Warren Commission (04 of 26): Hearings Vol. IV (of 15) (part 5 of 5)

Warren Commission (04 of 26): Hearings Vol. IV (of 15) (part 5 of 5)

Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir. After finishing my training session here at the seat of government. I believe that lasted 12 weeks at that time, I took my practical experience here for a couple of weeks, and then was assigned to the Chicago, Ill., field office, where I remained for a period of approximately 4 months. I received a transfer to Oklahoma City, where I was 3 weeks, and then they stationed me at Tulsa, Okla., as a resident agent, where I remained approximately a year. I then was transferred to San Francisco, Calif., where I remained for approximately 2 years; and in December of 1945 I was transferred to Dallas, Tex., where I remained for approximately 5 years in the head office there, division office in Dallas, and then I was sent to Fort Worth in 1949 as a resident agent of the FBI, and remained there until I voluntarily retired on October 29, 1962.

Mr. STERN. Now, would you describe the relationship between the Fort Worth office and the Dallas office.

Mr. STERN. Well, the Dallas office is the headquarters city to which I was originally assigned and, of course, in that area distances are rather great between the cities, so we have what is known as resident agencies, there being at that time 10 agents in the Fort Worth office.

(At this point in the proceedings Mr. McCloy entered the hearing room.)

And we had agents, of course, at Lubbock and Amarillo and Wichita Falls, Sherman, Harris, and the other cities in order for economy reasons, to save travel. It would be a rather expensive operation to go from Dallas to those other areas.

Mr. STERN. Mr. Fain, did you specialize in any particular area of FBI work or were your assignments general?

Mr. FAIN. My assignments were comparatively general up until, I would say, about 1951, at which time I specialized mostly in security matters. Most of my investigations after 1951 were security-type investigations.

Mr. STERN. This is true----

Mr. FAIN. However, I did handle--excuse me, I did continue to handle--other types of investigations, too.

Mr. STERN. This is true until your retirement?

Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir.

Mr. STERN. Were you in charge of the investigation of Lee Harvey Oswald until the time of your retirement?

Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir; up until the time we closed the case--I don't recall the exact date, it can be verified from the report--but, I think we closed the case, following his interview on August 26.

Mr. STERN. Well to the extent----

Mr. FAIN. I want to correct that. It was August 14.

Mr. STERN. We will get to that, Mr. Fain. But to the extent the case was being investigated during your tenure, were you in charge of the case?

Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir; the case was assigned to me.

Mr. STERN. Fine. That is all I want right now.

Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir.

Mr. STERN. How many other cases on an average would you be in charge of during this period from 1960 until retirement?

Mr. FAIN. From 1960 until the time of retirement?

Mr. STERN. Yes.

Mr. FAIN. I don't have any exact figure on that, but I suppose I would have 45 to 50 cases.

Mr. STERN. At anytime?

Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir.

Mr. STERN. Mr. Fain, I show you a seven-page mimeographed report marked "Report of John W. Fain," dated May 12, 1960. Can you identify that report?

(Marked for identification No. 821.)

Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir; this is my report.

Mr. STERN. Were you responsible for preparing this entire report, Mr. Fain?

Mr. FAIN. Yes; I was.

Mr. STERN. Have you reviewed the report in preparation for your testimony today?

Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir.

Mr. STERN. Is the report correct?

Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir.

Mr. STERN. Is there anything you want to correct in the report?

Mr. FAIN. No, sir.

Mr. STERN. Is it complete in covering the events described?

Mr. FAIN. It is.

Mr. STERN. So that you have no additions or corrections?

Mr. FAIN. No additions or corrections.

Mr. STERN. Let me ask you, first, Mr. Fain, about a couple of symbols that appear on the first page of the report. The report is characterized as "Internal Security R." What does the "R" mean?

Mr. FAIN. It stands for "Russia."

Mr. STERN. At the end of the synopsis on the first page are the letters "RUC." Can you tell us what that means?

Mr. FAIN. That is a symbol to save typing and stenographic effort and so forth. It is known to all agents, and it means "Referred Upon Completion," "RUC," "Referred Upon Completion," to the office of origin actually. In other words, it indicates that the investigation there at that point where it was conducted has been completed and we are referring it back.

Mr. STERN. To an office which had prime responsibility?

Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir; in this case I suppose it was the Bureau in Washington. I see the Bureau file number up there at the top.

Mr. STERN. I see. Do you recall, Mr. Fain, how you were assigned to investigate this matter which is entitled in this report "Funds Transmitted to Resident of Russia"?

Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir.

We received a communication, or rather the Dallas office did, from Bureau to the effect that there was an indication that application had been made by Mrs. Oswald, Marguerite C. Oswald, for a draft, purchase transfer of funds, to be sent to Lee Harvey Oswald over in Russia, and I was given the assignment to contact her and find out all I could about the circumstances.

Mr. STERN. Concerning the transfer of funds?

Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir; you will notice that the title in this case is "Funds Transmitted to Residents of Russia," that was the type of inquiry.

Mr. STERN. To your recollection, had you ever before this time heard the name "Lee Harvey Oswald" or any other member of the Oswald family?

Mr. FAIN. Well, I believe--let's see, April 27, 1960, I talked to Robert Lee in an effort to locate his mother.

Mr. STERN. By this time, Mr. Fain, I mean the time covered by your report, not the date of the report.

Mr. FAIN. Just what I read in the newspapers about his having gone over into Russia. The papers played it up.

Mr. STERN. Did you have any official responsibility in connection with Lee Harvey Oswald before the time covered by this report?

Mr. FAIN. No, sir; no, I did not.

Mr. STERN. On page 2 of the report--is this a record of an interview that you held, Mr. Fain?

Mr. FAIN. It is. It is a record of the interview that I conducted.

Mr. STERN. Is this a form normally used for reporting interviews?

Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir.

Mr. STERN. What is your practice or what was your practice, while an FBI agent, in making interviews? Would you make notes of the interview as you interviewed a subject?

Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir.

Mr. STERN. Are you familiar with any shorthand method?

Mr. FAIN. I had a course in shorthand and, of course, still know some of the symbols and, at that time, did use it, mixed it up with my other English as I wrote it. I did use it.

Mr. STERN. Can you tell from this report when you made the interview?

Mr. FAIN. I interviewed Robert Lee Oswald, who was the brother, older brother, of Lee Harvey Oswald, the subject of this case, on April 27, 1960, at Fort Worth, Tex.

Mr. STERN. Can you tell the Commission where that appears from your report?

Mr. FAIN. The date of the interview?

(At this point in the proceedings, Representative Ford entered the hearing room.)

Mr. STERN. Yes.

Mr. FAIN. The date of the interview is located on the lower left-hand corner, and also the place of the interview.

Mr. STERN. When did you transcribe--or, first, how would you do that normally?

Mr. FAIN. Well, I dictated this on May 2, 1960. It evidently was transcribed by the stenographer, as noted, on the upper right-hand corner--this is a little dim--but it looks like May 6, 1960. This is a very old copy.

Mr. STERN. You would dictate this to a secretary, Mr. Fain?

Mr. FAIN. Some of it I dictated on the dictaphone, some of it I would do by rough draft and send by mail to Dallas, and if I happened to be in Dallas, I would dictate to the stenographer.

Mr. STERN. Would you ordinarily preserve your rough notes of the interview after you dictated your report?

Mr. FAIN. Not after it gets in this form, because this contains all the information in the notes we have. In other words, we put everything right in. Now this is supposed to be an exact transcript of the information. It is not a recording of the information. I don't mean to leave that impression.

Mr. STERN. And you would normally destroy your notes?

Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir; unless there was some--there would be no reason to keep my notes, once I put all the information I was assured was in here. Once that is true I destroyed them.

Mr. STERN. I think these reports largely speak for themselves, Mr. Fain, but I would like to ask you a few details to clarify statements in the report.

On page 3 in the report of your interview of Mrs. Marguerite Oswald, you say in the second line, "She volunteered for interview." What does that mean in this connection?

Mr. FAIN. You will notice that on the lower left-hand corner it indicates I talked to her on the 28th, April 28, which was the day after I talked to her son Robert Lee, and evidently he had gotten in touch with her on the same afternoon that I talked to him or that night. Anyway she knocked on the door the next day and wanted to talk to me; and she came in voluntarily. I believe Robert told me that he would get in touch with her. He gave me her address, at least, and I was going to send out a lead to have her interviewed down there, but she came in to talk to me, voluntarily.

Mr. STERN. Would you look at page 4 of your report, Mr. Fain, the fourth full paragraph from the top of the page, the paragraph that begins, "Mrs. Oswald stated," and the last sentence of that paragraph reads, "Mrs. Oswald stated that she would not have been surprised to learn that Lee had gone to, say, South America or Cuba, but that it had never entered her mind that he might go to Russia or might try to become a citizen there." As far as you can remember, is that accurately what she said?

Mr. FAIN. Yes; that is as she said, I put it down. She seemed very much upset that he had gone to Russia.

Mr. STERN. Did she explain that to you?

Mr. FAIN. None other than this. In other words, she said she wouldn't have been surprised that he had gone to, say, South America or Cuba, she was taken aback by learning he had gone to Russia. You see, he had told her he was going over to New Orleans to go to work over there, and she was apparently very surprised that he had taken this boat to Europe, to Russia.

Mr. STERN. Mr. Fain, in your report of your interview with Mrs. Marguerite Oswald, you quote several letters and refer to other specific bits of information. How did you get that so accurately?

Mr. FAIN. She had all of those in her purse. She had all those clippings that had appeared in the paper, and she had quite a stack of them there, and I got the information out of those at the time.

Mr. STERN. She displayed them to you and let you copy them?

Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir; she displayed them to me, that is right.

The CHAIRMAN. Gentlemen, are there any other questions any of you would like to ask Mr. Fain? He has stated that everything he knows concerning this matter is contained in his written report.

Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir; that is correct.

Representative FORD. May I ask a question?

The CHAIRMAN. Yes, indeed.

Representative FORD. Is it the practice of the Bureau to check with relatives of those who defect or make an attempt to defect to the Soviet Union?

Mr. FAIN. Well, I was--my primary motive here was--trying to locate her. I wanted to talk to her. If I had been able to talk to her, the mother, I probably wouldn't have contacted Robert. But he was the only one that I could locate there that knew anything about it, about where she might be, so I, in the course of things, interviewed him to try to find out what I could find out from him.

Representative FORD. I am more concerned about the overall policy. Whenever an individual makes an attempt to defect or does defect, is it the policy of the FBI to subsequently interview relatives of the individual who tried or did defect?

Mr. FAIN. Mr. Ford, I am unable to answer that because I am not versed in overall policy, and I am sorry. I am not trying to avoid your question, but I just actually don't know.

Representative FORM. What prompted you then in your capacity to interview----

Mr. FAIN. Robert?

Representative FORD. Either Robert or Mrs. Oswald?

Mr. FAIN. Well, I was instructed to get in touch with her and find out what the situation was. The only way I could get the information was to talk to her, and I talked to Robert only in connection with my attempts to locate her.

Representative FORD. But your instructions came from whom?

Mr. FAIN. I don't have the memorandum or communication that came in here in connection with this, but it came from the Bureau, I am sure, through the Dallas office.

Representative FORD. And you were working out of Dallas?

Mr. FAIN. Right. My supervisor over in Dallas, no doubt, either called me or else very likely he wrote an assignment and mailed it to me in Fort Worth.

Representative FORD. Your assignment was really to check with the mother, both, or all?

Mr. FAIN. Actually, I don't recall how the assignment was worded, I really don't. I haven't seen it for over a year and a half, and I just don't recall exactly how that came.

Representative FORD. But the only reason for such an interview was the fact that the son had gone to Russia and either defected or attempted to do so; was that the basis of the investigation?

Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir. We wanted to find out the circumstances and about these funds and any information we could ascertain and, of course, it is always important in this type of case to find out whether or not any of these--especially intelligence agents or anyone like that might contact these people and try to get information from them. We try to get these people to let us know if anything like that happens.

Representative FORD. That was really the purpose of the interview or investigation you conducted?

Mr. FAIN. Let me see if I can find out. In this paragraph 4 there is an indication----

Representative FORD. Paragraph 4 on what page?

Mr. FAIN. Paragraph 4 on page 2. "He stated he had no contact in any manner or form with any individual known to him to be a Soviet official or affiliated in any way with Soviet establishments. He also advised that as far as he knows neither his mother or other members of his family had had any contact whatsoever with Soviet officials or with Soviet establishments."

I explained to him the jurisdiction of the FBI, that the FBI had jurisdiction in internal security matters in the United States, and Robert told me that he would immediately contact the FBI in the event he was contacted by Soviet officials. Then I also asked him, as is contained in that final paragraph on the same page, "Oswald stated that neither he nor his mother as far as he knew had been requested to furnish any items of personal identification to Lee Oswald in Russia. He said he would immediately contact the FBI in the event any information like that came to his attention."

Representative FORD. These were the only interviews you had with either one of them?

Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir; at that time, yes, sir.

Senator COOPER. Can I ask a question?

Mr. McCLOY. Did you have one at any other time?

Mr. FAIN. These were the first interviews. We will get to those later. Do you want to go into those?

Mr. McCLOY. Never mind. We will get to those in due course. But wasn't the touch-off on this investigation the fact that a transfer order or an attempted remittance was being sent to Oswald in Russia by his mother?

Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir.

Mr. McCLOY. That was the thing that prompted the inquiry, wasn't it?

Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir; that is right.

The CHAIRMAN. Senator.

Senator COOPER. Yes.

Did Mrs. Oswald give you any reason for her statement she would not have been surprised if Lee Oswald had gone to Cuba or some South American country? Did she explain that statement?

Mr. FAIN. No; she didn't. She just--of course, she was all upset and bothered by his having gone to Russia, and she expressed great surprise that he had gone to Russia, and she said just casually or during the course of the conversation she wouldn't have been surprised for him to have gone, say, to South America or to Cuba, but to go to Russia, she was totally surprised and taken aback.

Senator COOPER. She didn't give you any reason why she would not have been surprised----

Mr. FAIN. No; she didn't go into that.

Senator COOPER. Whether he had said anything about Cuba or South America.

The CHAIRMAN. All right, Mr. Fain. Do you have other questions?

Mr. STERN. I have other questions for him. I thought we might break it up in the order of his reports.

The CHAIRMAN. Go right ahead.

Mr. STERN. One last question at this stage, Mr. Fain: Did Mrs. Oswald indicate to you in any way that she thought Lee Harvey Oswald had gone to Russia in any capacity other than as a private citizen?

Mr. FAIN. No; she did not. She apparently didn't know why he had gone at all. She was surprised he had gone in the first place.

Mr. STERN. She did not suggest in any way that he might have been an agent of the United States or serving United States interests in Russia?

Mr. FAIN. I think she did remark something about she believed he was a secret agent. Maybe she was clutching at anything----

Mr. STERN. She did? Is that covered in that report?

Mr. FAIN. In one of these reports I believe it is.

Mr. STERN. I am talking about this one, as of this time.

Mr. FAIN. No; I believe that came in something else. She told evidently the State Department in Washington, D.C.

Mr. STERN. Yes.

Mr. FAIN. That is where that came from.

Mr. STERN. I am asking whether she suggested this to you at the time of your interview of Mrs. Oswald on April 28, 1960.

Mr. FAIN. No; I don't recall anything of that. I have confused that.

Mr. STERN. Mr. Chairman, may we have the report admitted into evidence?

The CHAIRMAN. It may be and it will take the next number.

Mr. STERN. That was marked for identification 821.

The CHAIRMAN. All right. No. 821 may be admitted.

(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 821 for identification, and received in evidence.)

Mr. STERN. Mr. Fain, I show you a report of 11 pages dated July 3, 1961, entitled "Lee Harvey Oswald." Can you identify this report for us, and we will number it for identification No. 822.

Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir; this is my report. It is dated July 3 of 1961.

Mr. STERN. Have you reviewed this report recently in preparation for your testimony today?

Mr. FAIN. I have.

Mr. STERN. Is the report complete in all respects of the subject matter it covers?

Mr. FAIN. Yes; it is.

Mr. STERN. Is it accurate in all respects of the subject matter it covers?

Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir.

Mr. STERN. Is there any addition or correction you would like to make to the report as it stands now?

Mr. FAIN. No, sir.

Mr. STERN. The report shows on the cover page, Mr. Fain, that a copy was sent to the Office of Naval Intelligence in New Orleans, La. Can you tell us why that was done?

Mr. FAIN. Well, this investigation at this time was under internal security category R, and you will notice that predicated on information received by a communication of January 11, 1961, from District Intelligence Office, Naval District, New Orleans, La., advising that Oswald, who had attempted to defect in Russia in October 1959, and who was a member of the U.S. Marine Corps Reserve had been given an undesirable discharge from the U.S. Marine Corps Reserve on August 17, 1960.

Mr. STERN. When you say the investigation was predicated on this information, what precisely do you mean?

Mr. FAIN. That was the reason that this report was initiated from that incoming communication from New Orleans.

Mr. STERN. And how did this information come to you? Was it sent to you directly, if you know, from the New Orleans Naval District or did it come from FBI----

Mr. FAIN. It would have come through Dallas, the headquarters division office in Dallas.

Mr. STERN. But so far as you know was it sent from New Orleans to Dallas or from New Orleans to FBI headquarters in Washington and then disseminated to Dallas?

Mr. FAIN. I expect it came directly to the Dallas office. It could have been, the office there might have gotten a copy of it, might have gotten the original, and this might have been a copy. I just don't recall.

Mr. STERN. Were you instructed to make this investigation or did you initiate it yourself on the strength of this information from the naval district in New Orleans?

Mr. FAIN. There again I believe that the supervisor in Dallas asked that this case be--or did reopen it and asked for a background investigation. It looks like this is a background type of investigation on the individual Lee Harvey Oswald.

Mr. STERN. When you say "reopen," Mr. Fain, does that mean there was a case opened previously on Lee Oswald?

Mr. FAIN. No; I used the wrong term. I confused it with this report. This looks a different type of investigation, this "Funds Transmitted to Residents of Russia."

Mr. STERN. That was not an investigation of Lee Harvey Oswald as such?

Mr. FAIN. That is right.

Mr. STERN. This was actually the first report concerning the individual?

Mr. FAIN. That is correct.

Mr. STERN. So that did this represent the opening of a case on Lee Harvey Oswald, Mr. Fain?

Mr. FAIN. Yes; it did.

Mr. STERN. And as far as you know, there was no earlier investigation of Lee Harvey Oswald as such; is that correct?

Mr. FAIN. I believe that is correct.

Mr. STERN. I am just asking you of your own knowledge.

Mr. FAIN. That is right.

Mr. STERN. You say this was a background investigation. What do you mean by that, Mr. Fain?

Mr. FAIN. Well, we always ascertain his correct name and aliases, and residences, where he previously lived, his employment, his citizenship status, his nationality background, his education, his military record, whether or not he had any relatives, close relatives, in the Armed Forces; and we get a physical description of him, identification record, and where possible we always get a photograph; and his mother furnished a copy of the photograph to us on April 28, 1960.

Mr. STERN. On the first page of the report, the initial "C" appears after the synopsis. What does that mean, Mr. Fain?

Mr. FAIN. That means closed.

Mr. STERN. What does that indicate to you in terms of the investigation?

Mr. FAIN. Well, it indicated that we obtained the information concerning this person, to identify him, as to who he was, something about him, about his background; it appearing there was no further need for investigation at that time, we closed the case.

Mr. STERN. Your report indicates at page 8 that the files of the office of naval intelligence in Louisiana were checked. Was that done at your request, if you recall? Did you check those files?

Mr. FAIN. I did not. That would have been checked in the New Orleans division.

Mr. STERN. Would this have been done at your request or on the instructions of someone else?

Mr. FAIN. I am of the opinion that that information probably came along with the other information or subsequent to the other information on which this case was predicated. I don't recall asking them to make any check like that.

Mr. STERN. The first paragraph on page 1 reads a little differently. It says, "Information received by communication from the Naval District," and on page 8 you refer to a check of the files of Naval Intelligence.

Mr. FAIN. It sounds like a check was made, and they had made some information available to us, and I incorporated it in this report.

Mr. STERN. "They" is--who do you mean by "they"?

Mr. FAIN. The New Orleans Division of the FBI.

Mr. STERN. Of the FBI?

Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir.

Mr. STERN. But the first indication on page 1, when you refer to information received by communication from the District Intelligence Office, does that seem to indicate a check was made by the FBI office in New Orleans or this information was delivered by the Office of Naval Intelligence voluntarily, without request?

Mr. FAIN. I don't recall ever dictating a request. It could have happened, but you must remember it has been over a year and a half since I referred to these things. And----

Mr. STERN. Sure.

Mr. FAIN. That just sounds like it is a communication we received from there, and that we opened the case based on that information. That would be my opinion now.

Mr. STERN. But you don't know why they would have been sending you that information?

Mr. FAIN. That can be ascertained.

Mr. STERN. Yes. We, perhaps, can find out from other witnesses if you don't remember, and if you don't know, just tell us that.

Mr. FAIN. I do not know; I don't recall that.

Mr. STERN. All right. On page 10, the top paragraph, in reference to a review of the files of the passport office of the Department of State, again do you recall whether this was done at your request by someone else?

Mr. FAIN. No, sir; I do not. It could have been requested by letter out of the Dallas office or it might have been that it was made up here at seat of Government.

Mr. STERN. But in any event did you check these files at the State Department?

Mr. FAIN. I did not.

Mr. STERN. The passport office?

Mr. FAIN. No. My investigative jurisdiction was the Fort Worth area and vicinity.

Mr. STERN. Again would you summarize your recollection of the purpose and direction of the investigation at this stage, at the time covered by this report. What do you recall to have been the purpose and direction of the investigation?

Mr. FAIN. At this particular point it seems we were looking at this individual, opened the case to find out who he was and see if he was any kind of an internal threat, a threat to the internal security of our country.

Mr. STERN. What was your evaluation of that question as a result of your investigation?

Mr. FAIN. At that time we--there was nothing appearing that he was of any potential danger to the security of--I was trying to find out whether or not, you will notice on page 9 there the last paragraph, to see whether or not he was a member of the Communist Party in Fort Worth, and my check of our confidential sources showed that there was no knowledge available, no information available, that he was a member of the Communist Party. That was supposed primarily my immediate objective, to find out whether or not he was connected with the Communist Party there in Fort Worth, in addition to the developing of the background information on him.

Mr. STERN. And this entered into your evaluation at the time, the fact that he was not a member of the Communist Party?

Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir; there was no indication that he was a member of the Communist Party in Fort Worth.

Mr. STERN. Was it also relevant to your evaluation that he was apparently living in Russia at the time?

Mr. FAIN. I beg your pardon?

Mr. STERN. Was it also relevant to your conclusion about his not being a threat to the internal security of the United States that at the time he was apparently living in Russia, at the time covered by this report?

Mr. FAIN. Well, certainly we were going to keep track of him from then on, naturally, if he is over there.

The CHAIRMAN. Gentlemen, any questions? Mr. McCloy.

Mr. McCLOY. On the top of page 10, Mr. Chief Justice, this report refers to the review on May 9, 1961, of the files of the passport office. Who did make that review if you didn't make it?

Mr. FAIN. Someone, some employee of the FBI here at the seat of Government.

Mr. McCLOY. How did you know it was made?

Mr. FAIN. How did I know it was made?

Mr. McCLOY. Yes.

Mr. FAIN. The communication concerning the results of the check were sent by mail back to Dallas, and then my supervisor sent it to me at Fort Worth.

Mr. McCLOY. That is how it came to be embodied in your report?

Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir; and I covered it in my report.

Mr. McCLOY. I see. Have we got a copy of that? Do we have that review, the report of that review?

Mr. STERN. We will receive testimony concerning it from the Assistant to the Director of the Bureau.

Mr. McCLOY. Will we be able to examine the person who examined Mrs. Oswald and to whom apparently she said that she thought he was a secret agent, that Oswald was a secret agent?

Mr. STERN. I am sure we can arrange that. That would have been someone in the State Department.

Mr. McCLOY. That is right. But you don't know anything except what is stated in the report here?

Mr. FAIN. That is correct, as a result of a communication from this office to Dallas.

Mr. McCLOY. No further reasons that you recall in that report as to why she thought he was a secret agent or he might have been a secret agent?

Mr. FAIN. No, sir; I am sure I copied it from that report just like it was there. She expressed the thought that, perhaps, her son had gone to the Soviet Union as a secret agent, and the State Department was not doing enough to help him.

Mr. McCLOY. All right.

The CHAIRMAN. Congressman Ford.

Representative FORD. No questions.

The CHAIRMAN. Senator Cooper.

Senator COOPER. Again I ask you, on page 6, the second paragraph, it states, "Mrs. Oswald also stated the subject had mentioned something about his desire to travel and said something also about the fact that he might go to Cuba." Do you remember whether or not she talked to you about that?

Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir; that was the information that she gave me on April 28. If you will notice from the first paragraph on April 28, 1960, Mrs. Marguerite Oswald stated that was a repeat, in other words, of the information that actually was contained in this first report we mentioned a while ago.

Senator COOPER. On page 8 she stated she had not been requested to furnish any items of personal identification of the subject in Russia. What is meant by that "personal identification"?

Mr. FAIN. Well, in these espionage cases we wanted to be sure that they hadn't been contacted by the Soviet intelligence agencies for any purpose or any reason at all. We didn't know whether maybe he went over there and maybe they had gotten in touch with his parents or his relatives and demanded any information about him to verify who he was, and so forth.

Mr. McCLOY. Could you remember the photograph that Mrs. Oswald presented to you of Lee Oswald?

Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir; I don't remember the details right now, but I believe it was a photograph of him in the service.

Mr. McCLOY. So far as you can recollect it was in uniform?

Mr. FAIN. I just don't recall the facts.

Mr. McCLOY. You don't recall that he was carrying any weapons?

Mr. FAIN. He was not. I am sure he was not carrying any weapons. I don't believe, I am certain--I don't believe--he was in uniform at all. I think it was a picture of him. The picture, as I recall it, was not a recent picture. It was 3 or 4 years old.

Mr. McCLOY. All right.

(At this point in the proceedings, Senator Cooper leaves the hearing room.)

The CHAIRMAN. Very well, Mr. Stern, you may continue with the next item.

Mr. STERN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. May we admit Exhibit 822 for identification at this time?

The CHAIRMAN. It may be admitted under that number.

(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 822 for identification and received in evidence.)

Mr. STERN. Mr. Fain, I show you Commission Exhibit No. 823 for identification, a report of 15 pages dated July 10, 1962. Can you identify this report for the Commission?

Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir; this is my report dated July 10, 1962.

Mr. STERN. Have you reviewed this report in preparation for your testimony today?

Mr. FAIN. I have.

Mr. STERN. Is it correct in all respects concerning the material covered?

Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir.

Mr. STERN. Is there anything you would like to add to any of the data set forth there?

Mr. FAIN. No, sir; I believe not.

Mr. STERN. It carries on page 1 after the synopsis the symbol "P." What does that mean, Mr. Fain?

Mr. FAIN. Pending, a pending case.

Mr. STERN. Now, the case was closed, I believe you told us, as of the time of your last report which was Commission No. 822. Can you tell us how this report, this Exhibit 823 for identification, came to be prepared, and how the investigation reflected in this report came to be held?

Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir; there began to appear various items of information that this subject, Lee Oswald, was preparing or was desiring to come back to the United States, and----

Mr. STERN. How did you learn this, Mr. Fain?

Mr. FAIN. Well, the various communications which I received or which our office there received, and various checks that the State Department----

Mr. STERN. Excuse me, by your office there what do you mean, Dallas?

Mr. FAIN. The communications would come over to me from Dallas from my supervisor.

Mr. STERN. Yes.

Mr. FAIN. And he would get the communications from the seat of Government.

Mr. STERN. "The seat of Government" is the way you refer in the Bureau to the Federal Bureau of Investigation?

Mr. FAIN. The Federal Bureau of Investigation or it might have come from the Washington field office here.

Mr. STERN. So the seat of Government can mean any communication from Washington, either from your field office here or from your headquarters?

Mr. FAIN. That is the way I have been referring to it as seat of Government.

Mr. STERN. I see. All right. Please continue telling us how this investigation was carried out.

Mr. FAIN. I was given the assignment to contact his folks, Mrs. Oswald, his mother, and----

Mr. STERN. By whom, if you recall, Mr. Fain? Was this an assignment that came from FBI headquarters or from----

Mr. FAIN. This incidentally, this communication, we got dated September 1, 1961, from the Washington field office. You see the seat of Government is the main headquarters, in D.C.

Then we have a field office there, Washington field office, that we refer to as WFO, which is an office similar to the Dallas division or the Buffalo division or other divisions, a working division that goes out and conducts investigations in the area. I was given the assignment to contact Mrs. Oswald, the mother, and to find out any information that she might have. They had been cooperative, and I wanted to see what the situation was, and especially when this boy was coming home. We wanted to interview him and stay on top of the situation, and in that connection I contacted Robert Lee Oswald again because she wasn't in town, I couldn't locate her.

Mr. STERN. Where in your report is that stated?

Mr. FAIN. On page 4. He gave me her address, said she had gone to a ranch around Vernon, Tex., in the western area and our agent at Wichita Falls made contact with her. That is set out in the middle of the page--the results of of the contact.

Mr. STERN. That was at what time?

Mr. FAIN. On October 13 "Mrs. Marguerite Oswald, 1808 Eagle Street, Apartment No. 3, Vernon, Texas, advised that about 2 months previously she had received from her son," and so forth.

Mr. STERN. It took this period of time from your interview in September----

Mr. FAIN. September 18.

Mr. STERN. To locate Mrs. Oswald?

Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir. That is about 3 weeks, isn't it?

Mr. STERN. Yes.

Mr. FAIN. I think, my recollection is, he had difficulty locating her in that sparsely settled western country. I think he had to go to several different towns and finally located her.

Mr. STERN. So that the interview of Mrs. Oswald reflected at the bottom of page 4 was the interview conducted by another agent at your request; is that right?

Mr. FAIN. That is at the request of the Dallas office, that is right.

The CHAIRMAN. May I interrupt a moment, gentlemen? I have a commitment at the Smithsonian Institution for about 45 minutes, and so I will be obliged to leave at this time. Congressman Ford, will you preside during my absence, and if you should be obliged to leave for your congressional duties, leave it in charge of Mr. McCloy to do it. I expect to be back in three-quarters of an hour.

(At this point in the proceedings, the Chairman leaves the hearing room.)

Representative FORD [presiding]. Will you proceed, please, Mr. Stern.

Mr. STERN. Yes, sir. Was your interview with Robert Lee Oswald at your instance or did he volunteer?

Mr. FAIN. I located him for interview and tried to locate his mother and, incidentally, in that connection he was very cooperative, and I obtained all the information that he had that I could, and he volunteered a lot of this information.

Mr. STERN. Had you previously asked him to let you know if he had received any communication from his brother?

Mr. FAIN. I had asked him to be sure to let us know in case--I told him we wanted to talk to him when he came back.

Mr. STERN. You told him you wanted to know when Lee Harvey Oswald was coming back, but not whether he had any specific communication?

Mr. FAIN. We specifically wanted him to let us know if he had any contact with Soviet intelligence agents, anything like that, anything that he thought might not look right, to be sure and let us know.

Mr. STERN. Then on page 8 it says that "Mrs. Robert Oswald promised to advise upon his arrival." Were you----

Mr. FAIN. That was the wife of Robert.

Mr. STERN. Yes. Did you interview Mrs. Oswald, Mrs. Robert Oswald?

Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir; yes, I did.

Mr. STERN. What was the occasion for that interview, Mr. Fain?

Mr. FAIN. Well, to be sure and have someone let us know when this boy Lee arrived back in town.

Mr. STERN. You were willing to rely on her advice?

Mr. FAIN. We had no reason not to. They had been very cooperative, both Mrs. Oswald and Robert Oswald. Robert is an older brother of Lee. I think he was about 2 years older than Lee.

Mr. STERN. Did Mrs. Robert Oswald advise you voluntarily that she had received this postcard from Lee Harvey Oswald or did this come up when you stopped by? That is at the bottom of page 7.

Mr. FAIN. Yes; I believe she volunteered that. She had said or I might have asked her if she had any word from Lee. I don't recall now just how the conversation came up, but she said she had received a postal card from him on or about May 15, and it had been dated April 10.

Mr. STERN. When did you finally learn that he had arrived in Fort Worth, Mr. Fain?

Mr. FAIN. Let's see, that was on, it must have been, the morning of the 26th, June 26.

Mr. STERN. How did you learn this information?

Mr. FAIN. They hadn't let me know, and I began to think it was time for checking on this thing.

Mr. STERN. And by "they" you mean----

Mr. FAIN. Robert had not let me know, and Mrs. Oswald had not let me know, so I thought I had better make an independent check, and so I inquired of them, and she told me that he and his wife and child had arrived in Fort Worth on June 14, and I asked her, "Why hadn't you let me know about it?" And she said, "Well, actually the whole family had been so harassed and that he just didn't feel like letting his face be shown outside of the house." In other words, he was afraid that the newspapers would come and harass him again, I guess.

Mr. STERN. Were there newspaper stories about his arrival, do you recall?

Mr. FAIN. There were some that appeared in the paper which I have set out on page 8 and page 9. Yes; I refer to them on page 8 where they report his having gone to Russia.

Mr. STERN. Had these come to your attention before June 26?

Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir; yes, sir. I kept up with these and was careful to clip them and put them in the file.

Mr. STERN. So that is it true that you knew before June 26 that he had returned?

Mr. FAIN. No; I didn't know until that morning. I had no way of knowing that. There were some verifying communications which I set out on page 10 showing when he actually came in; page 10, you will notice, shows a check of records again back here showing when he actually left over there and when he arrived here. He arrived in New York City June 13 and then took a plane to Dallas, where he arrived on the 14th.

Mr. STERN. Yes; I thought I had understood you to say that the newspapers reflected his arrival in Fort Worth.

Mr. FAIN. No; they were over there on pages 8 and 9. June 8, 1962, in the Fort Worth Star Telegram, daily newspaper of Fort Worth, there appeared a photograph of the subject, Lee Oswald, and the headline "Ex-Marine Reported On Way Back From Russia."

Mr. STERN. But there was no news story actually reporting his arrival?

Mr. FAIN. No; he was staying in, apparently that was the reason, I guess he didn't want to get out because he was afraid he would be harassed by the neighbors or somebody and, at least, that is what Mrs. Oswald said. He just----

Mr. STERN. The harassment by newspaper reporters you referred to, probably did not mean reporters at the time of his arrival in Fort Worth.

Mr. FAIN. Well, she was--I suppose she indicated or she said that he just hadn't gotten out of the house. In other words, he came in there on the 14th and apparently, according to her story, he didn't show his face outside that house.

Mr. STERN. Then what did you do when you learned he had arrived?

Mr. FAIN. Well, I told her I would like to talk to him, he was there, and I made arrangements for him to come to the office and he said he could make it by 1 o'clock. I requested B. Tom Carter, my senior agent, to assist if he would me in interviewing Oswald, who came in about 10 minutes before 1. He came in the office like he said he would, and we talked to him on June 26, 1962.

Mr. STERN. Before you interview any subject, Mr. Fain, do you have a practice of giving him any cautionary statement, any warning?

Mr. FAIN. It was always my policy, and I am sure I did in this case, to tell them this substantially, that, "You don't have to furnish us any information. Any information you furnish can be used against you in court, and you have a right to consult with an attorney before giving us any information or statements."

Mr. STERN. Can you actually recall that you said this to Oswald?

Mr. FAIN. I don't recall specifically, but I know it was my religious practice to do it because we are always instructed to do that.

Mr. STERN. Fine.

Was the interview with Mr. Oswald recorded mechanically in any way?

Mr. FAIN. It was not.

Mr. STERN. How did you record what he was telling you, in your usual fashion?

Mr. FAIN. I was sitting behind the desk. He came up and sat down in front of the desk, and Mr. Carter was sitting to my left. We explained to him, we wanted to talk to him. I took the notes, and from my notes I dictated this, which we call an FD-302.

Mr. STERN. This is your memorandum and not Agent Carter's?

Mr. FAIN. That is right; I was more familiar with the case. I took the notes and did the dictation.

Mr. STERN. And the dictation was when?

Mr. FAIN. July 2, 1962; transcribed July 6, 1962.

Mr. STERN. These dates appear where?

Mr. FAIN. The date of dictation is shown on the lower right-hand corner; date of interview at the left, and date of transcription or typing was on July 6, upper right-hand corner.

Mr. STERN. What was Lee Harvey Oswald's demeanor in the course of this interview?

Mr. FAIN. He was tense, kind of drawn up, and rigid. He is a wiry little fellow, kind of waspy.

Mr. STERN. Did he answer all of your questions?

Mr. FAIN. No; he didn't. As indicated there in the fourth paragraph, he was a little insolent in his answers. He was the type of individual who apparently doesn't want to give out information about himself, and we asked him why he had made this trip to Russia, and he looked like it got under his skin, and I noticed he got white around the lips and tensed up, and I understood it to be a show of a temper, and in a show of temper he stated he did not care to relive the past. He didn't want to go into that at all.

We asked him, I think I asked him, in various ways, three or four times, trying to ascertain just what the situation was, and he finally stated, that Soviet officials had asked him upon his arrival why he had come to Russia, and he told us, "I came because I wanted to." That is what he said he told the Soviet People, "I came because I wanted to," and he said, he told them, "I came over here to see the country." That is the kind of answers he gave.

Mr. STERN. Do you remember any other details of this interview that you haven't set forth here? I can't stress too greatly that we are interested in any detail, any fragment of this interview that you recall that isn't set forth here, any elaboration you want to make.

Mr. FAIN. No----

Mr. STERN. Why don't you read it through carefully now and, as you go through, add to it in any way that you wish to, tell us anything else that you remember, any small detail that occurs to you. I don't mean read it out loud, read it to yourself.

Mr. FAIN. I see.

Our primary objective at this time was to ascertain whether or not the Soviets had demanded anything of him in letting him get out of the country and permitting his wife to come along with him, and you will notice down there in paragraph 12----

Mr. STERN. Page 12.

Mr. FAIN. Excuse me, page 12, paragraph 4 of page 12, he stated that the Soviets made it very difficult for him to obtain permission for his wife to leave Russia, and that the process of obtaining permission for her to leave was a long, difficult course requiring much paper work. But he was just referring there to the length of time, and he denied that they had attempted to get anything from him or demand anything from him; and he denied that they had ever sought information from him of detriment to our country.

I don't recall anything, anything in addition to what is set out here.

Mr. McCLOY. No suggestion that he was a secret agent?

Mr. FAIN. No, sir.

Mr. McCLOY. He had made no such suggestion to you as to that?

Mr. FAIN. No, sir.

Mr. McCLOY. Did you ever have any suspicion that he might have been?

Mr. FAIN. That he may have been rewarded by the Russians and asked to do something or certain things about him? Well, an FBI agent is naturally suspicious, of course, of anything like that. Of course, he denied it. He denied that they demanded anything of him.

Mr. McCLOY. And you never had any indication that he was a secret agent of any other country?

Mr. FAIN. No, no.

Mr. McCLOY. Including the United States?

Mr. FAIN. You mean that he might have gone over there and seek out information for us?

Mr. McCLOY. Yes.

Mr. FAIN. No, sir; no, sir; nothing like that.

Representative FORD. At the time you had this interview with Oswald, did you have the information, for example, that appears on the first page of Commission No. 823 under the heading "Details"?

Mr. FAIN. This information there was furnished by the Office of Naval Intelligence. I didn't check the records on that. That came in by communication. Does that answer the question, Mr. Ford?

Representative FORD. What I was inquiring about was did you have this information available to you at the time you interviewed him on July 13 or 14----

Mr. STERN. June 26.

Representative FORD. June 26?

Mr. FAIN. June 26; yes, sir. I am sure I did, because that is on March 20. I read they had sent it.

Representative FORD. In other words, you undoubtedly had----

Mr. FAIN. I had access to anything in our files there pertaining to this case.

Representative FORD. You had information. For example, you were familiar with the statement in a report that, and I quote, "Subject allegedly told the embassy he had advised unnamed Soviet officials that as a former Marine radar operator he would make available to them information about his Marine Corps specialty when he became a Soviet citizen."

Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir; that was an allegation that was made over there. As I recall that was obtained in a check at the embassy, United States Embassy.

(At this point in the proceedings, Mr. Dulles enters the hearing room.)

Representative FORD. Did you make any inquiry as to whether or not that was an accurate statement alleged to have been made by him to an embassy official?

Mr. FAIN. Mr. Carter and I asked him, all about those things. Of course, he denied it.

Representative FORD. Did he make any specific denial of that, as you recall?

Mr. FAIN. Yes; we asked him if he had been asked about anything concerning his specialty while in the Marine Corps and I think he said no, that he had not.

Representative FORD. What confuses me is, one, that he denied this to you, but then he apparently at some prior time had told the Embassy that he had advised unnamed Soviet officials that as a former Marine radar operator he would make available to them information about his Marine Corps specialty when he became a Soviet citizen.

Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir; we were aware of that, that statement. He denied it, and he also denied that he had ever denounced his United States citizenship, and he denied to Mr. Carter and me that he had ever applied for Soviet citizenship specifically.

Mr. STERN. Was it your practice, Mr. Fain, to review the files on a subject before you interviewed him?

Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir.

Mr. STERN. Can you recall whether you did that in this case?

Mr. FAIN. I certainly did, yes, sir; there were so many details and so many allegations you had to study it long hours to get the thing further in mind.

Mr. STERN. But you think you did that before you interviewed Oswald?

Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir.

Mr. STERN. In view of the purpose of the investigation, the interest that you had, what was your overall evaluation of Oswald as a result of this interview?

Mr. FAIN. Well, that was--of course, that would be calling for my opinion, and we are interested only in getting facts on this case, facts, and all I could say is that he seemed tense.

Mr. DULLES. He seemed tense?

Mr. FAIN. Tense, yes, sir; and drawn up. I don't know whether he was just scared or what his situation was, but he was--he exhibited an arrogant attitude, arrogant, cold, and inclined to be just a little insolent.

Mr. STERN. When he did tell you something would you tend to believe that he was telling you the truth or not? Did you form an impression of his veracity?

Mr. FAIN. Well the information we had was that he had applied to renounce his citizenship, and he had applied for Soviet citizenship, and yet he denied that. It was just a flat denial and I had no way of knowing whether he was telling the truth or not. It is a thing that you cannot always tell. We got answers from him as set out here. He would give you some kind of answer.

Mr. STERN. Who was your immediate superior on a case like this, not his name, but describe his function.

Mr. FAIN. He was on the desk in Dallas, and all of these investigations, all of my work, went across his desk. He would make the assignments also.

Mr. STERN. Tell the Commission what you mean by "the desk," please.

Mr. FAIN. The supervisory desk in the Dallas office that handled security-type matters, and this report would go across his desk, and the assignments that would come to me would be made by him.

Mr. STERN. Did you discuss the Oswald case with your desk supervisor at this time, upon the completion of this interview?

Mr. FAIN. I don't recall specifically talking to him at this time. If I had been over there in the next few days I imagine I would have talked to him or did talk to him. You see, I was in Fort Worth.

Mr. STERN. Yes.

Mr. FAIN. And normally I would dictate my reports, and they would go by mail to Dallas and, of course, we were in telephonic contact, any time anything came up of any problem nature.

Mr. STERN. Would you have discussed the case with your supervisor if you thought that there was a particular and immediate problem?

Mr. FAIN. Oh, certainly; yes, sir.

Mr. STERN. Did you think that there was a particular and immediate problem following your interview?

Mr. FAIN. Well, I didn't feel satisfied because of his answers there as to why he went to Russia. He was evasive, and that was the reason I set out a lead to have him reinterviewed.

Mr. STERN. What do you mean by that, Mr. Fain?

Mr. FAIN. To talk to him again. You see, at this time he had just come to town and he was out there at his brother's place. He had a wife and a little 4-month-old baby that he had brought from Russia, and he didn't have any established place to live, and I can see how the newspapers may have harrassed him, and it might have been, very likely was, that he didn't want to show himself out of the house, but I felt under the circumstances he ought to be talked to again, he ought to be interviewed in detail about these same things and, consequently, I did set out a lead.

Mr. STERN. What does that mean in terms of your procedures?

Mr. FAIN. In my report I just suggested that he be reinterviewed.

Mr. STERN. Is that in this report?

Mr. FAIN. That might have been my transmittal--no, it doesn't show here. It is probably on the transmittal to the chief of the Dallas office.

Mr. STERN. A recommendation that he be----

Mr. FAIN. A recommendation, yes, that he be reinterviewed because I wasn't thoroughly satisfied with some of the answers he gave.

Mr. DULLES. I wonder, Mr. Chairman, whether we should not have that transmittal letter; it seems to be pertinent to the case.

Representative FORD. I think it would be helpful in light of the testimony, Mr. Fain.

Mr. FAIN. It was a lead sheet, what we call a lead, and I recall that on that I suggested that the records of Immigration and Naturalization Service be checked and incorporated, and also that he be reinterviewed. Those were the two things I remember specifically having put in the report.

Representative FORD. That would be a cover to Commission No. 823?

Mr. FAIN. A lead sheet; yes, sir.

Mr. STERN. We are going to have the testimony, gentlemen, of Mr. Alan Belmont, the third-ranking official of the Bureau, who can testify from an overall Bureau viewpoint on the way this case was handled and be able to respond to questions of that sort, what was in the internal memoranda, transmittal documents, and things of that sort.

Mr. DULLES. That is satisfactory.

Mr. STERN. Anything else at all, Mr. Fain, that you can tell us about this interview that we haven't covered already?

Mr. FAIN. No, sir; I put it all on this 302.

Mr. STERN. Mr. Chairman, may we have admitted Commission Exhibit 823 for identification?

Representative FORD. It will be so admitted.

(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 823 for identification and received in evidence.)

Mr. STERN. Mr. Fain, I show you a report marked Commission No. 824 for identification, an eight-page report dated August 30, 1962. Can you identify this report?

Mr. DULLES. Off the record.

(Discussion off the record.)

Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir; this is my report of August 30, 1962. It is a closing report, a report that records the result of an investigation pursuant to the lead I set out in this other report, referring to the reinterviewing.

Mr. STERN. This followed your other report by some 7 weeks?

Mr. FAIN. Yes. I talked to him the last time June 26, 1962, and this interview was conducted August 16, 1962.

Mr. STERN. And the early report was dated July 10, 1962.

Mr. McCLOY. July 10, 1962.

Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir; and this report August 30.

Mr. STERN. August 30.

Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir.

Mr. STERN. Have you reviewed this report recently, Mr. Fain?

Mr. FAIN. I have.

Mr. STERN. In preparation for your testimony today?

Mr. FAIN. I have.

Mr. STERN. Is there any statement in it you would like to correct?

Mr. FAIN. No, sir.

Mr. STERN. Any information you would like to add to the data that are set forth?

Mr. FAIN. No, sir.

Mr. STERN. What was the occasion for the investigative work reported in this document, Mr. Fain?

Mr. FAIN. You will recall that I had set out a lead to reinterview him. I felt that he had just gotten back, from Russia on the previous interview, and that he might have been upset naturally, and a reinterview might be more productive. He might feel now settled down, so I set about to locate him and to talk to him again.

Mr. STERN. How did you locate him, Mr. Fain?

Mr. FAIN. On August 14 I contacted Robert again, Robert L. Oswald, the older brother, at 7313 Davenport, and he told me that Lee Harvey had moved, that he didn't have his house number, but he was on Mercedes Street, west of Montgomery Ward & Co., just off Seventh Street.

Mr. STERN. In Fort Worth?

Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir; in Fort Worth. And then I went there. He gave me the name of the street, and I went there and made some inquiries, and finally ascertained from an adjoining neighbor, just east of Lee's house--these were little duplex apartments--and she told me, yes, there is a Mr. Oswald who just moved in next door a few days ago.

Then on August----

Mr. DULLES. Could I ask, did she seem to know him at all well?

Mr. FAIN. No; she didn't, she hadn't met them, but she just said some people had moved in, and that was enough for me. Robert had told me, had indicated pretty much where it was, and the fact is he gave me pretty good directions as to where to go. As a matter of fact, he had been down there himself in the apartment apparently, but he just didn't have the house number.

Mr. STERN. What did you do after you located the house, Mr. Fain?

Mr. FAIN. After I located the house on the 15th, and I made arrangements to have another agent and I go out there and reinterview him. I didn't want to go to his house. I didn't want to contact his wife. I knew from the background we had conducted that she could not speak English. She could speak Russian only, and I didn't know any Russian, so it wouldn't have been any point in my contacting her and upsetting her.

So this agent and I in an automobile took up a surveillance at the end of the street out of sight of the house and away from the house, and waited until he came from work.

We observed him toward the end of the day, and I suppose it must have been around 5:30, something like that, in the late afternoon, walking down the street, and we then moved up in front of his house.

Of course, I knew him and he knew me from a previous interview, and I spoke to him, "Hi, Lee. How are you?" I said, "Would you mind talking with us just a few minutes?" So he got in the back seat. I remained in the front seat. Arnold J. Brown, the other agent, was in the back seat with him, and we talked with him there, and the results of the interview are set out here on page 4.

Mr. STERN. Was it your normal practice to conduct an interview in teams?

Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir.

Mr. STERN. This interview you conducted with Agent Brown, and your previous interview you conducted with Agent Carter, I believe?

Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir; Agent Carter was with me on the first one, and Arnold Brown was on the second one.

Mr. STERN. Why is that, Mr. Fain?

Mr. FAIN. Well, in case something comes up in these important interview cases which might have some evidentiary value, we like to have two agents present.

Mr. STERN. Is your general rule always to have two agents when you interview any subject?

Mr. FAIN. Subject, particularly if it is something other than routine; yes, sir.

Mr. STERN. This, as far as you were concerned, was something other than routine?

Mr. FAIN. In internal security cases, in a case of this magnitude and this importance, we would always have two agents present.

Mr. STERN. When you say a case of this magnitude and a case of this importance, what do you have in mind?

Mr. FAIN. Well, this man had been to Russia, and we wanted to try to find out whether he had been recruited by the Russians to do a job against the United states.

Mr. STERN. So this, in relation to your other cases, was an important case?

Mr. FAIN. It was important.

Mr. DULLES. Do you often conduct interviews in a car or was this rather unusual?

Mr. FAIN. We felt that in this case we could get his cooperation better if we could show to him that we weren't trying to embarrass him. I explained to him that afternoon, "We didn't contact you at your place of employment; we didn't want to embarrass you before your employer," and didn't want to upset his wife and, therefore, I hadn't bothered his wife, and we just felt if we talked to him there in the car informally, he would better cooperate with us.

Mr. DULLES. It wasn't because he showed reluctance to have you go in the house or didn't invite you or anything of that kind?

Mr. FAIN. Oh, no; no. Actually he invited us in when we stopped him. He said, "Won't you come in the house?" And I said, "Well, we will just talk here. We will be alone to ourselves and we will be informal, and just fine." So he got in the car with Agent Brown.

Mr. McCLOY. Was he actually less truculent than he had been before?

Mr. FAIN. Yes; he had actually settled down. He had gotten a job at Leslie Machine Shop, and he wasn't as tense. He seemed to talk more freely with us.

Mr. McCLOY. He indicated that he had been or his wife had been in constant communication with the Soviet Embassy here?

Mr. FAIN. Well, he told me on the previous interview that he would have to get in touch with the Russian Embassy and let them know that his wife was in this country, and to let them know his address, and I asked him if he had done that, and he said he had in this second interview. He said he would have to contact them. The way he termed it, his phraseology was, that the Soviet law was that a person in her position coming over here, a citizen from Russia, must notify the Soviet Embassy of her current address, and he said that should be done periodically.

Mr. STERN. Did you discuss his discharge from the Marine Corps?

Mr. FAIN. We actually went over substantially everything we had asked him before.

Mr. STERN. Did he seem concerned about that?

Mr. FAIN. The fact that he had been given the unfavorable discharge? I believe now, I don't recall just exactly whether I asked him right at that time whether there had been any disposition of that, and maybe I did.

Mr. STERN. The third paragraph on page 4 refers to that, and I just wondered if you could say more about it.

Mr. FAIN. Yes; he just advised about the matter of having been given an undesirable discharge had not been reviewed. We did ask him that because he brought it up and mentioned it before.

Mr. STERN. Did he seem----

Mr. FAIN. He didn't know when it would be heard at that time. He said he didn't know when it would be heard.

Mr. STERN. Did he seem angry about it, the status?

Mr. FAIN. No; just answered it and didn't seem ruffled.

Mr. STERN. At any point in the course of the interview did he display anger or irritation?

Mr. FAIN. The only point he did, was when we asked him again why he went to the Soviet Union in the first place, and I didn't like his answer there. That is set out on the bottom of page 5. He still declined to answer questions as to why he went to the Soviet Union in the first instance. He said he considered it nobody's business why he wanted to go to the Soviet Union. Finally he stated he went over to Russia for his own personal reasons. He said it was a personal matter to him. He said, "I went and I came back." He said "It was something that I did." So he just bowed his neck and apparently wasn't going to tell anything further at all on that point.

Mr. DULLES. Could I ask a question? On the bottom of the earlier page, page 1, where it stated that Oswald was interviewed when he first arrived at the Soviet Union, and he stated he was interviewed when he was about to leave by representatives of the MVD, he was quite clear about the MVD and not the KGB?

Mr. FAIN. That is right; he indicated the MVD.

Mr. DULLES. And he clearly said MVD?

Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir; he described it as being--handling criminal matters among the population generally, is the way he described it.

Mr. DULLES. That might be. That is really the Ministry of the Interior, and the KGB is the secret security services, which has been sometimes controlling and sometimes has been under the Ministry of the Interior.

Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir; he indicated to us just the ordinary way. In other words, I gathered from him that the police interviewed him when he came in, and also he said the police interviewed him when he left. But he said he made no deals with them or with any intelligence agents of the Soviet system.

Representative FORD. On page 2, Mr. Fain, are written two words. One is "Texas," is that, and another is "Noloc."'

Mr. FAIN. I have no knowledge of who put that on or how that came there. I guess that looks like maybe "Texas" up there at the top.

Representative FORD. Would the second be "no location." Is that an abbreviation for that?

Mr. FAIN. That probably has reference to somebody's notation. It may have been on the desk over there; no location for the uncle, no city stated for his location.

Representative FORD. Would that be something added by someone other than yourself?

Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir; I did not make that notation. I have no knowledge as to who did. It was made in Dallas.

Mr. STERN. Mr. Fain, apart from the question of why he went to the Soviet Union in the first place, was he reluctant to answer any other questions that you put to him?

Mr. FAIN. As I recall it, he answered the other questions fairly readily, and he appeared to be a lot more relaxed than he was the first time.

Mr. STERN. Throughout the interview?

Mr. FAIN. With the exception of this, he kind of bowed up there, and said, it was a personal matter as to why he went over there. He said he came and he went back. Just a little bit insolent. He said it was nobody's business.

Mr. STERN. How long did this interview last, Mr. Fain?

Mr. FAIN. I don't recall exactly, but I expect we talked to him about an hour, maybe an hour and 15 minutes, something like that.

Mr. STERN. How does that compare with the length of time of your first interview with him in your office?

Mr. FAIN. As I recall, the first interview, and again I don't recall it exactly, but I was of the opinion we talked to him for maybe an hour and a half, and maybe 2 hours. It was close to 2 hours because we couldn't cover all the questions in a lesser period of time. We approached the things in different ways and from different angles, and to see if he wouldn't give us the information.

Mr. STERN. Would you read over these three pages of your memorandum of the interview, pages 4, 5, and 6 of the report, and see if there is anything you would like to add or clarify, any detail that occurs to you now that you didn't cover there, any flavor or color of the interview that you wouldn't ordinarily put in your report that you can tell us about?

Mr. FAIN. All right, sir; it is in there. It is indicated in the last paragraph.

Mr. STERN. On what page?

Mr. FAIN. Page 6. Really there is no point in repeating, but he did play down during the entire interview--he seemed to be just a little bit derisive of our questions, and hesitated to bring out whether or not the Soviet intelligence officials might have been interested in him or might have contacted him, and he downgraded or played that down. He just didn't think he was that important; in other words, that they would want to contact him.

Mr. DULLES. How was he on that point, was he strong on that point, did he press that point?

Mr. FAIN. No; there wasn't anything remarkable about that different from the other. He saw no reason why the Soviets would want to contact him. He didn't feel like he was of any importance to them. He said that he would cooperate with us and report to us any information that would come to his attention.

Mr. DULLES. On the bottom of--excuse me.

Mr. FAIN. That is all right; I was through.

Mr. DULLES. On the bottom of page 1 of your report, page 4 of the exhibit, it is indicated that this report was made by Special Agent Arnold J. Brown and by you. Do you recall who dictated the report?

Mr. FAIN. I did.

Mr. DULLES. And was it concurred in by Special Agent Arnold J. Brown?

Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir.

Mr. DULLES. He saw it?

Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir.

Mr. DULLES. He concurred in it?

Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir; he saw the dictated, the finished document and initialed it.

Representative FORD. What kind of covering letter did you send with this to the Dallas office, if any?

Mr. FAIN. There would be none because this is closed. In other words, there didn't seem to be any evidence that he had a potential for violence or anything like that, and we just closed the case, and this went over there very likely without any transmittal.

Mr. DULLES. Where is there an indication here that the case was closed?

Mr. FAIN. "C." This letter "C" under the synopsis is a symbol we use just to save typing time, it stands for closed.

Representative FORD. Who makes that determination?

Mr. FAIN. As to whether the ease would be closed or not?

Representative FORD. Yes.

Mr. FAIN. It was my determination and my recommendation it be closed. Of course, the report goes to the supervisor's desk in the Dallas office, and if he concurs he lets it go on through, and if he declines he would send it back for additional investigation or other action, whatever he deemed appropriate.

Mr. DULLES. Was there a written recommendation that this case be closed other than this?

Mr. FAIN. No; other than this, no.

Mr. DULLES. That "C" is all?

Mr. FAIN. Yes.

Representative FORD. Is that "C" put on by you?

Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir; in my dictation.

Representative FORD. In your dictation?

Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir; to show the case closed.

Mr. DULLES. Did you get any approval or disapproval of that, or, if it is not disapproved, you consider it conclusive?

Mr. FAIN. Well, if it is going to be disapproved, I would hear probably the third day, or if he wanted to get on the telephone and call me to do something additional that he thought ought to be done, then I would be told to do some additional work on it.

Representative FORD. What is the significance of the third day? Is this the usual time or what?

Mr. FAIN. No; I was just thinking about the mail time. You get a communication out, for instance, if I mailed this report it would get there the next day, and they would review it and then they would mail it out and I would get it the third day.

Representative FORD. Just the communication time.

Mr. FAIN. That is right; that is right.

Mr. DULLES. Did you get any comment back at all on this report from headquarters?

Mr. FAIN. No; I did not.

Mr. STERN. Would you elaborate, Mr. Fain, about your conclusions on this case and your evaluation of Oswald the man as of the time of your second interview. What led you to your recommendation?

Mr. FAIN. An evaluation as to what?

Mr. STERN. From the viewpoint of the investigation you were conducting. You told us how you felt about him on the first interview, and you felt a further interview would be necessary.

Mr. FAIN. Well, I felt in the second interview he was more relaxed, and I felt he answered the questions more readily and with less evasion.

However, he still didn't seem to want to go into the reasons why he went over there in the first place, and why he wouldn't do it. Evidently he had his own reasons for giving those answers. I don't know whether he just wanted to be--maybe he was just inherently insolent, and that is just typical of his personality is all I could figure out.

Mr. STERN. Will you tell us again the purpose of your investigation, what you were after.

Mr. FAIN. The purpose of this investigation was to determine whether or not he had been contacted by the Soviet intelligence agencies, whether he had been given an assignment or not, whether they had made any deal with him, and whether, as a demand, for permitting his wife to accompany him--you see, for a long time, they told him he couldn't take her apparently, and there was quite a period that he was waiting to get her, and he refused to come back to the United States unless his wife came back with him. We wanted to find out whether or not the Soviets had demanded anything of him in return for letting her come on over.

Mr. STERN. As to that, had you formed a conclusion, after the second interview?

Mr. FAIN. As to--on that point?

Mr. STERN. Yes.

Mr. FAIN. Well he answered it and said, "No." He played it down all the way through. In other words, that was the main purpose we were talking to him, was to try to ascertain that point. He downgraded it all the way through, and belittled himself. He said, "I was not that important."

Mr. STERN. Was your recommendation that this case be closed, a recommendation that indicates that you had reached a conclusion on the question of your investigation?

Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir; even though he was arrogant and cold, from his answers, I couldn't see any potential for danger or violence at that point.

Mr. DULLES. Did Special Agent Arnold J. Brown concur in your decision with regard to marking the case "C," closed?

Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir; I remarked to him we were just going to close it, and he saw the finished report and initialed the report.

Mr. DULLES. He saw that conclusion and concurred in it?

Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir.

Mr. STERN. In terms of your FBI procedures, what is the difference between marking a case closed or marking it pending?

Mr. FAIN. Well, if it is a pending case, there is additional work to be done on it.

Mr. STERN. Specific additional work?

Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir; specific leads to be done on the case.

Mr. STERN. And closed means that there are no such specific leads, is that right?

Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir; that is right; it is closed.

Mr. STERN. But does that mean that the case is in dead storage somewhere?

Mr. FAIN. Not forever; no. If there is any reason for reopening it, it could be reopened the next day if necessary or the next 3 days or any time. But this assignment had been completed. He had been interviewed. That was the purpose of this contact, to interview him, and set forth the results of re-interview, and that was all that was to be done.

Mr. STERN. Are cases frequently reopened?

Mr. FAIN. Cases are reopened constantly. If there is any reason for reopening it, it certainly would be reopened.

Mr. STERN. Is it fair to say then that in this kind of situation, "closed" is really a shorthand for "no further work to be done at this time"?

Mr. FAIN. Correct, correct.

Mr. DULLES. Off the record.

(Discussion off the record.)

Mr. McCLOY. What is the date of this last report here?

Mr. FAIN. The date of this was August 30, 1962.

Mr. McCLOY. August 30, 1962.

Mr. STERN. Mr. Fain, do you recall discussing Lee Harvey Oswald with his brother Robert Oswald about this time?

Mr. FAIN. Discussing his brother with him?

Mr. STERN. Did you ever talk to Robert Oswald about any of your conclusions regarding Lee Harvey Oswald?

Mr. FAIN. Certainly not. I contacted him on August 14, but that was for the purpose of locating his brother for interview.

Mr. STERN. Is it possible that you might have said to him at some point, "I have interviewed your brother and I don't think he presents a problem," or "I do"? I don't suppose you would say that.

Mr. FAIN. Positively not. I never made that statement to him at any time.

Mr. STERN. This would be contrary to your operations?

Mr. FAIN. That would call for a conclusion, and we wouldn't discuss a matter like that with anyone, especially a relative.

Mr. STERN. With any unofficial person?

Mr. FAIN. Official--that is right. Of course with my supervisor and some official who is entitled to it, but I certainly did not talk to Robert Oswald about anything like that.

Mr. STERN. Do you have any indication from your interviews with Lee Harvey Oswald or from anything else you knew about him, from your investigation, that he was dangerous or potentially violent?

Mr. FAIN. No, sir; no, sir; if there had been any indication that he was potentially dangerous or violent or had a potential for violence, we certainly wouldn't have closed it.

Mr. McCLOY. You felt he constituted no security risk to the United States?

Mr. FAIN. Well, we couldn't prove that he was a member of the Communist Party in Fort Worth; had no report that he was a member of the party.

Mr. McCLOY. Quite apart from the party, from party membership, was it your conclusion that he was--he did not constitute a security risk?

Mr. FAIN. I couldn't see any potential for violence.

Mr. McCLOY. I am not talking about potential for violence. I am talking about security risk. You know what I mean by that. You are an experienced security officer.

Mr. FAIN. Well, I am suspicious of any Communist, obviously, and I think any Communist is a threat because I think they are atheistic, materialistic; I don't think they know what the truth is, and from that standpoint I would think he is--but he wasn't, we couldn't say. The checks we made were to the effect that he was not a Communist, was not a member of the Communist Party.

Mr. McCLOY. Was not a member of the Communist Party.

Mr. FAIN. But he went to Russia. Of course, we couldn't get him to tell us why he went. We tried on two occasions. He said it was personal with him. He wanted to go over there the first time, and in that first interview he said, "I don't care to relive the past."

Mr. McCLOY. I understand that. But if you had doubts about his security, about his loyalty to the United States, or put it the other way, or if you think he might have been a security risk to the United States, should you have closed this case?

Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir; we would have closed it because there was no reason to keep it open. We had the information. We reinterviewed him, no potential for violence appearing.

Mr. McCLOY. That isn't the test, is it, whether he can be capable of intrigue or he can be capable of espionage without violence. He could be a security risk without violence, couldn't he?

Mr. FAIN. Well, that might be, of course. Of course--if we knew then what did happen, was going to happen, we certainly wouldn't----

Mr. McCLOY. I am not talking about hindsight. I am talking about as of that time whether in your judgment this man was no longer, in your judgment, to be considered as a security risk to the United States. I am not trying to place any blame or criticism here. I am just trying to get the state of your mind as of the date of that report, whether that included your belief that he was not a security risk.

Mr. FAIN. Well, we like to let our reports stand for themselves, in other words on the situation, the answers given. In answer to your question, I would have been rather satisfied if he would have told me why he went over there and if he weren't so evasive.

Mr. McCLOY. You got an impression he was evasive and he was not telling you the truth?

Mr. FAIN. Well, he was inclined to be haughty and arrogant, and even though he was insolent, and that could have been, of course, a part of his personality makeup, that type of individual.

Mr. McCLOY. Let me ask you this: If you had felt in spite of his answers that he was a security risk, would it have been incumbent upon you to report to your superiors that he was, and that you thought he ought to be continued under surveillance?

Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir; if he would have met the qualifications we considered that he had been a security risk, and had a potential for any violence or dangerousness, why, we certainly would have stayed on him.

Mr. DULLES. And you would not have marked the report as closed, the case as closed.

Mr. FAIN. Well, I closed it because my investigation was completed. The assignment was to interview him and the case at the end of the interview with the information we obtained the case was closed. The man had found a job, he was working, he was living in this duplex with his wife, and he was not a member of the Communist Party. Of course, it was true he had been to Russia. He denied any contacts with a Soviet intelligence agent. He denied that he had any contacts. We considered all the facts and circumstances and closed the case, and that is what I did.

Mr. McCLOY. If you had not come to that, would you have put in another lead for another interview?

Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir.

Mr. McCLOY. Would it have been incumbent upon you to recommend to your superiors that he be continued under surveillance?

Mr. FAIN. I could have recommended that he be reinterviewed but I frankly didn't see any point in doing that.

Mr. McCLOY. I understand that. But assuming you did find some derogatory information, or some facts that made you fear that he was a security risk beyond a recommendation for further interviews, what would be your province to do? Would it be your province to recommend surveillance?

Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir; if there had been some facts there to indicate that he was----

Mr. McCLOY. A potential danger?

Mr. FAIN. A potential danger to the security of the United States, and for instance if we had found that he was a member of the Communist Party and meeting with them, made some contact with them, I certainly would have stayed right on it.

Mr. McCLOY. You would have recommended that he be kept under surveillance then?

Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir.

Mr. McCLOY. That is all I am getting at.

Representative FORD. Are you through, John?

Mr. McCLOY. Yes.

Representative FORD. On the top page of Commission Exhibit 824 it says, and I quote, "Oswald and wife unknown to confidential informant." Did you make that check?

Mr. FAIN. I did. I checked with the confidential security informants that we had there, and they said this man was not known to be a member of the party, and the party had not discussed him for membership purposes or anything like that.

Representative FORD. Do you have in this area, or did you have at that time in this area reliable confidential informants?

Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir; yes, sir. Excellent informants.

Representative FORD. During your experience in Fort Worth or otherwise, did you ever have a case similar to the Oswald case, a defector who had returned to the United States?

Mr. FAIN. No, sir.

Representative FORD. This was your only one?

Mr. FAIN. I had read in the newspapers about them occurring in various areas in the United States but this was the first one I had handled.

Representative FORD. This was the only one of a similar nature that you handled?

Mr. FAIN. I believe there were some cases back there too. We did handle one or two of those where the man in the service had made some kind of a remark, and we had interviewed him when he returned. I remember two or three of those cases when he returned to this country.

We contacted him to ascertain what his employment was, what his status was, what his present residence was, what his present attitude was, and whether or not he would report to us if he were contacted under auspicious circumstances abroad or otherwise. We worked on several of those, that type of case.

Representative FORD. Your contacts with these confidential informants, were they prior to or subsequent to this interview with Oswald?

Mr. FAIN. This was subsequent. This was the day following. I had also previously interviewed them.

Representative FORD. I think there was a somewhat similar statement in one of your other reports.

Mr. FAIN. I believe in the other report, yes, sir.

(At this point, Chief Justice Warren entered the hearing room)

Mr. DULLES. Do you recall any other instances where you have marked a case closed where headquarters has come back and suggested that it not be closed and that further investigation be made?

Mr. FAIN. Right now, I can't specifically recall any instances, but it has been done, and if the supervisor felt additional work should be done we would have no hesitancy in doing it.

Mr. STERN. Mr. Fain, your recommendation about closing a case is checked by how many supervisors that you know?

Mr. FAIN. One on the security desk there before it goes on here to the seat of Government.

Mr. STERN. This is one on the security desk in Dallas?

Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir.

Mr. STERN. Then what happens?

Mr. FAIN. Then the report goes on into Washington here, to the FBI.

Mr. STERN. As far as you know is it checked again here?

Mr. FAIN. Oh, yes.

Mr. STERN. And by whom or by what kind of official?

Mr. FAIN. Well, they have a desk up here that has that function, too, you see. I don't know just, Mr. Belmont can probably answer that better than I can because I am not familiar at all with the workings of it up here. But I know they are rigidly checked and rechecked.

Mr. STERN. Now, at the time you filed this report, in view of the fact that you didn't see, as you testified, any further work to be done at this time----

Mr. FAIN. That is right.

Mr. STERN. Could you have put the case in any other status besides "Closed"? Is there any other administrative procedure that might have been available to you under the circumstances where you had nothing further, no further work to recommend at the time?

Mr. FAIN. Any other status? I could have put it, of course, in a pending status and set out some leads.

Mr. STERN. No, no; assuming you didn't see any further work to be done, any further leads at that time, under your administrative practices?

Mr. FAIN. No; if the work has been completed, we put the recommendation that it be closed and as I say, of course, that is no ironbound thing, to keep it from being reopened. It can be reopened any time, any of these security cases, the very next day, if necessary or the next 5 days or the next month, anything comes in on it or we get any specific reason for reopening it, it certainly is reopened.

Representative FORD. A few minutes ago I asked you a question about checking with confidential informants. Did this check involve only confidential informants in Fort Worth as far as the Communist Party was concerned, or would it have a broader check?

Mr. FAIN. These were the confidential informants available to me in Fort Worth only.

Representative FORD. Would there be a different set of informants in Dallas?

Mr. FAIN. Yes; they had informants, I suppose, one or two from the area there, but we certainly had two when I considered to be excellent right in Fort Worth and I am sure they had good access.

Representative FORD. But would such a check of informants at Fort Worth necessarily mean there couldn't have been some relationship Oswald had with the Communist Party in Dallas, for example?

Mr. FAIN. Well, these in Fort Worth are familiar with some of the activity in Dallas, too.

Representative FORD. There would be a connection between your informants in Fort Worth----

Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir.

Representative FORD. And those that might exist in Dallas?

Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir. I contacted these on several occasions, on two occasions that I remember, and, I felt, if this man was a member of the Communist Party they would know about it.

Representative FORD. When one of the Secret Service agents went down to Dallas prior to the assassination in his preparation for the visit of the President he checked through informants in certain right-wing elements in Dallas to see whether or not there was to be any violence at the time of the President's visit. There have been allegations to the effect that Oswald was in some way connected with such alleged right-wing organizations. Did you have any knowledge of that?

Mr. FAIN. No, sir; no, sir.

Representative FORD. Did you have any reason to check it?

Mr. FAIN. No; all the information that I had and as these reports will reflect, he was along the lines of Marxist, Communist, if anything, and I don't think you will find any indication that he was on the other.

Representative FORD. You had no information that he was in any way whatsoever connected with the alleged right-wing organizations?

Mr. FAIN. That is right. That is right, I did not.

Mr. McCLOY. Did any Secret Service people get in contact with you prior to the visit of the President, or did you get in contact with them?

Mr. FAIN. No, sir. You see, I retired from the FBI October 29 of 1962. The President was down there November 22, of 1963.

Mr. McCLOY. I forgot.

Mr. DULLES. That was how long, I didn't catch the date, how long before the assassination attempt?

Mr. FAIN. I retired October 29 of 1962, and the assassination----

Mr. DULLES. The year before, about?

Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir.

Mr. DULLES. A little over a year.

Mr. FAIN. The assassination occurred in November of 1963, isn't that correct?

Representative FORD. Are you still living in the Dallas-Fort Worth area?

Mr. FAIN. No, sir; I am at Houston. I moved to Houston and retired on the 28th and went to Houston on November 1 of 1962.

Representative FORD. What is your present occupation?

Mr. FAIN. I am office manager and in charge of accounts receivable for my brother who is an orthopedic surgeon in Houston.

Representative FORD. You no longer have any connection with the Government?

Mr. FAIN. No, sir; I do not. The Bureau has been mighty good to me. I have enjoyed my tenure of service.

Mr. STERN. Mr. Fain, was there any procedure that you went through upon your retirement in turning over cases, cases you had worked on whether they were in closed status or pending cases? Did you discuss the cases with an agent who was taking them over?

Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir.

Mr. STERN. Was a closed case discussed in that fashion?

Mr. FAIN. Yes, in general, in other words----

Mr. STERN. Do you recall discussing the Oswald case with another agent?

Mr. FAIN. Not specifically, no; I do not.

Mr. STERN. But you do think you would have in connection with the procedures you followed upon your retirement?

Mr. FAIN. Maybe not. We might not, since this case was closed, I doubt very much that we discussed it.

Mr. STERN. You have no recollection of it?

Mr. FAIN. At least I have no recollection of having discussed it with him.

Mr. STERN. May we have this report, Mr. Chairman, which has been marked for identification 824, admitted?

Representative FORD. It may be admitted.

(The document referred to, previously marked as Commission Exhibit No. 824 for identification, was received in evidence.)

Mr. STERN. Mr. Fain, I show you a document, a letter from Director Hoover with attachments, which has been marked for identification Commission No. 825. Would you turn to the last two pages and can you tell us what the last two pages constitute?

Mr. FAIN. The last two pages constitute an affidavit which I gave to the Houston office of the Federal Bureau of Investigation.

Mr. STERN. Did you make it at the Houston office?

Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir.

Mr. STERN. What was the occasion of your making this affidavit?

Mr. FAIN. I was contacted by Mr. Ed Dalrymple, special agent of the FBI, and he explained to me that he would like to talk to me about this matter. He said he had had an inquiry concerning whether or not I had ever paid this man, Lee Oswald, any money for any information and he asked me if I would be willing to give an affidavit and I said I certainly would be glad to. I came down to the office and gave this affidavit to him on January 29, 1964.

Mr. STERN. Is there anything you would like to add to this affidavit or any correction you would like to make in it at this time?

Mr. FAIN. No, sir; I do not.

Mr. STERN. When you talk about an informant, does that term mean to you only someone who receives money for information?

Mr. FAIN. No, they have an informant that would furnish information without compensation. Informant in the generally accepted term is anyone who would furnish information to the FBI.

Mr. STERN. When you say no effort was made to recruit Lee Harvey Oswald's services in any capacity on behalf of the FBI or any other Government agency, you mean for compensation or otherwise?

Mr. FAIN. Oh, yes. That was my understanding for the reason of this affidavit was whether or not I had ever paid him or offered to pay him any money, remuneration or compensation for any information and certainly there had been no effort to recruit him along that line at all and no payment had ever been made to him.

Mr. STERN. Would you consider then the same question but without the element of compensation: Had you ever made any effort to recruit his services without compensation?

Mr. FAIN. Well, we, of course, interviewed him a couple of times and asked him for information and told him that if he were ever contacted by any Soviet individuals or under any suspicious circumstances to be sure and let us know about it.

Mr. STERN. Did you ever ask him to do anything more than that for you?

Mr. FAIN. No, sir.

Mr. STERN. Did you ever ask him to try to become a member of any group for you?

Mr. FAIN. No, sir; no, sir.

Mr. DULLES. Did he agree to supply the information?

Mr. FAIN. He promised to; yes, sir.

Mr. DULLES. In case he should be approached?

Mr. FAIN. He said he would cooperate with us.

Mr. STERN. The last paragraph of your affidavit describes his attitude as arrogant and hostile. Did you say that on the basis of both interviews with him?

Mr. FAIN. Predominantly as a result of the first, and frankly as I said a while ago, he was and continued to be evasive as to his reason for ever having gone over there, and I consider that uncooperative.

Mr. STERN. But did you feel he was arrogant and hostile at the time of the second interview?

Mr. FAIN. Not so much as he was the first. I would say he was more so, more arrogant and hostile at the first interview.

Mr. STERN. If there are no other questions in this area, I have just one other point I would like to cover with Mr. Fain, and that is what were your instructions, Mr. Fain, as a special agent of the FBI, with regard to referring to the Secret Service information bearing upon the protection of the President, not in this case but as a general proposition?

Mr. FAIN. As a general proposition, if there was any information coming to our attention, express or implied, or any implication that the President might be in danger or anyone had made a threat of that character, we would always refer it to the Secret Service, that was made clear to us from the very beginning of my service.

Mr. STERN. In your 20 years of service as a special agent did you ever have any occasion to refer information to the Secret Service?

Mr. FAIN. I don't remember any specific instances but I am sure there have been a few occasions where I have turned over some information like that and I have run several investigations out as to who this individual was and as to what he was, and so forth.

But any indication of, a threat or otherwise I would have contacted my supervisor--it happened at Fort Worth at that time we didn't have a representative of Secret Service, it was covered out of Dallas, but if there had been anything like that, any indication of potential for violence or any threats I would have called my Dallas office and they would have in turn advised the Secret Service.

Mr. STERN. Did you see any reason to refer Lee Harvey Oswald to the Secret Service?

Mr. FAIN. No, sir; no, sir. I didn't see any potential for violence at that time; no, sir.

Mr. STERN. Did he ever mention the President or the Presidency or----

Mr. FAIN. No, sir.

Mr. STERN. Or any elected official to you?

Mr. FAIN. No, sir.

Mr. STERN. Governor Connally?

Mr. FAIN. No, sir.

Mr. DULLES. Would the memoranda of these conversations be put in a file that was in any way special as to of doubtful character or suspicious character so that it might be referred to later under that category?

Mr. FAIN. They constantly review these, as I understand it, these matters.

Mr. DULLES. Who is "they"?

Mr. FAIN. The supervisory desk over there constantly is going over these matters, and if there is any--they check the files to see if anything has come in on it that would look like it ought to be reopened.

Mr. DULLES. But there was no mark on this file to indicate that this was a case that might have some pending interest from the point of view of security?

Mr. FAIN. No, sir; not that I am aware of.

Mr. STERN. Is there anything you would like to add to anything you have told the Commission this morning, Mr. Fain?

Mr. FAIN. I believe not. I don't recall anything additionally.

Mr. DULLES. Did you card all these files so that--and was there a card in your files under the name of Lee Harvey Oswald?

Mr. FAIN. Not in my files, but when it goes to Dallas they index all those.

Mr. DULLES. They do that in Dallas?

Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir; and the seat of Government.

Mr. DULLES. And there was a card on Lee Harvey Oswald, a special card, in addition to a file in the office?

Mr. FAIN. I am sure there was, there might have been an index.

Mr. DULLES. But you didn't know that yourself?

Mr. FAIN. No, sir; but we didn't maintain one in Dallas--in Fort Worth.

Mr. STERN. That is all.

The CHAIRMAN (presiding). Well, Mr. Fain, thank you very much, sir, for your courtesy and your help to us. We appreciate it. Sorry to disturb you in your retirement.

(At this point Senator Cooper entered the hearing room.)

(At this point Representative Ford left the hearing room.)

TESTIMONY OF JOHN LESTER QUIGLEY

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Quigley, this session of the Commission is for the purpose of hearing the testimony of certain members of the FBI concerning interviews they had with Lee Oswald, and we understand that you had one with him.

Mr. QUIGLEY. Yes, sir; I did.

The CHAIRMAN. And we want to have you discuss that with us. Would you please rise and raise your right hand and be sworn. Do you solemnly swear the testimony you are about to give before this Commission shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?

Mr. QUIGLEY. I do, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. Be seated, please. Mr. Stern will conduct the examination.

Mr. STERN. Would you state your full name for the record, Mr. Quigley?

Mr. QUIGLEY. John Lester Quigley.

Mr. STERN. Your address?

Mr. QUIGLEY. No. 4, Cromwell Place, New Orleans, La.

Mr. STERN. Have you a law degree, Mr. Quigley?

Mr. QUIGLEY. I do, sir.

Mr. STERN. From what institution?

Mr. QUIGLEY. Columbus University, Washington.

Mr. STERN. Are you a member of the bar?

Mr. QUIGLEY. No; I am not, sir.

Mr. STERN. Upon receiving your law degree, did you join the FBI?

Mr. QUIGLEY. I was in the FBI at the time I was going to law school.

Mr. STERN. And when did you join the FBI?

Mr. QUIGLEY. July 7, 1936.

Mr. STERN. And you have been a member of the FBI since then?

Mr. QUIGLEY. That is correct.

Mr. STERN. To the present time. What was your assignment in 1963?

Mr. QUIGLEY. General assignment, investigative assignment.

Mr. STERN. In what office?

Mr. QUIGLEY. New Orleans division, at New Orleans, La.

Mr. STERN. How long had you been in the New Orleans office?

Mr. QUIGLEY. Since February of 1959.

Mr. STERN. Mr. Quigley, I show you a document which has been marked Commission No. 826 for identification. Can you identify this document for us, please?

Mr. QUIGLEY. Yes; I can identify it. This is the October 31, 1963, investigative report of Special Agent Milton R. Kaack, who was at that time assigned to the New Orleans division, with regard to Lee Harvey Oswald.

Mr. STERN. Are you responsible for any portion of this report, Mr. Quigley?

Mr. QUIGLEY. Yes; I am, sir.

Mr. STERN. What portion?

Mr. QUIGLEY. I direct your attention to page 6 of this report, pages 6 through 10, which reflect the result of an interview which I had with Lee Harvey Oswald on August 10, 1963, at New Orleans, La.

Mr. STERN. Are you responsible for any other portion of the report, Mr. Quigley?

Mr. QUIGLEY. I am confident I am not but may I just look at it for a moment. No, sir; I am not.

Mr. STERN. Can you identify the entire report from your official duties?

Mr. QUIGLEY. Yes. I have seen this, a copy of this report, in our files at New Orleans.

Mr. STERN. Have you reviewed this report recently in preparation for your testimony before the Commission?

Mr. QUIGLEY. Yes; I have.

Mr. STERN. Turning now to page 6 of the report, can you tell us from this memorandum when you interviewed Lee Harvey Oswald?

Mr. QUIGLEY. Yes; I interviewed him at the first district station, New Orleans Police Department, on August 10, 1963.

Mr. STERN. How did you come to interview Mr. Oswald?

Mr. QUIGLEY. Lt. Francis L. Martello, platoon commander at the first district, New Orleans Police Station, called our office and advised that he wished an agent to stop by there since there was a prisoner who desired to speak with an agent.

As a result of this telephone call, I proceeded to the first district.

Mr. STERN. Did you receive the telephone call?

Mr. QUIGLEY. No, sir; I did not.

Mr. DULLES. By agent, did he mean agent of the FBI?

Mr. QUIGLEY. Yes, sir; yes, sir.

Mr. STERN. You were assigned by someone in your office to take this assignment?

Mr. QUIGLEY. That is right. This was on a Saturday, which we operate on a skeleton staff. We do not have a full staff on a Saturday.

Mr. STERN. Were you accompanied by any other agent of the FBI in making this interview?

Mr. QUIGLEY. I was not.

Mr. STERN. Is that normal, under your procedures?

Mr. QUIGLEY. I would say yes. Agents operate independently unless there is a specific reason for more than one agent to be present.

Mr. STERN. As far as you knew here there was no such reason?

Mr. QUIGLEY. There was no reason.

Mr. STERN. Did you know whom you were going to interview, by name?

Mr. QUIGLEY. I did not, sir.

Mr. STERN. Just an individual who was----

Mr. QUIGLEY. An individual, that is correct.

Mr. STERN. Had you any knowledge of an organization called Fair Play for Cuba Committee's activities in New Orleans before this interview?

Mr. QUIGLEY. I had knowledge that there was such an organization in existence in the United States. I had no knowledge of any activities of such an organization in the city of New Orleans, La.

Mr. STERN. Did you know of its existence in the United States as part of your official work?

Mr. QUIGLEY. Overall knowledge of Bureau operations; yes, sir.

Mr. STERN. Were you working on any particular investigation involving this Committee at the time?

Mr. QUIGLEY. No, sir; I was not.

Mr. STERN. Will you tell us what occurred first when you came to the police station?

Mr. QUIGLEY. At the time I arrived at the police station, Lieutenant Martello directed me to the commanding officer's office, where there was laid out on the table a number of different pamphlets, throwaways, relating to the Fair Play for Cuba Committee, which he advised me had been removed by the New Orleans Police Department from Oswald the previous day, August 9, at the time of his arrest, for disturbing the peace on Canal Street.

I reviewed, generally looked over, the material to see what it was. I was not familiar with any of this material. While I was doing this, he had not at this point identified who the individual was other than the person had been arrested the previous day; while I was looking over the material, the jailer brought in an individual who was then introduced to me by Lieutenant Martello as Harvey Lee Oswald. I then identified myself by credentials to Lee Harvey Oswald.

Mr. STERN. You said Harvey Lee Oswald.

Mr. QUIGLEY. I beg your pardon.

Mr. STERN. You meant Lee Harvey Oswald?

Mr. QUIGLEY. Yes; Lee Harvey Oswald.

Mr. STERN. Did his name mean anything to you at that time?

Mr. QUIGLEY. No, sir; it did not.

Mr. STERN. In these documents that you were given to look at by the New Orleans Police was there a handwritten list of names, addresses, telephone numbers--anything of that sort.

Mr, QUIGLEY. No, sir; there was not.

Mr. STERN. Have you subsequently learned of such a list in connection with your duties?

Mr. QUIGLEY. Yes; I have.

Mr. STERN. Have you been told why that list wasn't furnished to you at the time of your interview?

Mr. QUIGLEY. Yes; I have. On November 29, 1963, I went to the first district station in New Orleans Police Department to confer with Lieutenant Martello. At this time he informed me that on November 23, 1963, a representative of the Secret Service had contacted him about 3 o'clock in the morning, told him that he was conducting an official investigation with regard to the assassination of the President, and desired to talk to him.

Arrangements were made the following or that same day, to meet at the first district station. At approximately 3 o'clock the Secret Service representative met there. At this time, Lieutenant Martello went to his files, removed from the files the evidence that had been taken from Oswald on August 9, 1963. In going through these documents, he noted this piece of paper that had what appeared to him to be foreign writing, he felt that it probably was Russian but he did not know. He turned this over to the Secret Service.

He related to me that at the time he had questioned Oswald on August 10, 1963, prior to the time that he had called the FBI office, that he had gone through items in Oswald's wallet, which is a normal procedure for the police to do, for background identification, and so forth, and among the items in his wallet was this piece of paper, and in the discussion that pursued, apparently this particular document and a small photograph of Oswald inadvertently became involved with the evidence that was being handled in the case at the time, and the file was then put away, and it was not gone back into, as I understand it, until this interview of the 23d, when he discovered this document.

Mr. DULLES. And the photograph?

Mr. QUIGLEY. Yes, sir.

Mr. DULLES. In addition to the writing was among these other papers?

Mr. QUIGLEY. Yes, sir.

Mr. STERN. Did you make notes of your interview?

Mr. QUIGLEY. Yes; I did, sir.

Mr. STERN. Do you practice shorthand or any speedwriting?

Mr. QUIGLEY. No, sir; I do not.

Mr. STERN. How soon after the interview did you record the interview formally?

Mr. QUIGLEY. Five days.

Mr. STERN. Did you dictate or draft it yourself?

Mr. QUIGLEY. I dictated from my notes.

Mr. STERN. Did you retain the notes?

Mr. QUIGLEY. No, sir; I did not.

Mr. STERN. Is it your usual practice to destroy notes once you have dictated a memorandum?

Mr. QUIGLEY. It is the usual practice to destroy your notes after the completed work has been returned to you for proofing to make certain that the information is accurate, then you do destroy them.

(Discussion off the record.)

Mr. STERN. Mr. Quigley, I show you a one-page document marked for identification with the number 827. Can you identify that document?

Mr. QUIGLEY. Yes; I can identify this document.

Mr. STERN. What is it, please?

Mr. QUIGLEY. This is a copy of a document that was turned over to me by Lt. Francis L. Martello of the New Orleans Police Department, on November 29, 1963. He informed me that at the time he interviewed Oswald on August 10, 1963, Oswald had on his person a piece of paper which was removed from his wallet which contained some foreign writing as well as some English, that the piece of paper inadvertently became involved in the evidence in the case with reference to the disturbing of the peace. And subsequently on November 29, 1963, he found this original document that had been taken from Oswald among the items of evidence at the first district police station. He then turned the original of this document over to Secret Service representative, Mr. Adrian Vial, who was assigned to the Secret Service office at New Orleans.

Prior to turning the original document over to Mr. Vial, Lieutenant Martello made a copy in his own handwriting of the document that was turned over to Mr. Vial. This is the copy of the document that Lieutenant Martello made and which was turned over to me on November 29, 1963.

Mr. STERN. And you have just supplied that document to the Commission?

Mr. QUIGLEY. I have.

Mr. STERN. You mentioned that Lieutenant Martello said that there was a photograph among these papers of Lee Harvey Oswald. Did you see the photograph?

Mr. QUIGLEY. No; I did not.

Mr. STERN. Do you know what he did--did he tell you what he had done with the photograph?

Mr QUIGLEY. He did not, sir.

Mr. STERN. Did he tell you anything about the photograph, tell you what it was a photograph of?

Mr. QUIGLEY. He remarked in his report that it appeared to be a passport photograph.

Mr. STERN. Of Lee Harvey Oswald?

Mr. QUIGLEY. Of Lee Harvey Oswald.

Mr. STERN. Turning now to the first page of your report, Mr. Quigley, in the third paragraph you show that you were told that Mrs. Oswald's maiden name was Prossa. From your practice, would you have taken that name down, asked the person being interviewed to spell it for you?

Mr. QUIGLEY. I certainly would have.

Mr. STERN. If you were relying on your ear, would you indicate that?

Mr. QUIGLEY. I would never take a name phonetically.

Mr. STERN. So you believe----

Mr. QUIGLEY. I would request an accurate spelling.

Mr. STERN. You believe that he spelled the name to you?

Mr. QUIGLEY. I am positive he did, sir.

Mr. STERN. This way. Have you reviewed this memorandum of your interview?

Mr. QUIGLEY. Yes; I have, sir.

Mr. STERN. Is there anything you would like to add to it now----

Mr. QUIGLEY. No, sir.

Mr. STERN. Any detail that you omitted that you now think of?

Mr. QUIGLEY. No, sir.

Mr. DULLES. Are you quite sure he said to you that about 4 months ago he and his wife Marina Oswald, named Prossa, whom he met and married in Fort Worth, moved to New Orleans?

Mr. QUIGLEY. Well, these are not his direct words, sir. This is the substance of what he told me; yes. This is accurate. This is my own phraseology.

Mr. DULLES. I understand.

Mr. McCLOY. One other thing. I have to leave shortly to go to lunch, but on page 7 of this report you described these membership cards.

Mr. QUIGLEY. Yes, sir.

Mr. McCLOY. Did he have the membership cards in his possession at that time?

Mr. QUIGLEY. Yes, sir; he did, sir.

Mr. McCLOY. You saw them?

Mr. QUIGLEY. Yes, sir; I did, sir. I think the last you will notice, in that last sentence he had in his possession both cards and exhibited both of them.

Mr. McCLOY. Right. One of them was, at least one of them, was signed A. Hidell?

Mr. QUIGLEY. Yes, sir; that is correct.

Mr. McCLOY. Do we have those cards?

Mr. STERN. I believe we do. I do not have them here.

Mr. McCLOY. But it is important to have them because the name Hidell was in the handwriting--but these are membership cards purporting to be membership cards in the Fair Play for Cuba organization.

Would you be able to identify these cards if you saw them, Mr. Quigley, as the ones that were shown in Oswald's possession exhibited to you?

Mr. QUIGLEY. I don't believe I could truthfully say if you showed me a card, these two cards now that those were the identical ones.

From the description and the data that I have recorded I could say they were similar.

Mr. McCLOY. All right.

Mr. QUIGLEY. I don't just feel I could identify them. Bear this in mind, sir; this material was evidence as far as the New Orleans Police Department was concerned at the time, we couldn't take this material.

Mr. McCLOY. I understand.

Mr. DULLES. Did you say that some of it was turned over to the Secret Service?

Mr. QUIGLEY. No, sir; not to my knowledge.

Mr. DULLES. Not this material?

Mr. QUIGLEY. Not to my knowledge, sir.

Mr. STERN. Did Oswald answer all the questions you put to him in the course of your interview?

Mr. QUIGLEY. I am sorry.

Mr. STERN. Did Oswald answer all the questions you put to him in the course of your interview?

Mr. QUIGLEY. No; he did not answer all of them.

Mr. STERN. Do you recall the nature of the questions he didn't want to answer or he evaded?

(At this point Mr. McCloy left the hearing room.)

Mr. QUIGLEY. When I began asking him specific details with respect to his activities in the Fair Play for Cuba Committee in New Orleans as to where meetings were held, who was involved, what occurred, he was reticent to furnish information, reluctant and actually as far as I was concerned, was completely evasive on them.

Mr. STERN. Did he tell you why he had requested the interview?

Mr. QUIGLEY. No; he did not, sir.

Mr. STERN. Did you form any impression as to why he had requested the interview?

Mr. QUIGLEY. Well, he was in police custody at the time, involved in a disturbing of the peace charge, was becoming involved in a fight with three Cubans on the street in the distribution of Fair Play for Cuba literature. I felt that he was probably making a self-serving statement in attempting to explain to me why he was distributing this literature, and for no other reason, and when I got to questioning him further then he felt that his purpose had been served and he wouldn't say anything further.

Mr. STERN. Why do you think it might have been important for him to explain to you what he was doing----

Mr. QUIGLEY. Well----

Mr. STERN. Or to an FBI agent?

Mr. QUIGLEY. Well, he is in custody--this I cannot answer you. You ask me what I thought, this is what my feeling was on the matter. His actual motive, I really wouldn't have any idea.

Mr. STERN. Is there any possibility that he was trying to give the New Orleans police the idea that he was working for or with the FBI?

Mr. QUIGLEY. Not to my knowledge, sir; no.

Mr. STERN. None of his conduct went in that direction?

Mr. QUIGLEY. No; he certainly, to my knowledge, never advised the New Orleans police of this. As a matter of fact, he, during the course of the interview with Lieutenant Martello, made a flat statement that he would like to talk to an FBI agent, which is not an unusual situation. Frequently persons who are in custody of local authorities would like to talk to the FBI.

The CHAIRMAN. Is that so?

Mr. QUIGLEY. That is true, sir. Many times people don't really understand what the FBI jurisdiction is. They feel we handle a multitude of things which we don't. We are happy to talk with them, we record the information, and if we can be of assistance, we are, and if we cannot be of assistance we tell them we cannot and we explain to them why we can't be of assistance.

The CHAIRMAN. Did he ask you to be of any assistance to him?

Mr. QUIGLEY. No, sir; he did not.

Mr. STERN. Mr. Quigley, did you believe he was telling you the truth in all respects?

Mr. QUIGLEY. No; I did not, sir.

Mr. STERN. In what respect did you think he was not telling the truth?

Mr. QUIGLEY. Well, as I stated before, when--I accepted basic information that he furnished to me regarding background, about what occurred at the time of his arrest. Then when I began questioning him as to who A. J. Hidell was, who the members of the Fair Play for Cuba Committee were in New Orleans, where they held their meetings, what literature he read, which he claimed he had been receiving from the Fair Play for Cuba Committee, he was noncommittal or wouldn't discuss it.

At one point of the interview he told me that he had held one of the Fair Play for Cuba Committee meetings at his home. I asked him, "Well, how did you get in touch with the other people?" "Well, I don't care to discuss that." "Who were the persons at the meeting?" "I don't know." "Did you know any names at all?" "Yes. They were introduced to me by first names only." "What were their first names?" "I cannot remember." So it was apparent to me that he was not certainly going to furnish anything that he had made his statement, why I did not know. But when I pressed him for details he declined to furnish anything.

Another one, for example, I asked him about A. J. Hidell, obviously you can see why I would have been interested in this. "Well, Mr. Hidell had a telephone." "What was Mr. Hidell's telephone number?" "Mr. Hidell's telephone has been disconnected." "What was the number?" "I can't remember." This was the end of it, so this is the basis for my thinking.

Mr. STERN. Yes.

Mr. QUIGLEY. One more thing I would like to add that might help clarify it, as to why I felt it was a self-serving statement is that he told me that he was distributing these throwaways for the Fair Play for Cuba Committee because of a patriotic duty, as a patriotic American citizen. This I felt was certainly, in his opinion, a self-serving statement.

Mr. STERN. Did he elaborate on that? Did he tell you in what respect he thought he was performing a patriotic duty by distributing this pamphlet?

Mr. QUIGLEY. No; not in so many words, but he did explain that he felt that the goal and theme of the Fair Play for Cuba Committee was that it was his patriotic duty to bring to the attention of as many people as he could, the fact that the United States should not attack Cuba at the time or interfere into their political affairs, and that by spreading what he considered the philosophy of the Fair Play for Cuba Committee, that the American people would better understand the internal conditions there, and the American people should be given an opportunity to go to Cuba and let them make their own mind up as to what the situation was as of that time rather than just merely reading it in the newspaper.

Senator COOPER. I have a question I would like to ask. You have just stated that Oswald told you something about his own purposes and also the objectives of this Fair Play for Cuba Committee. Did he make any comment on the policy of the United States toward Cuba?

Mr. QUIGLEY. No, sir; he did not.

Senator COOPER. Did he say----

Mr. QUIGLEY. To my recollection.

Senator COOPER. Did he say anything affirmatively opposing or stating what the policy of the United States was and to be opposed to it?

Mr. QUIGLEY. I have no recollection of that, sir.

Senator COOPER. Did he mention any official of the United States as opposing his policy?

Mr. QUIGLEY. No, sir; he did not.

Senator COOPER. The President of the United States, President Kennedy?

Mr. QUIGLEY. No, sir; everything that he told me I recorded in my notes, so everything that I have here in this document is what he told me. Now bear this in mind when it was apparent to me that he was not giving me information that, I didn't continue for hours and hours--I did not know who this individual was at the time, so I felt that I had adequate background for the time being. If we wished to pursue it further, at least we had a basis to talk to him.

Mr. STERN. Your report does not indicate, Mr. Quigley, specifically that you believed some of the information he told you was not true?

Mr. QUIGLEY. That is correct.

Mr. STERN. Tell us why that is.

Mr. QUIGLEY. Well, I feel that a person reviewing the document can draw their own conclusions that the information that he has furnished is not complete, is inaccurate, that he is obviously withholding information, plus the fact that, as a matter of policy, we do not express conclusions or personal opinions. We are a factfinding agency. We allow the facts to speak for themselves.

Mr. STERN. Would you look at page 10 of the report, the biographical data on Lee Harvey Oswald. At "place of birth" you have entered "New Orleans, Louisiana," but then put in parentheses, "at the time of arrest Oswald claimed he was from Cuba."

Mr. QUIGLEY. That is correct.

Mr. STERN. This is not in your report as such, there is no statement, no recorded note of anything he told you about where he was born. How did that come up and what did he say?

Mr. QUIGLEY. Following my interview with Oswald, I, of course, spoke with Lieutenant Martello, and I made an observation that this Oswald was a New Orleans boy. I couldn't remember that yesterday, that he was a New Orleans boy, and Lieutenant Martello said, "Well, that isn't what he told the officers at the time of arrest. He said he was born in Cuba," and this is why I recorded this. We frequently have persons who are arrested in various places in the county, and furnish record different dates, places of birth, and we always record any variations of what we feel is the truth, so our record will be complete on such a situation.

Mr. STERN. Did Lieutenant Martello tell you anything else at the time you learned this?

Mr. QUIGLEY. No, sir; we didn't discuss it further.

Mr. STERN. What was Lee Harvey Oswald's demeanor during the interview, his attitude, his cooperativeness?

Mr. QUIGLEY. He was receptive at the time I was questioning him about his general background, such as employment, "where have you been, what have you done," he told me he was unemployed at the time. He had previously worked for William Riley Coffee Co. there in New Orleans and he had been honorably discharged out of the service; that he had moved to Fort Worth after he had gotten out of the service and married, there were no problems involved here. But when I began questioning him with regard to his activities in the Fair Play for Cuba Committee, then he became reticent, reluctant to furnish information, and in some instances refused to furnish any information.

Mr. STERN. Was he antagonistic, hostile?

Mr. QUIGLEY. He was antagonistic to some extent, not overly so. He certainly was not friendly.

Mr. STERN. How long did the interview last, to the best you can recall?

Mr. QUIGLEY. As best I can recall approximately an hour and a half. This would include, of course, my reviewing of the documents with him, and so on.

Mr. STERN. Did you get any indication that he was a dangerous individual or that he was, potentially, a violent individual?

Mr. QUIGLEY. Absolutely none at all.

Mr. DULLES. What documents did you review with him?

Mr. QUIGLEY. Yes, sir.

Mr. DULLES. The Fair Play for Cuba Committee and the Corliss Lamont report?

Mr. QUIGLEY. Yes, sir; and the throwaways I went over those generally with him.

Mr. STERN. When you concluded your interview, then what did you do? After awhile you talked to Lieutenant Martello. What did you do after that?

Mr. QUIGLEY. I returned to my headquarters.

Mr. STERN. Did you check your office----

Mr. QUIGLEY. I did check our files and I determined that we had an investigation currently underway with regard to Oswald. I knew it was assigned to an agent in the New Orleans office who sat right in front of me. So I, on Monday morning, I discussed the fact that I had interviewed Oswald at the first district jail on Saturday morning.

Mr. STERN. Do you recall what you told him about the case other than the details? Did you think Oswald was worthy of further investigation?

Mr. QUIGLEY. Well, sir, this was not my decision. I was merely recording the results of an interview. I had nothing to do with the actual investigation of this particular matter.

Mr. STERN. Did you think he was behaving rationally or irrationally?

Mr. QUIGLEY. I would say he was acting rationally. You are speaking of the time I interviewed him?

Mr. STERN. Yes.

Mr. QUIGLEY. Rationally.

Mr. STERN. Were you concerned at all by the fact that he had requested this interview, volunteered for it after his arrest in connection with Fair Play for Cuba Committee activity and thereafter was misleading and reluctant to talk to you about these activities? Didn't you think it was strange?

Mr. QUIGLEY. No, sir; I just thought this was a normal situation that has occurred many times of persons in custody of the police wish to talk to an FBI agent. We have them come to our headquarters in New Orleans all the time to talk to us. So I didn't consider this unusual at all.

Mr. STERN. Would it be usual or had it occurred before that someone would ask for an interview and then refuse to respond to your questions. Didn't that seem strange?

Mr. QUIGLEY. Not necessarily; not necessarily. Frequently people will have a problem and want to talk to an FBI agent and they want to tell them what their problem is, but then when you start probing into it then they don't want to talk to you. I think that is just human nature. If you are probing too deep it gets a little touchy.

Mr. DULLES. Who was in charge of this other investigation from the FBI office with regard to Lee Harvey Oswald that you found out about later, was this Special Agent Milton R. Kaack?

Mr. QUIGLEY. Yes, sir.

Mr. DULLES. Did you make your report to him, did you?

Mr. QUIGLEY. Orally, yes; I discussed it with him.

Mr. DULLES. When it was sent forward was it sent forward with these documents we have in Exhibit 826 of which your report forms pages 6 through 10?

Mr. QUIGLEY. Yes, sir; this was prepared--that is correct--this was then prepared and transcribed. But I had discussed the matter or discussed the fact that I had interviewed him.

Mr. DULLES. Was Special Agent Kaack your superior or just happened to be in charge of this particular subject?

Mr. QUIGLEY. No; this investigative matter was assigned to him.

Mr. DULLES. I see. He was the one then who forwarded the report to Washington, this report we have, Exhibit 826?

Mr. QUIGLEY. He is the one who prepared it; yes, sir.

Mr. DULLES. And included verbatim your memorandum in this report?

Mr. QUIGLEY. Yes, sir.

Mr. DULLES. Pages 7 to 10.

Mr. QUIGLEY. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. Six to ten.

Mr. STERN. Have you found subsequent to this interview, Mr. Quigley, that you had any other contact with the case of Lee Harvey Oswald before this interview?

Mr. QUIGLEY. Yes; I discovered at the time I checked our files that on April 18, 1961, I had, as a result of a request of the Dallas office, checked the office of naval intelligence records at the U. S. Naval Station at Algiers. My purpose in checking that was merely to record what information their files contained.

Mr. STERN. And then you would send a report to that effect to the Dallas office?

Mr. QUIGLEY. I sent a letter I believe in that particular case.

Mr. STERN. Any other contact before this?

Mr. QUIGLEY. No, sir.

Mr. STERN. Any other contact with Lee Harvey Oswald or his case or anything to do with his case?

Mr. QUIGLEY. No, sir.

Mr. STERN. After your interview in the police station but before the assassination?

Mr. QUIGLEY. No, sir.

Mr. STERN. Up to the time of the assassination?

Mr. QUIGLEY. No, sir.

Mr. DULLES. I note this case is marked "P," which I understand is pending.

Mr. QUIGLEY. That means----

Mr. DULLES. This was an open case in the New Orleans office?

Mr. QUIGLEY. That is correct, sir. In other words, this indicates to us administratively that there is further investigation to be conducted, whether it be in New Orleans or some other place in the United States or the world, as a matter of fact.

Mr. DULLES. You mentioned Algiers a minute ago. What Algiers is this?

Mr. QUIGLEY. Algiers, La., sir, right across from New Orleans.

Mr. DULLES. I don't know the geography well enough, I thought it wasn't Algiers in Africa.

Mr. QUIGLEY. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. Gentlemen, I think we might as well adjourn for lunch now. What time would you like to return? Is 2 o'clock all right with you, or 2:30? Which would you rather have? We will be back at 2 o'clock.

(Whereupon, at 1:05 p.m., the President's Commission recessed.)

Afternoon Session

TESTIMONY OF JOHN LESTER QUIGLEY RESUMED

The President's Commission reconvened at 2:20 p.m.

The CHAIRMAN. The Commission will be in order. Mr. Stern, you may continue.

Mr. STERN. Before the luncheon recess, Mr. Chief Justice, the witness, Mr. Quigley, had identified Commission Exhibit No. 826 and afforded the Commission this one-page document which has been marked Commission Exhibit No. 827. He identified it as a copy furnished him by Lieutenant Martello of the New Orleans Police Department of Lieutenant Martello's own handwritten copy of a document in the wallet of Lee Harvey Oswald at the time of his arrest. I think it should be admitted, if it may be, in this form.

The CHAIRMAN. It may be.

(The documents heretofore marked for identification as Commission Exhibits Nos. 826 and 827, were received in evidence.)

Mr. STERN. Also, this morning a question was raised concerning the two membership cards which are mentioned at page 7 of the report.

Mr. QUIGLEY. I show you an envelope marked Commission Exhibit 828 for identification. There is a card inside which, unfortunately, has been badly discolored by fingerprint testing. Would you look at it and I think if you turn it in different directions of light you may be able to make out the typing and writing on the card.

Mr. QUIGLEY. Yes; I can see this.

Mr. STERN. Can you identify the card?

Mr. QUIGLEY. I am in no position to identify this particular exhibit.

Mr. STERN. Can you tell us anything about the information that appears on the card? Does it compare with any other information you have about another card?

Mr. QUIGLEY. At the time that I interviewed Oswald in New Orleans on August 10, 1963, I observed two Fair Play for Cuba Committee cards. One of them was signed V. L. Lee and was dated May 28, 1963, and it purported to be a Fair Play for Cuba Committee card showing the address of 799 Broadway, New York 3, N. Y. In looking at this exhibit, I see that this is a similar card as described in my report.

Mr. STERN. Similar in what respects?

Mr. QUIGLEY. Similar in that the identification I have just described appears on the card in the Exhibit 828. However, I am not able to identify the signature of any person other than V. L. Lee, and the date I am unable to determine, although I do believe I see 5-28-63 typewritten on the card.

Mr. STERN. What about the color of the card? There is a portion on the back, Mr. Quigley, which has not been discolored by the fingerprint treatment.

Mr. QUIGLEY. I notice this is gray in color and it is similar to a card that was in Oswald's possession at that time which was also gray in color.

Mr. STERN. Mr. Chairman, may this be admitted?

The CHAIRMAN. It may be admitted.

(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 828 for identification, and received in evidence.)

The CHAIRMAN. It has been identified and has a number, has it?

Mr. STERN. Yes; No. 828.

The CHAIRMAN. 828 will be admitted under that number.

(Discussion off the record.)

Mr. STERN. Mr. Quigley, will you look, please, at Commission Exhibit No. 825 for identification, at the fourth page from the end of that exhibit? Can you identify that page for us?

Mr. QUIGLEY. Yes; I can. This is an affidavit that was prepared at the FBI office, Dallas, Tex., on February 17, 1964, which bears my signature as well as the signature of Miss Matty Havens, the notary public.

Mr. STERN. What was the occasion for your making this affidavit, Mr. Quigley?

Mr. QUIGLEY. I was instructed to proceed to our Dallas office to prepare such a document. This document relates to informant material. This is the general context of it. Did you care for me to read the document?

Mr. STERN. No; we have it. Does informant mean to you only a person who gives information in return for money or some other valuable consideration, or does it have a broader meaning as far as you are concerned?

Mr. QUIGLEY. It would have a broader meaning as far as I was concerned.

Mr. STERN. What would that mean when you used the word in this affidavit? What did you mean by "informant"?

Mr. QUIGLEY. One who furnishes information.

Mr. STERN. For whatever reason?

Mr. QUIGLEY. Whatever may be the reason; yes.

Mr. STERN. And you did not, according to your affidavit, ask Mr. Oswald----

Mr. QUIGLEY. I did not ask or suggest that Mr. Oswald become an informant of the FBI nor did I offer him any money or any other inducements to become an informant.

Mr. STERN. Did you say anything to him at all about getting in touch with you or the FBI again about any matter?

Mr. QUIGLEY. I did not.

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Quigley, if you will, we will recall you if a document comes just for your identification. It will only take a few moments, I am sure.

Thank you very much for your coming and helping us.

Mr. QUIGLEY. Thank you very much, sir.

TESTIMONY OF JAMES PATRICK HOSTY, JR.

The CHAIRMAN. Would you raise your right hand, please, and be sworn? Do you solemnly swear the testimony you are about to give before this Commission shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?

Mr. HOSTY. I do.

The CHAIRMAN. Will you be seated, please? Mr. Stern will conduct the examination, Mr. Hosty.

Mr. STERN. Would you state your full name for the record?

Mr. HOSTY. My full name is James Patrick Hosty, Jr.

Mr. STERN. And what is your present address?

Mr. HOSTY. 11018 Genetta Drive, Dallas, 28, Tex.

Mr. STERN. What was your education at the college level, Mr. Hosty?

Mr. HOSTY. I have a bachelor of science degree in business administration from the University of Notre Dame.

Mr. STERN. When was that granted?

Mr. HOSTY. In 1948, June of 1948.

Mr. STERN. When did you join the Federal Bureau of Investigation?

Mr. HOSTY. January 21, 1952.

Mr. STERN. Briefly, what sort of work were you employed at between 1948 and 1952?

Mr. HOSTY. I was first employed by the First National Bank in Chicago, and then employed by the Beechnut Packing Co. as a salesman.

Mr. STERN. What were your assignments in the FBI?

Mr. HOSTY. I was first assigned to the Louisville division on general investigation, then transferred to the Dallas division and served in general investigation until approximately June of 1955 when I was assigned to the internal security squad.

Mr. STERN. When did you first arrive in the Dallas office?

Mr. HOSTY. December 2, 1953.

Mr. STERN. You have been in Dallas----

Mr. HOSTY. Ever since.

Mr. STERN. Ever since?

Mr. HOSTY. Correct.

Mr. STERN. Are you familiar with the Dallas area generally?

Mr. HOSTY. Yes, sir.

Mr. STERN. You know the downtown locations?

Mr. HOSTY. Yes, sir.

Mr. STERN. The buildings and streets?

Mr. HOSTY. Yes, sir.

Mr. STERN. Can you tell us whether you were assigned to the case of Lee Harvey Oswald?

Mr. HOSTY. Yes, sir; I was.

Mr. STERN. Did you take over from Agent Fain or in some other way?

Mr. HOSTY. No, sir; I did not take over directly. When Agent Fain retired directly from the Bureau he had closed the case. He had a case which we call a pending inactive case on Mrs. Marina Oswald. This case I did take over. It was in what we call a pending inactive status, that is, nothing was to be done for a period of 6 months. Then at the end of the 6-month period it was then turned into a pending case and I went out and attempted to locate Mrs. Marina Oswald for the purpose of interviewing her.

I might add that it is the practice of the FBI to interview immigrants from behind the Iron Curtain on a selective basis, and she was so selected to be one of these persons to be interviewed.

Mr. STERN. When was this?

Mr. HOSTY. This was March 4, 1963, when I began my inquiry as to her present whereabouts. I determined on March 4, 1963, through the Immigration and Naturalization Service records that she had moved from Fort Worth to the Dallas area. She was living on a street called Elsbeth Street in the Oak Cliff section of Dallas.

Mr. STERN. What happened in connection with the case of Lee Harvey Oswald?

Mr. HOSTY. This case was closed at this time. It was closed.

On March 11, 1963, I made inquiry at this Elsbeth address, and determined from the landlady, I believe her name was Mrs. Tobias, that she had just evicted Lee and Marina Oswald from her apartment building because of their alleged fighting and his alleged drinking. They caused a disturbance and she had asked him to leave on March 3, 1963. She told me they had moved a short distance away. She didn't know where. On that same date, I was able to determine from the postal authorities that they had changed their address to 214 Neely Street, also in the Oak Cliff section of Dallas.

On the 14th of March, I verified that Oswalds were residing at this address when I found the mailbox with the name of Lee and Marina Oswald at this address, 214 Neely Street. Now, because of the alleged marital difficulties they were having, I in my judgment decided this was not the time to interview Mrs. Oswald, but to allow a certain cooling off period. So I then checked Lee Oswald's file, at which time I determined that he had a contact with the New York Daily Worker.

Mr. STERN. How did you learn that?

Mr. HOSTY. From our New York office. Our New York office sent a letter through to the Dallas office. This was the first time I had seen this letter.

Mr. STERN. This appeared in his file?

Mr. HOSTY. In his file; yes, sir.

Mr. STERN. Even if the case was closed, the file would continue to accumulate?

Mr. HOSTY. That is correct, and they are periodically rechecked for things of this nature.

I noticed it, and then because of the domestic difficulty and the fact that I knew I would be interviewing his wife in the near future, I requested that the case be reopened. I requested the supervisor in Dallas to reopen the case to me.

Mr. STERN. Was that in writing or verbally?

Mr. HOSTY. Actually, it was, it would appear in writing. I did this by sending a letter to the Bureau, to the FBI headquarters in Washington, setting forth the information I had developed, and then on our office copy I made a request that this case be reopened. This is a normal procedure that we go through when we open cases, or reopen cases.

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Hosty, did the letter from your New York office say what the nature of the contact with the Daily Worker was?

Mr. HOSTY. It said he was on the mailing list, sir, of the Daily Worker.

The CHAIRMAN. On the mailing list?

Mr. HOSTY. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. Proceed.

Mr. HOSTY. Then, like I say, I made a judgment that it would be best not to interview Mrs. Oswald at this time until there was a certain cooling off of their domestic difficulty, because it is not wise to interview a person of that type under a strain.

So I set it up that I would go back and recheck in 45 days. This was not highly urgent at the time. We had waited a period of time, and it wouldn't hurt to wait another 45 days. When I went back to check again in May, the middle of May, I found out that they had moved from their Neely Street address and had left no forwarding address.

Mr. STERN. Stop there and let's go back and cover a few details.

Mr. HOSTY. All right, sir.

Mr. STERN. Your recommendation to reopen the case of Lee Harvey Oswald was made at the end of March 1963?

Mr. HOSTY. Right; I believe the letter would be dated March 31.

Mr. STERN. Was your recommendation accepted?

Mr. HOSTY. Yes; and it was reopened.

Mr. STERN. With respect to the pending inactive investigation of Marina Oswald, had any work been done previous to the time when you thought about interviewing her?

Mr. HOSTY. No, sir; in a pending inactive case it is really almost in the same status as a closed case. We do nothing on it, and it was just a waiting period of 6 months that we had set up.

Mr. STERN. Had that case been an active case?

Mr. HOSTY. No, sir; it never had been. It was opened as a pending inactive case.

Mr. STERN. So that no work had been done?

Mr. HOSTY. No, sir.

Mr. STERN. Until the point in time when you were considering the possibility of interviewing Mrs. Oswald?

Mr. HOSTY. The only work that had been done was the work which I did in connection with the Lee Oswald case for Mr. Fain. I checked the immigration records on Marina Oswald and got her background, just put her background, her name, her description, her place of birth, and that sort of thing in the file.

Mr. STERN. What is the difference administratively between a "pending inactive" and a "closed" case?

Mr. HOSTY. In a pending inactive case, any information coming into the office would be routed to the agent, it would not be put in the file and be missed by the agent.

Mr. STERN. Could Lee Harvey Oswald's case have been put in a pending inactive status rather than a closed status in 1962?

Mr. HOSTY. I wasn't involved in that. Mr. Fain was the one.

Mr. STERN. But as far as administrative procedures are concerned?

Mr. HOSTY. If they had so desired, I think they could have, yes.

Mr. STERN. There was no policy or procedure?

Mr. HOSTY. If there was some more work to be done, if they had decided to, say, reinterview him at, say, in 6 months, they could have.

Mr. STERN. But it would have taken something of that sort?

Mr. HOSTY. Yes; it would have to be some more work to be done on the case in the opinion of the agent.

Mr. STERN. So that pending inactive is part of pending?

Mr. HOSTY. It is sort of midway between.

Mr. STERN. Only the work you have decided to do is more remote?

Mr. HOSTY. Right.

Mr. STERN. More in the future?

Mr. HOSTY. Right.

Mr. STERN. You say that you were considering interviewing Marina Oswald?

Mr. HOSTY. Right.

Mr. STERN. Did you know that she did not speak English?

Mr. HOSTY. Yes; I knew that. In fact, I determined that when I did the neighborhood check on the 3d of March.

Mrs. Tobias told me that she didn't speak a word of English and couldn't communicate with anybody except her husband who spoke Russian.

Mr. STERN. I show you a report of four pages, marked "Report of James P. Hosty, Jr."

Mr. HOSTY. Right.

Mr. STERN. Dated 9-10-63.

Mr. HOSTY. Right.

Mr. STERN. And marked for identification Commission Exhibit No. 829.

(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 829 for identification.)

Mr. STERN. Can you identify that report for us?

Mr. HOSTY. Yes, sir; that is my report.

Mr. STERN. Tell us how you came to prepare this report?

Mr. HOSTY. Well, as I told you earlier, in May I found that they had left, Marina and Lee Oswald had apparently left the Dallas area.

In June, I believe it was the middle of June, we received a communication from our New Orleans office advising that one Lee Oswald, was apparently in New Orleans, and requested information on him. They had had previous correspondence with the Dallas office in connection with the Lee Oswald case, as an auxiliary office, and we are aware that we did have a case on him. They asked if this could be the same man, and I wrote back and told them that Lee Oswald had left the Dallas area, and for them to attempt to verify the presence of Lee Oswald and Marina Oswald in New Orleans.

Mr. STERN. This was at what time, Mr. Hosty?

Mr. HOSTY. This was June 17, I believe, they notified us, and by the time I got the letter back to them within a week or 2 it would have been the end of June, early part of July. I sent a request back that they verify his presence in New Orleans. They then wrote back a letter to me, within 2 or 3 weeks. It would have been in August when it came back, that they had verified Oswald's presence in New Orleans, and that he was working in New Orleans.

Now, this meant under our procedure that since Lee Oswald and Marina Oswald were now located in the New Orleans division, they would take control of the case.

Mr. STERN. Would you explain briefly for the Commission the terms "Office of Origin" and "Auxiliary Office" and how you use those terms?

Mr. HOSTY. Office of origin is the office covering the area of the residence of the individual under investigation. This is the office which controls the case. Now, an auxiliary office is any other office which has investigation in the case and assists the office of origin in this matter.

New Orleans had earlier been an auxiliary office. Dallas had been the office of origin. Now, the situation was reversed, because Lee Oswald and Marina Oswald were now in New Orleans. This had been verified.

Mr. STERN. Would you just summarize the relevant dates from March 1963 through August 1963 in terms of your concern and what you found out about his movements and your communications with the New Orleans office?

Mr. HOSTY. All right. This would be March 4 I got the address in Dallas.

March 11 I determined that they had moved from that one address to another address in Dallas.

March 14 I verified that address. I sent the communication to the Bureau and requested the case be reopened on March 25. I rechecked in the middle part of May as to if they were still at that address in Dallas and determined that they were gone.

On June 17 New Orleans contacted our office, and advised that they had information that the Oswalds were in New Orleans. Early July I wrote to New Orleans and requested that they verify this information and let me know. Early August they did so verify it.

Mr. STERN. If you will look at page 2 of the report we have marked for identification No. 829----

Mr. HOSTY. Yes, sir.

Mr. STERN. The last paragraph on that page relates--well, tell us what information that refers to.

Mr. HOSTY. It says, "On April 21, 1963, Dallas confidential informant T-2 advised that Lee H. Oswald of Dallas, Tex., was in contact with the Fair Play for Cuba Committee in New York City at which time he advised that he passed out pamphlets for the Fair Play for Cuba Committee. According to T-2, Oswald had a placard around his neck reading, 'Hands Off Cuba, Viva Fidel.'"

Mr. STERN. Did you attempt to verify that information?

Mr. HOSTY. When I got it, it was approximately 6 or 7 weeks old, past the date it allegedly took place, and we had received no information to the effect that anyone had been in the downtown streets of Dallas or anywhere in Dallas with a sign around their neck saying "Hands Off Cuba, Viva Fidel." It appeared highly unlikely to me that such an occurrence could have happened in Dallas without having been brought to our attention. So by the time I got it, it was, you might say, stale information and we did not attempt to verify it.

Mr. STERN. When you record this as something that an informant advised about on April 21, that doesn't mean he advised you or the Dallas office on April 21?

Mr. HOSTY. That is right.

Mr. STERN. Did this information come from another part of the FBI?

Mr. HOSTY. Yes, sir; it came from the New York office of the FBI. They were advised on the 21st of April.

Mr. STERN. But the information didn't get to you until some time after?

Mr. HOSTY. In June, I believe.

Mr. STERN. Did you have any information apart from this that there was an organization active in the Dallas area called, "The Fair Play for Cuba Committee"?

Mr. HOSTY. No, sir; we had no information of any organization by that name.

Mr. STERN. Had you at this time ever heard of such an organization?

Mr. HOSTY. Yes, sir; I had.

Mr. STERN. In what connection?

Mr. HOSTY. The New York office had advised all offices of the FBI to be on the alert for the possible formation of chapters of this organization which was headquartered in New York.

Mr. STERN. Had you investigated the Dallas area in that connection?

Mr. HOSTY. We had checked our sources, I had and other agents assigned to the internal security division had checked sources. We were on the alert for it.

Mr. STERN. And you found what?

Mr. HOSTY. We found no evidence that there was any such organization in Dallas.

Mr. STERN. Have you reviewed this report marked for identification No. 829, Mr. Hosty?

Mr. HOSTY. Yes, sir; I have.

Mr. STERN. In connection with your preparation for testimony today?

Mr. HOSTY. Yes, sir.

Mr. STERN. Is there any change you would like to make in anything set forth in it?

Mr. HOSTY. No, sir; I wish it to stand as it reads.

Mr. STERN. Is there anything you would like to add?

Mr. HOSTY. No, sir.

Mr. STERN. Amplify?

Mr. HOSTY. No, sir.

Mr. STERN. The letters "RUC" appear on the first page after the synopsis.

Mr. HOSTY. Right.

Mr. STERN. What do they mean?

Mr. HOSTY. That stands for "Referred Upon Completion" to the office of origin.

Mr. STERN. What does that indicate?

Mr. HOSTY. This indicates that as an auxiliary office we have now completed our investigation.

Mr. STERN. When did Dallas become an auxiliary office in connection with this case?

Mr. HOSTY. It became an auxiliary office upon the submission of the proper forms to the New Orleans office in which I designated them as office of origin. They had verified the residence and employment of Lee Oswald in their city, so upon sending this report and the form they automatically became office of origin.

Representative FORD. Who makes that determination, Mr. Hosty?

Mr. HOSTY. Well, sir; actually it is made by the person who resides in their area, sir. When they reside in their area and work in their area they automatically become office of origin.

The old office of origin sends a form to the new office and advises them, "You are now office of origin." Of course the Bureau gets a copy of that.

Representative FORD. Do you actually move the files or do they get duplicates?

Mr. HOSTY. No, sir. What we do is we review our files and see what communications in the file they do not have copies of. Then they are then sent the copies of any communications they don't have, so that they have a complete file. There is nothing that they don't have.

Representative FORD. You don't actually transfer anything from your office?

Mr. HOSTY. No; the file is not transferred. Individual communications would be if they were lacking a particular communication. Now, in this case New Orleans had previous communications. They did have some background. It was necessary for me to give them a couple of Mr. Fain's reports that you people have looked at earlier. I had to send those reports to them. They hadn't gotten them.

Mr. STERN. I think it is appropriate to have this admitted at this time, if we may, Mr. Chairman.

The CHAIRMAN. The document that has been numbered 829 may be admitted.

(The document heretofore marked Commission Exhibit No. 829 for identification was received in evidence.)

The CHAIRMAN. I would like to ask you, Mr. Hosty, about the information that Mrs. Tobias gave you. I am reading from it now: "Mrs. Tobias advised they had considerable difficulty with Mr. Oswald who apparently drank to excess and beat his wife on numerous occasions. They had numerous complaints from the other tenants due to Oswald's drinking and beating his wife."

Mr. HOSTY. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. Did you investigate that to see if that was true.

Mr. HOSTY. No, sir; I took her word for it. There was no reason for me to press it any farther. She had apparently looked into it and had evicted them on the basis of her feelings. I was just reporting what she had done.

Mr. STERN. Had you had any part of the investigation of the case of Lee Harvey Oswald before the time covered by the report?

Mr. HOSTY. Yes, sir; I had.

On the 12th of July 1962 on request of former Agent John Fain, I checked the records of the Immigration and Naturalization Service in Dallas, and got the background information on Marina Oswald, the wife of Lee Oswald. I incorporated it into a memorandum.

Mr. STERN. I show you Commission Exhibit No. 824 which has previously been admitted. Can you identify any part of that?

Mr. HOSTY. Yes, sir; starting in the details here, when it says "At Dallas the following investigation was conducted by S. A. James P. Hosty, Jr.," this is a direct copy of my memorandum which I prepared for Agent Fain down to and including all of page 2.

Mr. STERN. Have you reviewed that----

Mr. HOSTY. Yes, sir.

Mr. STERN. In preparation for your testimony, and have you anything you would like to correct or add?

Mr. HOSTY. No, sir.

Mr. STERN. After the New Orleans office became office of origin, Mr. Hosty, did you have any further connection with the investigation of Lee Harvey Oswald?

Mr. HOSTY. No, sir; not until October of 1963.

Mr. STERN. Not until October? No mention of his name as far as you are concerned until then?

Mr. HOSTY. No.

Mr. STERN. I show you a two-page document which has been marked Commission Exhibit No. 830 for identification.

(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 830 for identification.)

Can you identify this document?

Mr. HOSTY. Yes, sir. This is an insert which I prepared for a larger report. Notice on the top the initials "JPH." Those are my initials, showing I prepared these two pages.

Mr. STERN. Have you looked at the larger report from which this was taken?

Mr. HOSTY. Yes, sir.

Mr. STERN. Does any part of that report relate to an investigation made before November 22, 1963?

Mr. HOSTY. No, sir; this is the only part that relates to investigation prior to the 22d of November 1963.

Mr. STERN. Why was it that this was not made the subject of a separate report?

Mr. HOSTY. I don't know. I didn't make that decision.

Mr. STERN. This is something you filed covering----

Mr. HOSTY. I was told to do it this way, and I did it.

Mr. STERN. You said before that you had no further connection with the case of Oswald until October 1963.

Mr. HOSTY. That is correct.

Mr. STERN. Would you tell us in detail what your first contact was in October?

Mr. HOSTY. On October 3, 1963, I received a communication from our New Orleans office advising that Lee Oswald and his wife Marina Oswald had left the New Orleans area a short time before. According to the communication, Marina Oswald, who was at that time 8 months pregnant, had left New Orleans with her small child, 2-year-old child, in a station wagon with a Texas license plate driven by a woman who could speak the Russian language. Lee Oswald had remained behind and then disappeared the next day. I was requested to attempt to locate Lee and Marina Oswald.

Mr. STERN. Did the request come to you personally?

Mr. HOSTY. To the Dallas office, and the case was then reopened to me. Dallas was an auxiliary office to New Orleans, and it was reopened. I had previously handled the case. It was reopened and assigned to me.

Mr. STERN. And by what office?

Mr. HOSTY. By the Dallas office, reopened the case in Dallas.

Mr. STERN. By the supervisor?

Mr. HOSTY. Supervisor of our squad, yes.

Mr. STERN. And what squad is that?

Mr. HOSTY. The internal security squad.

Mr. STERN. What did you do on October 3 and thereafter?

Mr. HOSTY. Well, there wasn't too much to go on, just a woman driving a station wagon with a Texas license plate. I went to the immigration office to check to see if they had any information, tried to determine if we had any persons around the area, I tried to think of anyone who spoke Russian who had a station wagon and who was a friend of Marina Oswald's. I went to Fort Worth and checked in his old neighborhood, Lee and Marina's old neighborhood, attempted to locate Robert Oswald, his brother, and determined that Robert Oswald had left the Fort Worth area, had moved to Arkansas.

I then sent out a lead to the Little Rock office which covered the area of Malvern, Ark., where Robert Oswald was living, and requested that he be contacted to see if he knew where Lee Oswald was. Then I continued checking through the Dallas and Fort Worth area attempting to determine if the Oswalds had returned to the Dallas or Fort Worth areas.

Mr. STERN. Was this a usual or unusual amount of effort?

Mr. HOSTY. I would say usual amount. I went to neighborhoods where I knew they had been, checked with relatives who had previously been cooperative, just the usual.

Mr. STERN. Was there any notion of urgency in locating him that you got from the New Orleans office?

Mr. HOSTY. No particular note of urgency. Just to let me know that he had left and be on the alert for him.

Mr. STERN. Did they tell you anything about what he had been doing in New Orleans?

Mr. HOSTY. Not at that time.

Mr. STERN. Did you have any information apart from what you knew before he moved to New Orleans at that time?

Mr. HOSTY. Well, I had learned before we had referred the case to New Orleans that he had been engaged in this Fair Play for Cuba Committee work down in New Orleans. They had told us that. We were aware that he was in contact with the Fair Play for Cuba Committee in New York. That was about all at this time.

Mr. STERN. You learned this from the New Orleans office?

Mr. HOSTY. Right.

Mr. STERN. What next happened in your effort to locate him?

Mr. HOSTY. I then received a communication on the 25th of October from the New Orleans office advising me that another agency had determined that Lee Oswald was in contact with the Soviet Embassy in Mexico City in the early part of October 1963.

Mr. STERN. Did they tell you anything else?

Mr. HOSTY. No. Just very briefly that there had been a contact.

Mr. STERN. Did this increase your effort to find him?

Mr. HOSTY. Very much so, yes. I became curious then. Shortly thereafter, on the 29th of October, I received another communication from the New Orleans office advising that they had a change of address for Lee and Marina Oswald to 2515 West Fifth Street, Irving, Tex.

Mr. STERN. You received that information when?

Mr. HOSTY. On the 29th of October.

Mr. STERN. What did you do then?

Mr. HOSTY. Well, I went to--I checked the Dallas crisscross. Unfortunately Irving is a suburb outside of Dallas and people residing in Irving are not covered in the city directory, so it is very difficult to determine who resides at a given address in Irving. I then went out on the same date, on the 29th of October 1963, to the neighborhood of 2515 West Fifth Street, made inquiry at 2519 West Fifth Street, made what we call a pretext interview, and talked to a woman, whose name at that time I didn't know, but who I now know to be Mrs. Dorothy Roberts.

Mr. STERN. What did Mrs. Roberts tell you?

Mr. HOSTY. Mrs. Roberts told me that the residence of 2515 West Fifth Street was Mrs. Ruth Paine, the wife of Michael R. Paine. They were at this time separated. Michael was not living at that address.

She told me that Michael Paine was employed as engineer at the Bell Helicopter Co. in Fort Worth, Tex., that Mrs. Paine was employed on a part-time basis as a teacher of the Russian language at St. Marks School for Boys in Dallas, Tex.

She further told me that there was a Russian-born and Russian-speaking woman residing with Mrs. Paine. She told me this woman did not speak any English, and that she had just given birth the week before that to a new baby and she had another small child.

This woman further advised me that the wife of this Russian-born woman, who was an American, had visited his wife there on one occasion, but did not reside on West Fifth Street in Irving.

Mr. STERN. You mean husband.

Mr. HOSTY. Husband, yes; I am sorry. I mean the husband of the Russian, that is right.

Mr. STERN. Did you obtain any other information?

Mr. HOSTY. No, not at that time. That is what I determined from Mrs. Roberts at the time.

Mr. STERN. What did you do next?

Mr. HOSTY. On the 31st of October, I did a credit check on Michael and Ruth Paine for the purpose of developing further background.

This credit check showed that Michael Paine was employed at Bell Helicopter as an engineer, showed no employment for Mrs. Paine, just showed her as a housewife, showed they had resided in Irving area for a number of years, and showed a good reputation.

I then checked the criminal records of the Irving Police Department, Dallas County Sheriff's Office. They had no record for either Ruth or Michael Paine. Contacted the Bell Helicopter Co. and the security officer at Bell Helicopter, Mr. Ted Schurman, advised me that Michael Paine was employed by them as a research engineer and he held a security clearance.

I then went to St. Marks School in Dallas. I had known from previous experience this school enjoyed a good reputation and I could approach them safely. I talked to Mr. Edward T. Oviatt, the assistant headmaster at St. Marks School. He told me that Mrs. Paine was a satisfactory employee, loyal to the United States, and he considered her to be a stable individual. He stated that Mrs. Paine was employed as a part-time teacher of the Russian language at that school, and he also advised that in a recent conversation with Mrs. Paine she had advised him that she had a Russian-born woman living with her.

This woman could not speak any English. She had just given birth to a new baby, and she had another small child. The husband of this woman had deserted her and Mrs. Paine felt sorry for her and had taken her in.

Mr. Oviatt went on to explain that Mrs. Paine did this for two reasons. She wanted to improve her Russian-speaking ability by having this person who spoke only Russian in her household. Also, he stated that she was by nature a very kindly individual, Quaker by background, and this was the sort of thing that she would do to help a person in distress.

Mr. STERN. What was the purpose of all these inquiries into the background of Mr. and Mrs. Paine?

Mr. HOSTY. I wanted to make sure before I approached Mrs. Paine that she was not involved in any way with Lee Oswald, in any type of activities which were against the best interests of the United States.

Mr. STERN. How do you mean before you approached Mrs. Paine?

Mr. HOSTY. Well, it was my intention since we could not determine where Lee Oswald was, that he was obviously not at her address, that the best way to find out would be to ask Mrs. Paine.

Mr. STERN. And you were doing all this in connection with the original request?

Mr. HOSTY. Right.

Mr. STERN. From the New Orleans Office?

Mr. HOSTY. Right.

Mr. STERN. And that was?

Mr. HOSTY. To locate Lee Oswald.

Mr. STERN. What did you do next?

Mr. HOSTY. The next day was the 1st of November. I worked in the Fort Worth area in the morning and on my way back from the Fort Worth area at approximately 2:30 p.m., I stopped at the residence of Mrs. Ruth Paine, 2515 West Fifth Street, and identified myself as a special agent of the FBI, and asked if I could talk to her. She was very cordial and friendly, invited me into the house. At this time, she was the only one in the living room. Her small children were taking their naps, and apparently Marina Oswald and her children were, also napping.

Mr. STERN. Excuse me, Mr. Hosty. I show you Commission Exhibit No. 430, which is a floor plan of the Paine home.

Mr. HOSTY. Right.

Mr. STERN. Can you show the Commission from this where you went as you came into the house and where you talked to Mrs. Paine?

Mr. HOSTY. This is the front door, and we talked right here in the living room. I believe the couch was right along here. I believe I sat here and Mrs. Paine sat here, right here in the living room. We were the only two in the living room, to start with.

Mr. STERN. Did you conduct this interview alone?

Mr. HOSTY. Yes, sir; I was the only agent present.

Mr. STERN. Is that usual or unusual?

Mr. HOSTY. It is the usual custom when we are talking to a person who is not a subject or a hostile witness, and Mrs. Paine was not considered a hostile witness.

Mr. STERN. Can you show us from Exhibit 430 approximately where you parked your car that day if you recall?

Mr. HOSTY. I don't recall specifically. I do recall that her station wagon was parked in the driveway. There was another car in front of the house, and it is my recollection that I parked, perhaps, here.

There is another house right next door here which was vacant, and I believe I parked in front of the vacant house right next door.

Mr. STERN. Would you put your initials where you think you parked your car, on that exhibit, please? It was about that close to the front of the house, you believe?

Mr. HOSTY. Yes; it was not directly in front of the house because there was another car. Michael Paine, apparently, had two cars, and he kept one of them over here and he used the other one where he was now living. He left his other car here and there was a station wagon in the driveway.

Representative FORD. Is Mrs. Roberts' residence on----

Mr. HOSTY. Mrs. Roberts' residence is over here, sir.

Representative FORD. On the other side?

Mr. HOSTY. Right. This is a vacant house.

Mr. STERN. The top of that page is north.

Mr. HOSTY. Right. This would be 2519, 2515, and probably 2511 here.

Mr. STERN. 2511, you are indicating the east side of that diagram?

Mr. HOSTY. East, yes. It would go east.

Mr. STERN. 2519 the west side?

Mr. HOSTY. West side, that is correct.

Mr. STERN. North being the top?

Mr. HOSTY. Right.

Mr. STERN. Now, tell us in detail of your interview with Mrs. Paine starting from the time you rang the doorbell.

Mr. HOSTY. All right. As I say, when I entered the house I immediately identified myself. I showed her my credentials, identified myself as a special agent of the FBI, and requested to talk to her.

She invited me into the house.

Mr. STERN. Did she seemed surprised at your visit?

Mr. HOSTY. No, she didn't. She was quite friendly and invited me in, said this is the first time she had ever met an FBI agent. Very cordial.

As I say, it is my recollection I sat here on the couch and she sat across the room from me.

I then told her the purpose of my visit, that I was interested in locating the whereabouts of Lee Oswald.

She readily admitted that Mrs. Marina Oswald and Lee Oswald's two children were staying with her. She said that Lee Oswald was living somewhere in Dallas. She didn't know where. She said it was in the Oak Cliff area but she didn't have his address.

I asked her if she knew where he worked. After a moment's hesitation, she told me that he worked at the Texas School Book Depository near the downtown area of Dallas. She didn't have the exact address, and it is my recollection that we went to the phone book and looked it up, found it to be 411 Elm Street.

Mr. STERN. You looked it up while you were there?

Mr. HOSTY. Yes; that is my recollection that we looked it up in her telephone book to show it at 411 Elm Street, Dallas, Tex.

She told me at this time that she did not know where he was living, but she thought she could find out and she would let me know.

Mr. STERN. Did she tell you why she thought he was living alone in Dallas at that time?

Mr. HOSTY. Well, she said that she did not want him at her house; that she was willing to take Marina Oswald and the two children, but she didn't have room for him and she didn't want him at the house. She was willing to let him visit his wife and family, but she did not want him residing there.

Mr. STERN. What did she say about his visits?

Mr. HOSTY. She remarked that he came out there periodically to visit his wife and children on weekends.

Mr. STERN. Did she say when she expected his next visit might be?

Mr. HOSTY. I don't recall her stating when she expected him, no.

Mr. STERN. Did she say anything about the possibility of his coming later that day?

Mr. HOSTY. No, sir.

Mr. STERN. You say the interview started at about 2:30?

Mr. HOSTY. Approximately 2:30; yes, sir.

Mr. STERN. About how long did it last?

Mr. HOSTY. At the very most 20-25 minutes.

Mr. STERN. Were you alone with Mrs. Paine throughout this period?

Mr. HOSTY. No; towards the conclusion of the interview, Marina Oswald, who had apparently been napping, entered the living room.

Mr. STERN. Had you ever met Mrs. Oswald before?

Mr. HOSTY. Never before, no. As I had learned previously, and as Mrs. Paine had told me, she did not speak any English, so Mrs. Paine then told her in the Russian language who I was. I was an agent with the FBI.

I could tell from her eyes and her expression that she became quite alarmed, quite upset. I had had previous experience with people who come from Communist-controlled countries that they get excited when they see the police. They must think that we are like the Gestapo or something like that.

She became quite alarmed, and, like I say, I knew that she just had a baby the week before. So I didn't want to leave her in that state, so rather than just walking out and leaving her and not saying anything to her, I told Mrs. Paine to relate to her in the Russian language that I was not there for the purpose of harming her, harassing her, and that it wasn't the job of the FBI to harm people. It was our job to protect people.

Mrs. Paine relayed this information.

I assume she relayed it correctly. I don't speak Russian.

Representative FORD. What was the reaction, if any, on the part of Marina following that comment by Mrs. Paine?

Mr. HOSTY. The information I had her relay? She seemed to calm down a little bit, and when I left she was smiling. I left her in a relaxed mood. I didn't want to leave her alarmed and upset, a woman with a new baby. It is not the thing to do. So she apparently was smiling, happy, and she shook hands with me as I left, I wanted to leave her in a good frame of mind. I then left.

Mr. STERN. Did you address any questions to Marina Oswald through Mrs. Paine?

Mr. HOSTY. Not questions, no. I just relayed the information to her of this nature I just gave.

Mr. STERN. Anything else that you said----

Mr. HOSTY. No, sir; that is all I can recall.

Mr. STERN. To be translated for Marina Oswald?

Mr. HOSTY. No.

Mr. STERN. Anything else about your interview with Mrs. Paine?

Mr. HOSTY. Yes; after Mrs. Paine told me that she would try to find out where Lee Oswald was living, I then gave her my name and telephone number. I wrote it down on a piece of paper for her. I am fairly certain I printed it so she would be able to read it all right. I printed my name and wrote down my office telephone number, and handed it to Mrs. Paine.

Mr. STERN. Did you put anything else on this piece of paper?

Mr. HOSTY. No, sir; that was all.

Mr. STERN. Are you quite sure about your recollection of that, or are you telling us on the basis of your ordinary experience? Is this what you remember of the incident?

Mr. HOSTY. This is what I remember of it; yes, sir.

Mr. STERN. You don't remember putting anything on this paper other than your name?

Mr. HOSTY. My name and telephone number.

Mr. STERN. Office telephone?

Mr. HOSTY. Office telephone; right.

Mr. STERN. And no other telephone number?

Mr. HOSTY. No, sir.

Mr. STERN. No address?

Mr. HOSTY. No, sir.

Mr. STERN. License number?

Mr. HOSTY. No, sir.

Mr. STERN. You are quite certain that you can recall now only those two things?

Mr. HOSTY. Yes; I do this as a standard procedure. I do this all the time. I will write my name out if a person says they want to contact me. I will give them my name and telephone number, write it on a piece of paper and give it to them.

Representative FORD. Did you write on notepaper you had or paper provided by Mrs. Paine, or what?

Mr. HOSTY. It was my recollection it was on my paper. I took a piece of paper off, tore it in half, printed my name and telephone number on it that I gave to her.

Mr. STERN. Do you have cards?

Mr. HOSTY. No, sir; we don't have cards. We are not allowed to carry cards.

Mr. STERN. When Mrs. Paine told you that Lee Harvey Oswald was working at the School Book Depository, did that mean anything to you? Did you remember the building?

Mr. HOSTY. No, sir; I knew of the building in the outskirts of the downtown area. That is about all. I looked up the address, and I recognized the address, but it meant nothing to me.

Mr. STERN. Is there anything else at all that you can recall being said on November 1?

Mr. HOSTY. As I said earlier, I think I should bring this in, that Mrs. Paine was a little bit reluctant to give me his place of employment at first. She said that Lee Oswald had alleged that the FBI had had him fired from every job he ever had. I told her this was not true, that I had never had anyone fired from any job nor did I know of any other FBI agents that had ever done this.

I reassured her that I wanted to know his place of employment for the purpose of determining whether or not he was employed in a sensitive industry, and when I found out that he was working in a warehouse as a laborer, I realized this was not a sensitive industry.

Mr. STERN. You were acting for the New Orleans office at this time?

Mr. HOSTY. At this time; yes, sir.

Mr. STERN. In trying to locate him?

Mr. HOSTY. Right.

Mr. STERN. Had they asked you to try to determine what kind of work he was doing and whether he might be in a sensitive position?

Mr. HOSTY. Well, this is automatically considered; yes. They didn't have to ask me. I knew I was to do that.

Mr. DULLES. Did you clear this with the Dallas or Fort Worth office? How do you work out that liaison?

Mr. HOSTY. How do you mean, sir?

Mr. DULLES. I mean with the FBI. At this time this was the territory, I assume, of Dallas or Fort Worth.

Mr. HOSTY. Right. Irving, Tex., is in the Dallas territory; yes, sir.

Mr. DULLES. The Dallas territory?

Mr. HOSTY. Right.

Mr. DULLES. Did you clear or notify the Dallas office either before or after?

Mr. HOSTY. You mean after I determined this?

Mr. DULLES. Yes.

Mr. HOSTY. Oh, yes, sir. This occurred on the 1st. This was a Friday. I returned to the Dallas office. I covered a couple of other leads on the way back. I got in shortly after 5 o'clock and all our stenos had gone home. This information has to go registered mail, and it could not go then until Monday morning.

Monday morning--shall I continue?

Mr. STERN. Yes.

Mr. HOSTY. On Monday morning, I made a pretext telephone call to the Texas School Book Depository. I called up and asked for the personnel department, asked if a Lee Oswald was employed there. They said yes, he was. I said what address does he show? They said 2515 West Fifth Street, Irving, Tex., which I knew not to be his correct address.

I then sent a communication, airmail communication to the New Orleans office advising them--and to the headquarters of the FBI advising them--and then instructing the New Orleans office to make the Dallas office the office of origin. We were now assuming control, because he had now been verified in our division.

Representative FORD. When you say you made several other checks on the way to the office, did this involve----

Mr. HOSTY. Not in this case; other cases. I run anywhere from 25 to 40 cases any one time. I have to work them all, fit them in as I go.

Representative FORD. These other checks did not involve this case?

Mr. HOSTY. No; other cases I was working on.

Mr. STERN. Mr. Hosty, at your interview on November 1 with Mrs. Paine, do you recall whether you asked her whether there was any telephone number that she knew of where Lee Harvey Oswald could be reached?

Mr. HOSTY. No, sir; I didn't ask her about a telephone number; no, sir.

Mr. STERN. And she didn't tell you?

Mr. HOSTY. She didn't volunteer. She told me she did not know where he lived.

Mr. STERN. Why don't you continue with the chronological report.

Mr. HOSTY. As I say, then I forwarded this airmail communication.

Mr. McCLOY. May I ask at this point, did she indicate whether there were any belongings of Lee Oswald in the house?

Mr. HOSTY. She did not indicate, but, of course, she did tell me his wife and children were there, and I assumed that their personal effects would be there. We didn't go into that.

Mr. McCLOY. You made no search of the house?

Mr. HOSTY. No, sir; that would have been illegal. I couldn't have done it without his consent. There was no attempt to do that.

Mr. STERN. Did you have any thought of interviewing Marina Oswald at the time she came into Mrs. Paine's living room in connection with the investigation of Marina Oswald that you had started out thinking about in March?

Mr. HOSTY. Yes; I could have interviewed her here, but I thought at the time she was under a little emotional stress, this was maybe not a good time. Also, as I said before, we have a requirement to have two agents present when a subject is interviewed. I was alone. And, also, I wanted to get the New Orleans office to check their files to see if there was anything that I didn't have. For all I knew, they could have already interviewed her. I didn't know this. So before I would proceed with that, I wanted to make sure I had all the records, another agent, and at a better time where I could talk in more detail with Mrs. Oswald.

Then on the 5th of November----

Mr. STERN. Have you told us everything that elapsed--that occurred between November 1 and November 5?

Mr. HOSTY. Yes. Then on the 5th of November, I was on my way to the Fort Worth area, and stopped at Mrs. Paine's very briefly.

Mr. STERN. How did that happen to come about?

Mr. HOSTY. Well, I was on my way to Fort Worth, and I did not have his residence. I thought I would stop by. Mrs. Paine told me she would attempt to locate where he was living. It was not too much out of my way, so I just drove over to Mrs. Paine's. I had another agent with me that day.

Mr. STERN. Who was that?

Mr. HOSTY. Agent Gary S. Wilson. Agent Wilson was a brand new agent out of training school. And it is the custom to assign a new agent to work with an older agent for a period of 6 weeks. They work with different agents every day to observe what they are doing. This is the only reason he was with me, the only reason I had another man.

We went to the front porch. I rang the bell, talked to Mrs. Paine, at which time she advised me that Lee Oswald had been out to visit her, visit his wife, at her house over the weekend, but she had still not determined where he was living in Dallas, and she also made the remark that she considered him to be a very illogical person, that he had told her that weekend that he was a Trotskyite Communist. Since she did not have his address, I thanked her and left.

Mr. STERN. Did she indicate how she felt about this description of Trotskyite Communist that he pinned on himself?

Mr. HOSTY. Well, she thought he was rather illogical, is the way she put it. She was a little more amused than anything else. She thought he was illogical, as I say, was the term she used.

Mr. STERN. Was Marina Oswald present at all?

Mr. HOSTY. I didn't see her. She was probably in the house, but I didn't see her. I didn't go in the house. I just went in the front door.

Mr. STERN. How long do you think it was?

Mr. HOSTY. Not more than 1 or 2 minutes. Then I got in the car and left.

Mr. STERN. Where was your car parked at that time?

Mr. HOSTY. I believe in the same place, because here, again, this second car of Michael Paine's was still in front of the Paine house, and Mrs. Paine's station wagon was in the driveway. So I am fairly sure I parked here at the same spot.

Mr. STERN. And you are indicating the spot on Exhibit 430 where you initialed?

Mr. HOSTY. Right, where I parked on the first of November, to the best of my recollection that is where I parked.

Representative FORD. Did Agent Wilson accompany you to the door?

Mr. HOSTY. Yes; he walked up.

Representative FORD. And heard the conversation?

Mr. HOSTY. Yes, sir; he did.

Mr. STERN. Did you report anything about this conversation to the New Orleans office?

Mr. HOSTY. No; because there was nothing new to report. I knew I was to become the office of origin. There would be a report which I would be preparing and I would incorporate it in my report. There was nothing new that they didn't already know that would aid them.

Mr. STERN. Is there anything else about this interview on November 5 that you can tell us?

Mr. HOSTY. No, sir; that is about all.

Representative FORD. Was this comment by Mrs. Paine that Oswald had said he was a Trotskyite----

Mr. HOSTY. Trotskyite Communist was the word she used; yes, sir.

Representative FORD. Was that new as far as your knowledge of your file was concerned?

Mr. HOSTY. Well, he was a self-admitted Marxist. He had stated that earlier. The New Orleans office had reported that. He had been on television and made that statement in New Orleans, so this appeared to be in keeping with his character.

Representative FORD. The use of the word Trotskyite didn't add anything to the previous Marxist identification?

Mr. HOSTY. Well, of course, that is a particular type of Marxism, Trotskyite, the followers of Leon Trotsky's particular deviation, but this did show that he was not a member of the Communist Party USA, follower of the Leninist-Stalinist-Khrushchev movement, but would be an independent Marxist would be what it would show me, not tied in with the regular Communist Party USA.

Representative FORD. Is there anything particularly identifiable with the Trotskyite element that might alert you to anything?

Mr. HOSTY. Well, yes. The Socialist Workers Party is the Trotskyite Party in the United States, and they are supposedly the key element in the Fair Play for Cuba Committee, or were the key element in the Fair Play for Cuba Committee. So this would tie in with the fact that he was a member of the Fair Play for Cuba Committee, and, therefore, he claimed to be a Trotskyite--this would follow.

Mr. McCLOY. Do you associate with Trotskyite Communists any greater disposition to acts of violence than the normal Communist?

Mr. HOSTY. No, sir; no more than the others.

Mr. McCLOY. No doctrine of policy by assassination?

Mr. HOSTY. No, sir.

Mr. STERN. Have you reviewed, Mr. Hosty, the document that has been marked No. 830 for identification preliminary to your testimony today?

Mr. HOSTY. Oh, yes; this one you gave me earlier; yes, sir.

Mr. DULLES. I don't find a date on that. Maybe there is one there.

Mr. HOSTY. This is an insert, sir. The date of the various information will appear at the head of each paragraph.

Mr. DULLES. I see. But the date of preparation is not----

Mr. HOSTY. The date of preparation would be some time after the 22d of November.

Representative FORD. What do those identification numbers at the top in the left-hand corner mean?

Mr. HOSTY. That is our Dallas office file number 105-1716.

Representative FORD. Does that appear on the other documents?

Mr. HOSTY. Wait a minute; this relates to a control file. I believe that is the control file on Mrs. Paine, Mrs. Paine's file number.

Mr. DULLES. I wonder if I could just interrupt.

This is on the record. I am not quite clear, maybe because I came in late. Are you from the Dallas or New Orleans office?

Mr. HOSTY. I am from the Dallas division.

Mr. DULLES. From the Dallas division?

Mr. HOSTY. Yes, sir.

The man right before me was from the New Orleans division. I am from the Dallas division.

Mr. DULLES. You are from the Dallas division?

Mr. HOSTY. Yes, sir.

Representative FORD. May I pursue this just a minute. These identification numbers at the top in the upper left--as I understand it now, you are saying related to Mrs. Paine's file?

Mr. HOSTY. Right.

Representative FORD. Now, would this, even though it was from Mrs. Paine's file, have been in either Marina or Lee Harvey Oswald's file or both?

Mr. HOSTY. This did appear in the report on Lee Harvey Oswald. That was the report of December 2, I believe was the date. That was the first report. You probably have that overall report, don't you?

(Discussion off the record.)

Representative FORD. Did this material which was in Mrs. Paine's file----

Mr. HOSTY. Right.

Representative FORD. Appear in either Marina or Lee Harvey Oswald's file prior to the assassination?

Mr. HOSTY. Let me see. Part of it would have, this paragraph on page 11, this November 1, Mrs. Ruth Paine was interviewed. This appeared in the communication I sent out to the New Orleans office advising them where he was employed.

Mr. DULLES. When was that sent?

Mr. HOSTY. The 4th of November, sir. The rest of it was in note form. I hadn't reduced it to writing yet.

Representative FORD. I am still not clear what part was in Mrs. Paine's file and what part was in Marina's file and what part was in Lee Harvey Oswald's file prior to November 22.

Mr. HOSTY. Prior to November 22 just--there was no file for Mrs. Paine prior to November 22.

Representative FORD. So this didn't appear in her file?

Mr. HOSTY. No.

Representative FORD. Until subsequent to----

Mr. HOSTY. Right.

Representative FORD. The assassination?

Mr. HOSTY. There was no file for Mrs. Paine until after the assassination.

Representative FORD. Then what part appeared in Marina's file or Lee Harvey's file prior to November 22?

Mr. HOSTY. Just the second paragraph of this page 11 or the second page.

Mr. DULLES. Would this have constituted a reopening of the Lee Harvey Oswald file, because I think we had testimony this morning that the file had been closed.

Mr. HOSTY. This would constitute having the New Orleans office change origin to Dallas. At this time the file on Lee Oswald was open. We were open as an auxiliary office.

Mr. DULLES. In----

Mr. HOSTY. In Dallas.

Mr. DULLES. In Dallas?

Mr. HOSTY. Right, and this communication to New Orleans was a request that we be made origin.

Mr. STERN. I wonder if I might summarize this?

Mr. DULLES. It is not clear to me.

Mr. HOSTY. You missed a lot of this.

Mr. STERN. The file was closed, sir, until March of 1963 when Mr. Hosty decided it should be reopened on the basis of two items of information, one of them the fact that Lee Harvey Oswald was listed as a subscriber to the Worker newspaper.

Mr. DULLES. This is the Dallas file you are now talking of?

Mr. STERN. Dallas. The case was closed in the Dallas office. He reopened it in the Dallas office. He subsequently found that Oswald had moved, apparently permanently, to New Orleans, and had the file and the case administratively shifted as far as his responsibility, as far as his primary responsibility, to the New Orleans office.

Mr. DULLES. Does that mean the papers were also shifted?

Mr. HOSTY. No, sir; just those papers which they lacked. I reviewed our file. I could tell what communications they had and which communications they didn't. I then gave them all communications which I was not certain that they had.

Mr. DULLES. But the other communications remained in the Dallas file?

Mr. HOSTY. Right.

Mr. DULLES. But the Dallas file, then, was not, in a sense, reactivated since the action had been transferred to New Orleans, is that correct?

Mr. HOSTY. To New Orleans; right. Then in October the case was shifted back to Dallas again.

Mr. DULLES. At what time?

Mr. HOSTY. Well, actually, November 4 would be our request to have the case transferred back to Dallas office of origin.

Mr. STERN. I think you ought to make clear, Mr. Hosty, to Mr. Dulles, that early in October you started doing something for the New Orleans office at their request.

Mr. HOSTY. Yes.

Mr. STERN. New Orleans found that they couldn't locate Lee Harvey Oswald in New Orleans.

Mr. DULLES. He had left in the meantime?

Mr. HOSTY. Right.

Mr. STERN. Yes; from their leads he seemed to have gone back into the Dallas area, and they asked the Dallas office to see if they could locate him. Mr. Hosty was doing this work at the end of October and the beginning of November when he ran these interviews. Just to complete that, Mr. Hosty, you expected, did you not, that the case would be reassigned?

Mr. HOSTY. Oh, yes.

Mr. STERN. To the Dallas office?

Mr. HOSTY. Oh, yes. This was tantamount to requesting it be shifted to us, yes, when I sent this communication.

Mr. STERN. And you were beginning to think in terms of the case being your problem again?

Mr. HOSTY. Right.

Mr. STERN. Even though formally at the time you were only----

Mr. HOSTY. Auxiliary office.

Mr. STERN. Operating on the request of the New Orleans office to try to locate him, is that correct?

Mr. HOSTY. That is correct.

Mr. McCLOY. This has all been previously testified to?

Mr. DULLES. I am sorry to have missed that.

Mr. HOSTY. That is all right, Mr. Dulles, that is entirely all right.

Mr. DULLES. Just one question. Are cases of this kind administratively transferred by agreement between two offices, or does that have to go up to Washington?

Mr. HOSTY. Washington always gets a copy of these communications. They know what we are doing. Actually the original is sent to Washington, and a carbon is sent to the other field office.

Mr. DULLES. But you can transfer it directly from one office to another?

Mr. HOSTY. Right.

Mr. DULLES. And just notify Washington as to the possibility of its being transferred?

Mr. HOSTY. Right; because he is now residing and employed in our division. There is no more needs to be done.

Mr. DULLES. I am clear. Thank you very much.

Mr. STERN. I think perhaps we can just complete the line of inquiry started by Congressman Ford. Do your records or notes show when you first reduced to writing your notes on the interviews that began on October 29 and the last one of which occurred on November 5?

Mr. HOSTY. I can only say that it would have been sometime between the 22d of November and the 2d of December, because it went out in a report on the 2d of December.

Mr. STERN. Until then they were in the form of----

Mr. HOSTY. Notes.

Mr. STERN. Raw notes?

Mr. HOSTY. Right.

Mr. STERN. Do you take shorthand or any other form of speedwriting?

Mr. HOSTY. No.

Mr. STERN. Have you preserved the notes?

Mr. HOSTY. I don't have them with me, no; because once it is reduced to writing then we destroy the notes. That is the procedure.

Mr. STERN. You say you don't have them with you. Did you preserve these notes?

Mr. HOSTY. No; they were thrown away.

Mr. STERN. And this is the only record now that you have----

Mr. HOSTY. Right.

Mr. STERN. Of these activities?

Mr. McCLOY. Do you have any record in your office as to when that was put into type? Does your secretary have it?

Mr. HOSTY. They might, sir. I think they might. I couldn't say for sure.

Mr. McCLOY. I think you might look that up and see if you have any record, and give it to us.

Mr. HOSTY. All right, sir.

Mr. STERN. But you are clear that it occurred after the assassination?

Mr. HOSTY. Oh, yes, sir; positive.

Mr. STERN. Is that usual, that you would----

Mr. HOSTY. Something of this nature, yes, sir; no reason to reduce it to writing right away.

Mr. STERN. It is true, isn't it, that some of this information had already been----

Mr. HOSTY. Transmitted in letter form to New Orleans; right.

Mr. DULLES. Prior to the assassination?

Mr. HOSTY. Prior to the assassination; yes, sir.

Representative FORD. That part on the second page?

Mr. HOSTY. Right; this second paragraph starting, "On November 1, 1963, Mrs. Ruth Paine"----

Representative FORD. What did you do, dictate that to a stenographer?

Mr. HOSTY. Right.

Representative FORD. And she typed it and it was sent officially?

Mr. HOSTY. On the 4th of November, right, airmail letter to New Orleans.

Mr. STERN. Would that be sent to your headquarters in Washington?

Mr. HOSTY. Also. Excuse me, the original goes to headquarters in Washington, a copy goes to New Orleans. It is addressed to the headquarters.

Mr. STERN. But the only information sent was the information in that paragraph beginning "On November 1, 1963."

Mr. McCLOY. But you had your original notes with you?

Mr. HOSTY. Right.

Mr. McCLOY. And still intact?

Mr. HOSTY. Right.

Mr. McCLOY. At the time you put this----

Mr. HOSTY. Because I knew I was going to get this into a report. The next report was written, and I would put it in a report form and destroy the notes.

Mr. DULLES. Do we have a copy of that letter of November 4?

Mr. HOSTY. I don't know.

Mr. DULLES. That you sent to headquarters and to New Orleans?

(Discussion off the record.)

Mr. STERN. You tell us you have reviewed these two pages?

Mr. HOSTY. Yes.

Mr. STERN. Is there anything you would like to add?

Mr. HOSTY. No, sir.

Mr. STERN. Anything you would like to correct?

Mr. HOSTY. No, sir.

Mr. STERN. This accurately states the interviews that you covered. May this be admitted in the record?

The CHAIRMAN. It may be admitted, No. 830.

(The document marked Commission Exhibit No. 830 for identification was received in evidence.)

Representative FORD. May I ask one question here?

Mr. HOSTY. Yes, sir.

Representative FORD. Why in these notes that are now Commission Exhibit 830 didn't you mention the fact that Mrs. Paine had said that Oswald was a Trotskyite Marxist?

Mr. HOSTY. No; that is set forth down here, sir.

Representative FORD. Yes; right.

Mr. HOSTY. In this second to the last paragraph, the last line.

Mr. McCLOY. May I ask you this, Mr. Hosty. In your contacts with Mrs. Paine, did you get the impression that she was cooperative throughout?

Mr. HOSTY. Yes, sir; yes, sir.

Mr. McCLOY. Nothing that she said seemed to be inconsistent with any facts that you knew?

Mr. HOSTY. No.

Senator COOPER. May I ask a question? I believe you said that all the papers that you had respecting Lee Harvey Oswald were supplied to the office at New Orleans.

Mr. HOSTY. At the time they were made origin; yes, sir. In the summer of 1963, that is correct, all the files.

Senator COOPER. At the time that he was engaged in----

Mr. HOSTY. In the Fair Play for Cuba work; yes, sir.

Senator COOPER. What do you call it--Fair Play for Cuba?

Mr. HOSTY. Fair Play for Cuba; yes, sir.

Senator COOPER. Now Mr. Fain testified that he had interviewed Oswald I think in 19----

Mr. HOSTY. 1962.

Senator COOPER. 1962.

Mr. HOSTY. That is correct.

Senator COOPER. The year before. Mr. Quigley testified that Oswald told him that he had married a Russian girl whose maiden name was Prossa, and also in that file there was another statement in which Oswald had said that he had been married, that he had married a girl in Fort Worth. Now were all those papers available to the office in New Orleans?

Mr. HOSTY. Yes, sir.

Senator COOPER. I suppose this would be a question of Mr. Quigley, really, but if all those factors were known, it would appear that the facts that Mr. Fain had secured, which showed the defection and his marriage in Russia, and the fact that he had told someone else he was married in Texas, that there would have been some further investigation of it in New Orleans.

Mr. HOSTY. Well, this would be something that Mr. Quigley would have to answer.

Mr. McCLOY. You had a record of inconsistent statements in there.

Mr. HOSTY. Yes, sir.

Mr. STERN. Continuing that line, Mr. Hosty, do you recognize Commission Exhibit 826, I now hand you?

Mr. HOSTY. Yes.

Mr. STERN. That is the report of----

Mr. HOSTY. Milton R. Kaack.

Mr. STERN. And it is dated?

Mr. HOSTY. October 31, 1963. I received it on November 1.

Mr. DULLES. Do you recall whether that inconsistent statement, that inconsistency was picked up in New Orleans at this time, in the New Orleans office?

Mr. HOSTY. I don't; no, sir. You mean about----

Mr. DULLES. About marriage.

Mr. HOSTY. About marriage? I picked it up when I saw it.

Mr. DULLES. At what time was that?

Mr. HOSTY. November 1 when we got the report.

Mr. STERN. When you reviewed Mr. Kaack's report?

Mr. HOSTY. Right.

Mr. STERN. You were aware when you read that report that he had----

Mr. HOSTY. Lied; or was inconsistent.

Mr. STERN. He had said in New Orleans that he had been married in Fort Worth, married a girl named Prossa, that he had originally told the New Orleans police that he had been born in Cuba.

Mr. HOSTY. Yes.

Mr. STERN. You were aware of all these inconsistencies?

Mr. HOSTY. Right.

Mr. STERN. What did these suggest to you in view of what you knew about Oswald?

Mr. HOSTY. I knew that he was not telling the truth in his interview in New Orleans, because I had previously checked the background of his wife and himself, and I knew that she was born in Russia and her name was not Prossa. They were not married in Fort Worth, so I knew he was not telling the truth.

Mr. STERN. You knew that on November 1.

Mr. HOSTY. Right.

Mr. STERN. And at what time did you know of Oswald's trip to Mexico City and his apparent appearance there at the Russian Embassy?

Mr. HOSTY. The 25th of October.

Mr. STERN. Had you received any----

Mr. McCLOY. Let's get these years right.

Mr. HOSTY. The 25th of October 1963.

Mr. STERN. Had you received any information about any other contacts with Russian officials by Lee Harvey Oswald?

Mr. HOSTY. Not at that time.

Mr. STERN. What other information did you have at anytime about that?

Mr. HOSTY. On November 22, after the assassination of President Kennedy, I was advised that our Washington field office of the FBI had determined that he, Lee Oswald, had been in contact with the Soviet Embassy in Washington, D.C. I learned that after the assassination.

Mr. STERN. After the assassination?

Mr. HOSTY. Right, sir.

Mr. STERN. Putting that aside for the moment, what was your evaluation of Lee Harvey Oswald based on the work that you had done and the reports that you had made, the information you gathered early in November?

Mr. HOSTY. Well, there were many questions to be resolved. I was quite interested in determining the nature of his contact with the Soviet Embassy in Mexico City. I had not resolved that on the 22d of November. We were still waiting to resolve that. Prior to that, I mean that would be the only thing----

Mr. STERN. What had you planned to do after November 5 about this case?

Mr. HOSTY. Well, as I had previously stated, I have between 25 and 40 cases assigned to me at any one time. I had other matters to take care of. I had now established that Lee Oswald was not employed in a sensitive industry. I can now afford to wait until New Orleans forwarded the necessary papers to me to show me I now had all the information. It was then my plan to interview Marina Oswald in detail concerning both herself and her husband's background.

Mr. STERN. Had you planned any steps beyond that point?

Mr. HOSTY. No. I would have to wait until I had talked to Marina to see what I could determine, and from there I could make my plans.

Mr. STERN. Did you take any action on this case between November 5 and November 22?

Mr. HOSTY. No, sir.

Mr. STERN. I think we can then turn to the events of November 22, and have you tell us what transpired that day, beginning with the morning.

Mr. HOSTY. All right. The first order of business from 8:15 to 9 o'clock the special agent in charge held the regular biweekly conference. Now we held a conference in our office every other Friday morning. It so happened that this was the Friday morning which we would hold this conference, at which time the agent in charge would bring various items to our attention. Among the items he brought to our attention was the fact that President Kennedy would be in Dallas on that date.

Mr. DULLES. Who was the special agent in charge?

Mr. HOSTY. Gordon Shanklin. Gordon L. Shanklin.

Representative FORD. How many others besides yourself were under his jurisdiction?

Mr. HOSTY. About 75 agents.

Representative FORD. Seventy-five?

Mr. HOSTY. Yes. Now only the ones at headquarters city in Dallas were present. That would be about 40 of the agents were present at this conference.

Mr. Shanklin advised us, among other things, that in view of the President's visit to Dallas, that if anyone had any indication of any possibility of any acts of violence or any demonstrations against the President, or Vice President, to immediately notify the Secret Service and confirm it in writing. He had made the same statement about a week prior at another special conference which we had held. I don't recall the exact date. It was about a week prior.

Mr. STERN. Did you know that there was going to be a motorcade on November 22?

Mr. HOSTY. I found out about 9 p.m. the night before that there was to be a motorcade in downtown Dallas. I read it in the newspaper. That was the first time I knew of it.

Mr. STERN. Did you know that the motorcade would pass the School Book Depository Building?

Mr. HOSTY. No, sir.

Mr. STERN. Did you know the route of the motorcade?

Mr. HOSTY. No, sir.

Mr. DULLES. Had there been any contact between you or the Dallas office with the Secret Service on this point?

Mr. HOSTY. On the motorcade route, sir?

Mr. DULLES. Yes.

Mr. HOSTY. No.

Mr. DULLES. Had not been?

Mr. HOSTY. No.

Mr. STERN. The newspaper stories did not as far as you can recall tell what the motorcade route would be?

Mr. HOSTY. Yes; they did. There was a description of the motorcade route, but as I say, I didn't bother to read it in detail. I noticed that it was coming up Main Street. That was the only thing I was interested in, where maybe I could watch it if I had a chance.

Mr. STERN. So that the fact that Lee Harvey Oswald was working in the Texas School Book Depository meant nothing----

Mr. HOSTY. No.

Mr. STERN. In connection with the motorcade route?

Mr. HOSTY. No.

Mr. STERN. Did you think of him at all in connection with the President's trip?

Mr. HOSTY. No, sir.

Representative FORD. Did you have any others among the cases that were assigned to you that came to your attention in reference to the President's visit?

Mr. HOSTY. I did turn over one item of information to the Secret Service on the 21st; yes, sir. I did bring some matters to their attention.

There were some scurrilous pamphlets circulated around Dallas on the 21st of November. You may have seen them. It was a poster of President Kennedy with a front and a profile view saying, "Wanted for Treason." I took those pamphlets over to the Secret Service office the morning of the 21st. Then I assisted another agent in our division in giving the Secret Service some information on an individual in Denton, Tex., who had made some remarks about the President, and another member of my squad had also given some information to the Secret Service the evening of the 21st about the possibility of a demonstration at the Trade Mart against President Kennedy, some picketing.

Representative FORD. Do you recall to whom you gave this information?

Mr. HOSTY. The one piece of information I gave, I gave to an Agent Warner of the Secret Service.

Representative FORD. That was the information about what?

Mr. HOSTY. The pamphlets, the "Wanted for Treason" pamphlets.

Representative FORD. Those are the only documents or contacts you personally had?

Mr. HOSTY. That I personally had, that is correct.

The CHAIRMAN. Was it a pamphlet or a dodger?

Mr. HOSTY. It was, I guess you would call it a dodger.

The CHAIRMAN. Single sheet?

Mr. HOSTY. Single sheet; yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. A single sheet, was it not?

Mr. HOSTY. Yes.

The CHAIRMAN. Did you ever ascertain who put that out?

Mr. HOSTY. No, sir; I never did.

The CHAIRMAN. Did you ever investigate it?

Mr. HOSTY. I didn't.

The CHAIRMAN. Do you know whether your office did?

Mr. HOSTY. I am not sure; no, sir.

Mr. STERN. What next occurred on the 22d, Mr. Hosty?

Mr. HOSTY. All right. After the conference that lasted until about 9 a.m., I then left the office and joined an Army Intelligence agent, and an agent of the Alcohol Tax Unit of the Treasury Department. We had a conference concerning a case not related to Lee Oswald. This conference lasted most of the morning until about 11:45. At 11:45 the Army Intelligence agent and myself left, and walked over towards Main Street. The motorcade was scheduled to pass down Main Street near our office at approximately noon. I was now on my lunch hour, so I stood and watched the motorcade go by at the corner of Field and Main Street in Dallas.

After the President passed by, I then went across the street, started eating lunch. While I was eating my lunch, the waitress came up and told me she had just heard a radio report that the President and the Vice President had both been shot. I immediately stopped my lunch.

Mr. STERN. The President and the Vice President?

Mr. HOSTY. That was the earliest report, that the Vice President had been shot too. These were the rumors. I then of course left the lunchroom immediately and headed back for the office, which is only a block away. I got back to the office.

One of the supervisors told me to get a radio car and get out on the street right away and I would get further instructions. I did that. I got in the car and started out. I gave the signal that I was on the air and I was told to proceed towards Parkland Hospital. Just as I got to Parkland Hospital I got a call to return to the office immediately.

Mr. STERN. Do you know why you were sent to Parkland Hospital?

Mr. HOSTY. No. We were just told they wanted four cars to proceed to Parkland Hospital to stand by for further orders.

Mr. STERN. Were you told why you were ordered to return to the office?

Mr. HOSTY. When I got back they told me they wanted me to start reviewing our files to see if I could develop any information, any leads at all on the possible assassin, to help out administratively in the office.

Mr. STERN. Did the case of Oswald come to your mind at that time?

Mr. HOSTY. No, sir.

Mr. STERN. As a possible----

Mr. HOSTY. No, sir; it was approximately 1:30 that we got the report that a police officer had been killed in the Oak Cliff area of Dallas, and that the police were surrounding a movie theatre where the suspect was allegedly located.

Shortly after 2 o'clock, we received information that this man had been captured and taken to the Dallas Police Department. One of our agents called from the Dallas Police Department and identified this man as Lee Harvey Oswald. I immediately recognized the name.

Mr. STERN. What was your reaction?

Mr. HOSTY. Shock, complete surprise.

Mr. STERN. Because?

Mr. HOSTY. I had no reason prior to this time to believe that he was capable or potentially an assassin of the President of the United States.

Mr. STERN. What happened next?

Mr. HOSTY. I immediately got the file on Lee Oswald, and I determined that on the 21st of November this change of origin from New Orleans had arrived. It had not been routed to me as yet. It apparently arrived on the afternoon of the 21st. I got it for the first time after the assassination.

Mr. STERN. That is the administrative----

Mr. HOSTY. Administrative form showing that I was now origin, that we now had all the information on the case.

Mr. STERN. Did they send any other information with that?

Mr. HOSTY. The only other thing that they sent was a photograph of Lee Oswald taken at the New Orleans Police Department when he was arrested during the summer of 1963. The report of Milton Kaack of the 31st had covered everything else.

Mr. STERN. Just to be clear, you were not waiting for this shift of administrative responsibility before you did anything?

Mr. HOSTY. No; I mean if there was anything else to do, I would have gone ahead and done it.

Mr. DULLES. Was that action in Washington or New Orleans?

Mr. HOSTY. New Orleans.

Mr. STERN. Had anything else arrived at your Dallas office that you were told about at that point?

Mr. HOSTY. Not at that point, no; nothing had arrived then. I then took the file to the agent in charge.

Mr. DULLES. May I ask one point here?

Mr. HOSTY. Yes, sir.

Mr. DULLES. From the point of view of the administration, is the New Orleans office over the Dallas office, or are they equal?

Mr. HOSTY. They are equal, sir.

Mr. DULLES. They are equal?

Mr. HOSTY. We have 55 offices. They are all equal.

Mr. DULLES. All equal?

Mr. HOSTY. Right. There are no regional offices. I then took the file to the agent in charge, told him that we had a case on Lee Harvey Oswald. While I sat there he immediately called headquarters and advised headquarters here in Washington, D.C., that Lee Harvey Oswald was under arrest down at Dallas and had been observed shooting a police officer. They had eyewitnesses to his killing of Officer Tippit.

Mr. STERN. How do you know that?

Mr. HOSTY. This had been given to us by one of our agents from the call from the Dallas Police Department who had given the information. I don't know who it was. I did not receive the call.

I sat there and assisted the agent in charge while he talked to the Bureau headquarters here. I knew the file. Of course he would need some information. I would leaf through the file and get it for him so that he could relay the pertinent information.

Then sometime after that, the agent in charge instructed me to proceed to the Dallas Police Department and to sit in on the interview of Lee Oswald, which was apparently in progress at this time. Just prior to my leaving, I was told that a communication had just come in that day from the Washington field office advising that Lee Oswald had been in contact with the Soviet Embassy in Washington, D.C.

Mr. STERN. Were you told anything more about that?

Mr. HOSTY. No; I mean this is the point I was given this information. I then went and got a car and drove to the Dallas Police Department, pulled my car into the basement garage of the Dallas Police Department, parked my car.

Mr. STERN. What were conditions like?

Mr. HOSTY. Very chaotic. The press was swarming all over the police station. There were television cameras being brought into the building. Many people were running, coming and going. The place was a beehive of activity.

I parked the car, got out, and started in the door of the basement, at which time I observed a Dallas police car, an unmarked car, drive in, in which there were four detectives. The man sitting on the right-hand side of the front seat next to the driver was a man I recognized as Lieutenant Revill. He signaled me that he wanted to talk to me, at which time he jumped out of the car at the head of the ramp and came over towards me. The rest of the detectives in the car continued down the ramp to be parked.

We then proceeded in, Lieutenant Revill and I proceeded into the police department and started up the stairs. Lieutenant Revill advised me that--I might add he was in a very excited state--he advised me that he had a hot lead, that he had just determined that the only employee from the Texas School Book Depository who could not be accounted for was a man named Lee.

Now this conversation took place at approximately 3 p.m., about an hour after Lee Harvey Oswald had been arrested by the Dallas Police Department. I told Lieutenant Revill that Lee Harvey Oswald had been arrested about an hour ago, that he was an employee of the Texas School Book Depository, and that he was the man who had defected to Russia and had returned to the United States in 1962.

Now either Lieutenant Revill--I don't recall if he made a statement doubting that Oswald was the one who assassinated the President, or whether it was just a look of doubt on his face, but there was doubt came into Lieutenant Revill's--at this time I stated to him that Lee Oswald was the main suspect in this case.

Now this conversation took place running up the stairs from the basement to the third floor. At this time the level of noise was very high. As I said, there were many press representatives, TV representatives, curious bystanders, police officers, everybody running all over the place.

It was not too much unlike Grand Central Station at rush hour, maybe like the Yankee Stadium during the world series games, quite noisy. We got to the head of the stairs and I left Lieutenant Revill and went into Captain Fritz' office.

Mr. STERN. Was anyone else with you and Lieutenant Revill as you came up the stairs, as you recall?

Mr. HOSTY. As I say, the place was swarming with people. Just the two of us were going up the stairs together. My conversation was with Lieutenant Revill only.

Mr. STERN. I now show you a document marked for identification Commission 831, a letter dated April 27, 1964, from Director Hoover to Mr. Rankin, the General Counsel of this Commission, having attached a one-page copy of a newspaper article and an affidavit. Do you recognize this letter?

Mr. HOSTY. Yes, sir; I do.

Mr. STERN. Where have you seen it?

Mr. HOSTY. I have seen the file copy of this letter in the FBI files.

Mr. STERN. Do you recognize the newspaper article which is the first attachment to this letter?

Mr. HOSTY. Yes, sir. It appeared in the Dallas Morning News on April 24, 1964, I believe.

Mr. STERN. And the attachment after this is?

Mr. HOSTY. My affidavit.

Mr. STERN. Your affidavit of five pages?

Mr. HOSTY. Of five pages, bearing my signature.

Mr. STERN. Now tell us what the reason for your making this affidavit was.

Mr. HOSTY. It was to refute the story that appeared in the Dallas Morning News on April 24, 1964, to set the record straight as to what actually did take place in my conversation with Lieutenant Revill.

Mr. STERN. What did that story state?

Mr. HOSTY. It stated in substance, alleged that I was aware that Lee Harvey Oswald was capable of assassinating the President of the United States, but did not dream he would do it.

Mr. STERN. Did you say that?

Mr. HOSTY. No, sir. I want to state for the record at this time that I unequivocally deny ever having made the statement to Lieutenant Revill or to anyone else that, "We knew Lee Harvey Oswald was capable of assassinating the President of the United States, we didn't dream he would do it."

I also want to state at this time that I made no statement to Lieutenant Revill or to any other individual at any time that I or anyone else in the FBI knew that Lee Harvey Oswald was capable of assassinating the President of the United States or possessed any potential for violence.

Prior to the assassination of the President of the United States, I had no information indicating violence on the part of Lee Harvey Oswald. I wish the record to so read.

Mr. STERN. The newspaper story also mentioned another officer of the Dallas police force, V. J. "Jackie" Brian.

Mr. HOSTY. I know him as Jackie Brian.

Mr. STERN. Do you know this officer?

Mr. HOSTY. I know him to see him. I don't know him too well.

Mr. STERN. Do you recall whether or not he was present when you had your conversation with Lieutenant Revill?

Mr. HOSTY. I don't recall him being present. I was addressing my remarks to Lieutenant Revill.

Mr. STERN. Have you heard that there was a rumor to the effect of this story at any time before this newspaper article appeared?

Mr. HOSTY. About 2 weeks prior I heard a rumor, but I didn't know exactly what the story was all about. I did hear a rumor.

Mr. STERN. What was the tone and tenor of the rumor?

Mr. HOSTY. That I had made some statement concerning Oswald's assassinating the President. I wasn't clear. I was never given the exact wording. It involved my conversation with Lieutenant Revill.

Mr. STERN. Have you talked to Lieutenant Revill since this news story appeared?

Mr. HOSTY. No, sir; not since the news story appeared.

Mr. STERN. To Chief Curry?

Mr. HOSTY. No, sir.

Mr. STERN. To any supervising official of the Dallas police force?

Mr. HOSTY. No, sir.

Mr. STERN. To any newspaper reporter for any Dallas newspaper or otherwise?

Mr. HOSTY. They had contacted me for comment, and I have had no comment other than the first person who called me, I denied the story. Since then I have had no comment on instructions from headquarters.

Mr. STERN. Have you reviewed your affidavit in preparation for your testimony here today?

Mr. HOSTY. Yes, sir.

Mr. STERN. Is there anything you would like to add to it other than what you have already said?

Mr. HOSTY. No, sir. I think it speaks for itself.

Mr. STERN. Any change you would like to make in it?

Mr. HOSTY. No, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. Off the record.

(Discussion off the record.)

The CHAIRMAN. Will you put this on the record, please?

Mr. Rankin, is there anything in the record of the Commission showing that Lieutenant Revill made a report to his superior officers concerning this statement that is alleged to have been made by Agent Hosty in this newspaper article?

Mr. RANKIN. The only thing that we have is this affidavit which you will note is Commission Exhibit 709.

The CHAIRMAN. Yes.

Mr. RANKIN. And it bears the date November 22, 1963, at the top, and is sworn to as of the 7th day of April 1964. That is what Chief Curry testified he received from Lieutenant Revill.

The CHAIRMAN. Has Lieutenant Revill been a witness before the Commission or has he made a statement, a deposition of any kind?

Mr. RANKIN. He has not been a witness before the Commission.

Mr. REDLICH. He was talked to in Dallas.

Mr. RANKIN. He was a deposition witness.

The CHAIRMAN. When was that?

Mr. RANKIN. I will have to check that.

The CHAIRMAN. Was it before or after this affidavit?

Mr. RANKIN. I will have to check that, Mr. Chief Justice, to be sure.

The CHAIRMAN. Did he in that deposition state that Agent Hosty had made such a statement to him?

Mr. RANKIN. I haven't examined the deposition. I don't know. We have the deposition now, but I have not examined it.

The CHAIRMAN. Do you know, Professor Redlich?

Mr. REDLICH. Mr. Chief Justice, I asked that question, and the information I have is that he was not questioned about this particular allegation. He was questioned on other matters.

Representative FORD. Did he volunteer that information?

The CHAIRMAN. Yes. Is it in the deposition at all?

Mr. REDLICH. To the best of my knowledge, it is not, Mr. Chief Justice.

Mr. McCLOY. Don't we have the deposition here? Can't we get it?

Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Chief Justice, I would like to be sure to check that before we have that on the record. I will report by morning, if that is all right, and be sure of it.

The CHAIRMAN. What was the date of this newspaper article? It isn't dated here.

Mr. STERN. The cover letter, Mr. Chief Justice, states that it appeared on April 24, 1964.

The CHAIRMAN. Do I understand that Chief Curry said that no statement of that kind had been made by Lieutenant Revill at or about the time the statement was supposed to have been made by Agent Hosty?

Mr. RANKIN. I don't think his testimony was in that form, Mr. Chief Justice. It was in the form that this was given to him and there wasn't any indication that it was given as of the date of November 22 in his testimony.

The CHAIRMAN. I should like to see Lieutenant Revill's deposition.

Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Redlich has gone out for it.

The CHAIRMAN. We won't delay that now. We will proceed. Go right ahead, Mr. Stern.

Mr. STERN. What happened next?

Mr. HOSTY. As I said, I left Lieutenant Revill. I entered the office of Capt. Will Fritz. After a short delay, Agent James W. Bookhout and myself entered the inner office of Capt. Will Fritz of the homicide section, Dallas Police Department, where Lee Harvey Oswald was being questioned.

Mr. STERN. I show you a two-page document marked Commission No. 832 for identification. Can you identify that?

Mr. HOSTY. Yes, sir. This is an interview form which I made for my interview with Lee Harvey Oswald on the 22d of November 1963. It was dictated as the form will indicate, on the 23d of November 1963.

Mr. STERN. Let me ask you there, Mr. Hosty, about your practice in reducing to formal form your notes of interviews. This happened the next day?

Mr. HOSTY. Right.

Mr. STERN. Is that faster than usual because of the circumstances?

Mr. HOSTY. Because of the circumstances. We have to reduce them to writing within 5 days.

Mr. STERN. In 5 days?

Mr. HOSTY. Five working days.

Mr. STERN. Did you retain the notes of this?

Mr. HOSTY. No. After the interview is reduced to writing, I get it back and proofread it. My notes are then destroyed because this is the record.

Mr. STERN. And in this particular instance did you destroy your notes of this?

Mr. HOSTY. Yes, sir.

Mr. STERN. Now you say that you are required to reduce your notes of an interview to writing within 5 working days.

Mr. HOSTY. Right.

Mr. STERN. Did that happen with respect to the interviews you conducted on October 29, November 1, and November 5?

Mr. HOSTY. To make this a little clearer, this would be an interview of a subject, not of a witness, unless this witness has something that was quite pertinent to the investigation.

Routine-type matters do not have to be put on these interview forms, but pertinent interviews would be. Now everything in this case after the assassination was declared to be pertinent. All interviews, regardless of how insignificant, were to be put on these forms.

Mr. STERN. But the interviews you conducted at the beginning of November and the end of October were not within this rule?

Mr. HOSTY. No; because they were not an interview of the subject or anything that contained anything of major importance.

Mr. STERN. Do you yourself destroy the notes?

Mr. HOSTY. Yes.

Mr. STERN. Do you recall specifically destroying the notes of your interview?

Mr. HOSTY. Yes, sir; in the wastebasket.

Mr. STERN. Your interview of Oswald, on November 22, you put the notes in the wastebasket?

Mr. HOSTY. Right.

Mr. STERN. Do you recall specifically what you did with the notes of your interviews of October 29, November 1, and November 5?

Mr. HOSTY. After I reduced them to writing, such as I did here, and I got the form back, I proofread it, then I threw them away.

Mr. STERN. And you testified that the notes of your end of October--early November interviews were transcribed after November 22, is that correct?

Mr. HOSTY. Right.

Mr. STERN. Were the notes destroyed after you transcribed those interviews, also after November 22?

Mr. HOSTY. Yes.

Mr. STERN. Did you give any consideration to retaining the notes in view of the turn that the case had taken?

Mr. HOSTY. No.

Mr. STERN. The intervening assassination?

Mr. HOSTY. No; because this is the record and the notes would not be as good as this record, because the notes are not written out fully as this is. It would just be abbreviations and things of that type.

Mr. STERN. And you received no instructions about retaining notes?

Mr. HOSTY. No; we had no instructions. We were following the same rule we had always followed.

Mr. STERN. Why don't you tell us now, turning to your memorandum of the November 22 interview of Lee Harvey Oswald, what transpired from the time you first entered Captain Fritz' office.

Mr. HOSTY. As this interview form will show, the interview commenced at 3:15 p.m. I am certain of that time because I checked my wristwatch, and Agent Bookhout checked my wristwatch. We both agreed on the time, 3:15. We came in and identified ourselves as agents of the FBI. I told Oswald my name and he reacted violently.

Mr. STERN. How do you mean?

Mr. HOSTY. To both Agent Bookhout and myself. He adopted an extremely hostile attitude towards the FBI.

Mr. STERN. Was it the FBI or the name Hosty?

Mr. HOSTY. Both. He reacted to the fact that we were FBI, and he made the remark to me, "Oh, so you are Hosty. I've heard about you."

He then started to cuss at us, and so forth, and I tried to talk to him to calm him down. The more I talked to him the worse he got, so I just stopped talking to him, just sat back in the corner and pretty soon he stopped his ranting and raving.

Mr. STERN. What was he saying? Please be specific.

Mr. HOSTY. Well, he said, "I am going to fix you FBI," and he made some derogatory remarks about the Director and about FBI agents in general. I don't specifically recall the exact wording he used.

Representative FORD. Had this been the attitude that existed prior to you and Bookhout coming into the----

Mr. HOSTY. Apparently not; apparently not. I couldn't say because I wasn't in the room. We walked into the room. I immediately identified myself, told him I was with the FBI, and was a law-enforcement officer, and anything he said to me could be used against him. He did not have to talk to us.

Senator COOPER. Can you describe the tone of his voice and his manner?

Mr. HOSTY. I beg your pardon, sir?

Senator COOPER. Can you describe the tone of his voice?

Mr. HOSTY. He was highly excited. He was very surly, I think would be about the best way to describe him, very surly; and he was curt in his answers to us, snarled at us. That would be his general attitude.

Representative FORD. Did he use profanity?

Mr. HOSTY. Yes, sir. I can't recall any specific statements he made, however.

Mr. McCLOY. Did he complain that you had been abusing or harassing his wife in anyway?

Mr. HOSTY. He made the statement, "If you want to talk to me don't bother my wife. Come and see me." He didn't say that I had abused his wife in any manner, and I hadn't. He did criticize me for talking to her. He said, "Come talk to me if you want to talk to me."

Representative FORD. Is that why he knew your name, because of your conversations with her?

Mr. HOSTY. Yes; apparently.

Mr. STERN. Had you ever seen Oswald before?

Mr. HOSTY. Not until that time. That was the first time I had seen him.

Senator COOPER. Can you remember what he said about the FBI specifically?

Mr. HOSTY. He called us gestapo, secret police, we were harassing people. It was along that line. I don't recall the exact wording.

Mr. STERN. Was he handcuffed at this time?

Mr. HOSTY. He was handcuffed behind him. After he calmed down he asked Captain Fritz if they could remove the handcuffs. Captain Fritz ordered one of his detectives to remove them from the rear, and they handcuffed him in front.

Mr. STERN. This happened right after you came into the room?

Mr. HOSTY. Shortly after we came in the room.

Mr. STERN. Before or after his outburst?

Mr. HOSTY. After his outburst; after he had calmed down.

Mr. STERN. Please continue.

Mr. HOSTY. Captain Fritz actually conducted the interview. Agent Bookhout and myself sat back in the corner and observed. Captain Fritz asked Oswald if he had ever owned the rifle. He denied he had ever owned a rifle. He said that he had seen the superintendent of the School Book Depository with a rifle in his office a couple of days before the assassination, but that he had never had a rifle in the building. He then told Captain Fritz that he had been to the Soviet Union and resided there for 3 years, and he had many friends in the Soviet Union. Captain Fritz then showed him a piece of paper which had "Fair Play for Cuba" on it, and Oswald admitted to Captain Fritz that he was secretary for the Fair Play for Cuba Committee in New Orleans a few months ago.

He told Captain Fritz that the Fair Play for Cuba Committee had its headquarters in New York City. Captain Fritz then showed Oswald a marksman's medal from the Marine Corps, and Oswald admitted that this was his medal, that he had received a sharpshooter's medal while in the Marine Corps.

Mr. McCLOY. Was it a sharpshooter's or a marksman's? There are two different types, you know.

Mr. HOSTY. I believe it was a sharpshooter, sir. He then told Captain Fritz that he had been living at 1026 North Beckley, that is in Dallas, Tex., at 1026 North Beckley under the name O. H. Lee and not under his true name.

Oswald admitted that he was present in the Texas School Book Depository Building on the 22d of November 1963, where he had been employed since the 15th of October. Oswald told Captain Fritz that he was a laborer in this building and had access to the entire building. It had offices on the first and second floors with storage on third, fourth, fifth and sixth floors.

Oswald told Captain Fritz that he went to lunch at approximately noon on the 22d of November, ate his lunch in the lunchroom, and had gone and gotten a Coca Cola from the Coca Cola machine to have with his lunch. He claimed that he was in the lunchroom at the time President Kennedy passed the building.

He was asked why he left the School Book Depository that day, and he stated that in all the confusion he was certain that there would be no more work for the rest of the day, that everybody was too upset, there was too much confusion, so he just decided that there would be no work for the rest of the day and so he went home. He got on a bus and went home. He went to his residence on North Beckley, changed his clothes, and then went to a movie.

Captain Fritz asked him if he always carried a pistol when he went to the movie, and he said he carried it because he felt like it. He admitted that he did have a pistol on him at the time of his arrest, in this theatre, in the Oak Cliff area of Dallas. He further admitted that he had resisted arrest and had received a bump and a cut as a result of his resisting of arrest. He then denied that he had killed Officer Tippit or President Kennedy.

Mr. STERN. The memorandum says, "Oswald frantically denied shooting"----

Mr. HOSTY. It should be emphatically, I believe, rather than frantically. I think this probably should be "emphatically denied."

Mr. STERN. Is this your memorandum?

Mr. HOSTY. Yes, sir.

Mr. STERN. It is signed or initialed both by you and by Mr. Bookhout.

Mr. HOSTY. Right. The procedure is that when there are two agents involved, they both must approve it, so there can be no discrepancies.

Mr. STERN. But you dictated it.

Mr. HOSTY. I dictated it and he read it and we both approved it.

Mr. STERN. Have you been over it recently in preparation for your testimony?

Mr. HOSTY. Yes, sir.

Mr. STERN. Is it accurate? Is there anything you would like to add to it?

Mr. HOSTY. I think it is correct as it stands.

Mr. McCLOY. I didn't hear you repeating your testimony that he denied ever having been in Mexico.

Mr. HOSTY. Oh, yes; he was being questioned about his activities outside of the United States, where he had been outside of the United States. He told Captain Fritz that he had only been to Mexico to visit at Tijuana on the border, and then he did admit having been in Russia.

Mr. McCLOY. He only admitted to having been at Tijuana in Mexico?

Mr. HOSTY. Right.

Mr. McCLOY. Not to Mexico City.

Mr. HOSTY. Not to Mexico City; that is right.

Representative FORD. There was no recording made of this interrogation?

Mr. HOSTY. No, sir; it was notes I took. Agent Bookhout and I took notes, and we dictated from the notes the next day.

Mr. STERN. Did you ask him any questions?

Mr. HOSTY. No; like I say, he was acting in such a hostile condition towards us that we did not. This was Captain Fritz' interview anyway. We were just sitting in as observers.

Mr. STERN. Did you tell Captain Fritz at this time any of the information you had about Oswald, about his trip to Mexico, for example?

Mr. HOSTY. No.

Mr. STERN. About his being in touch with the Russian authorities seeking a visa?

Mr. HOSTY. No.

Mr. STERN. About his previous residence in the Soviet Union?

Mr. HOSTY. Oswald himself told Captain Fritz of this. I didn't have to. Oswald came right out and told him.

Mr. STERN. About the affair in New Orleans and his arrest there?

Mr. HOSTY. No.

Mr. STERN. Did you subsequently tell Captain Fritz?

Mr. HOSTY. No; I didn't tell Captain Fritz; no.

Mr. STERN. Was any of this information provided to the Dallas police as far as you know?

Mr. HOSTY. I provided it to Lieutenant Revill earlier, as I pointed out. He would have been the person I would have furnished this information to as the head of the intelligence section. He would be the logical and correct person to give this information to.

Mr. STERN. Was that the extent of your advice to the Dallas police?

Mr. HOSTY. Right.

Mr. McCLOY. Did you tell Chief Curry that you had a file?

Mr. HOSTY. No, sir; I haven't talked to Chief Curry in several years. Of course I don't deal with him too much on a chief level.

Mr. STERN. Wouldn't it be difficult for Lieutenant Revill to have gotten this information from you under the conditions that you described, running up the stairway and the rest of it? Do you think he heard enough of this?

Mr. HOSTY. Well, that is true, he might not have. But you see Oswald then proceeded to tell himself, he told the police all this information, so there was no point in me repeating it when he himself, Oswald, had furnished it directly to the police.

Mr. McCLOY. But you did tell Revill that you had a file on Oswald?

Mr. HOSTY. No; I didn't tell him I had a file; no, sir.

Mr. McCLOY. You did not?

Mr. HOSTY. Just as I related here in the affidavit.

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Hosty, I think the answer to this question is implicit in your testimony, but I would just like to ask it directly. Did you or anyone in the FBI to your knowledge for compensation or in any manner whatsoever use Oswald as an informant in any way, shape or form?

Mr. HOSTY. I have previously furnished a sworn affidavit to this Commission to the effect that I had never seen or talked to Lee Harvey Oswald prior to the 22d of November 1963. I had never made payments of any kind to him, and, in addition, I had never made any attempt to develop him as an informant or source of information. I have made a sworn affidavit to that effect.

The CHAIRMAN. Your answer to my question then is "No."

Mr. HOSTY. Correct.

Mr. STERN. This might be a good opportunity, Mr. Chairman, to have him identify this affidavit. I show you from Commission Exhibit 825 a one-page affidavit. Can you----

Mr. HOSTY. This is my affidavit. This is my signature.

Mr. STERN. And it was made when?

Mr. HOSTY. On the 5th day of February 1964.

Mr. STERN. Why don't you read that?

Mr. HOSTY. "I, James P. Hosty, Jr., Special Agent of the Federal Bureau of Investigation since January 21, 1952, having been duly sworn, make the following statement:

"At no time prior to the assassination of President John F. Kennedy did I ever see or talk to Lee Harvey Oswald. I have never made payments of any kind to him. In addition, I have never made any attempt to develop him as an informant or source of information."

Signed, James P. Hosty, Jr., Special Agent, Federal Bureau of Investigation.

Mr. STERN. Mr. Chairman, may we have admitted Exhibits 831 and 832, which Mr. Hosty has identified, the letter from the Director of the FBI enclosing Mr. Hosty's affidavit as 831, and 832, which is his two-page memorandum on the interview?

The CHAIRMAN. That may be admitted with those numbers.

(The items marked Commission Exhibits Nos. 831 and 832 for identification were received in evidence.)

The CHAIRMAN. Is that all, Mr. Stern?

Mr. STERN. There are a few other points.

The CHAIRMAN. Let's hurry them along.

Mr. STERN. To conclude that last point, Mr. Hosty, do you have any knowledge of anyone else in the government service, either FBI or any other branch----

Mr. HOSTY. No, sir.

Mr. STERN. That tried or was successful in recruiting Lee Harvey Oswald as an informant or employee or agent?

Mr. HOSTY. No, sir.

Mr. STERN. Did you see Oswald again after the interview that Captain Fritz conducted?

Mr. HOSTY. No.

Mr. STERN. What did you do when this interview concluded?

Mr. HOSTY. As I stated here, he was removed from Captain Fritz' office at 4:05 p.m. Here again I checked my wristwatch, so I am certain the time is correct.

I then went to the outer office of Capt. Will Fritz and remained there until approximately 8 p.m. that evening.

Mr. STERN. You did not attend any of the lineups?

Mr. HOSTY. No, sir.

Mr. STERN. Did you talk to any member of the Secret Service at this time?

Mr. HOSTY. Yes, sir; at approximately 6 p.m. on the 22d of November 1963, Special Agent in Charge Forrest V. Sorrels of the United States Secret Service entered Captain Fritz' office with about five or six Secret Service agents. He then proceeded to interview Lee Harvey Oswald, I was not present during this interview.

I did see him take Lee Oswald to the rear of Captain Fritz' outer office and interview Lee Oswald. It appeared to me that Forrest Sorrels of the Secret Service had appeared for the purpose of representing the United States Secret Service in this investigation. I was aware at this time that the FBI did not have jurisdiction over this matter, that is, the assassination of the President of the United States, and that if any Federal agency did have jurisdiction, it would be the United States Secret Service. As I later determined, no Federal agency had jurisdiction over this assassination.

When Forrest Sorrels concluded his interview with Lee Oswald, I called him aside and advised him that there was some additional information on Lee Oswald which the FBI headquarters in Washington could furnish to the headquarters of the Secret Service in Washington, and that there were two items, and that I did not feel that I could give them to him directly since they were secret in nature.

Mr. STERN. Was anyone else present during this conversation?

Mr. HOSTY. As I said, this took place in the outer office of Capt. Will Fritz. There were about 30 or 40 people milling around out there. There were three or four Texas Rangers. There were perhaps a dozen Dallas police officers. There were, as I said, five or six Secret Service agents.

There were three other FBI agents besides myself, various clerical personnel from the police department who were assigned to the homicide division. I recognized two postal inspectors. I directed this conversation to Mr. Sorrels. I called him to one side and directed this to him directly.

Mr. STERN. Did you repeat the same information to anyone else later on?

Mr, HOSTY. No, sir.

Mr. STERN. What did you have in mind? What were the two pieces of information?

Mr. HOSTY. The two pieces of information I had in mind were the contacts that Lee Oswald had with the Soviet Embassy in Mexico City, and the contact that he had had with the Soviet Embassy in Washington, D.C.

Mr. STERN. Were you in touch with your Dallas office from the police headquarters regularly during the evening of the 22d?

Mr. HOSTY. Yes. I went out and made phone calls to them, advised them of my interview and how things were going.

Mr. STERN. Did you make any calls directly to Bureau headquarters in Washington?

Mr. HOSTY. I didn't; no, sir.

Mr. STERN. Were you advised at any time on the 22d after you left your office of other information, any other information with regard to Lee Harvey Oswald that had been supplied by Bureau headquarters in Washington through your Dallas office?

Mr. HOSTY. No; that was all, just what I previously related.

Mr. STERN. Just what you mentioned, nothing else came through?

Mr. HOSTY. Nothing else.

Mr. STERN. Were you in the police headquarters on Saturday, the 23d, or Sunday, the 24th, at all?

Mr. HOSTY. No, sir.

Mr. STERN. Did you have any further discussions with Lieutenant Revill that weekend?

Mr. HOSTY. No.

Mr. STERN. At any time until now?

Mr. HOSTY. I have had discussions with him on two occasions since then. We did not discuss this matter of the 22d of November, this conversation of the 22d.

Mr. STERN. Did you discuss the assassination with him on either of these two occasions that you recall?

Mr. HOSTY. No, sir.

Mr. STERN. The only conversation you had with him was going up the stairway from the basement to the third floor of the police headquarters on November 22?

Mr. HOSTY. That is correct.

Representative FORD. Do you recall the dates of these two subsequent meetings with him?

Mr. HOSTY. No, sir; I don't. Just the first time was maybe in January, January sometimes, possibly February, and that was at his office. Then he came to our office maybe in March. I just don't recall the dates.

Representative FORD. But those visits were on matters not at all related to the assassination or the events surrounding it?

Mr. HOSTY. Actually, when he came to our office he was coming to talk to another agent, and I just said "Hello" to him, and we didn't discuss anything official. I just nodded "hello" to him, "How are you doing?" When I went to his office it was in connection with another matter.

Mr. STERN. But on neither occasion did you discuss the assassination or the events surrounding it?

Mr. HOSTY. No, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. Have you any further questions, Congressman Ford?

Representative FORD. What did you do on Saturday and Sunday following, in rough outline, involving the assassination, if anything?

Mr. HOSTY. I worked practically round the clock Saturday night. I didn't go to bed at all, as I recall, Friday night and Saturday. I was covering various leads in connection with the assassination, talking to people who knew Lee Oswald.

I talked to Mrs. Paine, to give you an example, the first thing Saturday morning. I talked to various people that knew Oswald, just covering general investigative leads in connection with the assassination, like everyone else was. But I wasn't working at the police department.

Representative FORD. You weren't at the police department at all on Saturday or Sunday?

Mr. HOSTY. That is correct.

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. McCloy, have you anything?

Mr. McCLOY. I noticed you mentioned Lieutenant Revill and Jackie Brian. There is another name mentioned here, Gordon Shanklin.

Mr. HOSTY. He is the agent in charge of the Dallas FBI Office.

Mr. McCLOY. It doesn't say so in this article, but it may be in this by implication. You said nothing or anything that is comparable to the alleged statement, "We have a suspect who is capable of the assassination of the President, but I never dreamed of it," to your colleague Gordon Shanklin?

Mr. HOSTY. No, sir.

Mr. McCLOY. When you went to talk to Mrs. Paine, did you go over the premises then with her? Did she, for example, show you where Oswald is alleged to have kept the rifle in the garage?

Mr. HOSTY. No, sir; I didn't do that, no.

Mr. McCLOY. Did you, in the course of your followup leads, talk to Mr. Truly?

Mr. HOSTY. Yes, sir.

Mr. McCLOY. Can you tell us what transpired between you and Mr. Truly?

Mr. HOSTY. Yes, sir; I talked to him about----

Mr. McCLOY. Is this anticipating something you have got?

Mr. STERN. No.

Mr. HOSTY. This interview took place quite a bit after the assassination. I did talk to Mr. Truly about I believe it was in January or February of 1964, and it concerned the time that he, Mr. Truly, was aware of the fact that there would be a parade through downtown Dallas. And his recollection was that he was not aware of the fact that the motorcade would pass in front of his building until shortly before noon on the 21st when an article appeared in the Dallas Times Herald.

Now the Dallas Times Herald appears on the street at approximately 10:30 a.m., and Mr. Truly said shortly before noon someone from his office saw this article and mentioned it to the office employees and said they all became excited, and this was apparently the first time anyone at the Texas School Book Depository realized the motorcade was going to pass directly in front of their building.

Representative FORD. This was Thursday?

Mr. HOSTY. Thursday before, yes. It was shortly before noon.

Representative FORD. The 21st?

Mr. HOSTY. On the 21st of November, yes.

Mr. McCLOY. But according to your recollection of what he said, all the employees were excited and became aware of the fact that the motorcade----

Mr. HOSTY. At that time.

Mr. McCLOY. At that time was going to pass the School Book Depository.

Mr. HOSTY. Right.

Mr. McCLOY. Did you notice that Oswald said in the course of his interview by Captain Fritz that he had not had a rifle but he had seen a rifle in the possession of Mr. Truly?

Mr. HOSTY. Right.

Mr. McCLOY. Did you interrogate Mr. Truly about that?

Mr. HOSTY. No, I didn't.

Mr. McCLOY. Do you know whether anyone else did?

Mr. HOSTY. I can't say for certain, no.

(Discussion off the record.)

Mr. McCLOY. Back on the record.

Do you know, Mr. Rankin, whether or not Mr. Truly has been interviewed on this subject?

Mr. RANKIN. It has been reported to me by the staff that he has.

Mr. McCLOY. Does he deny it, do you know?

Mr. RANKIN. He denies it.

Mr. McCLOY. He denies it?

Mr. RANKIN. Yes.

Mr. McCLOY. But we have no deposition from him in that regard as yet.

Mr. BELIN. No; we do not.

Senator COOPER. May I ask first as to Exhibit No. 830, you have it?

Mr. HOSTY. Yes, sir.

Senator COOPER. Does that represent statements made to you?

Mr. HOSTY. Yes, sir.

Senator COOPER. On November 5, did Mrs. Ruth Paine tell you that she thought Lee Oswald was an illogical person?

Mr. HOSTY. Yes, sir.

Senator COOPER. And that he admitted to her being a Trotskyite Communist?

Mr. HOSTY. Yes, sir.

Senator COOPER. Did you know that he had engaged in this Fair Play for Cuba demonstration in New Orleans and had been arrested?

Mr. HOSTY. Yes, sir.

Senator COOPER. You were told on November 1 that he was employed at the Texas School Book Depository?

Mr. HOSTY. Yes, sir.

Senator COOPER. Had you checked there to see if he was employed?

Mr. HOSTY. I made a pretext interview on the 4th.

Senator COOPER. On what day?

Mr. HOSTY. The 4th of November.

Senator COOPER. Considering that he was a defector, you knew he was a defector?

Mr. HOSTY. Yes, sir.

Senator COOPER. And considering that he had been engaged in this demonstration in New Orleans, and the statement that Mrs. Paine had made to you, did it occur to you at all that he was a potentially dangerous person?

Mr. HOSTY. No, sir.

Senator COOPER. Why?

Mr. HOSTY. There is no indication from something of that type that he would commit a violent act. This is not the form that a person of that type would necessarily take. This would not in any way indicate to me that he was capable of violence.

Senator COOPER. I believe you testified that you didn't know the route of the----

Mr. HOSTY. That is correct, sir.

Senator COOPER. Of the procession which passed the Texas School Book Depository?

Mr. HOSTY. That is correct, sir.

Senator COOPER. Did it occur to you to communicate this information to the Secret Service or the Dallas police about Oswald?

Mr. HOSTY. No, sir; there would be no reason for me to give it to them.

Mr. McCLOY. You did know he was lying though, didn't you?

Mr. HOSTY. Yes, sir.

Mr. McCLOY. Don't you think the combination of the fact that you knew that he was lying and that he was a defector and that he had this record with the Fair Play for Cuba, that he might be involved in some intrigue that would be if not necessarily violent, he was a dangerous security risk?

Mr. HOSTY. He was a security risk of a sort, but not the type of person who would engage in violence. That would be the indication.

Representative FORD. What are the criteria for a man being a potential violent man? Is this a subjective test?

Mr. HOSTY. You mean to the point where we would report him to the Secret Service?

Representative FORD. Yes.

Mr. HOSTY. It is instructions we had as of the 22d of November, we had to have some indication that the person planned to take some action against the safety of the President of the United States or the Vice President.

Representative FORD. How do you evaluate that? Do you have any criteria?

Mr. HOSTY. No; at that time it was that there had to be some actual indication of plan or a plot.

Representative FORD. There had to be a conspiracy of some sort?

Mr. HOSTY. Well, or a single person doing something if anyone was going to take any action against the safety of the President or Vice President.

Representative FORD. I think you testified earlier that at the time of the motorcade you were at your lunch hour.

Mr. HOSTY. Right.

Representative FORD. And were actually eating lunch? When a President visits a community, is the FBI or its people assigned any responsibilities as far as the security of the President is concerned?

Mr. HOSTY. Prior to November 22, I know of no incidents where the FBI was called in to help the Secret Service, to my knowledge.

Representative FORD. And particularly on this day none of the----

Mr. HOSTY. Definitely not.

Representative FORD. Of the people in the FBI in the Dallas area were given any assignments?

Mr. HOSTY. That is correct.

Representative FORD. For the security of the President?

Mr. HOSTY. That is correct.

Mr. McCLOY. Mr. Hosty, let me ask you this: Suppose you had known that that motorcade was going to go past the School Book Depository, do you think your action would have been any different?

Mr. HOSTY. No, sir; it wouldn't have been any different.

Mr. McCLOY. Even though you knew that he was located there?

Mr. HOSTY. Right.

Mr. McCLOY. And that he was a defector?

Mr. HOSTY. Right.

The CHAIRMAN. Senator.

Senator COOPER. Have you received any evidence that any person other than Lee Oswald was involved in the assassination of President Kennedy?

Mr. HOSTY. No, sir; I have no knowledge of anyone else.

Senator COOPER. Did you know anything about the attempt on General Walker's life?

Mr. HOSTY. I have read in the newspapers about the attempt on General Walker's life; yes.

Senator COOPER. Your office was not connected with an investigation of that?

Mr. HOSTY. No; this was not a matter under the jurisdiction of the FBI. It was under the jurisdiction of the Dallas Police Department.

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Hosty, you told us what your instructions were concerning dangerous persons as of the 22d of November. Have they been changed?

Mr. HOSTY. I think Mr. Belmont will bring that up tomorrow if it be all right. Yes; they have been.

The CHAIRMAN. You will be sure to ask him that to get that from him.

Are there any other questions, gentlemen?

Mr. McCLOY. Mr. Hosty, are you still engaged in any aspects of the assassination?

Mr. HOSTY. Oh, yes. I am still involved in the investigation of it, what investigation we still have.

Mr. McCLOY. And any odds and ends that come up?

Mr. HOSTY. Right.

Mr. McCLOY. You are still in the process of investigating?

Mr. HOSTY. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. I would like to ask Professor Redlich, did you find anything in the deposition of lieutenant, what was his name?

Mr. REDLICH. Revill.

The CHAIRMAN. Revill, on this subject?

Mr. REDLICH. No, sir. Lieutenant Revill was deposed on Tuesday, March 31, by Mr. Hubert of the Commission's staff.

The CHAIRMAN. What date?

Mr. REDLICH. March 31, 1964. The deposition consisted almost entirely of questions relating to Mr. Revill's responsibilities in connection with the investigation of the murder of Lee Harvey Oswald, and during the course of that interrogation there is nothing at all on the matter which was the subject of Commission Exhibit No. 709.

The CHAIRMAN. Is there any reference in his testimony to his going up the stairs with Agent Hosty on the 22d of November?

Mr. REDLICH. No, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. Nothing concerning that particular time in the police station?

Mr. REDLICH. No; there was not.

The CHAIRMAN. Very well. That is all.

Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Chief Justice, I answered Mr. McCloy's question in error about Mr. Truly. Mr. Belin tells me that he examined the FBI statement, and there is a statement by Mr. Truly in regard to two rifles in which he explains it, as he says, innocently. Mr. Belin, would you tell for the record what that is?

Mr. BELIN. I would almost rather wait until tomorrow morning to have the FBI reports before the Commission, if I can. I think it is a friend brought a rifle.

The CHAIRMAN. It would be better to have the report itself here.

Mr. BELIN. I will have that for the Commission tomorrow morning, sir.

Mr. McCLOY. I think, Mr. Hosty, you have probably answered this question which is very closely related to that which Senator Cooper asked you. You testified that you were continuing your investigation of various aspects of this case. You have not thus far at least unearthed anything which could be called in the nature of a conspiracy?

Mr. HOSTY. No, sir.

Mr. McCLOY. In connection with this assassination?

Mr. HOSTY. You mean involving someone else?

Mr. McCLOY. Someone else?

Mr. HOSTY. No.

Mr. McCLOY. Other than----

Mr. HOSTY. Lee Oswald.

Mr. McCLOY. Oswald. And that would cover certainly any connection with Mr. Ruby?

Mr. HOSTY. That is correct.

Mr. McCLOY. Have you ever interviewed Mr. Ruby?

Mr. HOSTY. No, sir.

Mr. McCLOY. I think that is all I have.

The CHAIRMAN. Are there any other questions?

Congressman Ford?

Representative FORD. I think earlier, Mr. Hosty, you indicated that the case of Oswald was under your jurisdiction?

Mr. HOSTY. Was assigned to me; yes, sir.

Representative FORD. Assigned to you?

Mr. HOSTY. Yes, sir.

Representative FORD. As I recall the language you indicated that documents or papers or reports came to you?

Mr. HOSTY. Correct.

Representative FORD. Would this go through the special agent in charge of the Dallas area or what would it be?

Mr. HOSTY. Here would be the procedure. The mail would be received at the chief clerk's office. They would then match it up with the proper file, and take it to the supervisor in question.

Representative FORD. Who is that?

Mr. HOSTY. Mr. Kenneth Howe was supervisor of the internal security squad, and he would get it first, would read it, and then route it to the agent to whom the case was assigned.

Representative FORD. So Mr. Howe----

Mr. HOSTY. Yes.

Representative FORD. Was knowledgeable about the Oswald case?

Mr. HOSTY. Right.

Representative FORD. Now how knowledgeable would a person in that capacity be about this case?

Mr. HOSTY. Well, I might point out where I would have 25 to 40 cases that I was working on, he might have 500 to 700 cases he was supervising, so obviously he couldn't pay as much attention to the details of the case as the agent to whom it was assigned.

Representative FORD. He saw all the documents that came in or went out involving this case?

Mr. HOSTY. This case and many other cases.

Representative FORD. Did you and Mr. Howe ever discuss the Oswald case prior to the assassination?

Mr. HOSTY. I have no recollection of any discussion of the case; no.

Representative FORD. Is this unusual or is this typical?

Mr. HOSTY. There would be a discussion if in my opinion there was something I wanted to consult him on or if in his opinion there was something he wanted to consult me on. If he thought I was handling the case all right, and I had no questions, we would not discuss the case.

Representative FORD. Your recollection is that in this instance you and Mr. Howe had no such discussion?

Mr. HOSTY. That is my recollection.

Mr. McCLOY. After this one interview in which you participated at least in part with Lieutenant or Captain Fritz, I forgot what his rank is----

Mr. HOSTY. Captain Fritz.

Mr. McCLOY. Captain Fritz, did you ever interview or were you ever a participant in an interview of Oswald thereafter?

Mr. HOSTY. No; this was the only time I participated.

Mr. McCLOY. Did you return to the police headquarters the next day?

Mr. HOSTY. No, sir.

Mr. McCLOY. You weren't there when Oswald was shot?

Mr. HOSTY. No, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, Mr. Hosty.

Mr. HOSTY. Thank you, Mr. Chief Justice.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you for your help. We are very glad to have seen you, sir.

The meeting will adjourn.

(Whereupon, at 5:10 p.m., the President's Commission recessed.)

Transcriber's Notes:

Punctuation and spelling were made consistent when a predominant preference was found in this book; otherwise they were not changed.

Misspellings in quoted evidence not changed; misspellings that could be due to mispronunciations were not changed.

Some simple typographical errors were corrected.

Inconsistent hyphenation of compound words retained.

Ambiguous end-of-line hyphens retained.

Occasional uses of "Mr." for "Mrs." and of "Mrs." for "Mr." corrected.

Dubious repeated words, (e.g., "What took place by way of of conversation?") retained.

Several unbalanced quotation marks not remedied.

Occasional periods that should be question marks not changed.

Occasional periods that should be commas, and commas that should be periods, were changed only when they clearly had been misprinted (at the end of a paragraph or following a speaker's name in small-caps at the beginning of a line). Some commas and semi-colons were printed so faintly that they appear to be periods or colons: some were found and corrected, but some almost certainly remain.

The Index and illustrated Exhibits volumes of this series may not be available at Project Gutenberg.

Page 21: "intransit to the FBI" perhaps should be "in transit".

Page 21: "Mr. Dulles. Is is likely" should be "Is it likely".

Page 36: "With you permission" should be "your".

Page 48: "Frankly, I don't know what there conclusion was" should be "their".

Page 68: "protrusion" was misprinted as "protrustion"; corrected here.

Page 79: "this cotton of this cotton" should be "or".

Page 107: "Several sutures of chromic gut where used" probably should be "were used".

Page 138: "alignement" was printed that way.

Page 139: "alinement" was printed that way.

Page 159: "we had a plane to fall" was printed that way.

Page 279: "so help you God" was misprinted as "held"; corrected here.

Page 320: "We would has asked them" was printed that way.

Pages 394 and 395: "Hideel" and "Hidell" both used.

Page 397: "October 13 1958" was printed without a comma after "13".

Page 439: "Mr. Quigley. I show you an envelope" was printed as though Mr. Quigley was the speaker, but in context, this must have been spoken by Mr. Stern.

Page 467: "harassing his wife in anyway?" probably should be "any way".

Spotted a typo or a problem in this chapter? Tell us