaning November 28, 1963. What does that mean? + +Mr. HULEN. Mr. Urquhart, who is our office secretary, laughingly told +the stenographer in the membership office that if Ruby ever came back +for a membership, not to let him in, not to accept his membership, and +she wrote that on there just for her own information. Actually, it was +a joke. + +Mr. JENNER. If he had returned to renew his membership, the renewal +would have been granted him? + +Mr. HULEN. No. + +Mr. JENNER. It would not have been? + +Mr. HULEN. No. + +Mr. JENNER. Why is that? + +Mr. HULEN. I don't know, Mr. Urquhart made the statement that it is, it +was---- + +Mr. JENNER. Well, I'll try to bring that out, is the entry "Do not +renew," of November 28, 1963, is that something in jest? + +Mr. HULEN. Yes, sir. In my opinion, I think he was just being facetious. + +Mr. JENNER. Mr. Urquhart was being facetious? + +Mr. HULEN. Mr. Urquhart was being facetious. + +Mr. JENNER. In any event, Mr. Ruby did not renew his membership? + +Mr. HULEN. No, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. In 1963? + +Mr. HULEN. Not to my knowledge. + +Mr. JENNER. "J.C.", I assume is John Campbell? + +Mr. HULEN. Correct. + +Mr. JENNER. And there appears at the very bottom of the form opposite +an asterisk, which in turn refers us to the initial entry fee, there +appears in writing, "Wants to pay up in month's time. Okay, J.C." That +indicates to me, and would you confirm or correct me that when Ruby +joined initially he asked for time to pay up and wanted a month to pay +up. + +Mr. HULEN. I think that means that if he made the complete payment +of the yearly membership in 2 payments within 30 days, that he would +receive benefit of the discount. + +Mr. JENNER. I see, and the fact is he didn't pay up within 30 days, his +payment, first payment was made on the 2d of September of $30, and his +second payment of $35, was made on November 12, 1958, so you gave him +the benefit of the discount even though he didn't pay up in the 30 days? + +Mr. HULEN. Yes; that explains---- + +Mr. JENNER. So, he had a full year $65 membership for the year 1958, +that is, 1 year from the time he joined which was September 10, 1958, +and he rejoined at the same rate on--$65, a year, on November 1, 1959, +and then in 1962, he had a $74 membership, which was really an increase +in your charge? + +Mr. HULEN. That's right. + +Mr. JENNER. For 1 year commencing October 1, 1959--but he didn't get +around to paying it, apparently until the following spring, which was +the $25, on the 18th of April and the $49, on the 3d of August, and +then on June 1, 1963, he took out a 3-month or a 90-day short term +membership? + +Mr. HULEN. Yes; a short-term membership. + +Mr. JENNER. That expired on September 1st of that year, is that correct? + +Mr. HULEN. That's correct. + +Mr. JENNER. I offer Hulen Exhibit No. 1 in evidence. Did Ruby ever live +at the YMCA? + +Mr. HULEN. Not to my knowledge. + +Mr. JENNER. Do you know whether the records of the YMCA have been +checked to determine or confirm that? + +Mr. HULEN. No, sir; I don't. + +Mr. JENNER. But as--at least as far as your personal recollection is +concerned, you do not recall his ever having been a guest in what you +call the dormitory? + +Mr. HULEN. No, sir; I don't. + +Mr. JENNER. I take it you recall Mr. Ruby using the Health Club +facilities? + +Mr. HULEN. Yes, sir; I do--very well. + +Mr. JENNER. And do you ever recall having any contact with or seeing a +person known as Lee Harvey Oswald? + +Mr. HULEN. No, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. At the suggestion of Mr. Sorrels, of the Secret Service, +have you caused an examination to be made of the guest record of the +YMCA to determine whether a person by the name of Lee Harvey Oswald or +Lee Oswald was ever a guest at the YMCA? + +Mr. HULEN. I wouldn't be in a position to know--I'm not familiar enough +with that and I have nothing whatsoever to do with it so I don't know +what has been done or what has been requested. + +Mr. JENNER. You have brought to me today a longhand sheet which appears +on ruled notepaper and is what purports to be a list of registrations +for one Lee Oswald during the year 1962, and another entry, one for the +year 1963, Hulen Exhibit No. 2. From whom and from what source did you +obtain this document? + +Mr. HULEN. From Mr. McRee's secretary, who is the resident manager. + +Mr. JENNER. McRee is the resident manager? + +Mr. HULEN. Mr. McRee is the resident manager. + +Mr. JENNER. And his secretary furnished you this slip of paper? + +Mr. HULEN. That's correct. + +Mr. JENNER. Did she advise you from what source she obtained these +entries? + +Mr. HULEN. I made the entries myself from her records of the payments. + +Mr. JENNER. I understand--you prepared this and it is in your +handwriting? + +Mr. HULEN. That is correct; yes. + +Mr. JENNER. And from what source did you obtain the information on this +piece of paper? + +Mr. HULEN. From her receipts of payment for room rent. + +Mr. JENNER. And those are records that are kept by the YMCA in the +usual and regular course of business? + +Mr. HULEN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. And you personally examined them? + +Mr. HULEN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Did you find, when you personally examined those receipt +records, any receipts in the name of a person named Lee Oswald. + +Mr. HULEN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. You actually saw on the receipts the name "Lee Oswald"? + +Mr. HULEN. I sure did. Yes, sir; I did. + +Mr. JENNER. And then you have listed under the first heading of "Lee +Oswald," a series of dates, October 15, October 16, October 17, and +October 18, 1962, in each instance. Then, in parentheses following +those entries in the the same sequences appears the name Burge and +the name Burgess and the name Burge again and then the name Barker. +Following those in the same descending sequence are serial numbers: +"L-18198." In your last column and in the same sequence are dollar +figures: "3.25, 2.25, 2.25 and again 2.25." Now, would you explain +those entries, please? + +Mr. HULEN. Well, he checked in on 10-15-62. + +Mr. JENNER. That is Lee Oswald? + +Mr. HULEN. Lee Oswald check in on 10-15-62. The desk clerk at that +time was a Mr. Burge, and the L-18198, was the number of the receipt +which was given Lee Oswald, and the amount of $3.25, was $2.25 for the +night's lodging and $1 deposit on the room key, which is refunded when +it is returned to the front desk. Shall I go on? + +Mr. JENNER. Yes. And then there is an additional set of entries below +those we have now described and they read, "Lee Oswald, [spelling] +T-o-r-o, Calif.," and the next line October 3, 1963----Barker? + +Mr. HULEN. Barker was the desk clerk, and the M-15593 was the number of +the receipt and $3.25 was the room fee and a $1 deposit on the key. + +Mr. JENNER. Now, those entries record the fact then that Oswald was a +guest at the YMCA October 15th through October 19th, both inclusive, +and again on October 3, 1963? + +Mr. HULEN. Through October 18th, I believe it is, isn't it? + +Mr. JENNER. It shows he was a guest at the YMCA October 15, 16, 17, 18, +and 19, of 1962, and again on October 3 and to October 4, of 1963? + +Mr. HULEN. That's correct. + +Mr. JENNER. Now, the examination of the receipts for lodging of guests +at the YMCA reveal only those entries you have now described and are +listed on this sheet of paper with respect to Lee Oswald? + +Mr. HULEN. That's correct. + +Mr. JENNER. The years--during the years 1962 and 1963? + +Mr. HULEN. Correct. + +Mr. JENNER. And had he been a guest and registered in on any other +occasion during the years 1962 and 1963, would there have been and +would there be now a registration entry and a receipt for payment of +the character you have described? + +Mr. HULEN. Yes, sir; I am sure there would be. + +Mr. JENNER. Now, we would like the YMCA to furnish us photostatic +copies of those five receipts just as you have furnished us a +photostatic copy of Mr. Ruby's membership application. + +Mr. HULEN. I would be glad to do it. + +Mr. JENNER. We would appreciate it very much. + +Mr. HULEN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. And if we can have those this afternoon, we would like it. + +Mr. HULEN. I'm sure we can arrange it and give them to you. Shall I +bring them right here? + +Mr. JENNER. Yes; please do and we will give them to Miss Oliver and she +can incorporate them in the transcript. I offer Hulen Exhibit No. 2. + +To be best of your recollection and drawing on whatever knowledge you +have, you don't recall anybody by that name, Lee Oswald, ever having +used the Health Club facilities? + +Mr. HULEN. No, sir; not to my knowledge. + +Mr. JENNER. And you know Jack Ruby well enough--do you recall this +person Lee Oswald ever having been in the company of Jack Ruby at the +YMCA? + +Mr. HULEN. No, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. You have seen pictures of Lee Oswald on television and in +newspapers and magazines? + +Mr. HULEN. Yes, sir; I have. + +Mr. JENNER. And that person is clear in your mind--do you recall his +physical characteristics? + +Mr. HULEN. Yes, sir; I do. + +Mr. JENNER. So that you are able to say with a reasonable degree of +certainty, so far as you are concerned, that you never saw that person +using the Health Club facilities and you never saw him in the company +of Jack Ruby? + +Mr. HULEN. That is correct. + +Mr. JENNER. Tell us what kind of a fellow Ruby was? + +Mr. HULEN. Well, I found---- + +Mr. JENNER. In your general impression? + +Mr. HULEN. I found Jack Ruby to be friendly and courteous and a +well-behaved person. He seemed to have a lot of enthusiasm about +anything that he liked. He generated a lot of enthusiasm around that. +For instance, any athletic events or sports he discussed--he discussed +that with the other members, which is the usual topic of well-known +weight lifters, for instance, there are several--Reeves and Stanko and +I can name several of them. + +Mr. JENNER. Was Ruby a weight lifter? Did he dabble at that? + +Mr. HULEN. Well, I should define weight lifting and body building. +Weight lifting is competing, like you have in the Olympics, which is +heavy lifting. In other words, you go to your maximum. Now, in body +building, you take a minimum amount of weight and exercise longer--in +other words, if you work with the heavy weights you can't work as long +with the heavy weights as you can with the lighter weights, and Ruby +was more of a body builder. In other words, he worked with the lighter +weights over a longer period of time. In other words, he was not after, +in my opinion, he wasn't after a large body or bulging muscle, he just +wanted to stay in a good general physical condition. + +It wasn't necessary for me to set up any kind of a program for him. He +had had experience in the past and he knew pretty well what he wanted +to do, so actually there was very little, if any, supervision on my +part. He used the facilities and behaved very well and I found him to +be a nice person to talk to--to visit with. + +Mr. JENNER. All right, sir. Leave the deposition open for the moment, +Miss Oliver, because Mr. Hulen will return with the photostatic copies +of those records and we will close his deposition when we take care of +that. + +Mr. HULEN. Now, I will be tied up until about 1. Would 1:30 or 2 +o'clock be agreeable with you? + +Mr. JENNER. 2 o'clock is fine. + +(At this point the witness Hulen left the deposing room, the +proceedings of the deposition to be resumed at 2 p.m., of this same +date, April 1, 1964, and were resumed as follows:) + +Mr. JENNER. Mr. Hulen has kindly returned this afternoon with copies of +the receipts to which he made reference in his testimony and of which +he supplied a longhand list on ruled notebook paper, Hulen Exhibit +No. 2. Now that we have the originals, we can substitute them. They +are five in number, and I identified them as entitled "Receipts Young +Men's Christian Association of Dallas Downtown Branch." They are signed +respectively by "Burge [spelling] B-u-r-g-e" and "Barker." We will work +them in order of dates, as Hulen Exhibits Nos. 3, 4, 5, and 6, and the +receipt of October 3 as Hulen Exhibit No. 7. I take it they were desk +clerks? + +Mr. HULEN. The desk clerks. + +Mr. JENNER. Mr. Burge registered in Mr. Oswald on October 15, 1962, is +that correct? + +Mr. HULEN. That's correct--yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. And the receipt shows the room number, room No. 415. Does +that indicate the room to which he was assigned? + +Mr. HULEN. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. And then there is $2.25, and underneath, opposite that, +"Deposit--$1, total $3.25." And that represents the charge for the room +and key deposit you testified about this morning? + +Mr. HULEN. Yes; that's correct. + +Mr. JENNER. The next one is dated October 16, 1962, also--name: Lee +Oswald, same room, $2.25, initialed, however--it looks like "HB", or is +this "W. Burgess." + +Mr. HULEN. Correct; Burgess. + +Mr. JENNER. He is also a registration clerk or desk clerk? + +Mr. HULEN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. The next is dated the 17th of October 1962, in the name of +Lee Oswald, the same room number, $2.25, signed by Mr. Burge, whom we +have already identified. The next is dated October 18, 1962, the same +name--Lee Oswald, same room number, same amount, but this time signed +by just one word "Barker." Is this a Mr. Barker or Miss Barker? + +Mr. HULEN. Yes--Mr. Barker. + +Mr. JENNER. Is he also a room clerk or registration clerk? + +Mr. HULEN. Yes; he is. + +Mr. JENNER. And the last in this series is dated October 3, 1963, and +in this instance it is in the name of Lee H. Oswald, and it shows an +address, whereas, none of the other of the first four had an address, +and the address is listed here as Toro [spelling] T-o-r-o, Calif. +[Spelling] C-a-l. + +I notice something on the first of the series which I notice again +on this one of October 3, 1963, which is the printing on the line +entitled, "Membership fees," and there is the word written in +longhand, "service." That's true of the first and the last of these +receipts--what does that indicate? + +Mr. HULEN. That indicates that he was a serviceman and that, in my +opinion, that waives the membership fee. + +Mr. JENNER. The room number on the October 3 receipt is 601. That, as +in the case of the others, indicates the room to which he was assigned? + +Mr. HULEN. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. On this visit on October 3? + +Mr. HULEN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. That line says, "Room 601 to 10/4," meaning October 4, I +assume. + +Mr. HULEN. I imagine--yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. $2.25 is shown for the room and a dollar for the key +deposit, which I take it means he was charged $2.25 for that Room 601, +for 1 day or 1 night, plus a dollar to cover the key deposit? + +Mr. HULEN. Yes, sir--that's correct. + +Mr. JENNER. I think that concludes Mr. Hulen's deposition. I offer +Hulen Exhibits Nos. 3 to 7, both inclusive. And we may close the +deposition at this point. + +Mr. Hulen, I didn't mention this this morning, but you may read over +your deposition when Miss Oliver has completed it and if you will call +in to the U.S. Attorney's Office here, Mr. Barefoot Sanders or his +secretary will know when it is ready for you to read it. + +Mr. HULEN. All right, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. And if you have any corrections, we would like to have them +and then you sign the deposition, or you may waive the signature now, +if you wish. + +Mr. HULEN. All right, I will waive the signature. + + + + +TESTIMONY OF COLIN BARNHORST + +The testimony of Colin Barnhorst was taken at 11:40 a.m., on April 1, +1964, in the office of the U.S. attorney, 301 Post Office Building, +Bryan and Ervay Streets, Dallas, Tex., by Mr. Albert E. Jenner, Jr., +assistant counsel of the President's Commission. Robert T. Davis, +assistant attorney general of Texas, was present. + + +Mr. JENNER. Please stand and be sworn. + +Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you are about to give will be +the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? + +Mr. BARNHORST. I do. + +Mr. JENNER. Mr. Barnhorst, I am Albert E. Jenner, Jr., a member of +the legal staff of the President's Commission which was authorized +to be created by Senate Joint Resolution 137, and President Johnson +in Executive Order 11130, appointed the Commission and specified its +powers pursuant to the legislation I have just identified to you. +The duties of the Commission are to investigate the assassination of +President John Fitzgerald Kennedy on the 22nd of November 1963. + +And that entails our inquiry into various facts and circumstances and +incidents, some of them involving a man known as Lee Harvey Oswald. We +understand that Mr. Oswald was a guest at the YMCA here in downtown +Dallas, and we would like to ask you a question or two in that respect. + +Mr. JENNER. What is your age, by the way? + +Mr. BARNHORST. Twenty-one. + +Mr. JENNER. Are you employed by the downtown YMCA here in Dallas? + +Mr. BARNHORST. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. That is located where? + +Mr. BARNHORST. 605 North Ervay. + +Mr. JENNER. When did your employment commence? + +Mr. BARNHORST. October 14. + +Mr. JENNER. What year? + +Mr. BARNHORST. 1963. + +Mr. JENNER. State the nature of that employment and your hours? + +Mr. BARNHORST. Desk clerk and mainly checking in and out guests--that +is the primary duty and my duties involve making change and the usual +reports and things like that. My hours are from 4 to midnight 4 nights +a week. + +Mr. JENNER. 4 in the afternoon until midnight 4 nights a week? + +Mr. BARNHORST. Then on Friday night--midnight to Saturday morning 8 +a.m. every week, and every other week from midnight to 8 a.m., on +Thursday night, so I alternate 6 days and 5 days. The particular week +of all this I had worked Thursday night also. + +Mr. JENNER. Were you on duty at any time so as to bring to your +attention the fact that Lee Harvey Oswald was or had become a guest at +the YMCA? + +Mr. BARNHORST. You mean at the time---- + +Mr. JENNER. At the time. + +Mr. BARNHORST. Well, I wasn't working there when he was a guest. I know +when he was there, but I wasn't working there. + +Mr. JENNER. That's right. Have you personally examined the records of +the YMCA in that respect? + +Mr. BARNHORST. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. And those records are of what character? + +Mr. BARNHORST. They are a daily report on transients in and out with +permanents in and out and the number of rooms, and a copy goes to the +residence manager and a copy stays at the household and a copy is sent +to and, well, it is placed on our desk copy. + +Mr. JENNER. And have you examined those records for both the years 1962 +and 1963? + +Mr. BARNHORST. No; only the month of October 1963. + +Mr. JENNER. Only the month of October 1963. In examining that month did +you examine each day of the month, that is, the records relating to +each day of that month? + +Mr. BARNHORST. Originally--yes, and I have looked at them also, +actually, I guess for September, because I had stayed there one night +and I had looked back to see which room I was in and I was just curious +and in looking back--later on--I saw there was a Lee H. Oswald. He was +in room 601, because I looked at it last night after the man called me +and it is still on the desk. + +Mr. JENNER. He occupied the room 601 when? + +Mr. BARNHORST. Until the morning or early part of the afternoon of +the 4th of October. I say that because the clerk who was on was Eva +Marshall. Her name was beside the checkout. So, she was the one who +would have checked him out and she works on the day shift and at that +time she was working day shift and that would have been about 10 days, +I guess, before I went to work there and she was filling in there +because the clerk had quit, which is why they hired me. I don't know +who the clerk was. I only found the checkout, I didn't ever see the +check-in--I think I did see it one time. And I think it was October 3, +the day before. + +Mr. JENNER. The check-in was October 3? + +Mr. BARNHORST. I remember that from sometime ago, but I just happened +to see the checkout. + +Mr. JENNER. Tell me what kind of records you keep--you keep a receipt? + +Mr. BARNHORST. Well, maybe I can describe these when he checks in to +see step by step what happens, because there is a little blue card +with a stub on it and we call this a transient register card. He fills +in his name and the phone number and membership, if any, and a number +of other details, if it has anything to do with such as when his +membership expires, if he is in the service, his service number or some +other things, and then we fill out a triplicate receipt for his room +rent. In this case he paid for 1 night and then we give him a receipt +and a receipt stays in the register and a receipt goes in the drawer +and, of course, we fill out the rest of the stub--the receipt number, +the amount paid, and we fill out his name and his room number on the +stub and the price of it and so forth for the operator to put his name +up on the board, and he came in fairly early on the 3d, because the +operator---- + +Mr. JENNER. What is the board you mentioned something now about? You +mentioned something new. + +Mr. BARNHORST. This is a board we have for locating anyone in the +building at that time, who is staying in the building. It is a PBX +machine and is in the nature of a board up on the wall and it has +several sections. It is a flip-type board and you put a little narrow +slip of paper with their name and room number on it. That's for the +telephone operator. + +Now, he must have come in fairly early on the 3d, if he came in in the +evening, because in fact, he did come in in the evening. Mr. Barker +checked him in because I know the evening operator typed his name in +and so that would place him coming in in the evening sometime before +10 o'clock, because that's about when she leaves, and after that they +are typed up by the--either the night clerk or the next operator in +the morning. Then, in the evening, it is put on a ledger sheet and +we have two types--we have one for the permanent guests for their +personal account, and for just general transients that pass through, +we have a group account. We just put the last name and the amount paid +and whether or not they paid a membership fee. And, I might mention he +didn't pay a membership fee when he came in. There is only two ways +a person can pay that and that is either be in the service or have a +membership card and I don't think he was registered as a member. He +may have tried to pass himself off as a serviceman, but that's just in +passing--that's not on the record--but--then, we make this daily report +which is what I saw his name on last night. That is a long sheet and it +has a list of room numbers in numerical order and then the name of the +person who checked into that room that day and anybody who checked out +of the room that day, and any transfers. + +Mr. JENNER. Mr. Hulen, when he testified a few moments ago, testified +with respect to his having checked over receipts showing payment for +lodging and he assembled a list and he is going to obtain photostatic +copies of them and return them this afternoon and return with them. Are +you returning to the YMCA after you leave here? + +Mr. BARNHORST. No, I can--it's just across the street. + +Mr. JENNER. Well, I would appreciate it if you would speak with Mr. +Hulen who made copies of the entries from the records--I would like to +have in addition to the copies of the receipts, photostatic copies of +the registration card you have mentioned. + +Mr. BARNHORST. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. And this is a check-in card, did you call it a check-in +card? + +Mr. BARNHORST. A transient register card, and do you want the daily +report? + +Mr. JENNER. Yes. + +Mr. BARNHORST. How about this one in our ledger book? + +Mr. JENNER. I would like that as well. + +Mr. BARNHORST. Because the clerk would be Mr. Michaels, depending on +what night of the week it was. Probably Mr. Michaels--chances are it +was he that made out that report. He is not with us now, but he didn't +report any membership fee paid at the time. + +Mr. JENNER. And that would indicate that none was paid? + +Mr. BARNHORST. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. Is there a difference in charge or rate for a room +depending upon whether you are a member of the YMCA or a serviceman? + +Mr. BARNHORST. From what I know, Mr. Oswald--he should have paid +$3.75 or $2.25 for a room, 50 cents for membership and $1 for the +key deposit. No doubt he paid the room rent because that's on the +record and the key deposit or else he wouldn't have gotten a room, but +the key deposit isn't listed in the ledger at all. It is a separate +account because we refund it and in the ledger we list memberships and +we separate that from the key deposits. Because it is in a separate +account. Now, I didn't see any membership fee by his name. + +Mr. JENNER. But does an ex-serviceman receive this reduced rate? + +Mr. BARNHORST. Not if he has been out a minute or more, at least I +never give it to him. Now, I always check the ID cards. Mr. Barker, I +believe, does not, but of course any serviceman could rattle off his +service number 20 years after he got out and I found that out quite +early so I have been checking them and I have had several fellows who +were trying to get away with it--they usually had forgotten it or say +they would be back in a minute and they don't come back and it was +embarrassing to me, and Mr. Barker has been there a long time. He +wouldn't write up a membership unless he was a serviceman. + +Mr. JENNER. These registration cards show---- + +Mr. BARNHORST. They don't show which one it is. + +Mr. JENNER. Would they show the address that the guests gave? + +Mr. BARNHORST. We always ask for an address, try to get an address +from them. Occasionally we don't. Occasionally they just sort of don't +put it on there and you say, "Well, I would like to have an address on +there." And they will say, "I plan to stay here." It should show an +address on there of some kind. + +Mr. JENNER. And among the papers I have asked to have photostated will +that appear? + +Mr. BARNHORST. If he gave an address, it will be there. Now, I came +across one fellow--I told a couple of the FBI men, because so many of +them were over there to talk to me--there's always around the YMCA +somebody who knows a little about everything, you know these kind of +people, but in this case there is a fellow down there who claims that +he knew Lee in New Orleans. Now, he is a little character and his IQ +matches his height. I'm not making personal opinions, you understand, +but this fellow was no end of trouble to me. He did come by and he, I +believe, stayed on the same floor, if I remember right. + +Mr. JENNER. He was a guest? + +Mr. BARNHORST. He was a permanent resident and he was one of these +fellows who bounced from job to job every few days but he just happened +to bounce in the same town all the time. + +Mr. JENNER. What is his name? + +Mr. BARNHORST. Joseph R. Hummel. + +Mr. JENNER. [Spelling] H-u-m-m-e-l? + +Mr. BARNHORST. Right. + +Mr. JENNER. Is he still a guest there? + +Mr. BARNHORST. No; he moved out 2 or 3 months ago. We have a forwarding +address, I believe because his mail isn't here any more--that would +indicate a forwarding address. In fact, I believe I put the forwarding +address in the box. It's over there and I can probably get it for you. + +Mr. JENNER. I wonder if you would do that and also give that to Mr. +Hulen and tell him what you told me about that so he can explain it to +me. + +Mr. BARNHORST. The night watchman over there told me one time--I +mentioned "Little" Joe, or heard "Little" Joe talking about it one +night and I wouldn't put much stock in it because the night watchman +says he has seen fellows come in there from some of these towns and +"Little" Joe recognized them and called them by name, and evidently he +has been in New Orleans possibly about that time, so if I didn't know +that, I would just say the guy was a glory hound, but something like +that sometimes a glory hound might be in the right place at the right +time. So, the FBI--I don't know whether they did anything about it or +not, but I just told them at that time that that wasn't the only person +around that I know of that remembers knowing Oswald or when he was +there, and if we didn't have the official records to show it. + +Apparently he just passed unnoticed, because from the pictures I have +seen, he's like a hundred and one guys I have checked in over there, +and the only reason I would watch him if I suspected he might be a +homosexual or something because in a transient hotel of any kind we +watch for them and try to see if they are going to--to see the people +they associate with, you know, what is going on and we do watch that. I +don't think anyone has said that he associated with anyone, because it +has been talked about some. + +Now, Mr. Barker, the one who checked him in is the one clerk we have +over there who the roof could fall in on--just so it didn't fall in +over the part that was his desk--it wouldn't matter. + +Mr. JENNER. It wouldn't matter to Barker? + +Mr. BARNHORST. No. + +Mr. JENNER. Is he still working there? + +Mr. BARNHORST. Yes; he's about 79. He just lives and lets live. He +checks them in and checks them out. Somehow, maybe it's better that +way but I have never heard him, of course, say anything one way or the +other, about it. + +Mr. JENNER. What hours does Barker have? + +Mr. BARNHORST. He works the same hours I do--four to midnight except +he works the three nights of the week that I don't and then works on +Saturday and Sunday from 8 a.m. to 4 p.m. He and I share the weekend +pretty well. + +Mr. JENNER. All right, Barker checked in Oswald, according to your +records? + +Mr. BARNHORST. According to my knowledge. + +Mr. JENNER. On those records? + +Mr. BARNHORST. Right. And Eva Marshall is the one who checked him out, +and I am personally pretty positive it was Mr. Barker because the +telephone operator that was on with him said that that is true. + +Mr. JENNER. Mr. Barker signed the receipt of payment of $3.25, for this +day on October 3 and 4? + +Mr. BARNHORST. It was $3.25 then? + +Mr. JENNER. It says $3.25. + +Mr. BARNHORST. It should have been $3.25, you see. + +Mr. JENNER. And Mr. Barker apparently charged him out on the 18th of +October 1962, and he paid $2.25 for the last day of that 4-day stay in +October 1962. Mr. Burge apparently checked him in because the receipt +is signed by Mr. Burge, on the 15th of October. + +Mr. BARNHORST. If they still do the same thing as they did then that +would pinpoint the time when he came in. Mr. Burge relieves us in the +evening for our lunch hour, which is usually half an hour and that +falls invariably between 5 and 7 because the cafeteria closes at 7:30. + +Mr. JENNER. So, with Mr. Burge checking the man in, that would indicate +that was at night or in the evening? + +Mr. BARNHORST. In the evening. + +Mr. JENNER. It would be sometime after 4 in the afternoon? + +Mr. BARNHORST. Sometime after 5, because he wouldn't come in until 5. + +Mr. JENNER. And if Mr. Barker either checked somebody in or checked +somebody out, that would appear, wouldn't it? + +Mr. BARNHORST. It depends on the day of the week. If it was on the +weekend, it would be between 8 and 4. It would--if it was on a +weekevening, I mean a weekday, it would be in the evening. That's +presuming, of course, I'm pretty sure he worked the same shift then as +he does now. Of course I don't know. + +Mr. JENNER. Well, October 15, 1962, was a Monday? + +Mr. BARNHORST. A Monday--well, then, that meant that he was very +possibly working the shift I am working now, because he's off Monday +and Tuesday now, but that would still be in the evening. I am presuming +that he wasn't working full time for us then. + +Mr. JENNER. But if he did work, it was at night? + +Mr. BARNHORST. Yes. I'm pretty sure it would be. I don't think he was +ever a day clerk. + +Mr. JENNER. All right. I appreciate very much your coming in. You have +been helpful and if you will relate to Mr. Hulen my desire for these +additional records, photostatic copies, I would appreciate it. He said +he was going to return about 2 o'clock this afternoon. + +Mr. BARNHORST. All right. + +Mr. JENNER. If he has those, you might speak with him--you see he is in +the health department. + +Mr. BARNHORST. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. I don't know just how familiar he is with these records, +but he may be able to explain them. + +Mr. BARNHORST. He might and he might not be. He probably might not be +familiar with the midnight reports. We make these daily reports where +his name would be at the desk. + +Mr. JENNER. Where the guest's name would appear at the desk? + +Mr. BARNHORST. I beg your pardon? + +Mr. JENNER. The name of the guest. + +Mr. BARNHORST. Yes; it would be, on a permanent form. We have a sheaf +of papers--we have a stack this high [indicating] and it goes back, +that goes back to Noah and if we had Noah, it would be on that. It had +everybody's else's name on there and it would go back oh, I know of +course it covers Oswald because I saw it on there. + +Mr. JENNER. You actually saw it? + +Mr. BARNHORST. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. As a matter of fact as late as last night? + +Mr. BARNHORST. Yes; and I remember it was "Lee H." Now, it doesn't +necessarily mean on that report that the card was filled out "Lee H." +It could have been filled out in the whole name, we abbreviate the +names for space. + +Mr. JENNER. Now, that room 601, was the room he occupied on the 3d of +October 1963, or was it the room he occupied in 1962? + +Mr. BARNHORST. In 1963. I didn't see the one in 1962. + +Mr. JENNER. Whatever room number he occupied on his earlier stay in +1962--appears on these records you have described? + +Mr. BARNHORST. Well; I would say it would be there unless it had been +mutilated, and it's double checked by this Mr. McRee's secretary. He is +the resident manager. It is double checked by her to see that all the +stubs are matched by name on the check-in and all of the blue cards are +matched by the name on the checkout, just in case there are two of them +stuck together. + +Mr. JENNER. I hesitate to press you but in view of your great +familiarity with the records, if you would not be horribly +inconvenienced, it would be helpful to me if you would return with +those registration records, because you know how to explain them, at 2 +o'clock, with Mr. Hulen. + +Mr. BARNHORST. The photostats or the originals? + +Mr. JENNER. The photostats. + +Mr. BARNHORST. At 2 o'clock? + +Mr. JENNER. Please, and you would be in a position to say that the +photostats that you produce are actually photostats of the records and +cards that you personally saw in the YMCA. + +Mr. BARNHORST. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. And if you will return, then I will not close your +deposition now, but I will wait until 2 o'clock. Thank you very much. I +appreciate your coming in. + +Mr. BARNHORST. Well, I realize this is just details that you have to +have. + +Mr. JENNER. Yes; that's right. + +Mr. BARNHORST. I'll be back at 2 o'clock. + +Mr. JENNER. All right, thank you. + +(At this point the witness Barnhorst was excused from the deposing room +and returned to same at 2 p.m. on this same day, April 1, 1964, and his +deposition was continued as follows:) + +Mr. JENNER. Now, the balance of Mr. Barnhorst's deposition. You thought +you might be able to obtain some records for me, Mr. Barnhorst. + +Mr. BARNHORST. Yes, sir; I was not able to obtain the blue card record. +The FBI has that. That's the notice from Mr. McRee in his handwriting. + +Mr. JENNER. "The FBI"--I am reading the note, "The FBI has the register +cards for October 3, 1963. 1962 has been destroyed and we didn't keep +them that long." + +Mr. BARNHORST. This is a sample register card just for your own +information. + +Mr. JENNER. Mr. Barnhorst has given me a sample of the blue "transient +register card," which he described this morning. The card is entitled, +"Transient register card." It has a stub entitled "Transient," and is +light blue in color. We will mark it Hulen Exhibit No. 8. + +Mr. BARNHORST. And that Toro, Calif.--I can identify that as a Marine +base, I believe, you've probably heard the name of it. + +Mr. JENNER. Yes. + +Mr. BARNHORST. That would have appeared as an address on the blue card +in October 1963, because that's the only place where Mr. Barker could +have gotten the information. + +Mr. JENNER. The receipt as to that occasion which I have described in +the record, dated October 3, 1963, Lee H. Oswald, opposite the word +"address," does have "Toro, Calif." So, in the normal course, I take it +that that address would have been furnished to the registration clerk, +and in this case, Mr. Barker? + +Mr. BARNHORST. Yes; it would be on the blue card. + +Mr. JENNER. Yes; the blue card, the sample of which you have furnished +me? + +Mr. BARNHORST. Yes; also, Mr. McRee, the resident manager, says that +Mr. Oswald produced an identification card, which is not hard to +believe because he could have simply claimed to have lost it, his ID, +when he was in the service, and had them make him another one and +turn in the one he had made. I've seen fellows do that quite often. +It is usually used for getting into PX's and USO's. This is from our +ledger sheets, these I have here that are dated in the red left-hand +column--everywhere there is a red checkmark on there, Mr. Oswald's name +appears with a receipt number, the amount paid, his last name, also +that he never paid any membership fees, but only the room fees. + +Mr. JENNER. All right, you have handed me three cards from the original +records of the downtown YMCA--they are three sheets. + +Mr. BARNHORST. Written on both sides. + +Mr. JENNER. Yes; written on both sides. I will mark them commencing +with the earliest date on the exhibits, as Hulen Exhibits Nos. 9, 10, +and 11. Would you identify the sheets? What are they, what kind of +record? + +Mr. BARNHORST. They are original ledger sheets for a transient guest +and they are for the purpose of recording temporarily that the +registrar has paid certain fees, because oftentimes they lose their +receipts. They come down and we copy into this register--which is +placed in a file, the amount that they paid. It is to guarantee that +there is no confusion on the amount that is paid. + +Mr. JENNER. And do these three register cards that I have in my hand +cover all the month of October 1963? + +Mr. BARNHORST. No, sir; they don't. + +Mr. JENNER. I'm sorry, do they cover the month of October 1962? + +Mr. BARNHORST. I don't know whether they do--I doubt it--I think they +would only cover the days before and after the time which you are +interested in. They cover from October--October 15th through October +19th. + +Mr. JENNER. May I call your attention to the last of the cards, which +is marked Hulen Exhibit No. 11, the first entry on which is dated +October 2, 1963, and that is for 1963, I'm sure? + +Mr. BARNHORST. Yes; the 1962 cards, marked Hulen Exhibits Nos. 9 and +10, respectively, run from October 15th through October 19th. + +Mr. JENNER. And they consist of two sheets? + +Mr. BARNHORST. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. In selecting these two sheets covering the 15th through the +19th, did you examine the ledger sheets for the balance of the month? + +Mr. BARNHORST. No, sir; Mr. McRee did. + +Mr. JENNER. Mr. McRee did so? + +Mr. BARNHORST. And he told me those are the only cards that have Mr. +Oswald's name on them. + +Mr. JENNER. So, they were selected from the ledger cards for October +1963, those which had some entry thereon with respect to Oswald? + +Mr. BARNHORST. Yes. It was done by the receipt numbers, also. + +Mr. JENNER. It was doublechecked, so that there appears a--on the third +line of the 1962, card commencing with October 15th, an entry under +date of October 15th, reciting item No. 18198 and the name, "Oswald," +and $2.25 and under the column, "balance," there is a strike line, +and--indicating nothing due. + +Mr. BARNHORST. Pardon me, that balance is not used for the purpose of +something due. We substitute for that a membership fee. That strike +line means he did not have a membership fee. + +Mr. JENNER. There is a similar entry for the 16th, the 17th, and +the 18th. These records then are for the recording of the fact that +Oswald was a guest on those days, and that he paid the amounts of +money recorded on the ledger sheets, which in turn correspond with the +receipts which Mr. Hulen brought in? + +Mr. BARNHORST. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. The third of these ledger sheets--the first entry is +opposite a date in 1963--October 2, 1963. I take it this ledger sheet +was selected from among all of the ledger sheets for the month of +October 1963, because it records the name Oswald on October 3, 1963, +item No. 15593, $2.25--is that correct? + +Mr. BARNHORST. Yes. I have seen all of the ledger sheets for October +1963. + +Mr. JENNER. And this is the only one that has any entry on it with +respect to Oswald? + +Mr. BARNHORST. That's the only one. + +Mr. JENNER. And that one entry that does have, corresponds with the +receipt on that date, produced by Mr. Hulen? + +Mr. BARNHORST. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. May we have these photostated and then returned to you or +did you make photostats? + +Mr. BARNHORST. We do not keep this for any great length of time. Mr. +McRee said we might turn this over to you. + +Mr. JENNER. Thank you very much. + +Mr. BARNHORST. As with all of the records. + +Mr. JENNER. All right, we will retain them. Do you have other papers? + +Mr. BARNHORST. Yes; these are the daily report sheets you requested. +This is October 1963. These are for the specific dates at the top. + +Mr. JENNER. Mr. Barnhorst has now produced and handed me---- + +Mr. BARNHORST. You see, the carbon was in the thing backwards when it +was typed, so, they didn't do it over on the third copy, they just +stapled a sheet behind it and attached it to the copies you read it +through from the top because an error was made in putting it in the +typewriter. + +Mr. JENNER. The front of each of these two sheets, for the purpose of +identification in the record consist of two sheets stapled together +back to back and in the typing the sheet was reversed and must be read +from back to front. The first, or facing sheet, is marked Hulen Exhibit +No. 12, and it is entitled "Resident's Hall Report, Thursday, October +3, 1963." The left-hand column is headed "Permanent-in." The right-hand +column is headed, "Transients-out continued." This records, as I look +at it here, the registrations in and out on October 3, 1963, is that +correct? + +Mr. BARNHORST. Yes; approximately. It may include one or two who came +in just the night before or who checked out, or men who would have been +there and checked out the following day--would be on the next day's +report. + +Mr. JENNER. Is there an entry on this sheet with respect to Lee Oswald? + +Mr. BARNHORST. Yes, room 601, on the "Transients-out," and I +believe on the "Transients-in," I'm not sure. On this one it is the +"Transients-in," room 601. He isn't on this sheet on "Transients-out." +I don't recall it. + +Mr. JENNER. Room 601--and he is shown checked in by Mr. Barker? + +Mr. BARNHORST. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. And from your knowledge of the hours Mr. Barker worked, +that check-in was either late in the day or early in the evening of +October 3? + +Mr. BARNHORST. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. The second set of papers you have produced consists of +three sheets, each entitled, "Resident's Hall Report." They are dated +at the top right-hand column as October 4, 1963, October 15, 1962, and +October 19, 1962. They are marked respectively, Hulen Exhibits Nos. 13, +14, and 15. + +Mr. BARNHORST. Hulen Exhibit No. 13 is for the day following October 3, +1963. + +Mr. JENNER. That would be the same report for the following day, and is +there an entry on this that relates to Mr. Oswald? + +Mr. BARNHORST. Yes, sir; "Transients-out, Room 601." + +Mr. JENNER. Under "Transients-out," Room 601, appears the name "Lee H. +Oswald." Then, at the end of the line there there is a word that is +apparently a name (spelling) E-v-a---- + +Mr. BARNHORST. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Who is that? + +Mr. BARNHORST. Mrs. Eva Marshall. + +Mr. JENNER. What does she do? + +Mr. BARNHORST. She is the day clerk. She was probably substituting at +the time for the clerk who quit. + +Mr. JENNER. All right, and this indicates then that he checked out on +the 3d of October and that the lady you have identified handled that +checkout? + +Mr. BARNHORST. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. And the fact that she did it would indicate to you what, as +to the time of day he checked out? + +Mr. BARNHORST. It would probably be morning, but it also could be early +afternoon. + +Mr. JENNER. Exhibits 14 and 15 cover the period October 15-19, 1963? + +Mr. BARNHORST. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. I offer the exhibits. + +I think that's all we have with respect to you. You overheard what I +said to Mr. Hulen with regard to reading the deposition. That applies +to you as well. If you will check with Mr. Sanders, this ought to be +ready next week. It is rather late in the week to have it ready. You +may sign the deposition if you wish or you may waive that. If there are +any errors in it, we would like to know. Thank you very much. + +Mr. BARNHORST. OK. + + + + +TESTIMONY OF MRS. ARTHUR CARL (GLADYS J.) JOHNSON + +The testimony of Mrs. Arthur Carl (Gladys J.) Johnson was taken at 3:40 +p.m., on April 1, 1964, in the office of the U.S. attorney, 301 Post +Office Building, Bryan and Ervay Streets, Dallas, Tex., by Mr. Joseph +A. Ball, assistant counsel of the President's Commission. + + +Mr. BALL. Come in, Mr. and Mrs. Johnson, and sit down. My name is Joe +Ball and Mrs. Johnson, I think we will start with you. Will you stand +up, Mrs. Johnson, please, and hold up your right hand? + +[Complying.] + +Mr. BALL. Do you solemnly swear the testimony given before this +Commission will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the +truth, so help you God? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. I certainly do; yes, sir. + +Mr. BALL. Mrs. Johnson, my name is Joe Ball and I am a staff counsel +for the President's Commission on the Assassination of President +Kennedy. You have received a letter from us, did you not? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes, I did. + +Mr. BALL. Asking you to appear today and you are appearing voluntarily? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes. + +Mr. BALL. You will be asked questions concerning certain facts of +which you have knowledge that have to do with our investigation of the +assassination of the President, and particularly your knowledge of Lee +Harvey Oswald and his place of residence and various things that you +might know concerning Lee Harvey Oswald. + +Mr. BALL. What is your address? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. 1026 North Beckley. + +Mr. BALL. How long have you lived there? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. 21 years. + +Mr. BALL. And you live there with your husband? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes, sir; I do. + +Mr. BALL. What is his name? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. Arthur Carl Johnson. + +Mr. BALL. First of all, before I ask you any more questions, can you +tell me something about your background, where you were born, where you +went to school? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BALL. How long you've been married and everything. + +Mrs. JOHNSON. I was born in 1902 in Cherokee County at Alto and I was +married to my first husband in 1920 and he is deceased. I had two +children by him and he is deceased and I have been married to this Mr. +Johnson will be 18 years in August. + +Mr. BALL. You are a housewife by occupation? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. No, I have a restaurant. I have a little restaurant of my +own for 28 years, 1029 Young Street, Johnson's Cafe. + +Mr. BALL. You still operate it? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes, sir; I still do. + +Mr. BALL. You said you had lived at this place, 1026---- + +Mrs. JOHNSON. About 21 years. + +Mr. BALL. North Beckley? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes, sir. + +Mrs. BALL. You and your husband own that property? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. I do; I owned it before I married. I don't own it. I am +paying for it but I had bought the property before I married Johnson. + +Mr. BALL. What size house is that, how many rooms? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. Well, it has about 20-odd--22 rooms. + +Mr. BALL. 22 rooms? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes. + +Mr. BALL. In October, last October, November, 1963, who lived there? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. October? + +Mr. BALL. Yes, October and November last year; you and your husband +lived there? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes; my husband and I; that's our home. + +Mr. BALL. Anyone else live there with you? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. I had a housekeeper. + +Mr. BALL. What is her name? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. Earlene Roberts. + +Mr. BALL. Anyone else live there? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. That's all except tenants. + +Mr. BALL. Then you rented out rooms? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes; I rent out bedrooms, don't give board, just bedroom +and living room privileges. + +Mr. BALL. How many tenants did you have in October last year? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. You know, I'm sorry I didn't bring my register. I +couldn't tell you exactly; I imagine I had about 10 or 12. + +Mr. BALL. Was it full? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. No; I don't--I most always have vacancies. + +Mr. BALL. You do? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. I have had more even since this happened. + +Mr. BALL. Oh, you have? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes; I have; people are funny about things like that, you +know. + +Mr. BALL. Well, now, you knew Lee Oswald, didn't you? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. Well, I just knew him when I seen him. I knew him as a +renter, that's all. + +Mr. BALL. Where was he when you first met him, at what place? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. At my home--I was between serving hours and I come home +for relaxation and to kind of help out. I cooperate in keeping the +house and seeing after it, too, and I had returned home that afternoon +and he seen the room for rent sign--the first time that he came by, I +happened to have just rented the last room that one time. Occasionally, +I will have them full and then they just go vacant; people just come in +and out, stay a week and then are gone, anyway, at that time, I didn't +have a room. + +Mr. BALL. The first time he came to see you? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes: that's something about 3 weeks before he came back. + +Mr. BALL. This was 1026 North Beckley? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes. + +Mr. BALL. He talked to you? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes; the first time and the last time; the first time, he +told me he wanted a room and I told him I was very sorry, I just rented +the last room and he said he was very sorry, he wanted to get near his +work and he didn't have a car and it being on the bus line, he was +sorry he missed it. I said, "You noticed the sign." I hadn't had time +to take the sign up and I told him, "I will take the sign up and if you +notice the sign up again, you might stop by and I will have a room" +and sure enough, he came by this second time and so this tiny, little +room--it was at one time my library; that's what it was built for, +and he came by and I said I only have this small room at the present +time. I run an ad, it seems like, at that time, and I said I only have +the small room and he looked at it and said, "I will take this room +with the understanding I can have a larger room at the time you have +one go vacant" and I said to him that's agreeable, so, at the time, I +had other vacancies which in just 2 or 3 days I had two or three more +accommodations go vacant, so I told him I had other accommodations that +are larger and he said, "I find this room to be light and comfortable." +It was four windows on the outside wall; it was all light. He said, "I +find it to be light and comfortable and worth the money, if you don't +mind, I will remain in this room," so he didn't even look at the other +rooms. He just remained in that room, what I call my library. When I +utilized it into a bedroom, my father-in-law lived with a family of +people on a farm and they went to Arkansas to live and he was getting +old and he didn't want to be that far away from his son, so he wanted +to come and make his home with us and I fixed this little library +room--it was off and private from the other roomers--for "Pappy" to +sleep in and the living room for him to sit in and he was--that's about +9 years before he was deceased. + +Mr. BALL. Do you remember the date Oswald rented the room? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. October 14. + +Mr. BALL. What time of day did he come by? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. It was between 4 and 5 o'clock, I do know that because I +was home that day when he came back by and I said, when he came by, I +said, "You did come back by." + +Mr. BALL. Was your sign out at that time? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes; it was; he seen the sign. + +Mr. BALL. How much did you charge him? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. $8 a week, refrigerator and living room privileges. + +Mr. BALL. The refrigerator was located where? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. In my kitchen--he wanted to know if he could put milk and +lunch meat in my refrigerator and I told him he could. + +Mr. BALL. Did he tell you what his name was? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. O. H. L-e-e [spelling]. + +Mr. BALL. Did he sign anything with that name? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes, sir; I have it in my purse. + +Mr. BALL. May I see it? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. I will be glad to--I don't want you to keep it. I want +you to--I brought it for your information. I knew you was going to ask +that. + +Mr. BALL. Now, is this in his handwriting? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. This "O. H. Lee" is in his handwriting and this other is +in the housekeeper's handwriting--Mrs. Roberts. + +Mr. BALL. And these are the rates you gave him? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes. + +Mr. BALL. I would like this marked as an exhibit to this deposition. +Mark this Exhibit A. + +[Exhibit so marked.] + +Mr. BALL. Could we make a copy of this and return this to you, Mrs. +Johnson? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes; I have been told that I could sell this and I +haven't gotten any money. I think about $30 is what I have received, +all the trouble and all I've had and I've had to take the rugs up once +or twice. People like to have driven us crazy before we asked for any +information what to do. I hated to be rude to people. I didn't know +what to do but they got so---- + +Mr. BALL. We will make a picture of this and give it back to you. + +Mrs. JOHNSON. May I have something to erase this November 13, 15--I +got that wrong, anyway. I was looking at the calendar and this, I +was thinking it was November 13 that he left--he left my place on a +Wednesday before this assassination on Friday. + +Mr. BALL. That was the last time you saw him? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. Yeah; the last time I saw him was on a Wednesday +but my housekeeper seen him on a Friday morning right after this +assassination, he came by the house hurriedly. + +Mr. BALL. Were you at home at the time? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. No; I wasn't. I was at my restaurant, so I got this +copied wrong. It was November 20; the assassination was on the 22d and +he left my house on the 20th and then didn't return until right after +this assassination. + +Mr. BALL. By this, you mean the last time you saw him was Wednesday, +the 20th? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BALL. He did not come home on Thursday night? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. He did not; no, sir. + +Mr. BALL. The 21st? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BALL. Friday, the 22d, you did not see him, either? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. No; I didn't. The housekeeper did. + +Mr. BALL. We will make a copy of this and give the original back to +you and we will mark this "A." Did he sign that "O. H. Lee" in your +presence? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BALL. On that day? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes, sir; the day he rented the room, they sign the +register--they sign the register before I accept any money. + +Mr. BALL. I'm talking about this "O. H. Lee" signature on this +document; he signed that on that date? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BALL. Did he give you the money? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes. + +Mr. BALL. $8? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes. + +Mr. BALL. Did you ever know his true name was Lee Harvey Oswald? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. No; not until we saw his picture flash on the television +as the officers were out. Those particulars was found in his pocket +after he killed Tippit, after his arrest. So I came from the +restaurant, I guess 1 or 1:30, and these officers were there 1:30 or 2, +something like that, anyway, it was after this assassination, and as I +drove in, well, the officers were there and they told me that they was +looking for this character and I told them I didn't think I had anyone +by that name there but we went through the register carefully two or +three times and there was no Oswald there and I had two new tenants, +rather new tenants, so we had carried them around the house to show +them and we was going to start in the new tenants' rooms and my husband +was sitting in the living room and seen this picture flash on the +television and he said, "Please go around that house and tell him it +was this guy that lived in this room here"; and it was O. H. Lee. + +Mr. BALL. That is the first time you learned his name was Oswald? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes. + +Mr. BALL. You knew him as O. H. Lee? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes; I knew him as O. H. Lee. + +Mr. BALL. The first time you knew the man to be Lee Harvey Oswald that +you had known as O. H. Lee? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. That's right. + +Mr. BALL. Were you there when Oswald brought his clothes into the room? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. No; what do you mean? + +Mr. BALL. Now, you rented the room to him on the 14th? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes. + +Mr. BALL. Did he move in on that same day? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes, sir; and he had his clothes with him. + +Mr. BALL. He had his clothes with him? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes, sir; he just had a little old bag of clothes, these +little bags you get when you are in the service. + +Mr. BALL. A duffelbag? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes. + +Mr. BALL. That's all he had? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. That's all he had. + +Mr. BALL. He was there only--you say he rented it on the 14th of +October? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. He rented the 14th of October. + +Mr. BALL. Then he paid his rent every week until when? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. Every week, every week, I tell you, when he rented the +room, he told me that he was--I told him the rules of the house before +I accepted any renter I rent to, I tell them the rules of the house. + +Mr. BALL. What did you tell him? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. That we definitely do not entertain in bedrooms, strictly +the living room, and, too, they cannot come in intoxicated. If they +drink, they must sober before they come in and I do not allow drinking +at the home. That's the rules of the house and he accepted it. + +Mr. BALL. He was there a little better than a month? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BALL. Five or six weeks? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes; he was. + +Mr. BALL. Did he eat any of his meals there at the home? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. He had sandwiches and had milk. He drank about a half +gallon of sweet milk a day. He kept a half gallon of sweet milk in my +refrigerator a day and he kept lunch meat. + +Mr. BALL. Anything else? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. Jelly and preserves, something like that. + +Mr. BALL. Did he eat in the evening after work? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes; he did, most every afternoon. + +Mr. BALL. He ate where, in his room? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. Sometimes take it in his room, but he was just spotless +with it. + +Mr. BALL. Did he eat in the kitchen with it sometimes? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. Occasionally, if there was no one in the kitchen, he +would sit in the kitchen, but if there was anyone in there, he would +take it in his room and every bit of that was put in the trash can. He +never kept anything cluttered, never kept anything outside, no papers, +books, or nothing. + +Mr. BALL. Did you see him eat anything but lunch meat? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. I never did, just lunch meat, all he ever put in there +and preserves, I think he had some preserves and milk; but he put about +a half gallon of sweet milk in that box each day. + +Mr. BALL. Did you ever see him eating his evening meal? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. Well, I don't think I had seen him but I have seen him +come in and get the lunch meat and carry it into his room. + +Mr. BALL. Did he go out nights, any? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. I just really never did see that man leave that room. + +Mr. BALL. After he came back from work? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes; he stayed very closely but he did tell me he would +be leaving to go home over weekends--no; he didn't say "home," he said, +"I will leave to go to Irving over weekends and won't return until +Monday." + +Mr. BALL. Was he gone almost every weekend? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. Every weekend but one and that was the weekend previous +to the assassination. + +Mr. BALL. What did he do that weekend? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. Well, I actually didn't see him leave the house but I +know he did because I heard some of the renters say they seen him leave +and I also heard--remember something that he went to the rifle range--I +read he was at the rifle range. + +Mr. BALL. You say you did not see him leave. Were you there over the +weekend? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. I surely was. + +Mr. BALL. But you did not see him leave? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. That's right. + +Mr. BALL. You say you heard some people say that; who said that? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. I have read. + +Mr. BALL. Don't tell me what you read. + +Mrs. JOHNSON. I actually read it in the newspaper; I just don't +remember. + +Mr. BALL. Is there anybody that you know of at your house that you say +saw Oswald leave the house the weekend before the assassination? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. I'm trying to think. I just don't believe that I remember +anyone who said definitely that they seen him leave. + +Mr. BALL. Did anybody tell you that lived in your house there? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. They could come in and out that door and we never would +notice it because the house is large and we stayed a lot in the back of +the house. + +Mr. BALL. You mentioned rifle range. Where did you get information that +Oswald went to a rifle range? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. I read it in the paper. + +Mr. BALL. Did anybody in your house tell you he went to a rifle range? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. No. + +Mr. BALL. Did you ever see him go to a rifle range? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. No, sir. + +Mr. BALL. Did he ever tell you he went to a rifle range? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. No, sir; that man never talked; that was the only +peculiarity about him. He would never speak. If we would speak to him +and some of the men renters he would speak to the housekeeper and I +everytime we would speak and we would speak to him just most every time +we would meet him and, of course, he would speak after we would speak, +but he would come in and watch television maybe 30, 40 minutes at a +time and never speak to a man. + +Mr. BALL. He would watch television sometimes? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes, sir; watch television with the other men renters +and he wouldn't speak to them. Maybe they would speak to him but he +wouldn't speak. + +Mr. BALL. Did you ever see him with a rifle? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. Never did; and he never brought that rifle in my house; +I just know he never had that rifle in there. He could have had this +pistol, I don't know, because they found the scabbard. + +Mr. BALL. The pistol holster is what they found? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. Pistol holster is what I'm trying to say. + +Mr. BALL. They found that after the assassination? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes sir; I seen the holster. + +Mr. BALL. Had you ever seen it before? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. No, sir; he kept that packed away. We never go through +people's personal things. I instruct my housekeeper never go through +people's personal things. We are not in a position to do that and it's +rude and we do not. + +Mr. BALL. How is this room furnished that Oswald rented? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. A very small room; it had an old fashioned clothes +closet that had a place to hang your clothes and drawer space for your +underwear, your socks and everything, and then it also had a cabinet +space anyone could have stored food or, well I mean bundles of things, +you know, and then I had a dresser and a bed and a heater and a little +refrigerated unit. + +Mr. BALL. A refrigerating unit? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes, sir; a window unit. + +Mr. BALL. You mean it cooled the room? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes, sir; and it had curtains and venetian blinds. + +Mr. BALL. What kind of curtains did it have? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. Well, it just had side drapes and panels. + +Mr. BALL. Were the curtains on curtain rods? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BALL. They were in the room when he rented it? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BALL. Did Oswald ever talk to you about redecorating his room? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. No, sir; never mentioned it. + +Mr. BALL. Did he ever talk to you about putting up new curtains in his +room? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. No, sir. + +Mr. BALL. Did he ever tell you he was going to get some curtain rods? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. No; he didn't. + +Mr. BALL. The room had curtain rods on the window when he came in there? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes, sir; sure did. + +Mr. BALL. Also curtains? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BALL. Was there one weekend when he was gone in which he didn't +return on Monday but he came back the next day, on Tuesday? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BALL. Was there? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes; there was one and it must have been on Labor--no---- + +Mr. BALL. Armistice Day? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. Armistice Day; it was on Monday, was it not? + +Mr. BALL. Yes. + +Mrs. JOHNSON. That was Monday he wasn't home. He didn't come home until +Tuesday; that's the first time and only time he failed to pay his rent +when it was due. It was due on Monday. + +Mr. BALL. When did he pay it? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. I would say the next 5 minutes after he walked into the +house from work. + +Mr. BALL. What time did he come home from work on Tuesday? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. Something like 5 o'clock, 4:30 or 5--5, I think. + +Mr. BALL. Did he tell you where he had been? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. No, no; he didn't tell us anything; no; we didn't ask. + +Mr. BALL. Now, in the next weekend, that would be the weekend before +the assassination, he stayed there? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. He remained there. + +Mr. BALL. Did you or did you not see him go out any that weekend? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. I did not see him go out; I did not; no, sir. + +(At this point Mr. Johnson left the room.) + +Mr. BALL. Let me ask you this: did he, that weekend, that was the +weekend before the assassination, on a Saturday, make a trip to a place +where they wash clothes? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. Well, I think that he did go across to that washateria. I +think he did. + +Mr. BALL. Did you see him go any place, go out of the house except for +that on that weekend? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. That's the only time and I had just forgotten that but I +do remember he carried some clothes out of that house that morning and +the washateria is right across the street, less than a block. + +Mr. BALL. But he left his room? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. And he wasn't gone long and I didn't see him return with +any clothes but I do know he was gone just about long enough to do a +wash. + +Mr. BALL. Did he watch television every evening? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. Not every evening but just every time he took a notion +but maybe 95 percent of the time he would sit in his room. + +Mr. BALL. Did he have any visitors? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. No, sir; he never had a visitor. + +Mr. BALL. Do you ever remember him spending an evening away from home +except for these times you told us about? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. Not an evening that I remember him being away but other +than weekends he would. He would leave on Friday mornings and return +Monday evenings. + +Mr. BALL. Did he tell you when he rented your room where he was working? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. No; he didn't, but he did tell me he would be returning +to Irving each weekend. + +Mr. BALL. Did he ever tell you where he was working? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. No, sir. + +Mr. BALL. Did he ever tell you what his job was? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. No; he told me he was anxious to rent the room being on +the busline and near his work and he didn't have a car and he would be +returning to Irving. + +Mr. BALL. Did you ever see him in the company of anyone? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. Never did see him in the company of nobody. + +Mr. BALL. Did he drink? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. No, sir; no more than sweet milk. + +Mr. BALL. He never drink intoxicating liquor? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. No, sir; I don't believe he drank. + +Mr. BALL. You never saw him drink anything? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. No, sir. + +Mr. BALL. You never saw him intoxicated? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. No, sir. + +Mr. BALL. Did he smoke? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. I don't believe he did. + +Mr. BALL. Miss Earlene Roberts was your housekeeper at this time? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes, she was. + +Mr. BALL. How long have you known her? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. I have known Mrs. Roberts, oh, I guess it was 6 years, +something like that, 6 years. + +Mr. BALL. Where did you first meet her? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. I hired her as a housekeeper. + +Mr. BALL. At 1026 North Beckley? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BALL. Has she been working for you for that period of time? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. No, sir; I let Mrs. Roberts go a time or two, then I +would hire her back. + +Mr. BALL. Was there some reason why you let her go? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. Well, she would just get to being disagreeable with +renters and I don't know, she has a lot of handicaps. She has an +overweight problem and she has some habits that some people have to +understand to tolerate. + +Mr. BALL. What are they? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. Talking, just sitting down and making up tales, you know, +have you ever seen people like that? Just have a creative mind, there's +nothing to it, and just make up and keep talking until she just makes +a lie out of it. Listen, I'm telling you the truth and this isn't to +go any further, understand that? You have to know these things because +you are going to question this lady. I will tell you, she's just as +intelligent--I think she is a person that doesn't mean to do that but +she just does it automatically. It seems as though that she, oh, I +don't know, wants to be attractive or something at times. I just don't +know; I don't understand it myself. I only wish I did. + +Mr. BALL. She was working for you in October and November while Oswald +was a renter with you? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes, she was. This Saturday night will be 3 weeks she +left. + +Mr. BALL. She quit 3 weeks ago? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes, sir; I didn't know she was going. + +Mr. BALL. Where did she go? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. I do not know. I called her sister to try to find out. I +don't think she knows. + +Mr. BALL. Who is her sister? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. Mrs. Bertha Cheek. + +Mr. BALL. She lives here in Dallas? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes; on Swiss. I think. + +Mr. BALL. Have you talked to her within the last few days? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. A number of times I talked to her, trying to find +Earlene. I thought it was important we did come to this Commission +and I wanted to ask Earlene just why she did leave because I didn't +know there was a thing in the world wrong. Well, I carried her to +Pleasant Grove to a doctor and spent a half day that I should have been +even with my brother that had had a heart attack, been assisting my +sister-in-law and her chores that day. + +Mr. BALL. When was this? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. Three weeks ago Saturday. + +Mr. BALL. That's the day you took her to the doctor? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes; I took her every 2 weeks just as regular. + +Mr. BALL. She quit that day? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. That night, and everything was just as agreeable; I went +and shopped for vegetables and her special meats for her diet. She +is a diabetic, too, while she was in the doctor's office, and I had +everything for another week for her diet. + +Mr. BALL. Did she come to you and tell you she was going to quit? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. No; she never mentioned such a thing. I thought +everything was just agreeable. + +Mr. BALL. What did she do, move out? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. After midnight, after everyone was in bed. + +Mr. BALL. She didn't tell you she was going? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. She didn't tell me she was going. + +Mr. BALL. You haven't see her since? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. I haven't seen her since. + +Mr. BALL. Did a letter come to your house to Earlene Roberts from the +Commission? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes. + +Mr. BALL. What did you do with it? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. I held it until the last minute and returned it to you. + +Mr. BALL. Your letter and your husband's letter came to the house? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes. + +Mr. BALL. You called Mrs. Cheek? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes, I did. + +Mr. BALL. To find out where Earlene was? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes. + +Mr. BALL. What did she tell you? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. She told me she had called her and told her she had left +my house and she said, "I just proceeded to tell her what I thought +about it because you are so good and so nice to her. She should never +have quit you like that." She said, "You know how she is, she hasn't +called back. She might swell up and pout and it will be months before +she calls me again." + +Mr. BALL. Do you know any reason why she should have left you? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. Mrs. Cheek, the sister, says when she was talking to +her she brought up a little old lady that does room with me and she +is a retired woman who is drawing her social security and she was a +housekeeper previous to this last time Mrs. Roberts was there--Katy +Gage, a precious woman, gets along with everybody. She's got children +but doesn't want to live with them. She prefers living with my husband +and I, renting a room and lives with us. She tells--and Mrs. Cheek says +first thing she brought up was Katy. She says she's jealous of Katy and +I don't know why she is. There is no reason to be. + +Mr. BALL. Did Earlene Roberts ever talk to Oswald in your presence; did +you ever see them talk to each other? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. Listen here, no; I don't believe that Lee talked to +anybody. I just really don't. + +Mr. BALL. Did Earlene ever talk to you about Oswald? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. No. + +Mr. BALL. Say she thought he was a peculiar one? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. No. + +Mr. BALL. She never mentioned him? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. No; she just didn't like him because he wouldn't speak +but that's all. + +Mr. BALL. She told you she did not like him? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. Yeah, she would say "I would like to know if he thinks he +is too good to speak to me when he comes through the kitchen." I said, +"If you speak to him, he will speak," I said, "I will speak to him" and +he says, "Good morning" but he didn't speak if I didn't speak. + +Mr. BALL. On the day of the 22d of November, were you home around 1 +o'clock? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. It must have been 1:30 or 2, something like that. + +Mr. BALL. When you came home? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes; after serving lunch. + +Mr. BALL. Did Earlene Roberts say anything to you whether or not this +man had returned? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. No; after these officers came in, well, then she began +to tell them that he did come rushing in and she had gotten a phone +call or had made one, anyway, she was on the phone--no, there was +someone called her, that's what she said, said someone called her and +she says, "Did you know that the President had been assassinated" and +she says, "Why, no" and she says, "Well, it's on the television now" +and she says, "I will run and turn it on" and she run in and turned +this television on to get this information and this Oswald walked in +hurriedly and she said, she said to him, "You seem to be in a hurry." +She was the only one in that place. She said he didn't say a word but +went on in his room and she said he changed his little zip-up coat, way +I understand it, and just went right back out. He evidently got the +gun; now, we don't know. + +Mr. BALL. Did she tell the officers that? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. Yeah, she told the officers that. + +Mr. BALL. When they came out there, did they have a search warrant? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes, surely. + +Mr. BALL. Did you permit them to search his room? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes; they taken everything immediately out of his room. + +Mr. BALL. Did you look in the room while they were searching it? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. I certainly did. It had French doors to it; folding open, +you couldn't help but see everything, the books and all they took out +of these chests of drawers. They was throwin' them down on the bed. + +Mr. BALL. Did you see a pistol holster? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes, I did. + +Mr. BALL. Where was it? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. I don't know; they took it out of one of the drawers of +this chest. + +Mr. BALL. It was in a drawer? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes. + +Mr. BALL. I think that's all. Now, you can look this over and sign +it, if you wish, or you can waive your signature and we will have it +written up and send it on to Washington. + +Mrs. JOHNSON. How is this? + +Mr. BALL. If you wish, we will have this written up and you can read it +over and sign it or you can waive signature, if you wish, and you won't +need to read it over and sign it. What do you prefer? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. I would think that you people--of course, the way I +worded it, it probably sounds terrible. + +Mr. BALL. I thought it sounded very good. + +Mrs. JOHNSON. I put it just as straight as I could because we did know +such a little about this man but you know I have rented rooms a long +time and I find people, around boys, especially, about this age, some +of them are shy. They don't prefer a lot of yakking and you will get +to where, actually, you appreciate a person that goes in his room and +takes care of his own business rather than sit around and quiz and ask +personal questions and wants to change from one television program to +another. You get tired of that. + +Mr. BALL. Are you satisfied to waive your signature, Mrs. Johnson? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. Why, yes. + +Mr. BALL. And leave it just as you said it? + +Mrs. JOHNSON. I have said the truth, nothing but the truth. + +Mr. BALL. Then, you won't have to sign it. We will send it on to the +Commission this way. + +Mrs. JOHNSON. I have told you the truth. + + + + +TESTIMONY OF A. C. JOHNSON + +The testimony of A. C. Johnson was taken at 3:45 p.m., on April 1, +1964, in the office of the U.S. Attorney, 301 Post Office Building, +Bryan and Ervay Streets, Dallas, Tex., by Mr. David S. Belin, assistant +counsel of the President's Commission. + + +Mr. BELIN. Will you stand up and raise your right hand, Mr. Johnson? + +Do you solemnly swear in your testimony to tell the truth, the whole +truth and nothing but the truth, so help you God? + +Mr. JOHNSON. I do. + +Mr. BELIN. Please be seated, sir. Your name is A. C. Johnson? + +Mr. JOHNSON. A. C. + +Mr. BELIN. Where do you live, Mr. Johnson? + +Mr. JOHNSON. 1026 North Beckley. + +Mr. BELIN. That's here in Dallas? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BELIN. How long have you lived there? + +Mr. JOHNSON. I've lived there 17 years, I believe. + +Mr. BELIN. Now what's your occupation? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Carpenter. + +Mr. BELIN. Are you originally from Texas, or did you move here? + +Mr. JOHNSON. No, I'm from Kentucky--was born in Kentucky. My folks came +here when I was 5 years old. + +Mr. BELIN. They came here to Texas? + +Mr. JOHNSON. When I was 5 years old. And I've been in and around Dallas +ever since. + +Mr. BELIN. Did you go to school here? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Yes--not in Dallas, but country schools--county schools, +you know. + +Mr. BELIN. How far did you go through school? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Sir? + +Mr. BELIN. How far did you go through school? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Uh--just grade school. + +Mr. BELIN. Just grade school. And then did you go to work? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Yes. + +Mr. BELIN. Did you ever have any Army service at all? + +Mr. JOHNSON. No. + +Mr. BELIN. Just by general background, has your general occupation been +a carpenter for most of these past 20 or 30 years? + +Mr. JOHNSON. No; I've been a carpenter for about--uh--well, about 20 +years, I guess. + +Mr. BELIN. Before that, what did you do? + +Mr. JOHNSON. I was raised on a farm. + +Mr. BELIN. And you worked on a farm then? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Yes. + +Mr. BELIN. And you and your wife have this house at 1026 North Beckley +and have people that room there by the week? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Yes. + +Mr. BELIN. About how many people do you have that room there? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Well, when it's full, we have 17. + +Mr. BELIN. Has it been full within the past 6 months at all, or not? + +Mr. JOHNSON. No, no, it hasn't. + +Mr. BELIN. By the way, how long have you been married, Mr. Johnson? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Seventeen years. + +Mr. BELIN. You've been married 17 years? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BELIN. Now, sometime last fall, a person came to your house to rent +a room who you knew by the name of O. H. Lee. Is that correct? + +Mr. JOHNSON. That's right. + +Mr. BELIN. When he first came, were you all full at that time or +not--or don't you know? + +Mr. JOHNSON. I believe that--uh--the little room he took was the only +room available at that time. + +Mr. BELIN. Had he come any earlier to try and find a room earlier--or +not? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Uh--Mrs. Roberts said he had been by once before. + +Mr. BELIN. And was that little room available then, or not--or don't +you remember? + +Mr. JOHNSON. I don't remember exactly. I believe, though, that--uh--I +believe he looked at it and decided he'd wait awhile. But the next time +he came back, why he decided he'd take it. + +My wife told him that--uh--if he wanted to take that room, why he +could, you know, when we had a larger room and more convenient for him, +why he could have it. And so he just--after he got this little room, +why he just decided he'd stay in it. + +Mr. BELIN. Could you describe that little room for us? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Well, it's just a--a small room. I believe it's about 8 by +12, or something like that. It was a library room. + +Mr. BELIN. Does it have any windows in it? + +Mr. JOHNSON. It has--uh--three--four windows, I believe. + +Mr. BELIN. On one side, two sides, three sides? + +Mr. JOHNSON. One side. + +Mr. BELIN. They're all on one side? + +Mr. JOHNSON. All on one side. + +Mr. BELIN. Do you have any curtains on those windows? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Yes. + +Mr. BELIN. Did you have curtains at that time on the windows? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Yes. + +Mr. BELIN. How were the curtains put up--by curtain rods, or by what? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Yes. Curtain rods. Yes. They were just on regular curtain +rods. + +Mr. BELIN. There were already curtain rods in the room, then, when this +O. H. Lee came there--is that correct? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Yes, uh-huh. + +Mr. BELIN. Could you describe the curtains at all, that were in there, +if you remember them, or not? + +Mr. JOHNSON. No; I couldn't. + +Mr. BELIN. Would those curtains still be on there today? Or might you +have different ones now? + +Mr. JOHNSON. No; we'd have different curtains now. + +Mr. BELIN. Do you know who he got his room from--from you or from your +wife or from your housekeeper? + +Mr. JOHNSON. I don't know. + +Mr. BELIN. Who was your housekeeper, by the way? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Earlene Roberts. + +Mr. BELIN. Is she still there? + +Mr. JOHNSON. No; she's moved. + +Mr. BELIN. How long had she been a housekeeper for you? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Well, that's something around a year--this past--the last +time, I mean. + +Mr. BELIN. She was a housekeeper for you prior to that time? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Yes; about a year or a little better. + +Mr. BELIN. Do you know how old Mrs. Roberts is--approximately? + +Mr. JOHNSON. I believe she's in her fifties. + +Mr. BELIN. Would you have any objections in stating for the record +approximately how old you are? + +Mr. JOHNSON. I'm 59. + +Mr. BELIN. Fifty-nine. Did Mrs. Roberts say why she was leaving? + +Mr. JOHNSON. No; she didn't. + +Mr. BELIN. Did she give you any notice that she was leaving? + +Mr. JOHNSON. No; didn't give us any notice. + +Mr. BELIN. She just walked out? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Just walked out. + +Mr. BELIN. When did she walk out? + +Mr. JOHNSON. It was in the night. + +Mr. BELIN. Just the middle of the night? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Well, we don't know what time. All the roomers had already +gone to bed, so we don't know what time it was. + +Mr. BELIN. Did she have any pay coming from you, or not? + +Mr. JOHNSON. I don't know. My wife always pays her. Now, I couldn't +tell you. I don't remember. I've even forgotten what night she moved. +I think my wife paid her on Wednesday night--or on Wednesdays. But I +couldn't tell you what day she moved. + +Mr. BELIN. The last time she worked for you, when she left did she give +you any notice? + +Mr. JOHNSON. No. The last--the last time was the one I had reference to. + +Mr. BELIN. I mean, the first time that she worked for you? Or don't you +remember? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Uh--I don't remember. + +Mr. BELIN. All right. In any case, this man, O. H. Lee, came to rent a +room from you or from your wife? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Yes. + +Mr. BELIN. Could you describe how you came to find out that this man +had another name other than O. H. Lee? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Well, it was when the officers came looking for him. + +Mr. BELIN. When was this? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Uh--after Tippit was shot, the police---- + +Mr. BELIN. This would have been on November 22, 1963? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Yes. + +Mr. BELIN. And can you state what happened? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Well, they just came down there looking for--uh--Oswald. + +Mr. BELIN. Did they say what his full name was? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Yes, I believe they did. + +Mr. BELIN. Lee Harvey Oswald? + +Mr. JOHNSON. I believe they did. + +Mr. BELIN. Did they say how they happened to come there? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Well, uh--after he was--uh--apprehended out there, they +searched him and found my address in his pocket. + +Mr. BELIN. Your address of 1026 North Beckley? + +Mr. JOHNSON. That's right. + +Mr. BELIN. All right. What happened when the officers got there? They +asked you if Lee Harvey Oswald lived there? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Yes. + +Mr. BELIN. How long had you been at the house when the officers arrived? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Oh, probably 30 minutes. + +Mr. BELIN. Do you remember about what time of the day they arrived? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Well, it must have been around 1:30 or 2 o'clock--the best +I remember. + +Mr. BELIN. When did you get home that day from your work? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Well, it was around 1 o'clock or maybe a little bit after. + +Mr. BELIN. At the time you had gotten home, had you heard that the +President had been shot? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Yes. I heard that before I went home. + +Mr. BELIN. Did you hear that the President had died before you went +home? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Yes. + +Mr. BELIN. So you got home sometime after you had heard that the +President had died? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Yes. + +Mr. BELIN. Where were you when you heard that the President had died? + +Mr. JOHNSON. 1029 Young Street. + +Mr. BELIN. And is that a business? + +Mr. JOHNSON. We have a little restaurant there. + +Mr. BELIN. You and your wife have a restaurant there? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Yes. + +Mr. BELIN. Was your wife there, too? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Yes; we work together. + +Mr. BELIN. And did you hear this on the radio? + +Mr. JOHNSON. No. Uh--we have a friend that is a policeman, works for +Cotton Belt Railroad. And he called us--called up here and told us. Of +course, we had heard all the sirens and everything, you know, going, +and we couldn't imagine what it was. And Nicholson called us and told +us that he had heard it over the radio. + +Mr. BELIN. He had heard over the radio that the President had been shot? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Yes. + +Mr. BELIN. And then, did you turn on your radio? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Yes. We don't have one there in the place, so we went out +in the car and sat there in the car and listened. + +Mr. BELIN. All right. And was it while you were sitting in the car that +you heard that the President had died? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Yes; we didn't leave until we--it was announced that he +was dead. + +Mr. BELIN. How soon after that announcement did you leave? + +Mr. JOHNSON. I'd say 5 minutes. + +Mr. BELIN. All right. Then, how long did it take you to get to 1026 +North Beckley? + +Mr. JOHNSON. It takes us about 5 minutes. + +Mr. BELIN. So that about 10 minutes after you heard on the radio that +the President had been shot, you arrived with your wife at 1026 North +Beckley? + +Mr. JOHNSON. That's right. + +Mr. BELIN. Did you see anyone? Was Mrs. Roberts there? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Yes; she was there--at the television. + +Mr. BELIN. She was watching television? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Yes. + +Mr. BELIN. Had this man, O. H. Lee, was he there when you got there? + +Mr. JOHNSON. No; he had been there just--uh--before we got home. + +Mr. BELIN. Did Mrs. Roberts tell you that he had? + +Mr. JOHNSON. She told us that he come in and got a--uh--little coat or +something and just walked in his room and right back out the door. + +Mr. BELIN. Now, what was the occasion of Mrs. Roberts telling you that? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Well, I--just general conversation, I suppose, you know. +Uh--after she found out who it was---- + +Mr. BELIN. Oh, she told you this after she found out that this was Lee +Harvey Oswald? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Uh-huh; that he did come in and get his coat. + +Mr. BELIN. Well, did she tell you this before the police came to your +house? + +Mr. JOHNSON. No; because she had no idea. Her sister, I believe it was, +called her and told her to turn the television on, that Kennedy had +been shot. And she was over there working with the television, tuning +it in, when Oswald came in. + +Mr. BELIN. When did she tell you this? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Uh--just after we found out that it was--Oswald. + +Mr. BELIN. After you found out that O. H. Lee was Lee Harvey Oswald? + +Mr. JOHNSON. That's right. + +Mr. BELIN. Well, you started to tell me how you found this out. I +believe you said the police came sometime after you got home? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Yes. And I saw his picture on television, you know. As +quick as we found out who he was, why Mrs. Roberts just said something +about that he had come by the house here. + +Mr. BELIN. Well, let me backtrack a minute, now. + +How soon after you got home did the police come--approximately? + +Mr. JOHNSON. I'd say within 30 minutes. + +Mr. BELIN. All right. 30 minutes after you got home, the police came. +And what did the police say to you? + +Mr. JOHNSON. They asked if--uh--we had anyone by that name living there. + +Mr. BELIN. By the name of Lee Harvey Oswald? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Yes. + +Mr. BELIN. And what did you tell them? + +Mr. JOHNSON. We told them, "No." + +Mr. BELIN. All right. And then what did they say? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Well, they wanted to see the rooms. They had described his +age, his build, and so forth, and we had two more boys rooming there. +Uh--and my wife was going to let them see the rooms. + +Mr. BELIN. Your wife was going to let them see the rooms that you +had--and you had a total of 17 roomers, I believe you said? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Well, no. I don't know just how many roomers we had. We +have 17 bedrooms--but I don't know just, at that time, how many roomers +we had. + +But, anyway, we had a couple of boys around his age that had moved in +just a few days before, and, so, she was going to let them see their +rooms. + +Mr. BELIN. All right. And then what happened? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Well, I saw his picture on television and I hollered at +them and told them. They were out in the back, started around the house +to the--uh--basement where these boys room. The bedrooms are all in the +basement. And they were going back there. + +And--uh--I just called them and told them, I said, "Why, it's this +fellow that lives in here." + +Mr. BELIN. You told them that you had seen the picture of this man on +television? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Yes. + +Mr. BELIN. And did you tell them what this man was known to you as? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Yes. + +Mr. BELIN. What did they say? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Well, they wanted to see the records, and we showed +them--the register, I mean--and we showed them the register. + +And then they searched his room. + +Mr. BELIN. You showed them the register with this name of O. H. Lee? + +Mr. JOHNSON. That's right. + +Mr. BELIN. When was it, after that, that Mrs. Roberts said that he had +been there that day? + +Mr. JOHNSON. It was along about--during the conversation with +these--uh--men. + +Mr. BELIN. Did she see his picture on television at the same time you +did? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Yes. + +Mr. BELIN. Did she say anything about him being O. H. Lee--or not? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Uh--yes. We all--uh--were just discussing it, you +know. And she told him--I believe she did--or my wife did. Said, +"Well, that's the reason we didn't understand who they were looking +for--because we didn't know him as Oswald." + +Mr. BELIN. All right. Who recognized his face on television first? You +or Mrs. Roberts? + +Mr. JOHNSON. I believe I was the one--best I remember. + +Mr. BELIN. Was Mrs. Roberts looking at television at the same time you +were then, or not? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Well, we were all talking--talking, like I say, to the +officers and so forth. And--uh--I believe though that she was looking +at it at the same time I was. My wife had just stepped out of the house +with the officers. + +Mr. BELIN. Now, what did Mrs. Roberts say about this man having been at +the home earlier that day--this O. H. Lee, which they had identified as +Lee Harvey Oswald? + +Mr. JOHNSON. She just--uh--I believe she told them that he came in +and got a little--uh--sport coat, or some sort of a little coat, and +slipped it on and went right back out. And she said that she made the +remark that he--said, "You must be in a hurry"--and he didn't say +anything; went on out the door. + +And the next thing we knew or heard of him was after Tippit was shot. + +Mr. BELIN. Do you remember anything else she said about Lee Harvey +Oswald's visit to your home? + +Mr. JOHNSON. No. That's just about it. + +Mr. BELIN. Could you describe Lee Harvey Oswald at all? What kind of a +person was he? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Well, he was nice enough, I'd say, as a roomer because +he always kept his room nice and he was very well-behaved. He +didn't--uh--talk to anyone. He might speak to you when he came in and +he might not. I suppose it was according to the mood he was in, or +something, I never did think too much about it--because--uh--we have so +many roomers anyway that I don't pay too much attention. + +Mr. BELIN. Did he drink at all? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Not that I know of. I don't--if he ever did drink a bottle +of beer, I never did know it; never did smell it, or anything. + +Mr. BELIN. Did he smoke cigarettes--do you know? + +Mr. JOHNSON. I don't remember. + +Mr. BELIN. Do you remember if he was right-handed or left-handed? + +Mr. JOHNSON. [Pausing before reply] No. + +Mr. BELIN. Did he stay out late at night or was he generally home +relatively early in the evening? + +Mr. JOHNSON. He was home--uh--usually right after work and just--uh--I +suppose he'd go out and eat or maybe to the washateria or somewhere +like that. If he was ever gone any other than this--the night before +the assassination, I didn't know it. It was after we had already gone +to bed, if he did leave. + +Mr. BELIN. What time did he leave for work in the morning, do you know? + +Mr. JOHNSON. I believe, around 7:30, something like that. Now, I +wouldn't be sure because we leave out real early and I was never there. +But I--I think that they said--Mrs. Roberts, I believe, or some of +them--said he left around 7:30. Now, I wouldn't say for sure. + +Mr. BELIN. Do you know whether or not he took his lunch to work with +him? + +Mr. JOHNSON. No; I don't. + +Mr. BELIN. You don't know? + +Mr. JOHNSON. No. + +Mr. BELIN. Is there a bus that goes by or near your house that goes +near to where he worked? + +Mr. JOHNSON. The bus comes right by the house. + +Mr. BELIN. What bus is that? + +Mr. JOHNSON. The Beckley bus. + +Mr. BELIN. The Beckley bus? Does it stop right in front of your house? + +Mr. JOHNSON. It stops right--uh--well, my house is the third house from +the corner, and it stops right on the corner. + +Mr. BELIN. And does that go right to or near Elm and Houston? + +Mr. JOHNSON. It goes right by there. + +Mr. BELIN. And can you pick up a bus near Elm and Houston to get right +back to your house? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Yes; I believe it goes right back down--uh--Elm. + +Mr. BELIN. Did Lee Harvey Oswald generally stay at your home on +weekends? + +Mr. JOHNSON. No. + +Mr. BELIN. Do you know where he went? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Uh--no; I don't. I just assumed he went home. + +Mr. BELIN. By "home," you mean to---- + +Mr. JOHNSON. Irving. I believe that's where his wife lived. + +Mr. BELIN. Did he ever talk to you about his wife or family? + +Mr. JOHNSON. No; never did. + +Mr. BELIN. Did you ever hear him make any telephone calls to his wife, +or to someone? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Yes, he'd make calls but I never did know who he was +calling. Because, like I say, he'd talk in a foreign language all the +time. + +Mr. BELIN. Were these toll calls, or not? + +Mr. JOHNSON. No; so far as I know, he never put in a toll call. + +Mr. BELIN. When you call Irving, Tex., is this a toll call, or not? + +Mr. JOHNSON. No; it's the same exchange. + +Mr. BELIN. You said that you heard him talk in a foreign language. +About how often would he make these calls? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Most every evening after work. + +Mr. BELIN. I believe you said that he generally wasn't there on +weekends. Is that correct? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Yes. + +Mr. BELIN. Were there some weekends when he might be there--or don't +you remember? + +Mr. JOHNSON. I don't remember. + +Mr. BELIN. Were there any week nights when he wasn't there? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Uh--so far as I know, the night before the assassination, +the night of the twenty--that would be the 21st. + +Mr. BELIN. Twenty-first of November? + +Mr. JOHNSON. The night before the assassination. + +Mr. BELIN. Yes. + +Was there any other week night, apart from November 21, that he wasn't +there--to the best of your recollection? + +Mr. JOHNSON. No. + +Mr. BELIN. Did he say anything to you before November 21 that he wasn't +going to be there that night? + +Mr. JOHNSON. No. + +Mr. BELIN. He paid for the room by the week, didn't he? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Yes. + +Mr. BELIN. How much was his room rent? + +Mr. JOHNSON. I believe, $8 a week. + +Mr. BELIN. Were your larger rooms more expensive? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Yes. + +Mr. BELIN. When a larger room became available was this ever told to +him, or not? + +Mr. JOHNSON. I believe my wife told him but--uh--but he just--said he'd +just as soon stay on in that small room, that it was handy and that +he'd just stay on. + +Mr. BELIN. When a person stayed by the week, did he pay his rent in +advance? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Yes. + +Mr. BELIN. What day of the week would his rent be due? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Well, I don't know what day his--Oswald's--was due. They +pay--if they move in on a Monday, they pay it--the rent is due on +Monday. + +Mr. BELIN. From one Monday to the following Monday, is that right? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Yes. + +Mr. BELIN. Now, with regard to this one night that he wasn't there. +Were there any telephone calls for him on November 21? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Not that I know of. + +Mr. BELIN. Did he ever say why he was going home? Did you ever know +ahead of time that he was going to Irving that night? + +Mr. JOHNSON. No. + +Mr. BELIN. Did you ever see him after the morning of November 21? + +Mr. JOHNSON. No. + +Mr. BELIN. Is there anything else that you can think of that might be +relevant or important? + +Mr. JOHNSON. No; I can't think of anything else because, like I say, I +didn't really know the man. + +Mr. BELIN. Is Johnny's Cafe the one that you say you and your wife +operate? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Johnson's Cafe. + +Mr. BELIN. Johnson's Cafe? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Yes; 1029 Young Street. + +Mr. BELIN. You own that? I mean, you operate it yourself as proprietor? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Yes. + +Mr. BELIN. You're kind of a real businessman here. You rent a +roominghouse, and you have a cafe, and you have carpenters. Anything +else, Mr. Johnson? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Well, I have an apartment house and a little rental +property. + +Mr. BELIN. Do you know anything about the assassination or about Lee +Harvey Oswald, or anything or anyone connected with Oswald or the +assassination that you might think would be of help? + +Mr. JOHNSON. No; no. I don't. + +Mr. BELIN. Since November 22, 1963, have you ever talked to your wife +or Mrs. Roberts about Lee Harvey Oswald? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Oh, yes. You know, we've discussed the thing--and--uh--I +suppose you'd say that we're just more or less in shock or something, +knowing that he lived there and that a thing like that happened. It's +just--and all the publicity of the thing, and so forth. + +Mr. BELIN. Has Mrs. Roberts said anything further about her +observations of Lee Harvey Oswald to you? + +Mr. JOHNSON. No. + +Mr. BELIN. Do you know where we can locate her at all to talk to her? + +Mr. JOHNSON. No; I sure don't. + +Mr. BELIN. You got a letter, by the way, saying that we would be here +to take the deposition? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Yes. + +Mr. BELIN. Did Mrs. Roberts leave before she got that letter or after? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Why she left before. She's been gone for--I guess--3 +weeks, or maybe 4. + +Mr. BELIN. Before we start taking your deposition, you and I chatted +briefly for a few minutes about your roominghouse, is that correct? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Yes. + +Mr. BELIN. Is there anything you can think of that we talked about that +we don't have recorded here on this deposition? + +Mr. JOHNSON. No. + +Mr. BELIN. In our conversation, did you just relate to me all you knew +about it, or did I try and lead you to say anything that wasn't true in +any way? + +Mr. JOHNSON. No. + +Mr. BELIN. You just told me---- + +Mr. JOHNSON. I told you just what little I know about it. + +Mr. BELIN. Anything else you can think of now? + +Mr. JOHNSON. That's about all I know about the man. + +Mr. BELIN. One other question; I might ask you if you've ever seen the +shirt--Exhibit 150? Did you ever see Oswald wearing this, or don't you +remember? + +Mr. JOHNSON. I don't remember. He did wear sports clothes. + +Mr. BELIN. Do you remember anything about the clothes he was wearing? + +Mr. JOHNSON. No; because I didn't see him that day. + +Mr. BELIN. You didn't see him that day. Well, on any day--for instance, +here's another exhibit here--kind of a dark blue jacket--Exhibit 163. +Have you ever seen Oswald wearing Exhibit No. 163? + +Mr. JOHNSON. I couldn't say. + +Mr. BELIN. Well, we certainly thank you, Mr. Johnson, for all of your +cooperation. I know this has been time consuming on your part here. + +Mr. JOHNSON. Well, we've always tried to cooperate because, you know +they've brought so much publicity down on us there and we've kinda felt +bad about it. So we've just thought the thing out and thought that it +could happen to anybody that deals with the public, you know--rents +rooms or anything. + +Mr. BELIN. By the way--I don't know if I asked you. You can sign the +deposition or you can waive the signing of it and just have the court +reporter record it as she has it recorded here. + +Do you want to sign it or do you just want to waive the signing of it? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Well, it doesn't make any difference because it's---- + +Mr. BELIN. Well, if it doesn't make any difference to you, will you +just then waive the signing of it and save your coming down the second +time here? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Yes. + +Mr. BELIN. Well, we want you to know that we appreciate the fact that +you've had people in and out of your house and everything else. + +Mr. JOHNSON. We're glad to help in any way we can, you know. + +Mr. BELIN. By the way, I might ask you one question that we forgot. +When the police first came on November 22, did they have a search +warrant at all or not? Or don't you remember? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Uh--they didn't have one at the time, but they called and +got one before they went into his room. + +Mr. BELIN. They called and got a search warrant before they went in his +room? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Yes. They called over my phone. + +Mr. BELIN. Over your phone? You heard them call? + +Mr. JOHNSON. Yes. + +Mr. BELIN. All right. I believe that's all. Thank you very much, sir. + + + + +TESTIMONY OF CLIFTON M. SHASTEEN + +The testimony of Clifton M. Shasteen was taken at 9:15 a.m., on April +1, 1964, in the office of the U.S. attorney, 301 Post Office Building, +Bryan and Ervay Streets, Dallas, Tex., by Mr. Albert E. Jenner, Jr., +assistant counsel of the President's Commission. Robert T. Davis, +assistant attorney general of Texas, was present. + + +Mr. JENNER. Would you rise and take the oath, please? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. All right. + +Mr. JENNER. Do you swear in your testimony to tell the whole truth and +nothing but the truth? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. I do. Now, I want to tell you before I start--there is +some question--I just have to go back from memory. + +Mr. JENNER. That's all right. All we mean when we say "the truth" is +just to the best of your ability. + +Mr. SHASTEEN. When I ever talked to him, I never dreamed I would ever +see him again--you see? + +Mr. JENNER. Sure. Did you receive a letter from Mr. Rankin, the General +Counsel of the Commission? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. No; the chief of police came out yesterday afternoon. +He's a good friend of mine, and he came out yesterday evening and had +me to call---- + +Mr. JENNER. The Secret Service--Mr. Sorrels? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. I am Albert E. Jenner, Jr., and a member of the legal +staff of the President's Commission, which is a Commission appointed +by President Lyndon B. Johnson to investigate the assassination of +President John F. Kennedy and all of the circumstances surrounding that +tragic event. + +The Commission was authorized by Senate Joint Resolution 137, and +President Johnson's Executive Order 11130, appointing the Commission +and fixing its scope of operation and its power. Under the regulations +of the Commission, the members of the staff are authorized to take +depositions and swear witnesses. + +We understand from various sources, FBI reports--that you may possibly +have some information with respect to Lee Harvey Oswald in which the +Commission is interested and there might be some other information on +which we are not immediately advised that may come to your mind. + +Mr. JENNER. As I understand it, your full name is Clifford---- + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Clifton [spelling] C-l-i-f-t-o-n. + +Mr. JENNER. M is your initial? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Shasteen. S-h-a-s-t-e-e-n. + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Right. + +Mr. JENNER. You live at 2214 Fairfax in Irving, Tex. As I understand +it, you are the owner and operator of Clifton's Barbershop? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. At 1321 South Storey in Irving, Tex.? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Right. + +Mr. JENNER. You are a native of Dallas, are you? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Oh, I've been here about 20 years. + +Mr. JENNER. Well, that's good enough and you are married and have a +family and live in Irving, Tex., as indicated? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. I understand that in the course of your looking at +television on the 22d of November 1963, there occurred to you upon +seeing some of the people shown on the screen that you had rendered +some tonsorial services to Lee Harvey Oswald? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. I'll tell you just as near as I can remember that +day--what happened is the TV shop next to me, in other words, about two +doors down---- + +Mr. JENNER. Next to your business? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Yes; I heard it over the radio and went to the house at +noon and that was all you could see on television, just the flashing, +but there wasn't anything definite, so I went back to the shop and as I +went back to the shop this fellow in the TV shop said, "Why don't you +come in and get a TV set and set it up in your shop in there and watch +it?" So, I went in and got a TV set and the name didn't mean anything +to me when they first mentioned the name. + +Mr. JENNER. The name Lee Harvey Oswald? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. It didn't mean a thing, but later on in the evening +when we began to see the pictures, you know, after they had him over +here--the first I remember seeing him to recognize that I had saw the +face before was about--over there around 5 o'clock, when I saw him over +at the jail or something and I seen him when they come out there and +when he looked toward the cameras. + +I didn't say anything to anybody. I had before told them, you know, +what I said was just a gag--I said, "You can't tell. That guy might +live here in Irving." You know how guys pop off or something, but I +didn't know a thing about it. I was just going on, but anyhow, when +that come on there, there was several in the shop and so I decided when +I saw his picture--I remembered him coming in the shop and I just knew +that. It finally dawned on me where I had saw him. I knew where he +lived. Actually, I knew where the station wagon was that was parked, +that I saw him and this lady in, so I just took out of the shop and +told the boy, I said, "I'm going to run to the house and I'll be back +in a minute." + +So, I drove up there and my lands of living, you couldn't get within +4 blocks of that house, and knew then I was not mistaken, that that +was the guy that came in my barber shop, and when I came back to the +shop--when I got back to the shop somebody else had already seen me up +there and said they saw Cliff up there and everybody in that community +knows me. When we got back to the shop, then, we began to talk about +it. All three of the barbers in there have cut his hair, but I cut it +more, I guess, than the rest of them did. I think the boy on the front +chair cut it once and the boy in the middle chair cut it a couple of +times, but I think I cut his hair three or four times. I don't know +just exactly because since then--I have backed up and looked at it and +tried to remember the dates he was in there and tried to tell you just +the way it was--when he would come in, he was always disgruntled, and +the only time I ever saw him smile--he had on a pair of yellow house +shoes and I never saw any like them before. + +Mr. JENNER. Sneakers? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Yes; slip-ons, only they were a little heavy--they were +just a little heavier than just a common house shoe, and I admired them +and I said, "Them looks expensive," and he said, "They are not." + +He said, "I gave a dollar and a half for them." I said, "My goodness, +where did you get a pair of house shoes for a dollar and a half?" And +he said, "Down in Old Mexico." + +Mr. JENNER. Down in Old Mexico? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. And I said, "Man, I'd like to have a pair of them because +I have to wear a shoe built up," you see and they were heavy enough +that I could build that shoe up and he said, "Well, I'll get you a +pair the next time I'm down there," and that is the only time he ever +was nice and polite--in the conversation, any time anything would come +up--anybody else would talk to him, he was just disgruntled. + +I remember him particularly one time. The barber in the front chair, +one Saturday morning, he cut his hair. You know, the barber chair is +only so far from the sink, but there's not room for two men between +that and the sink. Well, the fellow on the front chair cut his hair +and he gets up and goes back in the middle chair and gets between the +barber and his bench back there and stands back behind and combs his +hair. + +In other words, what he was trying to do--fixing to or wanting to, +he just pushed him out. He was just rude and we all remembered that +time, because this boy that works for me that's here, he is more or +less highstrung type of guy. I mean he is a real good fellow but you +wouldn't want to push him too far and I remembered that real well, and +I saw him--the only time I remember seeing him, you know, other than +just going in the grocery store across the street, Mr. Hutchison's +food market, and I was down at the drugstore one night, down at +Williamsburg's and he was in there. + +Mr. JENNER. Williamsburg's--that's in Irving? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Yes; it's down on Rock Island and Rogers Road. And, why I +remembered seeing him in there, I knew I couldn't understand his wife, +and that was before--I believe it was before she had her baby. The best +I remember she was pregnant. + +Mr. JENNER. Had you seen her before? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. That's the only time I had ever saw her, that I remember. +You know, she may have come to the grocery store with him but I didn't +pay any attention. Sometimes there were two women with him and I +assumed it was Mrs. Paine, but Mrs. Paine has never been in the shop. +I have saw her around, you know, like my brother-in-law used to live +right across the street from her and the fellow that lives right on the +corner and I'm trying to think of his name---- + +Mr. JENNER. On the fifth? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. And Westbrook--that old gentleman, I knew him for years, +but I don't never call his name and I can't think of it now to save my +neck. I would know it if I hear it called, but anyhow, you know, I've +stopped by and chatted with him a lot of times in the daytime. I've got +some rent houses, you know, and I would get out of the shop and I would +go by and see them and I would come by this fellow's house and I would +stop there and I saw Mrs. Paine out in the yard and I know all of the +people that live around there, nearly, around the Paine's house, but I +never had any connection with Mrs. Paine or Mr. Paine. + +Them is the things there about Oswald that I personally, you know, that +I ever paid any attention to and one other time--when the boy in the +middle chair cut his hair. It was on Friday night and it was about 5 +or 10 minutes to 7, the best I remember. Now, why I am saying this is +the fact that I was going to a football game. My shop has a door in the +back and then there is a storage room on one side and a restroom on +the other, but when you open the two doors, you see, there is just a +narrow place and it kind of makes it private back there, and I change +clothes back there, and I had the door but, as he came in the front +door, I started out--I went out the back. The next morning this boy +that works in the middle chair--he didn't go to the football game, but +the boy that works there, and I slipped off and went to the football +game--business had kind of slowed up about that time. But anyhow, he +really was inquisitive as to where I went. He wanted to know where I +was going and what I was going to do--he asked this guy cutting his +hair. You see, he didn't think nothing about it then. He just thought +maybe he wanted me to cut his hair and that is the only time there. + +Of course, there is some other things that happened but I could kick my +own self for. There was a 14-year-old boy come in with him a few times, +and--not every time, but I know he has been in there as much as two or +three times with him, but he never did say nothing until about 3 or 4 +days before this incident happened. This kid was in the shop---- + +Mr. JENNER. Three or four days before November 22? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Right. This boy was in the shop and the boy in the front +chair was cutting his hair, and you know how men are talking, and there +is this old saying, "If you haven't heard this you haven't been around +barbershops." The guys are always talking about we spend too much money +overseas and we give away this and we give away that and you know, just +the general consumption of the whole country and how everything is +going. They talk that in the barbershop and you hear it until you want +to run. + +Mr. JENNER. That's right, they solve all the problems of the world. + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Yes; but anyhow, there was several guys in there and they +were talking one evening and this kid was in there, and the best I +remember, it must have been--well, some of the guys that were in there +work the night shift, and I think they go to work around 3:30 or 4 +o'clock, so, I know it was around 3 or 2:30, or 3. + +Mr. JENNER. In the afternoon? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Yes; and this kid was in here. + +Mr. JENNER. Were you there? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Yes; what I am saying is--after they were doing all this +talking and the kid hadn't opened his mouth and the fellow on the front +chair was cutting his hair and he is a quiet guy and he never says +nothing about politics in no shape, form, or fashion. However, I try to +keep all of us barbers out of politics because it isn't good business +when you get politics in there you get out of the barber business +and all this talk was going on and I could tell he was listening and +directly he said, "I can tell you when you will stop all of this greed +and everything." + +And I said, "What do you mean, son?" And, he said, "Well, when you have +one leader over everyone else." And, he said, leader--he didn't just +say country. I remember that--how he said it. And, I said, "What do you +mean 'one leader'"? And he said, "Well, when you don't have a leader in +every little old country and them trying to scramble with one another" +and he said, "Another thing, like you--you own the shop and these other +fellows work for you and you get part of their money and he said when +everybody has a say, when one man is not allowed to hog up the whole +country and let another man starve," he says "that's when we are going +to quit having wars and all this junk." And I said, "Where in the world +did you get that kind of stuff?" + +He never did answer me, but it made me so--if I knew then what I know +now, I would probably have took him and bought him a steak to try to +quiz him and find out who it was and where he got all of that. Instead, +it made me mad, just to be honest about it--I would like to have took +one of them razor straps and tore him up. If he had been a 14-year-old +boy of mine that said a thing like that he would have got it, but he +got up and left the shop and I haven't heard him since, and I didn't +find out where he lived, who he was or nothing. The anger in him saying +that is where I did it, and I--the guy that talks like that, I know +one thing I should, as Mr. Odum told me, I should have found out where +he lived, where he went to school or something, but I didn't do it. It +just made me so mad the thing I wanted him to do was get out of there. + +Mr. JENNER. Mr. Odum is the FBI agent? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Well, he's one of them, and I know Mr. Odum--he came +back. He wasn't the first one that came to talk to me, but he has come +back several times and I met him several times--I don't know. I will +be honest with you--I don't--I know how to call him at any time, but +that's where your old temper gets away with you. I realize now that I +should have just, when the kid said that, instead of saying anything +back to him--I didn't have to agree with him, but I could have found +out where he lived, what he did and that kind of thing, but you know +it had to take something like this before it wakes up some of us and I +never give it a thought. + +Just like Oswald--I owned the shop and naturally I wanted to see every +head of hair come in there that will, but the thing of it is--a guy +like Oswald and that kid--you just disagree with them so much that you +hope they don't ever come back and that's the attitude I felt, but I +know I was wrong about it, but it's done and there ain't nothing I can +do about it. + +I just have watched and watched and I don't know a soul to ask, because +Oswald is dead and he's the only one I ever saw that kid with--he is +the only one that I ever saw that kid with and I don't remember seeing +him since that time--I don't know who he was any more than nothing. + +Mr. JENNER. How many times--you personally, now, without someone else +having told you the boy was in the shop, how many times do you recall +when he was in your shop? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. The 14-year-old boy? + +Mr. JENNER. Yes. + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Three times--I know. In other words, I know he came with +Oswald the night I'm talking about when he wanted to know where I was +going and I went to the back door. You see, I seen them coming in and I +did hurry to get out the back door. + +Mr. JENNER. The boy came in? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. He was with him that night and he was with him one other +time. + +Mr. JENNER. Can you fix that particular time? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Well, it was a couple of weeks and maybe 3 weeks before +that night. + +Mr. JENNER. Excuse me--the night you say you were going out to the +football game--when was that? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. It was Friday night and this was the last time Oswald +came in and I'm just saying this as near as I think, but I think it +was--in other words--was it Thursday or Friday that the President was +killed? + +Mr. JENNER. Friday the 22d. + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Well, it was probably 2 weeks before that. + +Mr. JENNER. Two weeks before that? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. And it was about Monday night before that when the +kid--it could be a week's difference there, but I don't think it is. + +Mr. JENNER. The 22d was on a Friday. This football game incident +occurred, you think, 2 weeks prior? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. That would be the evening of the 8th of November? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. I believe that's right, just as near right as I can get +it. + +Mr. JENNER. That was a high school football game on Friday night, as I +remember? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Yes; like I say, it could have possibly been 3 weeks +prior to that, but I'm almost sure it wasn't. I'm so nearly sure--I +would say it was almost for sure. + +Mr. JENNER. It could possibly have been the 1st of November but you are +pretty sure that it was the 8th? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. I just nearly knew it was the 8th, I think it was the 8th +and I'll tell you why I think it was the 8th. + +Mr. JENNER. All right. + +Mr. SHASTEEN. The fact is, he never did want his hair cut--he always +wanted it to look like it was about a week old when he cut it and he +got a haircut about every 2 weeks, and I don't think he ever went over +2 weeks--he either got a haircut on Friday night or Saturday morning, +and in running that back through my mind, and I thought about it then +and I have since. + +Mr. JENNER. And on that occasion was this 14-year-old boy with him? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. And that is the occasion when you were sneaking out to the +football game? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. And you did see him and you did see the 14-year-old boy on +that occasion? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. Which of your employees cut his hair that night, if you +know of your own knowledge. + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Buddy Lowe, the one that just works part time. + +Mr. JENNER. The new man--the middle chair? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Yes, and the only thing--he had told me the next morning, +you know, about it and I wondered why I didn't think something about +the character, but the next morning, he said, "Man, that guy was really +inquisitive about where you were going last night." That guy that come +in with him. Of course, we don't know his name from Adam and we have +lots of customers that we don't know their names. + +Mr. JENNER. When he came in with the 14-year-old boy, did the +14-year-old boy get his hair cut at the same time? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. No. + +Mr. JENNER. He just sat in the shop? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. He just come with him. I assumed, and I'm just saying +this because I haven't ever saw him before and never saw him other than +with Oswald, that he doesn't live in Irving. + +Mr. JENNER. He did not? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. I don't believe the boy lived there, because, you know, +in other words--it has been in the back of my mind and the last--and +when I see schoolkids. I'm always kind of wondering if I'm ever going +to see him again and I never, had never saw that kid since. + +Mr. JENNER. You have never seen that boy since? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. No. + +Mr. JENNER. Now, normally, this man you have in mind has his hair cut +every 2 weeks? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. Either on Friday night or on Saturday morning? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Right. + +Mr. JENNER. And there were occasions when you personally cut his hair? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Yes; I think I cut it--I know of three times that I cut +it and I might have cut it more than that, but I don't think that I did +because you just can't hardly forget a guy like that or you can't miss +knowing him when he is in your chair. + +Mr. JENNER. You cut his hair three times and your other barbers in your +shop, your employees, also cut his hair, is that right? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. That's right. + +Mr. JENNER. And over what period of time---- + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Oh, I would say we cut his hair five or possibly six +times. + +Mr. JENNER. Five or six times? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. At least. + +Mr. JENNER. Five and possibly six? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. At least--being in the barber business and all and +studying people and all, they might go an extra week, but ordinarily, +you know, in cutting their hair, you can tell about how long they've +gone--in other words, if you knew how they cut it before, you can tell +just about how long they have gone for a haircut, and that's what I was +referring to a while ago, and it was about 2 weeks before that, and the +only times I can remember definitely out of the five times and possibly +six he was in my shop--I'd say that all the five or six times was in +succession either, it might have been--he may have missed some haircuts +and one or two in between somewhere in there. + +Mr. JENNER. That is, you mean he might have had his hair cut somewhere +else? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. I'm just trying to figure out this 22d and the 8th--did +this hair-cutting go back into the summer? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. You know, that's--like I say, that's a saying--to point +back, and you know, just to say that that is the first time this guy +has come in here--I just can't pinpoint the first time. In other words, +it has been hard and I have tried to think, especially after I got that +call yesterday evening to come over here. I tried to run that back +through my mind and I wouldn't say when was the first time he was in +there and of course we have talked about it--me and the barbers, and +it seemed to me like there was a dead spot in there. Sometime--maybe a +month or 6 weeks that we might not have saw him, be the first time I +cut his hair, but the last three haircuts--it seemed to me like he was +pretty regular. + +Mr. JENNER. What? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. He was pretty regular--at the last three. + +Mr. JENNER. So, if you had a dead spot, allowing for--let's say getting +a haircut somewhere else occasionally, or not coming in precisely at +the end of every 2-week period and having in mind that your present +recollection is at least five or six occasions, that would run it back +into the summertime? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Yes; it was. In other words, 2 or 3 or 4 months that +we had been seeing him, but I don't know just exactly to the date or +nothing. + +Mr. JENNER. On how many of these occasions would you say--does your +recollection serve you--as to whether he was accompanied by this +14-year-old boy? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Twice--in other words--the only times I remember seeing +the boy was twice when he was with him. He was with him the night he +got the haircut, the last time he was in the shop, and he was with +him before that, the time before that this kid was with him. The two +last times he was in the shop, this boy was with him, and that's the +only time I ever saw the boy with him, but then about--in other words, +what I am saying, he came in on Friday, was--we'll say it is the 8th +there and then a week from this coming Monday the boy was in and got +a haircut, but Oswald wasn't with him. The boy came in by himself and +that tries to contradict what I said that I don't think he lived in +Irving, but why I said I don't think he lived in Irving, I have never +saw him before and I have been there 4 years and I have seen so many +kids grow up and I know their names, but I know their faces, but I +just have never saw him before, and that's one of those times that you +are sorry that you, like I said, let your temper get away. Since then +I have really wished--if I had done something, because this kid in my +estimation, even though he is warped in his thinking, and I think he is +warped, he could be helped if somebody could get ahold of him, but I +was the one that had an opportunity to try to and I let it slip. + +Mr. JENNER. What do you charge for a haircut? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. $1.25. + +Mr. JENNER. And that is cash on the barrelhead, isn't it? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Yes, sir. I tell you that much--like somebody comes in +and wants to know if they can get a free haircut, and when somebody +goes to giving you something, you had better watch out--you had better +be careful. + +Mr. JENNER. And you manage the till? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Well, no, sir; each one of us, we all have our same +drawers. I don't have a cash register, we have drawers, and that way, +if they give the wrong change back, it's not anything out of my pocket. + +Mr. JENNER. You cut hair and you have two---- + +Mr. SHASTEEN. I have one full time and one part time. + +Mr. JENNER. You have three chairs? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. On the occasions you saw this man would you describe his +appearance so far as his attire is concerned? How was he dressed? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. The best I remember is that he had on some kind of +coveralls, nearly every time he came in. + +Mr. JENNER. Coveralls? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Yes; he wore unionalls or coveralls, you know, sir. They +were G.I., of some description and they were green or a khaki-colored. +The only time he wasn't dressed that way when he came in the shop was +the night I went to the football game and that night he had on a pair +of old worn out dress pants of some kind, they were dark, and he had on +a sports shirt with his shirttail out. + +Mr. JENNER. Let me get at these coveralls--would you describe them? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. They buttoned down the front. + +Mr. JENNER. They buttoned down the front and they had sleeves--it was a +one-piece unit? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Right. + +Mr. JENNER. And covers you from top to bottom, full sleeves? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Now, one pair--one time I remember--he had pretty hairy +arms. I remember that about him, you know, he had black hair on his +arms, and one time he had on short sleeves. These coveralls had the +sleeves cut off and they were ragged--I mean--they were long sleeves +originally but they had just been chopped off. He is the type of guy +that when you met him you couldn't hardly forget him. I'll say that. I +mean, there is just something about him and I think I could say that +for all three of us that worked there in the shop that every time he +came in--we would ask him to come back, but right down deep we didn't +want him back. + +Mr. JENNER. Did he ever get a shave? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. No; never did. + +Mr. JENNER. Did he ever get a shampoo? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. No; never did. + +Mr. JENNER. Nothing but a haircut? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Just a haircut. + +Mr. JENNER. And what color did you say these coveralls were? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Well, they were either--I don't know what color you call +them old dungarees. You know, them old combat coveralls that the Army +wears. That's what they were. Now, somebody, I believe that Mr. Odum is +the one that asked me was they Marine coveralls or Army or something +like that, and that, I don't have any idea on. + +Mr. JENNER. They were the military type? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. They were the military type. They wasn't the kind you +just go down to the dry goods store and buy. I know that. He may have +bought them at a surplus store for all I know. + +Mr. JENNER. Now, were there occasions you saw this man that you have in +mind on the street when he didn't come into your shop? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Yes, I saw him going to the grocery store when he didn't +come to the shop. + +Mr. JENNER. And you occasionally saw him--is the grocery store across +the street? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. That's Hutch's Market? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. And how was he dressed on those occasions? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Well, I think most usually, like I said, the only time +I ever saw him with anything but those coveralls on was that night he +came in the shop--he had those on--those old coveralls on when he was +over there and another thing, they were big for him. I always noticed +they were big enough for him and somebody else. + +Mr. JENNER. They were very loose-fitting? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. And even on those occasions when you saw him across the +street at Hutch's, he had the coveralls, the military-type coveralls on? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Yes; of course. He could have went in there times I +didn't see him. And I don't know how many times I saw him but I have +seen him over there. + +Mr. JENNER. Well, I just want the times that you saw him. + +Mr. SHASTEEN. I wouldn't even commence to guess--probably three or four +times over there. + +Mr. JENNER. You saw him about three or four times across the street? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. In other words, his store sits over here and my shop +is here and these glasses, lot of them down here, a lot of times if +somebody has been in the shop that you are paying attention to, you +can even see them in the back mirrors, back there and he--and you just +notice and you are always looking at the front door. I mean, since I +own the shop I ask everybody in. + +Mr. JENNER. Do you have the chair next to the window? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. No; I have the back chair. + +Mr. JENNER. You didn't cut the young man's hair? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. No; he was in the front chair--the front barber chair +with Mr. Glover. + +Mr. JENNER. And would you describe this young man to me, how was he +dressed? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Well, he had on blue jeans and they fit tight and he had +on an old striped shirt. I remember him just like I see a picture over +there right now and he was a husky kid, he wasn't what you call fat, +but he was strong--broad-shouldered--he had a real full, and when I say +full, I don't mean a round fat face, he was a wide-faced kid. You know, +he was a nice looking kid. I mean, if he had had the personality and +the teaching and the understanding to go with his looks, he could have +done anything he wanted to do, but his personality to me made him look +terrible and what he thought, and naturally when somebody disagrees +with you to the point you get angry with them, you don't think much of +their looks, but if you bring it down to his looks, he was blue-eyed, +blonde-headed--he was not a light blonde he was a dark blonde. In fact +a lot of people might call him brown-headed. But he wasn't nobody's +dummy because a 14-year-old boy can't spit out--I wouldn't attempt to +say just how he said everything, but the things that struck me when he +belittled our country and our leaders as a whole--I might disagree with +our leaders but I'll stick up for them when it comes time--down to the +point. + +Mr. JENNER. Sure, and you have a distinct recollection, do you, that +there were occasions when you saw this man in the coveralls over at +Hutch's Market that he was accompanied by somebody else? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. And did you recognize any of the persons who were +accompanying him? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. No; I wouldn't say I did because most of the time--they +headed--they got out of the car and we saw their backs, and I would see +him and I just knew it was him. Once you cut somebody's hair that close +you are close enough so that you know them outside or when you see them. + +Mr. JENNER. So, you're not in a position, I take it, then, to say that +you have a distinct recollection that Mrs. Paine accompanied them at +anytime? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Well, now, that part of it I would have to take for +granted because they were in his car. Now, she, I understand through +one of the men who questioned me out at the shop, said he never did +drive her car. Again, I'm going to disagree because I know that he did. +He drove it up there and got a haircut. + +Mr. JENNER. You have a distinct recollection that on occasions when +this man came into your shop for a haircut, he drove an automobile up +to your shop? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. He drove that there 1955, I think it's a 1955, I'm sure +it's a 1955 Chevrolet station wagon. It's either blue and white or +green and white--it's two-toned--I know that. Now, why I say--why I +take it for granted that Mrs. Paine was with him when he come to the +grocery store--I do remember he wasn't driving when they would come to +the grocery store, there would be a lady driving and I'm assuming that +that was Mrs. Paine, because like I say, I have been--I have never been +close enough to her and knew it, to speak to her, but she trades at the +service station where I do and I saw her in there and I never did pay +any attention to her and I saw her passing, met her in the road in the +car and those things. + +Mr. JENNER. Were there any occasions when you have a recollection as to +his being accompanied by more than one person? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Yes; that's what I said--I saw him and two ladies get out +and go in the store. + +Mr. JENNER. On how many occasions did you see that? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Well, I was trying to think of that coming over here and +I know of twice and one of the times that I'm saying--it was the next +morning after he had gotten a haircut the night I went to the football +game, the next morning they were over to the store. You see, I open up +early around 7 in the morning and it was 8 o'clock, or so, not knowing +the exact hour. I would say it was 8 o'clock or 8:30 when they were +over at the store that Saturday morning. + +Mr. JENNER. That would be the 9th of November? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Yes; because one reason it made me remember that, I had +just come back--I had just come back from across the street to get +some cigarettes and they come up and pulled in and I walked over and +naturally I looked back across the street and I saw them getting out +and he wasn't driving at that time. I will agree but whenever I saw him +come with somebody else in the car he wasn't driving, but occasionally +he drove himself up there to get a haircut and Mr. Odum says, "Now, +that contradicts with some of the other information." I said, "I can't +help what it contradicts with, that's just the fact and that's it." + +Mr. JENNER. Was there ever an occasion when you saw him driving up that +he had the 14 year-old boy with him? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Yes; the night he got the haircut. + +Mr. JENNER. The night of November 8? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Yes; you see the difficulty was, I was wanting to get out +of giving a haircut and I had just gotten through with a guy, and I was +trying to get my tools put up and they pulled up in front and I kind of +left them half cocked, half cleaned up, and I ran back in the closet +to try to get away, because I saw there was two of them, you see, and +I figured they both would want a haircut. When they pulled up with +the headlights and I saw two get out I figured they both would want a +haircut. + +Mr. JENNER. This was night, was it? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. And it was dark? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Well, yes; it was done dark outside--I couldn't tell +who they were when they drove up but he was driving that night and I +was hurrying trying to get out and I went out the back door, because +ordinarily, if there had been two, one of them would have wanted me +to cut his hair and the other one would want the other boy to, and I +thought, well, maybe they can wait and let me go to the football game. +It's hard for me to get away for a football game and that night was +when the boy was with him and he drove up there. + +Mr. JENNER. Do you recall bring interviewed by FBI Agent Berry on the +3d of December? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Yes, sir. And he is from Oklahoma, I believe. He came on +the 4th, I mean on the 2d, and came back on the 3d. + +Mr. JENNER. Now, do you recall saying at that time that you had a +recollection that he had been at your shop for the purpose of obtaining +a haircut for the past 2 or 3 months? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. And when was the occasion in point of time that this +business respecting the yellow shoes occurred--how far prior to that? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. In other words on the 8th there, he got a haircut on a +Friday night. + +Mr. JENNER. Yes. + +Mr. SHASTEEN. And I would say it was 2 or 3 weeks before that on +Saturday morning, because I was the only one in the shop and he was the +first one there that morning. + +Mr. JENNER. On reflection, you fix it as 2 to 3 weeks on a Saturday +morning prior to November 8? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Right. + +Mr. JENNER. That would take us back to--that would be either the 25th +of October or the 18th of October? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Possibly; yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Could it have been 2 to 3 months prior? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. I don't believe so, not when he had the shoes on, the +house shoes on that morning, because the thing that made me remember +that was the fact that it seemed like I'd found something he agreed +with me on. He even smiled about this; you know, he had a good look on +his face when I complimented his house shoes. + +Mr. JENNER. What time of day was this? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Oh, it was probably 6:45 in the morning. + +Mr. JENNER. It was a Saturday morning? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Do you recall telling Agent Berry that when he interviewed +you on the 3d of December 1963, that your faint recollection of Oswald +was when he appeared in the shop, your shop on a Saturday, "2 or 3 +months ago at 6:30 in the morning," when you had just opened your shop? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Yes, sir. The first time I remember him was early one +morning. + +Mr. JENNER. And that you remembered him particularly because on this +particular occasion he was wearing house shoes which you considered out +of the ordinary? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Now, he wore house shoes every time he come over there in +the mornings. I think he may have that a little bit crossed there when +he and I talked about it. + +Mr. JENNER. And that you also said you had commented to Oswald +concerning the house shoes and suggested that they must be quite +expensive and Oswald said, "No; not where I bought them," and you +stated that he said he had purchased the shoes in Old Mexico for only a +dollar and a half? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Right. + +Mr. JENNER. Now, you will notice there is an inconsistency there--you +were firm that the house shoes incident occurred 2 to 3 weeks prior +to November 8, but in reporting this to Agent Berry on the 3rd of +December, you stated it occurred 2 to 3 months prior thereto. + +Mr. SHASTEEN. I believe--to tell you the truth, I think in the round of +the talking, I think he just taken that for granted. I don't believe +on that morning--what we were talking about when I said what made me +remember it--like even the night when I saw his picture on television +and all, was the fact that that's the only time, about his house shoes, +is the only time he ever was agreeable--I'll put it that way, in other +words, but he didn't talk much then. In other words, when that was over +he just hushed. + +Mr. JENNER. This hasn't been called to your attention, but is it your +testimony then, as I understand it, that you are firm that the incident +occurred 2 to 3 weeks prior to November 8 rather than 2 to 3 months and +you think Agent Berry misinterpreted it? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. He either misinterpreted what I said---- + +Mr. JENNER. Or jumped to a conclusion? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. Would you describe these coveralls a little bit +further--they were full length? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Did they zipper or button down the front? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Well, that I wouldn't--you know, to make a statement to +say I knew, I wouldn't say, but I would almost say that they buttoned. +At least they had a button at the top. + +Mr. JENNER. And did he normally have them buttoned up to the top, or +did he have them open at the throat? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Yes; he had them open, but another thing--you know--there +are little things, like we get to thinking about now--I know that these +old coveralls--he wore them like that [indicating]. + +Mr. JENNER. He wore them with the collar up? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Yes; and just flopping out. + +Mr. JENNER. And you remember one occasion when the coveralls, while +they were long sleeved, somebody had sheared off the sleeves on a +particular pair? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Yes; they were just ragged, they were just chopped off. + +Mr. JENNER. Otherwise, the sleeves were always long down to his wrists? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. I'll tell you this--one of the barbers said his head was +dirty when he cut his hair, but he was always clean when I worked on +him. + +Mr. JENNER. It's hard to explain. + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. Would you describe these house shoes, please? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Well, yes; they were--I wish I could find something--they +were a darker yellow than this right here [indicating]. And they had a +much tanner sole on them--it was almost what you call a brown sole. It +wasn't a leather, it wasn't a rubber, it was like a neoprene. + +Mr. JENNER. The soles were darker than the uppers? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. Were they firm leather, or soft or pliable? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. They were soft and nice, but they were sturdy house +shoes. Of course--like I said, I build a shoe up--one shoe and they +made me notice them, and they were the type you could have built one up +and they would still have stood up and been nice. + +Mr. JENNER. Were these house shoes that had flat soles without heels? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Yes--they didn't have no heels--they may have had a +little heel, but I mean they didn't have an extra heel, because I +looked at them good. I mean, I wasn't interested in them until he said +he got them from Old Mexico, and I knew that was out. + +Mr. JENNER. Were they the pull-on type or lace type? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. No; they were the--just the pull-on type. + +Mr. JENNER. Did they have any type of elastic in them? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. No--no elastic--they were just like loafers to a degree, +only they were nice shoes--it was just a slip-on and they had a spur +piece in the back. + +Mr. JENNER. A spur piece? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. You know what I mean--the back wasn't so flexible--it was +firm--a fitted heel. They were just real nice. + +Mr. JENNER. They had a reasonably firm or higher heel? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. In other words--what I'm talking about--up on the back +part of them. + +Mr. JENNER. The back part is what I'm talking about. + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. What we call the heel of the shoe--the back of the shoe, +not the heel you step on. + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Yes--this part here and then they had a round thing, you +know, like this here [indicating] only it went out and dropped down to +a point out here and had a seam sewed around the top, whatever it was. + +Mr. JENNER. Like a moccasin type? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Yes; they looked like a moccasin to a degree and these +loafers, as you called them, but they were in between. + +Mr. JENNER. Were they perfectly plain other than the moccasin sewing? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Yes; I believe they were--they didn't have no--that's the +reason I thought they would have been from Mexico is they, if they had +had a lot of trimmings on them or something like that, but they didn't +have. + +Mr. JENNER. Did they have fasteners of any type on them? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. No; that's why I liked them. They were just something I +could've jumped in. + +Mr. JENNER. No metal fasteners? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. They didn't have nothing. + +Mr. JENNER. Or even leather fasteners? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. If somebody would find them I would still give two and a +half for them. + +Mr. JENNER. How many haircuts did he get---- + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Well---- + +Mr. JENNER. Six or seven, is that what you said? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. No; he could have possibly gotten seven haircuts but I +think about six haircuts is what he got. It could have possibly been +five. + +I know personally three times I cut his hair and I know that the front +guy cut his hair one time, Mr. Glover, and Mr. Law cut his hair one +time and Buddy--he might have cut it one other time and if he did that +would've made six. + +Mr. JENNER. Do you recall telling Agent Berry that in all this man had +obtained six or seven haircuts at your shop? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. I told him it was possibly six or seven, you know, in +other words--he didn't pin me down to just exactly--he wanted to know +if I thought it was and I told him it could have been seven times. + +Mr. JENNER. Seven or eight? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. No; I believe--I don't believe he ever got eight haircuts +in there--I don't believe it could have been over seven. + +Mr. JENNER. Well, what I'm getting at is that the agent reports as you +said that Oswald had obtained seven or eight haircuts at your shop. + +Mr. SHASTEEN. You see, I told him about the times I remembered and he +said, "Could he possibly have been in here more than that?" And I said, +"Sure he could have possibly been in here more than that, but to have +an actual remembrance of him--I wouldn't." + +Mr. JENNER. But in any event, your present recollection, after thinking +it through further, is that it was six, and it might even have been as +few as five? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. It could have been five, but I personally know of five +times he was in there and like I told him, he could have been in there +two or three other times when I wasn't in there, because sometimes, +it's not very often I do, but occasionally Mr. Law will open up in the +morning and I won't be there right on time. Because, like I said, I +went to a football game and that--there could have been other times +that he came in that I wasn't there, but I asked Buddy did he ever +remember cutting his hair and he said he thought he did cut it another +time than the time--so if he did, there was six times, and of course, +Mr. Glover, he doesn't keep up with whose hair he cuts as much as some +of the others--he's not a friendly type guy, but Buddy said he might +have cut his hair more than once. + +The things that made us know when he cut his hair is like when Mr. +Glover cut his hair, he went around and instead of using his back bar +to look in the mirror and comb his hair, he went down to the one at +the middle chair and just rudely pushed out of the way and he got up +there and combed his hair and turned his water on, you know, and got +some more oil and put on it, on his hair, and he didn't say thank you +or excuse me or nothing. He just pushed in there--those things make you +remember. + +Mr. JENNER. Did he ever give you a tip? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. No. + +Mr. JENNER. Did he ever give any of the other barbers a tip? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. No. + +Mr. JENNER. Is it customary for your customers to give you a tip? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. No, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Or customers to give your barbers a tip? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Well, naturally, they get more tips than I do because +I own the shop. It would be a very small percentage, because in a +community like that they just expect to pay what the price is. + +Mr. JENNER. And no tips? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. No; you know, you might get 50 cents or a dollar a +day--something like if somebody might pitch something up there and say, +"Get you some coffee." It's not that type of a barber shop--it's not a +hotel type or anything like that or a bus station type. + +Mr. JENNER. Did this man have any reaction to the haircuts you gave him? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Well, instead of saying--I get tickled thinking about +it--I don't mean it's funny, but it is irritating. I mean, it's funny +since it's over, but he never did say, "That looks nice," or "That's +all right." He would say, "Aw, that's pretty good, that will do until +I get another one or that will do for this time." He never did say, +"That's a good haircut." I do remember him saying, "Take a 32d off of +the temple." Well, you can't take a 32d off of a man's hair, you know. + +Mr. JENNER. He did come back then? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Yes; we have talked about that--I don't care if we put it +on the record--it's the truth with us barbers--we have laughed about +it, but he's not the only one that said, "Take a third of it," you +know. We laughed about his saying, "Take a 32d," or he would say, "Take +a 16th off of the top," or something. I do remember him saying them +things. + +Mr. JENNER. Do you think he was just kidding about it? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Well, I don't know but to barbers that's silly, you +know. It's just ridiculous for a man to say "Take a 32d," or raise his +temples a 32d or take a 16th or something off of the top. You cut hair +like the shingles on a house. You cut it to where it will feather in +and not leave gaps. If you pulled it all up and cut it all the same +length and turned it back down on your head, you would have a mess. + +Mr. JENNER. It would look pretty bad? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. It sure would. + +Mr. JENNER. It might look like some of the haircuts I get, occasionally. + +Mr. SHASTEEN. But those things--I believe that news reporter--I have +forgotten which she was, but she asked me a while ago a few things +about him and I said, "He's just the type of guy you couldn't forget +but you just hoped he never come back." + +But she wasn't--she wanted to know what kind of nature he was or +something like that. That's what makes barbering interesting--you meet +all kinds. + +Mr. JENNER. Yes, sir; I'm sure you do. + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Yes. And like you were talking about there he came +back--one time one of the barbers--now this time I don't know, more +know which time it was than anything, but there was somebody sitting +out in the chair, and they made a remark about him saying take a +certain amount off and after he left, I said, "Well, we get that amount +off." And this fellow said, "How in the world do you do that?" And +I said, "Well, we satisfy him--and if he is real satisfied, when he +leaves, he comes back." I always make dry cracks and things like that, +that breaks the monotony in the shop and I have practiced it, and it's +hard for me to be serious sometimes, you know, about things, and you +just have to break the monotony in the barber shop or people would get +in there and get soured on the world. + +Mr. JENNER. Now, Mr. Robert Davis has come in and he is a special +assistant attorney general of Texas, and this is Mr. Shasteen, Mr. +Davis. He owns and operates a barber shop in Irving, Tex. + +Mr. DAVIS. Yes--Mr. Shasteen. + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. Did these coveralls have any pockets in them? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. Would you give me--what do they look like, looking at them +just the full front? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Well, the full front? + +Mr. DAVIS. Yes; as I'm looking at you now across the desk here. + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Well, the ones that were cut off at the sleeves, I can +remember the most. They just had some old pockets up here--[indicating]. + +Mr. JENNER. On each breast area? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. Was that a large pocket, large patch pocket? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. No; they were just outside patch pockets and pockets on +the front were patch pockets, I believe. + +Mr. JENNER. Do you mean at the hip on either side? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. They had some front pockets on either side. + +Mr. JENNER. Just one pocket or two? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Now, you pin me down until--to say that, I don't know. +I noticed the top, but I did notice the hip pockets they had two hip +pockets on them. When he got his billfold out, I just wondered how in +the world, if he ever sat down he didn't lose the thing. You know, they +were big enough--that's why I said they were big enough for two. They +sagged and the pockets just leaned back and you could have just walked +up and reached in there and got his billfold and never touched him. + +Mr. JENNER. None of these pockets had flaps or buttons on them? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. I think the two of them up here maybe had a flap. + +Mr. JENNER. The two top ones had a flap? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. The hip pockets didn't--they didn't have no flap or +button. + +Mr. JENNER. They were patch pockets, too? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. And these coveralls were so loose fitting that it made the +pockets hang down? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Yes; they were just real loose. Even if you had a belt +on them that pulled them around or something--I just couldn't stand to +wear something shuffling through it like that. + +Mr. JENNER. And the best of your recollection is that there were two +breast pockets and at least one hip or side pocket. + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Well, I'm sure they had side pockets in front. + +Mr. JENNER. Were those also patch? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. I believe they were. + +Mr. JENNER. And they had two hip rear patch pockets? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. Was there anything unusual about the pockets that drew your +attention, I'm talking about the front ones, now? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. No; not anything unusual about the front ones, but the +hip pockets were gapped open and sagged down. + +Mr. JENNER. Because these coveralls were so ill fitting? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Because they were just too big--they could have had about +6 inches cut out of them. + +Mr. JENNER. You barbers are generally pretty talkative. Did you seek to +engage this man in conversation when he came into your shop? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. You couldn't do it. + +Mr. JENNER. Did you seek to do it? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Oh, yes; naturally--she don't need to write this down +because this ain't going to help you a bit what I'm fixing to say, +but the theory I work on as a barber--if a man gets in a chair, and I +tell my other barbers that, if he gets in a chair and you strike up +a conversation with him and he doesn't want to talk, don't talk to +him--you say just as little as you can. + +Mr. JENNER. That makes sense. + +Mr. SHASTEEN. But if the guy wants to talk, then talk to him, if he--if +you can talk to him on his level or understand the thing he's talking +about, but if a man gets in your chair and he doesn't want to talk, you +can find it out without him turning around and saying, "Cut my hair, I +didn't come in here to have a bull session." I mean, that's barber shop +language, and I try to practice that, and nearly any time he come in I +would mention the weather or a football game--I mean, a barber has to +get up and read the paper every morning and turn the radio on because +everybody that comes in, if you're not up on the latest things that's +happening, you're going to be sitting back there and you can't talk to +them. + +I usually run through the paper real hurriedly and see the headlines +at least and I turn the radio on and you just couldn't strike up a +conversation with him and I guess if I had ever mentioned politics to +him, but we try to avoid that as much as possible in the shop. Had I +ever talked politics with him, I might have gotten him on that but +since he was the type guy he was, I never cared to talk politics with +him. + +Mr. JENNER. Well, in any event, he evidenced no interest in the bull +session, as you described it? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. No. + +Mr. JENNER. Is that true of your helpers? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. The front chair barber--he is the type barber that +doesn't talk a lot anyway and he would talk about fishing or wrestling +a little bit, but I don't think he ever said half a dozen words to him +altogether. He told him how he wanted his hair cut. + +You might attempt to ask me what kind of haircut he wore. + +Mr. JENNER. All right, go ahead. + +Mr. SHASTEEN. You could just name it, because he didn't wear it long +and he didn't wear it short. It was almost short enough to stand up but +it was too long to stand up. He just wore a rough shod haircut because +many times I thought, "Boy, you sure ought to let this grow out up here +where it will lay down and comb nice or either cut it off where it +would stand up." But like I say, he wanted that little bit taken off. +I tell you what he did do--He did try to make the barber work all he +could. He seemed like he wanted you to do all the work and naturally, +that's another thing, I have a bad attitude towards some people. If a +guy doesn't ask me to do much, I'll do a right smart, but if he thinks +I owe him something, he won't get any extras. + +Mr. JENNER. What color hair did this man have? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Oh, he was dark headed--I wouldn't say he was real black, +you know, what I mean, he wasn't jet black, but most people would call +him black-headed. + +Mr. JENNER. What color would you say your hair was? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Mine is dark brown, and what is not grey up it's covered +up with oil. + +Mr. JENNER. What color would you say mine is? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Oh, now I think your hair is--it's a shade of black. It's +not a dark black. I would say his hair was about the color of yours--it +might have been a little bit darker. It might have been a little +smuttier. You see, hair is a funny thing--a guy can be dark headed and +if he puts oil on it, he looks real black and if he washes the oil out +it's got a smutty look and he never did wear much oil because about the +only time he ever come in the shop, he never had his hair combed and he +never had any oil on it or nothing and naturally after we cut his hair +and put a little oil on it, it made it look darker. + +Mr. JENNER. It darkened it up? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. My hair is a whole lot darker with a little oil on it. +Now, this fellow here, referring to Mr. Davis---- + +Mr. JENNER. Mr. Davis, you're talking about? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. His hair, if you took the oil off of his hair and washed +it out with some kind of heavy shampoo, it would almost be what you +call a blonde or light red, is that right? + +Mr. DAVIS. (No response.) + +Mr. JENNER. How much hair did he have? A full head of hair? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. To me, he didn't have a full head of hair. It was rather +short and thin around here by the temples and the way his hair lies +back, he would have been bald if he had been 40 years old. + +Mr. JENNER. He had hair around the center, but he was losing his hair +around the sides of the forehead? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Yes; there was just a little crease that started back +here. Naturally, a barber would notice that because the hair is much +finer back here, you see, than it was down here [indicating]. In other +words, I have as much hair as I ever had but it's just so fine you +can't see it and that's what happens to a guy when he gets bald-headed. +The hair is still there but it just doesn't grow. It's just little +fuzz, and that hair of his, in another 5 or 6 years he would have been +bald-headed. You can believe it. + +I can tell you another thing--I don't know whether I told this fellow +or not, may have. There are little things you can't remember, but he +just had a hard look, just sitting in the chair. I'll tell you this +much--if a guy comes in the barbershop and he's got a pretty good +disposition and he smiles and speaks to people, every barber will want +to cut his hair, but if a guy comes in there and he kind of looks +grouchy, in barber language we call it soldiering on one another. We +might work on a guy just a little bit longer if this guy's next so +somebody else will have to get him. He's just the type guy you don't +care about working on. I mean, he was just that type. I believe I can +speak for all three of the barbers because I have heard their opinion +about him. They didn't care if he never came back. + +And, he never helped the shop. Well, you will say, how can a customer +help the shop? When you ask a man to come back, when he starts out the +door and if he says, "Thank you," or "I'll be back," or "I'll see you +in 2 weeks,"--that's the language that is used around the barbershop, +that helps the feeling at the barbershop, but if ask a guy going out +the door to come back and he didn't even grunt, you know, that just +lowers its morale in a barbershop right quick. + +I know that customers don't think about that, but we as barbers--that's +our business and we watch that and you would be surprised, if a guy +comes in and you give a haircut and you thank him, when he pays you, +and the barber ordinarily when he leaves for that door, when he starts +out, he asks him to come back and if he says, "I'll see you in 2 +weeks," or "Thank you for asking me to come back," it just builds up +the morale in a shop, but he wasn't that type. + +Mr. JENNER. I might have misled you a little bit ago--I mentioned your +being interviewed on the 3d of December. The fact is that interview was +on the 2d, was it not, the 2d of December? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. The fact is--why I say that, he came one day--I didn't +put the dates down and I didn't try to remember them, but he came one +day and I was real busy--the kids were trying to get a haircut for some +program. + +Mr. JENNER. The 2d of December was on a Monday? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Yes; I believe he came Monday and then he came back +Tuesday. In other words, he came one day and he got there a little late +and the kids were having their pictures made up at the school there +nearby and they were sitting in there and he said, "Suppose I come back +tomorrow?" He said, "I have some other places I need to go." And I told +him it would be fine or I would take him in a few minutes. + +Mr. JENNER. Do you recall Mr. Odum interviewing at a later time, the +16th of December? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Yes; but he didn't make any notes to my knowledge, but I +cut his hair. + +Mr. JENNER. He made notes all right, I can tell you that. + +Mr. SHASTEEN. He did--I josh and go on with Mr. Odum a lot. + +Mr. JENNER. Do you know him? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. Likewise a Monday? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Yes; I believe it was. I cut Mr. Odum's hair about a week +and a half ago. Do you know him? (Addressing Mr. Davis.) + +Mr. DAVIS. No. + +Mr. SHASTEEN. He's the type guy you like to have come in any time. + +Mr. JENNER. Do you recall telling him on that occasion that you had +never been able to identify the 14-year old boy, that this boy had been +in your shop on one occasion about 2 months prior to that day, that is +prior to December 16, and that would make it around the 16th of October? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Well, now, we--in other words, there were no customers in +there, but the barbers and I think he was in there, as I told you, I +think we were nearly positive about that, but if I told you I knew he +was, I couldn't be sure about that. + +Mr. JENNER. It was on a Wednesday or Thursday and Oswald's hair was cut +on that occasion by your fellow barber, Burt Glover? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Yes; and Burt is the one that says that was on a Thursday. + +Mr. JENNER. You see, this is what you told Mr. Odum, and that Glover +says on the next Monday or Tuesday he cut the hair of the 14-year old +boy? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. And that would be sometime in October? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Evidently that's the time that I don't--that wasn't the +time that he made the statement at all. If he got a haircut--but, if +you know Burt like I know Burt, I don't know that Burt knows that that +was the boy, but he still says it is. I think it was--I wouldn't be +sure about it. + +Mr. JENNER. All I have in mind here is your report to Agent Odum. Then +you told him at that occasion, that is, when the boy got his haircut on +Monday or Tuesday, that Oswald was not in the shop but that somebody +else had brought the boy to the shop. + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Yes; somebody let him out. + +Mr. JENNER. Is that something Glover told you? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. No. When he got his haircut, when he made the statement? + +Mr. JENNER. Yes. + +Mr. SHASTEEN. No; somebody brought him and somebody picked him up, but +they didn't pull right in front of the shop. They just let him out in +front in the street. + +Mr. JENNER. Did you notice whether there was a woman or man or men that +brought him to the shop? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. I know what you're fixing to ask and I could kick my own +self, but I didn't pay no attention to it. + +Mr. JENNER. Do you recall what type of automobile--did you notice it at +all? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Yes; I noticed the car. Now, I'll tell you the man's name +that I know--I know it is in my estimation--it was in the 1958 bracket +and as the old saying is, it didn't have the wings on it. This was the +thing that I noticed. + +Mr. JENNER. But it wasn't the station wagon you have described? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. No; I think it was a 1958 Ford--them there old +gun-colored, it was a dark color, but it wasn't black or nothing, and +that's what let him out--the kid out in front. + +Mr. JENNER. But this was the occasion the boy made the remark, "There +wouldn't be no peace until all the people had the same amount of +possessions and that most of our trouble now is caused because the poor +people have so little and the rich so much?" + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Right. + +Mr. JENNER. And this boy indicated peace would come when all the people +had the amount of--the same amount of wealth? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. And had one leader--he didn't say "ruler," he said +"leader." We talked about that and noticed it after he left. + +Mr. JENNER. Do you recall making this statement to Agent Odum? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Yes. I have made it in my mind a dozen times since +then--just thinking of a 14-year old boy having that kind of distilled +stuff in his mind. It's not funny to me, it hurts me to see a kid with +that kind of an attitude, because somebody is teaching him wrong and +the thing that hurts me the most was the fact that I did have a chance +to have took him and bought him a coke or took him and done something +and talked to him and found out who he was and where I could have at +least reasoned with him or turned him in where somebody--some of the +authorities could have gotten ahold of him or anything, but it made me +mad and I didn't do it. That's why we shouldn't let our tempers--you +fellows are lawyers and you know that you can't let your temper get too +far, but some of us people do let our tempers get away and that's one +time I let mine get away. I would much rather have took him and whipped +him with one of the belts or razor straps than took his money. + +Mr. JENNER. Well, I think of nothing else. + +Do you have anything in mind to ask him, Mr. Davis? + +Mr. DAVIS. No, is this person still coming, have you seen him any +more--when is the last time you saw him at the shop? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. This boy--I never saw that boy since that day. Of course, +I don't remember exactly, the exact words, you know, I was kind of +angry and aggravated and then you say things, but I let him know that +that was no way for anybody to feel and I told him he was just off--way +off base, and I said, "I don't know where you got your learning and +your thinking," but I said, "Boy, I disagree with you whole-heartedly." +And I said--I have a bad habit of telling people they had better take +inventory and see if they are right, and I told him, I said, "You had +better take inventory and find out where you stand because you are just +at the right age that you can get in a lot of trouble thinking like +that." + +Mr. JENNER. Did I ask you what your age was? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. No; 39. + +Mr. JENNER. And you are a married man and have a family? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. How old is Mr. Glover? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. 32. + +Mr. JENNER. And your third barber? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. 39. + +Mr. JENNER. That's all, and we appreciate your coming in. + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Well, I wish I could help you, but I know it doesn't help +you a lot. + +Mr. JENNER. Well, you helped us by telling us everything you know. + +Mr. DAVIS. We surely do appreciate your coming in. + +Mr. JENNER. If you wish to read your deposition and make any +corrections if you think any are warranted, you may do so and sign it, +if you wish, or you can waive all that if you wish to? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Well, I couldn't read what she has been writing there. + +Mr. JENNER. I take it by that that you had just as soon waive your +signature and reading it over? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. And signing it? + +Mr. SHASTEEN. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. All right, Mr. Shasteen, thank you very much. I appreciate +it. + +Mr. SHASTEEN. It's good to meet you fellows. + +Mr. JENNER. Thank you. + +Mr. DAVIS. Thank you. + + + + +TESTIMONY OF LEONARD EDWIN HUTCHISON + +The testimony of Leonard Edwin Hutchison was taken at 9 a.m., on March +25, 1964, in the office of the U.S. attorney, 301 Post Office Building, +Bryan and Ervay Streets, Dallas, Tex., by Mr. Albert E. Jenner, Jr., +assistant counsel of the President's Commission. + + +Mr. JENNER. Will you rise and be sworn, please? + +In the testimony which you are about to give, do you solemnly swear to +tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you +God? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. I do. + +Mr. JENNER. And you are Leonard Edwin Hutchinson? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. It's Hutchison (spelling) H-u-t-c-h-i-s-o-n, Mr. Jenner. + +Mr. JENNER. i-s-o-n? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. And you live at Scandia Apartments? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Apartment No. 505, at 601 West Sixth Street, Irving, Tex.? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Mr. Hutchison, the Presidential Assassination Commission +appointed pursuant to Presidential Executive Order No. 11130, of +November 29, 1963, and Senate and House of Representatives Joint +Resolution No. 137, of the 88th Congress, is investigating the +assassination of President John F. Kennedy here in Dallas, Tex., on the +22d of November 1963, and all of the circumstances surrounding it. + +Have you received a letter from J. Lee Rankin, the general counsel for +the Commission? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. With which was enclosed a copy of the joint resolution and +of the Executive order? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Yes, sir; I read them several times. + +Mr. JENNER. And we are advised, from information we have, that you +may have some information with respect to Lee Harvey Oswald and his +visiting in Irving, Tex., and possibly some information respecting the +Paines. And we would like to inquire of you of those circumstances. + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. What is your business, occupation or profession? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. I'm a retail grocery owner, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. And do you operate that business? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Yes, sir; I operate the business. + +Mr. JENNER. Where is your retail grocery store? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. On the corner of Shady Grove and Storey Road. + +Mr. JENNER. In what town? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Irving, Tex. + +Mr. JENNER. That's a suburb of Dallas? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. And would you just tell me, in general, the nature of your +market or store? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Yes, sir; I have a complete supermarket, sir--retail +grocery, meat, fresh fish, produce and all necessary food items. + +Mr. JENNER. Is the Paine family or Mrs. Paine a customer of your market? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Not a regular customer--just a drop in. + +Mr. JENNER. She does, from time to time, come by the store and purchase +food stuffs? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. Are you acquainted with Mrs. Paine--that is, would you +recognize her if you saw her? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Yes, sir; I would recognize her if I saw her. + +Mr. JENNER. And you have had occasion to speak with her? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Yes, sir; just to speak. I try to salute everyone that +comes in. + +Mr. JENNER. Naturally. + +Mr. HUTCHISON. That's just the business. + +Mr. JENNER. Do you know where her home is located in Irving, Tex.? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Yes, sir; yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Would you locate your market with respect to her home? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Yes, sir; you would turn east a block and a half--turn +right, and I'm 8 blocks due south. + +Mr. JENNER. You turn east a block and a half--and what cross street is +that? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. That is Storey, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. And you would go down Storey south---- + +Mr. HUTCHISON. To Shady Grove. + +Mr. JENNER. To Shady Grove? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Approximately how many blocks? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. It's 8 blocks from Fifth to Shady Grove. + +Mr. JENNER. All right. Do you have a large parking lot area? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Well, I would consider it fairly large; yes. + +Mr. JENNER. Mrs. Paine has testified with respect to attempting to +teach Lee Oswald to drive an automobile, and that she went to a +supermarket area, which she said was approximately 8 blocks from her +home--it took her about 4 minutes, 4-1/2 minutes or 5 minutes to drive +there--4 minutes, I guess. + +Mr. HUTCHISON. I don't believe she could teach on my driveway because +my driveway is three-way parking, and I don't have a lot to where she +could turn, feasibly, around. + +Mr. JENNER. I see. + +This was, she said, on Sunday afternoons when there were no vehicles on +the lot. + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Well, I'm open on Sunday so she---- + +Mr. JENNER. Oh, you are? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Yes, sir; I'm open on Sunday. So she couldn't--my +parking lot is not filled every Sunday, but I don't believe she would +have practiced on my parking lot. It would have been noticed--I would +say that. + +Now, I work until around 3 o'clock on every Sunday. + +Mr. JENNER. Every Sunday? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Yes, sir; so it would have had to have been after then +and, feasibly, I don't believe she could teach anyone to drive in my +parking lot. + +Mr. JENNER. I see. Were you aware that sometime in the fall of 1963, +that a lady was residing with Mrs. Paine who was a Russian emigre? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. No, sir; no, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Were you aware in the fall of 1963, that the man we now +know as Lee Harvey Oswald was visiting in the Paine home on weekends? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. I couldn't--I couldn't say that he was visiting there. +All I can say, Mr. Jenner, is that he came into the store and bought +items like--what I remember so vividly is that it was milk and cinnamon +rolls early in the morning. + +Mr. JENNER. Milk and cinnamon rolls? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Yes, sir; in the morning--early. When you're not busy +in the morning, you naturally acquaint yourself with people more than +when you are real busy. I mean, when you are there and there's, say, +three or four in the store and you're checking out, you notice people, +you observe them a lot more than you do if you're real crowded. + +Mr. JENNER. So, this being relatively early in the morning, it was +something that arrested your attention? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Was he accompanied by anyone? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Never; never. + +Mr. JENNER. How often did this take place? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. I would say I saw the boy approximately four or five +times at the maximum that I can remember--four or five times. And it +would be a day or two or three between. It was always in the morning. + +Mr. JENNER. Always? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. I open at 7 o'clock in the morning, and I would say it +was between 7:20 and 7:45 because it was--it just got to be a routine. + +Mr. JENNER. Does your memory serve you sufficiently as to whether these +purchases or visits included midweek days? That is, let's take Monday +through Thursday. Would there be any on those days? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. No, sir; I couldn't say. I couldn't pinpoint the day. I +know that--that it was between--there would be a day or two between, or +maybe three between. + +Mr. JENNER. Would your memory serve you as to whether--let's take one +day--there was any degree of regularity of this person's visits to your +market on Monday? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. No; no--I couldn't pinpoint Monday. No, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. You are open on Sunday, you say. Do you recall this +gentleman you have in mind ever having visited and made purchases on +Sunday morning? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. No; no, sir. We do very, very little business up until 9 +o'clock. They'd just be occasionally a drop-in for a, say, a package of +cigarettes or something like that. + +Mr. JENNER. I see. + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Sunday morning is very quiet, sir. I think I'd have +recognized him on Sunday. + +Mr. JENNER. All right. We can eliminate Sunday? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. And what about Saturday? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. I'm not there very often on Saturday morning because +I work Saturday nights. So, I couldn't--I couldn't pinpoint Saturday +morning. + +Mr. JENNER. And the odds are, then--let's see, we've eliminated Sunday +morning--and the likelihood is that you did not see him on Saturday? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. No, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. I see. So, it would be---- + +Mr. HUTCHISON. During the week. + +Mr. JENNER. Monday through Friday? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. When did these visits commence, if you recall? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. I would say--uh--I came back from out of the country +trip in September; so it would have had to have started late September. + +Mr. JENNER. And what is your recollection as to their persistence up to +and including November 22, 1963? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Well, it would have been just an occasional drop-in. + +Mr. JENNER. During that period? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Yes, sir; during that period. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Did you see this man at any time subsequent to November 22, +1963? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. After? + +Mr. JENNER. Uh-huh. + +Mr. HUTCHISON. No, sir. No, sir. I sure didn't. + +Mr. JENNER. I think I asked you whether he was accompanied by anyone at +anytime and you said, "No." + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Only one time. + +Mr. JENNER. One time? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. One time. Yes. There was a Wednesday evening, he and +his wife and an elderly lady were shopping in midcounters and I was +stocking around a corner and I heard this blurt--uh--statement in +foreign tongue. And, naturally, that would arouse your curiosity to +hear somebody speaking--now, I know Spanish, and I recognize German +and I recognize French--and it wasn't any of those. So, I immediately +came around the counter and he was taking something away from his--this +woman he was with and putting it back on the shelf and talking to her +in this language. + +Mr. JENNER. What was your impression as to what he was attempting to +convey to her? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. That he didn't want her to have it--that he took it away +from her. He still had it--he still had it in her hand--I mean, she +had it in her hand and he took it away from her and put it back on the +shelf. + +Mr. JENNER. Now, this was in the afternoon? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. That was late in the evening, sir, between--between, +I would say, between 6:45 and 7:30. Because I close at 8:30 and I +recognize that it was earlier. They were buying then what you would say +a complete bill of groceries. They had several items in the basket. + +Mr. JENNER. I see. You have the--I don't do much supermarket +shopping--but it's a cart with wheels? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Yes, sir; a cart with wheels. + +Mr. JENNER. Self-service? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Self-service. Yes, sir. All my store is self-service, +meat included; yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. All right. + +You said, "This man and his wife." What led you to say that this lady +or woman was his wife? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Well, uh--later, when her picture came on television, +I--uh--I recognized her. + +Mr. JENNER. Now, when you use the pronoun "her," you're now referring +to whom? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. To his wife. + +Mr. JENNER. Marina Oswald? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Yes. Marina Oswald. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. All right. Would you describe, as best you can, your +present recollection of what this man looked like? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Yes. He was--uh--around 5 foot 10 or 10-1/2; he had a +very, I would say--impressive look about him. It was always, to me, +uh--to her--at that time it was a glare. He was glaring at her. And, +of course, when anyone glares, their facial expressions tighten up and +you just naturally observe someone like that. And it looked like--well, +you wouldn't say a fit of anger, but a disgust or something out of the +ordinary. + +Mr. JENNER. Irritation? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Yes; irritation would be the word. Yes. It wasn't, +"You don't need that," or--of course, I couldn't understand Russian. +I heard Russian of course when I was in the service in Seattle, but I +didn't recognize the language. But he was telling her and it was in +irritation--and he put it back on the shelf. + +Mr. JENNER. By the way, I might do this at the moment--what is your age? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. I'm 50. + +Mr. JENNER. And are you a native of the Dallas area? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Yes, sir; I was raised right down here at Waxahachie, +sir. + +Mr. JENNER. And your formal education was what--elementary school, high +school? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. High school; high school education, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Then, you spent some time in the service, I gather? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. I take it, you make a practice of trying to obtain a +picture in your mind of all your customers? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Of every customer; yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. And to remember them? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. I love people and I love to speak to them and I address +everyone, regardless of creed, color, or anything. I always speak to +them. + +Mr. JENNER. Well, that's a mark of a good salesman--apart from your +normal disposition. + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Yes, sir; I like people. That's the thing. I like people. + +Mr. JENNER. Do you recall how this man was attired on that occasion? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. He was in slacks with just--uh--had a little +jacket--uh--I would say just a common, ordinary jacket. + +Mr. JENNER. There's my raincoat hanging there [indicating]. Was it +about that weight or---- + +Mr. HUTCHISON. A little heavier; a little heavier jacket. It was---- + +Mr. JENNER. Was it that type of material--twill? Or was it wool or what +was it? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Twill. + +Mr. JENNER. Twill? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Yes, sir; it was twill. + +Mr. JENNER. Short jacket? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Short jacket; yes, sir. Short jacket. + +Mr. JENNER. Zippered? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Zipper--yes, sir. Because it was open. I remember +that. He wore it several times. He had it on--uh--when he came in the +morning. Always an open shirt, always had a--he never wore a tie. I +observed that, naturally. + +Mr. JENNER. I see. Describe the lady. + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Well, she had on, I would say, a print dress and she had +on a coat. She had on a--not a heavy coat but a---- + +Mr. JENNER. How tall was she? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. I would say she was around 5 foot 2-1/2 or 3. + +Mr. JENNER. Do you recall the color of her hair? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. No, sir; I couldn't. She had---- + +Mr. JENNER. A babushka? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. No; a scarf. She had a scarf on her head. She had a +white scarf. + +Mr. JENNER. A white scarf? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Do you know what I mean when I say "babushka"? It's a scarf +that the ladies have over their head and they tie it under their chin. + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Yes, sir; yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Is that the way she wore the scarf? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Do you recall the shade or color of his hair? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. I would say that it was a kind of dark brown. + +Mr. JENNER. And what about its plenitude--did he have plenty of hair +or---- + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Yes, sir. It was--it was combed back each time. He never +wore a hat. His hair was always, I would call it--in mine and your +day--roached. I guess--roached back, just peeled completely back on +both sides. + +Mr. JENNER. I see. And as best you are able to fix it, when was this +with respect to month and what part of the month--the fore part, latter +part, middle part? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Well, that must have been the latter part of, I would +say, the last 10 days of October. + +Mr. JENNER. Uh-huh. And was it a midweek? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Yes, sir; yes, sir. It was in midweek, because I only +work Monday, Wednesday, and Saturday nights. So, it would have had to +have been a Wednesday night. + +Mr. JENNER. Wednesday night? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Could it be that this visit was sometime between the 4th of +October and the 15th of October? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. I don't believe so. I believe it was later than that, +sir. I believe, if I were to pinpoint it, I would say it was between +the 15th of October and November 1. + +Mr. JENNER. All right. Now, you said there was, to your recollection, +an older lady with them? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. With these people? What would you judge her age to be? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. I would say she was somewhere between 50 and 60. + +Mr. JENNER. Would you describe her, please? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Well, sir, she had on a small li'l ole hat and--uh--a +fur coat. She had on a fur cont. And--uh--she said nothing. She just +walks around. + +Mr. JENNER. What color was her hair? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. I couldn't say, sir; because she had this hat on. It +was just the language--it was the tone and the language that he was +speaking that attracted me. + +Mr. JENNER. And he was speaking in Russian? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Yes. Well, it was---- + +Mr. JENNER. Well, at least, in a foreign language that you couldn't +understand? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Yes; that's right. + +Mr. JENNER. Did the young lady say anything? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Nothing. She said nothing. + +Mr. JENNER. Now--she was a young lady? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. What would you judge her age to be? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. I would say between 20 and 24. + +Mr. JENNER. And his age? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Well, I'd say he looked--he at that time looked to be +about 21 or 22. + +Mr. JENNER. He looked younger than she? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. Do you recall whether the elderly lady did or did not wear +spectacles--or glasses? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. She had glasses on. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Were they a horn-rimmed type that I have and you have on? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Yes, sir; yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Can you recollect--is this the only occasion on which you +saw him---- + +Mr. HUTCHISON. With anyone? + +Mr. JENNER. With anyone at all? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Yes, sir; the rest of the time, it was by himself. + +Mr. JENNER. During the course of their visiting that day, did you hear +the elderly lady say anything? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. No, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. And I think you said you did not hear the young lady say +anything? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. No, sir; she said nothing. + +Mr. JENNER. And they were purchasing what you would call a--did you say +a "full stock of groceries"? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Yes, sir; yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Would you describe for the record what you mean by a full +stock of groceries? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Well, a full stock of groceries is when they buy soap, +soap powder, sugar, coffee, a few canned goods, milk, bread--say, +a total of $15 to $20 worth of groceries is considered a bill of +groceries. + +Mr. JENNER. Yes; and you recall that this occasion is what you have now +described as a full stock of groceries? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Yes, sir; a full stock bill of groceries. + +Mr. JENNER. Not only edibles, but things to apply in and about the home? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. About the house--the home; yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. And they were in your store, I take it then, for---- + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Several minutes. + +Mr. JENNER. Several minutes? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Yes, sir. How far between then, I don't know; but from +then on, I would say 20 minutes before they checked out. + +Mr. JENNER. Did he pay for these goods? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Yes, sir; yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. How? With cash? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Cash. Yes, sir. There was only one other time when he +tried to cash a check. + +Mr. JENNER. And I'll get to that in a minute--but on this particular +occasion, it was cash. + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Yes, sir. It was always cash. Yes, sir. He always paid +cash. + +Mr. JENNER. I am interested, Mr. Hutchison, in the older lady--the +older of the two ladies. + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Could you give me any more--draw on your imagination and +see if---- + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Well, she was on the heavy side; I would say weight 160 +or 170 pounds, and short and dumpy. + +Mr. JENNER. How tall was she with respect to the gentleman and the +young lady? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Well, she was--she was, of course, not as tall as the +gentleman and maybe about the same height as the lady. + +Mr. JENNER. The young lady? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Yes, sir; the young lady. + +Mr. JENNER. What was your judgment as to the young lady's height? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. I would say 5 feet 2-1/2 or 3. + +Mr. JENNER. Relatively short? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Yes, sir; relatively short--yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. And the elderly lady was approximately that height as well? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Yes, sir; but dumpy. + +Mr. JENNER. Heavier set? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Heavier set; yes. + +Mr. JENNER. What would you say was the weight of the younger lady? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. I would say 107 to 110. + +Mr. JENNER. Slightly built, then? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Did I ask you this--was that a busy period of time, as you +recall? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. No; no, no. It wasn't too busy. + +Mr. JENNER. And you were afforded plenty of opportunity, were you, to +observe these people? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Yes; yes. When I went around this aisle to hear this +foreign language, I looked at them and I could see them as plain as I'm +seeing you. I didn't go right down and just stare and look at them--but +my aisle is only 36 feet long and they were in the middle of the aisle. +So when I went around the aisle, I was within 15 feet of them. + +Mr. JENNER. Now, had the gentleman you're now describing been in--was +one of the occasions that he'd been in in the morning? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Yes, sir; before. + +Mr. JENNER. Prior to this event? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Yes, sir; yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. And on these prior occasions when he was alone, did he ever +use a language which was other than English? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Mr. Jenner, he never said a word. He never spoke. I'd +always speak when he came in and always thank him when he went out. +And whatever the purchase was, you addressed the amount--like it was a +$1.04, a $1.16, a $1.12--he'd just put the money out or get the change +and walk right out the door. He never said a word. + +Mr. JENNER. He didn't say hello, goodby, how are you, nice morning, +it's raining--nothing at all? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. No, sir; nothing. He never said a word. + +Mr. JENNER. He came in, employing the self-service, picked up--let's +see, cinnamon rolls--you said? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. And milk. + +Mr. JENNER. And milk. And you, recognizing the cost of the sales price +of these items, he'd walk up to the counter, you would state _x_ +dollars or cents---- + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Whatever the purchase was, he would hand you the change in +cash---- + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. And you would give him his change if it wasn't the exact +amount that he'd handed you. And he'd walk out without saying a word? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. He never said a word. That was odd. I began to notice +that after that happened a couple or three times. Most anyone will say, +"Thank you," or "Good morning," or something; but he never said a word. + +This is a friendly store, Mr. Jenner. It's not a cold store--like a +chainstore or anything like that. We don't change help and it's just +a--well, it's a neighborhood supermarket, is what it is. + +Mr. JENNER. Yes; I should bring this out; this is an independent store, +it's not a chainstore? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Yes, sir; it's independent--not a chainstore. + +Mr. JENNER. And you're both the owner and the manager? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. And it's a neighborly neighborhood store? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Now, you say there was an occasion when he attempted to +cash a check? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Now, would you first fix the date--I assume you can't +recall the exact date--but fix the month and the time of the month. + +Mr. HUTCHISON. It would be the first week in November. To the best of +my recollection, it was after this incident of the buying of the bill +of groceries. + +Mr. JENNER. All right. And what time of day was that? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. It was in the afternoon, sir, between 5 and 6 +o'clock--because I'm in the cage. I have a check-cashing cage, and on +busy days I go into the cage and, naturally, I cash 90 percent of the +checks--especially the big checks. + +Mr. JENNER. I see. Now, I think you've told me that you are in your +store on Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Nights. + +Mr. JENNER. Nights? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. But you are there during the day every day, also? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Yes, sir; yes, sir. I run my store. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. So, you are in your store in the neighborhood of the 5 +o'clock period every day? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Every day; yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. All right. Now what day of the week was this? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Friday. + +Mr. JENNER. Friday? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. And it was around 5 or 5:30? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Between 5 and 6 o'clock, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Now, using your own words, describe the incident, +commencing giving the background. + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Well, they line up to cash their checks. + +Mr. JENNER. And you were in the cage? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Yes, sir; I was in the cage. + +Mr. JENNER. And there were people lined up to cash checks? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Yes, sir; sometimes 8 to 10 line up--because we have +Ling Electric, we have Temco, and we have Chance Vought. We also +have General Motors people who live in Irving. And Friday is a big +check-cashing day. + +Mr. JENNER. Uh, huh. + +Mr. HUTCHISON. And I always step into the cage to cash checks and, +naturally, I know most people who come in. And this was a two-party +check. + +Mr. JENNER. What do you mean by that? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. A two-party check means that it was not a payroll check, +but a personal check given to him. + +Mr. JENNER. All right. + +Mr. HUTCHISON. And, as best as I can remember, it was $189--which is +strictly against our rules to cash. We don't cash any two-party checks +over $25. + +Mr. JENNER. I see. + +Mr. HUTCHISON. And so I just merely told him, "I'm sorry; I can't cash +this check." + +Mr. JENNER. Excuse me. If I call that a personal check--is that an apt +description? You call it a "two-party" check, meaning---- + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. It's drawn by an individual and payable to an individual? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Right. That's right. An individual check payable to an +individual. + +Mr. JENNER. As distinguished from a payroll check? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Yes; as distinguished from a payroll check. + +Mr. JENNER. And your practice is to limit your risk on that type of +check to $25? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. $25; yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. And your recollection is that that check was in the amount +of $189? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. $189; yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. All right. And he finally reached the wicket, or---- + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Yes, sir; the cage. + +Mr. JENNER. He came to the head of the line, eventually? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Then tell me what happened, as best you can recall. + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Well, he put the check up there and, of course, that's +what everyone does. They put it up there and you look at the check and +you observe the check and you either make up your mind whether you're +going to cash it or not. But, of course, like I say, with the rule that +I have, there never was any doubt in my mind what I was going to do +with it. I just handed it back to him. I said, "I'm sorry. This is a +two-party check, and we don't cash this amount in a two party check. + +Mr. JENNER. Did he say anything about that? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Not a word. Not a word. He just looked at me and picked +up the check and got out of line and walked on out. + +Mr. JENNER. Did he have any expression on his face that arrested your +attention? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. No, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Do you think he understood what you meant by a "two-party" +check? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Why, I'm sure he must have because I specifically said +to him, "This is a two-party check and our rules and regulations are +that we don't cash this large a check--two-party check." + +Mr. JENNER. He didn't seem irritated? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. No, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. And he accepted your explanation? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Do you recall whether or not--let's see, you were in the +cage, but despite that, do you have any recollection as to whether he +purchased anything on that trip? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. I couldn't say, because the cage is high enough that you +have to stand up to see across the store. It's not caged completely in +but there's a glass window---- + +Mr. JENNER. In any event, you didn't serve him anything. + +Mr. HUTCHISON. No, sir. Sure didn't. + +Mr. JENNER. Do you recall the payee of the check? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. No, sir; no, sir. I sure don't. It just didn't enter +my mind, Mr. Jenner, after it was that amount. I wouldn't care who it +was, I wouldn't have cashed it because, like I say, I have my rules and +regulations and if I violate them, my help can violate them, too--so, I +just don't do it. + +Mr. JENNER. Do you recall anything about the check--the form of the +check--other than it was a two-party check? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. No, sir; I couldn't. I couldn't tell you where it was +given and who wrote the check. All I looked at was--it was the amount. + +Mr. JENNER. Do you have any recollection--do you know what a counter +check is? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Yes, sir; I know what a counter check is. It was a +counter check. It wasn't a printed--it wasn't a personalized check. It +was a printed check. + +Mr. JENNER. I'm going to hand you one of my own personal checks +[handing to witness.] Now, that's what you call a printed personalized +check? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Yes, sir. That's a printed personalized check. + +Mr. JENNER. And it was not that form? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. No, sir. This was just a counter check. They all have it +right here [indicating on check]--it's in the form of a draft on the +Dallas market here. You have the name of your bank in print--like this +bank is printed in here. [Indicating on check.] + +Mr. JENNER. Yes. But on a counter check, the bank is not imprinted? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. No, sir; no, sir. It just has your date and "Pay to the +Order of," and your signature here and, of course, they all have your +micronized letters--they all have that now because each bank puts them +out. + +Mr. JENNER. Yes; but they do not appear on counter checks. + +Mr. HUTCHISON. No, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Under the circumstances you have explained, now you did not +make a mental note and you do not now have a recollection of the person +to whom this counter check was payable? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. No, sir; no, sir. I sure don't, Mr. Jenner. + +Mr. JENNER. On these mornings when he came in, these were occasions +when you were not too busy? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. That's right. + +Mr. JENNER. Do you have any recollection at all--and if so, state the +extent of it--as to whether he arrived at your place of business in +some vehicle--automobile? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Always walking. + +Mr. JENNER. Always walking? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Always walking. Yes, sir. He was always walking. +Because, once or twice, I'd be sweeping the sidewalks--I sweep the +sidewalk every morning--and he'd be coming down the Storey side. + +Mr. JENNER. All right. I was about to get to that. He was coming down +the Storey side--let's see if I can put it in my vernacular a little: +From what direction was he coming, normally, when you saw him? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. From north to south. + +Mr. JENNER. He was moving from the north to the south? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Which would be coming from the direction of the Paine home? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. And did you notice the direction in which he went when he +departed your store? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Yes, sir; he just went right around the corner. See, +from my door there's only about 25 feet from the entrance of the door +to the corner of the building. My checking stand is on the, what you +would say, the west side of the building. He'd go out the door and just +go right around the corner. + +Mr. JENNER. And in what direction would he be moving then, after he +turned the corner? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. North. + +Mr. JENNER. And then what street would he be on? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. That would be Storey, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. So, he was retracing his steps? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Yes, sir; retracing his steps. + +Mr. JENNER. Now, on the occasion when these three people were in your +store on that evening, you're not able now to fix that occasion any +more definitely as to point of time than sometime between the 1st and +the--did you say the 15th of November? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Fifteenth of October, sir; to the 1st of--uh---- + +Mr. JENNER. November? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. November. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. And it was not in the month of November? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. No, sir; no, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Do you have a recollection of having been interviewed by a +representative of the FBI---- + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Yes, sir; yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. On this occasion? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. And he questioned you about the incident of the evening---- + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. And substantially the things that I am examining you about? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Yes, sir; yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. And did you give him, then, your very best recollection of +what you recalled at that time? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Yes, sir; I sure did, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. All right. + +And this interview was shortly after the assassination? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. The 3d of December, 1963? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Yes, sir; it was. + +Mr. JENNER. How much milk did he buy on these morning occasions? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. A gallon. + +Mr. JENNER. A whole gallon? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. A whole gallon of milk; yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Now, the Internal Revenue Service might be interested in +this: Tell me again, and with prices to the extent you can recall, what +his normal purchase was on the mornings that he came in. + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Well, the milk sells for 79 a gallon and the cinnamon +rolls are 39. So, you see, that would be $1.18. + +Mr. JENNER. Did he ever buy any bread? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. No, sir; no, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Did you ever see him with any bills of large denomination? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. No, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Did you ever see him with a--well, I don't know; maybe +"large denomination," doesn't help us very much on these morning +occasions, did he ever hand you a $5 or a $10 bill? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. No, sir; it was always a dollar and some change. + +Mr. JENNER. All right. + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Either a dollar and a half or a dollar and a quarter--or +sometimes two dimes. He had almost the correct change. + +Mr. JENNER. Always? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. He was within a few cents--30 or 40 cents of his +purchase. + +Mr. JENNER. However, on the evening occasion, when they bought--what +expression did we use? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Full line of groceries? + +Mr. JENNER. Did he have bills on that occasion? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Sir, I didn't check him. + +Mr. JENNER. You didn't check him? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. I didn't check him; no, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. So, you don't know? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. I don't know, sir. I sure don't. + +Mr. JENNER. But your recollection is that purchase would run somewhere +between $15 and $20? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Yes, sir; $15 and $20. + +Mr. JENNER. From that, you would conclude that he must have had some +bills larger than a dollar? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Yes, sir; he would have had to have larger bills that +day. + +Mr. JENNER. Or else he would have had to have a number of dollar bills. + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. I think I failed to ask you what you thought his weight was. + +Mr. HUTCHISON. I would say his weight was somewhere in the neighborhood +of 155 to 160. + +Mr. JENNER. What is your recollection as to his dress in the sense of +neatness, cleanliness? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Well, I wouldn't say he was dirty, but he was shabbily +dressed. + +Mr. JENNER. Uh, huh. + +Mr. HUTCHISON. He was shabbily dressed--cheap slacks, and like I +said, the jacket was cheap, and his shirts were always open, he never +had a tie, he wasn't what you would call neatly dressed. He always +looked--well, like just a common worker. + +Mr. JENNER. I gather from all this that it was your impression that he +was a person of little means? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. What about his neatness? Was he always shaven? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Yes, sir; he was always shaven. + +Mr. JENNER. His hair neatly combed? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Hair cut and neatly combed; yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. And you didn't notice anything about, did you, that he +always needed a haircut or---- + +Mr. HUTCHISON. No; I would say that he was pretty well---- + +Mr. JENNER. In that respect, you would call him normal? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Normal; yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. All right. + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Because, you know, I'd notice if a person doesn't have a +haircut. Naturally, I would on account of my help and everything like +that. I have to observe those things. + +Mr. JENNER. Yes. Are you able to describe Mrs. Paine to me? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Well, she's an ordinary person--I mean---- + +Mr. JENNER. Physical characteristics, I mean, first. + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Yes, sir. Well, she's about 5 foot 4 and I'd say her +weight was around 122 and 124--I'd say between 115 and 125. Uh--she's +not a beautiful woman, but she's attractive. + +Mr. JENNER. What about her age? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Oh, I'd say--uh--between 42 and 46 years of age. + +Mr. JENNER. Are you acquainted with Mr. Paine? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. No, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. In the first place, do you know that there is a Mr. Paine? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. No, sir; I sure don't. + +Mr. JENNER. Do you know whether the lady you have in mind does or does +not have children and if so---- + +Mr. HUTCHISON. No, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Whenever she was in your store did she have children with +her? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. No, sir; she was alone. + +Mr. JENNER. Always alone. When was the last time you saw this person +that you have in mind in your store? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Oh, I'd say in January---- + +Mr. JENNER. Of this year? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Of this year. Yes, sir. She's been in since---- + +Mr. JENNER. She may well have been in on other occasions---- + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Oh, yes; yes. + +Mr. JENNER. But the last time you recall her was in January? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. January. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Well, you were never able to strike up any conversation +with this man, so---- + +Mr. HUTCHISON. No, sir; I couldn't have told you he lived with her, or +anything. + +Mr. JENNER. All you know is that he was a person that came from that +direction? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. He came from the north and came in the store--yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. And you do recall distinctly that, from the occasion of the +assassination, you have never seen this man in your store? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. No, sir; no, sir; I've never seen him. + +Mr. JENNER. And what arrested your attention in this regard was that +you saw a photograph of Marina Oswald published in one of the Dallas +papers? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. And seeing that photograph, you noticed a resemblance +between the lady you had seen in your store the evening you've +described---- + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. And that particular photograph? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Yes, sir; that's the only time I ever saw her. + +Mr. JENNER. Did you see, either published in the newspapers or +published in magazines somewhere or other, or on television, any +pictures of Lee Harvey Oswald? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. I saw them on television; yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. And tell us when you saw the television pictures that you +now have in mind. + +Mr. HUTCHISON. I saw the television program on Sunday afternoon after +he was shot here. + +Mr. JENNER. That's the 24th of November 1963? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Yes, sir; that's the first time I recognized that he had +been in my store. + +Mr. JENNER. You recognized the man you saw on the television Sunday +afternoon? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. And the man who had come in your store of a morning? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Yes, sir; I remarked to my wife the minute I saw it. I +was working when he was shot in the morning. I didn't see the actual--I +didn't see the--but they rerun it that Sunday. + +Mr. JENNER. You saw the rerun that Sunday afternoon? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Yes, sir. I told my wife then, I said, "That fellow has +traded--"--and I related to her what I told you, just casually. + +Mr. JENNER. Had you seen the newspaper picture of the lady, Marina +Oswald, prior to the time you saw the television rerun on Sunday +afternoon? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. No, sir; that was later. + +Mr. JENNER. All right, Mr. Hutchison, is there anything that occurs to +you now that I haven't brought out that you think might be helpful to +the Commission in this important work of the Commission? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. No, sir; I don't. + +Mr. JENNER. That you know? Any facts? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. I'd be happy to tell you because---- + +Mr. JENNER. I'm sure you would. + +Mr. HUTCHISON. I'm certainly a person who wants to help in every +way--in any way. + +Mr. JENNER. All right. Now, I have no further questions. + +It's your privilege, Mr. Hutchison, to read over your deposition as +soon as it is transcribed if you desire to do so. And this nice young +lady will have this transcribed so it may be read, oh, let us say, +Tuesday of next week. And if you wish to do so, you may come in and +read it, and if you think there is anything in the deposition---- + +Mr. HUTCHISON. No, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. That is incorrectly reported, why we'd like to have you +advise us of that. Or you may waive all this procedure as you see fit. + +Mr. HUTCHISON. I can waive it right now, Mr. Jenner. I have no---- + +Mr. JENNER. Then, you would like to waive it? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Yes, sir, yes, sir; I'd be glad to, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. I think I might add--when you were interviewed on the 3d of +December---- + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Which is some months ago, to the best of your recollection +did you report to the FBI agent, who was Mr. Berry--do you recall that +name? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Yes, sir; Mr. Berry was the man that came out--yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. It was then your recollection that the time that +Oswald--the man you recognized as Oswald--tendered the check for +cashing was November 8--that is, you used the expression, "Three weeks +ago?" + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Yes, sir; that would pinpoint it closer. + +Mr. JENNER. Does that refresh your recollection now---- + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. As to the time it was? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Yes, sir; it does. + +Mr. JENNER. Do you recall that on that occasion, that interview, that +you told Mr. Berry that the occasion when the elderly lady, the young +lady, and Oswald were in your store--that's an evening? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. You recall the incident? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. That it was on Wednesday evening November 13, 1963, rather +than in October--between the 15th and the 1st of November, as you've +testified today? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. [Pausing before reply.] Mr. Jenner, the best--it was +before the check cashing. + +Mr. JENNER. Incident? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Yes, sir; it was before that. Yes, sir; because he tried +to cash the check after he'd bought the bill of groceries. + +Mr. JENNER. Yes; you fixed the time of day as the same. + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. And according to the report I have--and all I have is the +report---- + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. You fixed the date as November 13. But, now, that you've +been able to reflect further about it. This check-cashing incident as +related to the time when the three of them were in---- + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Yes, sir; was before. + +Mr. JENNER. Was before rather than after? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. Yes, sir. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. I think that's all--no--one other thing I'd like to say +to you. We did have a little bit of conversation before we started +your deposition and we've been off the record once or twice--is there +anything that I discussed with you while we were off the record or +before your testimony began that you think is pertinent that I have +failed to bring out? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. No, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Is there anything that occurred during that time that you +told me that you think is inconsistent with any of the testimony you +have given--and which I failed to bring out? + +Mr. HUTCHISON. No, sir; I think it's very full on everything I know. + +Mr. JENNER. All right. Thank you very much. We're sorry to have +inconvenienced you but we very much appreciate your help. + +Mr. HUTCHISON. That's all right--it's perfectly all right. That's just +something that everybody should do if they're good Americans. + +Mr. JENNER. Thank you. + + + + +TESTIMONY OF FRANK PIZZO + +The testimony of Frank Pizzo was taken at 3:35 p.m., on March 31, 1964, +in the office of the U.S. attorney, 301 Post Office Building, Bryan and +Ervay Streets, Dallas, Tex., by Mr. Albert E. Jenner, Jr., assistant +counsel of the President's Commission. Robert T. Davis, assistant +attorney general of Texas, was present. + + +Mr. JENNER. Mr. Pizzo, would you stand up and be sworn? + +Mr. PIZZO. All right. + +Mr. JENNER. Do you solemnly swear that in the testimony you are about +to give, you will tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the +truth? + +Mr. PIZZO. I do. + +Mr. JENNER. Mr. Pizzo, I am Albert E. Jenner, Jr., a member of the +legal staff of the President's Commission. You received a letter from +Mr. Rankin, the general counsel, or did you? + +Mr. PIZZO. No, I didn't. + +Mr. JENNER. All right. Then, I'll tell you about it. The Commission +to investigate the assassination of President Kennedy was appointed +by President Johnson under Executive Order 11130, which in turn +was pursuant to Senate Joint Resolution No. 137 of the Congress, +and the Commission was authorized and appointed for the purpose of +investigating the assassination of the late President, John F. Kennedy, +on the 22d of November, 1963, and to report all the facts that are +pertinent to that tragic event that we can discover. + +We are particularly interested in persons who did or might have had +some contact with Lee Harvey Oswald and Marina Oswald, and it is our +understanding that you may have some information in that area and in +the course of conducting your business back in the fall of 1963, and +pursuant to my telephone call to you this morning, you have kindly come +down here, voluntarily, have you? + +Mr. PIZZO. I have. + +Mr. JENNER. You have heretofore been interviewed by the FBI, haven't +you? + +Mr. PIZZO. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. And, I know you are busy as it is particularly busy at the +end of the month in your business, and I'll see if I can't expedite +this. + +Mr. JENNER. Are you a native of Dallas? + +Mr. PIZZO. No; I am a native of Providence, R.I. + +Mr. JENNER. How long have you resided in Dallas? + +Mr. PIZZO. Around May 15 in 1963. + +Mr. JENNER. Take me back, say, to 1960--about yourself, or start with +1960; what were you doing then? + +Mr. PIZZO. Well, in 1960, I was in the automobile business in +Providence, R.I., with my own company. + +Mr. JENNER. Automobile sales business? + +Mr. PIZZO. Yes, used cars--Auto Village, Inc., in Providence, R.I. We +came here in, let's see, February of 1963--we came to Lufkin. + +Mr. JENNER. When you say "we," you mean you, your wife, and your family? + +Mr. PIZZO. My wife and my child, a 5-year-old boy. We came to Lufkin, +Tex. She is a native of Lufkin, Tex. + +Mr. JENNER. She is a native of Lufkin, Tex.? + +Mr. PIZZO. Yes, and we came down here to open up a business, which we +did. We opened a business in Lufkin--she opened a beauty shop and I +opened a used-car lot, and we were there a couple or 3 months and I +came to Dallas to buy cars and I went to McAllister Lincoln-Mercury, +who is now my boss, and owns Hamilton Chrysler-Plymouth, and while I +was there trying to buy cars, I wound up coming to work for him. + +Mr. JENNER. And the McAllister agency is located in downtown Dallas? + +Mr. PIZZO. It is Downtown Lincoln-Mercury--it used to be McAllister +Lincoln-Mercury. + +Mr. JENNER. And now it is called Downtown Lincoln-Mercury? + +Mr. PIZZO. That's correct--Downtown Lincoln-Mercury. + +Mr. JENNER. Has that been a recent change in name? + +Mr. PIZZO. Yes, it has. + +Mr. JENNER. I'm just curious, because I tried to find it in the phone +book this morning and I couldn't find Downtown Lincoln-Mercury. + +Mr. PIZZO. That's right, it has been--let's see, we changed the +name--the name was changed just before the assassination. You see, +it's a factory franchise dealership and they changed it to Downtown +Lincoln-Mercury. + +Mr. JENNER. I was looking in a May 1963, directory. + +Mr. PIZZO. That's it. + +Mr. JENNER. That would be McAllister Lincoln-Mercury at that time? + +Mr. PIZZO. When I went to work at that time--yes. Now, I stayed on when +Mr. McAllister went on to Hamilton Chrysler-Plymouth and I stayed on as +assistant manager at Downtown Lincoln-Mercury. We were working actually +for the factory, because they were running the store--they had no +president. + +Mr. JENNER. In which of the two agencies do you now work as of today? + +Mr. PIZZO. Hamilton Chrysler-Plymouth. + +Mr. JENNER. And you are what position there? + +Mr. PIZZO. Sales manager. + +Mr. JENNER. And you were what position--what position did you have with +McAllister? + +Mr. PIZZO. You mean at Downtown Lincoln-Mercury or McAllister? + +Mr. JENNER. Yes. + +Mr. PIZZO. Assistant manager. + +Mr. JENNER. You were assistant manager? + +Mr. PIZZO. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. When did that work commence--when did you start to work +with McAllister? + +Mr. PIZZO. Around the 14th or 15th of May. + +Mr. JENNER. Of 1963? + +Mr. PIZZO. That's right. + +Mr. JENNER. Did you have an employee under your supervision and +direction at that time by the name of Bogard? + +Mr. PIZZO. Yes, I did. + +Mr. JENNER. What is his full name? + +Mr. PIZZO. Albert G. Bogard. + +Mr. JENNER. Albert G. Bogard? + +Mr. PIZZO. Albert G. Bogard, that's correct. + +Mr. JENNER. And has he also worked over at the Hamilton agency? + +Mr. PIZZO. No, sir; he came from Ed Maher Ford. + +Mr. JENNER. That's M-a-h-e-r (spelling)? + +Mr. PIZZO. Yes--two words. When he applied for the job, he was working +at Maher's. + +Mr. JENNER. Some of these salesmen are inclined to shift about, I guess? + +Mr. PIZZO. Yes--if they like the looks of a car this year--it might +look a little better on this make of car, and you know, to them, it is +all money, and they are going to move around, but a real good person +will stay. He will stay in one place and build up a clientele. + +Mr. JENNER. With repeat sales? + +Mr. PIZZO. That's right. These boys--most of them live on floor traffic. + +Mr. JENNER. They wait for people to come in? + +Mr. PIZZO. Yes; they are not real working automobile salesmen. + +Mr. JENNER. In other words, I'll summarize--you are a native-born +American and a native of Rhode Island, Providence? + +Mr. PIZZO. Yes, sir; and I served in the U.S. Marine Corps in World War +II. + +Mr. JENNER. You did? + +Mr. PIZZO. Yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. And you were in the used car business in Providence and you +and your wife in due course came here to Dallas and she is a native of +Texas, as you recited? + +Mr. PIZZO. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. And you were in the used car business there, and what was +that town again? + +Mr. PIZZO. Lufkin. + +Mr. JENNER. Could you spell it? + +Mr. PIZZO. L-u-f-k-i-n (spelling). + +Mr. JENNER. And then you became associated with Downtown +Lincoln-Mercury? + +Mr. PIZZO. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. In May of 1963? Was there an incident that occurred +sometime in 1963, but prior to November 22, 1963, involving somebody +who might have been Lee Harvey Oswald? + +Mr. PIZZO. Yes; there was an incident. + +Mr. JENNER. Would you tell us about the incident, first, and then we +will become oriented? + +Mr. PIZZO. All right--of course, at the time nothing was thought of +the incident because it was just a natural sales setup we had. Our +salesmen, when they can't sell a customer a car, they run to the +manager and tell him, they'll say, "He's going to leave." + +Mr. JENNER. And that manager in this instance was you? + +Mr. PIZZO. It was me. + +Mr. JENNER. All right. + +Mr. PIZZO. And, I asked to see the man--no, I didn't ask to see him +personally--no, I didn't. + +Mr. JENNER. Who was the salesman? + +Mr. PIZZO. Albert G. Bogard. + +Mr. JENNER. The man we have identified here? + +Mr. PIZZO. That's right, sir. He brought the man to me--it was quite +late in the evening--it wasn't evening, because it was dark. + +Mr. JENNER. Do you remember what day of the week it was? + +Mr. PIZZO. I really don't--really don't. + +Mr. JENNER. It was a weekday? + +Mr. PIZZO. It was a weekday. + +Mr. JENNER. You are open on Sunday? + +Mr. PIZZO. No; we are not open on Sunday. + +Mr. JENNER. Are you open on Saturday? + +Mr. PIZZO. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. It could have been any day in the week? + +Mr. PIZZO. It could have been--it seems to me like it was the middle of +the week, towards the weekend, but I couldn't swear to that. + +Mr. JENNER. What month was it? + +Mr. PIZZO. It was November--now. + +Mr. JENNER. November 1963? + +Mr. PIZZO. November 1963--yes; I'm pretty sure it was November. Now, +that I can recollect--it was November. When he brought the man to me, +he said, "This man will have some money. He doesn't have the down +payment," because when we were trying to sell the man a car, he asked +me how much money he needed to buy this car and I said, "That man needs +around $200 or $300." + +Mr. JENNER. This is Bogard asking you? + +Mr. PIZZO. Yes; the salesman asking me. He asked me that and I said it +was around $200 or $300, and so he went back to his booth to work on +the customer. + +Mr. JENNER. Excuse me, at this point, you had not yet seen the customer? + +Mr. PIZZO. No, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. And Mr. Bogard had come to you as assistant sales manager, +to find out the minimum, let us say, of the down payment? + +Mr. PIZZO. Of the down payment. + +Mr. JENNER. And he had a man who was interested in what make of car? + +Mr. PIZZO. Now, that's something that I do not remember because there +was no writeup sheet that I could go back to to find out exactly what +car. I believe it was a Comet. + +Mr. JENNER. Have you made an effort to find a writeup sheet? + +Mr. PIZZO. Yes; we did--all of us did. + +Mr. JENNER. And you discovered what? + +Mr. PIZZO. I discovered nothing--no writeup sheet, but the incident +that happened later--I'll get to it, if you want me to get to it now, +I'll go to it now. + +Mr. JENNER. All right. I think probably the best thing for you to do +would be for you to tell us in your own words, and I'll try not to +interrupt you. + +Mr. PIZZO. All right, sir. He brought the customer to me, but previous +to that he had taken the customer out on a demonstration ride. + +Mr. JENNER. By the way, this occurred at McAllister Downtown Lincoln +Mercury? + +Mr. PIZZO. That's correct. I think it's better if we do call it +that--Downtown McAllister Lincoln Mercury, because the exact day of the +change of the name, I don't remember, you see. + +Now, this was previous to the assassination--I would say between a +period of a week and a half to 2 weeks, and I would guess I would be +right. After the man was worked on to buy a car---- + +Mr. JENNER. By Bogard. + +Mr. PIZZO. By Bogard, Mr. Bogard brought the man to my office and I'm +sitting like you are and he brought him to the door. + +Mr. JENNER. Was this the same day? + +Mr. PIZZO. Yes; this was within 2 hours, within a period of 2 hours. + +Mr. JENNER. This all occurred within a period of 2 hours. + +Mr. PIZZO. This all occurred within a period of 2 hours and he brought +the man to the door. + +Mr. JENNER. What door? + +Mr. PIZZO. My office door, and I get up from behind my desk and walk +up to the door, and he says, "He doesn't have the down payment, but he +will have $200 or $300 in a couple or 3 weeks." + +Mr. JENNER. And this conversation you are now relating occurred after +Bogard had demonstrated the car? + +Mr. PIZZO. Had demonstrated the car. + +Mr. JENNER. And had come to you and asked for the minimum? + +Mr. PIZZO. Yes; for the minimum. + +Mr. JENNER. And then he had gone back to the customer? + +Mr. PIZZO. And the customer told him he didn't have the down payment. + +Mr. JENNER. And then he brought the customer to the door of the office? + +Mr. PIZZO. Right. So, it was just 2 or 3 minutes--I was very busy, we +had other deals going, and I said, "Okay," and just let it go at that. + +Mr. JENNER. What did that mean--"okay"? + +Mr. PIZZO. There was nothing we could do with the customer if he +didn't have the down payment. I said, "Okay," to Al Bogard, which +means--follow him up, use him as a prospect, call him later--that's +what we do, we call a man later and try to work something out and this +is strictly automobile business. + +Mr. JENNER. I appreciate that; yes. + +Mr. PIZZO. Now, what else do you want to know now? What happened later? + +Mr. JENNER. Have you now completed relating the incident on the +particular date you have in mind? + +Mr. PIZZO. On that day; yes, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. And your recollection at the moment is that Bogard was +seeking to interest him in a Comet? + +Mr. PIZZO. I think so. + +Mr. JENNER. That's the Ford compact, is it not? + +Mr. PIZZO. Yes; that's the Mercury compact. The Caliente--we had a red +Caliente, I believe, and I believe it was a red Caliente he went for a +ride in, not that he was selling that particular car, but we had just +gotten the new line of the hot compact, which was the Caliente, and we +bought them all in red and that's what he went for a ride in. + +Mr. JENNER. Did you say "hot" or "hard"? + +Mr. PIZZO. Hot--Caliente means hot, and that was the hot model of the +year--it had just come out. + +Mr. JENNER. You have a little bit of New England accent or Rhode Island +or the Boston area? + +Mr. PIZZO. You can't miss it--you can't hide it. + +Mr. JENNER. Now, you volunteered there a second that the man had taken +a ride in the Comet Caliente? + +Mr. PIZZO. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. On what do you base that statement? + +Mr. PIZZO. On what Al Bogard told me, that that was the car he had +taken him for a ride in. + +Mr. JENNER. You had not seen this man in the car? + +Mr. PIZZO. In the car or drive off either. + +May I tell you the normal procedure that every salesman follows? He +talks to the customer, gets him interested in a car, takes him out for +a ride and puts him in a booth to see if he can sell him a car, and +that's the routine he followed. + +Mr. JENNER. And this first stage of taking him for a ride, the salesman +drives the car rather than the customer? + +Mr. PIZZO. That's the way it should be. + +Mr. JENNER. And if the normal procedure were followed here, the +prospect would have been taken for a ride by Mr. Bogard? + +Mr. PIZZO. If it was followed, but according to---- + +Mr. JENNER. Well, if it were followed? + +Mr. PIZZO. If it was followed--he drives the customer to a point and +lets the customer drive it back. But the only way to demonstrate an +automobile is that. You drive it and demonstrate it as you are driving +it. + +Mr. JENNER. Now, since you weren't present at this point we are relying +on normal procedures. + +Mr. PIZZO. Right, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. And a remark made by Mr. Bogard that the customer, whoever +he was, had been taken for a demonstration ride by Bogard? + +Mr. PIZZO. By Bogard. + +Mr. JENNER. Now, have you now stated everything that occurred that +particular day, occurred or said to you on that particular day? + +Mr. PIZZO. Yes; I can't remember anything else. + +Mr. JENNER. Now, was there a subsequent incident or something that +occurred with respect to the incident you have now related, is there a +second stage of this? + +Mr. PIZZO. Yes; after the assassination. + +Mr. JENNER. Now, when after the assassination? + +Mr. PIZZO. The same day--within, oh, 4 or 5 o'clock or something like +that. + +Mr. JENNER. Of the--late in the day on the 22d of November? + +Mr. PIZZO. When this man was captured, and the name announced over the +radio, the possible suspect, or the suspect's name was announced on the +radio, we had all radios on in the showroom. + +Mr. JENNER. You had your radios and television on? + +Mr. PIZZO. No; just radios. + +Mr. JENNER. Just radio? + +Mr. PIZZO. Well, we had the television set up in the Continental +Department that we were all watching. + +Mr. JENNER. And when you say "all," does that include Mr. Bogard? + +Mr. PIZZO. That includes Mr. Bogard. + +Mr. JENNER. All right, relate what happened--you were all sitting +around looking at the television, were you? + +Mr. PIZZO. I wasn't--I was standing around listening to the radio. +We were all in just different groups--this is a mighty big showroom, +Downtown Lincoln-Mercury, it is 350 feet long, and we were sitting +around listening to the news and also doing the work that had to be +done, and when the suspect's name was announced, I was standing right +in the middle of the showroom floor and---- + +Mr. JENNER. This is this great big showroom--the 350-foot long showroom? + +Mr. PIZZO. Yes; but right in front of my office is where the group was +standing, because that's a front door and there are three front doors, +but this is the first front door, and we were standing right there. Of +course, all of us were looking out at the underpass, which we are right +under, the triple underpass there. + +Mr. JENNER. Near the area of the assassination scene? + +Mr. PIZZO. That's right, sir; we are on this side--the Oak Cliff side +of the bridge, and, of course, we were all standing at the big windows +looking at that area and listening to the radio and a remark was made, +"Well," now, I didn't hear this. It was told to me just a few minutes +later. + +Mr. JENNER. By whom? + +Mr. PIZZO. By some salesman there and I just can't remember which one +it was. I think we had around 15 or 16 salesmen there at the time. We +weren't all standing around, but someone made the remark that, "Al +Bogard lost his prospect." + +Mr. JENNER. You overheard that? + +Mr. PIZZO. I overheard that. I said, "What do you mean?" They said, +"Well--" he pulled out a card, his own business card like this +[indicating]. + +Mr. JENNER. Your salesman did? + +Mr. PIZZO. Albert Bogard--this salesman made the remark that Al Bogard +had pulled out a business card and written behind the business card--a +lot of salesmen will do that--they will write down names of prospects +on the card and if they don't have a piece of paper, they will just +pull out one of their cards and write the names down, and he said, +"Well, there goes my prospect," when he heard the name Lee Harvey +Oswald, so he dumped it in the wastebasket. + +Now, I didn't know about this until a few minutes later and I didn't +make much of it at that time. That was it--at that time. I didn't know +that that was a custom he had--a week or two before it just--nothing +never entered my mind, we were all pretty saddened by the thing, and +that was it for that day. Let's see, I believe, was that a Friday or +Saturday? + +Mr. JENNER. The 22d was on a Friday. + +Mr. PIZZO. It was on a Friday--I want to tell it to you as correct as I +can, that's why I'm wondering. + +One of the boys said the next day that he had lost his customer and the +guy that they have got is the man that Bogard has as a prospect, so I +says, "Let's look--where is the writeup?" The first thing that I had in +my mind was--get the writeup, so everyone was looking for the writeup. +By now Bogard wasn't there, I think it was after lunch or breakfast, +so we went through the drawers, and we went through the baskets and I +called the two porters we have in the garage--called them in there and +I said, "Who dumped the baskets out last night," and one fellow said, +"I did." I said, "Where?" We have a trash barrel--not a barrel, but +it's a huge incinerator and the trash men come by and pick it up, and +so we went back there and I jumped inside this thing--that's how big +it is and started throwing out the papers, looking for some kind of a +writeup, and never could find anything. I just wanted the writeup to +see if he did have a writeup, but by that time Bogard came back and I +asked him, I said, "Al, have you got a writeup on that man, the man +that they have got locked up?" He said, "Yes," and I said, "Where is +it?" He said, "Well, it's not a writeup--I've got it on a card and I +just took it and threw it down in the basket." + +Mr. JENNER. The day before? + +Mr. PIZZO. The day before. I said, "Well, where is it now?" He said, "I +don't know." + +Mr. JENNER. Did you look through the refuse container to try to find +that card? + +Mr. PIZZO. We looked for the card to--we went right back again and did +the same thing, and he helped look for it and we had the colored boy +there helping us looking for it and then when some FBI men came there +they went in there and looked for it. + +Mr. JENNER. We became very interested in that. + +Mr. PIZZO. Me too. So, I kind of said, "Are you kidding us or what? You +either have his name or you don't." He said, "Well, Frank, don't you +remember?" I said, "I don't remember." He said, "I brought him to your +office and you said he needed $200 or $300 down," and I said, "Yes, I +guess I remember." He said, "Well, you should remember because when I +took that man for a ride he drove like a wild man, and besides we had +Gene Wilson's car and Gene got mad because we used up all his gas." He +said, "He drove so fast, he scared the daylights out of me. Don't you +remember me coming back and saying how mad I was?" + +I said, "I just don't remember that particular moment." That's how he +was trying to get me to remember that particular time when he took him +for a ride. I said, "I just really don't remember that night--that much +of it." + +Now, I'll tell you how I think I recognized the man--this was after +they had him on television and they showed him on television which was +Monday or Tuesday or something like that--it was a few days after. + +Mr. JENNER. You mean a rerun? + +Mr. PIZZO. No; of the Oswalds--when they showed him on television--the +first pictures of him on television, I saw that. + +Mr. JENNER. And do you recall what day that was? + +Mr. PIZZO. It was past a weekend. It was not Saturday--it might have +been Sunday and probably it was Monday, but it wasn't Friday or +Saturday, and I'm not sure it was Sunday, but I think it was on a +Monday, and of course--the seed planted--I got to thinking about it and +I looked at him and he looked familiar to me, and at that time I could +have sworn it was him, because I remember a man in a T-shirt. I don't +mean the open T-shirt but a full T-shirt. + +Mr. JENNER. Like the kind you wore in the Marines? + +Mr. PIZZO. Well, it wasn't green, but that type--the full T-shirt with +a sleeve. + +Mr. JENNER. About a half sleeve? + +Mr. PIZZO. Yes; and his face. And he just looked the type. He just +looked like the type of guy that I was talking to that day, and when I +came back to work the next day, of course we were all in there talking +about it, and we talked about different incidences that reminded me of +him. I only had a few seconds look at the man. He never said a word. I +never heard him talk. + +Mr. JENNER. The customer never said a word? + +Mr. PIZZO. The customer never said a word--whether it would be him or +not--but to me, it looked like it was, only from the pictures. + +Mr. JENNER. I will exhibit to you Commission Exhibits 451 and 453 +through 456 and ask you to examine them. + +Does the man depicted there bear a resemblance to what you might +possibly recall as the prospective customer you now have in mind? + +Mr. PIZZO. [Examining photographs referred to.] It wouldn't be fair +to say this one, because I think this was in the television or the +newspaper with a fat lip--I remember that. + +Mr. JENNER. Mr. Pizzo has refused Commission Exhibit 455. + +Mr. PIZZO. Possibly these two. + +Mr. JENNER. It might possibly be Commission Exhibit 453 or 451? + +Mr. PIZZO. And I will refuse these two. + +Mr. JENNER. The witness also refused Commission Exhibits Nos. 454 and +456. + +Mr. PIZZO. I'm not too positive on these, either. + +Mr. JENNER. And he is uncertain even as to Commission Exhibits Nos. 453 +and 451. + +(An instrument is marked by the reporter as Pizzo Exhibit 453-A, for +identification.) + +Mr. JENNER. Showing you that exhibit, do you see any person depicted +on that exhibit that resembles or is the prospective customer that was +brought to your office door by Mr. Bogard on the day you have testified +about? + +Mr. PIZZO. One of these two men seems like it. This one--it seems like +it because his nose is too big--one of these two here. + +Mr. JENNER. Using this green marker, will you put an "X" on the two men? + +Mr. PIZZO. I am not positive. + +Mr. JENNER. Of course you are not positive. + +Mr. PIZZO. Do you want me to put it right here? + +Mr. JENNER. Let's pick out the two that most closely resemble the man +of which you speak. + +Mr. PIZZO. [Witness at this point marked instrument referred to.] + +Mr. JENNER. Now, which of those two that you marked with the little +green mark most closely resembles the man you saw? + +Mr. PIZZO. Right here--but he seems older here--he was a little short +guy, the way I figure. + +Mr. JENNER. Put an "X" above him. The witness has put a cross--a +horizontal cross line, through the other line as indicating the man +who appears most like the person he saw. Your feeling is that the man +you have indicated with an "X" seems somewhat taller than the man you +recall as having seen at the door of your office prior to November 22, +1963. Is that correct, sir? + +Mr. PIZZO. That's correct--about 5 feet 8 inches, something like that, +what I recall--or maybe 5 feet 8-1/2 inches. Bogard is pretty tall and +it seemed like the fellow was a lot shorter than he was. + +Mr. JENNER. And that's what led you to put the marker over the head of +the man on the extreme right shown in that picture, Pizzo Exhibit 453-A? + +Mr. PIZZO. Yes--that's right--it's a downhill photo. + +Mr. JENNER. I have one that's taken more at a level. We will mark it +Pizzo Exhibit 453-B. + +(Instrument referred to marked by the reporter as Pizzo Exhibit No. +453-B, for identification.) + +Mr. JENNER. Exhibiting that photograph, does there appear on it anybody +who closely resembles the person you recall as having been at the door +of your office on the occasion you have described, and if there is, put +a mark on it. + +Mr. PIZZO. Gosh, the man I saw--I want you to know--didn't have that +much hair, nor did he have as much hair as these boys in this picture. + +Mr. JENNER. The man you saw did not have as much hair as is shown on +Pizzo Commission Exhibit 453-A, which you have marked with a cross? + +Mr. PIZZO. That's right, nor as this picture right here--right there. + +Mr. JENNER. Or the man on Pizzo Exhibit 453-B--appears to have more +hair than the man you saw at the door of your office? + +Mr. PIZZO. That's right. + +Mr. JENNER. And the men depicted on Commission Exhibits Nos. 453 and +451 also, in each instance, has more hair than the man you saw at the +door of your office? + +Mr. PIZZO. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. What about the man over whose head you placed a cross on +Pizzo Exhibit 453-A, that is, in respect to the amount of hair? + +Mr. PIZZO. This is more or less the hairline. + +Mr. JENNER. Now, the witness is pointing to the man over where there is +a single vertical stripe, over his head--green, and has dark glasses +on. It is his hairline to which you have now adverted? + +Mr. PIZZO. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. Now, the other man has the cross over his head--you wanted +to say something about that? + +Mr. PIZZO. You said it exactly--that resembles--the face resembles him +more than the hairline--it's sort of a "=V=" hairline. + +Mr. JENNER. So, your problem has been that the hairline and the man +with the single stripe above his head more resembles him than the man +you saw at the door of your office, but the physiognomy or the facial +features of the man over whose head you have placed the cross more +resembles the man you saw? + +Mr. PIZZO. Yes. I had just wondered if the pictures that I have seen of +Oswald might have---- + +Mr. JENNER. Might have colored your judgment now? + +Mr. PIZZO. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. It's always possible, you know. + +Mr. PIZZO. But that hairline is a thing--that's the thing that hit me +first when I saw his picture on television. + +Mr. JENNER. When you saw Oswald's picture on television? + +Mr. PIZZO. Yes; and in the paper. It was the hairline and the physical +features of it--a clean face with the high forehead and the "=V=" +shaped hairline, and it's easy to remember that because of the T-shirt, +the bare look he had because of the tight T-shirt. + +Mr. JENNER. Mr. Davis has come in and he is representing the attorney +general's office of the State of Texas. This is Mr. Robert Davis. They +are conducting a court of inquiry on this subject. + +Mr. PIZZO. I see, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. Mr. Davis, the witness has just emphasized the thing he +recalls most about the appearance or physiognomy of the man he saw at +the door of his office a week or 10 days prior to November 22 when one +of the employees he was supervising, Mr. Bogard, brought a prospective +customer who seemed to be interested in a Comet Caliente, Mr. Pizzo was +then the general sales manager of McAllister Downtown Lincoln-Mercury. + +Mr. PIZZO. I was assistant sales manager. + +Mr. JENNER. You are now the sales manager? + +Mr. PIZZO. I--of Hamilton Chrysler. + +Mr. JENNER. I have shown him some photographs. He was impressed, he +said, that the man he now recalls having seen on the occasion--he was +impressed particularly with his hairline. + +Mr. PIZZO. That's right. + +Mr. JENNER. And that the hairline of the man indicated on Pizzo +Exhibit 453-A, over whose head he has put the green vertical stripe, +has the hairline, but the man over whose head he has placed the cross +has more of the facial likeness. + +The person or persons depicted on Commission Exhibits Nos. 453 and 451, +he says have a resemblance, but it is in his opinion not the man, and +in any event the man on those two exhibits has more hair and does not +have the particular hairline that impressed you on this occasion? + +Mr. PIZZO. That's right. + +Mr. JENNER. Am I fairly stating your testimony? + +Mr. PIZZO. That's right. + +Mr. JENNER. I am just trying to summarize for Mr. Davis. + +Mr. PIZZO. Thank you. + +Mr. JENNER. I now show you a document we will mark as Pizzo Exhibit +453-C. + +(The instrument referred to was marked by the reporter as Pizzo Exhibit +No. 453-C, for identification.) + +Mr. JENNER. This is a picture of Lee Harvey Oswald that I'm about to +show you and before I show it to you, may I say that the important +thing to us--it is necessary for us to have your very best judgment, +and if this isn't the person, we want to know it and to carry yourself +back as best you can to that particular occasion when you saw this man +at the door of your office, and if this isn't the man, tell us, and if +it is--tell us, one way or the other. + +Mr. PIZZO. All right. That I will do. [Examining instrument referred +to.] + +Mr. JENNER. The greatest service you can give to us and to the country +and to yourself is to just be as fair as you possibly can. + +Mr. PIZZO. He certainly don't have the hairline I was describing--it +isn't the hairline I was describing. + +Mr. JENNER. This was taken the afternoon of November 22 in the Dallas +City Police showup. + +(Discussion off the record.) + +(Discussion between Counsel Jenner and Counsel Davis and the witness, +Mr. Pizzo, off the record.) + +Mr. JENNER. Back on the record. You recall him as being more in the +neighborhood of what--5 feet 8 inches, 5 feet 7 inches, more or less, +or more or less? + +Mr. PIZZO. Between 5 feet 7 inches and 5 foot 8-1/2 inches with sort of +a round forehead and that =V= shape is the thing that I remember the +most. + +Mr. JENNER. A widow's peak? + +Mr. PIZZO. Yes; but very weak. + +Mr. JENNER. Very weak? + +Mr. PIZZO. Very weak--not the bushy type that I see in the picture. +Well, if I'm not sure--then--I have to say that he is not the one--if +you want the absolute statement. + +Mr. JENNER. I just want your best judgment--I don't want you to say he +isn't because you feel you are compelled to state the ultimate. It is +better for me to have your rumination about it, as you have been giving +us--as to what you looked for, or didn't find and what you did look for +in the photographs--what you did find and what you didn't find. Now, +you don't find the hairline? + +Mr. PIZZO. No; I don't. From that picture I don't. + +Mr. JENNER. Yes; from any of the three pictures, except the one with +the man with the stripe over his head? + +Mr. PIZZO. That's right--he has the sort of a hairline that I recollect. + +Mr. JENNER. That's the man with the one stripe over his head? + +Mr. PIZZO. I'll have to take a look again--this is the face--it +resembles. + +Mr. JENNER. The witness is now pointing to the man that has the cross +over it. + +Mr. PIZZO. This is the hairline that I remember. + +Mr. JENNER. That is the man on the extreme right with the dark glasses, +having a single vertical stripe above his head? + +Mr. PIZZO. Right. + +Mr. JENNER. And that picture of Mr. Oswald that I showed the witness, +Pizzo Exhibit 453-C, in that picture, he does not have the hairline; is +that correct? + +Mr. PIZZO. That's correct. + +Mr. JENNER. What about his facial expression--features? + +Mr. PIZZO. There's resemblance there. May I say something? + +Mr. JENNER. Surely. + +Mr. PIZZO. All the time that I have been thinking about it--because +the FBI did tell me that they would call me sometime later and would I +appear, and I said--yes, I would. I thought about it and the thing that +stuck in my mind was always that hairline--the kind of balding right +here--the smooth line. + +Mr. JENNER. Above each temple? + +Mr. PIZZO. And that face resembles. Now, I'll tell you, if he has--I've +never seen the man in person, but if he has a small mouth it would fit +about the description that I would give. I couldn't say absolutely sure +that this was the man that was standing in front of my door. + +Mr. JENNER. And the witness is now referring to Pizzo Exhibit 453-C. I +offer Pizzo Exhibits 453-A, 453-B, and 453-C in evidence. + +Mr. PIZZO. May I say something else? + +Mr. JENNER. Yes; please. + +Mr. PIZZO. I have called Al Bogard into the office after the first +interview by the FBI, and I have asked him--I says, "Now, it is easy +for me to start imagining things because of the emotional situation +right now, Al. I want you to tell me the truth. Am I right when I say +I do remember that situation?" He says, "Yes," and then he went into +some more detail--"of course, don't you remember?" I didn't only ask +him once, I asked him again a week later, and he said the same thing +and that might have had some influence on it. Now, whether that's the +man he brought to my door--right now looking at that picture I couldn't +swear to it--I wouldn't want to do that. + +Mr. JENNER. Well, that's a fair type of an appraisal that we want. We +want your best judgment. You don't recall the incident that Bogard +related to you later that sought to stimulate your recollection about +somebody who drove this automobile wildly--you don't recall that having +been said to you on the afternoon? + +Mr. PIZZO. No; I don't--no; I don't. I asked him about it and he told +me. I'm the one that was after him to tell me--to help me remember. +You see, I'm the one that kept asking him about, "Would you help me +remember the situation." The more he talked about it, the more I +remember that particular situation, but only to the point of "He needs +$200 or $300," and he didn't have it at the time but he will have it in +a couple of weeks. That's the things that I do remember at the door. + +Mr. JENNER. And you do remember this man had a white T-shirt on--the +half-sleeve type? + +Mr. PIZZO. Yes. Sleeve type. + +Mr. JENNER. With which you are familiar and wore yourself in the +Marines except yours was colored green? + +Mr. PIZZO. It was green--that's right. + +Mr. JENNER. Mr. Davis, he has already related to us the effort he made +when this incident came to his attention late in the day on the 22d of +November of seeking to find Bogard's card on which he is alleged to +have written Oswald's name on the reverse side and was to attempt to +obtain a writeup sheet, which is what the salesmen normally write up +with respect to a prospect, even to the extent of his climbing into the +large refuse container in which all paper and waste paper baskets are +thrown the following day, and he was not able to find either of those, +though they made two examinations and emptied out the large container +twice--you did it yourself? + +Mr. PIZZO. I did it myself and once with the FBI. I believe it was the +man from Louisiana--one of the FBI men. + +Mr. JENNER. You were interviewed by Carter Hayden and Griffin on +January 8, was it either one of those? On January 8, 1964? + +Mr. PIZZO. I was interviewed by two pairs of FBI men--it was +immediately after the assassination, which was probably Monday or +Tuesday. + +Mr. JENNER. The first time? + +Mr. PIZZO. The first time; but it wasn't January 8. + +Mr. JENNER. Was that the last one--the last interview--January 8? + +Mr. PIZZO. This might have been the last one, although I remember two +other men came in from Chicago--one was from Chicago--one--I believe +there were three, no, I'm sorry, it was the same two twice and then +another team. + +Mr. JENNER. Could I ask you this--knowing Mr. Bogard as you do, is he +a man who on occasion departed from his usual practice of making out a +prospect sheet? + +Mr. PIZZO. Yes. + +Mr. JENNER. He sometimes departed from that practice? + +Mr. PIZZO. Yes; he would write them on just about anything--especially +business cards and put them in his desk. + +Mr. JENNER. Even though, as you recall, he had this man at the +customer's booth, where there would be a supply of these writeup +sheets, I assume? + +Mr. PIZZO. He would ordinarily write the man up after the demonstration +ride. + +Mr. JENNER. He would not? + +Mr. PIZZO. He would--he would ordinarily bring the man in and write +him up after a demonstration ride if you can sell him a car. We never +did find a writeup sheet--he said he never had one and he said he just +wrote the prospect's name on the back of a card and I asked him, "How +come, you usually write the thing on an order pad?" And we tried to +work from there, and he said, "I just didn't." + +Mr. JENNER. I have attempted to locate Mr. Bogard, just by calling +around this morning, but I haven't been able to run him down yet. If +you get any lead on where I might reach him, I would appreciate your +telling me. I don't mean to suggest that he is trying to escape or +anything, but quite the contrary. I just haven't been able to reach him. + +Mr. PIZZO. He's working around here somewhere. I believe, according +to his application when he gave it to me, he was a sales manager in +Louisiana and he owned a liquor store. + +Mr. JENNER. Well, he was the owner of the Bent Elbow, wherever that is, +here. + +Mr. PIZZO. Yes; and his name isn't used--one of the salesmen sold him +the place, the salesman that's still working there sold him the place. +I guess he wanted out from under it and just found Bogard to do so, and +when Bogard was bound to own a beer place, my boss immediately fired +him. He won't have it. You cannot have outside interests with a dealer +development company because factory and dealer development won't stand +for it. You have to work primarily for the dealership, and he was fired +for that and many other reasons, little reasons that, believe me, have +no concern with this. + +Mr. JENNER. Mr. Davis, do you have any questions for Mr. Pizzo? + +Mr. DAVIS. No. + +Mr. JENNER. Mr. Pizzo, we appreciate very much your coming in and I +know it was of considerable inconvenience at the month end and you have +a lot of salesmen who want their money or pay. + +Mr. PIZZO. I told my boss today--he says, "Do you have to go?" I said, +"I have to go, but really, if I wasn't so patriotic, they would have to +come after me, I told him." + +Mr. JENNER. We appreciate it very much. You have a right, Mr. Pizzo, to +read over your deposition if you wish and to sign it--this deposition I +have taken of you, and if you care to exercise that right and make any +corrections you wish, Miss Oliver will have this probably near the end +of the week and you can call in and ask Mr. Sanders, the U.S. attorney, +or for one of us if we are around--they will refer you to us anyhow, or +you have a right to waive that, as you see fit. It is a privilege you +may exercise if you wish to. + +Mr. PIZZO. You mean what I have said here today? + +Mr. JENNER. Yes. + +Mr. PIZZO. I believe everything I have said today--I will be glad to +sign it. + +Mr. JENNER. You don't have to--it is entirely up to you, if you see fit. + +Mr. PIZZO. When would I get this deposition? + +Mr. JENNER. Well, it will be ready for you to read--Miss Oliver will +have it toward the end of the week. + +Mr. PIZZO. All right, sir. + +Mr. JENNER. If you will call in, she can tell you if it is ready and +advise you if it isn't ready and then when it will be ready. + +Mr. PIZZO. Well, I wish you gentlemen a lot of luck. + +Mr. JENNER. Thank you very much. + + + + +TESTIMONY OF ALBERT GUY BOGARD + +The testimony of Albert Guy Bogard was taken at 11:05 a.m., on April +8, 1964, in the office of the U.S. attorney, 301 Post Office Building, +Bryan and Ervay Streets, Dallas, Tex., by Mr. Joseph A. Ball, assistant +counsel of the President's Commission. + + +Mr. BALL. Will you stand 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. BOGARD. I do. + +Mr. BALL. Will you state your name, please. + +Mr. BOGARD. Albert Guy Bogard. + +Mr. BALL. And your address? + +Mr. BOGARD. 304 Brighton Street. + +Mr. BALL. What is your occupation? + +Mr. BOGARD. Sales manager for L & L Vending Co. + +Mr. BALL. What do you sell? + +Mr. BOGARD. Vending machines. + +Mr. BALL. Vending machines. What kind of vending machines? + +Mr. BOGARD. Vending machines. Cigarette machines. + +Mr. BALL. Oh, vending. Oh, I see. I couldn't understand your Texas +dialect. That is the--I understand now. Vending. + +Mr. BOGARD. I have sinus trouble. + +Mr. BALL. Oh, you have? Let me see. Where were you born and raised? + +Mr. BOGARD. Born in Cowshatta, La. + +Mr. BALL. Where did you go to school? + +Mr. BOGARD. Hall Summit, La. + +Mr. BALL. How far through school, sir? + +Mr. BOGARD. Finished. Eleventh grade. + +Mr. BALL. Eleventh grade? And what occupation did you pursue after that? + +Mr. BOGARD. U.S. Navy. + +Mr. BALL. How long? + +Mr. BOGARD. Four years and two months and three days, I think, to be +exact. + +Mr. BALL. Then what did you do? What did you do after that? + +Mr. BOGARD. I started selling automobiles. + +Mr. BALL. Did you sell automobiles from then on until---- + +Mr. BOGARD. Then on until just recently. + +Mr. BALL. I see. When did you take this job you are on now? + +Mr. BOGARD. January. + +Mr. BALL. Of 1964? + +Mr. BOGARD. 1964; yes, sir. + +Mr. BALL. Who did you work for last fall, 1963? + +Mr. BOGARD. Downtown Lincoln Mercury, 118 East Commerce, Dallas, Tex. + +Mr. BALL. Shortly after the death of President Kennedy you notified the +FBI, didn't you? + +Mr. BOGARD. I did not notify the FBI. + +Mr. BALL. Did you notify someone that you had information? + +Mr. BOGARD. Was the other salesman notified the FBI. + +Mr. BALL. Who was he? + +Mr. BOGARD. I forget the name. + +Mr. BALL. But he notified the FBI that you had some information? + +Mr. BOGARD. Yes. + +Mr. BALL. And did some special agent from the Federal Bureau of +Investigation come and call on you? + +Mr. BOGARD. Yes, sir; several times. + +Mr. BALL. And took a statement from you? + +Mr. BOGARD. Yes; I took a lie detector test. + +Mr. BALL. You told him about an incident which occurred sometime before? + +Mr. BOGARD. Yes, sir; week before. + +Mr. BALL. Just 1 week before? + +Mr. BOGARD. Yes, sir; just one--one week before--two weeks before. + +Mr. BALL. About what date? Do you remember? + +Mr. BOGARD. Ninth day of November, I think it was, to be exact. + +Mr. BALL. 1963? + +Mr. BOGARD. 1963. + +Mr. BALL. What day of the week was that? + +Mr. BOGARD. That was on a Saturday. + +Mr. BALL. When was it? In the morning, or afternoon? + +Mr. BOGARD. Afternoon. + +Mr. BALL. About what time? + +Mr. BOGARD. I think it was around 1:30 or 2 o'clock, as I was leaving +town shortly after I gave the demonstration in the automobile and I was +in a hurry. + +Mr. BALL. Tell me just what happened there? Tell me the incident that +you remember and that you related to the Federal---- + +Mr. BOGARD. A gentleman walked in the door and walked up and introduced +himself to me, and tells me he wants to look at a car. I show him a car +on the showroom floor, and take him for a ride out Stemmons Expressway +and back, and he was driving at 60 to 70 miles an hour and came back to +the showroom. And I made some figures, and he told me that he wasn't +ready to buy, that he would be in a couple or 3 weeks, that he had some +money coming in. And when he finally started to leave I got his name +and wrote it on the back of one of my business cards, and never heard +from the man any more. And the day that the President was shot, when I +heard that--they had the radio on in the showroom, and when I heard the +name, that he had shot a policeman over in Oak Cliff, I pulled out some +business cards that I had wrote his name on the back on, and said, "He +won't be a prospect any more because he is going to jail," and ripped +the card up. + +Mr. BALL. Threw it away? + +Mr. BOGARD. Threw it away. + +Mr. BALL. And when the FBI agent came to see you, the card had already +been thrown away? + +Mr. BOGARD. Yes, sir; I tore it up that very same day. + +Mr. BALL. This was Friday the 22d? + +Mr. BOGARD. Yes, sir; the day I heard that Kennedy had been killed. I +hadn't heard that the President had been killed; just heard a policeman +had been shot and that's when I tore up the card and said, "He won't +want to buy a car." + +Mr. BALL. Now, what kind of a looking man was he, or could you describe +him? + +Mr. BOGARD. I can tell you the truth, I have already forgotten what he +actually looked like. I identified him as in pictures, but just to tell +you what he looked like that day, I don't remember. + +Mr. BALL. You don't have a memory of it? + +Mr. BOGARD. No, sir. + +Mr. BALL. Was he tall, or short? + +Mr. BOGARD. About medium build, I'd say. + +Mr. BALL. Do you remember what name he gave you? + +Mr. BOGARD. Gave me Lee Oswald. + +Mr. BALL. Did he give you that when he first introduced---- + +Mr. BOGARD. He give me that when he started to leave. + +Mr. BALL. Oh, gave you that when he started to leave? + +Mr. BOGARD. Yes. + +Mr. BALL. And didn't give you any name when he first introduced himself? + +Mr. BOGARD. No, sir. + +Mr. BALL. Did he tell you what kind of a car he wanted? + +Mr. BOGARD. Yes, sir; wanted a Caliente, two-door hardtop. + +Mr. BALL. What kind of make is that? + +Mr. BOGARD. Mercury Comet. + +Mr. BALL. And did you show him one? + +Mr. BOGARD. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BALL. What color did you show him? + +Mr. BOGARD. Red. + +Mr. BALL. You took a ride with him? + +Mr. BOGARD. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BALL. Did he drive, or did you drive it? + +Mr. BOGARD. He drove it. + +Mr. BALL. Drive it, right out of the shop, or did you drive it first +and then---- + +Mr. BOGARD. No; he drove it right offhand. He got in driving it. + +Mr. BALL. Did he appear to know how to drive the car? + +Mr. BOGARD. Well, he had drove before, I'm sure, because he took off. + +Mr. BALL. Did he---- + +Mr. BOGARD. He might have drove a little reckless, but other than that, +he knew how to drive. + +Mr. BALL. What do you mean, "He might have drove it a little reckless"? + +Mr. BOGARD. Well, going 60 and 70 miles an hour right up a Freeway and +took curves kind of fast. + +Mr. BALL. Did it appear to you that he knew how to handle the car? + +Mr. BOGARD. Yes. + +Mr. BALL. Now, when you got back to the showroom you say you did some +figuring. What kind of figuring? + +Mr. BOGARD. Just took out some papers and going to write up how much +the car would cost and, just like with anybody else, just trying to +close the deal, and he said he would have the money in 2 or 3 weeks and +would come in and---- + +Mr. BALL. Did you tell him you needed a down payment? + +Mr. BOGARD. He said he would have it. + +Mr. BALL. Did you tell him how much? + +Mr. BOGARD. Yes. + +Mr. BALL. How much? + +Mr. BOGARD. Three hundred dollars, I think. And he said he didn't have +the money then and would just pay cash for it at a later date. + +Mr. BALL. Did he tell you where he lived? + +Mr. BOGARD. No, sir. + +Mr. BALL. Did he give you his--didn't give you his address or telephone +number? + +Mr. BOGARD. No, sir; or occupation. + +Mr. BALL. And he gave you his name, though? + +Mr. BOGARD. Lee Oswald. + +Mr. BALL. At what time? + +Mr. BOGARD. That is when he was fixing to leave. + +Mr. BALL. Lee Oswald? + +Mr. BOGARD. Uh-huh. + +Mr. BALL. You say you wrote it on one of your own cards? + +Mr. BOGARD. Yes, sir; back of one of my business cards. + +Mr. BALL. Did you tell anybody about it at that time? + +Mr. BOGARD. Now, at that time I don't know whether--Now, Mr. Pizzo, I +think I introduced him to him. I introduced him to Mr. Pizzo. He asked +what was wrong with him and I said he hasn't got the money right now. +Will be back in a couple or 3 weeks. + +Mr. BALL. You introduced him to Pizzo? + +Mr. BOGARD. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BALL. And you said this in front of Pizzo that he didn't have the +money? + +Mr. BOGARD. Yes, sir; he was expecting some money--to have the money in +2 or 3 weeks. + +Mr. BALL. When did you see the television that called your attention to +this? + +Mr. BOGARD. I heard it on the radio. + +Mr. BALL. You heard it on the radio? + +Mr. BOGARD. And then I tore the card up, and that very same night on +the 10 o'clock news, I think it was, if I remember correctly, I saw him +on TV. + +Mr. BALL. Did you see any pictures of Lee Oswald in the newspaper? + +Mr. BOGARD. Yes, sir; Dallas Morning News, next morning. + +Mr. BALL. Now, what was your impression when you saw the man on +television? + +Mr. BOGARD. All my impression was that he had been in and tried to buy +a car, that he wasn't a prospect any more. + +Mr. BALL. What about his picture in the paper? Did it appear to be--did +you recognize him from the picture? + +Mr. BOGARD. Yes; I recognized him as being the same fellow that had +been in. + +Mr. BALL. And did you tell anybody out there that you thought it was +the same person? + +Mr. BOGARD. They began asking me then, and I said, "Yes," and this +Pizzo recognized him, too. + +Mr. BALL. What did Pizzo say? + +Mr. BOGARD. Said, "Yes; that is the same man." And Pizzo also has been +questioned by the FBI. + +Mr. BALL. How do you spell his name? + +Mr. BOGARD. P-i-z-z-o. + +Mr. BALL. He was the sales manager? + +Mr. BOGARD. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BALL. Is he still the sales manager out there? + +Mr. BOGARD. No, sir. + +Mr. BALL. Where is he now? + +Mr. BOGARD. I don't know. I think, though, that he is at Eagle +Lincoln-Mercury. I wouldn't be for sure, because I haven't seen Pizzo +since I left Downtown Lincoln-Mercury. + +Mr. BALL. Now, when was it that you talked to the other salesman about +this and told them that you thought the man had been in to see you? + +Mr. BOGARD. We were all standing there listening to the radio and the +name came on the radio, and I pulled this business card out with "Lee +Oswald," wrote across it. + +Mr. BALL. Who were some of the men standing by the radio when you +pulled this business card out? + +Mr. BOGARD. Oh, I think Oran Brown was there, Mr. Wilson was there, and +this other little boy, he hadn't been there very long. I can't remember +his name at this time right now. + +Mr. BALL. Oran Brown and Wilson? + +Mr. BOGARD. Yes. + +Mr. BALL. What are Wilson's initials, do you have them? + +Mr. BOGARD. I can't remember Mr. Wilson's initials right now. + +Mr. BALL. Wilson a salesman? + +Mr. BOGARD. Yes, sir; been there for about 12 years. + +Mr. BALL. Is Brown a salesman? + +Mr. BOGARD. He works for Fina Oil Co. out here on Inwood Road now. + +Mr. BALL. What is it? + +Mr. BOGARD. [Spelling] O-r-a-n. + +Mr. BALL. [Spelling] O-r-a-n--oil what? + +Mr. BOGARD. My--no, he works for Fina Oil Co., American Petra Fina Oil +Co. A service station. + +Mr. BALL. Service station? + +Mr. BOGARD. He manages this service station out there. New, big service +station. + +Mr. BALL. Well, Mr. Bogard, did you receive a letter from the +Commission asking you to appear here? + +Mr. BOGARD. No, sir. + +Mr. BALL. You were asked to appear by the Secret Service? + +Mr. BOGARD. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BALL. I probably should have stated to you the purpose of this +inquiry. The Commission has been authorized to investigate the +assassination of the President and any facts or circumstances that +might determine who assassinated him. And our attention was called to +your testimony by the Federal Bureau of Investigation report, and we +asked you to come in and testify and you did so willingly, didn't you? + +Mr. BOGARD. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BALL. You were willing? + +Mr. BOGARD. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BALL. Willing to come in and testify and be sworn? + +Mr. BOGARD. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BALL. And testify as to these facts? + +Mr. BOGARD. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BALL. I am a staff officer with the Commission. + +Mr. BOGARD. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BALL. And I am authorized by the Commission to administer the oath +to you and ask you these questions, and all questions you answered were +under oath. You understand that? + +Mr. BOGARD. Yes, sir; I answered the same questions under a polygraph +test. + +Mr. BALL. Under a polygraph test from the FBI? + +Mr. BOGARD. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BALL. Now, this will be written up and submitted to you for your +signature, and you can come down here and look it over and read it and +sign it, or you may waive your signature--whatever you wish. Which do +you prefer? + +Mr. BOGARD. Which do you want? Put it that way. + +Mr. BALL. I'm going to leave it up to you. That is really something for +you to decide whether you want to come back down here or not. + +Mr. BOGARD. I don't mind coming back down. + +Mr. BALL. We'll notify you and you can come in and we will notify you +when it is ready and you can come in and sign it. + +Mr. BOGARD. Thank you. + +Mr. BALL. Thank you for coming down. + +Mr. BOGARD. Thank you, Mr. Ball. + +Mr. BALL. All right. + + + + +TESTIMONY OF FLOYD GUY DAVIS + +The testimony of Floyd Guy Davis was taken at 9:30 a.m., on April 1, +1964, in the office of the U.S. attorney, 301 Post Office Building, +Bryan and Ervay Streets, Dallas, Tex., by Mr. Wesley J. Liebeler, +assistant counsel of the President's Commission. + + +Mr. LIEBELER. Mr. Davis, would you please rise and raise your right +hand. Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you are about to give is +the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, so help you God? + +Mr. DAVIS. I do. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Please sit down. Mr. Davis, my name is Wesley J. +Liebeler. I am a member of the legal staff of the President's +Commission investigating the assassination of President Kennedy. I have +been authorized by the Commission to take testimony from you and from +other witnesses pursuant to authority granted to the Commission by +Executive Order 11130, dated November 29, 1963, and joint resolution of +Congress No. 137. + +I understand that Mr. Rankin wrote to you, Mr. Davis, last week and +indicated--in point of fact, the letter was returned to Washington and +it was on my desk when I left. It was addressed to the Sports Drome +Rifle Range and could not be delivered at that address. With the letter +that Mr. Rankin originally sent to you, he enclosed a copy of the +Executive order and joint resolution to which I just referred as well +as a copy of the Commission's rules of procedure relating to the taking +of testimony. + +Since you didn't get copies of those documents nor the letter, I now +hand you copies of those documents which you may keep for your own +reference. It is my understanding that you were contacted by the Secret +Service and requested to come here and give testimony. Technically, you +are entitled to 3-days' notice. I don't expect you did get it, but you +are now here and I assume you have no objection to going ahead with +your testimony at this point, is that correct? + +Mr. DAVIS. That's right, yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. I want to inquire concerning the possibility that Lee +Harvey Oswald engaged in rifle practice at a rifle range which would +be, I am informed, one which you operated at 8000 West Davis, Dallas, +Tex. + +Before we get into the details of that, would you state your full name? + +Mr. DAVIS. Floyd Guy Davis. + +Mr. LIEBELER. What is your address? + +Mr. DAVIS. 2824 Byway. + +Mr. LIEBELER. How old are you, sir? + +Mr. DAVIS. Thirty-two. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Where were you born? + +Mr. DAVIS. In Louisville, Ky. + +Mr. LIEBELER. When did you move to Dallas? + +Mr. DAVIS. It was approximately 8 years ago. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you move here from Louisville? + +Mr. DAVIS. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You have lived all your life in Louisville and Dallas, is +that correct? + +Mr. DAVIS. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Am I correct in understanding that during the period +October and November of 1963, you were the operator of the Sports Dome +Rifle Range at 8000 West Davis? + +Mr. DAVIS. That is D-r-o-m-e. It is Sports Drome. + +Mr. LIEBELER. I was pronouncing it Dome. + +Mr. DAVIS. I thought you were. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Are you still operating that rifle range? + +Mr. DAVIS. Yes, we are. + +Mr. LIEBELER. When did you commence operating it? + +Mr. DAVIS. The exact date, I don't have, sir. It was about the first of +October of last year. + +Mr. LIEBELER. We are informed that the FBI has interviewed you and +taken from you certain shell cases? + +Mr. DAVIS. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. For analysis in the FBI laboratory? + +Mr. DAVIS. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Could you tell us briefly the circumstances that led up +to that, as far as you know. + +Mr. DAVIS. Well, the only thing that I know that happened, there was +some people that said that they had seen Oswald out at the range on +three different occasions. I believe that it was on the 9th, the 10th, +and the 17th of November. And they informed the FBI that he was out +there. The two I am sure that contacted me was Mr. Malcolm Price or +Howard Price and Garland Slack, and the FBI in turn came out and talked +to us. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Malcolm Price? + +Mr. DAVIS. That is Malcolm Howard Price, is his full name. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you know his name yourself? + +Mr. DAVIS. Yes; he worked with me. + +Mr. LIEBELER. He worked with you? + +Mr. DAVIS. He does now. At that time he was helping us out there trying +to get the range started, and he has a heart ailment where he don't +hold a regular job, so he helps us out there a little bit on the range. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did he tell you that he had seen an individual who he +thought was Oswald at the range? + +Mr. DAVIS. He sure did. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did he tell you what date he thought he saw this man? + +Mr. DAVIS. He said on the 9th and the 10th and the 17th. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Three different occasions? + +Mr. DAVIS. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Were you there at the range on those days? + +Mr. DAVIS. I was there, but not at the time that he was talking about +on the 9th and the 10th. Now on the 17th, I was there, and the two +individuals that he brought up in their testimony, I remember them +being there, but I don't remember the faces. + +Mr. LIEBELER. How do you mean you remember them being there? + +Mr. DAVIS. Well, Mr. Slack, there was this booth No. 9 on the rifle +range---- + +Mr. LIEBELER. On what date? + +Mr. DAVIS. On the 17th; and I was holding the turkey shoot at the same +time. Mr. Slack come to me and was complaining about someone shooting +his target. + +So there was two young fellows, I can remember the approximate height +of them but I don't remember what their faces looked like, that were in +booth No. 8. I do remember the person that was in booth No. 7, though, +because I don't know whether you have talked to Mr. Charlie Brown in +the last 2 weeks or not on this---- + +Mr. LIEBELER. Mr. Brown, the FBI agent, yes. + +Mr. DAVIS. There was a fellow with a black beard in that booth No. 7, +at the same time. I remember him because he was outstanding, you know, +and I went to these fellows in booth No. 8, and was giving them heck +about shooting at the wrong target. And this other fellow, I remember +him because he wouldn't say anything to me. I tried to speak to him +two or three different occasions, because he had a lot of guns, and I +thought he would be a good customer. + +Mr. LIEBELER. The fellow with the beard? + +Mr. DAVIS. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. He was how tall, approximately? + +Mr. DAVIS. He was over 6 feet and he weighed a good 250 pounds. A big +bruiser. + +Mr. LIEBELER. I think we can assume that was not Lee Harvey Oswald. + +Mr. DAVIS. They were trying to find him. Charlie Brown was trying to +find this person, and 2 weeks ago on a Sunday morning I saw him in an +automobile out on Davis, I believe it was. + +Mr. LIEBELER. The big fellow with the beard? + +Mr. DAVIS. The big fellow there with the beard. And I got the license +number on the car and the type of car it was and called it into the +office. + +I haven't heard anything from Mr. Brown since then, whether he got the +information, but I am sure he did when I turned it into the office. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Now let's review this. Mr. Slack was in booth No. 9, is +that correct? + +Mr. DAVIS. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. This big fellow was in booth No. 7? + +Mr. DAVIS. Right. And there was the two young fellows in booth No. 8. +One of them was 5 foot 6 or 5 foot 7, somewhere in that vicinity, and +the other one was about 6 foot, and he was blackheaded. + +I can remember that, but as far as remembering their faces, with that +turkey shoot we had 225 people that day, I can't remember what they +looked like. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You say that these two fellows, one was approximately 6 +feet tall or over, is that correct? + +Mr. DAVIS. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Was heavy-set or slender? + +Mr. DAVIS. No; he wasn't particularly heavy-set, he was just a medium +build. + +Mr. LIEBELER. He was not of a light build, however? + +Mr. DAVIS. No; he wasn't. He was just about my size. I would say 160 to +170 pounds. + +Mr. LIEBELER. How tall are you? + +Mr. DAVIS. Six-one. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And you weigh? + +Mr. DAVIS. I weigh about 160, but I was a little bit heavier about that +time. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you determine which of the fellows was shooting at +Mr. Slack's target? + +Mr. DAVIS. No, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you speak to both of them or all three of them? + +Mr. DAVIS. Not as an individual. I spoke to the group to be sure they +were firing at the right target and to watch where they were facing +because they were shooting at the wrong target. + +Mr. LIEBELER. This Mr. Slack, now then, believes that one of the two of +these fellows could have been Lee Harvey Oswald, is that right? + +Mr. DAVIS. Yes; that's right. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Mr. Slack has told you that? + +Mr. DAVIS. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And Mr. Price was also there the same day? + +Mr. DAVIS. He said he was. + +Mr. LIEBELER. He also indicated that he thinks one of those two +gentlemen was Oswald? + +Mr. DAVIS. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You yourself had an opportunity to observe both of these +gentlemen, did you not? + +Mr. DAVIS. Yes; I sure did. + +Mr. LIEBELER. I want to show you some pictures which have been +previously marked as Commission Exhibits Nos. 451, 453, 454, 455 and +456, and ask you if you recognize from these pictures the pictures of +the individuals who were firing from booth No. 8, at your range on +Sunday, November 17, 1963? + +Mr. DAVIS. He sure looks familiar, but I couldn't say for sure. It sure +looks familiar. This would have been the taller of the two, and this is +almost---- + +Mr. LIEBELER. You pointed to Commission Exhibit 451, and you think that +gentleman resembles the taller of the two men that were firing from +booth No. 8? + +Mr. DAVIS. Yes; he is about the same size. The face features, I seem +to have seen them before, but as far as--it sure looks like him. I +couldn't say definitely that it was him, but it sure looks a lot like +him. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Do you see any resemblance between any of the pictures +which I have shown and the shorter of the two men? + +Mr. DAVIS. The face on the other one, I couldn't say what it looked +like. So many of these pictures of Lee Harvey Oswald have been shown to +me, and they started showing me things about the time it all happened, +and I would hate to say that it was him. But definitely this fellow, +the taller of the two fellows was about his built. He looked like he is +about my size. He may be a little bit shorter in those pictures. + +Mr. LIEBELER. What about the facial features of the gentleman on 451? + +Mr. DAVIS. Like I say, the features of his face are familiar, they seem +to be familiar to me, but as far as definitely saying that was the +person out there I---- + +Mr. LIEBELER. You couldn't do that? + +Mr. DAVIS. No, sir; but it does look familiar, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. I show you next a photograph that has previously +been marked Pizzo Exhibit 453-B, which is a photograph of several +individuals, one of whom has been marked by a green marker. I ask you +if that picture bears any resemblance to either of the two men you saw +firing from booth No. 8, at your rifle range on Sunday, November 17? + +Mr. DAVIS. Like I said before I couldn't be too sure because I have saw +so many pictures of this that look like Lee Harvey Oswald that they get +to running together with them when I get to thinking about them, and I +would hate to say that I was, because I have saw pictures of him in all +different forms, in the newspapers, in--and also some that the police +have brought out there, and the Grand Prairie police brought them, +and some of the FBI, and I would hate to say because I was very much +interested in the case at the time it did happen, because myself it was +a blow to the business that I am in. + +As far as someone with a high-powered rifle shooting the President like +he did, I was afraid they were going to pass a bill which would stop +that stuff, and it is like a hard blow to me. + +Mr. LIEBELER. To your business at the range? + +Mr. DAVIS. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did your business actually fall off after the +assassination? + +Mr. DAVIS. It practically died on that thing. It just +gradually--yesterday we had one person out there, compared to 80 and 90 +when we first opened. Of course, they were in deer season. That had a +lot to do with it. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Have you ever been shown this picture that I just showed +you before? + +Mr. DAVIS. No. + +Mr. LIEBELER. 453-B? + +Mr. DAVIS. Not that particular shot. + +Mr. LIEBELER. I will show you an exhibit marked Pizzo 453-C, and ask +you if you recognize that individual as being one of those who were at +your range on the date we have been discussing? + +Mr. DAVIS. I have saw that picture or similar one before. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You have seen the picture before? + +Mr. DAVIS. I have seen a picture similar to him before. There was a +scar on his head, but as far as that is concerned, I don't believe I +have saw the individual. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You can't identify that individual as either one of the +two that was at the range? + +Mr. DAVIS. No, sir; definitely. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Let me show you Exhibit 451 again and ask you if that +individual appears to you to be the same individual as Lee Harvey +Oswald, based on your observation of Oswald's picture in the newspaper +and the press? + +Mr. DAVIS. That this is Lee Harvey Oswald? + +Mr. LIEBELER. Yes. Does that appear to you to be Lee Harvey Oswald? + +Mr. DAVIS. No, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. It does not? + +Mr. DAVIS. No, sir. This Mr. Price did say that Oswald was in an old +model Chevrolet when he was out there on this Friday, the 9th, because +it was late in the afternoon when he came out there. + +And Mr. Price helped him sight that rifle in. Helped him sight the +scope in on the rifle, and he had two comments to say about that rifle, +sir. + +I am not for sure, I don't know anything about it, but he said that +the markings, all but the serial number had been filed off of this +particular rifle. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Mr. Price did say that? + +Mr. DAVIS. Yes, sir. And he said that the scope was the clearest scope +that he had ever seen for a small scope. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did he tell you what size scope it was? + +Mr. DAVIS. Yes; he told me, but as far as---- + +Mr. LIEBELER. Do you remember what he said? + +Mr. DAVIS. Not the exact size of it. I know there was several different +sizes of scopes on there. + +Mr. LIEBELER. The size of this scope is measured in terms of power? + +Mr. DAVIS. Yes. There is 2, 2-1/2, 4, 6, and on up. And he knows the +sizes, what he was talking about, but I don't know. + +Mr. LIEBELER. How long have you known Mr. Price? + +Mr. DAVIS. Well, I have actually only known him since the rifle range +opened. But two of his boys has helped us at the racetrack or helped +my wife last summer, at the racetrack, all summer. And as far as an +individual person, I didn't know him until we opened the gun range, +other than just to speak to him. + +Mr. LIEBELER. How old a fellow is he? + +Mr. DAVIS. Mr. Price is approximately 35, and he does have a heart +condition that the doctors won't let him work, as far as any work is +concerned, and that is why he stays down at the range, more or less to +watch it for us. + +Mr. LIEBELER. In your opinion, is he a reliable fellow? + +Mr. DAVIS. He is very reliable, or I wouldn't have him down there. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You don't think he would say he saw Oswald if he didn't +in fact see him? + +Mr. DAVIS. No, sir. In fact, he told us about this before we called the +FBI. But he was afraid--he's got five children, and he was afraid that +it was some Communist plot or some gang that had done this, and he was +afraid for his children, or he would have called them sooner. + +Mr. LIEBELER. He is not a publicity seeker? + +Mr. DAVIS. No; he wasn't. I would say he was very sincere of this. It +might have been a case about a double identity or someone that looked a +lot like him. I would say definitely that he thought he saw him. + +There was also some doctor or lawyer in Oak Cliff, and his son, that he +said he saw him out there on the 17th. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Was that on the 17th? + +Mr. DAVIS. That was on the 17th. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Was that Dr. Wood? + +Mr. DAVIS. I believe it was. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Dentist? + +Mr. DAVIS. He might be a dentist. They told us at the range--Charlie +Brown, I believe, afterwards, of the FBI, said that he wasn't sure it +was him, but they told us previously they were sure that it was Oswald. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Has the FBI ever advised you as to the results of the +tests they probably ran on or did run on the cartridge cases you gave +them? + +Mr. DAVIS. No; nothing. I asked them if they were all there when they +returned them. He did return them, and he said they were all there, so +I took it from that that they didn't find anything in the case. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Do you know whether the cases that you gave the FBI were +cases that were used in a rifle that were used by these gentlemen that +were firing from booth No. 8, on November 17, 1963? + +Mr. DAVIS. From what Mr. Price told me, he was down at the range +helping out on the particular target. He saw these fellows pick up all +the shells and--they shot that day, which is very frequent, because +they reload a lot of that ammunition, but these particular fellows did +pick them up. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did your wife observe these two individuals on the 17th? + +Mr. DAVIS. No, sir; she was in the office, she doesn't remember them, +or she said before that she didn't remember them. She doesn't remember +this part I was telling you about, about Slack coming to them and +complaining about their shooting the wrong target. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Who else said they saw Oswald on the 9th and 10th? + +Mr. DAVIS. That was Mr. Price. + +Mr. LIEBELER. That was Mr. Price? + +Mr. DAVIS. Yes. Mr. Slack said he saw him on the 17th. + +Mr. LIEBELER. The 17th only? + +Mr. DAVIS. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Can you give me Mr. Slack's full name? + +Mr. DAVIS. No, sir; I don't have it. + +Mr. LIEBELER. He is just a customer of yours, is that correct? + +Mr. DAVIS. Yes, sir; Mr. Brown has talked to him before. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Mr. Price was not at the range on the 17th? + +Mr. DAVIS. Price was at the range on the 17th; yes, also. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did he also say that he thinks that these gentlemen were +with Mr. Oswald? + +Mr. DAVIS. He thought this one individual that was with this taller +fellow in booth No. 8, was Oswald. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Both Mr. Slack and Mr. Price came to that conclusion, is +that correct? + +Mr. DAVIS. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Am I correct in understanding then that both Mr. Price +and Mr. Slack observed these two gentlemen on the 17th, but only Mr. +Price observed them on the 9th and 10th, is that correct? + +Mr. DAVIS. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Do you know whether Mr. Price thinks they are the same +men? + +Mr. DAVIS. He definitely thinks that it is the same man Oswald on the +9th and 10th. I don't believe he said there was anyone with him, and +that he come out there just at dark, right before dark and was driving +an old-model Chevrolet, or was in an old-model Chevrolet. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Was it just a car or a station wagon? + +Mr. DAVIS. I don't remember. He just said it was an old-model car, and +he could have meant a station wagon when he said an old car. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you observe the rifle that these men at booth 8, were +using? + +Mr. DAVIS. No, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You did not at anytime observe it? + +Mr. DAVIS. I possibly could have when I walked up there, but I didn't +pay any attention. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And you wouldn't be able to identify that rifle if I +showed you a picture of it now? + +Mr. DAVIS. No, sir; when you see as many rifles as I do out at +that range out there, it would be hard unless there was something +outstanding about it. + +Mr. LIEBELER. There was nothing outstanding about that that you can +remember now? + +Mr. DAVIS. I was more or less mad when I went down there, because +someone was shooting at the wrong target. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you observe these two gentlemen leaving the range on +the 17th? + +Mr. DAVIS. No, sir; I sure didn't. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Have you had experience with the sighting in of rifles? + +Mr. DAVIS. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You are quite experienced in that field, as a matter of +fact, are you not? + +Mr. DAVIS. Well, I have taught myself in the past 5 months of operation +of that gun range to where I can usually sight one in within 8 to 10 +shots pretty close. Mr. Price is a gun enthusiast and he is real good +at it, and he has been doing it for a long time. + +Mr. LIEBELER. If a man purchased a rifle from a mail-order house that +had a telescopic sight mounted on it, would you have any opinion as to +what the accuracy of that rifle would be without it having actually +been sighted in by actual firing of the rifle? + +Mr. DAVIS. If the gun was anywhere near accurate, it would have to be +an accident, because the slightest jar can knock a scope 2 or 3 foot +out of balance, and there is no way that you could ship a gun and carry +a gun around a little bit and make sure it being accurate. That is why +your deer hunters practice and shoot their guns in every year before +they go deer hunting. And I have saw them waste almost five boxes of +shells trying to get them accurate down there after having sighted them +in the year before. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Are you familiar with the technique of boresighting? + +Mr. DAVIS. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. If a rifle is boresighted is that enough to make it +accurate? + +Mr. DAVIS. By the average individual, no. And by the shops around +Dallas here, no. Because they have brought us several guns out there +that have been boresighted in various shops around Dallas and we have +had to resight them, because another thing, the scope will have to be +adjusted to the individual eyes, too. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And that can only be done through firing a rifle? + +Mr. DAVIS. That is right, that can only be done from firing a rifle and +sighting it in. You can get it close, but you couldn't get it right on +target, especially at a hundred yards. + +Every gun I sight in, I boresight them myself at a 25-yard target to +get them into the 25-yard target, and once I get it within an inch of +the "bullseye," then I go to the long range, which is easy to bring it +in. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Are you familiar with the Irving Sports Shop in Irving, +Tex.? + +Mr. DAVIS. Nothing; only I have dropped a poster off, advertising, when +I first opened the gun range, and I am not familiar with the owner of +it. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Do you know a gentleman by the name of Dial Ryder? + +Mr. DAVIS. No, sir; not the name. I may know the face, but I don't know +the name. + +Mr. LIEBELER. He works in the Irving Sports Shop. + +Mr. DAVIS. No, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Sights rifles and mounts scopes and things like that. + +Mr. DAVIS. No; I am not familiar with him. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Do you know whether you have ever sighted in a rifle that +has been boresighted at the Irving Sports Shop? + +Mr. DAVIS. No, sir; not offhand. We usually don't ask them where they +sighted the guns in because it is not a good idea to run down any +gunshop. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Are you familiar with the area around Love Field? + +Mr. DAVIS. Fairly familiar with it; yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Do you think it would be possible to practice with a +high-powered rifle around Love Field? + +Mr. DAVIS. It would be right about Bachman Lake, around the lake +itself, as long as the police didn't catch you. There is the river +bottom right in there. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Do you think it would be possible to fire out there, to +sight a rifle in without having a police notice it or someone in the +neighborhood notice it and calling it to the police? + +Mr. DAVIS. As long as you stayed 400 yards off the highway, there is +places down there you could get that it would be possible. + +Mr. LIEBELER. There are areas surrounding the field that are not built +up to such an extent so that you could actually practice with a rifle +in that area, is that correct? + +Mr. DAVIS. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Have you ever heard of anybody firing a rifle in that +vicinity? + +Mr. DAVIS. I have people all the time that have been practicing in the +Trinity River bottoms around Dallas come out to the range and have been +glad we opened that range so they could quit it because it is not a +safe practice. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Is that near Love Field? + +Mr. DAVIS. Yes. The Trinity River bottom is not far from there. It is +actually between Irving and Love Field. + +Mr. LIEBELER. How far is it from Love Field itself if you wanted to go +to the Trinity River bottom and didn't have an automobile? Could you +take a bus to Love Field or near Love Field and then walk that readily +to the Trinity River bottom? + +Mr. DAVIS. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. One could do that very easily? + +Mr. DAVIS. It is a mile and a half. + +Mr. LIEBELER. I don't have any other questions at this point. I do want +to ask you if you can give me, Mr. Davis, Mr. Slack's address? + +Mr. DAVIS. I don't have it here, but I have some clippings at home out +of a newspaper that has it there. He lives on Urbandale. If you have a +Dallas phone book, I can probably get it out of the phone book. + +Mr. LIEBELER. What about Price? + +Mr. DAVIS. Mr. Price lives on Rice Street in Grand Prairie. + +Mr. LIEBELER. If you can think of anything that you would like to add +to the record, I would appreciate it if you would indicate that. + +Mr. DAVIS. The only thing that I would like to say is that there were +several other people mentioned that they saw Oswald on the 17th, but +they said they didn't want to get involved in it. I don't know whether +they were just talking or what it was. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Do you know their names? + +Mr. DAVIS. Not no particular persons. My wife, I'm sure, can tell you +some of them. She more or less runs the gun range through the week, and +I am only there through the weekend. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Thank you very much for coming in, Mr. Davis. I +appreciate your cooperation. The Commission wants you to know that it +appreciates the fact that you have cooperated with us in the way you +have. Thank you very much. + + + + +TESTIMONY OF VIRGINIA LOUISE DAVIS + +The testimony of Virginia Louise Davis was taken at 10 a.m., on April +1, 1964, in the office of the U.S. attorney, 301 Post Office Building, +Bryan and Ervay Streets, Dallas, Tex., by Mr. Wesley J. Liebeler, +assistant counsel of the President's Commission. + + +Mr. LIEBELER. Would you rise and 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? + +Mrs. DAVIS. I do. + +Mr. LIEBELER. My name is Wesley J. Liebeler. I am a member of the +legal staff of the President's Commission that is investigating the +assassination of President Kennedy. I have been authorized to take +testimony from you and from other witnesses pursuant to authority +granted to the Commission by Executive Order 11130, dated November 29, +1963, and Joint Resolution of Congress No. 137. + +As I told your husband, whose testimony which I just took, Mr. Rankin +sent you both a letter last week which was returned to Washington +because it could not be delivered at the gun range. It was addressed to +the Sports Drome Rifle Range and it could not be delivered there. + +Mr. Rankin in the letter advised you that we would be in touch with you +to arrange for the taking of your testimony. He enclosed copies of the +Executive order and the congressional resolution, as well as a copy of +the Commission's rules governing the taking of testimony from witnesses. + +I gave your husband a copy of those documents and he has them and will +make them available to you if you want to look at them. You have been +provided with copies this morning. + +As I told Mr. Davis, you are technically entitled to 3-days' notice +before appearing before us, but since you are here, I presume that you +would be willing to waive that notice and will go ahead? + +Mrs. DAVIS. Sure. + +Mr. LIEBELER. We want to question you about the possibility that Lee +Harvey Oswald engaged in rifle practice at the rifle range which is +operated by you and your husband. + +Before I get into the details of that testimony, however, would you +state your full name for the record? + +Mrs. DAVIS. Virginia Louise Davis. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You are married to Floyd Guy Davis, is that correct? + +Mrs. DAVIS. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Your address is 2825 Byway, Dallas? + +Mrs. DAVIS. Dallas; yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You and your husband have been operating the Sports Drome +Rifle Range since some time in October 1963; is that correct? + +Mrs. DAVIS. That's right. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Are you a native of Dallas, Mrs. Davis? + +Mrs. DAVIS. No; Kentucky. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Where in Kentucky? + +Mrs. DAVIS. Louisville. + +Mr. LIEBELER. When did you move to Dallas? + +Mrs. DAVIS. Oh, let's see, it has been 7 years ago, I think. I think we +have been here 7 years. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You and your husband moved to Dallas from Louisville +together; is that correct? + +Mrs. DAVIS. He came down about 6 months before I did. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Were you married at that time? + +Mrs. DAVIS. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. The Commission has had reports that various people +observed a gentleman whom they believed to be Lee Harvey Oswald at +the Sports Drome Rifle Range at 8000 West Davis on various occasions. +I would like to have you tell us now just what you know about those +reports, and whether or not you have ever seen anybody there that +resembled Oswald? + +Mrs. DAVIS. No; I did not. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You have not? + +Mrs. DAVIS. No. There is only three things that stand out in my mind +at the time it happened that I can verify what they say, and that is +the one night that I was there by myself and Mr. Howard Price got the +last customer that came in and took him down there, and he said that +he thought it was Lee Harvey Oswald because of the rifle, it being an +Italian rifle with this scope on it, and he remembered the gun. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Mr. Price told you that? + +Mrs. DAVIS. Yes. And then the other time I was there was, this +gentleman that was supposed to have been with him with the beard, +and I couldn't forget him--if I would see the man right now I would +recognize him, but he has never been back. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Can you tell us the date that Mr. Price said he took +Oswald in, or this man who he thought was Oswald, who was the last +customer? + +Mrs. DAVIS. I don't know the exact date, but I wrote it in my journal, +but I don't have it with me. + +Mr. LIEBELER. When you refer to the journal, what do you mean? + +Mrs. DAVIS. It is a daily record I keep of everything that happens at +the range. When we first opened, everyone had to sign it. But the FBI +picked up the sign-in slips and checked it out, and, of course, Lee +Harvey Oswald wasn't on it, but at the time we did not have fences up +and anyone could get on the range without us knowing it. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Do you know whether or not this man who Mr. Price took +down to the range this evening as the last customer signed in the book +or not? + +Mrs. DAVIS. He did not. It was our last customer and he just went on +down with him because it was late and they were tired and cold and +wanting to get home. But he was in an old car and he was alone and he +was a young slender man, and that is all I know. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Do you know what kind of car it was? + +Mrs. DAVIS. No; I don't. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Mr. Price does? + +Mrs. DAVIS. Yes; he does. But I don't. It is just an old car to me. I +don't know too much about cars and then the day that Mr. Slack came up +there in a panic because someone was shooting at a target that he had +paid for instead of his own, I remember that. That is the only three +incidents that I remember, and that is all. + +Mr. LIEBELER. The first incident was when? + +Mrs. DAVIS. A late customer when Mr. Price brought them in. + +Mr. LIEBELER. The man was a late customer? + +Mrs. DAVIS. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you see this man? + +Mrs. DAVIS. Yes; I did, but it was dark and I didn't see his face. I +just went to the window and Mr. Price said, "I will take him. You won't +have to take him down." We always take the customer to the range and +stay with them and put their target up for them because you can't let +them stay down there. They are liable to shoot anything, and he took +him down, and I locked up, and I left, and they were there. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You are not able to identify this man if I showed you a +picture of Oswald or someone else? + +Mrs. DAVIS. I don't remember. + +Mr. LIEBELER. The second incident was when Mr. Slack reported to you +that someone was firing his target, is that correct? Or was that the +third incident? + +Mrs. DAVIS. That was the third incident. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Let's cover that one. Mr. Slack came up to the office, +you say, and complained that someone was firing on his target? + +Mrs. DAVIS. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. What did you do? + +Mrs. DAVIS. My husband went down there and asked the boys to quit +firing at someone else's target, and he said something about, "Boys, +you must fire at your own target," or something like that. And he got +it straightened out, but they left. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you see any of these men at that time? + +Mrs. DAVIS. No; I was in the office. I take care of that part of it. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Was this man with the beard there at that time, do you +know? + +Mrs. DAVIS. No; that was on a Sunday afternoon or a Saturday. It was a +Saturday or a Sunday, and the reason I remember him, it was the same +day they said Oswald was out there, and I tried to talk to him, which +I talked to everyone that comes in, and he was noticeable because he +looked like the Castro type. He had this big beard and he was heavy +set and big broad shoulders, and well, he was just outstanding in his +appearance. He had big red earmuffs on and I couldn't help but notice +him. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Was anyone with him? + +Mrs. DAVIS. I don't know because he never spoke a word. I don't know if +anyone was with him or not, but he did have several guns. When I say +several, I mean not one or two. It was three or four, and he paid for +each rifle. + +Mr. LIEBELER. But you did not see anyone with him? + +Mrs. DAVIS. No. + +Mr. LIEBELER. That was Saturday or Sunday, you say? + +Mrs. DAVIS. It was a Saturday or a Sunday, and we was having turkey +shoots at the time and having several people out there. + +Mr. LIEBELER. That is when the man with the beard was there, is that +correct? + +Mrs. DAVIS. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Was that the same day that the gentleman complained about +somebody firing into their target? + +Mrs. DAVIS. It was. It was the same day they was complaining about the +two boys next to him firing into his target. + +Mr. LIEBELER. We mean Mr. Slack, do we not? + +Mrs. DAVIS. Mr. Slack. + +Mr. LIEBELER. But you yourself did not see either of these two men who +were supposedly firing into Mr. Slack's target? + +Mrs. DAVIS. No. + +Mr. LIEBELER. So you did not yourself personally observe any of those +gentlemen or who was supposed to have been Lee Oswald, is that correct? + +Mrs. DAVIS. That's right. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you ever observe the rifle that was in the possession +of this gentleman who was supposed to be Oswald? + +Mrs. DAVIS. No; at the time I didn't know one gun from another. Now I +can tell you everything they bring in. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Do you remember whether or not on this Sunday that Mr. +Slack complained that someone was firing into his target, everybody +signed into the journal? + +Mrs. DAVIS. Not everyone, because at the time we didn't have our fences +up. See, we have a fence that is all along the gun range, because there +were too many getting on the range without paying. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Do you know whether or not the two men who were supposed +to be firing into Mr. Slack's target signed in the journal? + +Mrs. DAVIS. No. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You don't know one way or the other, Mrs. Davis? + +Mrs. DAVIS. I don't know, because the only reason we was having them +sign in was to sign them cards to invite them to the next turkey shoot. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Would you have seen them at the time they signed it, +necessarily, or might someone else? + +Mrs. DAVIS. Someone might sign in for them. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And you would not necessarily have observed these +individuals signing in? + +Mrs. DAVIS. No; because the man who was outstanding, he didn't sign in. +I didn't see the man until he walked through the gun range. He didn't +walk through the entrance, or I would have seen him. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Mr. Davis mentioned the names of Mr. Slack and Mr. Price, +and he said that there were some others. + +Mrs. DAVIS. There was a doctor and his son that was out there that day. +They remembered the rifle and they reported that to me before any of it +came out in the paper, but I didn't get his name. But I do think that +the FBI contacted this doctor. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Would you remember his name if I told you it was Dr. +Wood? Would that ring a bell with you? + +Mrs. DAVIS. No, it doesn't. It has been so long ago. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Now, other than this doctor and Mr. Slack and Mr. Price, +do you know of anyone else who said that they thought that they saw +Oswald at the range? + +Mrs. DAVIS. Not that I would take their word for it. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Tell us what you mean by that. You must have somebody in +mind, somebody who told you these stories, and I would like to have you +tell them to us if you would. + +Mrs. DAVIS. Well, there was a mister--what is his name--Camplen, +Charlie Camplen, and he said he was out there on a Wednesday. + +Mr. LIEBELER. He said that Oswald?---- + +Mrs. DAVIS. But I didn't get into any detail, so I don't know. + +Mr. LIEBELER. But Camplen told you he saw Oswald on a Wednesday? + +Mrs. DAVIS. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Is there anybody else that has claimed to have seen +Oswald at the range? + +Mrs. DAVIS. No. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Do you know Mr. James Thompson? + +Mrs. DAVIS. Yes; Jim, he did say he thought he did, and I think he kind +of backed off. I don't know what to believe. I just don't know. He said +he wasn't going to say he did, because he couldn't swear to it. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Do you remember what day that he, Mr. Thompson, thought +he might have seen Oswald? + +Mrs. DAVIS. It was on a Sunday. It was the same Sunday, because he was +helping run the targets down. + +Mr. LIEBELER. What did Thompson tell you about this? + +Mrs. DAVIS. He told--he didn't talk to me too much about it. In fact, +he said he don't remember. He couldn't say he actually saw him. At +first he did say he saw him, and he did remember the incident about the +target, and Slack, but he don't, he said he couldn't swear that it was +Oswald. And we have never discussed it further. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Thompson lives---- + +Mrs. DAVIS. He is with the Bardahl Co. He is a representative of +Bardahl. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Does he live in the 1100 block of Gilpin Street? + +Mrs. DAVIS. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Is that in Dallas? + +Mrs. DAVIS. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. What about Mr. B. G. Moses, do you know him? + +Mrs. DAVIS. Yes; he is a neighbor. He lives across the street from me. +But I just don't know about him. I mean, he hasn't had too much to say +about it. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did he talk to you about it? + +Mrs. DAVIS. No; in a way, he did, and well, in a way--he didn't +actually come out and say--he said, "I think I saw him." I will put it +that way. He thinks. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Was this the same Sunday that you had the incident +concerning the target? + +Mrs. DAVIS. He worked that week, but I don't know if he was down there +or not that Sunday. It seems to me like he was working the trap. He was +in the office, come in and out of the office, but I don't think he was +on the rifle range. + +Mr. LIEBELER. On the Sunday we are speaking of? + +Mrs. DAVIS. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Do you remember the date of this Sunday? + +Mrs. DAVIS. No, I don't. I think it was around November, maybe the +13th, something like that. I wouldn't know unless I had my dates in +front of me. I don't remember names or dates too well, but I remember +faces. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Was it the weekend before the assassination? + +Mrs. DAVIS. Oh, yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. It was the last weekend preceding the assassination? + +Mrs. DAVIS. Yes; and we did quite a bit of advertising when we opened +that range. The last week in October is when we opened the range, and +we had in that month, we ran, let's see, it was 1600 and some people +through there, so you know the word got around that it was a public gun +range and was open. + +Mr. LIEBELER. So that anybody who was interested in it would have known +about it? + +Mrs. DAVIS. That's right. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Do you have any opinion as to whether or not Oswald was +really at the range as a result of all these discussions? + +Mrs. DAVIS. I really do think he was. I didn't see the man. I couldn't +say one word, but I really think he was, sincerely, because the two +men, especially Howard Price, he is the kind of person that you can +believe what he says. He is intelligent. When he says he knows a rifle, +he knows that rifle. He can get out there and dig out slugs, which he +does, and melt them down to the lead, and he can tell you what slug is +out of each gun, which I can't do. He is just a gun enthusiast and he +loves it and he remembered that gun. + +But that is the only thing I can say. I did not see the man and I +couldn't say. I mean nothing except I would take his word for it. He +wouldn't be the kind, and he told us this before it all come out in the +paper, and the rifle, it hadn't been identified in the paper when he +identified it. But Slack, I don't know too much about him. He is just +a temperamental hothead. He was very hot, and they kept kicking his +booth. He said they had odd shoes on and kept kicking his booth. If +someone is knocking this desk, she couldn't write, and he kept knocking +the side of the booth and he couldn't shoot, and that made him angry. +But that is the only thing that I know. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You are basing your opinion basically on the conversation +you had with Mr. Price and your respect for Mr. Price's judgment? + +Mrs. DAVIS. That's right. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did Mr. Price tell you, or did you learn how these men +got to the rifle range? + +Mrs. DAVIS. No. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did they walk or come in a car? + +Mrs. DAVIS. Now, Mr. Price said they came in a car, this old car. I +think he knows the make of it, but like I say, I didn't see him. The +only thing--only time I saw a car at a late arrival was the night I was +telling you about that Price took him down there, but I saw the man get +out, but that is all. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did Mr. Price see these two men on the Sunday before the +assassination when they had the incident over the target? + +Mrs. DAVIS. I don't think he was down there that day. I don't remember. +I don't think so. I know Jim Thompson was working that day and Mr. +Moses and my husband and I, and we never have over four, so I don't +think we was--I may be mistaken, he may have been there, but not +working for us, because he was there every day. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Price was? + +Mrs. DAVIS. Price was. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Can you think of anybody else who might have seen Oswald +at the range, or this fellow they thought was Oswald, come and told you +about it? + +Mrs. DAVIS. No, I sure can't. + +Mr. LIEBELER. I don't think I have any more questions at this point. Is +there anything that you can think of? + +Mrs. DAVIS. I have thought and thought, and I would give anything if I +could think of something or identify someone he was with. I think that +would be more of a help to you people than anything, wouldn't it? + +Mr. LIEBELER. Yes, it would. + +Mrs. DAVIS. My husband did call in that he saw this bearded man. Do you +have that on your records? + +Mr. LIEBELER. Your husband told us. + +Mrs. DAVIS. He went right to the phone and called, because we were +convinced. Do you know anybody that was with him that day? The man may +be completely innocent, but we just feel that he was with him because +he was so belligerent and stood around and he wouldn't talk. You don't +find people like that at a gun range. They are really friendly and they +come out to shoot and have a good time, and I have never had anyone +treat me like he did. + +Mr. LIEBELER. This bearded man? + +Mrs. DAVIS. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you see the rifle that the bearded man had with him? + +Mrs. DAVIS. He had several, yes. He had them, but I couldn't identify +them. I could now. They like for you to discuss their rifles with them +when they come in. They think they are important, you know. And now I +can identify a rifle, but I didn't know a rifle from a shotgun, a .22 +from a 16-gauge shotgun. I mean, I didn't know the difference. + +Mr. LIEBELER. So you wouldn't be able to identify the rifle that the +bearded man had with him if I showed you pictures of a rifle? + +Mrs. DAVIS. No; because like I say, at that time they were just guns. + +Mr. LIEBELER. If you don't have anything else that you think would +be helpful to us at this point, I will thank you for coming in and +cooperating with us the way you have. I want you to know the Commission +appreciates it very much. + +Mrs. DAVIS. All right. + + + + +TESTIMONY OF MALCOLM HOWARD PRICE, JR. + +The testimony of Malcolm Howard Price, Jr., was taken at 9:15 a.m., +on April 2, 1964, in the office of the U.S. attorney, 301 Post Office +Building, Bryan and Ervay Streets, Dallas, Tex., by Mr. Wesley J. +Liebeler, assistant counsel of the President's Commission. Robert T. +Davis, assistant attorney general of Texas, was present. + + +Mr. LIEBELER. Would you rise, sir, and 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. PRICE. I do. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Mr. Price, my name is Wesley J. Liebeler. I am a member +of the legal staff of the President's Commission investigating the +assassination of President Kennedy. I have been authorized to take +your testimony by the Commission, pursuant to authority granted to the +Commission by Executive Order No. 11130, dated November 29, 1963, and +Joint Resolution of Congress No. 137. I want to give to you a copy of +that Executive order and of that joint resolution, as well as a copy of +the rules of procedure adopted by the Commission governing the taking +of testimony of witnesses. + +We want to inquire of you concerning the possibility that you saw +Lee Harvey Oswald at the Sports Drome Rifle Range, 8000 West Davis, +sometime in November 1963. + +Before we get into the details, I would like to have you state your +full name for the record. + +Mr. PRICE. It is Malcolm Howard Price, Jr. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Where do you live, Mr. Price? + +Mr. PRICE. At 1127 Rice, Grand Prairie. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Where were you born? + +Mr. PRICE. I was born at Graham, Tex. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Have you lived all your life here in Texas? + +Mr. PRICE. No; I have lived in Oklahoma for 4 years and in California +for 5 years. + +Mr. LIEBELER. How long have you lived in Dallas--this last time--in +Grand Prairie? + +Mr. PRICE. Oh, about 13 years. + +Mr. LIEBELER. When were you born? + +Mr. PRICE. April 6, 1928. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Where are you employed? + +Mr. PRICE. I am retired--I am unemployed. + +Mr. LIEBELER. I understand that's primarily because of the fact that +you have a heart condition? + +Mr. PRICE. Yes; that's right. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Are you married? + +Mr. PRICE. Yes; I am. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Do you have any children? + +Mr. PRICE. I have five. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Are you familiar with Sports Drome Rifle Range? + +Mr. PRICE. Yes; very familiar with it. + +Mr. LIEBELER. As a matter of fact, you work there from time to time, do +you not? + +Mr. PRICE. I have helped them there--I'm not, as you say, employed, but +I do help there from time to time. They are close friends of mine and +I have helped them get the things set up and get it started. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Are you referring to the Davises? + +Mr. PRICE. Virginia and Floyd Davis. + +Mr. LIEBELER. The Commission has information to the effect that +sometime during November 1963, you saw a gentleman at the rifle range +whom you subsequently came to believe was Lee Harvey Oswald; is that +correct? + +Mr. PRICE. That's right. The first time that I saw this person was in +September, the last week--the last Saturday of September, and that was +the afternoon that they opened the rifle range. + +Mr. LIEBELER. On the last Saturday of September? + +Mr. PRICE. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. That would be September 28? + +Mr. PRICE. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Tell me the circumstances under which you first saw this +fellow? + +Mr. PRICE. Well, it was just about dusky dark and he came in in an old +model car, I would judge it was possibly a 1940 or 1941 model Ford. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Was there anyone with him? + +Mr. PRICE. No; he was by himself, and I have heard that he couldn't +drive, but he was driving that day because he was the only one in the +car, and he came down and inquired if there was anyone there that could +set a scope, a telescope on a rifle, and I told him that I could, and +he said, well--he had one that he had had mounted and boresighted but +it hadn't been fired on a range and that he would like to have it +sighted in, so I went down and set up a target on a hundred yards. + +Actually, he set the target up himself and I drove my car and turned +the headlights on on the target and as I proceeded to set the rifle--I +fired the rifle approximately 12 to--12 to 18 times I would say and +zeroed it in on a hundred yards and Mr. Davis came in from work before +we left and he also drove his pickup down and turned his lights on. He +drove his pickup down on the opposite side and turned his lights on the +target. + +Mr. LIEBELER. On the opposite side of the target from your car? + +Mr. PRICE. Yes; and Mrs. Davis went home--she was tired and wasn't +feeling too good and she went home as soon as he got down there. + +Mr. LIEBELER. As soon as Mr. Davis did? + +Mr. PRICE. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did Mr. Davis see this fellow at that time? + +Mr. PRICE. Well, I don't know whether he saw him or not. He apparently +don't remember it. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You have discussed it with Mr. Davis? + +Mr. PRICE. Oh, we have talked about it some, but he doesn't--he don't +even recall turning his headlights on. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Now, did this man fire the rifle himself? + +Mr. PRICE. He fired three shots after I had got it set to where I could +fire a pattern, with three shots in a bull's eye. I turned it over to +him and I said, "Now, I'm satisfied with it, you try it." + +And, he fired three shots and he scored bull's eye with all three--a +very tight pattern and he said, "Well, I am completely satisfied." + +Mr. LIEBELER. How much did you charge him for zeroing the rifle in? + +Mr. PRICE. I didn't charge him anything. I charged him $1 for the use +of the range and that was all. I just did that as a favor to Floyd to +help him get his business in. I figured this was just another hunter +who had come down to get his rifle zeroed in for deer season. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you have any other conversation with this fellow at +that time? + +Mr. PRICE. No, that was all. It was rather abrupt. He didn't talk too +much, and I was kind of surprised that he didn't fire the rifle more. +He just fired the three shots and he said, "Well, that's good enough," +and he got up and left. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did he leave the shell casings lying there at the range +or did he take them with him? + +Mr. PRICE. No, he took them with him--he picked them all up after the +rifle was fired and took the shell casings along with him. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You had an opportunity to observe the rifle, did you not? + +Mr. PRICE. Yes, I had it in my hand. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Would you be able to identify the rifle? + +Mr. PRICE. Well, I believe I would--it was a foreign make rifle and I +wasn't too familiar with it at the time. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you see it again? + +Mr. PRICE. On two other occasions that he was there. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Before we go on to that, you indicated that in order to +see the target you had to turn the lights of the automobile on and that +of Mr. Davis' truck on; is that right? + +Mr. PRICE. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Was it light up at the rifle range from where you fired? + +Mr. PRICE. Oh, yes; we have neon lights there. + +Mr. LIEBELER. So you didn't have any difficulty in seeing this fellow? + +Mr. PRICE. No--no difficulty at all. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Then this fellow just put the rifle in the car and drove +off? + +Mr. PRICE. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did he have a gun case or anything like that? + +Mr. PRICE. Well, if he did, he didn't bring it down to the firing house. + +Mr. LIEBELER. He didn't have anything he wrapped the rifle in? + +Mr. PRICE. Not that I know of. In fact, the best I remember, when he +got out of the car, he just picked the gun up out of the back seat +because it wasn't wrapped in anything or wasn't in a case. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you see this fellow again? + +Mr. PRICE. On two other occasions--one was 2 weeks later and at turkey +shoot. It was Sunday, though, it was on a Sunday. + +Mr. LIEBELER. It would have been in October sometime, then, is that +right? + +Mr. PRICE. Yes, it would. + +Mr. LIEBELER. The last Saturday in September, which is the day you +indicated was the first time you saw him was the 28th of September? + +Mr. PRICE. Yes; that was the day they opened. They opened in the +afternoon. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And 2 weeks later would have been the 12th of October, +and the Sunday following would be the 13th of October; is that right? + +Mr. PRICE. Yes, somewhere around there. They had a turkey shoot and I +went down to participate in a turkey shoot and he was sitting in Booth +6 or 8 and was firing on a 100-yard line with a heavy bore rifle and I +didn't talk to him then, but the third time that I saw him there I did. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you see this time in October, the day of this turkey +shoot, did you see that he had the same rifle you had observed? + +Mr. PRICE. No, I didn't pay too much attention to that. I just saw +him as he came by and he went on down to the booth. There are people +that come down there and some of them have as high as six or seven +different rifles. This Mr. Slack that you just talked to--I noticed him +in particular because he had quite a variety every time he come down +there--he had three or four rifles with him. + +Mr. LIEBELER. There's nothing that happened on this second time that +you saw that particularly stands out? + +Mr. PRICE. Well--not that I know of personally, but I do understand +there was a hassle between him and Mr. Slack over shooting the wrong +target or something like that. I was over on the opposite end shooting +at a target for the turkey shoot and I didn't pay any attention to +that. That was their business. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Who told you that there was a hassle between this guy and +Slack? + +Mr. PRICE. It was Mr. Davis and Mrs. Davis. + +Mr. LIEBELER. But you, yourself, don't remember anything that happened +on this day, as far as this fellow was concerned? + +Mr. PRICE. No. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Now, going back to the first time you saw him, was +there anyone there at the rifle range besides this man, Mr. Davis and +yourself? + +Mr. PRICE. At the first time I saw him--me and Mrs. Davis was the only +one there, and we were just fixing to close up and go home and he came +in and, like I said, inquired if there was anybody that could set a +telescope. I took him down to set his telescope and we stayed there +that much longer and Mr. Davis came in and Mrs. Davis went on home. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did Mrs. Davis have an opportunity to see this man? + +Mr. PRICE. Not that I know of--she knew there was somebody there but +she was inside the building. + +Mr. LIEBELER. There was nobody else there? + +Mr. PRICE. There was no one else there. + +Mr. LIEBELER. When was the next time you saw him, the third time? + +Mr. PRICE. Well, I don't remember just exactly when it was, but it +was--it could be anywhere from 1 to 3 weeks later--I don't remember +exactly, but it was on a Sunday, Sunday was the only time I went down +there after that in a good while. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Mr. Price, this is Mr. Davis from the attorney general's +office for the State of Texas. + +Mr. Price has testified that he saw Oswald out at the Sports Drome +Rifle Range. + +Mr. PRICE. I don't remember the exact date on that, but the third time +that I saw him he did have the same gun. + +Mr. LIEBELER. He did? + +Mr. PRICE. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Well---- + +Mr. PRICE. And I asked him if it was still doing the job, if it was +still set, and he said, "It was shooting just fine," and Mr. Slack was +there at the time and at this particular time--that might have been the +day that they had the hassle there, I don't know, but they were sitting +right next to one another--Mr. Slack was in booth 9 and Oswald was in +booth 8, and he commented on his telescope. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Who commented on the telescope? + +Mr. PRICE. Oswald. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Commented to you? + +Mr. PRICE. Yes; he asked me to look through it, and he said, "It's +one of the clearest telescopes that I have ever seen--one of the +brightest." He said, "It's a Japanese scope and I gave $18 for it." + +Mr. LIEBELER. He told you that he paid $18 for it? + +Mr. PRICE. Yes; he said that it was--he remarked that it was a 4-power +telescope and he said it was mounted on Redfield mounts. You see, they +make mounts for several different guns, but I don't know one mount from +another myself. I just took his word for it that it was a Redfield +mount, but I looked through the scope and it was very clear. It was +very bright and we compared it with two scopes that Mr. Slack had on +his gun and a fellow that was shooting on the right side in booth +7--I don't know who that was, but we compared it with three different +American-made scopes and his telescope was brighter and clearer by far. +You could read the lines and numerals on the target very plainly with +it. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did he tell you that he paid $18 for the scope or did he +say that he paid $18 for the whole works? + +Mr. PRICE. No; he said he paid $18 for the scope. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did he tell you where he had it mounted? + +Mr. PRICE. He said that he got the thing from a gunsmith in Cedar Hill +for a debt, the gun, and that he bought the scope and that the gunsmith +mounted it for him. + +Mr. LIEBELER. The same gunsmith? + +Mr. PRICE. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And that was in Cedar Hill? + +Mr. PRICE. It might be; but I don't know of any gunsmith in Cedar Hill. + +Mr. LIEBELER. But you remember that he did tell you it was done by a +gunsmith in Cedar Hill? + +Mr. PRICE. Yes; then, I questioned him about it, I told him, I said, "I +didn't know there was a gunsmith in Cedar Hill." + +Mr. LIEBELER. And what did he say? + +Mr. PRICE. He said, "Yes; one over there and he owed me some money and +he gave me this gun to settle the debt" and he said, "I bought the +scope and he mounted it and boresighted it." + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did he tell you where this gunsmith was located? + +Mr. PRICE. No; he didn't say anything about the location other than it +was in Cedar Hill. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did he tell you what the guy's name was? + +Mr. PRICE. No. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Was there anyone with him that day or was he by himself? + +Mr. PRICE. I don't know; I don't know whether he was by himself or not. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You didn't see anybody else that seemed to be with him? + +Mr. PRICE. No; there was a lot of people there and everybody was +milling around talking to everybody else and I don't know whether he +was with anyone or not. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Now, what about the fellow that was in the booth on the +other side of Mr. Slack, do you remember anything about him--I think +you said. + +Mr. PRICE. All I remember about him was that he was a big fellow with a +long black--it was either black or dark red beard. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you talk to him at all? + +Mr. PRICE. Other than just to comment on his scope--I didn't have any +conversation at all with him. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You are talking about Oswald now? + +Mr. PRICE. No; I'm talking about the fellow with the beard. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you look through his scope too? + +Mr. PRICE. Yes; I did. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did Oswald talk to the fellow with the beard? + +Mr. PRICE. Well, I suppose--he spoke to all of them--to Oswald and +Slack both, about the clarity of the telescope. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Were you there when they were talking about the clarity +of Oswald's telescope? + +Mr. PRICE. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you see this fellow that you think was Oswald come or +go from the range or did you just see him there then? + +Mr. PRICE. I just saw him there. I just saw him there a couple of times. + +Mr. LIEBELER. A couple of times that day? + +Mr. PRICE. No; two separate times, I believe, that Oswald was present +at the range both times that he was, as I remember, but I don't know +whether they were there together or not. + +Mr. LIEBELER. We are getting our wires crossed--you're talking now +about the fellow with the beard? + +Mr. PRICE. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You meant that he was there on the range a couple of +different times? + +Mr. PRICE. Yes; he was there both times that I saw Oswald. + +Mr. LIEBELER. That you saw Oswald? + +Mr. PRICE. That I saw Oswald; yes. The second and third time. + +Mr. LIEBELER. But you never saw them come and go together? + +Mr. PRICE. No; I didn't pay any attention to who came--whether they +came and left together or how they got there, but just that one +particular time--he was the only one there. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You never noticed how Oswald came to the rifle range and +left the range? + +Mr. PRICE. That's right. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Except that first time you saw him? + +Mr. PRICE. That's right. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did anything else happen with relation to this fellow +that you think was Oswald on this third time that you saw him there at +the rifle range? + +Mr. PRICE. No; it was just a conversation about the telescope is all. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you see the rifle closely that day--you must have +handled it in looking through the scope? + +Mr. PRICE. Oh, yes; I handled it--it was a Mauser-type rifle. + +Mr. LIEBELER. What do you mean by that--I don't know anything about +rifles? + +Mr. PRICE. Well, it's strictly a military rifle and it's patterned +after the German Mauser. + +Mr. LIEBELER. A bolt-action rifle? + +Mr. PRICE. A bolt action, and the general outline it had--about oh, +possibly a six shot clip that set just ahead of the trigger, and I +understand it was a 6.5 Italian, but at that time I didn't know. I +thought it was a Mauser because there's a friend of mine in Grand +Prairie that has an Argentine Mauser that was 7.6 and it looked very +familiar--they looked a whole lot alike. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you have a chance to look at any of the writing or +printing that was stamped on the rifle? + +Mr. PRICE. Well, the only thing that I could see on it--I looked for a +brand name so I could see approximately where it was made, and the only +thing that I could find on it was a serial number. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you look closely for a brand name? + +Mr. PRICE. I didn't examine it too close. + +Mr. LIEBELER. But you did see the serial number? + +Mr. PRICE. I saw the serial number and the gun wasn't blued at the +time--it had a bright finish on the barrel. It looked like it had been +placed in a lathe and turned down, as far as--well, in an attempt to +sporterize the gun. + +Mr. LIEBELER. It had been worked on in some manner in an attempt to +sporterize it? + +Mr. PRICE. I thought it had. + +Mr. LIEBELER. How far did the barrel protrude from the stock of the +rifle, how far did it stick out from the end of the stock? + +Mr. PRICE. Possibly 6 or 8 inches at the most. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Had the stock been cut back in this attempt to sporterize +the rifle? + +Mr. PRICE. Well, not that I could tell--it was similar to a German +Mauser and they have, you know, they have got a full length, almost a +full length stock with a wooden piece on the top of them also. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And the wooden piece on top was still on this +rifle--which you did see? + +Mr. PRICE. No; I don't believe it was. + +Mr. LIEBELER. It had been taken off? + +Mr. PRICE. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. It had been taken off as part of the attempt to +sporterize the rifle? + +Mr. PRICE. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Had the end of the barrel been cut off? + +Mr. PRICE. I don't know whether it had been cut off or not. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You say the barrel had a shiny finish? + +Mr. PRICE. Yes; it did at that time. + +Mr. LIEBELER. I will show you two pictures that have been previously +marked "Exhibits 3 and 4" on the deposition of Mr. Greener and ask you +if you recognize that as the rifle that this man had at the range? + +Mr. PRICE. [Examining instruments referred to.] Except for the sling +and the forepiece--I would say they are the same gun. The gun had no +sling on it. It did have the mounts on the side for a sling. + +Mr. LIEBELER. It didn't have a sling on it? + +Mr. PRICE. It didn't. + +Mr. LIEBELER. What do you mean when you say the forepiece? + +Mr. PRICE. The forepiece is this top wooden piece; of course, that +could be taken off and replaced very easily. + +Mr. LIEBELER. The wooden piece that is on top of the barrel, is that +what you are referring to? + +Mr. PRICE. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And you say that that was not on the rifle that you saw? + +Mr. PRICE. No; it wasn't. This barrel has a step along in here +somewhere. + +Mr. LIEBELER. A step? + +Mr. PRICE. A step along in here building it up to a larger diameter and +another one here, which you can see. + +Mr. LIEBELER. It gets larger by degrees as it comes back toward the +action, is that right? + +Mr. PRICE. That's right, and that's the reason I thought at the time +that it had been placed in a lathe and turned down, but I'm not too +familiar with the foreign made guns and I have learned since then that +all Mauser rifles are that type--they are made that way. + +Mr. LIEBELER. With these steps as they come back toward the action? + +Mr. PRICE. That's right. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Is this the same kind of scope that you saw on the rifle +that Oswald had, the fellow you thought was Oswald? + +Mr. PRICE. Yes; it had large receivers at both ends and I believe, +now, I might not be right about the brand name, but I believe it was a +Tascosa, since I examined it--it was a Japanese made scope. They make +several different brands of those things--it could be any of them, but +I believe, as I remember it--it was a Tascosa. + +Mr. LIEBELER. So, if you took the sling off this rifle and took the top +wooden piece off the barrel, you think it would look pretty much like +the one that this fellow had? + +Mr. PRICE. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Now, you testified before that when you examined this +rifle, you looked for the brand name and you weren't able to find a +brand name? + +Mr. PRICE. That's right. + +Mr. LIEBELER. But you did see the serial number? + +Mr. PRICE. The serial number was--it was in here, in here, or in +here--I believe it was right along in here. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And you are referring to the fore part of the action or +the part of the rifle just before the action and immediately under the +front edge of the scope, is that right? + +Mr. PRICE. Yes; the largest diameter of the barrel. The clip is here. + +Mr. LIEBELER. It fits in just in front of the trigger? + +Mr. PRICE. It fits in just in front of the trigger there. + +Mr. LIEBELER. I will hand you some pictures and see if you can +recognize any of the people in them as the man you saw at the rifle +range--these have been previously marked "Commission Exhibits Nos. 451 +and 453 through 456." + +Mr. PRICE. [Examining documents referred to.] Yes; this is the only one +that has any similarity I can recall. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You are referring to No. 455--does that look like him? + +Mr. PRICE. Well, these all seem like a photograph of the same fellow, +but this is the only one that has any resemblance, as I can remember. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Now, I show you another picture--it is a photograph of +a street scene with several people in it and I show you two different +pictures and ask you if you notice anybody in there as being the fellow +you saw at the rifle range? + +Mr. PRICE. Yes; this one here and this one here--he has a part of the +receding hairline on the right side. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Which one? + +Mr. PRICE. This one--right here--he's got a long--kind of a sharp nose. + +Mr. LIEBELER. The pictures that I have just showed you do not have any +marks on them, is that right? + +Mr. PRICE. That's right. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Let me show you two other pictures which are the same as +the pictures I just showed you except that they have some green marks +on them. + +Mr. PRICE. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. The first picture I showed you--you have indicated on it +that you recognized the man who has a green mark over his head. + +Mr. PRICE. That's right. + +Mr. LIEBELER. In the identical picture which has been marked as "Pizzo +Exhibit No. 453-B," and that is the man that you saw at the rifle range? + +Mr. PRICE. Right. + +Mr. LIEBELER. On the second picture I showed you, you identified as the +man you saw at the rifle range--the man who has a green "X" over him? + +Mr. PRICE. That's right. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And that picture has been marked "Pizzo Exhibit No. +453-A." I'll show you a picture that has been marked as "Pizzo Exhibit +No. 453-C," and ask you if you recognize that as the man you saw on the +rifle range? + +Mr. PRICE. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Do you have any questions about it at all? + +Mr. PRICE. About that picture? + +Mr. LIEBELER. Whether that's the fellow? + +Mr. PRICE. Other than the scar or cut on his head, because he didn't +have a cut on his head at the time. + +Mr. LIEBELER. When did you first become aware of the fact that this +fellow you saw was Lee Oswald, did you ever know his name? + +Mr. PRICE. No; I never knew his name. + +Mr. LIEBELER. When did you first become aware of the fact it was +Oswald--when did you first think that it was Oswald? + +Mr. PRICE. When I saw him on television when they were transferring him +from the Dallas jail. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And did you recognize him right away as the fellow you +had seen at the rifle range? + +Mr. PRICE. Yes; and I contacted the FBI the next day. I debated on it +all night whether I should call them or get mixed up with it or not. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you mention it to anyone else, when you saw him on +television? + +Mr. PRICE. Yes; my family. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you talk about it with anyone else before you told +the FBI? + +Mr. PRICE. No. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Whom did you talk with at the FBI, do you remember? + +Mr. PRICE. Charlie Brown. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Let's see if we can establish the date of the last time +that you saw this man at the rifle range. Do you recall that the +President was assassinated on Friday, November 22? Can you tell us +approximately how long prior to the assassination this time was that +you saw the man? + +Mr. PRICE. The last time I saw him was a week before Thanksgiving; +Sunday before. + +Mr. LIEBELER. The Sunday before Thanksgiving--that's the last time you +saw him at the rifle range? + +Mr. PRICE. That's the last time that I was down at the rifle range--the +last time I went there until after, oh, a month or so after the +assassination. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You mean it was the Sunday immediately preceding +Thanksgiving? + +Mr. PRICE. That's right; I was down there for the turkey shoot we had. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You saw him at the rifle range that day? + +Mr. PRICE. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Well, the last Sunday before Thanksgiving was after the +assassination. + +Mr. PRICE. It was after? + +Mr. LIEBELER. Yes; and you saw this man at the rifle range, you saw +Oswald at the rifle range after the assassination? + +Mr. PRICE. I believe I did, because that was the last time that I went +down there. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And the time you saw him the last time and looked through +the scope was the last time you were down at the rifle range? + +Mr. PRICE. Yes; that was the last day I was down there. + +Mr. LIEBELER. What makes you say it was the Sunday preceding +Thanksgiving, are you sure about that? + +Mr. PRICE. Well, I'm not exactly positive but it was getting close to +Thanksgiving because I was trying to get a turkey. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Do you remember whether you saw him after the +assassination? + +Mr. PRICE. No. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You are not sure one way or the other? + +Mr. PRICE. I know I haven't seen him after the assassination, but it +was before this assassination--I was down there the last time and I was +thinking it was a week before Thanksgiving, but anyhow, it was before +the assassination, the Sunday before, but they were holding a turkey +shoot. + +Mr. LIEBELER. The Sunday before the assassination would have been the +17th--that would have been two Sundays before Thanksgiving. + +Mr. PRICE. Well, it might be right--that's been so long ago--I'm not +sure about the dates, I don't remember dates too well. + +Mr. LIEBELER. But you were pretty clear in your mind you didn't see +Oswald after the assassination? + +Mr. PRICE. That's right. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Have you ever seen him since? + +Mr. PRICE. I have never seen him since. I have been down there quite +often since December. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Down at the rifle range? + +Mr. PRICE. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And business at the rifle range has fallen off since the +assassination, rather sharply, hasn't it? + +Mr. PRICE. Well, for a while it continued, but it has fallen off very +sharply in the last, oh, in the last month and a half except for +Sundays--they do have good business on Sunday. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did the FBI show you any pictures of anybody and ask you +to identify them when they talked to you? + +Mr. PRICE. It was the FBI or Secret Service, one of the two, I believe +it was the FBI. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did they show you any of the pictures that we have shown +you this morning? + +Mr. PRICE. They have shown one similar--they had three or four photos +showing this bruise and cut on the forehead. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did they show you a picture of the rifle? + +Mr. PRICE. I believe the Secret Service showed me a picture of the +rifle. I told them the same thing--it wasn't made up exactly the +same--it didn't have the sling, it didn't have the forepiece, like +there had been an attempt to sporterize the gun. + +Mr. LIEBELER. The last time you saw this man at the rifle range--do you +remember if there was anybody else there that you know? + +Mr. PRICE. Garland Slack. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And you saw Mr. Slack? + +Mr. PRICE. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Anybody else? + +Mr. PRICE. Well, there was this big fellow--I don't know who he is. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Have you ever seen him since? + +Mr. PRICE. No; I haven't. I understand that Mr. Davis saw him one time +because he called me and told me that he saw him, about 2 weeks ago, +and he turned the license number of the car over to the FBI. + +Mr. LIEBELER. But you, yourself, have never seen him since? + +Mr. PRICE. I have never seen him since. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Was there anybody else that last day at the rifle range +that saw this man that might be able to identify him other than Mr. +Slack and Mr. Davis? + +Mr. PRICE. Well, not that I know of. There was a lot of people +there--there were 300 or 400 people there. There could be any number of +them that could identify him, but I don't know them. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Can you think of anything about this subject that +I haven't asked you about that you think I should have asked you +about--anything you would like to add? + +Mr. PRICE. No; a conversation I had with him about the telescope--I +forgot that. I forgot to mention that--to Mr. Brown when he was out, +and I don't know whether I mentioned that to the Secret Service agent +or not. It will be in his report if I did. + +Mr. LIEBELER. The conversation about the clarity of the scope? + +Mr. PRICE. Yes. He wasn't--he didn't seem to be too talkative to anyone +other than when he was talking about the telescope--he seemed rather +proud of that. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you ever see him talk to this big fellow other than +talk to him about this telescope on this time you have told us about? + +Mr. PRICE. Well, not that I particular remember. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you form any impression as to whether they were +together or not? + +Mr. PRICE. No. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You couldn't tell one way or the other? + +Mr. PRICE. No; I didn't pay any attention to it. There was--I just +thought of it--there was a doctor and his son there at the same time +and they were firing a .308 caliber Winchester, I believe--it was +either a Winchester or a Remington and anyhow, they had identical guns +and they were sharpening up for, I believe, they said they were going +to Canada and they were there at the same time. + +Mr. LIEBELER. This was the Sunday, the last time you saw him? + +Mr. PRICE. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Do you know their names--do you know what their names are? + +Mr. PRICE. No; I don't--I don't know their names--I have heard it but I +don't remember it. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Would you remember it if I mentioned it to you? + +Mr. PRICE. Well, I might. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Is the doctor's name--Dr. Wood? + +Mr. PRICE. That don't sound like it--there was a doctor there and his +son--I know they were father and son. + +Mr. LIEBELER. About how old was the son? + +Mr. PRICE. He was in his early twenties, I believe. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And did they talk to this fellow about the telescope? + +Mr. PRICE. I don't remember whether they had any conversation with him +or not. + +Mr. LIEBELER. What makes you mention that? + +Mr. PRICE. It's just the fact that they were there at the same time and +I know they were talking to Garland Slack and there is a possibility +that they either observed or talked to Oswald, because he was sitting +next to Slack. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You have nothing else that you want to add--I don't +think of any more questions. I want to thank you for coming down +and cooperating with us to the extent that you have and it has been +considerable cooperation because you got very short notice and you came +very early this morning, and we appreciate this and we want you to know +that the Commission appreciates this very much. Thank you. + +Mr. PRICE. Well, I try to help all I can. I don't remember dates too +well--it's been quite some time. I can remember faces but I can't +remember names and dates worth a hoot. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Well, we sure appreciate your coming down. + +Mr. DAVIS. Thanks again--we appreciate your coming down. + +Mr. PRICE. You bet. + + + + +TESTIMONY OF GARLAND GLENWILL SLACK + +The testimony of Garland Glenwill Slack was taken at 8:30 a.m., on +April 2, 1964, in the office of the U.S. attorney, 301 Post Office +Building, Bryan and Ervay Streets, Dallas, Tex., by Mr. Wesley J. +Liebeler, assistant counsel of the President's Commission. + + +Mr. LIEBELER. Would you stand up for just a moment, Mr. Slack. Will you +raise your right hand. Do you 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. SLACK. I do. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Please be seated, sir. + +Mr. Slack, my name is Wesley J. Liebeler. I am a member of the legal +staff of the President's Commission investigating the assassination of +President Kennedy. + +I have been authorized to take your testimony and the testimony of +other witnesses by the Commission pursuant to authority granted to the +Commission by Executive Order No. 11130, dated November 29, 1963, and +joint resolution of Congress No. 137. I want to give you a copy of the +joint resolution and the Executive order and a copy of the rules of +procedure adopted by the Commission governing the taking of testimony +of witnesses. + +Actually, Mr. Slack, you are entitled to 3 days' notice before you +would be required to come and testify, and I realize we didn't give you +that much notice but you are also entitled to waive the notice, and I +assume that you will do so since you are here, and I assume that you +are perfectly willing to go ahead, is that correct? + +Mr. SLACK. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. I want to ask you today about the possibility that you +saw Lee Harvey Oswald at the Sports Drome gun range sometime in the +month of November 1963. Before we get into that, however, I would like +you to state your full name for the record, if you would? + +Mr. SLACK. Garland Glenwill Slack. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Where do you work, sir? + +Mr. SLACK. I work for myself. Heating contractors and real estate +development. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Where do you live? + +Mr. SLACK. 3130 DeLee Street. + +Mr. LIEBELER. How many people do you have working with you? + +Mr. SLACK. Just my wife and I now. We are on a semiretired basis. We +were in the water business and we sold out our water business to the +city of Dallas in June, and we are on a semiretired basis. + +Mr. LIEBELER. In June of 1963? + +Mr. SLACK. That's right; this last year. + +Mr. LIEBELER. How old are you, Mr. Slack? + +Mr. SLACK. Fifty-nine. No; I am 58. I will be 59, the 9th of May. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Are you married, Mr. Slack? + +Mr. SLACK. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Do you have any children? + +Mr. SLACK. Two. + +Mr. LIEBELER. They live here in Dallas? + +Mr. SLACK. No. Johnny Glenwill is a mechanical engineer. He is working +on a Government project in Richmond. Ind., and Marylyn Slack, she is +the wife of an Air Force man, Vernon Stone, stationed at Burke Burnett. +I have six grandkids. Our profession, we are in the real estate +business. We just sell what we own. We own half a million dollars worth +of property on the--on Military Parkway, and the heating business, we +only do what people can force us to do, our old friends' jobs that we +had put in 30 years ago. And we are on an area selling off all our land +around us. We subdivide and sell off 10 or 12 lots, and when we get +that finished, we subdivide another tract. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Are you familiar with the Sports Drome gun range, Mr. +Slack? + +Mr. SLACK. Yes; quite familiar with it. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Do you know the man who owns it or runs it? + +Mr. SLACK. Yes; and I knew the man before he even took it over, the +manager of the rifle range. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You knew Mr. Davis before he took it over? + +Mr. SLACK. Yes; he ran a ditching machine and dug water ditches for +the water works. I didn't know that until after we got real well +acquainted, and I knew I had seen him, but I never could figure out +until "Doc" Carter and Charlie Brown, they knew my full name and found +out where I worked and who I was, and I said I knew him but where, I +didn't know. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Were you out at the rifle range at any time in November +of 1963? + +Mr. SLACK. Yes; we were there the Saturday before Armistice Day. We +marked it on our calendar. That was November the 9th. We were out there +late in the evening and there were not very many people there, because +we got there in the really closing time. But we didn't even shoot the +rifle because they wanted the people to go home. But we went back +Sunday for this turkey shoot. + +Mr. LIEBELER. What was the date? + +Mr. SLACK. Now that was the 10th. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You went back to the rifle range the immediately +following Sunday, is that right? + +Mr. SLACK. That is right, the 10th. Oswald was there the 10th. He was +there the 17th. The 10th was the turkey shoot. And I contacted him +three or four times trying to get him to pay a dollar and get in the +turkey shoot. Ten men were paying a dollar a shoot, and he commented he +could win the turkey but he didn't have the dollar. + +Mr. LIEBELER. This was on the 10th, is that right? + +Mr. SLACK. But had no direct contact no more than asked him like the 10 +other fellows I talked to. That was my impression of him. + +The next, the 17th, is where he and I had the run in, where he shot my +target. I paid two bits and put up a target, and before I got ready to +shoot it there would be somebody shoot a hole in it. So Lucille, my +wife, she was with me. She was keeping score. We got to noticing who it +was, and maybe he would shoot anybody's target, and I raised the devil. +I didn't see why I have to pay my two bits and pay for a new target +sheet and I'm shooting No. 9, and the rifle range operator came and +told him not to shoot my target after that, and that is how I remember +the part in his hair and the look on his face. + +And I told him, I said, "You are not going to win no turkey shooting +rapid fire." + +He shot rapid fire about three or four times, and they had a cap +full of shells and they were shooting--I mean he was burning up the +ammunition. And I talked about that going back to Snug Harbor, because +somebody is going to get hurt, because everybody shooting everybody's +target. + +And there was a bunch of ruffians shooting pistols, and there was lots +of people. And I remember when I told him that, he give me a look that +I never would forget it. That is the only reason I remember him when +they showed him on television. It made me sick and I tried to figure +out. It took me a day to figure out where I had seen him. + +I said, Lucille, we own the waterworks and we know a lot of men and do +a lot of things. We have a fish hatchery and we contacted maybe five or +six people we don't know every day, and I didn't sleep at night for 3 +nights until I pinned down where we saw him. + +And I went to the rifle range and these four or five other people knew +he had been there, but they were afraid to say anything about it. + +But when I asked the manager, I said, "Oswald was over here," and he +said, "Yes, I know he was." And they were afraid it would hurt their +business. + +And I told Charlie Brown and Doc Carter where I saw the fellow, and I +think it was; everyone doubts if they knew anything at all on him, so +they met me over there and between the three, they admitted sure. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Who is this Charlie Brown that you referred to? + +Mr. SLACK. He is the FBI man. He and Doc Carter, they came out two +different times and I talked to them. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Carter is also an FBI agent? + +Mr. SLACK. One was Secret Service and one was the FBI. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You mentioned there were other people out at the range +who saw Oswald. Do you remember their names? + +Mr. SLACK. No, sir; because I was not taking their names. But I do know +that they got the boy that worked on his rifle scope on Wednesday. That +was in the middle of the week, between the 10th and the 17th. They got +his deposition, because the boy, I know, put his scope on his rifle for +him. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Do you know the boy's name? + +Mr. SLACK. No, sir; I don't know his name. Never tried to find out his +name. I never talked about it, because Charlie Brown and Doc Carter +asked me not to tell what I knew, and that is all. I had nothing to +gain. In other words, they took it up, what they found, I never knew. + +Mr. LIEBELER. When you mentioned this fellow that put the scope on the +rifle, how do you know? Tell us what you know about that? + +Mr. SLACK. Because I read it in the paper about a week afterwards. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You have no direct knowledge yourself about the scope? + +Mr. SLACK. No; there were so many different fellows working on the +rifle range, there was possibly three or four boys who did it, and I +never really connected which one it would be, because I wasn't doing +any investigating anyway. See what I mean? + +I felt like that knowing the guy and connecting it together, if I just +kept my mouth shut and tried to just remember seeing the fellow, there +was a lot of that done. It was done in our own family. + +In other words, Vernon Stone was with me and Jimbo, he is 12 years +old, the boy, and when it dawned on me where I saw him and I knew that +I had my son-in-law take my gun, my custom-made gun out of Oswald's, +take it out of his hand and put it in the car, because I was afraid he +would steal it, and I told Vernon by long distance on the telephone, +and Vernon did too, and well, he already had made up in his mind that +he never had seen that fellow. He didn't remember anything, and Jimbo +doesn't either. He didn't want to remember. + +Mr. LIEBELER. What is the incident about the rifle? Did Oswald have +your rifle at any time? + +Mr. SLACK. He handled my rifle and he handled my targets, that was the +17th. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you say anything to Oswald other than---- + +Mr. SLACK. The only time--I didn't specifically say to Oswald. I said +to all the boys, to seven or eight shooters, about that rapid firing +and about shooting other targets rather than the one they bought and +paid for. If they were in chair 7, and there was a number down a 100 +yards, No. 7, he was supposed to shoot No. 7. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Other than that, you didn't say anything to him? + +Mr. SLACK. That is all I said. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you have a chance to see the rifle that he had? + +Mr. SLACK. I absolutely saw the rifle. + +Mr. LIEBELER. What kind of rifle was it? + +Mr. SLACK. It was an Italian type rifle, but it never showed in the +newspapers, a picture of that rifle. + +In other words, if the first picture that came out of the officer +holding the rifle, that was on the floor of the Book Depository, if +that was the gun, I had never seen that gun before, and I know rifles +and I know scopes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. What was the difference between it and the rifle you saw? + +Mr. SLACK. The one he had was a small three-quarters, about seven +hundred fifty thousandths diameter tube, a small tube no bigger than +your thumb, with the windage gage. They were practicing. It was a cheap +scope. Well, $5.66 scope. But it was sporterized. You cut the wood off +of them. Short barrel. + +Mr. LIEBELER. In other words, this rifle that Oswald had was a +sporterized rifle? It had been rebuilt? + +Mr. SLACK. Just as advertised. I have seen besides the Oswald, I have +friends that have those rifles. I wouldn't shoot a toad frog with one +of them, because I know that they are just junk. + +In other words, you take that rifle as it was manufactured, and you cut +the barrel off 8 inches, and you take all the wood off the top of the +barrel and cut this off here, and varnish it, and have it blued, and it +makes a pretty little gun. It was one that he had wrapped up and handed +over the fence, but they had two other guns that type. They had no +scopes on them. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Was there somebody else? + +Mr. SLACK. That Sunday there sure was. The tall boy had the biggest +feet of any kid I ever saw, and about the time he would go to shoot, he +would kick with his feet, and I said if my feet was that big I would +bump somebody too. + +He was the boy that drove him to that rifle range the 17th. They found +the boy. He had no connection with him except he had driven him there. + +Mr. LIEBELER. How do you know they found him? + +Mr. SLACK. I read it in the paper. I don't know what his name was. +Don't know where they found him, but they found him, and he had no +connection with him, no more than I had. He just probably begged a ride +and he took him to the rifle range, but they had three guns. + +Lucille remembers the boy handing the guns over the fence, and they +were throwing the guns in the back of the old model car and taking off +like they did. + +And I recognized that because a gun, a good gun, you are not +supposed--they just threw those old guns in that car, or they took two +of them. Of course, one was wrapped up in a blanket, a dirty looking +old grey blanket that had a red trim, I remember. I remember that, +because we found an old blanket at our house and I told Lucille I was +trying to think, I knew it was something common, this good gun, it was +wrapped up and tied up. + +The sporterized Italian gun was tied up and he handed it over the fence +nicely. And he had a grey and red maroon, looked slick as satin, and +I remember it well, what a gun case--you see everything at a shooting +place--some bring a rifle in a tote sack and--for a gun case. + +The other thing I remember about that blanket he had wrapped around his +gun, it was tied up with a rag string that was torn about an inch and a +half wide out of a filling station type wipe cloth, a ribbon, pink, and +he had torn it up and--to use as a rag string. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Do you remember what kind of car these fellows drove? + +Mr. SLACK. No; I couldn't remember it, and Lucille couldn't except it +was an older model car. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Was it a sedan? + +Mr. SLACK. A four-door sedan, and it was a dark color, and he left +there like a crazy bunch of hoodlums. And Lucille would remember that +because she made a remark to me. You know how boys take off and make +the dust fly. + +Well we had--in other words, without having some reason, you wouldn't +notice what kind of car it was. + +Mr. LIEBELER. I want to show you a picture of a rifle. Two pictures +that have previously been marked as Exhibits 3 and 4, on the deposition +of Mr. Greener, and ask you if that looks like the rifle they had at +the rifle range? + +Mr. SLACK. I don't remember a carrying strap on it, this rifle here. +Of course, that is something you use to carry the gun, if you take it. +That could be it, that is right, with the sling off. When I saw the gun +the sling was not on it. + +I don't think it had the wood up above the barrel, because when it is +sporterized, as I remember, the whole barrel is painted blue. + +Mr. LIEBELER. So there was not as much wood to the front of the rifle +on the one you saw at the range, is that right? + +Mr. SLACK. That's right. + +Mr. LIEBELER. What about the scope? Was it the same kind of scope? + +Mr. SLACK. I can say no. Pictures do something to you, but that scope +seems like it is a 1-inch, that scope, according to the size of the gun +and proportions of sizes. This is the same gun upside down, the other +side. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Well, you are pretty clear this isn't the rifle because +of the wood that protrudes? + +Mr. SLACK. This rifle had the barrel cut off. I know this rifle right +here. This is proportionately, Mr. Liebeler---- + +Mr. LIEBELER. Pardon? + +Mr. SLACK. No; the sight is, the open sight is out on it since it has +been cut off. + +Mr. LIEBELER. The one that you saw at the rifle range had been cut off, +is that correct? + +Mr. SLACK. It had been cut off, and I will swear it had been reblued, +and it did not have the front ramp sight of that rifle. + +Mr. LIEBELER. So that the rifle you saw at the rifle range is not the +same rifle as the picture I have just shown you, is that right? + +Mr. SLACK. Now they had two other rifles that would fit that. They were +not sporterized. + +Mr. LIEBELER. But they didn't have scopes on them? + +Mr. SLACK. They didn't have scopes on them. + +Mr. LIEBELER. But you remember that the rifle you saw at the range did +have the barrel cut off and didn't have the sight on the front so it +couldn't have been this rifle? + +Mr. SLACK. I would say that. I would say that is not it, because the +sporterized rifle, the shiny new one, I don't think it had the metal +binding on it. The top wood, so this holds the top wood. Now, that is +the type of rifle, see what I mean. But I really notice things about +rifles like a jewelry man or a lady would about the setting of a ring. +I wouldn't know--but I know rifles. + +Mr. LIEBELER. But this was the same general type of rifle as the one +you saw that had been sporterized and had the wood cut off? + +Mr. SLACK. This is a magazine. You recognize one of them a mile off. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Let me show you some pictures of a man or some men that +have been previously marked Commission Exhibits 451 and 453 through +456. I want to ask you if this looks like either one of the men that +you saw at the rifle range on the 17th of November? + +Mr. SLACK. The jacket was the first thing I remembered. When they +described the jacket in the paper before I even looked at the fellow, +because the man pulled a jacket off and put it on top of a load of sand +you used it for a pad to shoot from---- + +Mr. LIEBELER. Is that the guy you saw? Does anyone in those pictures +look like him? + +Mr. SLACK. Those heavy eyebrows and that part in the hair, but +apparently he had more hair. Maybe he got a haircut afterwards. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Who had more hair, the fellow? + +Mr. SLACK. The picture. The man I saw in this picture right here. + +Mr. LIEBELER. The man you saw had more hair? + +Mr. SLACK. Yes; he sure did. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Do you think that any of these pictures are a picture of +the man that you saw at the rifle range that day? + +Mr. SLACK. The difference in position he was in and everything, that +looked like him, but he wasn't that sleepy-eyed. He was a cocky guy. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Referring to Exhibit 453? + +Mr. SLACK. When he looked at me. I don't see how in the world he could +ever get a pleasant look on his face like this picture here. Probably +he could, but---- + +Mr. LIEBELER. You think that the picture 456 looks a little more +pleasant than the fellow you remember seeing at the rifle range, is +that right? + +Mr. SLACK. He sure does. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Let me show you another picture, Mr. Slack, that has been +previously marked as Pizzo's 453-C, and ask you if that looks like the +fellow you saw at the rifle range? + +Mr. SLACK. That is him. I would know that baby face and that chin, and +he had a--I remember people, but no names. + +Mr. LIEBELER. What about the hair? + +Mr. SLACK. That is the man I saw at the rifle range. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You are sure about that? + +Mr. SLACK. I know it is. In other words, just like if I saw you +tomorrow. Because his eyes were deep like a man that was, that wears +highly magnified glasses and then doesn't have his glasses on. And he +had that deep--that is the man we saw out there. That is the man. And I +would remember him 20 years from now, just over that one incident. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Have you seen that guy's picture in the paper? + +Mr. SLACK. But he don't have a good--he didn't have a very good +likeness of him, like the paper pictures. That was him as I saw him at +the rifle range, and as I saw him I second before. No, one-tenth of a +second before he was shot. That is the time. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You mean on television? + +Mr. SLACK. On television. And I saw when they were transferring him +even before that. And I told Lucille, I told my wife, wait a minute, +I've got to see the side of his face. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Could you recognize the side of his face? + +Mr. SLACK. But not positive enough until I got to see him at the time +he was shot. You see, you read the papers and you get to where you +imagine things and you find yourself imagining that you saw somebody, +and I never had anything that made me as sick for 3 days. Absolutely +made me sick of stretching my brain of trying to figure out what +contact we had had with the guy. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Here is another picture. Take a look at that and see if +you can recognize anybody in that picture? + +Mr. SLACK. The fifth fellow from the left, because I saw the side of +his face quite a bit at the rifle range. He has rather a long nose and +long chin and a high forehead. In other words, that was the thing about +the man that I would remember. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Here is another picture. It is the same picture that I +just showed you except that it has a green line over the fellow that +you have indicated, does it not? + +Mr. SLACK. Well, it is like this picture. Those are the front, no, he +doesn't have a part. He didn't have that hair. I would remember his +hair. And he had the hair that grew down his neck, all the way down +into his jacket. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You say this fellow here in the picture, the fifth fellow +from the left is not the person? + +Mr. SLACK. That is the fellow. As I remember, this is the fellow that +is under the green mark. But seemed like he had more hair. You see, I +shot in one chair. I looked at the side of that fellow quite a bit. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You think the fellow you saw at the rifle range had more +hair than the fellow with the green mark? + +Mr. SLACK. Yes; of course, the wind blew and he was bareheaded. I guess +he had a haircut in this picture here. He had quite a bit of hair on +his back and on his neck like me. I need a haircut. But I remember, +because on the television the hair was also down on his neck. Even more +so than he shows in the picture there. Probably taken at different +times and under different conditions. Just like this picture here, he +is a pleasant looking fellow. + +Mr. LIEBELER. This fellow looks more pleasant than the guy you saw? + +Mr. SLACK. Yes; of course, at times, a fellow can be sorry on the world +and still there would be a little fun come into him sometime. And he +had big ears. His ears stood out, what I mean. + +Mr. LIEBELER. The picture that you are looking at is 453-B, Pizzo's +exhibit, that we have been referring to. I don't think I have any more +questions, Mr. Slack. I want to thank you very much for coming in and +cooperating with us the way you have. I know we gave you very little +time and we appreciate it very much. + +Mr. SLACK. We had already forgotten everything about it, and we figured +it was, well, it was just some unpleasant memory, and it couldn't have +shocked me. Now this newspaper, Gruber, was a press, a Washington +pressman, was he some of your bunch? + +Mr. LIEBELER. What was his name? + +Mr. SLACK. Gruber. + +Mr. LIEBELER. What about him? + +Mr. SLACK. He is the fellow that came to see me about 3 weeks ago. He +called me three or four times and give me a lot of trouble, and I give +him to understand that I didn't want to talk with him, because the +newspaper had, I thought, made too big a show out of it. + +And they used my name and used my address. They didn't put my picture, +with the assassination, or the picture, but I expected it any time to +come out, but I have a good friend with the Times Herald, Mr. Albert +Jackson, and I called Albert and I told him not to send his men because +I was not talking to the newspaper. My phone was tapped and they came +out the next day and everything that I told Albert, the newspaperman, +and I told him that, because I didn't want it to get in the paper. He +never put it in their paper. My own friend never got anything, but the +news, they got it all. + +Mr. LIEBELER. What made you think your telephone was tapped? + +Mr. SLACK. I think it was because they had things in the paper. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Who do you think tapped it, the newspaper people? + +Mr. SLACK. The FBI and the Secret Service, they didn't tap it. They +don't do things like that. + +Mr. LIEBELER. The Secret Service doesn't? + +Mr. SLACK. No. + +Mr. LIEBELER. What about the FBI? + +Mr. SLACK. They said they did not, and I blamed it on the newspaper. +And they came and made a television picture of me and gave me an +interview. And I wanted to know what identification they had and who +they were with, and they fooled around and made about a 3-minute +conversation and they never did show it, but it never was shown +anyplace. Just newshounds. And they put up a big front that it was the +Warren Commission. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Who were they? + +Mr. SLACK. The television guys from Fort Worth, and they were in such a +big hurry to leave, they just took my picture and took off. They had 15 +minutes to get to Fort Worth, and I never heard any more of it at all. + +Mr. LIEBELER. I don't think they had anything to do with the Warren +Commission. + + + + +TESTIMONY OF DR. HOMER WOOD + +The testimony of Dr. Homer Wood was taken at 3 p.m., on April 1, 1964, +in the office of the U.S. attorney, 301 Post Office Building, Bryan +and Ervay Streets, Dallas, Tex., by Mr. Wesley J. Liebeler, assistant +counsel of the President's Commission. + + +Mr. LIEBELER. Dr. Wood, would you please rise and 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? + +Dr. WOOD. I do. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Please be seated. My name is Wesley J. Liebeler. I am a +member of the legal staff of the President's Commission investigating +the assassination of President Kennedy. + +I have been authorized to take your testimony by the Commission +pursuant to authority granted to it by Executive Order No. 11130, +dated November 29, 1963, and joint resolution of Congress No. 137. I +understand that Mr. Rankin wrote to you last week. Did you get a letter +from him? + +Dr. WOOD. We each had an airmail letter from Washington, yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. I understand that Mr. Rankin included a copy of the +Executive order to which I have first referred as well as a copy of the +joint resolution of Congress and the rules of procedure relating to the +taking of testimony by the Commission, is that correct? + +Dr. WOOD. That is correct. + +Mr. LIEBELER. We want to question you about the possibility that Lee +Harvey Oswald was at the Sports Drome Rifle Range at 8000 West Davis +Street in Dallas, Tex., sometime during November 1963--before going +into the details of that particular incident, please state your full +name for the record. + +Dr. WOOD. Homer Wood. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You are a dentist, is that correct? + +Dr. WOOD. That is correct. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Would you state briefly for us your educational +background. + +Dr. WOOD. Well, I had 2 years of predental at Southern Methodist +University and 4 years at Baylor University College of Dentistry, +Dallas, Tex. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Are you a native Texan? + +Dr. WOOD. I am a native Texan, yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Born here in Dallas? + +Dr. WOOD. Born in Besse May, Tex. It is a dead town now. + +Mr. LIEBELER. When were you born? + +Dr. WOOD. July 4, 1910. + +Mr. LIEBELER. How long have you been practicing dentistry? + +Dr. WOOD. Since 1938. + +Mr. LIEBELER. The Commission is advised that sometime during November +of 1963, you and your son, whose name I understand is Sterling Charles +Wood, went to the Sports Drome Rifle Range, is that correct? + +Dr. WOOD. That is correct. If I recall correctly, it was on November +16. That was a Saturday afternoon. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Are you clear in your own mind that it was a Saturday +that you went to the range? + +Dr. WOOD. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Was that the only time that you went to the rifle range +during November? + +Dr. WOOD. That is correct. + +Mr. LIEBELER. What time of day did you go out there? + +Dr. WOOD. I was listening to the Southwest Conference football game. My +boy kept asking me to "Hurry, daddy, I want to go to try my scope out +on my gun," and I listened to half of the game. I presume when we got +out there it was around 3 o'clock in the afternoon. At the rifle range, +I am not definite, but it was between 3 and 5. We left before 5. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Left the range before 5? + +Dr. WOOD. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you get an opportunity to finish listening to the +game? + +Dr. WOOD. No; we didn't hear any more of the game. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Tell us what happened after you arrived at the range? + +Dr. WOOD. Well, the range was pretty busy because it was just before +deer season and most of the fellows out there was sighting in their +scope, and we waited a short while to get a place for my boy to sit +down to sight in his scope. Then when he did--now do you want me to +start here with Oswald? + +Mr. LIEBELER. I want you tell me just what happened. + +Dr. WOOD. Okay. My boy was shooting his rifle, and there was a fellow +sitting to his right. I thought it was an offbrand gun. It wasn't +shooting like the other rifles there. When he would fire the rifle, +at the end of the barrel there would be a ball of fire coming out at +the end of the barrel, and that is what attracted my attention to this +fellow. + +When I said to my son, I said, "Son, be careful, I am afraid that gun +is going to blow up." And I was kind of laughing and joking around with +the other fellow that was waiting in--waiting to sight in their scope +and I would hand him cotton and I would say, "Get ready, this fellow is +getting ready to shoot this 105 howitzer." And I said to my son, step +back, or lean over, or be careful, and he said, "Daddy, that is all +right, it is an Italian carbine." + +So they fired several rounds, and after they would fire three or four +rounds, then the keeper out there would say let's go look at our +targets, and we would go down and I would look at my boy's target and +he wasn't doing so good, but the second round we went down there and we +noticed this fellow's target to our right, and my boy made a statement, +"Daddy, this fellow is not having much trouble." So I did notice his +target, and most of his shots was within the target, but there were a +few that was outside the target, from an inch to 2 inches outside of it. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Outside the bulls-eye? + +Dr. WOOD. Bulls-eye. And that is as far as--do you want me to get into +the Oswald deal now, or you just want me to go on and tell what he did, +or are you going to ask me some questions? + +Mr. LIEBELER. I want to ask you first of all, did you talk to this +fellow at all? + +Dr. WOOD. I didn't say a word to him, but my son did. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did your son tell you at that time what he had said to +the fellow? + +Dr. WOOD. He didn't tell me at that time, no, sir. He told me later on. + +Mr. LIEBELER. He told you after the assassination, is that correct? + +Dr. WOOD. Yes; after the assassination he told me that. Yes, sir; that +is true. + +Mr. LIEBELER. He told you what he said to the fellow after the +assassination. Now you mentioned previously that when you warned your +son to be careful of that rifle because of your fear that it would +blow up and that your son had told you, don't worry, it is an Italian +carbine, is that correct? + +Dr. WOOD. Well---- + +Mr. LIEBELER. And that is substantially what he had mentioned to you at +the range, that it was Italian? + +Dr. WOOD. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Do you know whether or not your son spoke to this man +before he told you it was an Italian carbine, or not? + +Dr. WOOD. I feel sure he did not speak to the man before. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Your son's statement was based only on his observation of +the rifle, is that correct? + +Dr. WOOD. On his observation of the rifle and what he knows about guns, +which is quite a bit. He studies about guns a lot. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Do you think your son would be qualified to make a +statement in this regard? + +Dr. WOOD. I feel sure more so than I am. I know very little about guns, +but he knows quite a bit. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you observe this fellow leave the rifle range before +you? + +Dr. WOOD. I did not, but I didn't notice when the change was made, but +my son said he did. He noticed that the fellow came there after my boy +had sat down and this fellow had left before my boy had finished. The +reason for that was, that my boy was having some trouble sighting in +his scope, and he asked the keeper to help him. This fellow was there +less than most of the fellows that was out there. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Do you remember the name of the keeper? + +Dr. WOOD. I do not. He was a tall fellow; all I know. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Slender? + +Dr. WOOD. Slender, yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Do you know Mr. Floyd Davis? + +Dr. WOOD. No, sir; he might have been the fellow that was helping my +son, I don't know. But I recognized his picture later in the paper +when it came out, and--that this fellow was there practicing, and I +recognized the fellow as the fellow that helped my son. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Helped your son sight in his scope? + +Dr. WOOD. Helped my son sight in his scope, and I don't know who owned +the range. I have no idea. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did there come a time subsequent to that that you were +able to identify this man that you had seen there as Lee Harvey Oswald? + +Dr. WOOD. Would you repeat that? + +Mr. LIEBELER. After you saw this man, you left the rifle range. Then +later on the next Friday the President was assassinated, and at +sometime subsequent to that time, did you connect up Lee Harvey Oswald +with this man that you saw at the rifle range? + +Dr. WOOD. I did. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Tell me when and how you did that? + +Dr. WOOD. I saw him flashed on the television screen at home several +times. They would interrogate him and bring him down the hall and bring +him back to his cell. This particular time I mentioned to my wife, +I said to her, "Honey, that looks exactly like the fellow that was +sitting next to Sterling at the rifle range. But I am not going to say +anything to Sterling because I want to see if he recognizes him and if +he thinks it was." + +Well, I would say within 30 minutes or an hour he was flashed back +on the screen and he said to me, "Daddy, that is the fellow that was +sitting next to me out on the rifle range." + +Mr. LIEBELER. So that you, independently of your son, first noticed the +resemblance between Oswald---- + +Dr. WOOD. And mentioned it to my wife. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And Sterling was not in your presence at at time? + +Dr. WOOD. No, sir; he was not in the room. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Then later he came into the room, saw Oswald's picture on +the television, and said to you that that was the guy that was out at +the rifle range that previous Saturday, is that correct? + +Dr. WOOD. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You did not mention to Sterling in any way the +resemblance between Oswald and the fellow at the rifle range prior to +the time he mentioned it himself? + +Dr. WOOD. No. They mentioned on the newscast that he was an ex-Marine. +Well, I figured an ex-Marine would be a husky sort of fellow, and I +kept watching him, and he didn't look like a Marine to me. But he was a +Marine but he didn't seem to me to have the build. + +He looked to me as a fairly frail man, not too strong, and that is the +reason I wasn't thinking too much about it until he was flashed on the +screen and then his profile just came to me that that was the man that +was out at the rifle range. + +Mr. LIEBELER. What did you do then after you had had this conversation +and Sterling's observation? + +Dr. WOOD. I said I think I should report that to either the Dallas +police or FBI. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you do so? + +Dr. WOOD. I did not until the following Monday. On Sunday, the next +morning--this was Saturday night--on Sunday morning we went to church +and my wife said after church, let's go down and look at the place +where the President was assassinated. We haven't been down, so we went +down there and we looked over the area and we walked back to our car, +and I would say it was between 12 and 1 o'clock, and I turned on the +radio in the car and it said Oswald had been shot. + +So I said to my wife, well, I don't know whether it will do any +good now to turn it in or not, and I didn't turn it in. But later +on, on Monday I had a fellow in my office who works for the State +comptroller's office and told him about this incident and he said, "Dr. +Wood, I certainly would turn it in. Anything that you could do will +help." + +So after he left the office, I called the FBI and told them I thought I +had some information that might be of importance to them concerning the +Oswald case, and they talked to me, and this was on Monday. And I told +them I was leaving town. I think I told them, I am not positive, but we +went out, me and my wife and son went out to Uvalde deer hunting, and +while we were out there--this was on, we went out Tuesday, and we were +there Wednesday night, and Will Fritz of the Dallas police force called +me and questioned me about my son and me and were we sure, and I said +we were fairly sure that it was, and he wanted to know when we were +coming back, and I said that me and my wife were thinking about going +to Mexico so it will be Sunday before we return. And he said, when you +return would you please call me. + +Well, that was on the following Monday, and I called Will Fritz and +he had two men from homicide come out and talk to me. And on my lunch +hour, two FBI agents came out and talked with me. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Was this on Monday, too? + +Dr. WOOD. It was on Monday. I believe. I am fairly sure it was on +Monday because I called as soon as I came back, and I recall that when +I called, there was the homicide, two officers from Will Fritz' office +came, and as well as I remember, they called my office girl, the FBI +called my office girl and asked could they come out to see me, and they +came out around my lunch hour, and I talked to the FBI at that time. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Do you remember the names of the agents that spoke to you? + +Dr. WOOD. I don't remember the agents, sure don't. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you observe the rifle that this fellow was firing +closely enough so that you could be able to identify it? + +Dr. WOOD. I don't think I could identify it. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did the FBI or the Dallas police show you any pictures of +Oswald when they interviewed you? + +Dr. WOOD. Both the Dallas police and the FBI, I think, showed me the +same photograph that each showed me as they came out. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And you identified that man in that photograph as the +fellow you had seen at the rifle range? + +Dr. WOOD. I put it in this category that I couldn't be absolutely +positive, but in my mind I was positive that it was Oswald that I saw +out at the rifle range. + +Mr. LIEBELER. They showed pictures also to your son, did they not? + +Dr. WOOD. He said they did; yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You weren't there when they did? + +Dr. WOOD. They interviewed my son at school. The Secret Service came +out to his school, I think, a couple of times to see him, and an +officer from Will Fritz' office came out once or twice to school to see +him, and the FBI came out, I think, at the house on two occasions just +before I got off from the office, and I never was there when my son saw +either of them. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Do you know that the FBI subsequently showed your son a +picture of the rifle used to assassinate the President? + +Dr. WOOD. I knew this. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Were you aware of the fact that your son indicated that +the picture that the FBI showed them was not the same rifle that was in +possession of this man at the rifle range? + +Dr. WOOD. I am not aware of that. I am aware of the fact that he--he +thinks he said that the rifle they first showed him was the rifle, but +the scope was not the same scope that he showed them. I think that is +what my boy said. I don't know for sure whether they showed him two +different pictures or not, but one time they came out, the FBI come and +stayed a very short while and said is this the scope. That is the way I +understood my wife to say, and my boy said no, that is not the scope. + +Mr. LIEBELER. I want to show you some pictures that have previously +been marked as Commission Exhibits 451 and 453 through 456, and ask you +if any of the pictures I show you resemble the men who you saw at the +rifle range? + +Dr. WOOD. I pick out someone nearest resembling--is that what you are +asking me? Or is the likeness of either of these to him? + +Mr. LIEBELER. Yes, is this the fellow you saw at the rifle range, do +you think? Are any of these pictures of the man you saw at the rifle +range? + +Dr. WOOD. May I ask this, that the profile that I got of the man, as +I told the FBI, was not a profile like this. It was a lateral side +profile, because I was facing in this angle, and I said I could only +describe him from a lateral view and from the shoulder up, even though +I walked down to the rifle range to the target with him. I did not pay +a bit of attention to him. + +Mr. LIEBELER. So would the picture here, Commission Exhibit 454, be a +lateral view of the type you describe. + +Dr. WOOD. No, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. That is too much from the front? + +Dr. WOOD. Well, now, that is a right lateral view. I assume his was a +left lateral view. But still I would say that wasn't. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You would say what? + +Dr. WOOD. That was not the man that I saw. + +Mr. LIEBELER. That was not the man you saw? + +Dr. WOOD. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. I show you a photograph that has been previously marked +as Pizzo Exhibit 453-A and ask you if you recognize any of the +individuals in that photograph as the man you saw in the rifle range? + +Dr. WOOD. Yes. The man holding the paper facing me with a green mark +above his head. + +Mr. LIEBELER. With the green mark, with two marks above him? There are +two different marks and you indicated the---- + +Dr. WOOD. The green marking above this fellow right here [pointing]. + +Mr. LIEBELER. That has an "X"-shaped mark. + +Dr. WOOD. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. I show you another picture which has been marked Pizzo +Exhibit 453-B, and ask you if any of the individuals there appear to be +the same as the man you saw at the rifle range? + +Dr. WOOD. Yes. The man with one green marking above the top of his head +is the--I would identify as the man. + +Mr. LIEBELER. I show you another picture that has been marked as Pizzo +Exhibit 453-C, and ask you if you recognize that individual as the man +you saw at the rifle range? + +Dr. WOOD. I do. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Do you have any doubt about it? + +Dr. WOOD. In my mind there is no doubt. If I just had to swear on a +Bible, I couldn't, but in my mind, it is him. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Well, of course, you realize that you are testifying +under oath. + +Dr. WOOD. I know he is a dead man and all that, but I must say in my +own mind it is him, I am positive. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Now I show you two pictures which have been marked +Exhibits 3 and 4, on the deposition of Mr. Greener, and ask you if you +recognize either of those pictures as the rifle in the possession of +the man at the range? + +Dr. WOOD. I didn't observe the rifle close enough to say either one of +these was or wasn't. I only observed the way the rifle was fired, so I +couldn't identify either one as being the rifle that assassinated, or +the man that was shooting out at the rifle range. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You are unable to identify that as being the rifle either +one way or the other? + +Dr. WOOD. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Do you know of anybody else that was at the range when +you observed this fellow who also observed him? + +Dr. WOOD. Yes. I told the FBI of Kenney Longley. Dr. Longley's son, a +dental surgeon, a friend of mine, was talking to me at the time they +were shooting. He was getting ready to take over one of the booths, and +I understand that later the FBI went out to interview him. + +And he had two friends with him. They interviewed them too, but I have +forgotten their names. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did they observe this individual also? + +Dr. WOOD. Other than what I have said, the conversation that I was +concerned about, and I handed them each cotton to put in their ears +when he fired this rifle, and I don't know how much observation they +made of the man. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Have you discussed with them the question of whether or +not this man was Lee Harvey Oswald? + +Dr. WOOD. I haven't seen--I will retract that statement. I had seen Dr. +Longley's son. He had a front tooth knocked out and Dr. Longley brought +him over to my office, but nothing was mentioned about Oswald or this +man at the rifle range. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Longley and those two friends are the only two men that +you know of that were also at the range at that time? + +Dr. WOOD. The only people I know. I couldn't identify another soul that +was out there. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You haven't discussed this either with Longley or his two +friends? + +Dr. WOOD. No, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. I don't think I have any more questions at this point. If +you can think of anything else that you think ought to be on the record +about this matter, I want you to feel free to go right ahead and say +it. We want to get everything that you know about this. + +Dr. WOOD. You mean help you out in the case or any feelings in the case? + +Mr. LIEBELER. No; on the question of whether this was Oswald out there +at the rifle range, or anything else, if you know any other facts about +the case, we want to know those, too. + +Dr. WOOD. I have elaborated pretty much to you about what I saw. I was +a great admirer of the President and I felt that if there was anything +I could do to help clarify or clear up the case, I was willing to do +it, and that is why I reported. + +Mr. LIEBELER. On behalf of the Commission I want to thank you very much +for the cooperation you have shown us, Dr. Wood. + +Thank you, sir. + + + + +TESTIMONY OF STERLING CHARLES WOOD + +The testimony of Sterling Charles Wood was taken at 3:20 p.m., on April +1, 1964, in the office of the U.S. attorney, 301 Post Office Building, +Bryan and Ervay Streets, Dallas, Tex., by Mr. Wesley J. Liebeler, +assistant counsel of the President's Commission. + + +Mr. LIEBELER. Would you stand up, Sterling, and raise your right hand? +Do you 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. WOOD. I do. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Please sit down. Sterling, my name is Wesley J. Liebeler. + +Mr. WOOD. Glad to meet you. + +Mr. LIEBELER. I am a member of the legal staff of the President's +Commission investigating the assassination of President Kennedy. I +have been authorized to take testimony from witnesses such as you by +the Commission, pursuant to provisions of Executive Order 11130, dated +November 29, 1963, and joint resolution of Congress No. 137. + +I believe that Mr. Rankin sent a letter to you and to your father last +week, and that he enclosed copies of those two documents along with a +copy of the rules governing the taking of testimony by the Commission +or staff members. Do you remember getting that letter? + +Mr. WOOD. Yes, sir; but I didn't read those rules. + +Mr. LIEBELER. That is all right. Your father got them and you have them +still in your possession? + +Mr. WOOD. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Would you state your name for the record? + +Mr. WOOD. Sterling Charles Wood. + +Mr. LIEBELER. How old are you? + +Mr. WOOD. Thirteen. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Do you go to school? + +Mr. WOOD. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Where do you go to school? + +Mr. WOOD. Boude Storey Junior High. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Where do you live? + +Mr. WOOD. 1326 Alaska Street. + +Mr. LIEBELER. The Commission has been advised that you and your father +went out to the Sports Drome Gun Range on West Davis at about 8000 West +Davis sometime in November, is that correct? + +Mr. WOOD. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Can you tell us the date that you went out there? + +Mr. WOOD. It was the Saturday before. It was 6 days before the +President was killed. It was a Saturday. + +Mr. LIEBELER. The Saturday before he was assassinated? + +Mr. WOOD. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Who all went out to the range, just you and your father? + +Mr. WOOD. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Can you tell me about what time you got out there? + +Mr. WOOD. I would say it was about 1:30, right after my daddy was off +from work. + +Mr. LIEBELER. How long did you stay out there? + +Mr. WOOD. About an hour. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You went out there to sight your rifle in for deer +hunting? + +Mr. WOOD. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you go deer hunting? + +Mr. WOOD. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you get a deer? + +Mr. WOOD. No, sir; saw one. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you get a shot at it? + +Mr. WOOD. Yes; I think I hit him and he jumped the fence. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Now I understand that you and your father saw a man out +there firing in the booth next to you? + +Mr. WOOD. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Can you tell us what happened right there at the rifle +range that day? + +Mr. WOOD. Yes, sir; I came out there. I had been shooting for about 10 +or 15 minutes and he came up next to me and started shooting, and he +only shot about 8 or 10 times and I noticed every time he got through +shooting he would take the breech and open it up and put the shell +in his pocket. We went down to check our target and I remembered +that his was almost always in the bull's-eye. And as we came back to +shoot again, I talked to him and I said, "Sir, is that a 6.5 Italian +carbine?" And he said, "Yes, sir." + +Mr. LIEBELER. Why did you ask him that question? + +Mr. WOOD. Because I read gun books and I was pretty sure that was a 6.5 +Italian carbine and I wanted to make sure. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Have you told your father about this, that that was an +Italian carbine? + +Mr. WOOD. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. How did you express it? + +Mr. WOOD. I said, "Daddy, it looks like a 6.5 Italian carbine," and I +asked him if it was a four-power scope, because it was funny looking, +it wasn't American, and he said, "Yes, it was." + +Mr. LIEBELER. Had you talked to your father about this fellow or this +rifle before you talked to this guy? + +Mr. WOOD. I think I said that it looked like an Italian make gun, to me. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You said that to your father? + +Mr. WOOD. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Can you remember why you mentioned that particular gun to +your father? + +Mr. WOOD. Well, call it an Army rifle. + +Mr. LIEBELER. How could you tell that? + +Mr. WOOD. Well, you can tell it had been scratched up and it was a +surplus gun. It was probably--you can tell it was probably used in the +war. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Was there anything else peculiar about this rifle that +made you mention it to your father? + +Mr. WOOD. It had a sawed-off barrel, shorter barrel than most rifles +were. + +Mr. LIEBELER. How long did the barrel of the rifle stick out? + +Mr. WOOD. About that far out of the stock. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Would you say that was about 3 or 4 inches? + +Mr. WOOD. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You say that the barrel was sawed off? + +Mr. WOOD. You could tell it was shorter than most military rifles, and +everytime he shot, a spit of fire would come out and I could feel the +heat when he shot every time. + +Mr. LIEBELER. What kind of a rifle do you have, Sterling? + +Mr. WOOD. Winchester 30-30. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Do you know about how long it is? + +Mr. WOOD. No, sir; I wouldn't have any idea. It is a shorter rifle than +most of them, which is 30-30. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Do you know how long a yardstick is? Can you visualize +that in your mind? + +Mr. WOOD. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Is your rifle longer or shorter than a yardstick? + +Mr. WOOD. It is about, I would say it was shorter than a yardstick, yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. What about the rifle that this fellow had, was it longer +or shorter? + +Mr. WOOD. Longer than a yard stick, because it is--a Winchester is a +small gun to start off with, and a military rifle is a pretty long +rifle. + +Mr. LIEBELER. This one, even though the barrel was sawed-off, you think +it was still longer than a yardstick? + +Mr. WOOD. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Could you guess about how much longer than a yardstick it +would be? + +Mr. WOOD. No, sir; it wasn't too much bigger than a yardstick. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you talk to this fellow any more than just ask him +what you have already told us? + +Mr. WOOD. No, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And he said only two words to you? + +Mr. WOOD. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did he leave the range before you or after? + +Mr. WOOD. Before I did. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you see him go? + +Mr. WOOD. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. How did he go? + +Mr. WOOD. He left with a man in a newer model car. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you see the model? + +Mr. WOOD. No, I didn't. They went into the parking lot. They went +around and I heard the car door slam and they took off, but it was a +newer model. + +Mr. LIEBELER. What kind of car? + +Mr. WOOD. It was a Ford, if I remember. + +Mr. LIEBELER. About what year would you say? + +Mr. WOOD. I don't remember. I just knew it was a newer model car. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Was it a convertible or station wagon? + +Mr. WOOD. It was a hardtop. + +Mr. LIEBELER. A hardtop? + +Mr. WOOD. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. About this other fellow that this guy was with, was he a +big man or just---- + +Mr. WOOD. About the same size this man was. + +Mr. LIEBELER. How tall would you say this man was? + +Mr. WOOD. Oh, about 5'9". + +Mr. LIEBELER. About 5'9"? + +Mr. WOOD. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Now the FBI talked to you about this once before or a +couple of times, didn't they? + +Mr. WOOD. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did the FBI ask you now how this fellow left the range? + +Mr. WOOD. What do you mean by that? + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did he ask you, did he go and get in a car or did he +leave with somebody else? + +Mr. WOOD. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Do you remember them asking you this? + +Mr. WOOD. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Do you remember what you told him? + +Mr. WOOD. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. What did you tell him? + +Mr. WOOD. I told him they left in a newer model car. He had to go +around through the main office because that was 30 yards down and he +had to come around and he left in a newer model car with this man, and +he wasn't driving. + +Mr. LIEBELER. That the man who you saw firing was not driving? + +Mr. WOOD. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you tell the FBI what kind of car it was? + +Mr. WOOD. I think I told him, I am pretty sure it was a Ford. That is +what I remember, because I like Fords and I remember what a Ford looks +like. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you tell the FBI that this fellow who you saw +shooting this rifle left with another man? + +Mr. WOOD. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You are pretty clear about that? + +Mr. WOOD. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And you also told that the fellow you saw shooting the +rifle wasn't driving the car, is that right? + +Mr. WOOD. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Now later on the next week after the President was +assassinated, did you see a picture of this man or observe his picture +on television or the radio or newspaper, or see him in any other way? + +Mr. WOOD. Are you talking about Oswald? + +Mr. LIEBELER. The man that was firing at the rifle range? + +Mr. WOOD. That is what made me notice him. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Tell us about that. + +Mr. WOOD. The man out at the rifle range had a mean, stern face. You +could tell he was a cold man, and that is what made me look at him more +than I did anybody else. So when I saw the picture on television that +night, I was sure it was him. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You spoke to your father about it? + +Mr. WOOD. Yes; we went to get a paper about the assassination and I +said, "Dad, that does look like the man to me." And he said it did, too. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did your father mention it to you first, or did you +mention it to your father? + +Mr. WOOD. I mentioned it to him first. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You mentioned it to him first? + +Mr. WOOD. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Was your mother there when you mentioned it to him? + +Mr. WOOD. No, sir; she was out. We had gone out to get a paper. + +Mr. LIEBELER. The first time you saw this guy's picture was in the +newspaper, is that right? + +Mr. WOOD. Yes; I kept remembering how he looked and I finally told my +dad. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You told your father that this guy you saw at the rifle +range looked like Oswald, based on the picture of Oswald in the +newspaper? + +Mr. WOOD. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Now, did you ever read in the newspaper anything about +Oswald's ability to drive an automobile? + +Mr. WOOD. No, sir; I didn't read anything about that. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Do you remember whether or not Oswald could drive a car +or not? + +Mr. WOOD. I think he could, because my mother told me something about +him going to Mexico or something. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Now you said that your mother told you something about +Oswald going to Mexico, is that right? + +Mr. WOOD. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You never were aware of the fact or heard that Oswald +could not drive a car, is that right? + +Mr. WOOD. Do you mean--I didn't get what you said. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did anybody ever tell you that Oswald couldn't drive a +car? + +Mr. WOOD. No, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You never heard that? + +Mr. WOOD. No, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And you don't know that now? + +Mr. WOOD. No, sir; I thought he could drive. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did this other man that he was with fire a rifle at all? + +Mr. WOOD. No, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. He did not? + +Mr. WOOD. No, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Sterling, I want to show you some pictures of some men, +and these pictures have previously been marked as Commission's Exhibit +451 and 453 through 456, sir. There are five of them. I want you to +look at them and tell me if any of the pictures look like the guy you +saw at the rifle range that you think was Oswald? + +Mr. WOOD. No, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. None of those look like him? + +Mr. WOOD. No, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Now I want to show you another photograph which has not +yet been marked, and ask you to look at it very carefully and tell me +if any of the people in that picture look like the boy at the rifle +range? + +Mr. WOOD. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Which one? + +Mr. WOOD. That one with the paper in his hand. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Now I want to show you another picture that has been +marked as Pizzo Exhibit 453-B, and ask you, that is the same picture, +isn't it? + +Mr. WOOD. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You pointed out that he has a green line over his head +and you say that is the fellow you saw at the rifle range? + +Mr. WOOD. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Here is another picture that I want you to look at and +see if you see anybody that looks like the fellow you saw at the rifle +range? + +Mr. WOOD. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Which one is that? + +Mr. WOOD. That man right here. + +Mr. LIEBELER. This one right here? + +Mr. WOOD. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Here is another picture just the same one as the one I +showed you. + +Mr. WOOD. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. The man that you pointed out as being the individual +that you saw at the rifle range has a green mark over his head. There +are two different marks. It looks like an "X," but it is two marks as +opposed to one mark over here. + +Mr. WOOD. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And you say that is the man you saw at the rifle range? + +Mr. WOOD. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. I want to show you a picture that has been marked "Pizzo +Exhibit 453-C," and ask you if that looks like the fellow you saw at +the rifle range? + +Mr. WOOD. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Have you seen that picture before? + +Mr. WOOD. No, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. One like it? + +Mr. WOOD. No, sir; not unless it's been in the paper. I think there has +been one like that in the paper. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did the FBI show you a picture of Oswald? + +Mr. WOOD. They showed me a picture with his gun in his backyard. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And you recognized that picture as being the man you saw +at the rifle range? + +Mr. WOOD. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. I show you two pictures that have been previously marked +as Exhibits 3 and 4, on the deposition of Mr. Greener. Tell me whether +that is the rifle the man had? + +Mr. WOOD. It does look like the rifle, but the scope looks a little +funny to me. + +Mr. LIEBELER. What looks funny about the scope? + +Mr. WOOD. Because I seem to remember when I got a glance, it seemed to +get bigger at the end and get smaller as it went along. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Would you say that is not the scope that was on the rifle? + +Mr. WOOD. I am not too sure, but I would say that looks like a foreign +made scope. + +Mr. LIEBELER. The one in this picture does? + +Mr. WOOD. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You are pretty sure in your own mind that the scope +that was on the rifle at the range was not an American scope, is that +correct? + +Mr. WOOD. Yes; it looked Japanese. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Sterling, you noticed how the sling is mounted on this +rifle? + +Mr. WOOD. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. It is mounted on the side on the butt, is it not? And on +the side of the rifle, also? + +Mr. WOOD. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Is that the way the sling was on the rifle that you saw +at the rifle range? + +Mr. WOOD. I am not too sure. It was either mounted underneath or on the +side. I am not sure. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You wouldn't remember one way or the other? + +Mr. WOOD. I think it was mounted on the side. I am not too sure. I +wouldn't want to be positive. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Now do you remember that the FBI showed you a picture of +a rifle? + +Mr. WOOD. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Is this the same picture? + +Mr. WOOD. As I remember, it looks like the same picture. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you tell the FBI that the weapon in the picture that +they showed you was not the one you observed out at the rifle range? + +Mr. WOOD. I said that was not the one. It didn't have this background +in it. It's a picture that he showed me. + +Mr. LIEBELER. This is not the same picture the FBI showed you? + +Mr. WOOD. No, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Well, now, the FBI did show you a picture of a rifle? + +Mr. WOOD. Yes; it was an enlarged picture. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you tell them that that was the rifle that the man +you think is Oswald had, or was not the rifle? + +Mr. WOOD. I told them that was not the rifle. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You told them that was not the rifle? + +Mr. WOOD. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. The rifle in this picture, is this the same rifle? Can +you tell, or a different rifle that was in the picture that the FBI +showed you? + +Mr. WOOD. You mean to say--I don't know what you said. + +Mr. LIEBELER. The FBI agent showed you a picture of a rifle? + +Mr. WOOD. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Is the rifle that he showed you, the picture that he +showed you, the picture of the same rifle as is in the picture we have +here on the desk, or were they different rifles or can you tell? + +Mr. WOOD. I think they were the same rifles, except the rifle that he +showed me didn't have that scope. I told them that that wasn't the +scope. + +Mr. LIEBELER. That is what you told me just now? + +Mr. WOOD. Yes; so it would be a different rifle. + +Mr. LIEBELER. My question is this. Note that I am not asking you now +whether this rifle is the same as the one that the fellow at the rifle +range had, or whether or not the rifle that the FBI showed you, or the +picture that the FBI showed you, was a picture of the same rifle that +Oswald had on the rifle range--I just want to know now whether you can +tell me whether the picture that I am showing you now is a picture of +the same rifle as the FBI showed you. + +Mr. WOOD. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. It is? + +Mr. WOOD. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And you still say now that the scope on this rifle +doesn't look like the scope the guy at the rifle range had? + +Mr. WOOD. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. But this is the same scope as in the picture that the FBI +showed you? + +Mr. WOOD. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did the FBI ask you about the sling mount on the rifle? + +Mr. WOOD. I think they did. + +Mr. LIEBELER. What did you tell them about that? + +Mr. WOOD. I think I told them it was mounted on the underneath, I am +not too sure. I wasn't too positive then when I told them that. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And you are not sure now? + +Mr. WOOD. I am not sure now, because I didn't have that long of glance. + +Mr. LIEBELER. How did the FBI agent talk to you? Did he try to convince +you that it wasn't the same rifle, or just show the picture and let you +tell? + +Mr. WOOD. Let me tell. + +Mr. LIEBELER. He didn't try to convince you one way or the other? + +Mr. WOOD. No, sir; he didn't try to force me one way or the other. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Now the scope that we have here on this rifle is enlarged +at the forward end, is it not? + +Mr. WOOD. It is big towards the muzzle of the rifle; yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Is that the way the scope was on the rifle that you saw +at the rifle range, too? + +Mr. WOOD. Yes, sir; but it was the same size as that, and it got +smaller as it came to a point, but it was a big point. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Well, now, this one here is big at the back and it gets +smaller in the middle, and then gets bigger at the front end. Now tell +me the difference between this one and the one that you saw at the +rifle range? + +Mr. WOOD. This was bigger and it got smaller as it went along. + +Mr. LIEBELER. It didn't get bigger at the forward end? + +Mr. WOOD. No; I didn't get that good a glance, but what I saw is what I +told you. + +Mr. LIEBELER. All right, you are pretty sure in your own mind that that +was Lee Oswald that you saw at the rifle range? + +Mr. WOOD. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Do you know Kenney Longley? + +Mr. WOOD. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Was he out there that day? + +Mr. WOOD. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did he see this guy? + +Mr. WOOD. I don't know if he saw him or not. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you talk to him about it? + +Mr. WOOD. Yes, sir; I think I did, because I was standing, he was +waiting in a booth to shoot. They all were filled up, and he stood back +there and was noticing it, too. He noticed the fire coming out of the +gun. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Well, now, have you talked to Kenney Longley about this +fellow at the rifle range since the assassination? + +Mr. WOOD. I haven't seen him. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Was there anybody else out there at the range that day +that you knew? + +Mr. WOOD. A friend of mine, Charles McDowell, but he was busy gathering +shells. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And he didn't see this guy, as far as you know? + +Mr. WOOD. I don't know if he saw him. I don't think so. Maybe he did. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Have you talked to McDowell about it since the +assassination? + +Mr. WOOD. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you ask McDowell whether he saw this fellow? + +Mr. WOOD. No, sir; but I am pretty sure, because he was right next to +him, and he was down under the booth gathering shells. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You said that you have talked to McDowell about this guy +at the rifle range? + +Mr. WOOD. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. What did you talk to him about? + +Mr. WOOD. I talked to him about, I told him that very same night I +talked to my daddy, and I called him on the phone and told him that I +saw that man out there, and we talked about the President's death, and +that was all. He said he remembered him, too, I think. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you tell him that you thought that the fellow at the +rifle range was Oswald? + +Mr. WOOD. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. What did he say? + +Mr. WOOD. He didn't know, and he wasn't too sure, but he wasn't as +close as I was to him. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Where does this fellow live? + +Mr. WOOD. McDowell? + +Mr. LIEBELER. Yes. + +Mr. WOOD. Marsalis, the first street over from where I do. I don't know +the address. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Now, Sterling, I don't think I have any more questions +that I can think of right now, but I want to say this: If you can think +of anything else about this fellow that I haven't asked you about, or +that you think you should tell me, I want you to tell me now so we can +get it on the record. + +Mr. WOOD. Well, I remember we went down to look at our target, and he +left after I did. Because I went down there real quick and I remember +looking at his, and as I was leaving, he came down to look at his +target and was looking at how accurate it was, and that is about all I +have to tell you. + +Mr. LIEBELER. He was a pretty good shot? + +Mr. WOOD. He was the most accurate of all the targets that I noticed. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Okay, Sterling, I want to thank you very much. You have +been very helpful. I hope we weren't too hard on you. The Commission +wants you to know that it appreciates the cooperation you have given to +us. + +Mr. WOOD. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Thank you very much. + +Mr. WOOD. All right. + + + + +TESTIMONY OF THERESA WOOD + +The testimony of Theresa Wood was taken at 4 p.m., on April 1 1964, +in the office of the U.S. attorney, 301 Post Office Building, Bryan +and Ervay Streets, Dallas, Tex., by Mr. Wesley J. Liebeler, assistant +counsel of the President's Commission. + + +Mr. LIEBELER. Would you rise and raise your right hand, please. Do you +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? + +Mrs. WOOD. I do. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Please sit down. My name is Wesley J. Liebeler. I am +a staff attorney on the President's Commission investigating the +assassination of President Kennedy. Mr. Rankin wrote a letter to your +husband and your son last week, telling them that he wanted to question +them. I have just concluded questioning both of them. I would like to +ask you a couple of questions about some points that came up during +their statements. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Would you state your full name, for the record, please? + +Mrs. WOOD. My married name? + +Mr. LIEBELER. Yes; your married name. + +Mrs. WOOD. Theresa Wood. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You are the wife of Dr. Homer Wood, are you not? + +Mrs. WOOD. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And the mother of Sterling Charles Wood? + +Mrs. WOOD. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Do you recall that sometime after the assassination of +the President, your husband saw a picture of Oswald either in the +newspaper or on television and said something to you about it? Do you +remember that? + +Mrs. WOOD. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Tell me what happened, and the circumstances and what you +saw? + +Mrs. WOOD. He thought he was the same man they saw out at the gun +range. In fact, he was sure of it. And he asked Sterling, and Sterling +said, "Yes, daddy, it is the same man." And they were very, very sure +of it at the time. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Now, was Sterling in the room? Did your husband first +see Oswald's picture on the television or in the newspapers; do you +remember? + +Mrs. WOOD. I don't remember exactly. I think it was the newspapers +or somewhere. They had three pictures of him. I think it was in the +newspapers. Could have been on television. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Now, was Sterling there at the time your husband first +spoke of this to you? + +Mrs. WOOD. No, I don't think so. I think he later asked Sterling. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Do you remember whether he asked Sterling, or whether +Sterling mentioned it of his own accord without any prompting from his +father? Do you remember how that happened? + +Mrs. WOOD. No, I don't remember exactly. I know they were both talking +about it. They were both pretty sure that he was the man. + +Mr. LIEBELER. But you have no recollection at this point that your +husband first saw a picture and said to you, now, in substance, that +this looked like the man he saw on the rifle range and he wanted to +wait and see if Sterling recognized him also, and that he purposely did +not mention it to Sterling, but waited to see if Sterling would come +forward with the same idea? Do you remember that happening? + +Mrs. WOOD. No; my husband was very, very sure. In fact, he was +positive. And there was a friend that they met at the range. I think +it was the same day. He called him to see if he thought, or if he had +recognized Oswald. + +Mr. LIEBELER. What was that friends name? + +Mrs. WOOD. It was Kenny Longley. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You didn't talk to Longley, did you? + +Mrs. WOOD. No. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Your husband did? + +Mrs. WOOD. I think my husband called, but he never did talk to the boy. +The boy was in school. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Do you know if he ever talked to the boy about it +afterward? + +Mrs. WOOD. I don't think so. Kenney Longley though was a good ways off +or something, and I don't know whether he really saw him. According to +my husband, he said he could have. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Do you know of anybody else that was out at the rifle +range that your husband or your son knew who might have seen this +fellow? + +Mrs. WOOD. No. + +Mr. LIEBELER. That is about all I wanted to ask you. Thank you very +much for your cooperation. + + + + +TESTIMONY OF GLENN EMMETT SMITH + +The testimony of Glenn Emmett Smith was taken at 9:10 a.m., on April +1, 1964, in the office of the U.S. attorney, 301 Post Office Building, +Bryan and Ervay Streets, Dallas, Tex., by Mr. Wesley J. Liebeler, +assistant counsel of the President's Commission. + + +Mr. LIEBELER. My name is Wesley J. Liebeler. I am a member of the legal +staff of the President's Commission to investigate the assassination of +President John F. Kennedy. + +I have been authorized to take your testimony by the Commission +pursuant to authority granted to it by Executive Order 11130, dated +November 29, 1963, and joint resolution of Congress No. 137. + +I understand that Mr. Rankin wrote to you sometime last week advising +you that I would be in touch with you to take your testimony. I +understand also that he included with his letter a copy of the +Executive order and resolution just referred to, together with a copy +of the rules of procedure for the taking of testimony which have been +adopted by the Commission in conformance with the Executive order and +joint resolution described above. + +Did you receive the letter from Mr. Rankin? + +Mr. SMITH. I did. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Those documents were enclosed with it, were they not? +Three different documents in that letter? + +Mr. SMITH. [Hands papers to attorney.] I'd better let you look, for I +don't know what is in there. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Yes; they are. The general nature of the Commission's +inquiry is to ascertain, evaluate and report upon the facts relating +to the assassination of President Kennedy and the subsequent killing +of Lee Harvey Oswald. We want to inquire of you today concerning +any knowledge you may have about the alleged sale of a rifle by an +individual thought to be Lee Harvey Oswald to one Robert Taylor. We +would also like to get from you any information that you have about +Oswald's associates in Irving, Tex. + +Before we get to the details of that testimony, would you state your +full name for the record? + +Mr. SMITH. Glenn Emmett Smith. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Where do you live, sir? + +Mr. SMITH. 1604 Argentia, apartment C. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Is that in Dallas? + +Mr. SMITH. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Where are you employed? + +Mr. SMITH. At Jack's Super Shell, Rock Island and Story Road, Irving. + +Mr. LIEBELER. How long have you been employed there? + +Mr. SMITH. Since the 25th of April of 1963. + +Mr. LIEBELER. In what capacity do you work at the Shell station? + +Mr. SMITH. I am a drive attendant. I work the driveway. + +Mr. LIEBELER. What did you do prior to the time that you went to work +for the Shell station? + +Mr. SMITH. I was an income tax consultant. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Worked in Dallas? + +Mr. SMITH. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. How long were you engaged in that? + +Mr. SMITH. Just through the tax months, from January 1 to the 15th of +April. + +Mr. LIEBELER. What do you usually do? Do you usually work service +stations? + +Mr. SMITH. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. How old are you, sir? + +Mr. SMITH. Fifty-three. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Are you a native of Texas? + +Mr. SMITH. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Have you lived all your life in Dallas? + +Mr. SMITH. No. I have been here since 1936. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Where did you live prior to that time? + +Mr. SMITH. Shawnee, Okla. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Were you born in Oklahoma or born in Texas? + +Mr. SMITH. Born in Texas. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Then moved to Oklahoma? + +Mr. SMITH. Moved to Oklahoma. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Then moved back to Texas? + +Mr. SMITH. Moved back to Texas. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Do you know one Robert Taylor? + +Mr. SMITH. I think I do. + +Mr. LIEBELER. How long have you known him? + +Mr. SMITH. Since I went to work, since the 25th of April 1963. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Is Mr. Taylor also employed at the Shell station where +you worked? + +Mr. SMITH. Well, I don't know if he is going to be let out or not. He +is off sick, and I understand that Mr. Smith has hired another man, +which I know he got a man working. I don't know if he is going to let +Robert come back. + +Mr. LIEBELER. But Mr. Taylor did work at the Shell station from at +least April of 1963, up until sometime when he became ill, is that +correct? + +Mr. SMITH. He was working there when I went to work, and he worked +there steadily. + +Mr. LIEBELER. He became ill? + +Mr. SMITH. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Approximately when did he get sick? + +Mr. SMITH. He has been off a week and a half now. He went home sick +Saturday a week ago. + +Mr. LIEBELER. He hasn't been at work since that time? + +Mr. SMITH. Well, he come back and worked 3 hours last Friday and had to +go home again. + +Mr. LIEBELER. What kind of work does Mr. Taylor do at the station? He +is--is he a driveway attendant? + +Mr. SMITH. No; a mechanic. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You actually have a shop there at the Shell station? + +Mr. SMITH. We do minor repairs, no major, just minor repair. + +Mr. LIEBELER. How old is Mr. Taylor, do you know, possibly? + +Mr. SMITH. I think he is 49. I believe he told me he is 49. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you ever have any discussions with Mr. Taylor about a +man who Taylor thought might be or was Lee Harvey Oswald? + +Mr. SMITH. No, sir; I did not. I heard Mr. Taylor, if I may tell you +this---- + +Mr. LIEBELER. I want you to tell me what you know about it. + +Mr. SMITH. There was an FBI man called out and talked to us, and I +heard Mr. Taylor tell him between customers now, I was just catching +little words, and not enough to make very much sense, but I did hear +him tell that he had traded a rifle or bought a rifle or something from +Oswald. + +Now I didn't know Oswald. He showed us his picture, but I didn't know +him. He had been through there but I didn't recognize him. + +Mr. LIEBELER. The FBI showed you Oswald's picture? + +Mr. SMITH. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And you didn't recognize him? + +Mr. SMITH. No, sir. + +You see, sir--to my knowledge, I have never seen he or his wife. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you hear Mr. Taylor discussing this rifle that he +bought from this fellow, before the FBI fellow talked to him? + +Mr. SMITH. No. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Do you remember when the FBI man came to the station? +Would that have been in about the middle of December of 1963? + +Mr. SMITH. I'd be afraid to commit myself. I don't remember when he was +there. It's been about 2 or 3 months ago or something like that. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Do you remember the man's name? + +Mr. SMITH. No; I don't. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Would it refresh your recollection if I suggested that +his name was Morris J. White? Do you remember that was his name or +don't you remember? + +Mr. SMITH. I don't remember. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Don't you remember that you told the FBI agent that you +had heard conversation that Taylor had purchased a rifle from some +customer, and that that customer was thought by Taylor to be Lee Harvey +Oswald? Didn't you tell that to the FBI agent? + +Mr. SMITH. No, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You did not? + +Mr. SMITH. No, sir; absolutely not. I am absolutely positive. + +Mr. LIEBELER. The first time you ever heard anything about this rifle +that Taylor was supposed to have purchased was when the FBI agent was +interviewing Taylor, isn't that your statement? + +Mr. SMITH. That is right. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You never heard anything about it from Taylor or anyone +else prior to that time? + +Mr. SMITH. No, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you discuss this question of the rifle with Taylor +after the FBI agent was there? + +Mr. SMITH. Nothing more than he told me that let's see now, Bob said he +had traded a rifle, and that is about all. We were busy, and he said he +traded a rifle, and that was the day that he showed the picture to me, +the picture that the FBI man showed me, and that was all that was said +about it. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Taylor told you afterwards that the FBI agent had showed +him a picture and this picture was supposed to be a picture of Oswald? + +Mr. SMITH. He showed both of us the picture. + +Mr. LIEBELER. He showed both of you the picture? + +Mr. SMITH. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And Taylor told you after the FBI agent left that the +picture that the FBI agent showed you was a picture of the man from +whom Taylor had purchased the rifle, is that correct? + +Mr. SMITH. He told the FBI man that. He didn't tell me that after he +left, but he definitely told him that in my presence. I heard him. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you have any discussions with Taylor after the FBI +agent left about this question? + +Mr. SMITH. No, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you have any discussions with anybody else about it? + +Mr. SMITH. No, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you ever see the rifle that Taylor supposedly +purchased from this man? + +Mr. SMITH. No. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did Taylor ever tell you what kind of rifle it was? + +Mr. SMITH. No, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And you never heard from anybody what kind of rifle it +was? + +Mr. SMITH. I never heard anything about it at all. + +Mr. LIEBELER. How well do you know Taylor? + +Mr. SMITH. I never knew him until I went to work there. Just by working +with him, that is all. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You never associated with him outside of work? + +Mr. SMITH. No, sir; I hadn't. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Have you ever formed any opinion as to Taylor's +truthfulness or his reliability? + +Mr. SMITH. I think he is truthful, and I think he is reliable. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You don't think he would tell the FBI agent that he got +a rifle from this fellow if he didn't in fact get a rifle from this +fellow? + +Mr. SMITH. I don't. I sure don't. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Do you know where 2515 West Fifth Street is in Irving, +Tex.? + +Mr. SMITH. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Have you ever been there? + +Mr. SMITH. I have taken a lady home that lived there, to bring a car +back to service it. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Can you remember approximately when that was? + +Mr. SMITH. Oh, we serviced her car quite often. What I mean, washed it +and greased it, and she comes in occasionally now, but not like she +used to. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Have you gone to her house more than once to bring the +car back to the station? + +Mr. SMITH. To the best of my knowledge, I believe three times. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Were all of these times prior to the assassination? + +Mr. SMITH. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Can you remember approximately when the first time was +that you took this lady home to her house and brought the car back to +the station? + +Mr. SMITH. Well---- + +Mr. LIEBELER. Do you remember now that you first started to work for +the station in the last of April 1963? Can you remember approximately +how long after that it was when you first went to this address on Fifth +Street? + +Mr. SMITH. I sure don't. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You have no idea? + +Mr. SMITH. No. + +Mr. LIEBELER. A month, or 2 months, or just don't remember? + +Mr. SMITH. Possibly 2 or 3 months, something like that. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Ever have any conversation with this lady during the time +that you drove with her back to her house? + +Mr. SMITH. Nothing more than just passing the time of day. The only +thing, she made the statement one time, the first time I took her home, +that she got a little child and she said the baby, he could speak +Russian better than he could English. That is the first time I knew +there was any Russian blood there. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did she tell you they were Russian, or just told you the +little child could speak Russian? + +Mr. SMITH. That is all she told me. + +Mr. LIEBELER. That the child could speak Russian better than English? + +Mr. SMITH. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you ever see anyone other than this lady and her +children at the house on Fifth Street in Irving? + +Mr. SMITH. No, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you actually go into the house on any occasion? + +Mr. SMITH. I helped her. I carried some groceries in her house one +time. She had a carload of groceries, and I helped her put them in the +house. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Do you remember how many children were with her at that +time? + +Mr. SMITH. Three, I believe. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Three children? + +Mr. SMITH. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you make any judgment as to approximately how old +they were? Did it appear to you that they were all her children, or +weren't the ages so that it seemed to you that maybe one was the child +of somebody else? + +Mr. SMITH. I had an idea they were all hers. They were approximately, +looked like spaced out about a year or year and a half apart, something +like that. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Do you remember which child this lady said could speak +Russian better than she could speak English? + +Mr. SMITH. The baby. + +Mr. LIEBELER. The youngest one? + +Mr. SMITH. The youngest one. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Do you remember hearing this young baby speaking Russian? + +Mr. SMITH. I did, but I didn't know what she was talking about. I +couldn't understand it, and that is the reason she told me that. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did anybody else speak Russian to the child? + +Mr. SMITH. No. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you hear the lady speak Russian? + +Mr. SMITH. No, I didn't. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did the other two children speak Russian? + +Mr. SMITH. They didn't do no talking. + +Mr. LIEBELER. In either English or Russian; is that right? + +Mr. SMITH. No. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Could you describe this lady for us? + +Mr. SMITH. She is a slender woman, tall, slender woman; has very nice +personality, and that is about all that I can say for her. She didn't +do much talking either. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did she ever make a statement to you that she was Russian +herself? + +Mr. SMITH. No, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. She just indicated to you that the little baby spoke +Russian better than English, is that right? + +Mr. SMITH. That's right. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did she tell you how it came to be that baby spoke +Russian? + +Mr. SMITH. No, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You didn't ask her? + +Mr. SMITH. I didn't ask her. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Were you curious about that? + +Mr. SMITH. Yes; I was. I went back to the station and talked to the +boss about it. I told him, "I believe those people are Russian people +living down there," and he said why, and I told him about the lady +telling me the little fellow spoke Russian better than English. And +they were curious about it, but nothing was ever said. We didn't say +anything to her, because she just come in and got gas and that was all. +She never did talk much or anything. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you ever learn what this lady's name was? + +Mr. SMITH. No; I did not. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And you don't know what it is today? + +Mr. SMITH. I do not. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Was this child a boy or girl, or could you tell? + +Mr. SMITH. I don't know. I never paid any attention to it. I don't know +if it was or not. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You couldn't tell whether it was a boy or girl? + +Mr. SMITH. Well. I didn't know, because I didn't notice. I didn't pay +any attention whether it was a boy or girl. + +Ordinarily, when I take a car home out there, I try to get there and +back as fast as I can and I don't pay any attention other than the +house number and what time it is supposed to be delivered. + +Mr. LIEBELER. What kind of car did this lady have? + +Mr. SMITH. It is a station wagon. I believe a Plymouth. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Approximately what year? + +Mr. SMITH. About a '53 or '54. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Are you sure it is a Plymouth, or could it be some other +car? + +Mr. SMITH. No; I am not positive. It is either a Plymouth or a +Chevrolet. I am not positive. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Have you ever seen this lady at any time other than when +she brought her car to the gas station to have it serviced, or when you +took her to her house? + +Mr. SMITH. No, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Was there ever anyone with this lady other than the +children at any time? + +Mr. SMITH. No, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you ever meet this lady's husband? + +Mr. SMITH. No, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you ever hear anything about him? + +Mr. SMITH. No, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you ever hear that they were separated from each +other? + +Mr. SMITH. No, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. When you went into the house this first time to take the +groceries in, as I understand it, that was the time when the youngest +child was speaking Russian, is that correct? + +Mr. SMITH. That's right. + +Mr. LIEBELER. When you went into the house, you brought the groceries +into the kitchen, is that correct? + +Mr. SMITH. No; I set them down in the living room. She told me to put +them on the coffee table, and I did. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you at that time see anything that would indicate to +you that there was someone else in the house? + +Mr. SMITH. The house was awfully dirty. Boy, I never saw such a mess in +my life. Things were on the floor, clothing and papers and everything +else. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you have any idea when you went into the house with +her that there might be someone else in the house or was someone there +in the house when you came in? + +Mr. SMITH. No, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Could you tell one way or the other? You didn't see into +the bedrooms, did you? + +Mr. SMITH. No, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. There could have been someone else in the bedrooms and +you wouldn't have seen them? + +Mr. SMITH. There could have been. + +Mr. LIEBELER. The lady didn't speak to anybody or call out when she +came into the house to anyone else? + +Mr. SMITH. No, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. This lady never indicated to you that this child that +spoke Russian was not, in fact, her own child, did she? + +Mr. SMITH. No, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You always assumed it was this lady's child? + +Mr. SMITH. That's right. + +Mr. LIEBELER. I want to show you five different pictures that have been +marked in a previous procedure as Commission Exhibits 451, 453, 454, +455, and 456. I want you to look at them and tell me if you have seen +the individuals depicted in these pictures at any time? + +Mr. SMITH. [Looking] No, sir; I sure don't recognize him. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You don't recognize any of these? + +Mr. SMITH. I don't ever remember seeing him. + +Mr. LIEBELER. I show you another photograph which has been marked +previously as Pizzo Exhibit 453-B. It is a picture of several people, +but one of the individuals has been indicated by a green mark on the +face of the photo and I ask you if you have ever seen that individual, +to the best of your knowledge? + +Mr. SMITH. No, sir; I do not recognize him. + +Mr. LIEBELER. I show you another photograph which has been marked +previously as Pizzo Exhibit 453-C and ask you if you have ever seen +that individual, to the best of your knowledge? + +Mr. SMITH. No, sir; I haven't. + +Mr. LIEBELER. I asked you before, did I not, whether you have ever seen +this rifle that Mr. Taylor told you he had purchased? + +Mr. SMITH. I have not seen it. + +Mr. LIEBELER. I don't think I have any more questions, Mr. Smith. If +you can think of anything that you know that you think the Commission +might be interested in, whether I have asked you about it or haven't +asked you, I would appreciate it if you would indicate that. + +Mr. SMITH. Well, I don't think I have a thing in the world, because +actually I didn't know Oswald or his wife, either one. I don't ever +remember seeing them. + +And I do want to tell you this. At the time President Kennedy was +assassinated, I thought this woman who lived on Fifth Street, right +after it happened, I thought that was his wife simply because of her +saying that this child spoke Russian and the police arrested Oswald, +and I figured in my own mind that this was his wife, but it turned out +differently, and that is the only thing that I learned about. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You learned that it wasn't this lady's husband that was +involved, by reading the newspapers, is that correct? + +Mr. SMITH. Yes, sir; and as far as if this lady that lived on Fifth +Street had a husband, I have never seen a man around there at all, and +I have never seen a man with her. Ordinarily, just human nature would +cause a man and his wife to be together sometime. + +Mr. LIEBELER. But you have never seen this lady with her husband? + +Mr. SMITH. I have never seen her with a man. + +Mr. LIEBELER. I want to thank you very much, Mr. Smith, for coming in, +I appreciate it. + +Mr. SMITH. I wish there was something I could do, but I don't know a +thing in the world I could help you with, I believe. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Thank you. I appreciate it very much. + + + + +TESTIMONY OF W. W. SEMINGSEN + +The testimony of W. W. Semingsen was taken at 11 a.m., on March 31, +1964, in the office of the U.S. attorney, 301 Post Office Building, +Bryan and Ervay Streets, Dallas, Tex., by Mr. Wesley J. Liebeler, +assistant counsel of the President's Commission. + + +Mr. LIEBELER. Please rise and 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. SEMINGSEN. I do. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Please be seated. Mr. Semingsen my name is Wesley +J. Liebeler. I am a member of the legal staff of the President's +Commission which has been appointed to investigate the assassination +of President Kennedy. The staff counsel have been authorized by the +Commission to take testimony pursuant to authority granted to the +Commission by Executive Order 11130, dated November 29, 1963, and joint +resolution of Congress No. 137. + +I believe that Mr. Rankin wrote you a letter last week telling you we +would be in touch with you to take your testimony, and he sent that +letter along with copies of the Executive order and joint resolution +of Congress, as well as a copy of the Commission's rules of procedure +relating to the taking of testimony is that not correct? + +Mr. SEMINGSEN. Yes; I received Mr. Rankin's letter. + +Mr. LIEBELER. We want to inquire of you today concerning the +possibility that Lee Harvey Oswald received money order telegrams +through the offices of Western Union here in Dallas, or possibly in +Fort Worth or Irving, and also briefly as to a money order telegram +sent by Jack Ruby to an associate of his on November 24, 1963. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Before we get into the details of that, would you state +your full name for the record? + +Mr. SEMINGSEN. My name is W. W. Semingsen. + +Mr. LIEBELER. By whom are you employed, sir? + +Mr. SEMINGSEN. The Western Union Telegraph Co. + +Mr. LIEBELER. In what capacity are you employed? + +Mr. SEMINGSEN. As vice president, Gulf Division, headquarters, Dallas, +Tex. + +Mr. LIEBELER. What is the nature of your duties with the Western Union +Co. in that position? + +Mr. SEMINGSEN. They are administrative and executive in capacity. I +have jurisdiction over the operations in eight of the Gulf Division +states. + +Mr. LIEBELER. What are those States? + +Mr. SEMINGSEN. Texas, New Mexico, Colorado, Kansas, Missouri, Arkansas, +Oklahoma, and Louisiana. + +Mr. LIEBELER. In your capacity as vice president of the Gulf Division, +are you generally familiar with the recordkeeping procedures, the +manner in which records of telegrams sent or received are kept by the +company? + +Mr. SEMINGSEN. Yes; I am. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You are not in direct supervision of the recordkeeping +procedure? + +Mr. SEMINGSEN. No; I am not. That is delegated to various supervisory +employees. + +Mr. LIEBELER. But in your capacity as vice president, you are +thoroughly familiar with the way records are kept by the company? + +Mr. SEMINGSEN. Yes. I do have knowledge of recordkeeping, general +knowledge of recordkeeping. + +Mr. LIEBELER. In anticipation of the fact that your testimony would be +taken by the Commission, you have prepared a statement which is dated +March 30, 1964, which consists of five pages relating to the efforts +made by Western Union in investigating the possibility that money +orders payable to Oswald or his alias, O. H. Lee and Alek James Hidell, +may have been received in the Dallas or Fort Worth or Irving office of +Western Union? And also relating to telegrams sent or received by Jack +Ruby during certain indicated periods; is that not correct? + +Mr. SEMINGSEN. That is correct. + +Mr. LIEBELER. I would like to mark that document as Exhibit 3001. + +I have marked the memorandum received as Exhibit 3001 on the deposition +of W. W. Semingsen, March 31, 1964, Dallas, Tex., and have initialed +it, and I will ask you also to initial it, if you would, Mr. Semingsen. + +(Witness initials and signs on page 5.) + +Mr. LIEBELER. Am I correct in understanding that you did prepare this +report in anticipation of giving testimony to the Commission? + +Mr. SEMINGSEN. Yes; I did, in the interest of expediting the testimony. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And you are thoroughly familiar with the matters set +forth in Exhibit 3001, are you not? + +Mr. SEMINGSEN. Yes; I am. + +Mr. LIEBELER. The material set forth in that memorandum is true and +correct, to the best of your knowledge, is it not? + +Mr. SEMINGSEN. Yes; it is. + +Mr. LIEBELER. We should note for the record that Exhibit 3001 has in +the left-hand margin certain numerals which I have placed there running +from 1 through 7, which refers to attachments to the exhibit, which, in +effect, form a part of the memorandum. And, you have marked, have you +not, the exhibits running 1 through 7 which you intend should be a part +of the memorandum; is that correct? + +Mr. SEMINGSEN. Yes; that is correct. + +Mr. LIEBELER. The attachments to the exhibit, which are numbered +1 through 7, are photostatic copies of the originals of certain +documents, or of copies of certain documents which you retain in your +possession, as are described in Exhibit 3001; is that correct? + +Mr. SEMINGSEN. That is correct. + +Mr. LIEBELER. I refer specifically to the item marked "Attachment 1 to +Exhibit 3001," which consists of photostatic copies of four separate +documents. Please identify for the record the first one of those +documents. + +Mr. SEMINGSEN. The first one of the documents on page 1 of the +attachment is the original money order application prepared and filed +by Jack Ruby in Dallas, Tex., on November 24, 1963, at 11:17 a.m., as +noted by the automatic time stamp shown on the application. + +Mr. LIEBELER. We will mark that as Exhibit No. 5118, and note for the +record that we are marking these at the request of Mr. Hubert, who has +the responsibility for area 5 of the investigation, relating to Mr. +Ruby. + +I have marked the document referred to as Exhibit 5118 on the +deposition of Mr. W. W. Semingsen, March 31, 1964, in Dallas, Tex., and +have initialed it, and ask you to initial it also, if you would, Mr. +Semingsen. + +Mr. SEMINGSEN. [Initials.] + +Mr. LIEBELER. The next document forming a part of attachment No. 1 to +Exhibit 3001, is what, Mr. Semingsen? + +Mr. SEMINGSEN. It is the duplicate or carbon copy of the original money +order receipt given to Jack Ruby at the time he filed the money order +application. The original of this receipt was given to Mr. Ruby and +found in his possession by the police at the time of his arrest. + +Mr. LIEBELER. We will mark the copy which you have just described as +Exhibit 5119 on the deposition of Mr. W. W. Semingsen, Dallas, Tex., +March 31, 1964. [Also introduced as Lane Exhibits Nos. 5118 and 5119.] + +I have initialed the copy which you have just described, and ask that +you also initial it, please. + +Mr. SEMINGSEN. [Initials.] I have so done. + +Mr. LIEBELER. The next document forming a part of attachment No. 1 to +Exhibit 3001, is what, sir? + +Mr. SEMINGSEN. This is the original money order receipt, showing the +signature of the money order payable to Karen Bennett at Fort Worth, +Tex., on November 24, 1963. + +Mr. LIEBELER. I have marked the third document to which we just +referred as Exhibit 5120 on the deposition of Mr. W. W. Semingsen, +Dallas, Tex., March 31, 1964, and have initialed it. I notice that you +have already initialed that exhibit; is that not correct, Mr. Semingsen? + +Mr. SEMINGSEN. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. The next document forming a part of attachment No. 1 to +Exhibit 3001, is what, sir? + +Mr. SEMINGSEN. That is a copy of the original money order message +received in Fort Worth authorizing the payment of the money to the +payee. + +Mr. LIEBELER. We will mark that telegram as 5121 on the deposition of +Mr. W. W. Semingsen, Dallas, Tex., March 31, 1964. I have initialed it +and ask you, sir, to do the same. [Also introduced as Strong Exhibits +Nos. 5120 and 5121.] + +Mr. SEMINGSEN. [Initials.] And I have so done. + +Mr. LIEBELER. On page 1 of your memorandum, Exhibit 3001, you indicate +that a search of your records in the Dallas, Tex., office show that no +money orders payable to Lee Harvey Oswald or his aliases, O. H. Lee +or Alek James Hidell, went through that office during the period June +through November 1963; is that correct? + +Mr. SEMINGSEN. That is correct. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Would you tell us how you came to that conclusion? + +Mr. SEMINGSEN. A search was made of our "Received money order file" for +the period mentioned by supervisory employees, and no "Received money +orders" were found. The "Received money orders" are filed in date order. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Is it a fact, Mr. Semingsen, that the receiving office +of your company--in this case, Dallas, Tex.--actually keeps records +showing the receipt of money orders payable to any person who received +money orders through that office? + +Mr. SEMINGSEN. Yes; that's correct. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Who issued instructions that this search be made? + +Mr. SEMINGSEN. I issued the instructions at the request of the FBI. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Are you personally satisfied that the search was carried +out in a thorough manner and that there are in fact no records in the +possession of the Western Union Telegraph Co. that would indicate that +any money orders payable in the names mentioned above during the period +June through November 1963, exist? + +Mr. SEMINGSEN. I am satisfied that a very thorough search was made by +competent supervisory personnel who are familiar with our records. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And you are in fact satisfied that there are no records +in the possession of your company that would indicate that money order +telegrams had been received by Oswald under his own name or other +names during that period; is that correct? + +Mr. SEMINGSEN. I am satisfied as to that. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Now, also on the bottom of page 1 of your memorandum +you indicate that no telegrams were sent by Lee Harvey Oswald or by +any person under the name of the two aliases which we have mentioned, +through the Dallas, Tex., office during the period September 1 to +November 22, 1963; is that correct? + +Mr. SEMINGSEN. That is correct. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Would you tell us how you came to that conclusion? + +Mr. SEMINGSEN. The same supervisory personnel who made the search for +the "Received money orders" made the search for any telegram sent by +Lee Harvey Oswald and alias already mentioned. The search was confined +to "Sent paid cash message" and to "Sent collect messages." + +Mr. LIEBELER. Those messages are filed chronologically, is that correct? + +Mr. SEMINGSEN. Those messages are filed in date order. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You mentioned two categories of messages to which the +search was confined, and those were "Sent paid messages," or "Sent +collect messages"? + +Mr. SEMINGSEN. "Sent paid cash messages," and "Sent collect messages." + +Mr. LIEBELER. What other type messages are there? + +Mr. SEMINGSEN. The other types of messages are messages charged to +customers having authorized charge accounts. It is obvious that a +message filed by Oswald would not be found in any of our charge account +message files. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Now, it is possible to pick up the telephone and call the +Western Union office and instruct that a telegram be sent and have it +charged to the telephone number, is it not? + +Mr. SEMINGSEN. That is correct. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Is that a separate category, or is that a third category? + +Mr. SEMINGSEN. That is a separate category of messages filed by +telephone subscribers and charged to their telephone. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Was a search made of those messages? + +Mr. SEMINGSEN. I believe a search was made of those message, but I +would have to confirm that with Mr. Wilcox, our local district manager +in Dallas. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Well, for the sake of clarity of the record, at this +point let me suggest that we go off the record, and Mr. Wilcox is +available. Would you confer with Mr. Wilcox on that point and let us +indicate on the record what he has advised you? + +Mr. SEMINGSEN. Yes. + +(Discussion off the record.) + +Mr. LIEBELER. Let the record indicate that we have conferred off the +record with Mr. Wilcox, and you have consulted with him as to whether +or not a check was made of the records covering messages called in by +telephone and charged to a telephone number. Would you tell us what Mr. +Wilcox indicated? + +Mr. SEMINGSEN. Mr. Wilcox made reference to notes in these files and +has determined that a search was not made of messages sent and charged +to the telephone, for the reason that it had been indicated that Oswald +had filed messages at our office. In such event, the message would not +be charged to the telephone, and for that reason, a search of the sent +messages charged to the telephone was not made. + +Mr. LIEBELER. At the same time you mean to indicate that the thing that +prompted this search by your office in the first place was the story +that Oswald had actually been in the Western Union office and filed the +message in person; is that correct? + +Mr. SEMINGSEN. That is correct. + +Mr. LIEBELER. If he had filed it in person, it would obviously not have +been called in by telephone and charged to his telephone number; is +that correct? + +Mr. SEMINGSEN. That is correct. + +Mr. LIEBELER. On the top of page 3 of your memorandum 3001, the +statement appears "For money orders payable to Lee Harvey Oswald and +his aliases or to anyone at a specific address in Dallas--October +through November 1963--result: Negative." Would you explain that for +us, please? + +Mr. SEMINGSEN. Yes. As I have indicated in my prepared statement, one +of our employees thought he had recognized Oswald as having received a +money order at our main office sometime during the dates mentioned. + +Mr. LIEBELER. October through November 1963? + +Mr. SEMINGSEN. Yes. It was thought that the money order was payable to +someone at a specific address in Dallas, which was the YMCA. + +Mr. LIEBELER. So when you searched through the records indicating money +orders payable during the period October through November 1963, you +determined that no money order had been made payable to Lee Harvey +Oswald, or to these aliases, and in addition to that fact, that no +money orders of any kind had been made payable to anyone at the YMCA in +Dallas; is that correct? + +Mr. SEMINGSEN. That is correct. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Do you know where the information came from that the +money order was supposed to have been payable to Oswald at the YMCA? + +Mr. SEMINGSEN. Yes. This information came from one of our night +employees, Mr. C. A. Hamblen. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Before we get into Mr. Hamblen, I want to cover the rest +of the statements made in your memorandum, and we will try to cover +them generally. The memorandum indicates that certain money orders were +received by Jack Ruby, and that certain telegrams were sent by Jack +Ruby through the Dallas office; is that correct? + +Mr. SEMINGSEN. That's correct. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And that information was determined as a result of the +search that you have just described? + +Mr. SEMINGSEN. That is correct. + +Mr. LIEBELER. That is, the search of the money order payable file, +plus the telegrams sent file, which search was confined, as you have +indicated, only to the telegrams sent cash paid or sent collect; is +that correct? + +Mr. SEMINGSEN. That is correct. With respect to the money orders, the +search was made of the received money order file records of which we +have. As to the telegrams filed by Mr. Ruby, knowing that he was a +resident of Dallas, having a business here, we asked the FBI agent +to check with the telephone company to see whether or not their +records indicate any messages had been sent by Ruby and charged to his +telephone. This information was secured by the FBI from the telephone +company and enabled us to readily locate the messages in our files +which were charged to his telephone. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You indicated before that when searching for telegrams +sent by Oswald, a general search was made of the chronological dates +that you have described; is that correct? + +Mr. SEMINGSEN. That's correct. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You searched all the chronological records of the two +classifications of telegrams that we have indicated? + +Mr. SEMINGSEN. That's correct. + +Mr. LIEBELER. During the time that search was made for telegrams sent +by Oswald, did the person making that search also look for telegrams +sent by Ruby? + +Mr. SEMINGSEN. No. The search made for telegrams sent by Ruby was +confined to the dates given to us by the FBI, which dates were obtained +from the telephone company records showing telegrams charged to Ruby's +telephone number or numbers on those dates. + +Mr. LIEBELER. So, it is possible that Mr. Ruby may have sent other +telegrams which were not charged to his telephone number or numbers, +and of which we would not be aware as a result of the search made in +connection with Mr. Ruby; is that correct? + +Mr. SEMINGSEN. That is correct. + +Mr. LIEBELER. On page 3 of your memorandum, exhibit 3001, you indicate +that a telegram dated Painesville, Ohio, January 13, 1964, to Mrs. Lee +Harvey Oswald, was received. How did that come to your attention, Mr. +Semingsen? + +Mr. SEMINGSEN. That telegram was brought to my attention by District +Manager Wilcox, it having been shown to him by one of our main office +employees who handled the message. + +Mr. LIEBELER. It was shown to Mr. Wilcox because of the nature of the +message which the telegram contained; is that correct? + +Mr. SEMINGSEN. That is correct. + +Mr. LIEBELER. The telegram to which reference has just been made is +attached to the memorandum as attachment No. 4. Your memorandum also +indicates negative results when a search was made of the office in +Irving. Tex., in Fort Worth, Tex., and in New Orleans, La., for money +orders payable to Oswald or to his aliases, or in the case of New +Orleans for money orders sent or received by Oswald and aliases through +the periods indicated in the memorandum. Were these statements made in +your memorandum as a result of searches made similar to that in the +Dallas office, do you know? + +Mr. SEMINGSEN. That is correct. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you personally instruct the New Orleans office to +conduct the search of their records or cause such instructions to be +given? + +Mr. SEMINGSEN. The search at New Orleans with respect to received money +orders was authorized by our district manager in New Orleans. Later +a request was made for a similar search of sent money orders, which +was referred to my office. And in this instance I authorized our New +Orleans office to make the search. + +Mr. LIEBELER. So, as far as you know, the search concerning received +money orders was instigated by a direct request to the New Orleans +office by the FBI or some other investigatory agency, is that correct? + +Mr. SEMINGSEN. That is correct. + +Mr. LIEBELER. I notice that the period for which a search was made in +the Fort Worth office is confined to July 19, 20, 21, 22, 26, 27, and +29, 1963. Can you tell me the reason for that? + +Mr. SEMINGSEN. The request for the search for money orders payable to +Oswald on those dates was made by local FBI agents in Fort Worth of our +district manager there. The FBI agents requested the search because +they had information to the effect that the mother of Lee Harvey Oswald +was a tenant at this address during that time. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Which address is that? + +Mr. SEMINGSEN. The address was the Rotary Apartments, 1501 West Seventh +Street. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Fort Worth? + +Mr. SEMINGSEN. Fort Worth. + +Mr. LIEBELER. In answering the last question, you referred to a +memorandum in your file from a Mr. T. R. Coates to you, is that correct? + +Mr. SEMINGSEN. That's correct. + +Mr. LIEBELER. That is dated December 9, 1963; is that correct? + +Mr. SEMINGSEN. That's correct. + +Mr. LIEBELER. The memorandum indicates that a Mr. Meyers of the FBI +came to the Fort Worth office of your company and requested that a +check be made of the received money orders for the last 2 weekends of +July to determine if a money order had been received addressed to Lee +Harvey Oswald, or anyone at the address of the Rotary Apartments, 1501 +West Seventh Street, Fort Worth, Tex.; is that correct? + +Mr. SEMINGSEN. That's correct. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Mr. Coates says that the FBI agent said that the FBI +had information that Lee Harvey Oswald's mother was a tenant at that +address during that time, and Mr. Coates also indicates that a search +of the received money orders of July 19, 20, 21-22, 26-27 and 28-29 +were made, but no record was found of any having been received; is that +correct? + +Mr. SEMINGSEN. That is correct. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Would it have been possible for Oswald to have received +money orders at any offices in Dallas other than a Dallas main office? + +Mr. SEMINGSEN. Yes. He could have received money orders at the branch +offices. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Would the records of received money orders for the branch +offices be filed at the Dallas main office or at the Dallas branch +offices? + +Mr. SEMINGSEN. I am not certain about that, but the search of all +received money orders was made covering both the main and branch +offices. + +Mr. LIEBELER. In Dallas? + +Mr. SEMINGSEN. In Dallas. + +Mr. LIEBELER. What about suburban offices? We have noted that a +specific search was made of the Irving office. Are there other suburban +offices at which Oswald could have received money orders, which would +not have been uncovered by the search which was made? + +Mr. SEMINGSEN. Yes; it is possible he could have received money orders +at such places, for example, at Garland or Grand Prairie. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Is there only one office in Irving? + +Mr. SEMINGSEN. Yes; there is one office in Irving. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Do you know whether or not the records of received money +orders for suburban areas of Dallas are kept in the local suburban +office or kept in the Dallas main office? + +Mr. SEMINGSEN. They are kept at the branch office. + +Mr. LIEBELER. But you are absolutely certain that the records relating +to the money orders received at the Dallas branch office are either +kept at the Dallas main office or would the search that was made +include a search of the branch offices; is that correct? + +Mr. SEMINGSEN. Yes; and in addition, Irving, Tex. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You mentioned a moment ago the fact that one of your +employees, Mr. C. A. Hamblen, who is presently a night manager in the +Dallas main office--is that correct? + +Mr. SEMINGSEN. I am not sure what his title is. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Mr. Hamblen said that he thought he recognized Oswald as +a customer in that office, is that correct? + +Mr. SEMINGSEN. Yes. He had indicated that he had thought he had seen +Mr. Oswald or someone that looked like him in the office on some +occasion, either receiving the money order or sending a telegram. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Would you tell us the background of Mr. Hamblen's +involvement in this matter. In your own words tell us the story of the +events that prompted this search. What investigation was made as to Mr. +Hamblen's activities, and what conclusion the company came to in this +respect? + +Mr. SEMINGSEN. Perhaps it would be best to get that testimony direct +from Mr. Wilcox. However, I did participate in a very thorough +questioning of Mr. Hamblen and can furnish you with this information. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Would you indicate for us briefly, and we will perhaps go +into greater detail with Mr. Wilcox after lunch. + +Mr. SEMINGSEN. Sometime shortly after the killing of Oswald by Ruby, +which was shown on television, Mr. Hamblen indicated or mentioned to +Mr. Wilcox that he thought he had seen someone who appeared to look +like Oswald in our main office, either receiving a money order or +sending a telegram. When Mr. Wilcox learned of this information, he +had a search made of our files for certain dates which he is in better +position to testify on. + +Mr. LIEBELER. He caused the search to be made for a telegram that might +have been sent by Oswald or money order received by Oswald; is that +correct? + +Mr. SEMINGSEN. That is correct. There were two specific instances in +which Mr. Hamblen thought that he had seen Oswald in the office. One +having to do with a received money order, and the other instance having +to do with the filing of a telegram. The search made by Mr. Wilcox +revealed no such transactions. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Was this search made before or after Mr. Hamblen's views +became known to the press? + +Mr. SEMINGSEN. The first search was made before the information reached +the press. The second and more intensive search was made following +appearance in the press concerning the alleged filing of telegrams and +receiving of money orders by Oswald. + +Mr. LIEBELER. As I understand the chronology of events here, Mr. +Hamblen first indicated to Mr. Wilcox that he, Hamblen, thought he +recalled Oswald having been in the Western Union office, the main +office in Dallas; is that correct? + +Mr. SEMINGSEN. That is correct. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Subsequent to that time, as I understand it, Mr. Wilcox +observed a story in the newspaper that indicated that Oswald had been +in the office and had received a small amount of money by telegram +money order; is that correct? + +Mr. SEMINGSEN. That is correct. + +Mr. LIEBELER. As I understand it, Mr. Wilcox at that point concluded +that the story must have gotten to the press through Mr. Hamblen, and +after that time, Mr. Hamblen was questioned by Mr. Wilcox and also +by yourself, and gave to Mr. Wilcox certain statements relating to +his alleged recollection of Oswald having been in the office; is that +correct? + +Mr. SEMINGSEN. That is correct. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You have given me copies of two statements by Mr. +Hamblen, dated December 2, 1963, and December 5, 1963, respectively. +Did you have any personal involvement in the preparation of these +statements to which I have referred? + +Mr. SEMINGSEN. No; I did not. At a meeting in Mr. Wilcox's office +following my receipt of copies of these statements, I personally +interrogated Mr. Hamblen and other employees whom Hamblen had thought +had handled the transactions in question. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Specifically, that would have been a Mrs. D. J. McClure? +Is that correct? + +Mr. SEMINGSEN. That's correct. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Mrs. McClure is an employee of the company who Mr. +Hamblen said had had trouble with Oswald and had requested him, +Hamblen, to assist in handling Oswald; is that correct? + +Mr. SEMINGSEN. That is correct. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you make any written report to the file, or for any +other officer of the company, of your interrogation of Mr. Hamblen or +Mrs. McClure? + +Mr. SEMINGSEN. No; I did not. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Can you state for us at this time the general nature of +the interrogation and the conclusions to which you came as a result of +your questioning of Mr. Hamblen and Mrs. McClure? + +We will note at this time for the record that while Mr. Semingsen is +referring to copies of the two statements made by Mr. Hamblen, dated +December 2 and December 5, 1963, they will not be marked at this time, +since Mr. Semingsen had no direct involvement in the preparation of +these statements. They will be marked subsequently upon the examination +of Mr. Wilcox. + +You may refer to those statements, if you wish. + +Perhaps the record should also note that a statement was given to Mr. +Wilcox, apparently by Mrs. McClure, on December 4, 1963. Mr. Semingsen, +you indicated that you had questioned both of those employees. I assume +that when you did question them, you had these statements before you; +is that correct? + +Mr. SEMINGSEN. That is correct. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Please state the general nature of your questioning and +the conclusions to which you came as a result of your questioning. + +Mr. SEMINGSEN. As previously indicated, I questioned both of the +employees separately, individually, and together in the presence of +Mr. Wilcox, my purpose being to reconcile the differences in their +statements. + +After having informed Mr. Hamblen of the extensive search that had been +made for the telegram which he so vividly recalled having been filed +by someone who looked like Oswald, and calling to his attention that +all of the cash messages that had been handled by Mrs. McClure had +been accounted for and no such message located, I asked for a further +explanation from him. After questioning him, he would give no further +explanation in the presence of Mrs. McClure. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did he still stick to the proposition that to the best of +his recollection Oswald or someone that he thought looked like Oswald, +had, in fact, been in the office and had these difficulties with Mrs. +McClure? + +Mr. SEMINGSEN. I similarly questioned Mrs. McClure, and I am satisfied +from the answers that she gave that her story is the correct one. +Particularly in the absence of any such message in our files. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Mrs. McClure's version is that no such person as Oswald +ever came in the office, and she had no difficulty with anyone as a +result of which she requested assistance from Mr. Hamblen; is that +correct? + +Mr. SEMINGSEN. That is correct. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Are you satisfied that is a correct story? + +Mr. SEMINGSEN. I am satisfied that that is the correct story as +indicated by Mrs. McClure in her statement that Mr. Hamblen was +confused, possibly had Oswald mixed up with someone else who looked +very much like him. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Mr. Hamblen particularly mentioned a message that this +person who he thought looked like Oswald was supposed to have sent to +Washington, D.C.; is that correct? + +Mr. SEMINGSEN. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. To the Secretary of Navy in particular; is that correct? + +Mr. SEMINGSEN. The message that he had reference to was supposedly +a night letter addressed to Washington. D.C., as indicated in his +statement of December 5. In that statement he also indicated that the +telegram was a cash telegram, accounted for by Mrs. McClure as a night +letter. Such accounting would have to appear on her record of cash +telegrams accepted. + +Mr. LIEBELER. This is the telegram with respect to which Hamblen +said Mrs. McClure had difficulty with a customer and requested his +assistance; is that correct? + +Mr. SEMINGSEN. That is correct. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You have caused a thorough search of Mrs. McClure's +records to be made and you have not found any night letter to +Washington, D.C.; is that correct? + +Mr. SEMINGSEN. That is correct during the period searched. We did +locate several messages to Washington, D.C. I do not recall that they +were accepted by Mrs. McClure, but Mr. Wilcox can testify as to that. +In any event, a telegram to Washington, D.C., and several other cities +fitting the description that Hamblen had given were shown to him and +he could not identify any of them as the telegram he had referred to, +which Mrs. McClure was supposed to have accepted. + +Mr. LIEBELER. What dates were searched for the specific message to +Washington, D.C.? + +Mr. SEMINGSEN. All cash messages sent to Washington, D.C., from the +latter part of October through November 22, 1963. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Can you be more specific as to what the latter part of +October might be? + +Mr. SEMINGSEN. Whether or not accepted by Mrs. McClure. In addition, a +search of all cash messages accepted by Mrs. McClure during the period +November 1 to November 21, 1963, inclusive, was made, and all messages +accepted by her were matched out with her cash sheet and all messages +have been accounted for. All cash messages accepted by her have been +accounted for. None could be identified as the message in question +referred to by Mr. Hamblen. + +Mr. LIEBELER. When you said it could not be identified, you mean it +could not be identified by Mr. Hamblen? When shown to Mr. Hamblen, he +could not identify them? + +Mr. SEMINGSEN. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. So, you are perfectly satisfied in your own mind based +on the investigation which your company has conducted, and your +questioning of Mr. Hamblen and Mrs. McClure, that Oswald did not +receive any money order through your Dallas office or any of the other +offices indicated in your memorandum, Exhibit 3001, and that Oswald did +not, in fact, send a message to Washington, D.C., or give a message to +Mrs. McClure as indicated by Mr. Hamblen; is that correct? + +Mr. SEMINGSEN. That is correct, and I am satisfied of that conclusion. + +Mr. LIEBELER. I have no more questions at this point, Mr. Semingsen. +I think that some of the details of the searches made and of other +aspects of this matter will be taken up with Mr. Wilcox after lunch. +If you have anything else that you would like to add, or you think I +should ask you that I haven't asked you, I would appreciate if you +would so indicate on the record at this point. + +Mr. SEMINGSEN. I can think of nothing at this time, but if anything +further does occur to me, I will be glad to bring it to your attention. +I am sure that Mr. Wilcox will be more helpful in answering any +questions that you may wish to ask him. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Thank you very much, Mr. Semingsen. + + + + +TESTIMONY OF LAURANCE R. WILCOX + +The testimony of Laurance R. Wilcox was taken at 2 p. m., on March 31, +1964, in the office of the U.S. attorney, 301 Post Office Building, +Bryan and Ervay Streets, Dallas, Tex., by Mr. Wesley J. Liebeler, +assistant counsel of the President's Commission. + + +Mr. LIEBELER. Before I start, I want to swear you in as a witness. + +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. WILCOX. I do. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Mr. Wilcox, my name is Wesley J. Liebeler. I am a member +of the legal staff of the Commission appointed by President Johnson to +investigate the assassination of President Kennedy. + +Staff counsel have been authorized to take the testimony of witnesses +by the Commission pursuant to authority granted to the Commission under +Executive Order 11130, dated November 29, 1963, and Joint Resolution of +Congress No. 137. + +The Commission rules of procedure require that copies of that Executive +order and the congressional resolution, as well as copies of the +Commission's rules and procedures relating to the taking of testimony +be provided to each witness prior to the time his testimony is +taken. I now provide you with copies of those documents. The general +nature of the testimony that we wish to get from you today relates +to investigations made by Western Union Telegraph Co. concerning the +possibility that Lee Harvey Oswald received money orders through the +offices of your company, either in Dallas or the surrounding area, +and the possibility that he may have sent telegrams to other persons +through the facilities of your company. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Before we get into the details of your testimony, would +you please state your full name for the record? + +Mr. WILCOX. Laurance R. Wilcox. + +Mr. LIEBELER. By whom are you employed? + +Mr. WILCOX. Western Union Telegraph Co. + +Mr. LIEBELER. In what capacity? + +Mr. WILCOX. District manager. + +Mr. LIEBELER. What are your duties as district manager? + +Mr. WILCOX. Administrative; in charge of the operation for Western +Union in the city of Dallas. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You are general manager then of the area which includes +just the city of Dallas; is that correct? + +Mr. WILCOX. District manager. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Of just the city of Dallas; is that correct? + +Mr. WILCOX. Yes; and immediate surrounding towns such as Garland, +Mesquite, Grand Prairie, Irving, and Lancaster. That is all I can think +of right now. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You are generally in charge of the operations of the +company within that particular area; is that correct? + +Mr. WILCOX. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did there come a time, Mr. Wilcox, when you caused a +search to be made of the records of the Western Union Telegraph Co. to +determine whether or not Lee Harvey Oswald had ever received or sent +any telegrams through the offices under your jurisdiction? + +Mr. WILCOX. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Would you tell us about that? + +Mr. WILCOX. Can I refer to these papers? + +Mr. LIEBELER. You may refer to any papers that you wish. + +Mr. WILCOX. I want to so that I will have this exactly right as to what +took place. My first knowledge of the message that was supposed to have +been sent by Oswald was when Mr. Hamblen, early night manager at my +office, visited with me telling me---- + +Mr. LIEBELER. Is that Mr. C. A. Hamblen? + +Mr. WILCOX. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Go ahead. + +Mr. WILCOX. Telling me that he had been watching the television, and +when he saw the picture of Oswald, he recognized that as being a man +that had been in our office and had filed a message. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Do you remember when Mr. Hamblen told you this? + +Mr. WILCOX. This was on a Wednesday following the +assassination--following the shooting of Oswald. He told me that he was +positive that he had seen Mr. Oswald in our office. + +Mr. LIEBELER. He told you this on Wednesday following the Sunday on +which Mr. Oswald was shot by Ruby; is that correct? + +Mr. WILCOX. That's right. + +Mr. LIEBELER. That would have been November 27, 1963? Thanksgiving was +on November the 28th. + +Mr. WILCOX. Yes. It was on a Wednesday preceding Thanksgiving. I asked +Mr. Hamblen to tell me exactly what had taken place. + +He stated that Oswald had filed a message going to Washington--a cash +message, and it was written in a peculiar script, as Mr. Hamblen put +it. It was typed in pencil. I think he meant is printed in pencil. + +I asked him to immediately set about to obtain copies of that, as I was +leaving town, and to get a copy of the message, and to do that it would +be necessary for him to see Mr. Pirtle, our bookkeeping manager, and to +get the message, put it in an envelope, and address it to my personal +attention while I was in Kansas City. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did Mr. Hamblen tell you anything about what the message +said or to whom it was addressed at this first conversation? + +Mr. WILCOX. No, he didn't. We left for Kansas City and was there over +the Thanksgiving holidays. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You and your family? + +Mr. WILCOX. Yes. And while there, this article appeared in the Kansas +City Star, their evening paper; very much the same story as appeared in +the Dallas Times Herald. + +Mr. LIEBELER. I show you a copy of a clipping which purports to have +appeared in the Dallas Times Herald on November 30, 1963. I ask you if +this tells a story similar to the report you saw in the Kansas City +Star? + +Mr. WILCOX. Yes, same story. + +Mr. LIEBELER. We will mark this clipping as Exhibit 3002 on the +deposition of Laurance R. Wilcox, at Dallas, Tex., March 31, 1964. I +have initialed the clipping in question, Mr. Wilcox, and ask you to do +the same. + +Mr. WILCOX. [Initials.] Immediately when I read this story in the +Kansas City paper I recognized it as being the same story that Mr. +Hamblen had told me just a couple of days before in my office. + +We returned to Dallas Sunday, and immediately on my return to the +office Monday---- + +Mr. LIEBELER. Monday, I suggest would have been December 2, 1963? + +Mr. WILCOX. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And you fix that by recalling that the assassination was +on the 22d. The following Friday would have been the 29th. Saturday, +the 30th. Sunday the 1st; and Monday would have been December 2? + +Mr. WILCOX. Yes, December 2. Now, this was on my return to the office, +and we indicated that was December 2. I went over the information that +was contained in the newspaper article with Mr. Hamblen, reminding him +that this was in effect the same story as he had told me just 2 days +before, a few days before. Particularly, its comment about the strange +printing on the telegram which he had seen presented by Oswald. + +Mr. Hamblen admitted that he had discussed several matters with +different reporters, but insisted that he hadn't given out such +detailed information as appeared in the newspaper article. + +However, I was constrained to feel that he had because it was exactly +the same story as he had given me initially in the past week. + +There was no doubt in my mind but that the newspaper article stemmed +from Mr. Hamblen's visit with a newspaper reporter. + +Mr. LIEBELER. In this connection, Mr. Wilcox, you have referred to a +copy of a letter dated December 3, 1963, which appears to be a letter +from you to Mr. Semingsen; is that correct? + +Mr. WILCOX. Yes, sir; would you like to have a copy? + +Mr. LIEBELER. Yes. Did you prepare that letter on or about December 3? + +Mr. WILCOX. Yes, I did. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Does it accurately reflect the events that occurred prior +to that time? + +Mr. WILCOX. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. I mark that letter as Exhibit 3003, on the deposition +of Mr. Laurance R. Wilcox, at Dallas, Tex., March 31, 1964. I have +initialed the copy in question, Mr. Wilcox, and would like to have you +do the same thing if you would. + +Mr. WILCOX. [Initials.] + +Mr. LIEBELER. Before we go on, I call your attention to the fact that +this letter of December 3, 1963, starts out by saying "This is to +supplement my report of December 2 in connection with newspaper article +regarding messages and money order to Ruby or Oswald." + +Do you have a copy of your report of December 2, referred to in Exhibit +3003? + +Mr. WILCOX. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. May we mark that as Exhibit No. 3004 on the deposition of +Mr. Laurance R. Wilcox, Dallas, Tex., March 31, 1964? + +Mr. WILCOX. [Hands document to attorney.] + +Mr. LIEBELER. I have initialed Exhibit No. 3004 and you have done +likewise, have you not? + +Mr. WILCOX. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You had just indicated that you had talked to Mr. Hamblen +upon your return concerning the newspaper story. Would you tell us what +happened next? + +Mr. WILCOX. I asked Mr. Hamblen if he had obtained the message from the +bookkeeping department as I had requested he do, and he stated that he +had not found it and did not have it and it wasn't available. + +On December 9, Mr. Semingsen, vice president of Western Union, was at +my office, and at this time we interviewed several employees for the +purpose of finding out if any of them could recall having seen Oswald +in our office. We also discussed the Ruby money orders. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Can you tell us the names of the employees who were +interviewed on December 9, 1963, in connection with the possibility +that Oswald might have sent or received telegrams through your company? + +Do you have a memorandum reflecting what happened? + +Mr. WILCOX. No, because what we did, we asked for statements from these +people, and I have those statements and that was the result of that +meeting. + +Mr. LIEBELER. The meeting you referred to now is the meeting held in +your office on December 9? + +Mr. WILCOX. The meeting held in my office on December 9. + +Mr. LIEBELER. I call your attention to a message that was sent by Mr. +Semingsen to Mr. J. H. Waters in New York City, which has been attached +as Attachment No. 5 to Exhibit 3001 on Mr. Semingsen's deposition. I +show you that message and ask you if that accurately reflects what +occurred at the meeting in your office on December 9, 1963? + +Mr. WILCOX. This doesn't. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You say it does not? + +Mr. WILCOX. This was pertaining to Mr. Ruby. This did not have anything +to do with that. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Let me further point out to you, Mr. Wilcox, that we +have statements of Mr. Hamblen dated December 2 and December 5, 1963, +which are apparently addressed to you. I show you copies, first, of the +statement dated December 2, 1963, and ask you if you can remember the +circumstances under which that statement was obtained from Mr. Hamblen? + +Mr. WILCOX. This statement was obtained---- + +Mr. LIEBELER. The statement you are referring to is the statement dated +December 2, 1963; is that correct? + +Mr. WILCOX. Yes. This statement was obtained at the time I discussed +the matter with Mr. Hamblen on December 2, Monday. That was this +statement. + +Mr. LIEBELER. That visit with Mr. Hamblen is described in Exhibit No. +3003, your letter to Mr. Semingsen on December 3, 1963, is that correct? + +Mr. WILCOX. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And the statement of Mr. Hamblen, dated December 2, 1963, +was obtained at that time? That time being the first time that you +talked to Mr. Hamblen after this matter appeared in the newspapers; is +that correct? + +Mr. WILCOX. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Do you have the original of Mr. Hamblen's statement of +December 2, 1963? + +Mr. WILCOX. I can't find it in my file. I am wondering if it was sent +to Mr. Semingsen's file, but we have gone through that. + +Mr. LIEBELER. I show you a thermofax copy that has been provided to us, +and ask you if that is an accurate copy of the original statement? + +Mr. WILCOX. Yes. That was made in our office on the thermofax machine. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Let us mark the thermofax copy of the statement of Mr. +C. A. Hamblen to Mr. Wilcox dated December 2, 1963, as Exhibit 3005 on +the deposition of Mr. Laurance R. Wilcox, at Dallas, Tex., on March 31, +1964. + +I have initialed Exhibit 3005, Mr. Wilcox. Will you do the same? + +Mr. WILCOX. [Initials.] + +Mr. LIEBELER. Does the statement of Mr. Hamblen, Exhibit No. 3005, +accurately reflect the conversation which you had with him on December +2, 1963? + +Mr. WILCOX. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you prepare that statement yourself? + +Mr. WILCOX. No, sir; Mr. Hamblen prepared that. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did Mr. Hamblen dictate it himself, or write it out? + +Mr. WILCOX. Wrote it on the typewriter himself. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Now in the December 2, 1963, statement, Mr. Hamblen says: +"As I recall, several weeks ago Mr. Aubrey Lewis had trouble paying +this party a money order. He expected to get same without proper ID. +He was informed to get some ID and come back and get paid, and as Mr. +Lewis recalled he returned about 1 hour later with Navy ID card and a +library card and was paid a small amount with this ID and after payment +made, party left the office. + +Mr. Lewis remarked to me, I would like to pinch the heads off people of +his character." + +Do you recall discussing this with Mr. Hamblen on December 2, 1963? + +Mr. WILCOX. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Can you remember anything else that Mr. Hamblen might +have said about this incident other than that which is reflected in the +statement? + +Mr. WILCOX. No. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Do you recall discussing this statement with Mr. Lewis at +any time? + +Mr. WILCOX. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. When did you first discuss it with Mr. Lewis? + +Mr. WILCOX. That is what I am trying to find right here. Must have been +on December 4 that I talked to Mr. Lewis about it, and his statement +addressed to me was written by himself. + +Mr. LIEBELER. On December 4, 1963? + +Mr. WILCOX. On December 4, 1963. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Do you have a copy of that statement? + +Mr. WILCOX. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Could we mark that as Exhibit No. 3006 on the deposition +of Laurance R. Wilcox, at Dallas, Tex., March 31, 1964? + +In this case you have actually provided me the original of Mr. Lewis' +statement, is that correct? + +Mr. WILCOX. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. I have initialed Exhibit No. 3006 and would like to have +you do the same, if you would. + +Mr. WILCOX. [Initials.] + +Mr. LIEBELER. Mr. Lewis' statement refers to that portion of Mr. +Hamblen's statement, dated December 2, 1963, which we just read, does +it not? + +Mr. WILCOX. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And Mr. Lewis says that he does recall the difficulty he +had paying a small money order to a gentleman who struck him as being a +feminine type of person, but says he cannot remember the name of that +person; is that correct? + +Mr. WILCOX. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Do you remember discussing that with Mr. Lewis to any +extent other than as reflected on this statement? + +Mr. WILCOX. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Could you tell us what you said and what Mr. Lewis said +about this? + +Before you tell us what was said, this discussion that you are +referring to was held on December 4, 1963, or some other time? + +Mr. WILCOX. Yes, sir; at that time. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Will you tell us what that conversation was? + +Mr. WILCOX. The conversation with Mr. Lewis had to do with trying to +identify the person that he was supposed to have paid this money order +to, and the one with which he had some difficulty in establishing +identification. + +Mr. LIEBELER. I want you to tell me exactly what happened in as great +detail as you can remember it. + +Now, at this conversation with Mr. Lewis, the possibility that this +money order was to be delivered to someone at the YMCA on Ervay Street +in Dallas was discussed, was it not? + +Mr. WILCOX. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Will you tell us all that you can remember about that +aspect of the discussion that you had with Mr. Lewis? + +Mr. WILCOX. I have discussed the matter with Mr. Lewis regarding the +money order which he was having difficulty in paying. He could not +pay the money order because the recipient could not produce suitable +identification. + +Mr. Lewis was a little hazy on the details about it, but was under the +impression that it was a money order or a message in the nearby area, +possibly on Ervay Street or at the YMCA. + +We instituted a search for all money orders during this period, that +might be the message to which Mr. Hamblen was making reference. + +Mr. LIEBELER. That was the one with which Mr. Lewis had difficulty in +paying; is that correct? + +Mr. WILCOX. Yes. Now, we found some messages. One in the amount of $65. +One in the amount of $35. But neither of these were the money orders +that Mr. Hamblen had reference to. + +Mr. LIEBELER. How did you establish the fact that they were not the +money orders? + +Mr. WILCOX. He looked at them and decided it wasn't the one, because +we couldn't find anything that had reference to this particular +identification that Hamblen was talking about. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Mr. Lewis looked at these telegrams; is that correct? + +Mr. WILCOX. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Does the telegram indicate what sort of identification +was produced by the person to whom the money order was paid? + +Mr. WILCOX. Well, there are several others in here. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You are looking through a number of telegrams covering +money orders; is that correct? + +Mr. WILCOX. Going to different people at the YMCA, but none of them was +the money order message. None of them was a money order message that +Lewis could identify as being a money order of the type Hamblen was +describing. In other words, he couldn't find anything that fitted into +that pattern at all. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You discussed these money orders with Mr. Lewis after you +obtained them from the files; is that correct? + +Mr. WILCOX. That's right. Mr. Lewis later told me that it might have +been a money order draft that could have been paid to some individual +in our town, and that the party holding the draft had presented it +at our office for payment, but was having difficulty in producing +suitable identification for us to cash the draft. In that event, we +would not have any message or record of message in our file locally. + +Mr. LIEBELER. If I understand you correctly, Mr. Wilcox, the situation +which you just described would occur when a money order telegram had +been delivered to some party at some other office, some office other +than the Dallas central office? + +Mr. WILCOX. That's right. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And he would have the draft in his hand that would have +been delivered to him by the telegraph company in some other office, +and then he would come to the Dallas central office and attempt to cash +that draft; is that correct? + +Mr. WILCOX. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And Mr. Lewis said it is possible that the transaction +with which he had such difficulty could have been a transaction such as +the one we have described; is that correct? + +Mr. WILCOX. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. In that event, you would not have any record of it in the +Dallas office? + +Mr. WILCOX. No, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Is it correct that you would not have any record of it in +the Dallas office even when the draft had been successfully cashed, as +it apparently subsequently was in this case? + +Mr. WILCOX. No, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You would still not have any record of it? + +Mr. WILCOX. No, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Now, you have produced 11 money orders in the form of +telegrams, transmitting money to individuals living at the YMCA here +in Dallas. Is it correct that these are the only 11 telegrams which +you were able to find addressed to the YMCA or to anyone at the YMCA +during some period beginning on or about October 1963, and running up +to approximately the end of November 1963? + +Mr. WILCOX. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you, yourself, personally authorize or instruct that +the search be conducted which produced these telegrams? + +Mr. WILCOX. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. That would have been a search through every single money +order delivered through the Dallas office through the month of October +or November, 1963, is that correct? + +Mr. WILCOX. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. These 11 telegrams are the only 11 that were addressed to +the YMCA? + +Mr. WILCOX. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Now, the dates covered by the search would be October +1 through the 17th of November 1963? Or what was it, as best you can +recall? + +Mr. WILCOX. The end of November, as I remember. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Beginning when? + +Mr. WILCOX. Beginning the first part of October. + +Mr. LIEBELER. It is a fact, is it not, that none of these 11 telegrams +are addressed to Lee Harvey Oswald? + +Mr. WILCOX. No, sir; none of them are. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Or to anybody using any of Mr. Oswald's known aliases? + +Mr. WILCOX. No, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. I think that we had better, for the record, indicate +the names of the people to whom these telegrams are addressed. There +is a telegram dated October 4, 1963, addressed to George McMurray, +transmitting $15, is that correct? + +Mr. WILCOX. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. There is also a telegram dated October 10, 1963, +addressed to Michael C. Robinson, transmitting $100 to Mr. Robinson at +the YMCA, is that correct? + +Mr. WILCOX. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And there is a telegram dated October 11, 1963, +transmitting $150 to James McGinley, is that right? + +Mr. WILCOX. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Also for the record we better indicate who sent these +telegrams. The telegram to Mr. McMurray was sent by Mrs. Mildred +McMurray in Plainsfield, N.J.; is that correct? + +Mr. WILCOX. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. The telegram to Mr. Robinson was sent by Mrs. S. R. +Robinson, of Charleston, S.C.; is that correct? + +Mr. WILCOX. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. The telegram to Mr. McGinley was sent by Cornelius +McGinley of Chicago; is that correct? + +Mr. WILCOX. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. There is a telegram dated October 15, 1963, to Mr. Jack +Burge from Rosalie A. Burge, Tulsa. Okla., transmitting $10; is that +correct? + +Mr. WILCOX. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. There is also a telegram dated October 19, 1963, to John +A. Casber from John Casber of Midland. Tex., transmitting $35? + +Mr. WILCOX. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. A telegram dated October 28, 1963, to Gary Aue from Mrs. +G. C. O'Quinn, Ft. Morgan, Colo., transmitting $65. + +Mr. WILCOX. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. There is a telegram dated October 31, 1963, to Stanley S. +Qupiec from Stayea Houston of Ware, Mass., transmitting $50; is that +correct? + +Mr. WILCOX. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. There is also a telegram dated November 22, 1963, to +Welton Hayes from Louis W. Hayes, of Rome, N.Y., transmitting $25; is +that correct? + +Mr. WILCOX. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And a telegram dated November either 27 or 28. + +Mr. WILCOX. It would be November 7. This is a transmission, November 7. + +Mr. LIEBELER. 1963 to John M. Brandes, Jr., from Helen Tuttle, San +Antonio, transmitting $20; is that correct? + +Mr. WILCOX. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And one dated November 22, 1963, to Frank or Grace +Fitzell, from the Akron Dime Bank in Akron, Ohio, transmitting $200; is +that correct? + +Mr. WILCOX. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And one dated November 28, 1963, to George McMurray from +Mildred McMurray, Plainfield. N.J., transmitting $6; is that correct? + +Mr. WILCOX. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And the addresses in each case were located then at the +YMCA on North Ervay in Dallas; is that correct? + +Mr. WILCOX. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Those were the only money order telegrams to individuals +at the YMCA that you were able to find in the search of your records, +and you are satisfied that those are the only money order telegrams in +existence addressed to people in the YMCA during that period; is that +correct? + +Mr. WILCOX. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Now, Mr. Lewis' statement of December 4, 1963, mentions +that the individual with whom he had difficulty in paying the money +order was a man of Spanish descent, is that correct? + +Mr. WILCOX. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you have any discussion with Mr. Lewis about that? + +Mr. WILCOX. We may have had it at the time we read this statement, but +I don't recall anything specific. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you have any discussion with Mr. Lewis as to whether +he recognized this individual with whom he had difficulty in paying +the money order, as Lee Harvey Oswald, from pictures of Oswald which +appeared in the newspaper? + +Mr. WILCOX. I asked him about that and he said he couldn't describe +or associate the party to the extent that he could associate it with +Oswald's picture or anything like that. + +Mr. LIEBELER. He just had no recognition? + +Mr. WILCOX. Other than that he had some difficulty in paying a money +order. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Now, as a result of these events that followed Mr. +Hamblen's statement to the newspaper reporter and the subsequent +investigation that was requested or instigated by the FBI and the +Secret Service and other investigatory agencies, you conducted certain +searches of certain files in your office in an attempt to locate any +money orders that Oswald might have received, or any telegrams that +Oswald might have sent during certain periods; is that correct? + +Mr. WILCOX. Yes; I can give you those dates. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Let me show you Exhibit 3001, which is a memorandum from +Mr. Semingsen, and ask you if that memorandum accurately sets forth +the dates and the checks that were made of the files in the Dallas +and Irving, Tex., offices of your company to determine whether or not +Oswald had received or sent any telegrams? + +Mr. WILCOX. Yes, sir; that's right. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Mr. Semingsen testified this morning that the paying +office--that is, the office through which a money order is delivered, +maintains a chronological record or file of all money orders passing +through that office; is that correct? + +Mr. WILCOX. That's right. + +Mr. LIEBELER. It is my understanding that you caused the files for both +Dallas and Irving to be searched for the periods indicated in Exhibit +3001? + +Mr. WILCOX. That's right. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You were unable to find any money order payable to Lee +Harvey Oswald or O. H. Lee or Alex James Hidell; is that correct? + +Mr. WILCOX. That's correct. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Is it possible that money orders could be sent to someone +just by using initials or some shorthand name? + +Mr. WILCOX. No; you never see anything because you would have no way +to identify the man or associate it that you are paying it to them +correctly, associate it with any identification that he might have. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Since each individual must produce identification at the +time the money order is paid, the money order is naturally in the full +name? + +Mr. WILCOX. Correct. They could be accepting it for someone--it might +not be their correct name, but they could have some identification +that, if it was just a small money order, but we can't change that +identification. If it meets what shows on the money order, then we pay +it. + +Mr. LIEBELER. But you have never heard of a situation where a money +order is paid to somebody just addressed to him by initials or +something like that? + +Mr. WILCOX. No. + +Mr. LIEBELER. How many offices, approximately, does the Western Union +office have in Dallas? + +Mr. WILCOX. There are eight branch offices. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Plus a central office? + +Mr. WILCOX. Plus a central office. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Is it possible to receive money orders through the branch +office? + +Mr. WILCOX. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Are the files of money orders received through branch +offices kept in the branch offices, or the Dallas central office? + +Mr. WILCOX. Kept at our main office. + +Mr. LIEBELER. So, that the search that you made of the records of the +central office would include money orders that were received through +any branch office located within the City of Dallas, is that correct? + +Mr. WILCOX. That's right. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You said before that your district covered not only the +City of Dallas, but surrounding communities including Irving? + +Mr. WILCOX. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Are the records relating to money orders received through +these other offices of suburban communities located or kept in the +suburban offices or the Dallas central office? + +Mr. WILCOX. In this case, this was an agency office and it would +be--the records were kept at the Irving agency office. We did search +those records at the Irving agency office. + +Mr. LIEBELER. That fact is indicated in Exhibit 3001, is it not? + +Mr. WILCOX. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. The records of telegrams or money orders received through +other suburban offices such as Garland, for example, would also be kept +in the Garland office, would they not? + +Mr. WILCOX. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. But no search was made of any suburban office other than +Irving; is that correct? + +Mr. WILCOX. That's right. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Mr. Semingsen's memorandum also indicates that a search +was made of the files in Fort Worth and in New Orleans, but you have no +direct personal knowledge of what happened at those offices, do you? + +Mr. WILCOX. No, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. We also have here a statement from Mr. Hamblen dated +December 5, 1963. Do you have the original of that statement? + +Mr WILCOX. Yes; I do have. + +Mr. LIEBELER. We will mark the original as Exhibit No. 3007 on the +deposition of Laurance R. Wilcox, at Dallas, Tex., March 31, 1963. + +I have initialed Exhibit No. 3007, Mr. Wilcox, and I would like you do +the same. + +Mr. WILCOX. [Initials.] + +Mr. LIEBELER. This statement was apparently taken on December 5, 1963. +Do you recall the circumstances under which it was given? + +Mr. WILCOX. This was following a meeting and discussion that we held on +December 4, at which time we discussed the money orders and messages +with Mr. Hamblen, Mrs. McClure, and Mr. Lewis. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Who was present at this discussion other than the +individuals you just mentioned and yourself? + +(Mr. Wilcox phoned his office re: correct date of meeting.) + +Mr. WILCOX. I did hold this meeting. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Let the record indicate that Mr. Wilcox has just +conferred telephonically with Mr. Semingsen and wishes now to clarify +the statements concerning the time on which certain meetings were held +with the employees. + +Mr. WILCOX. I did hold the meetings with these people on December 4, +and did obtain these statements, including the statement from Mrs. +McClure, Mr. Lewis, both indicated as December 4, and the statement +from Mr. Hamblen which is dated December 5. + +Following this meeting I endeavored to find the message or messages +that Mr. Hamblen was referring to, which he insisted Mrs. McClure had +accepted from Mr. Oswald. I did extract from our files all messages +matching the message numbers on the cash sheet prepared by Mrs. McClure. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did the FBI ask you to do this because Mr. Hamblen said +that a message with which Mrs. McClure had difficulty was given to her +by a man who Hamblen thought was Oswald, and that the message was one +to Washington, D.C., specifically to the Secretary of the Navy---- + +Mr. WILCOX. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And that it was accounted for on Mrs. McClure's sheet as +a night letter that was set forth on her cash sheet; is that correct? + +Mr. WILCOX. That's right. + +Mr. LIEBELER. So you then got all of the telegrams that were listed on +Mrs. McClure's cash sheets; is that correct? + +Mr. WILCOX. From the 1st of November through the November 22. We could +not find any such messages. However, we did extract all messages going +to Washington, D.C., regardless of the names to whom they were sent, or +signed, including some messages going to other points, because of their +peculiar type of printing. + +Now, would you like to see those messages? + +Mr. LIEBELER. Yes, sir; I would. Let me ask you specifically if the +period covered in terms of this extraction was from October? + +Mr. WILCOX. From November 1. + +Mr. LIEBELER. From November 1? + +Mr. WILCOX. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You picked that period because Mr. Hamblen said that he +thought the event occurred about 10 days prior to the assassination; is +that correct? + +Mr. WILCOX. That's right. Now, I think you have the only thermofax of +Mrs. McClure's. Would you want the original? + +Mr. LIEBELER. Yes; I do want to mark the original statement of Mrs. +McClure, dated December 4, 1963, which has been previously referred to +by Mr. Wilcox. I will mark it as Exhibit 3008 on the deposition of Mr. +Laurance R. Wilcox at Dallas, Tex., on March 31, 1964. + +I have initialed that exhibit, Mr. Wilcox, and would like to have you +do the same. + +Mr. WILCOX. [Initials.] + +Mr. LIEBELER. Who prepared Mrs. McClure's statement? + +Mr. WILCOX. Mrs. McClure wrote that. + +Mr. LIEBELER. She typed it on the typewriter herself? + +Mr. WILCOX. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Were you present at the time she prepared it? + +Mr. WILCOX. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you discuss these incidents with her prior to the +statement? + +Mr. WILCOX. Only during the course of the meeting that she attended in +my office. + +Mr. LIEBELER. During the course of that time, Mrs. McClure indicated +to you, did she not, that she had no recollection of any of the events +described by Mr. Hamblen concerning the message allegedly sent to +Washington, D.C.? + +Mr. WILCOX. That's right. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Let's mark these telegrams as Exhibits 3009 through 3014. +I have initialed each one of them and would like to have you do the +same. I have not indicated on each one of them in detail. It is on your +deposition and on the dates, as I have on the others, but that fact +will appear from the record. + +Mr. WILCOX. [Initials.] + +Mr. LIEBELER. You have now provided me with six telegrams, cables which +have been marked for identification as Exhibits 3009 through 3014, and +it is my understanding that these telegrams and cables were all shown +to Mr. Hamblen and he was unable to identify any of them as answering +the description of the telegram or cablegram with which Mrs. McClure +had had difficulty, and which Mr. Hamblen thought had been sent by a +person resembling Lee Harvey Oswald, is that correct? + +Mr. WILCOX. That's right. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And a thorough search of the files along the lines that +you have previously indicated was unable to produce any other telegrams +even remotely falling into the category described by Mr. Hamblen; i.e., +a telegram to Washington, D.C. or in a peculiar hand script such as +described by Mr. Hamblen to any destination, whether it be Washington +or otherwise; is that correct? + +Mr. WILCOX. That's right. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Now, you have provided me with a letter from yourself to +Mr. Semingsen, dated December 6, 1963, which we will mark as Exhibit +3015, on deposition of Laurance R. Wilcox, at Dallas, Tex., March 31, +1964. I have initialed that exhibit and ask you to do the same, sir. + +Mr. WILCOX. [Initials.] + +Mr. LIEBELER. And ask you if you prepared the original of that letter +on or about December 6, 1963? + +Mr. WILCOX. That's right. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You sent the original of it to Mr. Semingsen, did you not? + +Mr. WILCOX. Yes, sir; that's right. + +Mr. LIEBELER. And the letter accurately sets forth the events preceding +that date which we have been discussing here, does it not? + +Mr. WILCOX. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You have also provided me with a copy of a letter from +yourself to Mr. Semingsen, dated December 9, 1963, to which is attached +the original of statement from Mrs. Betty Bedwell, dated December 6, +1963, and A. I. English, dated December 6, 1963. I notice that Mr. +English's statement is not signed. + +Mr. WILCOX. [Signs.] + +Mr. LIEBELER. And I ask you if the original of it was signed at the +time you received it? + +Mr. WILCOX. No, sir; he just signed this on the typewriter to me. + +Mr. LIEBELER. No; he did not himself sign it? + +Mr. WILCOX. No. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You have indicated below that it was in effect signed by +Mr. English when he delivered it to you? + +Mr. WILCOX. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Also attached is a statement of Miss Bess Mildred +Francis, dated December 9, 1963. Also attached is a statement of Doyle +E. Lane, dated December 9, 1963; and one of Mr. E. T. Pirtle, dated +December 6, 1963; and one of Ward Townsley dated December 6, 1963. Did +you receive those statements from the individuals thus described? + +Mr. WILCOX. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. We have marked the letter described above, together with +the attachments just described as Exhibit 3016 on the deposition of Mr. +Laurance R. Wilcox at Dallas, Tex., on March 31, 1964. I have initialed +the first page of that exhibit and would like to have you do the same. + +Mr. WILCOX. [Initials.] + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you send the original of your letter dated December +9, 1963, to Mr. Semingsen on or about that date? + +Mr. WILCOX. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. The statements made in that letter are true and correct +to the best of your knowledge, are they not? + +Mr. WILCOX. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. You have also given me the original of a statement dated +December 6, 1963, of Mr. Doyle E. Lane. Was that also attached to your +letter of December 9, 1963, to Mr. Semingsen? + +Mr. WILCOX. No, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you receive yourself from Mr. Lane the statement just +described? + +Mr. WILCOX. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Let me mark it as Exhibit 3017 on this deposition. + +Would you initial the statement of Mr. Lane which we have marked 3017? + +Mr. WILCOX. Yes, sir. [Initials.] + +Mr. LIEBELER. Thank you. + +You previously testified, Mr. Wilcox, that you had a meeting on or +about December 4, 1963, with Mr. Hamblen, Mrs. McClure, and Mr. +Lewis in regard to the meeting we have been discussing, and you also +testified that you thought you had an additional meeting on December 9, +1963, at which Mr. Semingsen was present. Would you care to elaborate +on that? + +Mr. WILCOX. The meeting as you have outlined--the meetings on the dates +you have outlined are correct. The meeting on December 9, at which +Mr. Semingsen attended was for the purpose of confronting Mr. Hamblen +with the messages that we had extracted that were going to Washington, +or those which were in peculiar print, that had been accepted by Mrs. +McClure during the period of 1st of November until about November 22. +Mr. Hamblen, of course, could not identify any of these telegrams as +having been the message he described in his statement of December 2 and +December 5. + +Mr. LIEBELER. Did you form a conclusion at that time as to the accuracy +of Mr. Hamblen's recollection concerning the events which he had +related to you and to the press? + +Mr. WILCOX. Yes. + +Mr. LIEBELER. What was that conclusion? + +Mr. WILCOX. That this whole thing was a figment of Mr. Hamblen's +imagination. I am fearful that he was just emotionally upset over the +events as they transpired, and this may have been the factor causing +him to say what he had said about the acceptance of the messages and +the money order, and possibly have something to do with his statements +to the press. + +Mr. LIEBELER. As I understand you, you were perfectly satisfied at +that time that Oswald had never in fact been in the office either to +receive money orders or to send any telegram of the type described by +Mr. Hamblen, or as far as you have been able to determine, any other +telegram; is that correct? + +Mr. WILCOX. That's right. + +Mr. LIEBELER. At this point I can't think of any further questions, Mr. +Wilcox. If you can think of anything that you would like to say that +in your opinion would be of assistance to the Commission in its work, +please indicate that at this time? Can you think of anything else? + +Mr. WILCOX. I can't think of anything else now, but if I do, I will be +happy to pass it along to you. + +Mr. LIEBELER. If you do think of anything subsequently, call it to my +attention and I would appreciate it very much. + +Thank you very much, Mr. Wilcox. You have been very helpful and very +cooperative. The Commission appreciates the cooperation you and Western +Union have shown. Thank you very much. + + + + +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, and question marks +that probably should be periods, not changed. + +Occasional periods that should be commas, and commas that should be +periods, were changed only when they clearly had been misprinted (at +the end of a paragraph or following a speaker's name in small-caps at +the beginning of a line). Some commas and semi-colons were printed so +faintly that they appear to be periods or colons: some were found and +corrected, but some almost certainly remain. + +The Index and illustrated Exhibits volumes of this series may not be +available at Project Gutenberg. + +Page 1: "had an acquaintance with the Oswald's" was printed that way. + +Page 24: "thinking she said this latter" probably should be "later". + +Page 54: "October 18, 1938" is the date printed in Testimony; Oswald's +actual date of birth was October 18, 1939. + +Page 110: "ever been a subscribed to The Militant" should be either +"subscriber" or "ever subscribed". + +Page 112: "examine Watts' No. 8" probably should be "Dobbs' No. 8". + +Page 117: Sentence beginning "If my voice is low, young lady" is +unattributed, but in context, probably was spoken by Mr. Jenner. + +Page 130: "or anyone of a number of" was printed that way. + +Page 204: "through his hurrying be made" perhaps should be "he made". + +Page 208: "NVD" is either misprint or mispronunciation for "MVD". + +Page 273: "you know, what night or" probably should be "that night". + +Page 277: "Rubenstein" is spelled "Rubinstein" elsewhere in this and +other volumes of the Hearings. + +Page 282: "To be best of your recollection" was printed that way. + +Page 351: "Bogard was bound to own" probably should be "found". + +Page 352: "Vending machines. What kind of vending machines?" was +missing the period; changed here. + + + + + + + + +End of the Project Gutenberg EBook of Warren Commission (10 of 26): Hearings +Vol. X (of 15), by The President's Commission on the Assassination of President Kennedy + +*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK 44010 *** |