Warren Commission (05 of 26): Hearings Vol. V (of 15) (part 3 of 6)

Warren Commission (05 of 26): Hearings Vol. V (of 15) (part 3 of 6)

Mr. KELLEY. I was shown a drawing of--that was prepared by some medical technicians indicating the point of entry.

Mr. SPECTER. Permit me to show you Commission Exhibit No. 386, which has heretofore been marked and introduced into evidence, and I ask you if that is the drawing that you were shown as the basis for the marking of the wound on the back of the President's neck.

Mr. KELLEY. Yes.

Mr. SPECTER. And the record will show, may it please the Commission, that this was made by the autopsy surgeons at Bethesda.

And was there any marking placed on the back of Governor Connally?

Mr. KELLEY. Yes; there was a marking placed on the back of his coat in the area where the medical testimony had indicated the bullet had entered Governor Connally.

Mr. SPECTER. And what coat was worn by the stand-in for Governor Connally?

Mr. KELLEY. It was the coat that Governor Connally was wearing at the time he was injured.

Mr. SPECTER. And was the chalk circle placed around the hole which appeared on the back of that coat garment?

Mr. KELLEY. It was.

Mr. SPECTER. Were certain tests made by the Secret Service shortly after the day of the assassination?

Mr. KELLEY. Yes.

Mr. SPECTER. And were those tests reduced to photographs which were compiled in an album?

Mr. KELLEY. Yes; in Commission Document No. 88, we took some photographs of the scene of the assassination on December 5, 1963, from the window of the Texas Book Depository, and from the street.

Mr. SPECTER. The number which you refer to bears Commission No. 88, which is an index number which was given for internal Commission document filing, but it has not been marked as a Commission exhibit.

I would now like to mark it Commission Exhibit No. 875 and move for its admission into evidence.

The CHAIRMAN. It may be admitted.

(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 875 for identification, and received in evidence.)

Mr. SPECTER. Does a photograph in that group show the condition of the foliage of the trees in the vicinity where the assassination occurred?

Mr. KELLEY. Yes.

Mr. SPECTER. And is there----

Mr. DULLES. One question. This photograph was taken, though, several weeks later, wasn't it?

Mr. KELLEY. On December 5.

Mr. DULLES. That was 2 weeks later.

Mr. KELLEY. Two weeks later; yes, sir.

Mr. DULLES. So the foliage would presumably be somewhat less in that picture, would it not, than it was on November 22?

Mr. KELLEY. No; actually, the foliage hadn't changed very much even in the latest tests we are making.

The CHAIRMAN. It was an evergreen?

Mr. KELLEY. It was an oak tree, Mr. Chief Justice, I have been told the foliage doesn't change much during the year. They call it pine oak. Some people call it a life oak. But the people down there I talked to said it was called a pine oak.

Mr. SPECTER. And did you observe the foliage on the tree on May 24?

Mr. KELLEY. I did, sir.

Mr. SPECTER. And would you state the relative condition of that foliage, as contrasted with the photographs you have before you taken on December 5?

Mr. KELLEY. It was very similar, practically the same.

Mr. SPECTER. And the description which you have just given applies to a large oak tree which intervened between a point on the sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository Building and any automobile which would have been driven down the center lane of Elm Street in a westerly direction?

Mr. KELLEY. Yes, sir.

Mr. SPECTER. Mr. Chief Justice, the purpose of having Inspector Kelley testify was just to set the scene. That completes our questioning of him.

The CHAIRMAN. Very well. Thank you, Inspector Kelley.

Mr. SPECTER. The next witness will be Inspector Gauthier.

TESTIMONY OF LEO J. GAUTHIER

Mr. SPECTER. Would you state your full name for the record, please?

Mr. GAUTHIER. Leo J. Gauthier.

Mr. SPECTER. And by whom are you employed, sir?

Mr. GAUTHIER. The Federal Bureau of Investigation.

Mr. SPECTER. And what is your rank with the Federal Bureau of Investigation?

Mr. GAUTHIER. Inspector. I am in charge of the Bureau's exhibit section, where we prepare investigative aids, consisting of diagrams, charts, maps, three-dimensional exhibits, in connection with the presentation of cases in court.

Mr. SPECTER. How long have you been employed by the Federal Bureau of Investigation?

Mr. GAUTHIER. Twenty-nine years.

Mr. SPECTER. Did you have occasion to reconstruct certain models to scale in connection with the investigation on the assassination of President Kennedy?

Mr. GAUTHIER. Yes; I did.

Mr. SPECTER. And what model reproduction, if any, did you make of the scene of the assassination itself?

Mr. GAUTHIER. The data, concerning the scene of the assassination, was developed by the Bureau's Exhibits Section, including myself, at the site on December 2, 3, and 4, of 1963. From this data we built a three-dimensional exhibit, one-quarter of an inch to the foot. It contained the pertinent details of the site, including street lights, catch basin, concrete structures in the area, including buildings, grades, scale models of the cars that comprised the motorcade, consisting of the police lead car, the Presidential car, the followup car, the Lincoln open car that the Vice President was riding in, and the followup car behind the Vice-Presidential car.

Mr. SPECTER. On the model of the scene itself, Mr. Gauthier, did you reproduce a portion of the scene which is depicted in Commission Exhibit No. 876?

Mr. GAUTHIER. Yes; I did.

Mr. SPECTER. Handing you that Commission Exhibit No. 876, I will ask you to describe what it represents in toto.

Mr. GAUTHIER. This is an aerial view of the site known as Dealey Plaza, in Dallas, Tex.

It indicates the large buildings that surround this area. They are numbered 1 through 11. It indicates the main streets--Commerce, Main, and Elm Streets, and the roadways through the plaza, including the triple underpass.

Mr. SPECTER. I now hand you a document which has been marked as Commission Exhibit No. 877 and ask you if that document was obtained by you in connection with the survey for the model which you prepared.

Mr. GAUTHIER. Yes; this is a description of Dealey Plaza stating the historical background and the physical description.

Mr. SPECTER. I move at this time for the admission into evidence of Commission Exhibits Nos. 876 and 877.

The CHAIRMAN. They may be admitted.

(The documents referred to were marked Commission Exhibits Nos. 876 and 877 for identification, and received in evidence.)

Mr. SPECTER. Inspector, I now hand you two photographs marked as Commission Exhibits Nos. 878 and 879 and ask you to state what those depict.

(The documents referred to were marked Commission Exhibits Nos. 878 and 879 for identification.)

Mr. GAUTHIER. Commission Exhibit No. 878 is a view of the scale model looking toward the northeast with the Texas School Book Depository Building in the background, together with the Daltex Building, and a portion of the Dallas County Courthouse. It includes the pergola to the left, and the pericycle structure on the right with the reflecting pool in the immediate background.

It also shows the roadway through the plaza, which is an extension of Elm Street, upon which appears miniature scale models of the vehicles in the motorcade.

Mr. DULLES. What motorcade is this?

Mr. GAUTHIER. We are depicting the Presidential motorcade at the time of the assassination, the motorcade that passed that area.

Mr. DULLES. And this was done on what day?

Mr. GAUTHIER. Our data to build this were compiled on December 2, 3, and 4. It took about 5 weeks to prepare this exhibit in Washington.

Mr. SPECTER. Would you now describe what is shown on the photograph?

Mr. GAUTHIER. Commission Exhibit No. 879 is a view of the scale model looking toward the southwest, in the direction of the Triple Underpass, from a position on the sixth floor in the southeast corner window.

Mr. SPECTER. I now hand you two additional photographs marked as Commission Exhibits Nos. 880 and 881, and ask you to state what they represent.

(The documents referred to were marked Commission Exhibits Nos. 880 and 881 for identification.)

Mr. GAUTHIER. Commission Exhibit No. 880 is a scale dimension view of the sixth floor looking toward the southeast corner of the Texas School Book Depository Building.

Mr. SPECTER. And in the corner of that photograph is the area depicted which has been described as the possible site of the rifleman?

Mr. GAUTHIER. That is correct.

Mr. SPECTER. Will you now describe what Exhibit No. 881 shows?

Mr. GAUTHIER. Commission Exhibit No. 881 is a three-dimensional view of leading down from Main Street and Commerce Street. Positioned on the ramps are scale models of an armored van and two police squad cars. There are also miniature mockups of individuals--representing position of people in this area of the basement garage.

Mr. SPECTER. And what event is depicted in that model, if any?

Mr. GAUTHIER. This represents the arrangement, physical arrangement, in the basement at the time Lee Harvey Oswald walked out from the elevator through the jail office onto the basement ramp.

Mr. SPECTER. And where have these models been maintained since the time they were prepared by the FBI?

Mr. GAUTHIER. The models were delivered to the Commission's building and installed in the exhibits room on the first floor, on January 20, 1964.

Mr. SPECTER. Mr. Chief Justice, I now move for the admission into evidence of the photographs 878, 879, 880, and 881.

The CHAIRMAN. They may be admitted.

(The documents heretofore marked for identification as Commission Exhibits Nos. 878, 879, 880, and 881, were received in evidence.)

Mr. SPECTER. Did you participate in the onsite tests made in Dallas?

Mr. GAUTHIER. I did.

Mr. SPECTER. Was a survey made of the scene used to record some of the results of that onsite testing?

Mr. GAUTHIER. Yes.

Mr. SPECTER. And by whom was the survey made?

Mr. GAUTHIER. The survey was made on May 24, 1964, by Robert H. West, county surveyor, a licensed State land surveyor, located at 160 County Courthouse, Dallas, Tex.

Mr. SPECTER. Have you brought the tracing of that survey with you today?

Mr. GAUTHIER. I have; yes.

Mr. SPECTER. And have you brought a cardboard reproduction of that?

Mr. GAUTHIER. A copy made from the tracing; yes.

Mr. SPECTER. Would you produce the cardboard copy made from the tracing for the inspection of the Commission at this time, please?

Mr. GAUTHIER. Yes.

Mr. SPECTER. Would you produce the tracing at this time, please?

Mr. GAUTHIER. Yes; the tracing is wrapped, and sealed in this container.

Mr. SPECTER. Without breaking the seal, I will ask you if the cardboard which has been set up here--may the record show it is a large cardboard. I will ask you for the dimensions in just a minute.

Does the printing on the cardboard represent an exact duplication of the tracing which you have in your hand?

Mr. GAUTHIER. Yes.

Mr. SPECTER. May it please the Commission, we will mark the tracing Commission Exhibit No. 882, and not take it out, since the cardboard represents it, and place Commission Exhibit No. 883 on the cardboard drawing itself, and I would like to move for the admission into evidence of both Exhibits Nos. 882 and 883.

The CHAIRMAN. They may be admitted.

(The documents referred to were marked Commission Exhibits Nos. 882 and 883 for identification, and received in evidence.)

Mr. SPECTER. Will you now describe what Exhibit No. 883 is, Inspector Gauthier, indicating, first of all, the approximate size of the cardboard?

Mr. GAUTHIER. This is a copy of the tracing measuring 40 inches in width, 72 inches in length. It is made to a scale of 1 inch equals 10 feet.

From the data compiled on that day by the surveyor, this tracing was prepared.

The area is bounded on the north by the Texas School Book Depository Building, and on further here by railroad property.

Mr. SPECTER. Indicating a general westerly direction from the School Book Depository Building?

Mr. GAUTHIER. Yes; I am pointing towards the west.

On the east it is bounded by Houston Street.

On the south by Main, which is a roadway going through Dealey Plaza.

And on the west by the triple underpass.

Located on this plat map are street lights accurately located, a catch basin, certain trees, location of trees, the delineation of the concrete pergola, which you see here on the photograph, the outer boundaries of the pericycle, and the reflecting pool--locating exactly the window in the Texas School Book Depository Building, in the southeast corner, and also a tabulation of the measurements and angles that the surveyor has compiled from certain positions identified for him on the street by an observation from this window, an observation from the position of Mr. Zapruder----

Mr. SPECTER. When you say this window, which window did you mean?

Mr. GAUTHIER. The window on the sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository Building, the one in the southeast corner, the farthest window.

Mr. SPECTER. And when you identify the Zapruder position, what did you mean by that?

Mr. GAUTHIER. This is a concrete abutment of the pergola, located in the area upon which Zapruder was standing at the time the movies were made.

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

(At this point, Representative Ford withdrew from the hearing room.)

Mr. SPECTER. Are there any other positions noted on the diagram that you have been describing showing where other movies were made?

Mr. GAUTHIER. Yes.

(At this point, Chief Justice Warren withdrew from the hearing room.)

Mr. GAUTHIER. We also locate the position of Mr. Nix, who also made movies of the motorcade at certain points on the roadway.

Mr. SPECTER. On what street was Mr. Nix standing?

Mr. GAUTHIER. I am pointing now to the south side of Main Street, approximately in front of the concrete pylon of the south pericycle structure. That is a short distance from the intersection of Main and Houston.

Mr. SPECTER. A short distance west of the intersection?

Mr. GAUTHIER. West.

Mr. SPECTER. And what other position is shown of the situs of a movie photographer?

Mr. GAUTHIER. We have another position here by Mrs. Mary Muchmore, who made movies of the motorcade movement along the Elm Street roadway on November 22, 1963.

Mr. SPECTER. I now hand you a schedule which I have marked as Commission Exhibit No. 884 and ask you what figures are contained thereon.

(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 884 for identification.)

Mr. GAUTHIER. This is a copy of a tabulation which appears on the plat map. It contains certain positions marked as frame numbers. It indicates elevations and a column dealing with angle of sight from the frame positions to the window and to a horizontal line.

It also contains angels of sight the degree of sight and distances from these positions to a point on the top of the bridge, handrail height.

Mr. SPECTER. May it please the Commission, that concludes the description of the general setting.

I would like to move now at this time for the admission into evidence of Exhibit No. 884, which completes all of the exhibits used heretofore.

Mr. McCLOY. It may be admitted.

(The document heretofore marked for identification as Commission Exhibit No. 884, was received in evidence.)

Mr. SPECTER. May it please the Commission, that completes the testimony of Inspector Gauthier.

I would like to call Mr. Shaneyfelt.

Mr. McCLOY. Mr Shaneyfelt?

TESTIMONY OF LYNDAL L. SHANEYFELT

Mr. SPECTER. Would you state your full name for the record, please?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; Lyndal L. Shaneyfelt.

Mr. SPECTER. By whom are you employed?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. I am employed as a special agent of the Federal Bureau of Investigation.

Mr. SPECTER. And how long have you been so employed?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Fourteen years.

Mr. SPECTER. What are your duties, in a general way?

Mr SHANEYFELT. I am assigned to the FBI Laboratory, as a document examiner, and photographic expert.

Mr. SPECTER. During the course of those duties, have you had occasion to make an analysis of certain movies which purport to have been taken of the assassination?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; I have.

Mr. SPECTER. What movies have you examined?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. I have examined a roll of 8-mm. motion pictures made by Mr. Abraham Zapruder of Dallas, Tex., that he took on November 22, of the assassination of President Kennedy.

Mr. SPECTER. Can you outline in a general way how the movies taken by Mr. Zapruder came into your possession?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; Mr. Zapruder, on realizing what he had in his photographs, took them immediately to a local Dallas processing plant, had them processed, and had three copies made. He turned two copies of those movies over to representatives of the Secret Service.

The original and other copy he sold to Life magazine.

The FBI was given one of the copies by the Secret Service. The Secret Service loaned a copy to us long enough for us to make a copy for our use, which we did, and this copy is the one that I have been examining.

Mr. SPECTER. At any time in the course of the examination of the Zapruder film, was the original of that movie obtained?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; it was. On February 25, Mr. Herbert Orth, who is the assistant chief of the Life magazine photographic laboratory, provided the original of the Zapruder film for review by the Commission representatives and representatives of the FBI and Secret Service here in the Commission building.

Mr. SPECTER. And what was the reason for his making that original available?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Life magazine was reluctant to release the original because of the value. So he brought it down personally and projected it for us and allowed us to run through it several times, studying the original.

Mr. SPECTER. Was that because the copies were not distinct on certain important particulars?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct. The original had considerably more detail and more there to study than any of the copies, since in the photographic process each time you copy you lose some detail.

Mr. SPECTER. And subsequently, were slides made from the original of the Zapruder film?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes. Since it was not practical to stop the projector when using the original of the Zapruder film, because of the possibility of damage to the film, Mr. Orth volunteered to prepare 35-mm. color slides directly from the original movie of all of the pertinent frames of the assassination which were determined to be frames 171 through 434.

Mr. SPECTER. Would you outline what you mean by frames, please?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes. In motion picture films, the actual motion picture film consists of consecutive pictures that are made in rapid succession, each one being a separate exposure. And as the camera runs, it films these, and they are projected fast enough on the screen when you do not have the sensation of them being individual pictures, but you have the sensation of seeing the movement--even though they are individual little pictures on the film. So each one of those little pictures on the film is called a frame.

Mr. SPECTER. And how did you number the frames?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. I numbered the frames on the Zapruder film beginning with No. 1 at the assassination portion of his film.

He did have on his film some photographs of a personal nature that we disregarded, and started at the first frame of his motion picture that was made there on Elm Street of the assassination.

Mr. SPECTER. And what was happening at the time of frame 1?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. At the time of frame 1, the police motorcycle lead portion of the parade is in view, and that goes for several frames. Then he stopped his camera, feeling that it might be some time before the Presidential car came into view. Then when the Presidential car rounded the corner and came into view, he started his camera again, and kept it running throughout the route down Elm Street until the car went out of sight on his right.

Mr. SPECTER. What other movies have been examined by you in the course of this analysis?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. An amateur 8-mm. motion picture film made by a Mr. Orville Nix of Dallas, Tex., has been examined. Mr. Nix was standing on the corner of Houston and Main Streets, photographing the motorcade as it came down Main Street and turned right into Houston Street.

Mr. SPECTER. Would you explain briefly how you ascertained the location of Mr. Nix when he took those movies?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes. At the time Mr. Nix took his movies of the motorcade coming down Main Street, he was standing on the corner, and photographed them turning the corner and going down Houston Street.

Mr. SPECTER. You are now indicating the southwest corner of Houston and Main?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; southwest corner. After he heard the shots, he hurried down along the curb of Main Street, but did not remember exactly where he was standing. On the basis of his motion pictures, we were able to analyze the pictures using his camera, and on the 23d of May of this year, during the survey, preparatory to the reenactment, we reestablished this point by viewing pictures taken from his motion picture camera, at varying angles across here, in order to reestablish the point where he was standing, based on the relationship of this street light to other items in the background of the photograph.

Mr. SPECTER. When you say this point, you mean the point of the Nix position?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes.

Mr. SPECTER. And when you say this street light, you are referring to a street lamp on the opposite side of Main Street?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct.

Mr. SPECTER. Would you outline in a general way how you obtained the copy of the Nix film?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes.

The Nix film was obtained as a result of a notice that the FBI gave to processing plants in the Dallas area, that the FBI would be interested in obtaining or knowing about any film they processed, that had anything on it, relating to the assassination.

And, as a result of this, we learned of the Nix film and arranged to obtain a copy of it.

Mr. SPECTER. Did you analyze any other film in connection with this inquiry?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes. I analyzed a film that was 8-mm. motion picture film taken by Mrs. Mary Muchmore of Dallas, Tex.

Mr. SPECTER. How did you obtain a copy of that film?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Our first knowledge of this came as a result of a review of the book "Four Days" which covers the assassination period, in which representatives of the FBI noted a colored picture taken from a motion picture film that did not match either the Nix film or the Zapruder film.

Once we established that, then we investigated and learned that it was made by Mrs. Mary Muchmore, and was at that time in the possession of United Press International in New York, and made arrangements for them to furnish us with a copy of the Muchmore film. That is the copy that I used for examination.

Mr. SPECTER. Where was Mrs. Muchmore standing at the time she took those movies?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Mrs. Muchmore was standing along Houston Street, close to the corner of Main, on the west side of Houston Street, and photographed the motorcade as it came down Main, turned into Houston, and proceeded down Houston. She says that when she heard the shots, she panicked, and did not take any further pictures. But a review of her film shows pictures of the assassination route, the motorcade going down Elm Street, beginning just before the shot that hit the President in the head, and continuing a short period after that.

Since she did not remember taking the pictures, we then, in the same manner we established Mr. Nix's position, by checking the photograph in relation to objects in the background, established her position along this structure that is marked on the map and found that she had come from the curb over to this point----

Mr. SPECTER. Indicating a position on Exhibit No. 883 marked "Muchmore Position."

Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct.

And this we established as her position when she photographed a portion of the assassination--motorcade.

Mr. SPECTER. Would you elaborate just a bit more on how you ascertained that position from fixed points in the background of the movie?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; we took a frame of the motion picture that is close to the beginning and a picture that is close to the end, and made a still photograph of those. We then establish a position and try to line up the relationship of objects close to where we are standing with objects in the background, so that they are in relation to each other as they are in the picture.

Then we take the other picture from farther along the motion picture film, and do the same thing, and where those two lines intersect is where she had to be standing.

Mr. SPECTER. You draw two straight lines through two objects that you line up on each of those pictures, and the intersection point of those two lines is the calculated position of the camera.

Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct.

Mr. SPECTER. And was that same system used to ascertain the position of Mr. Nix?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct.

Mr. SPECTER. And how did you ascertain the position of Mr. Zapruder?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Mr. Zapruder's position was known, as he was on the top of the abutment along Elm Street--he stated that he was standing on the abutment. And there is relatively no room to move around there, other than to stand there. It is about 2 feet wide by 3 to 4 feet deep.

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

Mr. SHANEYFELT. And aside from that, we checked that position against his photographs and determined that that was in fact correct.

Mr. SPECTER. Was the position of Mr. Zapruder confirmed through the use of any other film?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; in Mr. Nix's motion picture films you can see Mr. Zapruder standing on the abutment.

Senator COOPER. May I ask a question there?

After you had made those calculations to establish the position of Mrs. Muchmore and Mr. Nix and Mr. Zapruder, did you then identify those positions to the three and ask them whether or not it corresponded--your findings corresponded with their recollection as to where they were standing?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. We did not do that; no. Mr. Nix, I might say, did state that he went down along this side--the south side of Main Street, along the curb, and it generally conforms to where he stated he went, but he could not place the exact position. We did, by this study.

Senator COOPER. Mr. Zapruder's position was established by another photograph?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct.

Mr. DULLES. Do I understand you correctly that Mrs. Muchmore didn't realize she had taken the later pictures that appear?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. According to her statement, she said after hearing the shots, she panicked, and didn't take any more pictures.

Mr. DULLES. You think she did?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. On the film there are pictures.

Mr. SPECTER. Was the position of Mrs. Muchmore and Mr. Nix ascertained through a geometric calculation, lining up various points as you have just described?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Well, it is actually a geometric calculation, although no strings were drawn or no lines were drawn. It is a matter of standing in a position out there with Mr. Nix's camera, and viewing the two different photographs we had selected, until we arrived at a point that matched.

Mr. SPECTER. Was there reasonable mathematical certainty in that alinement, within the limits of your observations of their pictures?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes.

Mr. SPECTER. Did Mr. Zapruder himself point out his location on the abutment as depicted on Exhibit No. 883?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct.

Mr. SPECTER. Now, how many occasions were you a participant in an analysis of these various films which you have just described?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Seven.

Mr. SPECTER. And when was the first time that you were a participant in such an analysis?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. On January 27, 1964.

Mr. SPECTER. And who else has been with you at the time you analyzed those films--just stating in in a general way without identifying each person present on each of the occasions?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. On most occasions, Mr. Gauthier of the FBI was present, I was present, Mr. Malley of the FBI was present. Inspector Kelley from Secret Service, and Mr. John Howlett from Secret Service.

Representatives of the Commission were always present--normally Mr. Redlich, Mr. Specter, or Mr. Eisenberg were present.

On several occasions Mr. Ball and Mr. Belin were present. Mr. Rankin was present on some occasions.

I believe Mr. McCloy was present on one occasion.

Various representatives of the Commission were present.

Mr. SPECTER. And how long did those analysis sessions ordinarily last?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. They would normally last most of the day, about all day.

Mr. SPECTER. And what would be done during the course of those analytical sessions?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. In each case we would take the film and run it through regular speed, slow motion, we would stop it on individual frames and study it frame by frame, trying to see in the photographs anything that would give any indication of a shot hitting its mark, a reaction of the President, a reaction of Mr. Connally or Mrs. Connally, reaction of the Secret Service agents, reaction of people in the crowd, relating it to all the facts that we felt were important.

When we obtained the slides from Life magazine, we went through those very thoroughly, because they gave so much more detail and were so much clearer and analyzed again all these things about the reaction of the President and Mr. Connally, trying to ascertain where he was reacting--whether either one was reacting to being hit.

Of course the only shot that is readily apparent in any of the films, and it appears in the Zapruder, the Nix, and the Muchmore films, is the shot that hit the President in the head.

Mr. SPECTER. Why do you say that is readily apparent?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Because on the film there is practically an explosion of his head and this is obviously the shot that hit the President in the head. It is very apparent from the photograph.

Mr. SPECTER. Now, were any others present at any time, such as witnesses who appeared before the Commission, during the analysis sessions on these films and slides?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes.

On April 14, representatives of the Commission, FBI, and doctors--Dr. Hume of the Navy, who is at Bethesda, Commander Boswell from the U.S. Navy Medical School at Bethesda, Colonel Finck, Chief of the Wound Ballistics Pathology of the Armed Forces Institute of Pathology.

Mr. SPECTER. Are those the autopsy surgeons?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; that is my understanding. Dr. Olivier, from Edgewood Arsenal, Dr. Light, from Edgewood Arsenal, were present also with Dr. Humes and the others, on April 14.

Mr. SPECTER. Did any individuals who were present at the motorcade itself ever have an opportunity to view the films and slides?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; on April 21, films were again viewed by representatives of the Commission and the FBI, and at that time Drs. Gregory and Shaw, from Parkland Hospital in Dallas, were available, Drs. Light and Olivier, and a Dr. Dolce, and Governor and Mrs. Connally were present.

And at all of the viewings, they were again reviewed frame by frame, studied by the doctors to tie it in with their findings, studied by the Parkland doctors, and studied by the Connallys, to try to tie in where the shots occurred along the film.

Mr. SPECTER. I now hand you an album which has been marked as Commission Exhibit No. 885.

(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 885 for identification.)

Mr. SPECTER. I ask you to state what that album depicts.

Mr. SHANEYFELT. This is an album that I prepared of black and white photographs made of the majority of the frames in the Zapruder film----

Mr. SPECTER. Starting with what frame number?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Starting with frame 171, going through frame 334.

Mr. SPECTER. And why did you start with frame 171?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. This is the frame that the slides start from. This was an arbitrary frame number that was decided on as being far enough back to include the area that we wanted to study.

Mr. SPECTER. Is that a frame where President Kennedy comes into full view after the motorcade turns left off of Houston onto Elm Street?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes, yes.

Mr. SPECTER. And how was the ending point of that frame sequence, being No. 334, fixed?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. It was fixed as several frames past the shot that hit the President in the head. Frame 313 is the frame showing the shot to the President's head, and it ends at 334.

Mr. SPECTER. Are there any other photographs in that album in addition to the Zapruder frames?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; there are. There are six photographs selected at random from the Nix film, including frame 24, which is a frame depicting the shot to the head of the President, and there are three photographs picked at random from the Muchmore film, including frame 42, which is the frame depicting the head shot. These are the pictures that were used in establishing the location of the Nix and Muchmore cameras on location in Dallas. Frame 10, which is the first one of the Nix series, is the one showing Mr. Zapruder standing on the projection.

Mr. SPECTER. And where was the viewing of the films and slides undertaken?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. They have been viewed here at the Commission--all those in addition to the ones I have made personally in the FBI Laboratory.

Mr. SPECTER. And was that down on the first floor of the VFW Building here?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct.

Mr. SPECTER. And was there any model available adjacent to the area where the films were shown, for use in re-creating or reconstructing the assassination events?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; the model was available and used.

Mr. SPECTER. Is that the model which has been described earlier this afternoon by Inspector Gauthier?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct.

Mr. SPECTER. Were you present on May 24 in Dallas, Tex.?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes.

Mr. SPECTER. And what, if anything, was done at the site of the assassination on that date?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. On May 24, 1964, representatives of the Commission, Secret Service, and FBI reenacted the assassination, relocated specific locations of the car on the street based on the motion pictures, and in general staged a reenactment.

Mr. SPECTER. Who was present at that time representing the Commission?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. The Commission was represented by Mr. Rankin, Mr. Specter, and Mr. Redlich.

Mr. SPECTER. And who was present at that time from the FBI?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. I was present, Inspector Gauthier was present, Inspector J. R. Malley was present, Special Agent R. A. Frazier was present, with some aids, assistants.

Mr. SPECTER. Other aids from the FBI were also present?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; in addition, there were several agents from the Dallas office of the Federal Bureau of Investigation who assisted.

Mr. SPECTER. And were there representatives of the Secret Service participating in that onsite testing?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; there were. Inspector Kelley was present, Agent John Howlett was present, the driver of the car, or the Secret Service agent whose name I do not recall----

Mr. SPECTER. George Hickey?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct.

Mr. SPECTER. And at what time did the onsite test start?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. They started at 6 o'clock Sunday morning.

Mr. SPECTER. Why was that time selected?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. The time was selected because of the traffic in the area. The Dallas Police Department recommended that that would be the most logical time to do it, causing the least problem with traffic.

Mr. SPECTER. At what time did the onsite tests conclude?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. They concluded about 1 o'clock, 12:45 to 1 o'clock.

Mr. SPECTER. Was there any subsequent testing done in Dallas on that day?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; there was.

Mr. SPECTER. And where was that testing undertaken?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. There was some testing done in a railway express agency garage nearby the assassination site.

Mr. SPECTER. At what time did that start?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. That started at 3 p.m., and lasted until 5:30 p.m.

Mr. SPECTER. Where were the various individuals positioned who participated in these onsite tests at the outset, at, say, 6 a.m., on the 24th of May?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. At the very beginning, at 6 a.m., Mr. Rankin and Mr. Specter were in the sixth floor window of the Texas School Book Depository Building, which is the southeast corner of the building, sixth floor window, which was referred to as our control point, and where we had the master radio control for the other units.

Mr. Redlich was on the street with the car. At the car on the street were the occupants of the car, the Secret Service driver, Mr. Hickey, an agent from the FBI, who handled radio contact with control, Agents Anderton and Williams in the President's and Connally's seats, Mr. Gauthier and his aids, a surveyor, and I, were all on the ground in the vicinity of the car.

Agent Frazier was in the window of the Book Building at the control point with the rifle that was found at the window following the assassination.

Mr. SPECTER. Now, was that rifle found at the window or in another location on the sixth floor?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. In another location on the sixth floor.

Mr. SPECTER. And that is the Mannlicher-Carcano rifle which was heretofore identified as Commission Exhibit No. 139?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct.

Mr. SPECTER. And where were you positioned on most of the occasions at the time of the onsite tests?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. For the first portion of them, I was at the car in the street, and at the position of Mr. Zapruder, the position from which he took his pictures.

Mr. SPECTER. What communications were available, if any, among the participants at the various locations heretofore described?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. We had radio contact between all points.

Mr. SPECTER. What was the starting position of the car at the most easterly position on Elm Street, immediately after turning off Houston Street?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. The first position we established that morning was frame 161.

Mr. SPECTER. Was there not a position established prior in sequence to frame 161, specifically that designated as position A?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. That was actually established later. But the first one to be actually located was 161. And we went back later and positioned point A.

Mr. SPECTER. Well, let's start with the position which is the most easterly point on Elm Street, which I believe would be position A, would it not?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes.

Mr. SPECTER. Have you a photographic exhibit depicting that position?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; in each of the positions that we established, we used, insofar as possible, the Zapruder pictures to establish the position, or we established it from the window, and made photographs from the position Mr. Zapruder was standing in.

Mr. SPECTER. This chart has been marked as Commission Exhibit No. 886.

(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 886 for identification.)

Mr. SHANEYFELT. This shows the photograph that was made from the point where Zapruder was standing looking toward the car, and is a point that we have designated as position A because it is in a position that did not appear on the Zapruder film.

The Zapruder film does not start until the car gets farther down Elm Street.

Mr. SPECTER. What is that exhibit number?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Exhibit No. 886.

Mr. SPECTER. And why was that location selected for the position of the car?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. This location was selected as the first point at which a person in the sixth floor window of the Book Building at our control point could have gotten a shot at the President after the car had rounded the corner from Houston to Elm.

Mr. SPECTER. And what position is station C?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Station C is on a line drawn along the west curb line of Houston Street in a direct line, and station C is at a point along that line that is in line with where the car would have turned coming around that corner. It is on a line which is an extension of the west curb line of Houston Street.

Mr. DULLES. Where is position A on that chart?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Position A is here.

Mr. McCLOY. That is before you get to the tree?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; he isn't under the tree yet.

Mr. SPECTER. And what occupant, if any, in the car is position A sighted on for measuring purposes?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. All of the photographs made through the rifle sight that are shown on the exhibit in the lower left-hand corner were sighted on the spot that was simulating the spot where the President was wounded in the neck. The chalk mark is on the back of the coat.

Mr. SPECTER. When you say that position A is the first position at which President Kennedy was in view of the marksman from the southeast window on the sixth floor of the School Book Depository Building, you mean by that the first position where the marksman saw the rear of the President's stand-in?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct.

Mr. SPECTER. So that would be the first position where the marksman could focus in on the circled point where the point of entry on the President was marked?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct.

Mr. SPECTER. Could the marksman then have taken a shot at the President at any prior position and have struck him with the point of entry on that spot, on the base of the President's neck?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. I don't quite understand the question.

Mr. SPECTER. Was there any prior position, that is a position before position A, where the marksman from the sixth floor could have fired the weapon and have struck the President at the known point of entry at the base of the back of his neck?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. No; because as the car moves back, you lose sight of the chalk mark on the back of his coat.

Mr. SPECTER. And what is the distance between that point on the President and station C?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is 44 feet from station C--91.6 feet to the rifle in the window from the actual chalk mark on the coat. All measurements were made to the chalk mark on the coat.

Mr. SPECTER. On the coat of the President?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct.

Mr. SPECTER. The President's stand-in?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Right. The angle to the rifle in the window was 40°10´.

Mr. SPECTER. And what is the other data?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. The distance to the overpass was 447 feet, and the angle to the overpass was minus O°27´; that is, 27´ below the horizontal.

Senator COOPER. May I ask a question there? How did you establish the location of the rifle in making those calculations?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. The location of the rifle was established on the basis of other testimony and information furnished to us by the Commission, photographs taken by the Dallas Police Department immediately after the assassination, and the known opening of the window.

It was an estimation of where the rifle most likely was based on the knowledge that the Commission has through testimony.

Mr. SPECTER. Senator Cooper, Mr. Frazier is present and has been sworn, and he is going to identify that. He could do it at this time, to pinpoint that issue.

Senator COOPER. I think we can just make a note of that, and go ahead with this witness.

Mr. SPECTER. Fine. We will proceed then with this witness and Mr. Frazier will testify in due course.

Mr. SHANEYFELT. I might say that this position was determined by Mr. Frazier in the window. We moved the car around until he told us from the window, viewing through the rifle, the point where he wanted the car to stop. And he was the one in the window that told us where the point A was. Once we established that, we then photographed it.

Mr. DULLES. Could he see the mark on the back of the coat from the window?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; through the rifle scope, he could see the mark.

Mr. SPECTER. Does the picture designated "photograph through rifle scope" depict the actual view of the rifleman through the actual Mannlicher-Carcano weapon?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct. At point A.

Senator COOPER. When Mr. Frazier testifies, then, will he correlate this photograph with a frame from photographs taken of the actual motorcade at the time of the assassination?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. No; we cannot correlate this with a frame from the motion picture because Mr. Zapruder didn't start taking pictures until the car had passed this point.

So we, therefore, on this frame and for the next two or three points, have no picture from Mr. Zapruder, since he wasn't taking pictures at that time.

Mr. DULLES. Off the record.

(Discussion off the record.)

Mr. DULLES. Back on the record.

Do I understand that you are not suggesting that a shot was necessarily fired at this point A, but this was the first point where this particular vision of the President's back could have been obtained?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct. It is only an arbitrary point showing the first possible shot that could have entered the President's coat at this chalk mark.

Representative FORD. What criteria did you use for determining that you could see the chalk mark? Was the criteria a part or the whole of the chalk mark?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. The actual manner in which it was set up--let me see if this answers your question. As we moved the car around, Mr. Frazier was in the window looking through the actual scope of the rifle, and could see very clearly the President or the man taking the President's place, as the car moved around.

And the instant that he could first see that chalk mark is the point where he radioed to us to stop the car, and is the first point at which a shot could be fired that would go in where the chalk mark is located.

Mr. DULLES. And that is point A?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is point A. Does that answer your question?

Representative FORD. I think it does. Is that picture in the lower left-hand corner of Exhibit No. 886 an actual photograph taken through the sight of the weapon that was allegedly used in the assassination?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct.

Representative FORD. And the chalk mark we see there is through that sight?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct. And that is exactly what an individual looking through the sight would see.

Mr. SPECTER. Then at point A, could the rifleman see the entire back of the President's stand-in as well as the specific chalk mark, as depicted on the exhibit?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. He could see only a portion of the back.

Mr. SPECTER. And the portion, which he could not see, is that which is below the seat level?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes.

Mr. DULLES. You didn't say the President's stand-in, did you?

Mr. SPECTER. Yes; stand-in.

Mr. Shaneyfelt, for purposes of illustration would you produce the photograph at this time showing the mounting of the motion picture camera on the weapon found on the sixth floor?

I now hand you a photograph which is being marked as Commission Exhibit No. 887 and ask you to state for the record who that is a picture of, and what else is in the photograph.

(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 887 for identification.)

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Commission Exhibit No. 887 is a picture of me that was taken on May 24, 1964. My location was at the sixth floor window of the Texas School Book Depository that we have designated as our control point. I have the rifle that is the assassination rifle mounted on a tripod, and on the rifle is mounted an Arriflex 16-mm. motion picture camera, that is alined to take photographs through the telescopic sight.

This Arriflex motion picture camera is commonly known as a reflex camera in that as you view through the viewfinder a prism allows you to view directly through the lens system as you are taking your photographs so that as I took the photographs looking into the viewfinder I was also looking through the scope and seeing the actual image that was being recorded on the film.

Mr. SPECTER. Was the view recorded on the film as shown on Exhibit No. 886 the actual view which would have been seen had you been looking through the telescopic sight of the Mannlicher-Carcano itself?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes.

Mr. SPECTER. How did you determine the level and angle at which to hold the rifle?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. I placed the rifle in the approximate position based on prior knowledge of where the boxes were stacked and the elevation of the window and other information that was furnished to me by representatives of the Commission.

Mr. DULLES. You used the same boxes, did you, that the assassin had used?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. No; I did not.

Mr. SPECTER. Were those boxes used by Mr. Frazier.

Mr. SHANEYFELT. They were used by Mr. Frazier and used in making the measurements. I had to use a tripod because of the weight of the camera and placed the elevation of the rifle at an approximate height in a position as though the boxes were there.

Mr. SPECTER. Was Mr. Frazier present at the time you positioned the rifle on the tripod?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; he was.

Mr. SPECTER. Did he assist in describing for you or did you have an opportunity to observe the way he held a rifle to ascertain the approximate position of the rifle at that time?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct.

Mr. SPECTER. May it please the Commission, we will, with Mr. Frazier, indicate, the reasons he held the rifle in the way he did to approximate the way we believe it was held at the time of the assassination.

What is the next position which has been depicted on one of your exhibits, please.

Mr. SHANEYFELT. The next position that we established during the reenactment is frame 161 of the Zapruder motion picture film.

Mr. SPECTER. Permit me to mark that if you would as Commission Exhibit No. 888.

(Commission Exhibit No. 888 was marked for identification.)

Mr. SHANEYFELT. This position which has been designated by us as frame 161 and as Commission Exhibit No. 888, was established as the last position that the car could be in where the rifleman in the window could get a clear shot of the President in the car before the car went under the covering of the tree.

Mr. SPECTER. How was that position located, from the ground or from the sixth floor?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. This was positioned by Mr. Frazier in the sixth floor window. In addition we knew from the Zapruder photographs the relative position of the car in the street as related to the curb and the guidelines or the lane lines.

Following those lane lines we then moved the car down to a point where Mr. Frazier radioed to us that it was the last point at which he could get a clear shot and we stopped the car there.

Mr. SPECTER. How did you then select the appropriate frame from the Zapruder film?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. After Mr. Frazier had stationed the car at this point, I then went to the position of Mr. Zapruder. Based on his motion pictures, a comparison of the photograph that we made with the photograph from the film, I was able to state that because of the relative position of the car in the street and in relation to other objects in the background, it corresponded to frame 161 of the motion picture.

Mr. SPECTER. Do you have on Exhibit No. 888 a reproduction of frame 161?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; the upper left-hand corner is a reproduction of the frame 161 of the Zapruder motion picture. The picture on the upper right is a photograph that I made with a speed graphic camera from Zapruder's position of the car reestablished in that location. The photograph in the lower left-hand corner, is a photograph of the view through the rifle scope that Mr. Frazier saw at the time he positioned the car there. This is the view that you would obtain from looking through the rifle scope from the sixth floor window.

Mr. SPECTER. Was the automobile in exactly the same position at the time of the taking of the "photograph through rifle scope" and the "photograph from reenactment"?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; approximately the same. We went through all stations with Mr. Frazier in the window and I took photographs from Mr. Zapruder's position, and once establishing a frame position, we marked it clearly in the street. After we had taken all of the photographs from Zapruder's position, we then took the car back, and went to the sixth floor window and mounted the motion picture camera on the rifle. These photographs were made by rolling the car in the same position based on the marks we had in the street so it was as accurate as could be done in the same position.

Mr. DULLES. There is no one sitting in that right-hand corner of the rear seat, is there in that picture?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; the person taking President Kennedy's place is sitting in the back seat.

Mr. DULLES. Yes; I see it. It is rather hard to see through the trees.

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; we moved it up to a point where the chalk mark was just about to disappear on the street.

Mr. DULLES. I don't think I see the chalk mark maybe someone else can.

Mr. SHANEYFELT. It may be covered by the crosshair of the rifle scope.

Representative FORD. In that picture photographed through the rifle scope on Exhibit No. 888 a man standing in for Governor Connally is also in the car, is he not?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct. He is mostly hidden by the tree.

Mr. DULLES. Yes; I see.

Mr. SPECTER. Was there any difference between the position of President Kennedy's stand-in and the position of President Kennedy on the day of the assassination by virtue of any difference in the automobiles in which each rode?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; because of the difference in the automobiles there was a variation of 10 inches, a vertical distance of 10 inches that had to be considered. The stand-in for President Kennedy was sitting 10 inches higher and the stand-in for Governor Connally was sitting 10 inches higher than the President and Governor Connally were sitting and we took this into account in our calculations.

Mr. SPECTER. Was any allowance then made in the photographing of the first point or rather last point at which the spot was visible on the back of the coat of President Kennedy's stand-in before passing under the oak tree?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; there was. After establishing this position, represented by frame 161, where the chalk mark was about to disappear under the tree, we established a point 10 inches below that as the actual point where President Kennedy would have had a chalk mark on his back or where the wound would have been if the car was 10 inches lower. And we rolled the car then sufficiently forward to reestablish the position that the chalk mark would be in at its last clear shot before going under the tree, based on this 10 inches, and this gave us frame 166 of the Zapruder film.

Mr. SPECTER. What Commission Exhibit number has been affixed to that?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. This is Commission Exhibit No. 889.

(Commission Exhibit No. 889 was marked for identification.)

Mr. DULLES. Is that 10 inches difference due to the difference in the two cars?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct.

Mr. DULLES. That is the President's--the car the President was in and the car you had to use for this particular test?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct.

Mr. SPECTER. On Exhibit No. 889, is the car in the same position on the "photograph through rifle scope" as it is on "photograph from reenactment"?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct, the same position.

Mr. SPECTER. And what is the comparison between the photograph from Zapruder film on that Exhibit No. 889 and the photograph from reenactment?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. The car is in the same position relative to the surrounding area in both the reenactment photograph and the Zapruder photograph.

Incidentally, the position that was used throughout all of the positioning of the car was the President's. His placement in the photograph, and this will be clearer in some of the later photographs, if the President's head was directly under a stop sign or a street sign or whatever, in the background, this was then the way we positioned the car with the person standing in for the President directly below or slightly to the side or directly below the stop sign and so on; so all of the calculations were based upon the position of the President.

Mr. SPECTER. Before leaving frame 161, finally, would you recite the distances which appear from the various points on that exhibit?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes.

At the position that has been designated as frame 161, and appears on Commission Exhibit No. 888, the distance from the wound mark on a stand-in for President Kennedy to station C was 94.7 feet.

The distance to the rifle in the window was 137.4 feet, the angle to the window was 26°58' based on the horizontal line, the distance to the overpass was 392.4 feet, and the angle to the overpass was minus 0°7´.

Mr. SPECTER. Are all angles calculated thereon based on the horizontal?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes.

Mr. SPECTER. Was there any street angle taken into consideration in the calculations here?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; there is a 3° street grade that has to be deducted from the angle to the window to determine the actual angle from the street to the window as opposed to the horizon.

Mr. SPECTER. Will you now----

Mr. DULLES. Frame 161 is 3° on 161?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Three degrees all along Elm Street.

Mr. DULLES. All along. That applies to all of these different pictures, is that correct?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct.

Mr. SPECTER. Would you now read the same statistical data from frame 166 on Exhibit No. 889, please?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes.

From the chalk mark on the back of the stand-in for President Kennedy, to station C is 95.6 feet, the distance to rifle in window, 138.2 feet, the angle to rifle in window based on the horizontal, is minus 26°52´.

Distance to overpass is 391.5 feet. The angle to the overpass is 0°7´.

Mr. SPECTER. Did the back of President Kennedy ever come into view at any time while he was passing through the foliage of the oak tree?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes.

Mr. SPECTER. What frame number was ascertained with respect to that position?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. This was determined to be frame 185. There is a slight opening in the tree, where the car passed under the tree, where a shot could have been fired that would have passed through this opening in the tree. This again was positioned on the basis of Mr. Frazier in the window looking through the rifle scope and telling us on the street where to stop the car at the point where he could get a shot through the trees.

Mr. SPECTER. What Commission Exhibit number has been assigned to frame 185?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. This is Commission Exhibit No. 890, frame 185.

Mr. SPECTER. Is the "photograph through rifle scope" taken with the position of the car at the same place as "photograph from reenactment"?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct.

Mr. SPECTER. And is the "photograph from reenactment" in the same position, as close as you could make it to the "photograph from Zapruder's film"?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct.

Mr. SPECTER. Will you read the statistical data from frame 185?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; from the point of the chalk on the back of the stand-in for the President at position 185 to station C is 114.8 feet, the distance to rifle on window is 154.9 feet.

The angle to rifle in window based on horizontal is 24°14´, distance to overpass is 372.5 feet. The angle to the overpass is 0°3´ above horizontal.

Mr. SPECTER. Was there any adjustment made for the difference in the height of the automobiles on the location where the back of the President's stand-in was visible through the tree?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; there was an adjustment made for the 10 inch differential in the heights because of the different cars, and this was established as frame 186.

Mr. SPECTER. What Commission Exhibit number is affixed to frame 186?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Commission Exhibit No. 891.

Mr. SPECTER. On Exhibit No. 891 is the car in the same position in "photograph through rifle scope" and "photograph from reenactment"?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct.

Mr. SPECTER. Are the cars on those two pictures in the same positions on all of the frames which you are going to show this afternoon?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct.

Mr. SPECTER. In the "photograph from Zapruder film", does that "photograph from Zapruder film" show the Presidential automobile to be in the same position or as close to the same position as you could make it as is the replica car in the "photograph from reenactment"?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct.

Mr. SPECTER. Will you read the statistical data from frame 186, please?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes.

At frame 186 position the distance from the chalk mark on the back of the stand-in for the President was 116.3 feet from the station C. It was 156.3 feet to the rifle in the window.

The angle to the rifle in the window was 24°3' based on the horizontal. Distance to the overpass was 371.7 feet. The angle to the overpass is 0°3´.

Mr. SPECTER. Was that position ascertained where the chalk spot on the back of President Kennedy's coat was first visible from the sixth floor window through the telescopic sight?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct.

Mr. DULLES. This is after passing the tree.

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes.

Mr. SPECTER. After passing out from under the oak tree.

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes.

Mr. SPECTER. What frame did that turn out to be?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. That was frame 207.

Mr. SPECTER. Do you have an exhibit depicting the same photographic sequence on frame 207?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; I do.

Mr. SPECTER. What Commission Exhibit number has been affixed to that frame?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Commission Exhibit No. 892.

Mr. SPECTER. Is the car in the same position on "photograph through rifle scope" and "photograph from reenactment" on that exhibit?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes.

Mr. SPECTER. Is the car in the same position, as closely as you could make it, on the "photograph from reenactment" and "photograph from Zapruder film"?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct.

Mr. SPECTER. Will you now read the statistical data from that exhibit?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes. Distance from the chalk mark on the back of the stand-in for the President to the station C is 136.6 feet.

Distance to rifle in the window is 174.9 feet. The angle to the rifle in the window based on the horizontal is 21°50'. The distance to the overpass is 350.9 feet, and the angle to the overpass is 0°12'.

This is on frame 207, Commission Exhibit No. 892.

Mr. SPECTER. Was an adjustment made on that position for the heights of the automobiles?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes.

Mr. SPECTER. What was the adjusted frame for the first view that the marksman had of the President's stand-in coming out from under the tree?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is frame 210 and has been marked as Commission Exhibit No. 893 and represents the 10-inch adjustment for the difference in the height of the car as compared with frame 207.

Mr. SPECTER. Is the layout of frame 210 exactly the same as that for frames 207 and 185 that you have already testified about?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct.

Mr. SPECTER. In viewing the films on the frames preceding 210, what was President Kennedy doing?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. He is waving to the crowd, and in some frames it is obvious that he is smiling, you can actually see a happy expression on his face and his hand----

Mr. DULLES. Which way is he turning, to the left or to the right?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. He is looking toward the crowd to his right during most of that area, he is looking slightly to his right. His arm is up on the side of the car and his hand is in a wave, in approximately this position and he appears to be smiling.

Mr. SPECTER. What is the latest frame count where, to your eye, it appears that he is showing no reaction to any possible shot?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Approximately--I would like to explain a little bit, that at frames in the vicinity of 200 to 210 he is obviously still waving, and there is no marked change.

In the area from approximately 200 to 205 he is still, his hand is still in a waving position, he is still turned slightly toward the crowd, and there has been no change in his position that would signify anything occurring unusual. I see nothing in the frames to arouse my suspicion about his movements, up through in the areas from 200 on and as he disappears behind the signboard, there is no change.

Now, 205 is the last frame, 205 and 206 are the last frames where we see any of his, where we see the cuff of his coat showing above the signboard indicating his hand is still up generally in a wave.

From there on the frames are too blurry as his head disappears you can't really see any expression on his face. You can't see any change. It is all consistent as he moves in behind the signboard.

Mr. SPECTER. When you say "signboard" what do you mean by that, Mr. Shaneyfelt?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. I refer to the sign that is between the photographer, Mr. Zapruder, and the Presidential car.

Representative FORD. Not any sign post between the rifleman and the President?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. No; this is a sign between the cameraman and the President. So that we are unable to see his reaction, if any.

Mr. SPECTER. What is the frame at which Governor Connally first emerges from behind the sign you just described?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is frame 222.

Mr. SPECTER. Have you prepared a model demonstration on frame 222?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; I have.

Mr. SPECTER. What Commission Exhibit number has just been affixed on that frame?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Frame 222 has been given Commission Exhibit No. 894.

Mr. SPECTER. Was the location of the automobile fixed from the window or from the street on frame 222?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. On frame 222, the position of the automobile was fixed from the street, based on the photograph from the Zapruder film.

Mr. SPECTER. Are the various photographs on that frame and the various distances the same in terms of general layout as the prior exhibit you testified to?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct.

Mr. SPECTER. What is the first frame at which President Kennedy is visible coming out from behind that sign?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. This is frame 225.

Mr. SPECTER. What Commission Exhibit has been affixed to frame 225?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Frame 225 has been assigned Commission Exhibit No. 895.

Mr. SPECTER. What, if anything, is detectable from a view of the Zapruder film frame 225 as to the positions or reaction of President Kennedy?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Frame 225 there appears to be a reaction on the part of the President. This is----

Mr. SPECTER. Describe specifically what movement he is making in that picture or what his position is?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. At frame 225 his hand is down, his right hand that was waving is down, and has been brought down as though it were reaching for his lapel or his throat. The other hand, his left hand is on his lapel but rather high, as though it were coming up, and he is beginning to go into a hunched position.

Mr. SPECTER. When you say beginning to go into a hunched position is that apparent to you from viewing the motion picture and slides from the frames which succeed frame 225?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is primarily apparent from the motion picture because of the two or three or four frames that show as he emerges from the sign; that is, in the motion picture, you see the President reaching for his coat lapels and going into a hunched position, leaning forward and lowering his head.

Mr. McCLOY. That doesn't exist in frame 225 yet, does it?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. It is just beginning in frame 225. That is frame 225 is the first view we have of the President.

Mr. McCLOY. Out past the sign.

Mr. SHANEYFELT. As he comes out from behind the sign that obstructs the cameraman from the President.

Mr. DULLES. But there is no obstruction from the sixth floor window?

Mr. SHANEYFELT, No; no obstruction at this point. There is no obstruction from the sixth floor window from the time they leave the tree until they disappear down toward the triple overpass.

Mr. SPECTER. Do the photographs on frame 225 depict the same circumstances as those depicted on the prior exhibits?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct.

Mr. SPECTER. And do the measurements on frame 225 cover the same subjects as those covered on prior exhibits?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct.

Mr. SPECTER. What is the angle from the rifle to the spot on the President's back on frame 210, please?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. On frame 210, the angle from the rifle to the window, based on the horizon is 21°34´.

Mr. SPECTER. That is from the rifle to what, Mr. Shaneyfelt.

Mr. SHANEYFELT. From the rifle to the chalk mark on the back of the stand-in for the President.

Mr. SPECTER. What is the same angle at frame 225?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. It is 20°11´.

Mr. SPECTER. Those angles are computed to the horizontal?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct.

Mr. SPECTER. What is the range of distance from the position of the car in frame 210 to the position of the car in frame 225?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is 14.9 feet between frame 210 and frame 225.

Mr. SPECTER. What is the position of President Kennedy at frame 210 with respect to position C.

Mr. SHANEYFELT. President Kennedy is 138.9 feet from station C at frame 210.

Mr. SPECTER. Station C.

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; station C to President Kennedy on frame 210 is 138.9 feet.

Mr. SPECTER. What is the distance between station C and President Kennedy at frame 225?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is 153.8 feet.

Mr. SPECTER. Was the car further positioned at frame 231?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; it was.

Mr. SPECTER. What Commission exhibit number are we affixing to that?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is Commission Exhibit No. 896.

Mr. SPECTER. Are the photographs and measurements on 896 the same layout as those affixed to prior exhibits?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct.

Mr. SPECTER. Was the automobile stopped at frame 235 and similar photographs and measurements taken?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct.

Mr. SPECTER. What Commission exhibit number is affixed to frame 235.

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Exhibit No. 897.

Mr. SPECTER. Was the automobile again stopped at frame 240 with measurements and photographs taken similar to those in prior exhibits?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; it was. That is correct.

Mr. SPECTER. What Commission exhibit number is affixed to that frame?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Exhibit No. 898.

Mr. SPECTER. Was the automobile again stopped at frame 249 with similar photographs and measurements taken?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct.

Mr. SPECTER. And what Commission exhibit number is given to those calculations and photographs on frame 249?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Commission Exhibit 899.

Mr. SPECTER. Now, as to frame 249, that is how many frames beyond the first point at which the spot on President Kennedy's back was visible after he passed out from under the oak tree?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is 249?

Mr. SPECTER. Yes.

Mr. SHANEYFELT. It is 42 frames.

Mr. SPECTER. And does a 42-frame count have any significance with respect to the firing time on the Mannlicher-Carcano rifle?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; we have established that the Zapruder motion picture camera operates at an average speed of 18.3 frames per second. And we have been advised that the minimum time for firing the rifle in successive shots is approximately two and a quarter seconds. So this gives us then a figure of two and a quarter seconds of frames; at 18.3, this gives us this figure of 41 to 42 frames.

Representative FORD. Would you repeat that again, please?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. The camera operates at a speed of 18.3 frames per second. So that in two and a quarter seconds it would run through about 42--41 to 42 frames.

Representative FORD. Then the firing of the rifle, repeat that again?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. As to the firing of the rifle--we have been advised that the minimum time for getting off two successive well-aimed shots on the rifle is approximately two and a quarter seconds. That is the basis for using this 41 to 42 frames to establish two points in the film where two successive quick shots could have been fired.

Representative FORD. That is with one shot and then the firing.

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Work the bolt and fire another one.

Mr. SPECTER. At frame 249 was Governor Connally in a position where he could have taken a shot with the bullet entering at the point immediately to the left under his right armpit with the bullet then going through and exiting at a point immediately under his right nipple?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. No; Governor Connally has begun to turn in his seat around in this manner, in such a way, turn to his right so that his body is in a position that a shot fired from the sixth floor window could not have passed through the path that it reportedly took through his body, if the bullet followed a straight, undeflected path.

Mr. DULLES. I don't quite get that. You mean because of his having turned this way, the shot that was then--had then been fired and apparently had hit the President could not have gone through him at that point?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct under the stated conditions. Even a shot, independent of the shot that hit the President, could not have gone through in that manner, coming from the sixth floor window, because the window was almost directly behind the automobile at that time and the Governor was in a position where the bullet couldn't have gone through his body in the manner that it reportedly did.

It would have come in through his shoulder and out through the other shoulder, in the way that he was lined up with the window.

Mr. SPECTER. So you say it could have gone through him, but it could not have passed through him with the angle of entry as disclosed in the Parkland Hospital records and described by Dr. Shaw?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct, if it followed a straight path.

Mr. SPECTER. And exiting immediately under his right nipple, again as described in the hospital records at Parkland and by Dr. Shaw.

Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct.

Mr. SPECTER. Have those points of entry and exit been made available to you in your analysis of this situation?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; they have.

Mr. SPECTER. Could you elaborate just a little further on the observations and reasoning which you have undertaken to come to the conclusion which you have just expressed?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. We are speaking of frame 249, are we?

Mr. SPECTER. Yes, sir, frame 249.

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Could I see that exhibit? The photograph in the lower left corner of Commission Exhibit No. 899 is the photograph taken through the scope of the rifle on the sixth floor window when the car was stationed in this frame number position. It is noted from this photograph that the rifle is not quite directly behind the car but very nearly directly behind the car.

Governor Connally's body is turned. We have duplicated the position in the Zapruder photographs of Governor Connally and the President in the reenactment photograph, as nearly as possible, duplicated the same body position, and from the sixth floor window then you can see from the photograph that the Governor's body is turned to the Governor's right in such a fashion that an undeflected shot would not go through in the path as described by the Parkland doctors.

Mr. McCLOY. I don't quite follow that yet. The President has been shot at frame 249, according to your theory.

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes.

Mr. McCLOY. Might he not also have been shot at some earlier frames in--the indications are the reactions are shown considerably ahead of that frame.

Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct.

Mr. McCLOY. So, for example, at frame 237 and at frame 237 Governor Connolly hasn't turned to the right.

Mr. DULLES. But a shot has been fired at this time.

Mr. McCLOY. But a shot has been fired at that time.

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes.

Mr. McCLOY. So at that point he could have been hit; Governor Connally could have been hit.

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; Governor Connally could have been hit by frame 238.

Mr. McCLOY. But your point is when he gets farther along, he couldn't have been hit, let's say at frame 249 in the same spot where he was hit.

Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct.

Mr. McCLOY. Yes.

Mr. DULLES. He made the turn later than those frames you have been discussing at the time apparently of the first shot at the President.

Mr. McCLOY. Yes; the first shot, but according to these frames, the first shot hit the President considerably before this.

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes, sir.

Mr. McCLOY. And at a time again when Governor Connally's back was square to the window.

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Well, not exactly square. I believe he was turned slightly to the right as he went behind the sign.

Mr. McCLOY. Take frame 231.

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes.

Mr. McCLOY. There the President has got his hands up as you put it to his throat.

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes.

Mr. McCLOY. And here is Connally facing to the front.

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes.

Mr. McCLOY. So at that point a bullet coming through the President's throat could have hit Connally in the spot where it did hit Connally.

Mr. SHANEYFELT. I am going to defer that question to Mr. Frazier who is in the window with the rifle scope and made a more thorough study of the possible path of the bullet. But he is straight in the car in frame 231.

Mr. McCLOY. But your testimony is in frame 248--frame 249 Connally couldn't have been hit from this window in the position where he was sitting.

Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct, on the basis stated.

Mr. DULLES. But, you would have then the problem you would think if Connally had been hit at the same time, would have reacted in the same way, and not reacted much later as these pictures show.

Mr. McCLOY. That is right.

Mr. DULLES. Because the wounds would have been inflicted.

Mr. McCLOY. That is what puzzles me.

Mr. DULLES. That is what puzzles me.

Senator COOPER. Would you identify the frame in which Governor Connally started turning to the right?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. I might say that as--in the motion picture--as the car comes out from behind the signboard, the Governor is turned slightly to his right in this manner. This would be in the first frame, in frame 222, he is turned just slightly to his right, and from there on he turns almost square, straight on with the car momentarily, and there is a jerking motion there at one point in the film about there, at which time he starts to turn this way and continues to turn.

Mr. DULLES. Jerky motion in Connally in the film.

Mr. SHANEYFELT. There is--it may be merely where he stopped turning and started turning this way. It is hard to analyze.

Mr. DULLES. What I wanted to get at--whether it was Connally who made the jerky motion or there was something in the film that was jerky. You can't tell.

Mr. SHANEYFELT. You can't tell that.

Mr. McCLOY. Certainly the film is jerky at that point. I mean there is a big blur.

Mr. SHANEYFELT. He does turn.

Mr. McCLOY. Just before and after that.

Representative FORD. But isn't it apparent in those pictures that after a slight hesitation Governor Connally's body turns more violently than the President's body?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes.

Representative FORD. The President's only reaction is a motion to his throat or to his neck with his hands.

Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct.

Representative FORD. Whereas Governor Connally actually turns his body rather sharply?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; he turns as they go behind the signboard, he turns this way and he is turning a little bit this way and as he comes out of the signboard he is facing slightly to the right, comes around straight on and then he turns to his left straight on, and then he turns to his right, continues to turn around and falls over in Mrs. Connally's lap.

But in the motion picture it is a continuous movement as he goes around and falls.

Senator COOPER. Will you again answer my question which I asked and hasn't been answered and I say with all respect, in what frame did Governor Connally begin to turn to the right after he had placed his position straightforward as you have testified.

Mr. SHANEYFELT. I am sorry. That starts approximately at frames 233 to 234.

Senator COOPER. In what frame does the photograph show or in what frame is it shown that President Kennedy had moved his hands to his throat?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. That shows on frame--it is clearer on frame 226, 225 is the frame where you first see him, and frame 226.

Mr. DULLES. How many frames between those two?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. From 26 to 33, eight. That would be a fraction of a second in time.

That is less than half second.

Representative FORD. It can be contended that based on these photographs of films that the first shot apparently was fired in frames 220 to 224, in that area.

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; I think you have to go back even to 210 because of reaction times; we don't know reaction times. But I would say between 210 and 225 because at 225 we have the President reacting.

So, in that 15 frames there it is behind the signboard, we can't see what is happening.

Mr. DULLES. What frame first shows him with his hands at his throat?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. 225, 226.

Mr. McCLOY. 225, it is not too clear. It is much more pronounced in the next frame is where he puts his both hands to his throat, such as that.

Mr. DULLES. And Mrs. Kennedy has apparently turned around and looking at him.

Mr. McCLOY. One hand may be coming down from waving in 225.

Mr. DULLES. That is his left hand there--no; it is his right hand, your right. His right hand.

Representative FORD. Then based on the mathematics of how quickly a second shot could be fired, the second shot would be fired in approximately what frame?

If you assume it, the first shot is from 210 to 224.

Mr. SHANEYFELT. It would be 252 to 266, down in there.

Representative FORD. That would be the elapsed time of what?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Two and a quarter seconds.

Representative FORD. Two and a quarter seconds.

Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is the very quickest.

Mr. SPECTER. On fixing the range from frames 210 to 225, where the President was first struck, did you take frame 210 because that was the first point after the President had passed out from under the oak tree?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; that is the first point from this, and although we are able to see in the films that there is no apparent reaction from the President from 203 to 210, and as he disappears from behind the signboard, we cannot estimate the reaction time.

Mr. SPECTER. When you say reaction time you mean?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Of the President?

Mr. SPECTER. Reaction time from 205----

Representative FORD. To 210?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes.

Representative FORD. But there at frame 210, that is the first point at which the marksman had a clear shot after the President passed out from under the tree.

Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct.

Representative FORM. Then you select frame 225 as the outside limit of the shot which struck the President because that is where you first observe a reaction by the President when he comes out from behind the sign.

Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct.

Mr. DULLES. What frames are blanked out because of the sign?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. The President, the last we get any scene of him at all, and this is just the very top of his head is 210.

Mr. DULLES. 210 to what is blanked out?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. 225.

Mr. DULLES. To 225 is blanked out?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes, that is 15 frames.

Mr. McCLOY. 224 he just begins to appear.

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes.

Mr. McCLOY. I don't think if you assume the President was hit at 225 and I don't think that is clear at all. I think it begins to get clear about 227 that he had been hit, that the reaction really develops. But I think that 225 it may very well be that he has not been hit because his hand isn't at his throat, he may be just moving from the position of waving.

Mr. DULLES. But that is about a tenth of a second.

Mr. McCLOY. Yes; it is a very short time entirely, but I don't think the frame unequivocally shows the reaction to the bullet at 225. I think it does unequivocally show it at 226 and 227.

Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct.

Mr. SPECTER. Perhaps an additional question on the clarity of the slide itself as a point of reaction would be in order for Mr. Shaneyfelt, and then, may I say parenthetically, we want to have the Commission see these slides this afternoon.

We have prepared them to show to you so that you can observe for yourself what we are bringing to you through the witness to give you a frame of reference and an orientation.

Mr. Shaneyfelt, then what was your impression by frame 225, as you viewed it most recently this morning, with respect to a possible reaction on that frame made from the original Zapruder film?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. It is my feeling that at frames 225, 226 and 227 you are having a reaction. You have a split second there, and at 225 the reaction is barely discernible, more discernible on the film and the slides than the reproduction you have here but it has to be considered in the light of the motion picture you see as he starts this reaction, and the reaction is by frame--in either the slides or pictures--is clearly apparent in 226, and barely apparent in 225.

Mr. SPECTER. Now, was frame 249 selected as a situs for calculations on the possible construction that President Kennedy was struck in the back at the first point unadjusted at which he emerged from the tree, to wit: frame 207, with an additional calculation of 42 frames giving the approximately two and a quarter seconds for the firing of a second shot to determine through this one means whether there was time for the rifleman to have operated the bolt, assuming he made a shot at 207, and to have made another shot at the earliest possible time at 249.

Mr. SHANEYFELT. That was the basis for the selection of frame 249, yes.

Mr. SPECTER. Now, going back just a moment, was frame 231 selected as a basis for analysis as the first frame after 225 because Governor Connally expressed the opinion when he viewed the frames that he thought he was hit by or at frame 231.

Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct.

Mr. SPECTER. And was frame 235 selected as a basis of analysis because that was one point at which a number of the viewers, including staff and agents of the FBI and Secret Service thought that might be the last frame at which Governor Connally had turned enough to the right to still take a shot and have the bullet pass through his body from the sixth floor window at the angle described in the medical reports and by his doctors.

Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct on the basis of an undeflected path. That is the frame that the doctors selected as the frame beyond which he could not have received this shot and have it travel in the path that it reportedly traveled.

Mr. SPECTER. Was frame 240 selected for analysis as being the absolutely last time, based on the observations of those whom you have described as seeing the films, that the Governor could have conceivably taken a shot from the sixth floor window and have it pass through the body of the Governor in the way described in the medical reports and by the Governor's doctors?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct.

Mr. SPECTER. Was the analysis, made on the ability of the Governor to take the shot at each of the positions, based on the position he had at that particular frame in accordance with the amount of turn to the right which he had made at that particular time?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes.

Mr. SPECTER. Was there a still photograph known as AP photograph, which was taken at the time of the assassination or a view seconds thereafter, studied by you and others in connection with the analysis that you have been describing?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; there was.

Mr. SPECTER. Was the simulated automobile placed in the same position that the Presidential automobile was in when the photograph was made by the AP photographer, as closely as it could be positioned at the time of the reenactment?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct.

Mr. SPECTER. What Commission exhibit number is attached to the photographs of that AP shot and the reenactment picture?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is Commission Exhibit No. 900.

Mr. SPECTER. Would you describe what photographs appear then on Commission Exhibit No. 900?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. On Commission Exhibit No. 900, the top photograph is a photograph purportedly made by an AP photographer shortly after one of the shots. It depicts the side of the Governor's head, the left side of the Governor's head, his ear is visible, he has turned considerably. It depicts the President's hand touching his lapels, and a portion of the President's face.

Secret Service agents on the followup car are seen also. The Texas School Book Building in the background.

The reenactment photograph was made after positioning the car by looking at the photograph, based on the position of the car as related to the lane line in the street, as related to the position of the building, the column of the building and so on to reestablish the location.

We also reestablish in reenactment the position of the agent taking Governor Connally's position in the car used in the reenactment and the position of President Kennedy to closely approximate the actual photograph made by the AP, Associated Press. This was then studied, the car in this position was then studied, from the Zapruder position, and was determined to be frame 255.

Mr. SPECTER. Was an exhibit prepared then on frame 255?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct.

Mr. SPECTER. What Commission exhibit number is affixed to frame 255?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Exhibit No. 901.

Mr. SPECTER. Does that have the same layout of photographs and measurements as on frames 225, 222 and those which preceded them.

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; it has. It has the Zapruder photographs, the matching reenactment photograph, and the photograph through the rifle scope along with the measurements and the angles.

Mr. SPECTER. On the AP photograph shown on Commission Exhibit No. 900, what reaction, if any, do you observe by the Secret Service agents on the followup car?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. The Secret Service agents on the right-hand side of the followup car are looking back and to their right. The one to the front on the left-hand side of the car is looking generally toward the President.

The one in back of him on the left fender is looking slightly to his right.

Representative FORD. What is the distance on frame 255 between the President and the rifle?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. The distance to the rifle in the window is 218 feet. This is frame 255, which is well past the signboard, well past 249 which is the last frame we considered.

Mr. McCLOY. Well past the first evidence of reaction?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes.

Mr. McCLOY. On the part of the President to a shot.

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Well past, and past the point in the film where Governor Connally states he has been hit.

Mr. SPECTER. Was that simulated car placed in any other position to duplicate still a subsequent frame?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; the frame No. 313, which is the frame that records the shot to the President's head, was recorded as frame 313 and was reestablished during reenactment.

Mr. SPECTER. What Commission number has been affixed to frame 313?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Commission Exhibit No. 902.

Mr. SPECTER. Is this exhibit organized in a somewhat different fashion from the prior frame exhibits?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct.

Mr. SPECTER. Will you start with the photograph in the upper left-hand corner and describe for the Commissioners, please, each photograph or picture which appears thereon and what it represents?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; I might state first that all of the other photographs were reestablished on the basis of the Zapruder film using reference points in the background of the pictures.

As is apparent here from the photograph of the Zapruder frame 313 there are no reference points. There is just a grassy plot. So there is no reference point on which we can reestablish the position of the car in the roadway.

For this reason it was necessary to use the Nix film of the head shot and the Muchmore film of the head shot to establish this position in the road.

The right-hand photograph represents frame 24 from the Nix film, and is the frame that depicts the shot to the head. We used Mr. Nix's camera and a print of this picture and stood in the previously determined position of Mr. Nix when he took his photographs, and had them roll the car down to a position so that the President's head was directly under the point where Mr. Zapruder is standing on the projection.

Mr. SPECTER. You are describing the photograph on which side----

Mr. SHANEYFELT. On the---

Mr. SPECTER. Of the viewer.

Mr. SHANEYFELT. On the upper left-hand side.

Mr. McCLOY. I think you said right.

Mr. SHANEYFELT. The upper left-hand photograph is the photograph from the--taken from the frame 24 of the Nix film.

The photograph on the right, upper right, is the photograph taken at the reenactment from the position where Mr. Nix was standing. We then proceeded over to the point that we had established as the position of Mrs. Muchmore, and using frame 42, which is a frame in her film depicting the shot to the head, and using the steps and their relation to the President and the objects in the background in relation to the President as shown in this lower left-hand photograph, which is the Muchmore frame 42, we reestablished, we checked the position we had placed the car in, based on the Nix photographs, and found that it conformed and checked out as being in a closely accurate position.

This is the basis used for establishing the position of the car. After we had established that, through the Nix and Muchmore films, we then checked it against the Zapruder photograph, which is the second from the top on the left of Commission Exhibit No. 902, frame 313, which shows the explosion from the top of the President's head. Just to the right of that second picture down from the right, is the photograph made at the reenactment from Zapruder's position.

We know from studying the films that just two or three frames before frame 313 we can see a little bit of yellow along the curb, and this checks out because along this area of the photograph from the Zapruder position of the reenactment is a yellow strip.

Mr. SPECTER. When you say this area you are referring to the yellow area which appears on the left-hand curb immediately to the rear of the simulated car?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct, and this, therefore, checks out this as being a fairly accurate position for the car in frame 313.

This photograph then, the third down on the left, is a photograph through the telescope of the rifle of the car positioned in frame 313.

Mr. McCLOY. Would you read off those dimensions from that?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. The dimensions from the surveyor on frame 313 of the distance from the wound mark on the President's stand-in to station C is 230.8 feet.

Distance to the rifle in the window is 265.3 feet. The angle to rifle in window is 15°21´ and this is based on the horizontal.

Distance to the overpass is 260.6 feet, the angle to the overpass is 1°28´.

Mr. SPECTER. What would the angle be considering the adjustment on the angle of the street?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. It would be less 3° or 12°21´, approximately.

Mr. SPECTER. When you say approximately is that because the adjustment is somewhat greater than 3°?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes.

Mr. SPECTER. How much is it exactly, if you know?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. It is 3.9. It is almost 4.

Mr. SPECTER. Three degrees nine minutes?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Three degrees nine minutes, I am sorry.

Mr. DULLES. Would you have to make a similar adjustment to the overpass?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; because the angle to the overpass is based on the horizontal. The overpass, you would have to add the 3°9´.

Mr. DULLES. From the overpass, is this an angle up or angle down?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. This is an angle down.

Mr. DULLES. So it is an angle down in both cases?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct.

Mr. SPECTER. When you say that you are reducing the angle of 15°21´ by 3°9´ to an angle of 12°12´, is that as the shot passes through the body of the President?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct. It is at that point.

Mr. SPECTER. How was the speed of the camera ascertained, Mr. Shaneyfelt?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. We obtained from Mr. Zapruder, Mr. Nix, Mrs. Muchmore; their cameras for examination, and in the FBI laboratory exposed film in all three cameras, aiming, focusing the camera on a clock with a large sweep-second hand. We then ran the camera at the speed and conditions as described by the people who used the cameras. We ran through several tests of film, and then after the film was developed it was studied under magnification, and frames were counted for a period of 2 to 3 seconds or for the full running time, and averages were taken.

Mr. Zapruder has stated that his camera was fully wound. Most of the others have stated their cameras were fully wound, so we were able to more or less eliminate the very slow time that occurs when the cameras are approximately run down, and all of these things were taken into consideration and were averaged.

The Zapruder camera was found to run at an average speed of 18.3 frames per second.

The Nix and Muchmore cameras were both found around 18.5 frames per second.

Mr. SPECTER. Were you able to ascertain the speed of the Presidential limousine at the time of the assassination?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; because we were able to determine the speed of the camera, and thereby accurately determine the length of time it takes for a specific number of frames to run through the camera at this 18.3 frames per second, and having located these frame positions in the street, we took the farthest distance point we had in the Zapruder film which was frame 161 through frame 313.

This was found to run elapsed time from the film standpoint which runs at 18.3 frames a second, runs for a total of 8.3 seconds.

This distance is 136.1 feet, and this can be calculated then to 11.2 miles per hour.

Mr. SPECTER. Is that a constant average speed or does that speed reflect any variations in the movement of the car?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is the overall average from 161 to 313. It does not mean that it was traveling constantly at 11.2, because it was more than likely going faster in some areas and slightly slower in some areas. It is only an average speed over the entire run.

Mr. DULLES. Over the entire run between what points?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Between frame 161 and 313.

Mr. DULLES. Yes; but where, could you place that on that chart, for example?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes.

Mr. DULLES. And describe the points?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. This is frame 161 which is the frame where they have just gone under the tree, to frame 313 which is the shot to the head. So that it is that distance there which is 136.1 feet.

Mr. SPECTER. In referring to those points, will you specify what exhibit number you are referring to there?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is----

Mr. DULLES. I wonder if we could mark those points on that exhibit?

Mr. SPECTER. Of course, Mr. Dulles.

That is Commission Exhibit No. 883, is it not, Mr. Shaneyfelt?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes.

Mr. SPECTER. Will you take the first point Mr. Dulles has referred to and mark it as point X. I think we already have some letter designations in the early part of the alphabet.

Mr. McCLOY. Where is that point? What significance is that point? The first point?

Mr. SPECTER. This frame 161----

Mr. McCLOY. Yes.

Mr. SPECTER. Is the first frame we have on the Zapruder film.

Mr. DULLES. It is only to get the speed and distance here.

Mr. McCLOY. It has no relation to any shots.

Mr. DULLES. No relation to shots. Speed and distance.

Mr. SPECTER. It is the first frame we have where the marksman has his last clear shot of the back of the President's neck before it passes under the tree without adjustment. Is that correct, Mr. Shaneyfelt?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct. What letter designations did you want?

Mr. SPECTER. Mark 161, frame 161, with the letter designation X, if you will, please.

Mr. SHANEYFELT. And 313?

Mr. SPECTER. With the letter designation Y.

Mr. McCLOY. The record ought to show the two points are the point which you merely calculated the speed at which the car is going, isn't that right?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct.

Mr. McCLOY. Yes.

Mr. DULLES. Between those two points the car went at an average speed of 11.2 miles an hour?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct. Between point X and Y on Exhibit No. 883 the speed of the car was determined to be an average speed of 11.2 miles per hour.

Mr. DULLES. How long did the car take to go that distance, do you know, translated into time?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. 8.3 seconds.

Mr. DULLES. 8.3 seconds.

Mr. SPECTER. What motion pictures, if any, were taken during the reenactment?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. During the reenactment the black-and-white photographs were made from Zapruder's position with a Speedgraphic camera and we also took motion pictures with Mr. Zapruder's camera from Zapruder's position with the car in the fixed locations as they were established with the car just stationary in those locations.

After establishing all those points and making these film records of it, we then had the car proceed along that Elm Street route at approximately 11 miles per hour, and filmed it with Mr. Zapruder's camera loaded with color film from Mr. Zapruder's position and simultaneously photographed it with Mr. Nix's camera from Mr. Nix's position, and Mrs. Muchmore's camera from Mrs. Muchmore's position, and this was done twice.

(Off the record.)

Mr. SPECTER. The last question was about what movies and stills you took?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. We haven't discussed them all yet.

Mr. SPECTER. Were any other movies taken or photographs taken in addition to those which you heretofore described?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; after positioning the car in the street at the specific locations and making the movies with the Zapruder, Nix, and Muchmore cameras with the car running at 11 miles an hour on the route, I then went to the sixth-floor window and mounted the camera on the rifle, and photographs were made with black and white film motion pictures of the car in the fixed positions from frame 161 through frame positions 313. The car was stopped at each position. The individuals and the car were positioned by Mr. Gauthier on the street using the Zapruder pictures to reposition the individuals in the car, and motion pictures were made of the car sitting in those various positions. After this the car was driven at 11 miles an hour along the route and photographs were made through the rifle scope with a 16-mm. motion picture camera following the car as a target, as the car drove down the assassination route.

Following this, there were three runs made on black and white film. Then color film was loaded in the camera and it was again photographed on color film, 16 mm. with the car traveling at 11 miles an hour and the scope of the rifle following the car as the target.

This completed all the photographs that were made at the assassination site.

Mr. SPECTER. Was a subsequent photograph taken in the garage which you previously identified as the railway express garage?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct.

Mr. SPECTER. Will you repeat, even though you have heretofore mentioned them, the angles between the spot on the back of President Kennedy's neck which was marked with a white chalk mark and the muzzle of the rifle when the car was positioned at frame 210?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. The angle, based on the horizontal at frame 210, to the rifle in the window was 21°34´.

Mr. SPECTER. What was the comparable angle at frame 225?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. 20°11´.

Mr. SPECTER. So what would be the average angle then between those two points?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. The average angle, allowing for the 3°9´ street grade results in an average angle between frame 210 and frame 225 of 17°43´30´´.

Mr. SPECTER. And that is the average angle from the muzzle to President Kennedy as he sat in the car or President Kennedy's stand-in as he sat in the car?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct. To the wound entrance.

Mr. SPECTER. Is the average angle of 17°43´30´´ measured from the muzzle to the President's body as the President would be seated in the car?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is out on the street in those frame positions, yes. It is measured to the point of the wound on the back of the President.

Mr. SPECTER. I now hand you a photograph which has been marked as Commission Exhibit No. 903 and ask you if you know who the photographer was?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; I took this photograph.

Mr. SPECTER. When was that photograph taken?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. It was taken Sunday afternoon, May 24, 1964.

Mr. SPECTER. Is there a white string which is apparent in the background of that photograph?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct.

Mr. SPECTER. What is the angle of declination of that string?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. That string was placed along the wall by the surveyor at an angle of 17°43´30´´.

Mr. SPECTER. Did the surveyor make that placement in your presence?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. He did.

Mr. SPECTER. Were the stand-ins for President Kennedy and Governor Connally positioned in the same relative positions as those occupied by President Kennedy and Governor Connally depicted in the Zapruder films?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; these positions were approximately the position of the President and Governor Connally in the Zapruder films in the area around frame 225 as they go behind the signboard and as they emerge from the signboard.

Mr. SPECTER. Was the rod which is held in that photograph positioned at an angle as closely parallel to the white string as it could be positioned?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes.

Mr. SPECTER. And through what positions did that rod pass?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. The rod passed through a position on the back of the stand-in for the President at a point approximating that of the entrance wound, exited along about the knot of the tie or the button of the coat or button of the shirt, and the end of the rod was inserted in the entrance hole on the back of Governor Connally's coat which was being worn by the stand-in for Governor Connally.

Mr. SPECTER. And was Governor Connally's stand-in seated in the position where the point of exit would have been below the right nipple at the approximate point described by Governor Connally's doctors?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct.

Senator COOPER. May I ask a couple of questions?

Am I correct in assuming that you have made these determinations about the degree of the angle of the trajectory of the bullet at the time the President was struck, locating the position of the President in the car on the one hand, and the location of the rifle at the time the shots were fired?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. The location of the wound, you mean the angle of the wound?

Senator COOPER. Yes.

Mr. SHANEYFELT. The angle----

Senator COOPER. You had to establish the position of the President at the time the bullet struck him and the position of the rifle to make a determination about the degree of the angle of the direction?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct. The positions in the car, their positions in the car, were based on the Zapruder film.

Senator COOPER. And you were able to determine what you think very accurately the position of the President in the car by the films that you have examined?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes.

Senator COOPER. Then the factor then, which is not determinate, exactly, then is the location of the rifle, is that correct?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct.

Senator COOPER. Upon what did you determine the location of the rifle--upon what factors?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. The rifle was positioned in the sixth floor window of the Book Building where the cartridges were found, and was determined from information furnished by representatives of the Commission.

Senator COOPER. Did you have information about the location of certain boxes that were seen--were found--at the window after the shooting occurred?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct. Yes; we had photographs of the boxes and we were advised, of the approximate position in the window and how far down the window was, the fact that some observers noted the rifle sticking out the window.

Senator COOPER. I want to ask you--you did have information from the testimony of witnesses who said they saw the rifle protruding from the window?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. We had this information furnished to us by the Commission.

Senator COOPER. And those facts, those locations were made known to you, and upon that evidence did you locate the rifle, in making these calculations?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. That was the basis for the location of the rifle in all of our calculations.

Senator COOPER. Just one other question. Assuming that there might have been some variation in the location of the rifle, length of the window, the breadth of the window, or that the rifle you used was held higher than the rifle might have been, would it have made--how much variation would it have made, in your judgement, in these calculations you made?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. I don't believe that any movement of the rifle in that specific window would alter our calculations to any appreciable degree if you stay within that window, because our reenactment and our repositioning of the bodies in the car based on the photographs is subject to some variation, too, so we have variations throughout.

And the variations from the position of the rifle at that particular window, I feel would be negligible.

Senator COOPER. At every point where you made it, hypothetically, at least, made the determination that at a particular point the President was struck by a bullet, at that point the car and the President could be seen from the window?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct.

Senator COOPER. That is all I want to ask.

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Even under the tree you still could see the car and the President through the tree.

Mr. SPECTER. Mr. Shaneyfelt, did the surveyors calculate the angle and distance from each position where the simulated car was stopped from the President to the triple underpass?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct.

Mr. SPECTER. And are those figures reproduced in terms of distance to overpass, and angle to overpass on every one of the exhibits which also depict distance to window, referring to the sixth floor window, and angle to rifle in window?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; they do. They are on all the exhibits.

Mr. SPECTER. Now; is there any point on the overpass where the angle to the President's car or the angle to the President's stand-in seated in the simulated car, would permit a shot to be fired and to create the wound in the President's neck, which has an angle of decline of approximately 17°, based on the information furnished to you by the medical evidence, which we have asked you to assume, where that wound could be inflicted on the President's neck without regard to the point of entry?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. No; none of the angles from the overpass are anywhere near 17°. They range from frame 161 at a minus 7´, from horizontal, to frame 313 which is 1°28´. None of them are even close to 17°.

Senator COOPER. From the exhibit that has been introduced, showing the position of the car and the President at the time of the first shot--what was the distance from that point to the overpass?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. The approximate location of the first shot----

Senator COOPER. Frame what?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Well, the exact frame has not been established, but it would be in the range from frames 207 to 225. At frame 207, the distance to the handrail on a line of sight vision to the wound on the President is 350.9 feet.

At frame 225 the line of sight distance from the handrail of the overpass to the wound on the President is 334 feet.

Senator COOPER. What is the distance at those points to the window in the Texas School Book Depository?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Frame 207 line of sight distance from the wound to the window is 174.9 feet. This distance to the overpass from there is 350.9.

On frame 225, line of sight to the window is 190.8 feet as opposed to the distance to the handrail on the overpass of 334.0 feet.

Senator COOPER. Did you yourself stand at the handrail of the overpass?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Did I?

Senator COOPER. Yes.

Mr. SHANEYFELT. No; I did not.

Mr. SPECTER. What do you mean, Mr. Shaneyfelt, by line of sight?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Straight line distance.

Representative FORD. Is that what is calculated by the surveyor?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct; by Mr. West.

Mr. SPECTER. Were there members of the testing teams that did go to the handrail at the triple underpass to make observations?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; there were.

Mr. SPECTER. Who were they?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. I am not real sure.

Mr. SPECTER. Mr. Chairman, those conclude my questions for Mr. Shaneyfelt. If it please the Commission, I would like to call Mr. Frazier at this time.

Mr. McCLOY. Thank you very much, Mr. Shaneyfelt.

TESTIMONY OF ROBERT A. FRAZIER RESUMED

Mr. SPECTER. Would you state your full name for the record, please?

Mr. FRAZIER. Robert A. Frazier.

Mr. SPECTER. Mr. Frazier, you have appeared before to testify, but will you at this juncture again give us the outline of your occupation and experience?

Mr. FRAZIER. Yes; I am a special agent of the Federal Bureau of Investigation assigned to the FBI Laboratory, Washington, D.C.

I work in the firearms identification unit in the laboratory, making examinations of firearms, bullets, the effects of bullets, trajectories, firing tests, powder pattern tests, and various other types of examinations.

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

Mr. SPECTER. Have you appeared heretofore before the Commission to testify about examinations which you have conducted of the clothing worn by President Kennedy, the clothing worn by Governor Connally, the examination of the Presidential limousine and certain ballistics information?

Mr. FRAZIER. Yes; I have.

Mr. SPECTER. Did you participate in the onsite tests at Dallas on May 24, 1964?

Mr. FRAZIER. Yes.

Mr. SPECTER. What was your position during most of the time of those onsite tests?

Mr. FRAZIER. I was stationed at the window on the sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository Building at the southeast corner of the building.

Mr. SPECTER. How far was that window open at the time the tests were being conducted?

Mr. FRAZIER. I estimated it as approximately one-third. It was somewhat less than halfway open.

Mr. SPECTER. Is that the distance depicted on Commission Exhibit No. 492, which has heretofore been introduced in evidence?

Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir.

Mr. SPECTER. Is the distance open on that window about the same as that which you had it open at the time these tests were run?

Mr. FRAZIER. Yes; I would say that this is very close. The window was placed according to information already furnished to the Commission as to how much it had been opened at that time.

Mr. SPECTER. Did you handle the Mannlicher-Carcano rifle during the course of the onsite tests?

Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir.

Mr. SPECTER. The rifle previously identified as Commission Exhibit No. 139?

Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir; I did.

Mr. SPECTER. At what position--what was the basis for your positioning of that rifle during those tests?

Mr. FRAZIER. To position the rifle, we selected boxes of the same size and contour as boxes shown in a photograph or rather in two photographs, reportedly taken by the police department at Dallas shortly after the assassination.

We placed these boxes in their relative position in front of the window spacing them from left to right, according to the photographs which were furnished to us, and also placing them up against the window, with one of them resting on the window ledge as it was shown in the photographs.

Mr. SPECTER. In addition to the placement of the boxes, were there any other guides which you had for reconstructing the position of the rifle to the way which you believed it to have been held on November 22, 1963?

Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir; there was one physical obstruction in the building which could not be moved consisting of two vertical pipes located just at the left side of the sixth floor window. These prevented me or anyone who was shooting from that window from moving any further to the left.

The position of the rifle, of course, had to be such that it could be sighted out through the window, using the telescopic sight high enough above the window ledge so that the muzzle of the weapon would clear the window ledge, and low enough in position so that the bottom of the window, which was only partially raised, would not interfere with a view through the telescopic sight, which is approximately 2 inches higher than the actual bore of the weapon.

Mr. SPECTER. Did you position the rifle further, based on information provided to you concerning the testimony of certain eyewitnesses at the assassination scene concerning what they observed?

Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir; we attempted to put the muzzle of the weapon sufficiently far out the window so it would have been visible from below.

Mr. SPECTER. Mr. Frazier, referring to Commission Exhibit No. 886, did you view through the sight that depicted in "photograph through rifle scope" on the positioning of the Presidential limousine or the car to simulate the limousine at position A?

Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir; this would be the first position that an individual in that sixth floor window could sight at the car due to the interference of the window ledge of the building and the fact that the angle downward is limited by the partially lowered window.

Mr. SPECTER. I now hand you Commission Exhibit No. 888 and ask you if you had the view depicted on the "photograph through the rifle scope" shown on that exhibit?

Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir; this Exhibit No. 888 is frame 161, and is the position at which I had the car stopped just before the spot, indicating the entrance wound on the back of the President's stand-in, passed into the foliage of the tree.

Mr. SPECTER. I now hand you Exhibits Nos. 889, 890, and 891, and ask you if you had the view on each of those depicted in the "photograph through rifle scope"?

Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir; Commission No. 889 represented by frame 166 is the adjusted position to account for the fact that the Presidential stand-in on May 24 was actually 10 inches higher in the air above the street than the President would have been in the Presidential limousine.

Mr. DULLES. Would you explain to us simply how you made those adjustments?

Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir.

Mr. DULLES. I mean how did you get him down 10 inches as a practical matter.

Mr. FRAZIER. They had marked on the back of the President's coat the location of the wound, according to the distance from the top of his head down to the hole in his back as shown in the autopsy figures. They then held a ruler, a tape measure up against that, both the back of the Presidential stand-in-and the back of the Governor's stand-in, and looking through the scope you could estimate the 10-inch distance down on the automobile.

You could not actually see it on the President's back. But could locate that 10-inch distance as a point which we marked with tape on the automobile itself, both for the Presidential and the Governor's stand-in.

Mr. DULLES. Thank you.

Mr. FRAZIER. Continuing with Commission Exhibit No. 890, represented by frame----

Mr. McCLOY. Hold that around so I can see it.

Mr. FRAZIER. Represented by frame 185, this is the first or rather the only position through the foliage of the tree at which a person from the sixth floor could get a clear shot at the back of the President, and I had the car stopped at this position and then we determined that this was frame 185 from the Zapruder films.

Mr. DULLES. There are no heavy limbs in there of any kind, are there----

Mr. FRAZIER. No, sir.

Mr. DULLES. That would obstruct a bullet?

Mr. FRAZIER. No, sir. The tree--it is a live oak tree which retains its leaves all year around and the limbs at that point are relatively small.

Mr. DULLES. All right.

Mr. SPECTER. Did you compare the appearance of the foliage on the pictures taken by the Secret Service, about which Inspector Kelley earlier testified, with the appearance of the foliage on May 24?

Mr. FRAZIER. Yes; I did.

Mr. SPECTER. What was that comparison?

Mr. FRAZIER. They are so nearly identical that you could not really pick out any difference between the foliage and the photograph taken previously in November.

In Commission Exhibit No. 891, which is marked frame 186, this is the adjusted position to which the car was moved to accommodate the 10-inch distance at which the actual wound in the President would have been located had the car been the actual Presidential limousine rather than the stand-in car.

Mr. SPECTER. Were you standing, seated, or kneeling at the time when these photographs were taken and the sighting of the rifle was made by you.

Mr. FRAZIER. I was actually sitting on a carton with my left elbow resting on the boxes stacked in front of the window.

Mr. SPECTER. Did that position represent to you the most likely position which the rifleman assumed on November 22, 1963, based upon the positioning of the various boxes?

Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir.

Mr. SPECTER. And the eyewitness accounts as to how far the rifle protruded?

Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir; it was.

Mr. SPECTER. Now, in all of the frames that you have described up to now, did you position the automobile on the street or give instructions over the radio as to where the automobile ought to be stopped for those various sightings?

Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir.

Mr. SPECTER. I now hand you Commission Exhibits Nos. 892 and 893, and ask you if you observed the views depicted in the "photograph through rifle scope" on each of those exhibits?

Mr. FRAZIER. On Commission Exhibit No. 892, also marked frame No. 207, the car was moved forward under the tree to the point where the spot on the Presidential stand-in's back just became visible beyond the foliage of the tree. I had the car stopped at that point so that this photograph could be made there.

On Commission Exhibit No. 893, also marked frame 210, we have the photograph made at the adjusted position to accommodate the 10-inch difference in height between the stand-in and the actual position of the wound above the street and on the President's body.

Mr. SPECTER. What was the alinement of President Kennedy's stand-in with Governor Connally's stand-in at frames 207 and 210?

Mr. FRAZIER. They both are in direct alinement with the telescopic sight at the window. The Governor is immediately behind the President in the field of view. Was that your question?

Mr. SPECTER. Yes.

Mr. FRAZIER. Alinement of people?

Mr. SPECTER. Yes, sir.

Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir.

Mr. SPECTER. Could Governor Connally have taken a shot in the range of frames 207 to 210 which would have traversed his body with the entry and exit points being approximately what they were shown to be through the medical records?

Preliminarily, let me ask you if, for the record, you had seen or had made available to you the contents of the medical records showing the point of entry on the back of the Governor and the point of exit on the front side of his chest?

Mr. FRAZIER. No, sir; I don't recall having seen the medical testimony. However, information has been furnished to me by Commission members as to the relative positions on the back and the front of the Governor.

Mr. SPECTER. Have you in addition had an opportunity to examine personally the clothing worn by the Governor consisting of his jacket and shirt?

Mr. FRAZIER. Yes; I have.

Mr. SPECTER. Based on the Governor's position then in frames 207 and 210, was he lined up so that a bullet fired from the sixth floor would have passed through his body in about the way that the entry and exit holes were described to you?

Mr. FRAZIER. Yes; I would say that this could have happened at these two frames.

However, this would assume that the path of the bullet through the Governor's body was the same as the path of the bullet before it struck, that is, there was no appreciable deflection in the body itself. Since I have no actual technical evidence available to me that there was no deflection, I can only say that it is a possibility under the circumstances as set up in these photographs.

Mr. SPECTER. You would state that as a possibility based upon the observations you made and the facts provided to you?

Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir.

Mr. SPECTER. All right.

I now hand you Commission Exhibits Nos. 894 and 895 and ask you if you saw the photograph as depicted on the "photograph through rifle sight" on those exhibits?

Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir.

Commission Exhibit No. 894 is marked frame 222, and the photograph through the scope is the same field which I saw looking through the telescope on May 24, 1964.

This is similarly true of Commission Exhibit No. 895--895 being frame No. 225.

Mr. SPECTER. I now show you Exhibits Nos. 896 and 897 and ask you if the picture shown on "photograph through rifle scope" is that which you observed at the times those pictures were taken.

Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir. This Exhibit No. 896 is also marked frame No. 231, and represents the relative positions of the President's and Governor's stand-in on May 24.

Commission Exhibit No. 897, which is marked frame 235, also represents the positions of the Presidential and Governor's stand-in as I saw it from the sixth floor on that date.

Mr. SPECTER. I now hand you Exhibits Nos. 899, 898, and 901 and ask if you saw the pictures or if your view was the same as "photograph through rifle scope" depicted on those exhibits?

Mr. FRAZIER. Yes; they are. In each case Commission Exhibit No. 898, which is marked frame 240, Commission Exhibit No. 899, which is also marked frame 249, and Commission Exhibit No. 901, which is also marked frame 255.

In the "photographs through the scope" the individuals representing the President and the Governor are as they were positioned on May 24.

Mr. SPECTER. Now, assuming certain factors, Mr. Frazier, to wit: That the President and Governor Connally were seated in an open automobile in the approximate positions taken by the President's stand-in and the Governor's stand-in during the onsite tests, that a bullet passed through President Kennedy entering at a velocity of 1,900 feet per second striking 14 centimeters below the right mastoid process and 14 centimeters to the left of the right acromion process which is the tip of the right shoulder, that the bullet passed through a fascia channel, hitting no bones, and proceeded in a straight line, exiting through the lower one-third of his neck, passing out of his shirt at the position which you observed personally from your inspection of the President's shirt, nicking the knot on the President's tie in the way you observed from your examination of that tie; do you have an opinion as to whether it is probable, based on the fact which I have asked you to assume, that a bullet could have gone through the President and missed the interior of the limousine and all of its occupants between frames 207 and 225?

Mr. FRAZIER. I can give you my opinion based on this reconstruction, as I understand your question.

All of these things refer to the reconstruction and assuming particularly that the path of the projectile to the President was also the same path, the same angle as it went through his body and then on, and in that connection, yes.

In my opinion the bullet had to strike in the car, either the car itself or an occupant of the car.

Mr. SPECTER. And is that a probable opinion of yours based on what you saw during the tests and the facts I have asked you to assume?

Mr. FRAZIER. Yes; it is, and in fact, I think it is rather--it is obvious when you look at the photographs themselves that the crosshair of the telescopic sight actually would give you the point of impact of the bullet if the weapon is sighted in and if there is no change in the line of sight the bullet had to strike the cars shown in each of these photographs which is frame 225 on this end of this series, and frame 207 on the other end of the series.

It shows that there would be no chance for the bullet to miss the car at all if it had no deviation in its--if it had no deflection in its path.

Mr. SPECTER. Did you have an opportunity to examine the car shortly after the assassination?

Mr. FRAZIER. Yes; I did, on the early morning of November 23, 1963.

Mr. SPECTER. The record will show you have testified about it heretofore, but will you again state at this juncture whether or not you found any indication within the car that the interior of the car was struck by a missile proceeding at a high velocity such as 1,775 feet per second?

Mr. FRAZIER. No, sir; we found none.

We examined in particular the passenger's section, the rear seat area of the back of the automobile clear up to the back of the rear seat, the rear seat itself, the floorboards and the back of the front seat, the backs primarily of the jump seats, and other areas in the front of the car, the windshield and the chrome and the front hoods and fenders and sides of the automobile and we found no evidence of a bullet impact having those characteristics you mentioned.

Mr. SPECTER. Did you also examine the windshield of the car, interior and exterior?

Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir.

Mr. SPECTER. And the chrome of the car on the interior and the exterior?

Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir.

Mr. SPECTER. Did you also examine the front portion of the Presidential limousine?

Mr. FRAZIER. Yes; we did. That portion, the dashboard below the windshield and the dashboard in the area immediately under that were particularly examined, because the rest of it would have been shielded from a shot due to the height of the dashboard and the height of the back of the front seat.

Mr. SPECTER. Did any of that area examined disclose any impact of such a missile?

Mr. FRAZIER. No, sir; not of a high velocity. Only the lead area smeared on the inside of the windshield from a relatively light object which struck the inside, and did not even break the inside surface of the glass, and then there was a possible bullet impact area at the top of the chrome to the right of the rearview mirror. This was made by a projectile not having the weight or velocity of a whole bullet moving at, in the range of a thousand to 1,500 feet per second or more.

Mr. SPECTER. Based on the position of Governor Connally as depicted in the Zapruder slides at frames 222 and 225, could he have taken a shot, assuming the firing point to have been the sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository Building, which entered and exited from his body in accordance with the known medical evidence?

Mr. FRAZIER. I have not made a very thorough study of the Zapruder film which I understand you mentioned in this particular question with reference to the Zapruder film itself.

Mr. SPECTER. We will take it with reference to the reconstructed positions of Governor Connally in frames 222 and 225, which you have testified you did observe at the time the measurements and photographs were taken.

Mr. FRAZIER. I would say, yes, under the conditions that I mentioned previously, that the reconstruction would represent the Governor as it was in November, then he could have been struck anywhere in that frame area of from 207 to 225.

Mr. SPECTER. How about the same question in frames 231, 235, 240 and thereafter?

Mr. FRAZIER. There is only one position beyond frame 225 at which the Governor could have been struck according to the information furnished to me and from my examination of his clothing that he was struck near the right sleeve seam and that the bullet came out through the inside pocket of his jacket.

At frame 231 the Governor is, as I saw it from the window on that date, turned to the front to such an extent that he could not have been hit at that particular frame.

Mr. SPECTER. Why not, Mr. Frazier?

Mr. FRAZIER. The angle through his body, as I measured it on the coat is approximately 20° from the right toward the left. On May 24 in our reconstruction I found that the Governor had turned farther to the front from a position slightly facing the right than he was in at frame 225. He had turned back to the front so that a shot which struck him in this shoulder in the back----

Mr. SPECTER. Indicating the right shoulder?

Mr. FRAZIER. Indicating the right shoulder near the seam would have come out much further to his right than the actual exit hole described to me as being just under the right nipple.

Mr. SPECTER. How would the bullet have passed through his body based on his position as shown in frame 235?

Mr. FRAZIER. In frame 235, which is Commission Exhibit No. 897, the Governor in our reconstruction, according to the Zapruder film was also facing too far, too much towards the front. The angle of the bullet through his body, assuming no deflection, would not have corresponded to the angle through his clothing or according to the information furnished from the medical examiners.

Mr. SPECTER. How about the Governor's position in frame 240?

Mr. FRAZIER. In frame 240 the Governor again could not have been shot, assuming no deflection of the bullet prior to its striking his body, from the window on the sixth floor because he is turned in this case too far to the right.

Now, this obviously indicates that the Governor in between frame 235 and frame 240 has turned from facing completely forward in the car around to the right to the point that a bullet entering his back on the right shoulder area would have exited in my opinion somewhere from his left chest area rather than from his right chest area.

Mr. SPECTER. How about the Governor's position at frame 249?

Mr. FRAZIER. In frame 249 a similar situation exists in that the Governor, as represented by his stand-in in our reconstruction, has turned too far to the right, even further than frame 240, so that in frame 249 represented by Commission Exhibit No. 899, he again could not have been hit by a bullet which came from the window on the sixth floor and struck him in an undeflected fashion and passed through his body undeflected.

Mr. SPECTER. How about frame 255?

Mr. FRAZIER. On frame 255 which is in Commission Exhibit No. 901 the Governor is turned again too far to the right, and the same situation would hold true as to what we saw in frame 249.

The bullet would have exited too far on his left side, provided there was no deflection between the window and the point of exit from the Governor's body.

Mr. SPECTER. Mr. Frazier, based on the angles, distances, and speeds of the car and bullet in this situation, what lead would a marksman have to give to strike the moving target, allowing for all of those factors?

Mr. FRAZIER. The lead would be approximately the same for all of these positions represented by your frame or rather your Commission Exhibit No. 888, which is frame 161, all the way up to frame 313 which I don't have, the Commission's Exhibit is No. 902 on frame 313, a lead of 6 inches above the point of impact would be sufficient to account for the movement of the car during the flight of the bullet.

The fact that the same lead would be necessary at each place is because at the closer frame numbers, the lower frame numbers, 161, 166, 185, and so forth, there is a relatively steep downward angle beginning at 40°, whereas the last shot, the downward angle is approximately 17° or 20°, in that neighborhood.

Just one thing more, it would require less apparent elevation of the crosshair over the point of impact at the distant target to allow for a further movement of the car of approximately 2 feet at the point where the head shot occurred.

So the lead would be constant between 5.9 inches above the point of impact to 6.3 inches above the point of impact.

Mr. DULLES. Have you asked the witness--I was studying these frame pictures--at about what frame he thinks the body of Governor Connally would have been in a position to receive a bullet that would go through the body with this trajectory?

Mr. SPECTER. Yes; I believe I did.

Mr. DULLES. I wasn't quite clear.

Mr. FRAZIER. I testified that it would have been in position from anywhere from frames 207 to 225.

However, I cannot limit it to 207 because at that point the car goes back under the foliage and you can't actually see clearly enough.

Mr. DULLES. Between frames 207 and 225?

Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir; approximately frame 207 to approximately frame 225.

Mr. DULLES. Thank you.

Mr. SPECTER. Looking at Exhibit No. 902, frame 313, on the view shown on the "photograph through rifle scope," is that the way you saw it at the time of the reconstruction, when the car was in that position as shown in that exhibit?

Mr. FRAZIER. Yes; it is.

Mr. SPECTER. At this time I move for the admission into evidence of Commission Exhibits Nos. 885 through 903 which constitute all of the photographs referred to by Mr. Shaneyfelt and Mr. Frazier during their testimony.

(Commission Exhibits Nos. 855 through 903 were marked for identification, and received in evidence.)

Mr. McCLOY. They may be admitted.

Mr. SPECTER. That completes the questioning.

Mr. McCLOY. As I get it, Mr. Frazier, what you are saying is there is only a certain point at which the bullet could pass through the President, could have hit Mr. Connally, and that is at a point when he is not sitting full face forward and at a point when he is not too far turned around.

Mr. FRAZIER. That is exactly right.

Mr. McCLOY. Somewhere when he is turning to the right.

Mr. FRAZIER. He was placed approximately 20° to the right.

Mr. McCLOY. To the right.

Mr. FRAZIER. That is 20° according to my examination of his clothing but I don't know the exact figures of the angle through his body.

Mr. SPECTER. I have one additional question.

Mr. Frazier, assuming the factors which I have asked you to accept as true for the purposes of expressing an opinion before, as to the flight of the bullet and the straight line penetration through the President's body, considering the point of entry and exit, do you have an opinion as to what probably happened during the interval between frames 207 and 225 as to whether the bullet which passed through the neck of the President entered the Governor's back.

Mr. FRAZIER. There are a lot of probables in that. First, we have to assume there is absolutely no deflection in the bullet from the time it left the barrel until the time it exited from the Governor's body. That assumes that it has gone through the President's body and through the Governor's body.

I feel that physically this would have been possible because of the positions of the Presidential stand-in and the Governor's stand-in, it would be entirely possible for this to have occurred.

However, I myself don't have any technical evidence which would permit me to say one way or the other, in other words, which would support it as far as my rendering an opinion as an expert. I would certainly say it was possible but I don't say that it probably occurred because I don't have the evidence on which to base a statement like that.

Mr. SPECTER. What evidence is it that you would be missing to assess the probabilities?

Mr. FRAZIER. We are dealing with hypothetical situations here of placing people in cars from photographs which are not absolutely accurate. They are two dimensional. They don't give you the third dimension. They are as accurate as you can accurately place the people but it isn't absolute.

Secondly, we are dealing with the fact that we don't know whether, I don't know technically, whether there was any deviation in the bullet which struck the President in the back, and exited from his front. If there were a few degrees deviation then it may affect my opinion as to whether or not it would have struck the Governor.

We are dealing with an assumed fact that the Governor was in front of the President in such a position that he could have taken. So when you say would it probably have occurred, then you are asking me for an opinion, to base my opinion on a whole series of hypothetical facts which I can't substantiate.

Mr. McCLOY. Let me put it to you in another way--from your best judgment about what you know about this thing, what was the sequence of the shots, and who was hit, and when in relation to----

Mr. FRAZIER. I will say this--I have looked at the film and have seen evidence of one shot occurring which struck the President in the head. That was at frame 313.

Mr. SPECTER. Frame 313? Yes.

Mr. FRAZIER. Commission Exhibit No. 902. I have seen evidence in the film of the President with both arms up clutching at his throat, and having examined his clothing and having seen the hole in his shirt and his back, I might assume that he is clutching his throat because a bullet exited from his throat. I don't have the technical knowledge to substantiate that. There was no metal on this hole in front, and there is no way for me to say from my own examination that it actually was a bullet hole. Nowhere else in this film have I seen any indication of a bullet striking.

Mr. SPECTER. The President?

Mr. FRAZIER. Either the President or the Governor. Because I do not know the reaction time which would exist from the time a bullet struck until someone made a move. It may be a half second, it may be a full second. It may be a tenth of a second. It depends upon the intensity of the pain, and actually what happened.

And therefore, in looking at the film you can't say a bullet struck right here because he started to move his hands here. It may have been a full second, a half second behind that spot. I would say that two bullets at least struck in the automobile. I cannot say that three bullets did not strike in the automobile from my examination, but it appears and due to the reconstruction at Dallas, it appears that if the one bullet did strike the President, then it landed in the automobile, and if it landed in the automobile, and we found no evidence of it having hit the car itself, then I say it is possible that it struck the Governor.

Now, as to the sequence of the shots, that one obviously was before the head shot. If there was a third shot fired, I could not tell you from anything I know whether it was the first, the second, or the third.

Mr. McCLOY. It is possible, according to your analysis of it, that the first shot could have gone through the back of the President and exited through the front of his neck, and the second shot could have hit Connally, and the third shot could have hit the President.

Mr. DULLES. Where would the first shot have gone under that thesis?

Mr. McCLOY. I just say I don't know where it could have gone.

Mr. FRAZIER. From what I know from my examination that is true, because I have seen bullets strike small twigs, small objects, and ricochet for no apparent reason except they hit and all the pressure is on one side and it turns the bullet and it goes off at an angle.

If there was no deviation from the time the bullet left the rifle barrel until the time it exited from the Governor's body, then the physical setup exists for it to have gone through the President, and through the Governor.

Mr. SPECTER. You mean from the time it exited through the Governor's body?

Mr. FRAZIER. That is right. Otherwise, you have nothing to base a conclusion upon. If you have deviation anywhere along the line then you both affect the position at which the Governor could have been shot--for instance--if the bullet entered the Governor's back and immediately took a 20° leftward angle, then the Governor could have been shot when he was facing straightforward in the automobile.

Now, I can't tell that, and therefore I can only say that my opinion must be based on your assumption that there was not a deviation of the bullet through the President's body and no deviation of the bullet through the Governor's body, no deflection. On that basis then you can say that it is possible for both of them to have been hit with one bullet.

Representative FORD. Does that opinion rule out the possibility or cast doubt on the possibility of a third shot?

Mr. FRAZIER. It does not rule out the possibility of a third shot. No, sir; because I can only base my opinion on what I saw and my own experience, and that is that a bullet could have struck the President, if it had deflection in the President's body it could have, and he happened to be in a certain position in the car which would affect the angle, the bullet may have exited from the automobile.

Representative FORD. As I understood your assumptions there was no deviation and no deflection, and I thought I phrased my question based on your opinion under those facts, it might rule out a third shot.

Mr. DULLES. Do you mean rule out a third shot entirely or just rule out a third shot hitting in the car?

Representative FORD. Rule out a third shot in one instance or establish the possibility of a third shot that missed everything.

Mr. FRAZIER. As I understand your question I am now assuming these various factors to exist, that there was no deviation, no change in the path of the bullet.

Representative FORD. The bullet went through the President and through the Governor.

Mr. FRAZIER. Yes; then under that premise and the reconstruction showing the position of the car with reference to the path of the bullet, then it is entirely possible that these two individuals were hit with one bullet and that there was not another bullet that struck in the car other than the one that struck the President in the back of the head and exited from his head.

Representative FORD. Under these assumptions there is a possibility there was not a third shot or there was a third shot that missed everything.

Mr. FRAZIER. That missed everything; yes, sir.

Mr. DULLES. Is there any way of correlating the time of the shot with the position of the car so as to know whether possibly the first shot was fired before the car was out from the tree and it might have hit a branch of the tree and be deflected so it didn't hit the car? If he had fired too soon. I guess it is impossible.

Mr. FRAZIER. It is possible, I don't have any evidence to support it one way or the other.

Mr. DULLES. Yes.

Mr. FRAZIER. As to whether or not a limb of the tree may have deflected one shot. However, I think it should be remembered that the frame 207 is just as he exits under the tree; from there to frame 225 to where the President shows a reaction is only a matter of 1 second. He is under the tree in frames 166 until frame 207, which is about 2 seconds. So somewhere in that 3-second interval there may have been a shot--which deflected from a limb or for some other reason and was never discovered.

Representative FORD. Mr. Chairman, may I return to questions that I was asking Mr. Frazier?

Mr. McCLOY. Yes.

Representative FORD. Again making those same assumptions we made a moment ago, is there any evidence that a third shot hit the car or any occupant of the car?

Mr. FRAZIER. Assuming all those assumptions we had before; no. I would say that, and again I have not the technical evidence to back this up one way or the other but you make these assumptions and I would say under those conditions only two shots hit the occupants of the car because the one through the President had to cause Connally's wound otherwise it would have struck somewhere else in the car and it did not strike somewhere else.

Therefore, it had to go through Governor Connally.

And the second shot had to strike the President in the head.

Mr. McCLOY. How about these shots you spoke of, one of the fragments, at least, hitting the glass, the windshield and one possibly hitting the chrome. Was there anything, could it have been any fragmentation of the first shot which didn't hit, the first shot that hit the President, let's say, but didn't hit Connally, might that again make the possibility of three shots, one of them hitting the President and fragmenting as you indicated, and a second one hitting Connally, and the third one hitting the President for the lethal shot.

Mr. FRAZIER. Under that circumstance the bullet exiting from the President would have had to strike something else in the car to break it up.

Mr. McCLOY. Break it up inasmuch as it was broken up?

Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir; there was no evidence that the bullet which exited from the President was in any but complete condition, that is there was only one hole through the shirt, there was only one hole through his coat or shirt actually and the testimony of the medical examiners was that it made a relatively straight path through the body.

Mr. SPECTER. That completes my questions of Mr. Frazier.

Mr. DULLES. Could I ask just one more question?

Mr. SPECTER. Yes, sir; Mr. Dulles.

Mr. DULLES. There has been a certain amount of testimony indicating there was a longer pause between the report of the first shot or what is believed to be the report, explosion of the first shot and the second and third shots, that is not absolutely unanimous but I would say it is something like 5 to 1 or something of that kind, what would you say, 2 to 1, 3 to 1?

(Discussion off the record.)

Mr. DULLES. Is it possible that the assassin attempted to fire when the car was behind the tree or going into the tree, that that shot went astray, and that that accounts for, if there was a longer delay between one and two, that would account for it, and then the lethal shots were fired or the wound, the one shot that was fired that hit the two and then the lethal shot was fired immediately after. It is speculation.

Mr. McCLOY. I think that must be speculation because there certainly is conflicting evidence as to the intervals between the first and the second shot and the second and the third shot.

Mr. DULLES. I think if you will read the testimony you will find it at least 2 to 1 except for the people in the car.

Mr. McCLOY. Maybe, but what weight do you give these, I don't know. I think that is quite possible that a bullet was deflected by that tree, but there is no evidence whatever of the bullet landing anywhere in the street or among the crowd.

And yet there seems to be no doubt at all that three shots were fired.

Mr. DULLES. That seems to be the evidence.

Mr. McCLOY. At least three shots were fired, and probably three shots were fired because of the three shells that were found.

Mr. DULLES. Three shells?

Mr. McCLOY. Yes.

Mr. DULLES. We probably won't settle that today.

Mr. FRAZIER. I don't know how to answer that question except possibly to go back to the frame numbers of the Zapruder film and you will find they are about equally spaced from frame 161 just before the tree to frame, say, 220, which is just a few frames after the tree, that is 59 or approximately 60 frames, from that point. But from frame 222 to the last shot of frame 313 is 78 and 13, 91 frames, so there is more time between the second and third than the first and second, assuming that the second one actually occurred and that it occurred at about the middle of that interval.

Mr. McCLOY. In the middle of that frame, yes. I think that is pretty persuasive.

Mr. DULLES. I didn't quite follow that.

Mr. McCLOY. There seemed to be more frames between, going backwards, between the third shot, that is between the time that----

Mr. DULLES. The first shot went astray, you don't know whether it was fired. You have no way of getting at that.

(Discussion off the record.)

Mr. McCLOY. Thank you very much, Mr. Frazier.

Mr. SPECTER. I want to call Inspector Kelley for observations from the underpass.

May the record show that Inspector Thomas Kelley has returned to the witness chair.

TESTIMONY OF THOMAS J. KELLEY RESUMED

Mr. KELLEY. Yes, sir.

Mr. SPECTER. Before we conclude the testimony, Inspector Kelley, I want to ask you if on May 24 you had occasion to go over to the triple underpass and observe the simulated car and occupants drive down Elm Street from Houston Street?

Mr. KELLEY. Yes; I accompanied Mr. Redlich and Mr. Specter from the Commission on the point on the overpass.

Mr. SPECTER. From the Commission or from where to the overpass--pardon me. I understand your sequence there.

What did you observe as to the position of the President's stand-in concerning whether he could have been struck by a bullet which was fired from the top of the triple underpass?

Mr. KELLEY. I observed as the car came down Elm Street that the President's stand-in was in our view all the time as he was coming down the street from the right-hand side of the car. As the more you moved over to the left of the underpass, the longer the stand-in was in direct view of anybody standing on the overpass.

Mr. SPECTER. And was the stand-in obstructed by the windshield at anytime as the car drove down Elm Street?

Mr. KELLEY. No; he was not. However, never at any time was he in a position to take a wound in the throat which from the drawings that have been given me, that I have been shown by the Commission, would he take a wound in the throat which would have exited higher than the throat or in the shoulder.

From the evidence that has been shown previously, the wound in the throat was lower on the President's body than the wound in the shoulder, and----

Mr. SPECTER. By the wound in the shoulder do you mean the wound in the back of the President's neck, the base of his neck?

Mr. KELLEY. Yes.

Mr. SPECTER. So, could a shot have been fired from the top of the triple underpass which would have passed through the President's neck, disregarding the medical evidence on point of entry, which traveled in an upward direction from the front of his neck upward to the back of his neck?

Mr. KELLEY. In my judgment, no.

Representative FORD. If a person were standing where you have indicated you were on that triple overpass, on November 22, he would have been in full view of anybody in the immediate vicinity.

Mr. KELLEY. Yes; and there were people on the overpass. There was a policeman on the overpass, there were a number of railroad workmen on the overpass at that time.

Representative FORD. There would have been no place where such a person could have hidden himself and not been detected?

Mr. KELLEY. Not on the overpass.

Mr. DULLES. What were the railway workmen doing on the overpass, were they helping to guard the overpass or just spectators?

Mr. KELLEY. No; they were working. There are a great many tracks indicated here.

Mr. DULLES. Yes; I was up there and I remember it very well.

Mr. KELLEY. They were doing some repairs on the tracks.

Mr. DULLES. I see.

Mr. McCLOY. I had the impression there was more than one policeman also guarding up there, at least two, but maybe I am wrong. At least there is some testimony.

Mr. DULLES. Do you recall, Mr. Specter, what the testimony is on that--the number of policemen on the overpass?

Mr. SPECTER. I believe there were two officers on the overpass, who said that no shots came from that direction.

Mr. McCLOY. No shots came from that direction. Is that all you wanted?

Mr. SPECTER. That completes the testimony of Mr. Kelley and all of the individuals this afternoon.

Mr. McCLOY. Thank you very much, Mr. Kelley.

(Whereupon, at 6:40 p.m., the President's Commission recessed to view the films.)

TESTIMONY OF LYNDAL L. SHANEYFELT RESUMED

(Present were Mr. McCloy, Mr. Dulles, and Representative Ford)

Mr. SPECTER. May the record now show that the Commission has now reassembled on the first floor of the VFW Building where a motion picture projector and slide projector and screen have been set up for viewing of the films.

Mr. Shaneyfelt, what are you going to show us first of all?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. The first film will be of the color motion picture made through the rifle scope as the car drove down the assassination route at approximately 11 miles an hour. It will give the view the rifleman had as he aimed the rifle from the sixth floor window of the Book Building.

(Film)

Mr. DULLES. Is that going 11 miles per hour?

(Discussion off the record.)

Mr. SHANEYFELT. This film will be the black and white photographs of the car in the fixed still positions in each of the frame numbers described in previous testimony.

In addition the final portion of the film is a run through of the car at 11 miles an hour on three separate runs filmed as the rifleman would have seen the car looking through the rifle.

On the first run of the car going down the assassination route I have stained frames in the vicinity of frame 222 which is after the first clear shot after the tree, I have stained the frame at the location of shot 313, which is the second pink flash you will see.

I found, in examining the film, that this is a shorter span of time than in the actual film. It is a span on the reenactment of about three and a half seconds between 222 and 313.

The second frame stained is 313 but since it is running at a faster speed I have also stained a spot that represents 5 seconds which is what the time lapse was between frame 222 and frame 313 in the actual assassination films.

That will be after the car driving scene.

(Film)

Mr. SHANEYFELT. This is the last clear shot and this is an adjusted last clear shot before going under the tree. This is the shot approximately 185. This is frame 186 which is the adjusted shots which would account for a 10-inch variance.

Shot of frame 207, and the adjusted frame which was 210. This is frame 222 and you can see the tree is still in the background.

This is 225 now. 231. At this point Governor Connally states he has been hit by now. This is 235. 240--249--255--and the shot to the head which is 313.

Mr. SPECTER. What is this? Describe this, Mr. Shaneyfelt.

Mr. SHANEYFELT. This is the run at 11 miles an hour containing the pink stain. This is another run at 11 miles an hour. It will give you some idea of the difficulty of tracking a car with a heavy camera mounted on the rifle.

Mr. McCLOY. You have to sight that with a camera?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Sighting through a camera.

(Film)

Mr. REDLICH. Just as a final thing, Mr. McCloy, would you like to see the Zapruder film?

Mr. McCLOY. I think we will take the original Zapruder again, I don't know whether we have anything that is more significant in the black and whites, I am talking about the particular movies of the frames, we have not seen those.

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes.

Mr. McCLOY. I think we have seen all we need to see with regard to that. What have you got left?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. The original Zapruder film.

Mr. McCLOY. We will see that.

Mr. SHANEYFELT. We have the duplication of the Zapruder film reenactment. The first portion of the reel is the still shots and the last portion is the run through at 11 miles an hour.

Mr. SPECTER. I think you would find that worth while to see.

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Then we have Nix and Muchmore of the same run.

Mr. McCLOY. Let's do those, too.

Representative FORD. First is the original Zapruder.

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Original Zapruder. This is not the original. This is the first copy.

(Film)

Mr. SPECTER. Will you state for the record what film we just saw?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. This film we just viewed is a copy made directly from the original Zapruder film of the actual assassination.

Mr. SPECTER. Could you now show us the film which was taken at the reconstruction from the Zapruder position?

(Film)

Mr. SHANEYFELT. These films we made in Dallas have been developed and left intact and have not been edited in any way so there are a lot of blank spaces where we run the leader off and turn the film. This is position 161. This side-to-side jiggle is a camera malfunction.

Mr. McCLOY. This is 16 mm.?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. No; 8 mm.

Representative FORD. Is this from his camera?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; taken with his camera. Frame 222, frame 225. This is frame 231.

Representative FORD. He has a delayed reaction compared to what the President did.

Mr. SPECTER. What frame is this, Mr. Shaneyfelt?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. 313, the head shot.

Mr. McCLOY. The head shot.

Mr. SHANEYFELT. This is the position which is not duplicated on the Zapruder film. This is running the film out to reload it.

During that run at 11 miles an hour we made no effort to duplicate the body position because it would have been most difficult to know just when to turn. The only other films we have are the ones we shot with the Nix and Muchmore cameras of this same run from their positions.

Mr. McCLOY. Did Nix, Muchmore get a second shot of the head shot?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Mrs. Muchmore got the head shot and Mr. Nix got the head shot.

Mr. McCLOY. They both got it.

Mr. SHANEYFELT. We have both those films.

Mr. McCLOY. We might take a look at it while we are here. I don't think I have ever seen those. Those are 88 mm., too.

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes.

(Film.)

Mr. SHANEYFELT. This film is the film that was taken by Mr. Orville Nix of the assassination. This is along Houston street going toward Elm. There was the head shot. We will roll it back and run it at slow motion. The head shot shows just a very faint pink.

Mr. McCLOY. Very soon after this sequence begins. Just as the President is directly under the white abutment in the background. I will try to give you a clue about when it is going to happen, there.

The next film is the film that was exposed in Mr. Nix's camera standing in the position determined to be his camera position at the reenactment in Dallas, with the car traveling at approximately 11 miles an hour along Elm street.

These films were compared with each other and found to be consistent in the size of the car in the area of the picture and verified the position as being that of Mr. Nix.

(Film)

Mr. SPECTER. Have you now shown us, Mr. Shaneyfelt, all of the movies that we saw, we took in Dallas?

Mr. McCLOY. Mrs. Muchmore.

Mr. SPECTER. Mrs. Muchmore.

(Film)

Mr. SHANEYFELT. This is the motorcade coming down Main and turning into Houston street.

Mr. McCLOY. She didn't know she took that.

Mr. SHANEYFELT. No.

Mr. SPECTER. Have we now seen all the films from Dallas? That concludes the films.

Mr. McCloy, for the record, I would like to have the films marked with Commission Exhibit No. 904 identifying the Zapruder copy. That is the copy of the original Zapruder film.

May I say here, parenthetically, that we do not intend to reproduce all of this in the published record of the Commission since we have extracted the key numbers on Exhibit 885 on the album which shows the frames of the Zapruder film after the President's automobile turns left off of Houston onto Elm, but for the permanent archives these films should be made a part of the permanent record.

I would like to have a copy of the original Nix film marked as Commission Exhibit No. 905. I would like to have the copy of the original Muchmore film marked as Commission Exhibit No. 906. I would like to have all of the movies which we took at Dallas marked in a group as Commission Exhibit No. 907.

Mr. McCLOY. That is all the movies that were taken on May 24 in Dallas by the test team, so to speak.

Mr. SPECTER. Right, Commissioner McCloy. They are marked as Commission Exhibit No. 907, and I would like to move formally for the admission into evidence of Commission Exhibits Nos. 904 through 907 at this time.

Mr. McCLOY. They may be admitted.

(Commission Exhibits Nos. 904, 905, 906, and 907 were marked for identification, and received in evidence.)

(Whereupon, at 7:20 p.m., the President's Commission recessed.)

Friday, June 5, 1964

TESTIMONY OF MRS. JOHN F. KENNEDY

The President's Commission met, at 4:20 p.m., on Friday, June 5, 1964, at 3017 N Street NW., Washington, D.C.

Present was Chief Justice Earl Warren, Chairman.

Also present were J. Lee Rankin, general counsel; and Robert F. Kennedy, Attorney General of the United States.

The CHAIRMAN. The Commission will be in order.

Mrs. Kennedy, the Commission would just like to have you say in your own words, in your own way, what happened at the time of the assassination of the President. Mr. Rankin will ask you a few questions, just from the time you left the airport until the time you started for the hospital. And we want it to be brief. We want it to be in your own words and want you to say anything that you feel is appropriate to that occasion.

Would you be sworn, please, Mrs. Kennedy?

Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you give before the Commission will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?

Mrs. KENNEDY. I do.

The CHAIRMAN. Would you be seated.

Mr. RANKIN. State your name for the record.

Mrs. KENNEDY. Jacqueline Kennedy.

Mr. RANKIN. And you are the widow of the former President Kennedy?

Mrs. KENNEDY. That is right.

Mr. RANKIN. You live here in Washington?

Mrs. KENNEDY. Yes.

Mr. RANKIN. Can you go back to the time that you came to Love Field on November 22 and describe what happened there after you landed in the plane?

Mrs. KENNEDY. We got off the plane. The then Vice President and Mrs. Johnson were there. They gave us flowers. And then the car was waiting, but there was a big crowd there, all yelling, with banners and everything. And we went to shake hands with them. It was a very hot day. And you went all along a long line. I tried to stay close to my husband and lots of times you get pushed away, you know, people leaning over and pulling your hand. They were very friendly.

And, finally, I don't know how we got back to the car. I think Congressman Thomas somehow was helping me. There was lots of confusion.

Mr. RANKIN. Then you did get into the car. And you sat on the left side of the car, did you, and your husband on your right?

Mrs. KENNEDY. Yes.

Mr. RANKIN. And was Mrs. Connally----

Mrs. KENNEDY. In front of me.

Mr. RANKIN. And Governor Connally to your right in the jump seat?

Mrs. KENNEDY. Yes.

Mr. RANKIN. And Mrs. Connally was in the jump seat?

Mrs. KENNEDY. Yes.

Mr. RANKIN. And then did you start off on the parade route?

Mrs. KENNEDY. Yes.

Mr. RANKIN. And were there many people along the route that you waved to?

Mrs. KENNEDY. Yes. It was rather scattered going in.

Once there was a crowd of people with a sign saying something like "President Kennedy, please get out and shake our hands, our neighbors said you wouldn't."

Mr. RANKIN. Did you?

Mrs. KENNEDY. And he stopped and got out. That was, you know, like a little suburb and there were not many crowds. But then the crowds got bigger as you went in.

Mr. RANKIN. As you got into the main street of Dallas were there very large crowds on all the streets?

Mrs. KENNEDY. Yes.

Mr. RANKIN. And you waved to them and proceeded down the street with the motorcade?

Mrs. KENNEDY. Yes. And in the motorcade, you know, I usually would be waving mostly to the left side and he was waving mostly to the right, which is one reason you are not looking at each other very much. And it was terribly hot. Just blinding all of us.

Mr. RANKIN. Now, do you remember as you turned off of the main street onto Houston Street?

Mrs. KENNEDY. I don't know the name of the street.

Mr. RANKIN. That is that one block before you get to the Depository Building.

Mrs. KENNEDY. Well, I remember whenever it was, Mrs. Connally said, "We will soon be there." We could see a tunnel in front of us. Everything was really slow then. And I remember thinking it would be so cool under that tunnel.

Mr. RANKIN. And then do you remember as you turned off of Houston onto Elm right by the Depository Building?

Mrs. KENNEDY. Well, I don't know the names of the streets, but I suppose right by the Depository is what you are talking about?

Mr. RANKIN. Yes; that is the street that sort of curves as you go down under the underpass.

Mrs. KENNEDY. Yes; well, that is when she said to President Kennedy, "You certainly can't say that the people of Dallas haven't given you a nice welcome."

Mr. RANKIN. What did he say?

Mrs. KENNEDY. I think he said--I don't know if I remember it or I have read it, "No, you certainly can't," or something. And you know then the car was very slow and there weren't very many people around.

And then--do you want me to tell you what happened?

Mr. RANKIN. Yes; if you would, please.

Mrs. KENNEDY. You know, there is always noise in a motorcade and there are always motorcycles besides us, a lot of them backfiring. So I was looking to the left. I guess there was a noise, but it didn't seem like any different noise really because there is so much noise, motorcycles and things. But then suddenly Governor Connally was yelling, "Oh, no, no, no."

Mr. RANKIN. Did he turn toward you?

Mrs. KENNEDY. No; I was looking this way, to the left, and I heard these terrible noises. You know. And my husband never made any sound. So I turned to the right. And all I remember is seeing my husband, he had this sort of quizzical look on his face, and his hand was up, it must have been his left hand. And just as I turned and looked at him, I could see a piece of his skull and I remember it was flesh colored. I remember thinking he just looked as if he had a slight headache. And I just remember seeing that. No blood or anything.

And then he sort of did this [indicating], put his hand to his forehead and fell in my lap.

And then I just remember falling on him and saying, "Oh, no, no, no," I mean, "Oh, my God, they have shot my husband." And "I love you, Jack," I remember I was shouting. And just being down in the car with his head in my lap. And it just seemed an eternity.

You know, then, there were pictures later on of me climbing out the back. But I don't remember that at all.

Mr. RANKIN. Do you remember Mr. Hill coming to try to help on the car?

Mrs. KENNEDY. I don't remember anything. I was just down like that.

And finally I remember a voice behind me, or something, and then I remember the people in the front seat, or somebody, finally knew something was wrong, and a voice yelling, which must have been Mr. Hill, "Get to the hospital," or maybe it was Mr. Kellerman, in the front seat. But someone yelling. I was just down and holding him. [Reference to wounds deleted.]

Mr. RANKIN. Do you have any recollection of whether there were one or more shots?

Mrs. KENNEDY. Well, there must have been two because the one that made me turn around was Governor Connally yelling. And it used to confuse me because first I remembered there were three and I used to think my husband didn't make any sound when he was shot. And Governor Connally screamed. And then I read the other day that it was the same shot that hit them both. But I used to think if I only had been looking to the right I would have seen the first shot hit him, then I could have pulled him down, and then the second shot would not have hit him. But I heard Governor Connally yelling and that made me turn around, and as I turned to the right my husband was doing this [indicating with hand at neck]. He was receiving a bullet. And those are the only two I remember.

And I read there was a third shot. But I don't know.

Just those two.

Mr. RANKIN. Do you have any recollection generally of the speed that you were going, not any precise amount.

Mrs. KENNEDY. We were really slowing turning the corner. And there were very few people.

Mr. RANKIN. And did you stop at any time after the shots, or proceed about the same way?

Mrs. KENNEDY. I don't know, because--I don't think we stopped. But there was such confusion. And I was down in the car and everyone was yelling to get to the hospital and you could hear them on the radio, and then suddenly I remember a sensation of enormous speed, which must have been when we took off.

Mr. RANKIN. And then from there you proceeded as rapidly as possible to the hospital, is that right?

Mrs. KENNEDY. Yes.

Mr. RANKIN. Do you recall anyone saying anything else during the time of the shooting?

Mrs. KENNEDY. So; there weren't any words. There was just Governor Connally's. And then I suppose Mrs. Connally was sort of crying and covering her husband. But I don't remember any words.

And there was a big windshield between--you know--I think. Isn't there?

Mr. RANKIN. Between the seats.

Mrs. KENNEDY. So you know, those poor men in the front, you couldn't hear them.

Mr. RANKIN. Can you think of anything more?

The CHAIRMAN. No; I think not. I think that is the story and that is what we came for.

We thank you very much, Mrs. Kennedy.

Mr. RANKIN. I would just like to ask if you recall Special Agent Kellerman saying anything to you as you came down the street after you turned that corner that you referred to.

Mrs. KENNEDY. You mean before the shots?

Mr. RANKIN. Yes.

Mrs. KENNEDY. Well, I don't, because--you know, it is very hard for them to talk. But I do not remember, just as I don't recall climbing out on the back of the car.

Mr. RANKIN. Yes. You have told us what you remember about the entire period as far as you can recall, have you?

Mrs. KENNEDY. Yes.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, Mrs. Kennedy. (Whereupon, at 4:30 p.m., the President's Commission recessed.)

Sunday, June 7, 1964

TESTIMONY OF MR. JACK RUBY

The President's Commission met at 11:45 a.m., on June 7, 1964, in the interrogation room of the Dallas County Jail, Main and Houston Streets, Dallas, Tex.

Present were Chief Justice Earl Warren, Chairman; and Representative Gerald R. Ford, member.

Also present were J. Lee Rankin, general counsel; Joseph A. Ball, assistant counsel; Arlen Specter, assistant counsel; Leon Jaworski and Robert G. Storey, special counsel to the attorney general of Texas; Jim Bowie, assistant district attorney; Joe H. Tonahill, attorney for Jack Ruby; Elmer W. Moore, special agent, U.S. Secret Service; and J. E. Decker, sheriff of Dallas County.

Mr. RUBY. Without a lie detector test on my testimony, my verbal statements to you, how do you know if I am tell the truth?

Mr. TONAHILL. Don't worry about that, Jack.

Mr. RUBY. Just a minute, gentlemen.

Chief Justice WARREN. You wanted to ask something, did you, Mr. Ruby?

Mr. RUBY. I would like to be able to get a lie detector test or truth serum of what motivated me to do what I did at that particular time, and it seems as you get further into something, even though you know what you did, it operates against you somehow, brainwashes you, that you are weak in what you want to tell the truth about and what you want to say which is the truth.

Now Mr. Warren, I don't know if you got any confidence in the lie detector test and the truth serum, and so on.

Chief Justice WARREN. I can't tell you just how much confidence I have in it, because it depends so much on who is taking it, and so forth.

But I will say this to you, that if you and your counsel want any kind of test, I will arrange it for you. I would be glad to do that, if you want it.

I wouldn't suggest a lie detector test to testify the truth, We will treat you just the same as we do any other witness, but if you want such a test, I will arrange for it.

Mr. RUBY. I do want it. Will you agree to that, Joe?

Mr. TONAHILL. I sure do, Jack.

Chief Justice WARREN. Any kind of a test you want to verify what you say, we will be glad to do.

Mr. RUBY. I want it even if you put me into a sort of drowsiness so you can question me as to anything pertaining to my involvement in this particular act.

Mr. TONAHILL. Jack, you have wanted to do that from the very beginning, haven't you?

Mr. RUBY. Yes; and the reason why I am asking for that is--are you limited for time?

Chief Justice WARREN. No; we have all the time you want.

Mr. RUBY. As it started to trial--I don't know if you realize my reasoning, how I happened to be involved--I was carried away tremendously emotionally, and all the time I tried to ask Mr. Belli, I wanted to get up and say the truth regarding the steps that led me to do what I have got involved in, but since I have a spotty background in the night club business, I should have been the last person to ever want to do something that I had been involved in.

In other words, I was carried away tremendously.

You want to ask me questions?

Chief Justice WARREN. You tell us what you want, and then we will ask you some questions.

Mr. RANKIN. I think he ought to be sworn.

Mr. RUBY. Am I boring you?

Chief Justice WARREN. Go ahead. All right, Mr. Ruby, tell us your story.

Mr. RUBY. That particular morning--where is Mr. Moore--I had to go down to the News Building, getting back to this--I don't want to interrupt.

Chief Justice WARREN. What morning do you mean?

Mr. RUBY. Friday morning, the starting of the tragedy.

Mr. Belli evidently did not go into my case thoroughly, circumstantially. If he had gone into it, he wouldn't have tried to vindicate me on an insanity plea to relieve me of all responsibility, because circumstantially everything looks so bad for me.

It can happen--it happens to many people who happen to be at the wrong place at the right time.

Had Mr. Belli spent more time with me, he would have realized not to try to get me out completely free; at the time we are talking, technically, how attorneys operate.

Chief Justice WARREN. I understand.

Mr. RUBY. Different things came up, flashed back into my mind, that it dirtied my background, that Mr. Belli and I tell the truth what I went to say that I wanted to get on the stand and tell the truth what happened that morning, he said, "Jack, when they get you on the stand, you are actually speaking of a premeditated crime that you involved yourself in."

But I didn't care, because I wanted to tell the truth.

He said, "When the prosecution gets you on the stand, they will cut you to ribbons."

So naturally, I had to retract, and he fought his way to try to vindicate me out of this particular crime.

You follow that?

Chief Justice WARREN. Yes; I do indeed.

Mr. RUBY. I want you to question me and requestion me on anything you want, plus the fact I do want the tests when they are available.

Chief Justice WARREN. Yes.

Mr. RUBY. On Friday, the morning parade--this goes back to Thursday night, because it has something to do with it.

We were having dinner at the Egyptian Restaurant----

Chief Justice WARREN. Right now, Mr. Ruby, before we get started taking your testimony, would you mind being sworn?

(Chief Justice Warren and Jack Ruby stand and both raise their right hand.)

Chief Justice WARREN. Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you are about to give before the Commission will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?

Mr. RUBY. I do.

Chief Justice WARREN. Now will you please state whether the things you have just told us are true under your oath?

Mr. RUBY. I do so state they are the truth.

Chief Justice WARREN. Now you complete whatever story you want to tell.

Mr. RUBY. All right. Thursday night I was having dinner at the Egyptian Restaurant on Mockingbird Lane, and a fellow comes over to the table. I was sitting with a guy by the name of Ralph Paul. He tried to invite me to the club a couple of doors down and I refused, because he had taken a band away from me that had been engaged for 7 years, and I felt it was a lost cause, that the club would be failing because of that, and I sort of excused myself and I refused to go over to the club.

We finished our dinner, and I went down to the club that I operated, the Carousel, and this particular master of ceremonies happened to be there at the time, and we discussed a few things.

And there is a columnist by the name of Tony Zoppi--and prior to that, I wrote out a full page copy of this build--I have the copies--as an emcee, and I brought a picture and brochure, and Tony said, "I will write a story."

This was done 2 days prior to this Thursday night.

So then I went down, so we discussed it and were very much disgusted with Tony because he only gave us a build of one or two lines.

Well, I retired that night after closing the club. Then I knew I wanted to go back to the Morning News Building to get the brochure I left, and also this complete page of longhand writing describing the various talents of this Bill DeMar.

I picked up the brochure that Friday morning, and I also had business at the News Building on Friday because that is the start of the weekend, which is very lucrative, the weekend.

I have ways of making my ads of where they have a way of selling the product I am producing or putting on on the show.

So I went down there Friday morning to Tony Zoppi's office, and they said he went to New Orleans for a couple of days.

I picked up the brochure. I believe I got downtown there at 10:30 or 11 o'clock that morning. And I took the brochure and then went into the main room where we compose our ads. That is the sales room where we placed our ads.

And I remained there for a while. I started to write the copy of my ad.

Now I go back to the same fellow that wanted me to come over to the club when we were having our dinner on Mockingbird at the Egyptian Lounge.

I came to the desk and I wanted to apologize and explain why I didn't accept his invitation last night. I wanted to explain, and that took about 20 or 25 minutes. All this is pertaining to everything prior to the terrible tragedy that happened.

I started to explain to him why I didn't want to go there, because this fellow mentioned--Tony, I think--I can't think of his last name--of me having his band so many years, and I felt at the moment I didn't want to go over to the club because I didn't care to meet this fellow.

And he started to apologize, "Jack, I am sorry, I did work for the fellow and we have been advertising him for that club, and I am putting out a night club book."

I remained with him for 20 or 25 minutes talking there. I don't know whether my ad was completed or not. It was an ad on the Vegas and the Carousel.

My ads were completed, I believe, and after finishing my conversation with him, he left.

Suddenly the man that completes my ads for me, that helps me with it on occasion--but I usually make it up myself--but the person that takes the money for the ads--this is the reason it is so hard for me to meet a deadline when I get downtown to the News Building. And as a rule, I have to pay cash for my ads.

When you are in debt, it is necessary, and they will not put it in unless you pay cash.

And consequently, the weekend, I had been to town on that particular day. All this adds up later on, as I will state why I didn't go to the parade.

In the first place, I don't want to go where there is big crowds. I can't explain it to you. If I was interested, I would have seen it on television, our beloved President and all the parade that transpired.

But all that adds up why it is important for me to be in the News Building.

I owe the Government quite a bit of money, and it is doing business out of your pocket, supposedly, in the slang expression.

Well, John Newnam comes in, and evidently he took it for granted I finished my ad, and I don't recall if he paid for his ad, and suddenly there is some milling around. I think it was 12, or 15 minutes after 12, I don't recall what, but John Newnam said someone had been shot.

And I am sorry, I got carried away. It is the first time I got carried away, because I had been under pressure.

And someone else came running over and he said a Secret Service man was shot, or something to that effect.

And I am here in the middle with John Newnam, because Newnam isn't paying any attention to anyone else, and there is a lot of going back and forth.

So someone must have made a statement that Governor Connally was shot. I don't recall what was said. And I was in a state of hysteria, I mean.

You say, "Oh my God, it can't happen." You carry on crazy sayings.

There was a little television set in one office not far away from where I had been sitting at the desk. I ran over there and noticed a little boy and a little sister say, "I was standing right there when it happened." I mean, different things you hear on the television.

Then the phone started ringing off the desk and I heard John Newnam say people were complaining about the ad, why they accepted this ad.

(A tray of water and glasses was brought in.)

Thank you.

Has every witness been this hesitant in trying to explain their story?

Chief Justice WARREN. You are doing very well. I can understand why you have to reflect upon a story of that length.

Mr. RUBY. The phones were ringing off the desk calling various ads, and they were having a turmoil in that News Building because of a person by the name of Bernard Weissman placing that particular ad, a full page ad. I am sure you are familiar with the ad.

Chief Justice WARREN. Yes; I am.

Mr. RUBY. Criticizing a lot of things about our beloved President. Then John Newnam and I and another gentleman walked over to another part of the room, and I heard John Newnam say, "I told him not to take that ad." Something to that effect.

Then he said, "Well, you have seen him pay part cash and come back and pay the balance."

Now everything is very vague to me as to when this transpired; after they heard the President had been shot, or prior to that.

You know it's been a long time, and I am under a very bad mental strain here.

Chief Justice WARREN. Yes.

Mr. RUBY. From the time that we were told that the President was shot, 35 minutes later they said he had passed away. In the meantime, I became very emotional. I called my sister at home. She was carried away terribly bad. And John Newnam happened to be there, and I know it is a funny reaction you have, you want other people to feel that you feel emotionally disturbed the same way as other people, so I let John listen to the phone that my sister was crying hysterically.

And I said to John, I said, "John, I will have to leave Dallas." I don't know why I said that, but it is a funny reaction that you feel; the city is terribly let down by the tragedy that happened. And I said, "John, I am not opening up tonight."

And I don't know what else transpired there. I know people were just heartbroken.

I left the room. I may have left out a few things. Mr. Moore remembers probably more, but you come back and question me and maybe I can answer those questions.

I left the building and I went down and I got my car, and I couldn't stop crying, because naturally when I pulled up to a stoplight and other people would be adjacent to me, I wouldn't want them to see me crying, because it looked kind of artificial.

And I went to the club and I came up, and I may have made a couple of calls from there. I could have called my colored boy, Andy, down at the club. I could have--I don't know who else I would have called, but I could have, because it is so long now since my mind is very much warped now.

You think that literally?

I went up to the club, and I told Andy, I said, "Call everyone and tell them we are not opening."

We have a little girl in Fort Worth I wanted to make sure he called her.

And a fellow by the name of Bell called and wanted to know if we were open.

And Kathy Kay called, and I said, "Definitely not."

And I called Ralph Paul, that owns the Bull Pen. He said, "Jack, being as everyone else is open"--because he knows I was pressed for money--and I said, "No, Ralph, I can't open."

He said, "Okay, if that is why, that is the way it's got to be."

So in the meantime, I had gone with Alice Nichols for some time, and I called her on the phone but she wasn't there, but I left the number on the pay phone for her to return the call, because I didn't want to keep the business phone tied up. And I hadn't spoken to her in maybe 9 months or a year. I don't know what I said to her, not many words, but just what happened.

I still remained around the club there. I am sure I was crying pretty bad. I think I made a long-distance call to California. This fellow had just visited me, and I had known him in the days back in Chicago when we were very young, in the real tough part of Chicago. His name is Al Gruber.

He was a bad kid in those days, but he is quite reformed. He is married and has a family, and I am sure he makes a very legitimate livelihood at this time.

He happened to come through a couple of nights prior to that to try to interest me, or 4 or 5 days prior to that, to interest me in a new kind--you follow the story as I tell it?

Chief Justice WARREN. Yes.

Mr. RUBY. It is important, very important. It is on a new kind of machine that washes cars. You pay with tokens. It is a new thing. I don't know if it faded out or not. He tried to interest my brother, Sammy, because Sammy sold his washateria.

And my sister was in the hospital when he first came. I am going back a little bit. Sammy didn't go to the hospital, and we needed to tell Sammy about this particular thing, and that is the reason Al Gruber came into the picture, because he came to try to interest my brother, Sammy, in this new washateria deal to wash cars.

He left and went to California, but before he went to California I promised him my dachshund dog.

When this thing happened, I called him. He said, "Yes, we are just watching on television." And I couldn't carry on more conversation. I said, "Al, I have to hang up."

Then I must have called my sister, Eileen, in Chicago.

Then a fellow came over to deliver some merchandise I had ordered over the phone, or Andy ordered. And we said, "What is the use of purchasing any merchandise of any kind, we are not interested in business." And I don't recall what I said, but I told him whatever money he received, to keep the change. I am not a philanthropist, but nothing bothered me at the time. I wasn't interested in anything.

Then I kept calling my sister, Eva, because she wanted me to come be with her.

Eva and I have a very complex personality. Very rarely can I be with her, but on this particular occasion, since she was carrying on so, I felt that I wanted to be with someone that meant something to me. I wanted to be with her.

And I kept calling her back, "I will be there." And so on. But I never did get there until a couple of hours later.

I finally left the club. I am sure you gentlemen can brief in all the things that happened before. A kid by the name of Larry up there, I think I told him to send the dog they crated, to find out about the price--very implusive about everything.

Then I left the club. And I had been dieting, but I felt I wanted some food. I can't explain it. It would be like getting intoxicated at that particular time. It is amusing, but it is true.

I went over to the Ritz Delicatessen a block and a half away. Must have bought out the store, for about $10 worth of delicacies and so on. Went out to my sister's and stayed at her apartment.

Oh, I called from the apartment--my sister knew more of my calls than I did. I remember I think I called--I can't think of who I called.

Anyway, I am sure I made some calls of what had happened there. Somebody will have to piece me together from the time I got to my sister's apartment where I had partaken of the food.

Oh yes, I called Andy. This Andy Armstrong called me and said, "Don Safran wants you to call him."

This is rare for this gentleman, because he is a columnist for the Dallas Times Herald, because he never could get out any copy for my club. And he said, "Don Safran wants me to call him."

I called him, and he said, "Jack, are you going to be closed tonight?"

I said, "Yes."

He said, "Well, the Cabana and the Adolphus, the Century Room, are going to be closed."

I said, "Don, I am not asking you about any clubs that are going to be closed. I know I am going to be closed."

And he said, "Jack, that is what I want to know."

And I said, "You don't have to prompt me about who else is going to be closed."

I put the receiver down and talked to my sister, and I said, "Eva, what shall we do?"

And she said, "Jack, let's close for the 3 days." She said, "We don't have anything anyway, but we owe it to"--(chokes up).

So I called Don Safran back immediately and I said, "Don, we decided to close for Friday, Saturday, and Sunday."

And he said, "Okay."

Then I called the Morning News and I wanted to definitely make sure to change a copy of my ad to "Closed Friday, Saturday, and Sunday," something to that effect.

And it was a little late in the afternoon, but he said, "we will try to get the copy in."

Then I called Don back again but couldn't get him, and I spoke to one of his assistants, and I said, I forget what I told him. Anyway, that is one of the calls I had that had transpired.

I lie down and take a nap. I wake about 7 or 7:30. In the meantime, I think I called--the reason this comes back to me, I know I was going to go to the synagogue.

I called Coleman Jacobson and asked him what time services are tonight, and he said he didn't know.

And I said, "Are there going to be any special services?"

And he said he didn't know of any.

And I called the Congregation Shearith Israel and asked the girl, and she said, "Regular services at 8 o'clock."

And I said, "Aren't there going to be earlier services like 5:30 or 6?

And about 7:30 I went to my apartment. I don't know if I went downtown to the club. I know I went to my apartment--either to the club or to the apartment.

And I changed, showered and shaved, and I think I drove--and as I drove down, there is a certain Thornton Freeway, and I saw the clubs were still open going full blast, a couple of clubs there.

Anyway, I went out to the synagogue and I went through the line and I spoke to Rabbi Silverman, and I thanked him for going to visit my sister at the hospital. She was in a week prior and had just gotten out. I don't remember the date.

Then he had a confirmation--this is the night prior to the confirmation. They serve little delicacies. So in spite of the fact of the mood I was in, I strolled into the place, and I think I had a little glass of punch. Nothing intoxicating, just a little punch they serve there. I didn't speak to anyone. One girl, Leona, said "Hello, Jack," and I wasn't in a conversational mood whatsoever.

I left the club--I left the synagogue and I drove by the Bali-Hai Restaurant. I noticed they were open. I took recognition of that.

I drove by another club called the Gay Nineties, and they were closed.

And I made it my business to drive down Preston Road. In my mind suddenly it mulled over me that the police department was working overtime. And this is the craziest thing that ever happened in a person's life. I have always been very close to the police department, I don't know why.

I felt I have always abided by the law--a few little infractions, but not serious--and I felt we have one of the greatest police forces in the world here, and I have always been close to them, and I visited in the office.

And over the radio I heard they were working overtime.

I stopped at the delicatessen called Phil's on Oak Lawn Avenue, and suddenly I decided--I told the clerk there I wanted him to make me some real good sandwiches, about 10 or 12, and he had already started on the sandwiches and I got on the phone.

I called an officer by the name of Sims and I said, "Sims, I hear you guys are working," and so on. I said, "I want to bring some sandwiches."

And he said, "Jack, we wound up our work already. We wound up what we were doing. We are finished what we were doing. I will tell the boys about your thoughtfulness, and I will thank them for you."

In the meantime, there is a fellow in town that has been very good to me named Gordon McLendon. Do you know him, Mr. Warren?

Chief Justice WARREN. I think I do not.

Mr. RUBY. He had been giving me a lot of free plugs. And all the while listening to the radio, I heard about a certain diskjockey, Joe Long, that is down at the station, giving firsthand information--I want to describe him--of Oswald.

Very rarely do I use the name Oswald. I don't know why. I don't know how to explain it--of the person that committed the act. [Pause to compose self.]

So before going down to the police station, I try to call KLIF but can't get their number.

I wanted to bring the sandwiches to KLIF so they would have the sandwiches, since they already started to make them up.

And I remember Russ Knight, a diskjockey--these names aren't familiar to you, but I have to mention them in order to refresh my memory.

His name was Moore, or something, and I tried to get information on the telephone, but they couldn't give me the phone number of his home.

I probably thought I could get the phone number, but after 6 p.m., you cannot get into the premises unless you have a "hot" number that is right to the diskjockey room.

So I couldn't get a hold of that.

But in the meantime, I called Gordon McLendon's home, because I know he lives near the synagogue out there, and I got a little girl on the phone, and I knew they had children, and I asked for the number for KLIF.

I said, "Anyone home?"

She said, "No."

I said, "Is your daddy or mommy home?" I forget what transpired. I said, "I would like to get the number of the station so I can get in the building at this time."

She said she would go and see, and gave me a Riverside exchange.

Mind you, this is 6 or 7 months back, gentlemen.

And I asked her name. Her name was Christine, I think. I said, "I wanted to bring some sandwiches."

She said, "My mother already brought sandwiches."

And I said, "I wanted to go there too." And that was the end of this little girl's conversation with myself.

I called that number, as I am repeating myself. There was no such number. It was an obsolete number.

I go down to the--I drive by--I leave the delicatessen--the clerk helped me with the sandwiches out to my car, and I thanked him. I told him, "These were going to KLIF, and I want you to make them real good."

He helped me with the sandwiches in the car. I got in the car and drove down toward town. I imagine it is about 4 or 5 miles to the downtown section from this delicatessen.

But prior to going into the station, I drove up McKinney Avenue to look over a couple of clubs to see if they were activating. I knew the club across from the Phil's Delicatessen and I knew the B. & B. Restaurant was open. That is a restaurant and I know the necessity for food, but I can't understand some of the clubs remaining open. It struck me funny at such a tragic time as that happening.

I drove down to Commerce and Harwood and parked my car with my dog--incidentally, I always have my dog with me--on the lot there, left the sandwiches in the car, went into the building of the police station, took the elevator up to the second floor, and there was a police officer there.

This is the first time I ever entered the building, gentlemen. The first time of that Friday. This time it must have been about--I mean the time, the time of my entering the building, I guess, was approximately 11:15 p.m.

The officer was there, and I said, "Where is Joe Long?"

I said, "Can I go and look for him?"

Evidently I took a little domineering part about me, and I was able to be admitted. I asked different reporters and various personalities there, "Are you Joe Long?," and I couldn't locate him.

I even had a police officer try to page him and he couldn't locate him.

I recognized a couple of police officers, Cal Jones and a few others, and I said "hello" to them.

And I am still looking for Joe Long, but I am carried away with the excitement of history.

And one fellow then--I am in the hallway there--there is a narrow hallway, and I don't recall if Captain Fritz or Chief Curry brings the prisoner out, and I am standing about 2 or 3 feet away from him, and there is some reporters that didn't know the various police officers, and I don't know whether they asked me or I volunteered to tell them, because I knew they were looking to find out who that was, and I said, "That was Chief Curry" or "That is Captain Fritz," or whoever it was.

I don't recall Henry Wade coming out in the hallway. He probably did. I don't recall what happened.

(To Joe Tonahill) Is that for me, Joe?

Then suddenly someone asked, either the Chief or Captain Fritz, "Isn't there a larger room we can go into?"

They said, "Well, let's go down to the assembly room downstairs."

I don't know what transpired in between from the time that I had the officer page Joe Long up to the time I was standing about 3 feet away from Oswald. All the things--I don't recall if I am telling you everything that happened from that time, from the time I entered the building to the time I went down to the assembly room.

I went down to the assembly room down in the basement. I felt perfectly free walking in there. No one asked me or anything. I got up on a little table there where I knew I wasn't blocking anyone's view, because there was an abutment sticking out, and I had my back to the abutment, and I was standing there.

Then they brought the prisoner out and various questions were being shouted.

I noticed there was a chief county judge--Davidson, I can't think of his name, one of these precinct court judges, and they brought the prisoner out.

I don't recall if Chief Fritz, Captain Fritz was there, or Chief Curry. I know Henry Wade was there. And they started shouting questions and he said, "Is he the one?" And the question about the gun.

And they questioned Henry Wade, "what organization did he belong to," or something. And if I recall, I think Henry Wade answered, "Free Cuba."

And I corrected Henry Wade, because listening to the radio or KLIF, it stood out in my mind that it was "Fair Play Cuba." There was a difference.

So he said, "Oh yes, Fair Play Cuba," and he corrected that.

I don't know how long we remained there. There was a lot of questions thrown back and forth, and this District Attorney Henry Wade was answering them to the best he could.

From the way he stated, he let the reporters know that this was the guilty one that committed the crime.

He specifically stated that in that room, that he was the one.

It didn't have any effect in my mind, because whether the person had come out, whether he come out openly and publicly stated didn't have any bearing in my mind, because I wasn't interested in anything. All I knew, they had the prisoner. But the reporters like to know where they stand, "is he the one?"

We left out in the hallway, and I saw Henry Wade standing there, and I went over to him and said, "Henry. I want you to know I was the one that corrected you." I think it is a childish thing, but I met Henry Wade sometime back, and I knew he would recognize me.

By the way, it was "Fair Play Cuba," or something to that effect.

In the meantime, as I leave Henry Wade, two gentlemen pass by and I said, "Are you Joe Long?" He said, "No, why do you want Joe Long?"

And I said, "I got to get into KLIF. I have got some sandwiches."

And he said, "What about us?"

And I said, "Some other time."

And it so happened I found out Jerry Cunkle and Sam Pease, I found out they were the names, so I did get the number, because these fellows work for a rival radio station, and he gave me the number of KLIF.

And in the testimony of John Rutledge, if I recall now--this is the only time I had ever seen this person. When I went out the railing where the phone was at, people felt free to walk in.

In other words, I felt that I was deputized as a reporter momentarily, you might say.

So I called one of the boys at KLIF and I said to them, "I have sandwiches for you. I want to get over there." I said, "By the way, I see Henry Wade talking on the phone to someone. Do you want me to get him over here?"

And he said, "Yes, do that."

That is when everyone was beckoning Henry Wade, and I called him over and he talked on the phone to this boy.

And after he finished; I didn't even tell him what station it was. I said, "Here is somebody that wants to talk to you." And I felt he wouldn't turn it down.

And this fellow was very much elated that I brought him over there.

And I said, "Now, will you let me in?"

He said, "I will only leave the door open for 5 minutes." That was after the conversation was finished with Henry Wade.

I got ready to leave the building and I got up to the next floor and there was another diskjockey at KLIF, Russ Knight. He said, "Jack, where is everything happening?" And he had a tape recorder.

And I said, "Come on downstairs", and led him downstairs. And there was Henry Wade sitting there. And I said, "Henry, this is Russ Knight." And I left him there with Henry Wade, and I went to my car and drove over to KLIF, which is a block away from there.

And it was a little chilly that night, as I recall, but by bringing Russ Knight over to Henry Wade, I delayed too long to get to KLIF, and I had to wait 15 minutes until Russ Knight came from finishing his interview with Henry Wade.

I had the sandwiches with me and some soda pop and various things, and Russ Knight opened the door and we went upstairs.

(Mr. Arlen Specter, a staff counsel, entered the room.)

Chief Justice WARREN. This is another man on my staff, Mr. Specter. Would you mind if he came in?

(Chief Justice Warren introduced the men around the room.)

Mr. RUBY. Is there any way to get me to Washington?

Chief Justice WARREN. I beg your pardon?

Mr. RUBY. Is there any way of you getting me to Washington?

Chief Justice WARREN. I don't know of any. I will be glad to talk to your counsel about what the situation is, Mr. Ruby, when we get an opportunity to talk.

Mr. RUBY. I don't think I will get a fair representation with my counsel, Joe Tonahill. I don't think so. I would like to request that I go to Washington and you take all the tests that I have to take. It is very important.

Mr. TONAHILL. Jack, will you tell him why you don't think you will get a fair representation?

Mr. RUBY. Because I have been over this for the longest time to get the lie detector test. Somebody has been holding it back from me.

Chief Justice WARREN. Mr. Ruby, I might say to you that the lateness of this thing is not due to your counsel. He wrote me, I think, close to 2 months ago and told me that you would be glad to testify and take, I believe he said, any test. I am not sure of that, but he said you would be glad to testify before the Commission.

And I thanked him for the letter. But we have been so busy that this is the first time we have had an opportunity to do it.

But there has been no delay, as far as I know, on the part of Mr. Tonahill in bringing about this meeting. It was our own delay due to the pressures we had on us at the time.

Mr. RUBY. What State are you from, Congressman?

Representative FORD. Michigan. Grand Rapids, Mich.

Chief Justice WARREN. I will be glad to talk that over, if we can. You might go right ahead, if you wish, with the rest of your statement.

Mr. RUBY. All right. I remained at KLIF from that moment on, from the time I got into the building, with Russ Knight. We talked about various things. I brought out the thought of this ad that Bernard Weissman had placed in the newspaper, and I also told Russ the one I admired by Gordon McLendon.

He came out with an editorial about the incident with Adlai Stevenson and all those things. He is one person that will immediately go to bat if anything is wrong. He will clarify it.

And I told Russ Knight there were some other things that were occurring at the time. So I remained there until about 2 a.m., and we all partook of the sandwiches and had a feast there.

And they spliced the various comments they got back and forth of Henry Wade, of Russ Knight's copy--of Russ Knight's items of Henry Wade.

Chief Justice WARREN. Mr. Ruby, this is the young man, Mr. Specter. He is a member of our staff, and he comes from Philadelphia.

(Ruby shakes hands with Mr. Specter.)

Mr. RUBY. I am at a disadvantage, gentlemen, telling my story.

Chief Justice WARREN. You were right at the point where you had it about 2 o'clock in the morning, and you had had your feast, as you mentioned, and had talked to these men, and so forth. That was the last that you had told us.

Mr. RUBY. Well, lots of things occurred up to that. They talked pro and con about the tragedy.

At 2 a.m., I left the building. I drove--I was going to go toward the Times Herald Building, because as a result--I very rarely go there for my weekend ad, because once I get the ad into the Morning News, which is the earlier issue, all I have to do is call the newspaper and they transpire the same ad that I had into the newspaper--into the Morning News.

And I promised one of the boys working in the Times Herald Building there--I was in the act, in the business of a twist-board deal I was promoting as a sales item by advertisement and mail order, and I had been evading him, or didn't have time to go out there because it was very late when I left the club, and I didn't want to stop, but because this was an early morning, I thought this would be the right time to go over there, plus the fact of changing my ad I had in the Morning News to the closing of 3 days, that I would go over there and maybe add a little more effectiveness to it in the way I wanted the ad placed.

As I was driving toward the Times Herald with the intention of doing these things, I heard someone honk a horn very loudly, and I stopped. There was a police officer sitting in a car. He was sitting with this young lady that works in my club, Kathy Kay, and they were very much carried away.

And I was carried away; and he had a few beers, and it is so bad, about those places open, and I was a great guy to close; and I remained with them--did I tell you this part of it?

Mr. MOORE. I don't recall this part; no.

Mr. RUBY. I didn't tell you this part because at the time I thought a lot of Harry Carlson as a police officer, and either it slipped my mind in telling this, or it was more or less a reason for leaving it out, because I felt I didn't want to involve them in anything, because it was supposed to be a secret that he was going with this young lady. He had marital problems.

I don't know if that is why I didn't tell you that. Anyway, I did leave it out. His name is Harry Carlson. Her name is Kathy Kay.

And they talked and they carried on, and they thought I was the greatest guy in the world, and he stated they should cut this guy inch by inch into ribbons, and so on.

And she said, "Well, if he was in England, they would drag him through the streets and would have hung him." I forget what she said.

I left them after a long delay. They kept me from leaving. They were constantly talking and were in a pretty dramatic mood. They were crying and carrying on.

I went to the building of the Times Herald. I went to the Times Herald--may I read that, Joe? May I please?

(Joe Tonahill hands paper to Jack Ruby.)

Mr. TONAHILL. Sam ever get your glasses?

Mr. RUBY. Not yet. [Reading.] "This is the girl that"--what?--"that started Jack off." What is this other word?

Mr. TONAHILL. Culminated?

Mr. RUBY. That is untrue. That is what I wanted to read. (Throwing pad on table.)

Gentlemen, unless you get me to Washington, you can't get a fair shake out of me.

If you understand my way of talking, you have got to bring me to Washington to get the tests.

Do I sound dramatic? Off the beam?

Chief Justice WARREN. No; you are speaking very, very rationally, and I am really surprised that you can remember as much as you have remembered up to the present time.

You have given it to us in detail.

Mr. RUBY. Unless you can get me to Washington, and I am not a crackpot, I have all my senses--I don't want to evade any crime I am guilty of. But Mr. Moore, have I spoken this way when we have talked?

Mr. MOORE. Yes.

Mr. RUBY. Unless you get me to Washington immediately, I am afraid after what Mr. Tonahill has written there, which is unfair to me regarding my testimony here--you all want to hear what he wrote?

Chief Justice WARREN. Yes; you might read it. If you need glasses again, try mine this time (handing glasses to Mr. Ruby).

Mr. RUBY (putting on glasses). "This is the girl"----

Mr. TONAHILL. "Thing," isn't it?

Mr. RUBY. "This is the thing that started Jack in the shooting."

Mr. TONAHILL. Kathy Kay was talking about Oswald.

Mr. RUBY. You are lying, Joe Tonahill. You are lying.

Mr. TONAHILL. No; I am not.

Mr. RUBY. You are lying, because you know what motivated me. You want to make it that it was a premeditation.

Mr. TONAHILL. No.

Mr. RUBY. Yes; you do.

Mr. TONAHILL. I don't think there was any premeditation, but you go ahead and tell it your way. That is what we want you to do. That is what the Chief Justice wants.

Mr. RUBY. Not when you specify this.

You are Senator Rankin?

Mr. RANKIN. No; I am the general counsel for our Commission, Mr. Ruby.

Mr. TONAHILL. You go on and keep telling it down to Caroline and the truth.

Chief Justice WARREN. Mr. Ruby, may I suggest this, that if we are to have any tests, either a lie detector or, as you suggest, maybe a truth serum--I don't know anything about truth serum, but if we are to have it, we have to have something to check against, and we would like to have the rest of your story as you started to tell us, because you are now getting down to the crucial part of it, and it wouldn't be fair to you to have this much of it and then not have the rest.

Mr. RUBY. Because the reason why, Joe knows from the time that I told Attorney Belli, and the story I wanted to tell on the stand, and Mr. Tonahill knows this isn't the time. The thought never entered my mind. He knows it.

Mr. TONAHILL. I didn't say the thought entered your mind. I didn't say that.

Mr. RUBY. You are inferring that.

Mr. TONAHILL. Unconsciously, maybe, is what I meant to say.

Mr. RUBY. Why go back to Friday, Joe?

Mr. TONAHILL. You are going to come right down----

Mr. RUBY. Why go back to Friday? That set me off.

Then it is a greater premeditation than you know is true.

Mr. TONAHILL. I don't say it is premeditation. I never have. I don't think it is.

Mr. RUBY. Because it never entered my mind when they talked about, the officer, cutting him into bits. You would like to have built it up for my defense, but that is not it. I am here to tell the truth.

Mr. TONAHILL. The psychiatrist said that to me.

Mr. RUBY. You want to put that into my thoughts, but it never happened. I took it with a grain of salt what he said at that particular time.

Well, it is too bad, Chief Warren, that you didn't get me to your headquarters 6 months ago.

Chief Justice WARREN. Well, Mr. Ruby, I will tell you why we didn't. Because you were then about to be tried and I didn't want to do anything that would prejudice you in your trial. And for that reason, I wouldn't even consider asking you to testify until your trial was over. That is the only reason that we didn't talk to you sooner.

And I wish we had gotten here a little sooner after your trial was over, but I know you had other things on your mind, and we had other work, and it got to this late date.

But I assure you, there is no desire on our part to let this matter go to any late date for any ulterior purpose. I assure you of that.

And as I told you at the beginning, if you want a test of some kind made, I will undertake to see that it is done.

Mr. RUBY. You have power to do it, even though the district attorney objects to me getting the tests?

Chief Justice WARREN. Yes; I do.

Mr. RUBY. How soon can it be done?

Chief Justice WARREN. Well, I am not familiar with those things, but we will try to do it expeditiously, you may be sure, because we are trying to wind up the work of this Commission. And I assure you we won't delay it.

Mr. RUBY. Are you staying overnight here, Chief Warren?

Chief Justice WARREN. No; I have to be back, because we have an early session of the Court tomorrow morning.

Mr. RUBY. Is there any way of getting a polygraph here?

Mr. DECKER. May I make a suggestion?

Jack, listen, you and I have had a lot of dealings. Do you want my officers removed from the room while you talk to this Commission?

Mr. RUBY. That wouldn't prove any truth.

Mr. DECKER. These people came several thousand miles to interview you. You have wanted to tell me your story and I have refused to let you tell me. Now be a man with a bunch of men that have come a long way to give you an opportunity to.

You asked me for permission to tell your story, and I told you "No."

This is a supreme investigating committee at this particular time. Now give them your story and be a man, if you want them to deal with you and deal fairly with you.

Mr. RUBY. It is unfair to me unless I get all the facilities to back up what I say.

Mr. DECKER. You tell him your story. Nobody is denying it. You tell this man. He has come a thousand or more miles to listen to you. Now be a man about it.

Mr. MOORE. What I suggest--Jack, at one time I was a polygraph operator, and you would not be able to go through the entire story the way you have here.

So, seriously, you should tell the story and the things you want checked, you can be asked directly. Because you can only answer yes or no on the polygraph examination. So I think in view of what you want, you should tell your story first, and then the points that you want verified, you can be questioned on.

As the sheriff mentioned, the Commission has come a long way to have the opportunity to listen to your story, and I am sure that they know you are telling the truth, in any case.

Mr. RUBY. I wish the President were right here now. It is a terrible ordeal, I tell you that.

Chief Justice WARREN. I am sure it is an ordeal for you, and we want to make it just as easy as we can. That is the reason that we have let you tell your story in your own way without being interrupted.

If you will just proceed with the rest of your statement, I think it would make it a lot easier for us to verify it in the way that you want it to be done.

Mr. RUBY. I don't know how to answer you.

Chief Justice WARREN. Well, you have told us most of what happened up to the time of the incident, and you are almost within, you are just within a few hours of it now.

Mr. RUBY. There is a Saturday.

Chief Justice WARREN. Beg your pardon?

Mr. RUBY. There is a Saturday night. There is a Friday night. This is still only Friday night, Chief.

Chief Justice WARREN. Yes; that is true.

Mr. RUBY. Well, I will go into a certain point, and if I stop, you will have to understand if I stop to get my bearings together.

Chief Justice WARREN. Yes.

Mr. RUBY. I am in the Times Herald Building. I go upstairs, naturally.

Chief Justice WARREN. This is about what time?

Mr. RUBY. This, I imagine, is--I left the KLIF at 2 a.m., and I spent an hour with the officer and his girl friend, so it must have been about 3:15 approximately. No; it wasn't. When you are not concerned with time, it could have been 4 o'clock.

Chief Justice WARREN. It doesn't make any difference.

Mr. RUBY. Forty-five minutes difference.

I am up there in the composing room talking to a guy by the name of Pat Gadash. He was so elated that I brought him this twist board, and I had it sealed in a polyethylene bag, but he wanted to see how it is demonstrated, how it was worked.

It is a board that is on a pivot, a ball bearing, and it has a tendency to give you certain exercises in twisting your body. So not that I wanted to get in with the hilarity of frolicking, but he asked me to show him, and the other men gathered around.

When you get into the movement of a ball bearing disk, your body is free to move. I know you look like you are having a gay time, because naturally if your body is so free of moving, it is going to look that way.

I am stating this in that even with my emotional feeling for our beloved President, even to demonstrate the twist board, I did it because someone asked me to.

You follow me, gentlemen, as I describe it?

Chief Justice WARREN. Yes; I do.

Mr. RUBY. Then we placed the ad in, and if I recall, I requested from Pat to put a black border around to show that the ad was in mourning, or something, because we were, everything was in mourning.

Bill, will you do that for me that you asked a minute ago? You said you wanted to leave the room.

Mr. DECKER. I will have everyone leave the room, including myself, if you want to talk about it. You name it, and out we will go.

Mr. RUBY. All right.

Mr. DECKER. You want all of us outside?

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. DECKER. I will leave Tonahill and Moore. I am not going to have Joe leave.

Mr. RUBY. If you are not going to have Joe leave----

Mr. DECKER. Moore, his body is responsible to you. His body is responsible to you.

Mr. RUBY. Bill, I am not accomplishing anything if they are here, and Joe Tonahill is here. You asked me anybody I wanted out.

Mr. DECKER. Jack, this is your attorney. That is your lawyer.

Mr. RUBY. He is not my lawyer.

(Sheriff Decker and law enforcement officers left room.)

Gentleman, if you want to hear any further testimony, you will have to get me to Washington soon, because it has something to do with you, Chief Warren.

Do I sound sober enough to tell you this?

Chief Justice WARREN. Yes; go right ahead.

Mr. RUBY. I want to tell the truth, and I can't tell it here. I can't tell it here. Does that make sense to you?

Chief Justice WARREN. Well, let's not talk about sense. But I really can't see why you can't tell this Commission.

Mr. RUBY. What is your name?

Mr. BALL. Joe Ball.

Chief Justice WARREN. Mr. Joe Ball. He is an attorney from Los Angeles who has been working for me.

Mr. RUBY. Do you know Belli too?

Mr. BALL. I know of him.

Mr. RUBY. Ball was working with him. He knows Belli. You know Melvin Belli?

Mr. BALL. I am not acquainted with him.

Chief Justice WARREN. No association of any kind.

Mr. BALL. We practice in different cities.

Chief Justice WARREN. Five hundred miles away. Mr. Ball practices in Long Beach, and Mr. Belli practices in San Francisco. There is positively no connection between anybody in this room, as far as I know, with Mr. Belli. I can assure you of that.

Mr. RUBY. Where do you stand, Moore?

Mr. MOORE. Well, I am assigned to the Commission, Jack.

Mr. RUBY. The President assigned you?

Mr. MOORE. No; my chief did. And I am not involved in the investigation. I am more of a security officer.

Mr. RUBY. Boys, I am in a tough spot, I tell you that.

Mr. MOORE. You recall when I talked to you, there were certain things I asked you not to tell me at the time, for certain reasons, that you were probably going to trial at that time, and I respected your position on that and asked you not to tell me certain things.

Mr. RUBY. But this isn't the place for me to tell what I want to tell.

Mr. MOORE. The Commission is looking into the entire matter, and you are part of it, should be.

Mr. RUBY. Chief Warren, your life is in danger in this city, do you know that?

Chief Justice WARREN. No; I don't know that. If that is the thing that you don't want to talk about, you can tell me, if you wish, when this is all over, just between you and me.

Mr. RUBY. No; I would like to talk to you in private.

Chief Justice WARREN. You may do that when you finish your story. You may tell me that phase of it.

Mr. RUBY. I bet you haven't had a witness like me in your whole investigation, is that correct?

Chief Justice WARREN. There are many witnesses whose memory has not been as good as yours. I tell you that, honestly.

Mr. RUBY. My reluctance to talk--you haven't had any witness in telling the story, in finding so many problems?

Chief Justice WARREN. You have a greater problem than any witness we have had.

Mr. RUBY. I have a lot of reasons for having those problems.

Chief Justice WARREN. I know that, and we want to respect your rights, whatever they may be. And I only want to hear what you are willing to tell us, because I realize that you still have a great problem before you, and I am not trying to press you.

I came here because I thought you wanted to tell us the story, and I think the story should be told for the public, and it will eventually be made public. If you want to do that, you are entitled to do that, and if you want to have it verified as the thing can be verified by a polygraph test, you may have that, too.

I will undertake to do that for you, but at all events we must first have the story that we are going to check it against.

Mr. RUBY. When are you going back to Washington?

Chief Justice WARREN. I am going back very shortly after we finish this hearing--I am going to have some lunch.

Mr. RUBY. Can I make a statement?

Chief Justice WARREN. Yes.

Mr. RUBY. If you request me to go back to Washington with you right now, that couldn't be done, could it?

Chief Justice WARREN. No; it could not be done. It could not be done. There are a good many things involved in that, Mr. Ruby.

Mr. RUBY. What are they?

Chief Justice WARREN. Well, the public attention that it would attract, and the people who would be around. We have no place there for you to be safe when we take you out, and we are not law enforcement officers, and it isn't our responsibility to go into anything of that kind.

And certainly it couldn't be done on a moment's notice this way.

Mr. RUBY. Well, from what I read in the paper, they made certain precautions for you coming here, but you got here.

Chief Justice WARREN. There are no precautions taken at all.

Mr. RUBY. There were some remarks in the paper about some crackpots.

Chief Justice WARREN. I don't believe everything I read in the paper.

Mr. MOORE. In that respect, the Chief Justice is in public life. People in public life are well aware they don't please everyone, and they get these threats.

Incidentally, if it is the part about George Senator talking about the Earl Warren Society, the Chief Justice is aware of that phase, and I am sure he would like to hear anything that you have to say if it affects the security.

Chief Justice WARREN. Before you finish the rest of your statement, may I ask you this question, and this is one of the questions we came here to ask you.

Did you know Lee Harvey Oswald prior to this shooting?

Mr. RUBY. That is why I want to take the lie detector test. Just saying no isn't sufficient.

Chief Justice WARREN. I will afford you that opportunity.

Mr. RUBY. All right.

Chief Justice WARREN. I will afford you that opportunity. You can't do both of them at one time.

Mr. RUBY. Gentlemen, my life is in danger here. Not with my guilty plea of execution.

Do I sound sober enough to you as I say this?

Chief Justice WARREN. You do. You sound entirely sober.

Mr. RUBY. From the moment I started my testimony, have I sounded as though, with the exception of becoming emotional, have I sounded as though I made sense, what I was speaking about?

Chief Justice WARREN. You have indeed. I understood everything you have said. If I haven't, it is my fault.

Mr. RUBY. Then I follow this up. I may not live tomorrow to give any further testimony. The reason why I add this to this, since you assure me that I have been speaking sense by then, I might be speaking sense by following what I have said, and the only thing I want to get out to the public, and I can't say it here, is with authenticity, with sincerity of the truth of everything and why my act was committed, but it can't be said here.

It can be said, it's got to be said amongst people of the highest authority that would give me the benefit of doubt. And following that, immediately give me the lie detector test after I do make the statement.

Chairman Warren, if you felt that your life was in danger at the moment, how would you feel? Wouldn't you be reluctant to go on speaking, even though you request me to do so?

Chief Justice WARREN. I think I might have some reluctance if I was in your position, yes; I think I would. I think I would figure it out very carefully as to whether it would endanger me or not.

If you think that anything that I am doing or anything that I am asking you is endangering you in any way, shape, or form, I want you to feel absolutely free to say that the interview is over.

Mr. RUBY. What happens then? I didn't accomplish anything.

Chief Justice WARREN. No; nothing has been accomplished.

Mr. RUBY. Well, then you won't follow up with anything further?

Chief Justice WARREN. There wouldn't be anything to follow up if you hadn't completed your statement.

Mr. RUBY. You said you have the power to do what you want to do, is that correct?

Chief Justice WARREN. Exactly.

Mr. RUBY. Without any limitations?

Chief Justice WARREN. Within the purview of the Executive order which established the Commission. We have the right to take testimony of anyone we want in this whole situation, and we have the right, if we so choose to do it, to verify that statement in any way that we wish to do it.

Mr. RUBY. But you don't have a right to take a prisoner back with you when you want to?

Chief Justice WARREN. No; we have the power to subpena witnesses to Washington if we want to do it, but we have taken the testimony of 200 or 300 people, I would imagine, here in Dallas without going to Washington.

Mr. RUBY. Yes; but those people aren't Jack Ruby.

Chief Justice WARREN. No; they weren't.

Mr. RUBY. They weren't.

Chief Justice WARREN. Now I want you to feel that we are not here to take any advantage of you, because I know that you are in a delicate position, and unless you had indicated not only through your lawyers but also through your sister, who wrote a letter addressed either to me or to Mr. Rankin saying that you wanted to testify before the Commission, unless she had told us that, I wouldn't have bothered you.

Because I know you do have this case that is not yet finished, and I wouldn't jeopardize your position by trying to insist that you testify.

So I want you to feel that you are free to refrain from testifying any time you wish.

But I will also be frank with you and say that I don't think it would be to your advantage to tell us as much as you have and then to stop and not tell us the rest. I can't see what advantage that would give you.

Mr. RUBY. The thing is this, that with your power that you have, Chief Justice Warren, and all these gentlemen, too much time has gone by for me to give you any benefit of what I may say now.

Chief Justice WARREN. No; that isn't a fact, because until we make our findings for the Commission, and until we make our report on the case, it is not too late.

And there are other witnesses we have who are yet to be examined. So from our standpoint, it is timely. We are not handicapped at all by the lateness of your examination.

Mr. RUBY. Well, it is too tragic to talk about.

Mr. RANKIN. Isn't it true that we waited until very late in our proceedings to talk to Mrs. Kennedy?

Chief Justice WARREN. Yes; I might say to you that we didn't take Mrs. Kennedy's statement until day before yesterday. Mr. Rankin and I took her testimony then.

So we are not treating you different from any other witness.

Mr. RUBY. I tell you, gentlemen, my whole family is in jeopardy. My sisters, as to their lives.

Chief Justice WARREN. Yes?

Mr. RUBY. Naturally, I am a foregone conclusion. My sisters Eva, Eileen, and Mary, I lost my sisters.

My brothers Sam, Earl, Hyman, and myself naturally--my in-laws, Harold Kaminsky, Marge Ruby, the wife of Earl, and Phyllis, the wife of Sam Ruby, they are in jeopardy of loss of their lives. Yet they have, just because they are blood related to myself--does that sound serious enough to you, Chief Justice Warren?

Chief Justice WARREN. Nothing could be more serious, if that is the fact. But your sister, I don't know whether it was your sister Eva or your other sister----

Mr. RUBY. Eileen wrote you a letter.

Chief Justice WARREN. Wrote the letter to me and told us that you would like to testify, and that is one of the reasons that we came down here.

Mr. RUBY. But unfortunately, when did you get the letter, Chief Justice Warren?

Chief Justice WARREN. It was a long time ago, I admit. I think it was, let's see, roughly between 2 and 3 months ago.

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Chief Justice WARREN. I think it was; yes.

Mr. RUBY. At that time when you first got the letter and I was begging Joe Tonahill and the other lawyers to know the truth about me, certain things that are happening now wouldn't be happening at this particular time.

Chief Justice WARREN. Yes?

Mr. RUBY. Because then they would have known the truth about Jack Ruby and his emotional breakdown.

Chief Justice WARREN. Yes?

Mr. RUBY. Of why that Sunday morning--that thought never entered my mind prior to that Sunday morning when I took it upon myself to try to be a martyr or some screwball, you might say.

But I felt very emotional and very carried away for Mrs. Kennedy, that with all the strife she had gone through--I had been following it pretty well--that someone owed it to our beloved President that she shouldn't be expected to come back to face trial of this heinous crime.

And I have never had the chance to tell that, to back it up, to prove it.

Consequently, right at this moment I am being victimized as a part of a plot in the world's worst tragedy and crime at this moment.

Months back had I been given a chance--I take that back. Sometime back a police officer of the Dallas Police Department wanted to know how I got into the building. And I don't know whether I requested a lie detector test or not, but my attorney wasn't available.

When you are a defendant in the case, you say "speak to your attorney," you know. But that was a different time. It was after the trial, whenever it happened.

At this moment, Lee Harvey Oswald isn't guilty of committing the crime of assassinating President Kennedy. Jack Ruby is.

How can I fight that, Chief Justice Warren?

Chief Justice WARREN. Well now, I want to say, Mr. Ruby, that as far as this Commission is concerned, there is no implication of that in what we are doing.

Mr. RUBY. All right, there is a certain organization here----

Chief Justice WARREN. That I can assure you.

Mr. RUBY. There is an organization here, Chief Justice Warren, if it takes my life at this moment to say it, and Bill Decker said be a man and say it, there is a John Birch Society right now in activity, and Edwin Walker is one of the top men of this organization--take it for what it is worth, Chief Justice Warren.

Unfortunately for me, for me giving the people the opportunity to get in power, because of the act I committed, has put a lot of people in jeopardy with their lives.

Don't register with you, does it?

Chief Justice WARREN. No; I don't understand that.

Mr. RUBY. Would you rather I just delete what I said and just pretend that nothing is going on?

Chief Justice WARREN. I would not indeed. I am only interested in what you want to tell this Commission. That is all I am interested in.

Mr. RUBY. Well, I said my life, I won't be living long now. I know that. My family's lives will be gone. When I left my apartment that morning----

Chief Justice WARREN. What morning?

Mr. RUBY. Sunday morning.

Chief Justice WARREN. Sunday morning.

Mr. RUBY. Let's go back. Saturday I watched Rabbi Seligman. Any of you watch it that Saturday morning?

Chief Justice WARREN. No; I didn't happen to hear it.

Mr. RUBY. He went ahead and eulogized that here is a man that fought in every battle, went to every country, and had to come back to his own country to be shot in the back [starts crying].

I must be a great actor, I tell you that.

Chief Justice WARREN. No.

Mr. RUBY. That created a tremendous emotional feeling for me, the way he said that. Prior to all the other times, I was carried away.

Then that Saturday night, I didn't do anything but visit a little club over here and had a Coca-Cola, because I was sort of depressed. A fellow that owns the Pago Club, Bob Norton, and he knew something was wrong with me in the certain mood I was in.

And I went home and that weekend, the Sunday morning, and saw a letter to Caroline, two columns about a 16-inch area. Someone had written a letter to Caroline. The most heartbreaking letter. I don't remember the contents. Do you remember that?

Mr. MOORE. I think I saw it.

Mr. RUBY. Yes; and alongside that letter on the same sheet of paper was a small comment in the newspaper that, I don't know how it was stated, that Mrs. Kennedy may have to come back for the trial of Lee Harvey Oswald.

That caused me to go like I did; that caused me to go like I did.

I don't know, Chief Justice, but I got so carried away. And I remember prior to that thought, there has never been another thought in my mind; I was never malicious toward this person. No one else requested me to do anything.

I never spoke to anyone about attempting to do anything. No subversive organization gave me any idea. No underworld person made any effort to contact me. It all happened that Sunday morning.

The last thing I read was that Mrs. Kennedy may have to come back to Dallas for trial for Lee Harvey Oswald, and I don't know what bug got ahold of me. I don't know what it is, but I am going to tell the truth word for word.

I am taking a pill called Preludin. It is a harmless pill, and it is very easy to get in the drugstore. It isn't a highly prescribed pill. I use it for dieting.

I don't partake of that much food. I think that was a stimulus to give me an emotional feeling that suddenly I felt, which was so stupid, that I wanted to show my love for our faith, being of the Jewish faith, and I never used the term and I don't want to go into that--suddenly the feeling, the emotional feeling came within me that someone owed this debt to our beloved President to save her the ordeal of coming back. I don't know why that came through my mind.

And I drove past Main Street, past the County Building, and there was a crowd already gathered there. And I guess I thought I knew he was going to be moved at 10 o'clock, I don't know. I listened to the radio; and I passed a crowd and it looked--I am repeating myself--and I took it for granted he had already been moved.

And I parked my car in the lot across from the Western Union. Prior to that, I got a call from a little girl--she wanted some money--that worked for me, and I said, "Can't you wait till payday?" And she said, "Jack, you are going to be closed."

So my purpose was to go to the Western Union--my double purpose--but the thought of doing, committing the act wasn't until I left my apartment.

Sending the wire was when I had the phone call--or the money order.

I drove down Main Street--there was a little incident I left out, that I started to go down a driveway, but I wanted to go by the wreaths, and I saw them and started to cry again.

Then I drove, parked the car across from the Western Union, went into the Western Union, sent the money order, whatever it was, walked the distance from the Western Union to the ramp--I didn't sneak in. I didn't linger in there.

I didn't crouch or hide behind anyone, unless the television camera can make it seem that way.

There was an officer talking--I don't know what rank he had--talking to a Sam Pease in a car parked up on the curb.

I walked down those few steps, and there was the person that--I wouldn't say I saw red--it was a feeling I had for our beloved President and Mrs. Kennedy, that he was insignificant to what my purpose was.

And when I walked down the ramp--I would say there was an 8-foot clearance--not that I wanted to be a hero, or I didn't realize that even if the officer would have observed me, the klieg lights, but I can't take that.

I did not mingle with the crowd. There was no one near me when I walked down that ramp, because if you will time the time I sent the money order, I think it was 10:17 Sunday morning.

I think the actual act was committed--I take that back--was it 11 o'clock? You should know this.

Mr. MOORE. 11:21.

Mr. RUBY. No; when Oswald was shot.

Mr. MOORE. I understood it to be 11:22.

Mr. RUBY. The clock stopped and said 11:21. I was watching on that thing; yes. Then it must have been 11:17, closer to 18. That is the timing when I left the Western Union to the time of the bottom of the ramp.

You wouldn't have time enough to have any conspiracy, to be self-saving, to mingle with the crowd, as it was told about me.

I realize it is a terrible thing I have done, and it was a stupid thing, but I just was carried away emotionally. Do you follow that?

Chief Justice WARREN. Yes; I do indeed, every word.

Mr. RUBY. I had the gun in my right hip pocket, and impulsively, if that is the correct word here, I saw him, and that is all I can say. And I didn't care what happened to me.

I think I used the words, "You killed my President, you rat." The next thing, I was down on the floor.

I said, "I am Jack Ruby. You all know me."

I never used anything malicious, nothing like s.o.b. I never said that I wanted to get three more off, as they stated.

The only words, and I was highly emotional; to Ray Hall--he interrogated more than any other person down there--all I believe I said to him was, "I didn't want Mrs. Kennedy to come back to trial."

And I forget what else. And I used a little expression like being of the Jewish faith, I wanted to show that we love our President, even though we are not of the same faith.

And I have a friend of mine--do you mind if it is a slipshod story?

Chief Justice WARREN. No; you tell us in your own way.

Mr. RUBY. A fellow whom I sort of idolized is of the Catholic faith, and a gambler. Naturally in my business you meet people of various backgrounds.

And the thought came, we were very close, and I always thought a lot of him, and I knew that Kennedy, being Catholic, I knew how heartbroken he was, and even his picture--of this Mr. McWillie--flashed across me, because I have a great fondness for him.

All that blended into the thing that, like a screwball, the way it turned out, that I thought that I would sacrifice myself for the few moments of saving Mrs. Kennedy the discomfiture of coming back to trial.

Now all these things of my background, I should have been the last person in the world to want to be a martyr. It happens, doesn't it, Chief Warren?

I mean, for instance, I have been in the night club business, a burlesque house. It was a means of a livelihood. I knew persons of notorious backgrounds years ago in Chicago. I was with the union back in Chicago, and I left the union when I found out the notorious organization had moved in there. It was in 1940.

Then recently, I had to make so many numerous calls that I am sure you know of. Am I right? Because of trying to survive in my business.

My unfair competition had been running certain shows that we were restricted to run by regulation of the union, but they violated all the rules of the union, and I didn't violate it, and consequently I was becoming insolvent because of it.

All those calls were made with only, in relation to seeing if they can help out, with the American Guild of Variety Artists. Does that confirm a lot of things you have heard?

Every person I have called, and sometimes you may not even know a person intimately, you sort of tell them, well, you are stranded down here and you want some help--if they know of any official of the American Guild of Variety Artists to help me. Because my competitors were putting me out of business.

I even flew to New York to see Joe Glazer, and he called Bobby Faye. He was the national president. That didn't help. He called Barney Ross and Joey Adams. All these phone calls were related not in anyway involved with the underworld, because I have been away from Chicago 17 years down in Dallas.

As a matter of fact, I even called a Mr.--hold it before I say it--headed the American Federation of Labor--I can't think--in the State of Texas--Miller.

Chief Justice WARREN. I don't know.

Mr. RUBY. Is there a Deutsch I. Maylor? I called a Mr. Maylor here in Texas to see if he could help me out.

I want to set you gentlemen straight on all the telephone calls I had. This was a long time prior to what has happened. And the only association I had with those calls, the only questions that I inquired about, was if they could help me with the American Guild of Variety Artists, to see that they abolished it, because it was unfair to professional talent, abolish them from putting on their shows in Dallas. That is the only reason I made those calls. Where do we go from there?

Chief Justice WARREN. Well, I will go back to the original question that I asked you. Did you ever know Oswald?

Mr. RUBY. No; let me add--you are refreshing my mind about a few things.

Can I ask one thing? Did you all talk to Mr. McWillie? I am sure you have.

VOICE. Yes.

Mr. RUBY. He always wanted me to come down to Havana, Cuba; invited me down there, and I didn't want to leave my business because I had to watch over it.

He was a key man over the Tropicana down there. That was during our good times. Was in harmony with our enemy of our present time.

Chief Justice WARREN. Yes?

Mr. RUBY. I refused. I couldn't make it. Finally he sent me tickets to come down, airplane tickets.

I made the trip down there via New Orleans, and so I stayed at the Volk's Apartments, and I was with him constantly.

And I was bored with the gambling, because I don't gamble, and there is nothing exciting unless you can speak their language, which is Spanish, I believe.

And that was the only environment. That was in August of 1959.

Any thought of ever being close to Havana, Cuba, I called him frequently because he was down there, and he was the last person to leave, if I recall, when they had to leave, when he left the casino.

As a matter of fact, on the plane, if I recall, I had an article he sent me, and I wanted to get it published because I idolized McWillie. He is a pretty nice boy, and I happened to be idolizing him.

When the plane left Havana and landed in the United States, some schoolteacher remarked that the United States is not treating Castro right. When they landed in the United States, this Mr. Louis McWillie slugged this guy for making that comment.

So I want you to know, as far as him having any subversive thoughts, and I wanted Tony to put it in the paper here. That is how much I thought of Mr. McWillie. And that is my only association.

The only other association with him was, there was a gentleman here that sells guns. He has a hardware store on Singleton Avenue.

Have I told this to you gentlemen? It is Ray's Hardware. His name is Ray Brantley.

This was--I don't recall when he called me, but he was a little worried of the new regime coming in, and evidently he wanted some protection.

He called me or sent me a letter that I should call Ray Brantley. He wanted some four little Cobra guns--big shipment.

So me, I should say myself rather, feeling no harm, I didn't realize, because he wasn't sending them to me, and I thought there was no crime, the man wanted protection, he is earning a livelihood.

I called Ray Brantley and I said, "Ray, McWillie called me." I don't remember if he sent me a letter or he called. He said he wants four little Cobras, or something like that.

He said "I know Mac. I have been doing business with him for a long time." Meaning with reference to when he was living in Texas. He did a lot of hunting and things like that.

Chief Justice WARREN. Yes?

Mr. RUBY. That was the only relationship I had of any mention, outside of phone calls, to Mr. McWillie, or any person from Havana, Cuba.

Chief Justice WARREN. When was that?

Mr. RUBY. Now the guns--am I correct? Did you ever go to check on it? On Ray Brantley?

Mr. MOORE. No.

Mr. RUBY. He denies I ever called. Evidently he feels, maybe he feels it would be illegal to send guns out of the country. I don't know if you gentlemen know the law. I don't know the law.

Chief Justice WARREN. I don't know.

Mr. RUBY. I kept--did I tell you this, Joe, about this?

Mr. TONAHILL. Yes; you did.

Mr. RUBY. That I wanted someone to go to Ray Brantley?

Mr. TONAHILL. Yes.

Mr. RUBY. When Phil Burleson came back with a letter signed, an affidavit that Ray Brantley said he never did receive a call from me, and the only gun he sent to McWillie was to the Vegas, but it came back that they didn't pick it up because it was a c.o.d. order.

This definitely would do me more harm, because if I tell my story that I called Ray Brantley, and he denies that he ever got a call from me, definitely that makes it look like I am hiding something.

Haven't I felt that right along, Joe?

Mr. TONAHILL. You sure have, Jack.

Mr. RUBY. Now, the reason I am telling you these things, I never knew Lee Harvey Oswald. The first time I ever have seen him was the time in the assembly room when they brought him out, when he had some sort of a shiner on his eye.

Chief Justice WARREN. When was that little incident about the Cobras? About what year? That is all I am interested in.

Mr. RUBY. Could have been prior to the early part of 1959.

Chief Justice WARREN. Yes; all right.

Mr. RUBY. That is the only call I made. And as a matter of fact, I didn't even follow up to inquire of this Mr. Brantley, whether he received it or what the recourse was. That is why I tell you, Chief Justice Warren--who is this new gentleman, may I ask?

Mr. RANKIN. This is Mr. Storey from your community, a lawyer who is working with the attorney general, and Mr. Jaworski, in connection with watching the work of the Commission so that they will be satisfied as to the quality of the work done insofar as the State of Texas is concerned.

(Pause for reporter to change paper, and Ruby asked about one of the gentlemen, to which Chief Justice Warren replied as follows):

Chief Justice WARREN (referring to Mr. Specter). He has been working with us on the Commission since very close to the beginning now.

Mr. RANKIN. How long did you spend in Cuba on this trip?

Mr. RUBY. Eight days. A lot of your tourists were there. As a matter of fact, a lot of group tourists were going down, students of schools.

I mean, he had a way of purchasing tickets from Havana that I think he purchased them at a lesser price. He bought them from the travel agent in the Capri Hotel.

He bought them--did you meet McWillie?

Mr. MOORE. I didn't.

Mr. RANKIN. He was checked by the Commission in connection with this work.

Chief Justice WARREN. There was some story in one of the papers that you had been interested in shipping jeeps down to Cuba. Was there anything to that at all?

Mr. RUBY. No; but this was the earlier part, when the first time Castro had ever invaded Cuba. There was even a Government article that they would need jeeps. I don't recall what it was, but I never had the facilities or the capabilities of knowing where to get jeeps.

But probably in conversation with other persons--you see, it is a new land, and they have to have a lot of things. As a matter of fact, the U.S. Government was wanting persons to help them at that particular time when they threw out the dictator, Batista.

And one particular time there was a gentleman that smuggled guns to Castro. I think I told you that, Mr. Moore; I don't remember.

Mr. MOORE. I don't recall that.

Mr. RUBY. I think his name was Longley out of Bay--something--Texas, on the Bayshore. And somehow he was, I read the article about him, that he was given a jail term for smuggling guns to Castro. This is the early part of their revolution.

Chief Justice WARREN. Before the Batista government fell?

Mr. RUBY. Yes; I think he had a boat, and he lived somewhere in Bay something, Bayshore, in the center part of Texas. Do you know him, Mr. Storey? Do you know this man?

Mr. STOREY. No; I don't know him.

Mr. RUBY. How can I prove my authenticity of what I have stated here today?

Chief Justice WARREN. Well, you have testified under oath, and I don't even know that there is anything to disprove what you have said.

Mr. RUBY. No; because I will say this. You don't know if there is anything to disprove, but at this moment, there is a certain organization in this area that has been indoctrinated, that I am the one that was in the plot to assassinate our President.

Mr. RANKIN. Would you tell us what that is?

Mr. RUBY. The John Birch Society.

Mr. RANKIN. Can you tell us what basis you have for that, Mr. Ruby?

Mr. RUBY. Just a feeling of it. Mr. Warren, you don't recall when I--Friday night after leaving the Times Herald, I went to my apartment and very impatiently awakened George Senator. As a matter of fact, used the words, as I state, "You will have to get up, George. I want you to go with me."

And he had been in bed for a couple of hours, which was about, I imagine, about 4:30 or a quarter to 5 in the morning.

And I called the club and I asked this kid Larry if he knew how to pack a Polaroid, and he said "Yes."

And I said, "Get up." And we went down and picked up Larry. And in the meantime, I don't recall if I stopped at the post office to find out his box number of this Bernard Weissman. I think the box number was 1792, or something to that; and then there was, it came to my mind when I left the Times Herald--I am skipping back--why I had awakened George.

I recall seeing a sign on a certain billboard "Impeach Earl Warren." You have heard something about that?

Chief Justice WARREN. I read something in the paper, yes; that is all.

Mr. RUBY. And it came from New Bedford, or Massachusetts; I don't recall what the town was.

And there was a similar number to that, but I thought at the time it would be the same number of 1792, but it was 1757.

That is the reason I went down there to take the Polaroid picture of it, because of that remaining in the city at the time.

What happened to the picture, I don't know. I asked Jim Bowie or Alexander to tell you.

Mr. RANKIN. Did you know Weissman before that?

Mr. RUBY. Never knew him. When I said Jim Bowie, no one says a word.

Mr. BOWIE. We never have seen them.

Mr. RUBY. They were in my person.

Mr. BOWIE. But no evidence came?

Mr. RUBY. No; it did not, never. As a matter of fact, I went to the post office to check on box 1792. I even inquired with the man in charge of where you purchase the boxes, and I said to him, "Who bought this box?"

And he said, "I can't give you the information. All I know is, it is a legitimate business box purchase."

And I checked the various contents of mail there.

Mr. RANKIN. Did you know Officer Tippit?

Mr. RUBY. I knew there was three Tippits on the force. The only one I knew used to work for the special services, and I am certain this wasn't the Tippit, this wasn't the man.

Mr. RANKIN. The man that was murdered. There was a story that you were seen sitting in your Carousel Club with Mr. Weissman, Officer Tippit, and another who has been called a rich oil man, at one time shortly before the assassination. Can you tell us anything about that?

Mr. RUBY. Who was the rich oil man?

Mr. RANKIN. Can you remember? We haven't been told. We are just trying to find out anything that you know about him.

Mr. RUBY. I am the one that made such a big issue of Bernard Weissman's ad. Maybe you do things to cover up, if you are capable of doing it.

As a matter of fact, Saturday afternoon we went over to the Turf Bar lounge, and it was a whole hullabaloo, and I showed the pictures "Impeach Earl Warren" to Bellocchio, and he saw the pictures and got very emotional.

And Bellocchio said, "Why did the newspaper take this ad of Weissman?"

And Bellocchio said, "I have got to leave Dallas."

And suddenly after making that statement, I realized it is his incapability, and suddenly you do things impulsively, and suddenly you realize if you love the city, you stay here and you make the best of it. And there were witnesses.

I said, "The city was good enough for you all before this. Now you feel that way about it." And that was Bellocchio.

As far as Tippit, it is not Tippitts, it is not Tippitts it is Tippit.

Mr. RANKIN. This Weissman and the rich oil man, did you ever have a conversation with them?

Mr. RUBY. There was only a few. Bill Rudman from the YMCA, and I haven't seen him in years.

And there is a Bill Howard, but he is not a rich oil man. He owns the Stork Club now. He used to dabble in oil.

Chief Justice WARREN. This story was given by a lawyer by the name of Mark Lane, who is representing Mrs. Marguerite Oswald, the mother of Lee Harvey Oswald, and it was in the paper, so we subpenaed him, and he testified that someone had given him information to the effect that a week or two before President Kennedy was assassinated, that in your Carousel Club you and Weissman and Tippit, Officer Tippit, the one who was killed, and a rich oil man had an interview or conversation for an hour or two.

And we asked him who it was that told him, and he said that it was confidential and he couldn't tell at the moment, but that he would find out for us if whether he could be released or not from his confidential relationship.

He has never done it, and we have written him several letters asking him to disclose the name of that person, and he has never complied.

Mr. RUBY. Isn't that foolish? If a man is patriotic enough in the first place, who am I to be concerned if he wasn't an informer.

I am incarcerated, nothing to be worried about anyone hurting me.

Chief Justice WARREN. Mr. Ruby, I am not questioning your story at all. I wanted you to know the background of this thing, and to know that it was with us only hearsay. But I did feel that our record should show that we would ask you the question and that you would answer it, and you have answered it.

Mr. RUBY. How many days prior to the assassination was that?

Chief Justice WARREN. My recollection is that it was a week or two. Is that correct?

Mr. RUBY. Did anyone have any knowledge that their beloved President was going to visit here prior to that time, or what is the definite time that they knew he was coming to Dallas?

Chief Justice WARREN. Well, I don't know just what those dates are.

Mr. RUBY. I see.

Chief Justice WARREN. I just don't know. Well, we wanted to ask you that question, because this man had so testified, and we have been trying ever since to get him to give the source of his information, but he will not do it, so we will leave that matter as it is.

Mr. RUBY. No; I am as innocent regarding any conspiracy as any of you gentlemen in the room, and I don't want anything to be run over lightly. I want you to dig into it with any biting, any question that might embarrass me, or anything that might bring up my background, which isn't so terribly spotted--I have never been a criminal--I have never been in jail--I know when you live in the city of Chicago and you are in the livelihood of selling tickets to sporting events, your lucrative patrons are some of these people, but you don't mean anything to those people. You may know them as you get acquainted with them at the sporting events or the ball park.

Chief Justice WARREN. The prizefights?

Mr. RUBY. The prizefights. If that was your means of livelihood, yet you don't have no other affiliation with them, so when I say I know them, or what I have read from stories of personalities that are notorious, that is the extent of my involvement in any criminal activity.

I have never been a bookmaker. I have never stolen for a living. I am not a gangster. I have never used a goon squad for union activities.

All I was was a representative to sound out applications for the American Federation of Labor, and if the employees would sign it, we would accept them as members.

I never knew what a goon looked like in Chicago, with the exception when I went to the service.

I never belonged to any subversive organization. I don't know any subversive people that are against my beloved country.

Mr. RANKIN. You have never been connected with the Communist Party?

Mr. RUBY. Never have. All I have ever done in my life--I had a very rough start in life, but anything I have done, I at least try to do it in good taste, whatever I have been active in.

Mr. RANKIN. There was a story that you had a gun with you during the showup that you described in the large room there.

Mr. RUBY. I will be honest with you. I lied about it. It isn't so. I didn't have a gun. But in order to make my defense more accurate, to save your life, that is the reason that statement was made.

Mr. RANKIN. It would be quite helpful to the Commission if you could--in the first place, I want to get the trip to Cuba. Was that in 1959?

Mr. RUBY. Yes; because I had to buy a $2 ticket, a pass to get through Florida.

Mr. RANKIN. Did you have any other trip to Cuba?

Mr. RUBY. Never; that is the only one that I made.

I stayed at the Volk's Apartments with Mr. McWillie, lived in his apartment. Ate directly in a place called Wolf's, downstairs. Wouldn't know how to speak their language. I wouldn't know how to communicate with them.

I probably had two dates from meeting some young ladies I got to dancing with, because my dinners were served in the Tropicana.

One thing I forgot to tell you--you are bringing my mind back to a few things--the owners, the greatest that have been expelled from Cuba, are the Fox brothers. They own the Tropicana.

Mr. RANKIN. Who are the Fox brothers?

Mr. RUBY. Martin Fox and I can't think of the other name.

Mr. RANKIN. Do you know where they are located now?

Mr. RUBY. They are in Miami, Fla. They know everything about McWillie, I heard; and know the officials.

I met McWillie because he came to the club, and he came to the club to look over the show. And you get to talk to people and meet a lot of different types of people.

The Fox brothers came to Dallas--I don't know which one it was--to collect a debt that some man owed the Cotton Gin Co. here.

Do you know their name, Mr. Bowie?

Mr. BOWIE. Murray, or something.

Mr. RUBY. He gave some bad checks on a gambling debt, and they came to visit me. The lawyer, I think, is Mark Lane. That is the attorney that was killed in New York?

Chief Justice WARREN. That is the fellow who represents, or did represent Mrs. Marguerite Oswald. I think I read in the paper where he no longer represents her.

Mr. RANKIN. He is still alive though.

Chief Justice WARREN. Oh, yes.

Mr. RUBY. There was one Lane that was killed in a taxicab. I thought he was an attorney in Dallas.

Chief Justice WARREN. That was a Dave Lane.

Mr. RUBY. There is a very prominent attorney in Dallas, McCord. McCord represents the Fox brothers here. They called me because the Fox brothers wanted to see me, and I came down to the hotel.

And Mrs. McWillie--Mr. McWillie was married to her at that time--and if I recall, I didn't show them off to the airport at that time.

This is when they were still living in Havana, the Fox brothers. We had dinner at--how do you pronounce that restaurant at Love Field? Luau? That serves this Chinese food.

Dave McCord, I was in his presence, and I was invited out to dinner, and there was an attorney by the name of Leon. Is he associated with McCord?

And there was a McClain.

Chief Justice WARREN. Alfred was killed in a taxi in New York.

Mr. RUBY. He was at this dinner meeting I had with McCord. I don't know if Mrs. McWillie was along. And one of the Fox brothers, because they had just been awarded the case that this person owns, this Gin Co., that was compelled to pay off.

Mr. RANKIN. I think, Mr. Ruby, it would be quite helpful to the Commission if you could tell, as you recall it, just what you said to Mr. Sorrels and the others after the shooting of Lee Harvey Oswald. Can you recall that?

Mr. RUBY. The only one I recall Mr. Sorrels in, there were some incorrect statements made at this time.

Mr. RANKIN. Can you tell us what you said?

Congressman FORD. First, tell us when this took place.

Mr. RANKIN. How soon after the shooting occurred?

Mr. RUBY. Well, Ray Hall was the first one that interrogated me. Wanted to know my whole background.

Mr. RANKIN. Can you tell us how soon it was? Within a few minutes after the shooting?

Mr. RUBY. No; I waited in a little room there somewhere upstairs in--I don't know what floor it was. I don't recall.

Mr. RANKIN. Where did this occur, on the third floor?

Mr. RUBY. One of those floors. I don't know whether it was the third or second. If you are up on an elevator----

Mr. RANKIN. Can you give us any idea of the time after the shooting?

Mr. RUBY. I spent an hour with Mr. Hall, Ray Hall. And I was very much, I was very much broken up emotionally, and I constantly repeated that I didn't want Mrs. Kennedy to come back to trial, and those were my words, constantly repeated to Mr. Hall.

And I heard there was a statement made--now I am skipping--and then I gave Mr. Hall my complete background about things he wanted to know, my earlier background going back from the years, and I guess there was nothing else to say to Hall because as long as I stated why I did it--it is not like planning a crime and you are confessing something. I already confessed, and all it took is one sentence why I did it.

Now what else could I have said that you think I could have said? Refresh my memory a little bit.

Mr. RANKIN. There was a conversation with Mr. Sorrels in which you told him about the matter. Do you remember that?

Mr. RUBY. The only thing I ever recall I said to Mr. Ray Hall and Sorrels was, I said, "Being of Jewish faith, I wanted to show my love for my President and his lovely wife."

After I said whatever I said, then a statement came out that someone introduced Mr. Sorrels to me and I said, "What are you, a newsman?" Or something to that effect. Which is really--what I am trying to say is, the way it sounded is like I was looking for publicity and inquiring if you are a newsman, I wanted to see you.

But I am certain--I don't recall definitely, but I know in my right mind, because I know my motive for doing it, and certainly to gain publicity to take a chance of being mortally wounded, as I said before, and who else could have timed it so perfectly by seconds.

If it were timed that way, then someone in the police department is guilty of giving the information as to when Lee Harvey Oswald was coming down.

I never made a statement. I never inquired from the television man what time is Lee Harvey Oswald coming down. Because really, a man in his right mind would never ask that question. I never made the statement "I wanted to get three more off. Someone had to do it. You wouldn't do it." I never made those statements.

I never called the man by any obscene name, because as I stated earlier, there was no malice in me. He was insignificant, to my feelings for my love for Mrs. Kennedy and our beloved President. He was nothing comparable to them, so I can't explain it.

I never used any words--as a matter of fact, there were questions at the hearing with Roy Pryor and a few others--I may have used one word "a little weasel" or something, but I didn't use it. I don't remember, because Roy said it. If he said I did, I may have said it.

I never made the statement to anyone that I intended to get him. I never used the obscene words that were stated.

Anything I said was with emotional feeling of I didn't want Mrs. Kennedy to come back to trial.

Representative FORD. It has been alleged that you went out to Parkland Hospital.

Mr. RUBY. No; I didn't go there. They tried to ask me. My sisters asked me. Some people told my sister that you were there. I am of sound mind. I never went there. Everything that transpired during the tragedy, I was at the Morning News Building.

Congressman FORD. You didn't go out there subsequent to the assassination?

Mr. RUBY. No; in other words, like somebody is trying to make me something of a martyr in that case. No; I never did.

Does this conflict with my story and yours in great length?

Mr. MOORE. Substantially the same, Jack, as well as I remember.

Mr. RANKIN. Did you say anything about people of your religion have guts, or something like that?

Mr. RUBY. I said it. I never said it up there. I said, I could have said, "Weren't you afraid of getting your head blown off?" I said, "Well, to be truthful, I have a little nerve." I could have said that.

Now I could have said to the doctor that was sent to me, Bromberg, because there is a certain familiarity you have, because it is like you have an attorney representing you, it is there. I mean, it is there.

But I did say this. McWillie made a statement about me, something to the effect that "he is considered a pretty rough guy," this McWillie. He said, "One thing about Jack Ruby, he runs this club and no one runs over him."

And you have a different type of entertainment here than any other part of the country, our type of entertainment.

But I don't recall that. I could have said the sentimental feeling that I may have used.

Representative FORD. When you flew to Cuba, where did you go from Dallas en route? What was the step-by-step process by which you arrived at Havana?

Mr. RUBY. I think I told Mr. Moore I stopped in New Orleans. Sometime I stopped in New Orleans, and I don't remember if I stopped in Florida or New Orleans, but I know I did stop in New Orleans, because I bought some Carioca rum coming back.

I know I was to Miami on a stopover. It could have been on the way back. I only went to Cuba once, so naturally, when I bought the Carioca rum, there was a couple of fellows that sell tickets for Delta Airlines, and they know me like I know you, and I am sure you gentlemen have spoken to them, and they were to tell me where to go in Havana, and have a ball, and I told them why I was going there, and who I was going to look up, and everything else.

Representative FORD. They were Delta Airlines employees in New Orleans or Dallas?

Mr. RUBY. No; in New Orleans. Evidently I went out to the Delta Airlines at Love Field and caught the plane. I may have taken the flight--here is what could have happened. I could have made a double stop from Havana on the way back in taking in Miami, and then taking another plane to New Orleans, I am not certain.

But I only made one trip to Havana. Yet I know I was in Miami, Fla. and I was in New Orleans.

And the next time I went to New Orleans, when I tried to look up some showgirl by the name of Jada, I stopped in to see the same fellows at Delta Airlines.

Mr. RANKIN. Do you recall going up the elevator after the shooting of Oswald?

Mr. RUBY. That is so small to remember, I guess it is automatic, you know.

Mr. RANKIN. Did you have this gun a long while that you did the shooting with?

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. RANKIN. You didn't carry it all the time?

Mr. RUBY. I did. I had it in a little bag with money constantly. I carry my money.

Chief Justice WARREN. Congressman, do you have anything further?

Mr. RUBY. You can get more out of me. Let's not break up too soon.

Representative FORD. When you got to Havana, who met you in Havana?

Mr. RUBY. McWillie. Now here is what happened. One of the Fox brothers came to visit me in Dallas with his wife. They came to the Vegas Club with Mrs. McWillie, and we had taken some pictures. 8 x 10's.

Evidently the Foxes were in exile at that time, because when I went to visit McWillie, when he sent me the plane tickets, they looked through my luggage and they saw a photograph of Mr. Fox and his wife. They didn't interrogate, but they went through everything and held me up for hours.

Representative FORD. Castro employees?

Mr. RUBY. Yes; because evidently, in my ignorance, I didn't realize I was bringing a picture that they knew was a bitter enemy. At that time they knew that the Fox brothers weren't going to jail, or something was going to happen.

Whether it was they were in exile at that time. I don't know.

But they came to my club, the Vegas Club, and we had taken pictures.

Mr. McWillie was waiting for me, and he saw me go through the customs line for a couple of hours, and he said, "Jack, they never did this to anyone before." Evidently, they had me pretty well lined up as to where I come in the picture of Mr. Rivera Fox. I can't think of his name.

Representative FORD. You spent 8 days there in Havana?

Mr. RUBY. Yes; approximately.

Representative FORD. And you stayed at the apartment of Mr.----

Mr. RUBY. Volk's Apartments. I never used the phone. I wouldn't know how to use the phone. Probably to call back to Dallas. And the only time, Mr. McWillie had to be at the club early, so I remained a little later in town--not often--because I saved money when I rode with him, because they charge you quite a bit. But I didn't want to get there too early, because to get there at 7 o'clock wasn't very lively.

Because I would always be with him for the complete evening.

We leave the place and stop somewhere to get coffee, a little dugout--I saw Ava Gardner down there at the time when I was there. She was visiting there.

Representative FORD. What prompted you to leave at the end of 8 days?

Mr. RUBY. I was bored because gambling isn't my profession, and when you have a business to run, and there weren't many tourists I could get acquainted with there.

I went to the Capri rooftop to go swimming, and went to the Nacional to go swimming once.

Representative FORD. Did you ever go to Mexico? Have you ever been to Mexico?

Mr. RUBY. The only time, 30 or 40 years ago, 1934.

Representative FORD. This trip to Cuba was the only time you left the country other than military service?

Mr. RUBY. Actually I didn't leave in the military. I was stationed three and a half years here in the States. Let's see, never out of the United States except at one time to Havana, Cuba.

Chief Justice WARREN. Now you said there were some other things. Would you mind telling us anything you have on your mind?

Mr. RUBY. No; because as I said earlier, you seem to have gotten the juicy part of the story up to now in the various spasmodic way of my telling it.

How valuable am I to you to give you all this information?

Chief Justice WARREN. Well, how valuable is rather an indefinite term, but I think it is very helpful to our Commission report. I think the report would have been deficient if it had not been for this interview we have had with you.

So we are interested in anything that you would like to tell us, in your own language.

Mr. RUBY. The only thing is this. If I cannot get these tests you give, it is pretty haphazard to tell you the things I should tell you.

Mr. Moore, you seem to have known more about my interrogation than anybody else, right?

Mr. MOORE. I think you have told us about everything you told me.

Mr. RANKIN. It isn't entirely clear how you feel that your family and you yourself are threatened by your telling what you have to the Commission.

How do you come to the conclusion that they might be killed? Will you tell us a little bit more about that, if you can?

Mr. RUBY. Well, assuming that, as I stated before, some persons are accusing me falsely of being part of the plot--naturally, in all the time from over 6 months ago, my family has been so interested in helping me.

Mr. RANKIN. By that, you mean a party to the plot of Oswald?

Mr. RUBY. That I was party to a plot to silence Oswald.

All right now, when your family believes you and knows your mannerisms and your thoughts, and knows your sincerity, they have lived with you all your life and know your emotional feelings and your patriotism--on the surface, they see me only as the guilty assailant of Oswald, and by helping me like they have, going all out.

My brother who has a successful business, I know he is going to be killed. And I haven't seen him in years. And suddenly he feels that he wants to help me, because he believes that I couldn't be any further involved than the actual----

When I told him I did it because of Mrs. Kennedy, that is all he had to hear, because I would never involve my family or involve him in a conspiracy.

Everyone haven't let me down. Because they read the newspapers away from Dallas that stated certain facts about me, but they are untrue, because they wouldn't come out and put those things in the newspapers that they should be putting in; and people outside of Dallas read the Dallas newspapers and are all in sympathy with me, as far as the country itself.

That they felt, well, Jack did it. They probably felt they would do the same thing.

That sympathy isn't going to help me, because the people that have the power here, they have a different verdict. They already have me as the accused assassin of our beloved President.

Now if I sound screwy telling you this, then I must be screwy.

Chief Justice WARREN. Mr. Ruby, I think you are entitled to a statement to this effect, because you have been frank with us and have told us your story.

I think I can say to you that there has been no witness before this Commission out of the hundreds we have questioned who has claimed to have any personal knowledge that you were a party to any conspiracy to kill our President.

Mr. RUBY. Yes; but you don't know this area here.

Chief Justice WARREN. No; I don't vouch for anything except that I think I am correct in that, am I not?

Mr. RANKIN. That is correct.

Chief Justice WARREN. I just wanted to tell you before our own Commission, and I might say to you also that we have explored the situation.

Mr. RUBY. I know, but I want to say this to you. If certain people have the means and want to gain something by propagandizing something to their own use, they will make ways to present certain things that I do look guilty.

Chief Justice WARREN. Well. I will make this additional statement to you, that if any witness should testify before the Commission that you were, to their knowledge, a party to any conspiracy to assassinate the President, I assure you that we will give you the opportunity to deny it and to take any tests that you may desire to so disprove it.

I don't anticipate that there will be any such testimony, but should there be, we will give you that opportunity.

Does that seem fair?

Mr. RUBY. No; that isn't going to save my family.

Chief Justice WARREN. Well, we can't do everything at once.

Mr. RUBY. I am in a tough spot, and I don't know what the solution can be to save me.

And I know our wonderful President, Lyndon Johnson, as soon as he was the President of his country, he appointed you as head of this group. But through certain falsehoods that have been said about me to other people, the John Birch Society, I am as good as guilty as the accused assassin of President Kennedy.

How can you remedy that, Mr. Warren? Do any of you men have any ways of remedying that?

Mr. Bill Decker said be a man and speak up. I am making a statement now that I may not live the next hour when I walk out of this room.

Now it is the most fantastic story you have ever heard in a lifetime. I did something out of the goodness of my heart. Unfortunately, Chief Earl Warren, had you been around 5 or 6 months ago, and I know your hands were tied, you couldn't do it, and immediately the President would have gotten ahold of my true story, or whatever would have been said about me, a certain organization wouldn't have so completely formed now, so powerfully, to use me because I am of the Jewish extraction, Jewish faith, to commit the most dastardly crime that has ever been committed.

Can you understand now in visualizing, what happened, what powers, what momentum has been carried on to create this feeling of mass feeling against my people, against certain people that were against them prior to their power?

That goes over your head, doesn't it?

Chief Justice WARREN. Well, I don't quite get the full significance of it, Mr. Ruby. I know what you feel about the John Birch Society.

Mr. RUBY. Very powerful.

Chief Justice WARREN. I think it is powerful, yes I do. Of course, I don't have all the information that you feel you have on that subject.

Mr. RUBY. Unfortunately, you don't have, because it is too late. And I wish that our beloved President, Lyndon Johnson, would have delved deeper into the situation, hear me, not to accept just circumstantial facts about my guilt or innocence, and would have questioned to find out the truth about me before he relinquished certain powers to these certain people.

Chief Justice WARREN. Well, I am afraid I don't know what power you believe he relinquished to them. I think that it is difficult to understand what you have to say.

Mr. RUBY. I want to say this to you. The Jewish people are being exterminated at this moment. Consequently, a whole new form of government is going to take over our country, and I know I won't live to see you another time.

Do I sound sort of screwy in telling you these things?

Chief Justice WARREN. No; I think that is what you believe, or you wouldn't tell it under your oath.

Mr. RUBY. But it is a very serious situation. I guess it is too late to stop it, isn't it?

All right, I want to ask you this. All you men have been chosen by the President for this committee, is that correct?

Chief Justice WARREN. Representative Ford and I are the only members of the Commission that are here.

Mr. Rankin of the Commission is employed as our chief counsel.

Mr. Rankin employed Mr. Specter and Mr. Ball as members of the staff.

You know who the other gentlemen here are.

You know that Mr. Moore is a member of the Secret Service, and he has been a liaison officer with our staff since the Commission was formed.

Representative FORD. Are there any questions that ought to be asked to help clarify the situation that you described?

Mr. RUBY. There is only one thing. If you don't take me back to Washington tonight to give me a chance to prove to the President that I am not guilty, then you will see the most tragic thing that will ever happen.

And if you don't have the power to take me back, I won't be around to be able to prove my innocence or guilt.

Now up to this moment, I have been talking with you for how long?

Chief Justice WARREN. I would say for the better part of 3 hours.

Mr. RUBY. All right, wouldn't it be ridiculous for me to speak sensibly all this time and give you this climactic talk that I have?

Maybe something can be saved, something can be done.

What have you got to answer to that, Chief Justice Warren?

Chief Justice WARREN. Well, I don't know what can be done. Mr. Ruby, because I don't know what you anticipate we will encounter.

Representative FORD. Is there anything more you can tell us if you went back to Washington?

Mr. RUBY. Yes; are you sincere in wanting to take me back?

Representative FORD. We are most interested in all the information you have.

Mr. RUBY. All I know is maybe something can be saved. Because right now, I want to tell you this, I am used as a scapegoat, and there is no greater weapon that you can use to create some falsehood about some of the Jewish faith, especially at the terrible heinous crime such as the killing of President Kennedy.

Now maybe something can be saved. It may not be too late, whatever happens, if our President, Lyndon Johnson, knew the truth from me.

But if I am eliminated, there won't be any way of knowing.

Right now, when I leave your presence now. I am the only one that can bring out the truth to our President, who believes in righteousness and justice.

But he has been told, I am certain, that I was part of a plot to assassinate the President.

I know your hands are tied; you are helpless.

Chief Justice WARREN. Mr. Ruby. I think I can say this to you, that if he has been told any such thing, there is no indication of any kind that he believes it.

Mr. RUBY. I am sorry. Chief Justice Warren. I thought I would be very effective in telling you what I have said here. But in all fairness to everyone, maybe all I want to do is beg that if they found out I was telling the truth, maybe they can succeed in what their motives are, but maybe my people won't be tortured and mutilated.

Chief Justice WARREN. Well, you may be sure that the President and his whole Commission will do anything that is necessary to see that your people are not tortured.

Mr. RUBY. No.

Chief Justice WARREN. You may be sure of that.

Mr. RUBY. No; the only way you can do it is if he knows the truth, that I am telling the truth, and why I was down in that basement Sunday morning, and maybe some sense of decency will come out and they can still fulfill their plan, as I stated before, without my people going through torture and mutilation.

Chief Justice WARREN. The President will know everything that you have said, everything that you have said.

Mr. RUBY. But I won't be around, Chief Justice. I won't be around to verify these things you are going to tell the President.

Mr. TONAHILL. Who do you think is going to eliminate you, Jack?

Mr. RUBY. I have been used for a purpose, and there will be a certain tragic occurrence happening if you don't take my testimony and somehow vindicate me so my people don't suffer because of what I have done.

Chief Justice WARREN. But we have taken your testimony. We have it here. It will be in permanent form for the President of the United States and for the Congress of the United States, and for the courts of the United States, and for the people of the entire world.

It is there. It will be recorded for all to see. That is the purpose of our coming here today. We feel that you are entitled to have your story told.

Mr. RUBY. You have lost me though. You have lost me, Chief Justice Warren.

Chief Justice WARREN. Lost you in what sense?

Mr. RUBY. I won't be around for you to come and question me again.

Chief Justice WARREN. Well, it is very hard for me to believe that. I am sure that everybody would want to protect you to the very limit.

Mr. RUBY. All I want is a lie detector test, and you refuse to give it to me.

Because as it stands now--and the truth serum, and any other--Pentothal--how do you pronounce it, whatever it is. And they will not give it to me, because I want to tell the truth.

And then I want to leave this world. But I don't want my people to be blamed for something that is untrue, that they claim has happened.

Chief Justice WARREN. Mr. Ruby, I promise you that you will be able to take such a test.

Mr. RUBY. When?

Chief Justice WARREN. You will have to let me see when we can figure that out. But I assure you, it won't be delayed, because our desire is to terminate the work of the Commission and make our report to the public just as soon as possible, so there won't be any misunderstanding caused by all of these rumors or stories that have been put out that are not consistent with the evidence in the case.

But it will not be unnecessarily delayed, and we will do it on behalf of the Commission, I promise you.

Mr. RUBY. All I want, and I beg you--when are you going to see the President?

Chief Justice WARREN. Well, I have no date with the President. I don't know just when. But as soon as I do see him, I will be glad to tell him what you have said.

Mr. RUBY. All I want is to take a polygraph to tell the truth. That is all I want to do.

Chief Justice WARREN. Yes; that, I promise you you can do.

Mr. RUBY. Because my people are going to suffer about things that will be said about me.

Chief Justice WARREN. Yes; well, I promise.

Mr. RUBY. Hold on another minute.

Chief Justice WARREN. All right.

Mr. RUBY. How do you know if the facts I stated about everything I said, statements with reference to, are the truth or not?

Chief Justice WARREN. Well, if you want a test made to test those principal questions, we will work them out so they can be tested.

As I understand it, you can't use the polygraph to say now this is the story.

Mr. RUBY. I know that.

Chief Justice WARREN. To say you have the story of Jack Ruby. You can't do that.

Mr. RUBY. I know that. You can clarify by questioning me when I conceived the idea and what my answer would naturally be that Sunday morning.

Chief Justice WARREN. Maybe I can help the situation this way. Suppose you list for us, if you can, the questions that you would like to have asked of you on the polygraph to establish the truth of your testimony.

What things do you consider vital in it, and what would you like to have verified?

Mr. RUBY. Yes; but you are telling me to do these things--these things are going to be promised, but you see they aren't going to let me do these things.

Because when you leave here, I am finished. My family is finished.

Representative FORD. Isn't it true, Mr. Chief Justice, that the same maximum protection and security Mr. Ruby has been given in the past will be continued?

Mr. RUBY. But now that I have divulged certain information because I want to be honest, all I want to take is a polygraph test and tell the truth about things and combat the lies that have been told about me.

Now maybe certain people don't want to know the truth that may come out of me. Is that plausible?

Representative FORD. In other words, the Chief Justice has agreed, and I on the Commission wholeheartedly concur, that you will be given a polygraph test as expeditiously as possible.

And I am sure you can rely on what has been stated here by the Chairman.

Mr. RUBY. How are we going to communicate and so on?

Chief Justice WARREN. We will communicate directly with you.

Mr. RUBY. You have a lost cause, Earl Warren. You don't stand a chance. They feel about you like they do about me, Chief Justice Warren.

I shouldn't hurt your feelings in telling you that.

Chief Justice WARREN. That won't hurt my feelings, because I have had some evidence of the feeling that some people have concerning me.

Mr. RUBY. But you are the only one that can save me. I think you can.

Chief Justice WARREN. Yes?

Mr. RUBY. But by delaying minutes, you lose the chance. And all I want to do is tell the truth, and that is all.

There was no conspiracy. But by you telling them what you are going to do and how you are going to do it is too late as of this moment.

Chief Justice WARREN. You take my word for it and the word of Representative Ford, that we will do this thing at the earliest possible moment, and that it will be done in time. It will be done in time.

Mr. RUBY. Well, you won't ever see me again, I tell you that. And I have lost my family.

Chief Justice WARREN. Yes?

Mr. RUBY. No, no; you don't believe me, do you?

Chief Justice WARREN. To be frank with you, I believe that you are not stating now what is the fact.

I don't say you don't believe it, but I believe that I will be able to see you again and that we will be able to take this test that you are speaking of.

Well, I think we have tired Mr. Ruby. We have had him here for close to 4 hours now, and I am sure our reporter must be equally tired, but we appreciate your patience and your willingness to testify in this manner for us.

Mr. RUBY. All I want to do is tell the truth, and the only way you can know it is by the polygraph, as that is the only way you can know it.

Chief Justice WARREN. That we will do for you.

(Whereupon, at 2:50 p.m., the President's Commission recessed.)

Monday, June 8, 1964

TESTIMONY OF HENRY WADE, PATRICK D. DEAN, AND WAGGONER CARR

The President's Commission met at 9:25 a.m., on June 8, 1964, at 200 Maryland Avenue NE., Washington, D.C.

Present were Chief Justice Earl Warren, Chairman; Senator John Sherman Cooper and Allen W. Dulles, members.

Also present were J. Lee Rankin, general counsel; Norman Redlich, assistant counsel; Dr. Alfred Goldberg, historian; Waggoner Carr, attorney general of Texas, and Charles Murray, observers.

TESTIMONY OF HENRY WADE

Senator COOPER. Will you raise your hand?

Do you solemnly swear the testimony you are about to give this Commission will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?

Mr. WADE. I do.

Senator COOPER. You are informed about the purposes of this investigation.

Mr. WADE. I know it, generally.

Senator COOPER. Do you desire a lawyer?

Mr. WADE. No, sir.

Senator COOPER. Thank you very much.

Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Wade, we are going to ask you generally about the time of Mr. Oswald's, Lee Harvey Oswald's, arrest, what you had to do in connection with the entire matter, and the press being there at the jail, and the scene and seeing what happened there, and the various things in regard to Mr. Dean and other witnesses in connection with the matter.

Will you state your name?

Mr. WADE. Henry Wade.

Mr. RANKIN. Where do you live?

Mr. WADE. I am district attorney, or criminal district attorney of Dallas, Tex.; my home is in Dallas.

Mr. RANKIN. Will you tell us briefly your qualifications for your position and profession?

Mr. WADE. Well, I am a graduate of the University of Texas Law School, 1938, with highest honors. I was county attorney at Rock Wall, Tex., another county for 1 year. I resigned on December 4, 1939, and became a special agent of the FBI. As a special agent of the FBI--I was there until August of 1943, these were rough months--when I resigned and became an apprentice seaman in the Navy.

Later I became a lieutenant, junior grade, served in the Pacific 2 years, about 2 years.

Then after the war I got out of the Navy on the 6th of February 1946, ran for district attorney in Dallas and was not elected at that time. I hadn't ever lived in Dallas prior to that. You see there was another county. I was assistant district attorney and then was Federal prosecutor from January 1, 1947, up until December 1949, when I resigned and ran for district attorney.

I was elected district attorney in 1950 and have been criminal district attorney of Dallas County since January 1, 1951.

Mr. RANKIN. Have you handled many of the prosecutions of that county since that time?

Mr. WADE. Well, my office or I have handled all of them since that time. I have had quite a bit of experience myself. I have a staff of 41 lawyers and, of course, I don't try all the cases but I have tried quite a few, I would say 40, 50 anyhow since I have been district attorney.

Mr. RANKIN. Do you have any particular policy about which cases you would try generally?

Mr. WADE. Well, it varies according to who my first assistant has been. It is varied. If I have a first assistant who likes to try cases, I usually let him try a lot and I do the administrative. At the present time I have a very fine administrative assistant, Jim Bowie, whom you met and I try a few more cases.

I guess I have tried four in the last year probably but two to five a year are about all the cases I try myself personally.

Mr. RANKIN. Do you have any policy about capital cases as to whether you should try them or somebody else?

Mr. WADE. I don't try all of them. I try all the cases that are very aggravated and receive probably some publicity to some extent, and I don't try all the capital cases. I think we have had quite a few death penalties but I don't imagine I have been in over half of them, probably half of them.

Mr. RANKIN. Do you remember where you were at the time you learned of the assassination of President Kennedy?

Mr. WADE. Well, they were having a party for President Kennedy at Market Hall and I was out at Market Hall waiting for the President to arrive.

Mr. RANKIN. How did you learn about the assassination?

Mr. WADE. Well, one of the reporters for one of the newspapers told me there had been a shooting or something, of course, one of those things we were getting all kinds of rumors spreading through a crowd of 3,000-5,000 people, and then they got the radio on and the first report was they had killed two Secret Service agents, that was on the radio, and then the press all came running in there and then ran out, no one knew for sure what was going on until finally they announced that President had been shot and from the rostrum there the chairman of the----

Mr. DULLES. Who was the chairman of that meeting, do you recall?

Mr. WADE. Eric Johnson. Eric Johnson.

Mr. RANKIN. Was he mayor then?

Mr. WADE. No; he wasn't mayor, he was the president of Texas Industries and I believe was president of the Dallas Chamber of Commerce. I may have been wrong on that but he has been president of the chamber of commerce. He is president of Texas Industries, and this is not particularly important but he is--that was sort of a bipartisan deal, in that he is one of the leading Republicans of Dallas and he was chairman of the meeting.

Mr. RANKIN. What did you do after you heard of the assassination?

Mr. WADE. Well, the first thing, we were set up in a bus to go from there to Austin to another party that night for President Kennedy, a group of us, 30 or 40. We got on a bus and went. I went back to the office and sent my wife home, my wife was with me.

And the first thing that I did was go check the law to see whether it was a Federal offense or mine. I thought it was a Federal offense when I first heard about it. We checked the law, and were satisfied that was no serious Federal offense, or not a capital case, anyhow.

There might be some lesser offense. I talked to the U.S. attorney.

Mr. RANKIN. Who was that?

Mr. WADE. Barefoot Sanders and he was in agreement it was going to be our case rather than his and he had been doing the same thing.

Mr. RANKIN. Where did you talk to him?

Mr. WADE. On the telephone as I recall, in his office from my office. I am not even sure I talked with him, somebody from my office talked to him, because I think you can realize things were a little confused and that took us, say, until 3:30 or 4.

I let everybody in the office go home, but some of my key personnel who stayed there. I let the girls or told them they could go home, because they did close all the offices down there. The next thing I did--do you want me to tell you?

Mr. RANKIN. Yes.

Mr. WADE. I will tell you what I can.

The next thing I did was to go by the sheriff's office who is next door to me and talked to Decker, who is the sheriff. Bill Decker, and they were interviewing witnesses who were on the streets at the time, and I asked him and he said they have got a good prospect.

This must have been 3 o'clock roughly.

Mr. RANKIN. The witnesses that were on the street near the Depository Building?

Mr. WADE. Yes, sir; and in the building, I am not sure who they were, they had two court reporters there taking statements.

Mr. RANKIN. Did they tell you anything about a suspect at that point?

Mr. WADE. The Sheriff told me, he said, "Don't say nothing about it, but they have got a good suspect," talking about the Dallas Police.

He didn't have him there. John Connally, you know, was shot also--and he was, he used to be a roommate of mine in the Navy and we were good friends, and are now--and the first thing I did then was went out to the hospital to see how he was getting along.

I must have stayed out there until about 5 o'clock, and in case you all don't know or understand one thing, it has never been my policy to make any investigations out of my office of murders or anything else for that matter. We leave that entirely to the police agency.

Mr. RANKIN. Do you have a reason for that?

Mr. WADE. That is the way it is set up down there. We have more than we can do actually in trying the cases. The only time we investigate them is after they are filed on, indicted, and then we have investigators who get them ready for trial and then lawyers.

Mr. DULLES. Have you any personnel for that?

Mr. WADE. No, sir; I have in my office 11 investigators but that is just 1 for each court, and they primarily, or at least about all they do is line up the witnesses for trial and help with jury picking and things of that kind.

Mr. RANKIN. At this point that you are describing, had you learned of any arrest?

Mr. WADE. No, sir; Mr. Decker says they have a good suspect. He said that sometime around 3 o'clock. You see, I didn't have the benefit of all that was on the air. I didn't even know Oswald had been arrested at this time. As a matter of fact, I didn't know it at 5 o'clock when I left the hospital.

When I left the hospital, I went home, watched television a while, had dinner, and a couple, some friends of ours came over there. They were going to Austin with us on the bus, and we had dinner and started out somewhere but I said we had better go by the police station.

At that time they kept announcing they had Oswald or I believe they named a name.

Mr. RANKIN. Had you learned about the Tippit murder yet?

Mr. WADE. Yes, sir; of course, it had been on the air that Tippit had been killed.

I went by the Dallas police, just to let us see what was kind of going on.

Mr. RANKIN. Was that unusual for you to do that?

Mr. WADE. It was unusual because I hadn't been in the Dallas Police Department, I won't be there on the average of once a year actually, I mean on anything. I went by there and I went to Chief Curry's office.

Mr. RANKIN. How did you happen to do that this time?

Mr. WADE. Of course, this is not really, this was not an ordinary case, this was a little bit different, and I mostly wanted to know how he was coming along on the investigation is the main reason I went by.

As I went in, and this is roughly 6:30, 7 at night--I said we ate dinner at home, I believe the couple were out in the car with my wife were waiting for me to go to dinner with them.

Mr. DULLES. Did you go down to the airfield when President Johnson left?

Mr. WADE. No, sir; no, sir.

Mr. DULLES. You did not.

Mr. WADE. I didn't go anywhere but to my office, then to Parkland Hospital and then home, and then I was there a while and then I went by the police station, mostly to see how they were coming along. Papers were announcing, the radios, I mean, were announcing, television, that they had a suspect and was even telling them what some of the evidence was against him.

Mr. RANKIN. About what time was this at the police station?

Mr. WADE. I would say around 7 o'clock. This can vary 30 minutes either way.

Mr. RANKIN. Who did you see there?

Mr. WADE. Chief Curry.

Mr. RANKIN. Did you talk to him?

Mr. WADE. I talked to him.

Mr. RANKIN. What did you say to him and what did he say to you?

Mr. WADE. Well, it is hard to remember. I know the first thing he did was pull out a memorandum that you all were interested in, signed by Jack Revill, and showed it to me and I read it, and said, "What do you think about that?"

And I said----

Mr. DULLES. I wonder if you would identify this for the record?

Mr. WADE. You can get it. Let me tell you the story. I read that thing there hurriedly and I remember it mentioned that Agent Hosty had talked to Revill----

Senator COOPER. Who was that?

Mr. WADE. Hosty.

Senator COOPER. Can you identify him as to what he does?

Mr. WADE. He is a special agent of the FBI, but I don't think I would know him if he walked in here actually.

But that is his business. He showed me that, and I read it. Now, as far as identifying it, I have seen--I have a copy of it in my files.

You see, when they turned the records over to me and I read it and looked it over and to the best of my knowledge was the same memorandum he showed me, although all I did was glance at it and it said generally they knew something about him and knew he was in town or something like that.

Senator COOPER. Who said that?

Mr. WADE. This memorandum said that.

Senator COOPER. Who is reported to be quoting the memorandum?

Mr. WADE. Special Agent Hosty. Now, I have since looked at the memorandum. So far as I know it is the same memorandum, but like I say I read it there and I don't know whether it is the--I don't know whether it said word for word to be the same thing but it appears to me to my best knowledge to be the same memorandum.

Mr. RANKIN. Do you know when you first got the memorandum in your files that you are referring to?

Mr. WADE. It was a month later. You see the police gave me a record of everything on the Ruby case, I would say some time about Christmas.

Mr. RANKIN. I will hand you Commission Exhibit No. 709 and ask you if that is the memorandum you just referred to?

Mr. WADE. Yes; to the best of my knowledge that is the memorandum he showed me there at 7 p.m. on the 22d day of November 1963.

Jack Revill incidentally, you all have talked with him, but he is one of the brightest, to my mind, of the young Dallas police officers.

As a matter of fact, when we got into the Ruby trial, I asked that they assign Jack Revill to assist us in the investigation and he assisted with picking of the jury and getting the witnesses all through the Ruby trial.

Mr. RANKIN. Would your records show when you received a copy of this document, Commission Exhibit No. 709?

Mr. WADE. Well, I am sure it would. It would be the day--you can trace it back to when the newspapers said he had turned all the files over to me and it was around Christmas as I recall, and I believe actually it was after Christmas, but probably 30 days, but you see they turned over a file that thick to me, I imagine. It was of all of that, the same thing they turned over to you, everything the police had on Jack Ruby.

Mr. RANKIN. You put a receipt stamp on anything like that?

Mr. WADE. I don't think it will show a date or anything like that on it because they just hauled it in there and laid it on my desk. But this was--it is in our files, and I am rather sure it is the same time. You all got the same thing.

Mr. RANKIN. We didn't receive anything like that until the time that Chief Curry came to testify, just for your information.

Mr. WADE. Well, I didn't know that, but now on this, this is the Ruby matter----

Mr. DULLES. Could I ask one question there?

Mr. WADE. Yes, sir.

Mr. DULLES. Just to refresh my recollection of your testimony, did you see this that afternoon around 5 or 6 o'clock?

Mr. WADE. Around 7 o'clock I would say it was on Chief Curry's desk.

Mr. DULLES. Of the 22d?

Mr. WADE. Of the 22d.

Senator COOPER. I don't want to interrupt too much, but looking at this exhibit, I note it is written, you have seen this Commission, Commission Exhibit No. 709 signed by Jack Revill?

Mr. WADE. Yes; let me see it; yes.

Senator COOPER. Is your recollection, was the memorandum that was shown to you by--first, who did show you the memorandum on the 22d?

Mr. WADE. Chief Curry of the Dallas police.

Senator COOPER. Was the memorandum shown to you on the 22d by Chief Curry in this same form?

Mr. WADE. To the best of my knowledge that was it now.

Now, like I said I read this memorandum, and I read the memorandum, and asked the chief what he was going to do with it and he said, "I don't know."

And then the next morning I heard on television Chief Curry, I don't know whether I heard him or not, he made some kind of statement concerning this memorandum on television, and then later came back and said that wasn't to his personal knowledge, and I think that was--he said that what he said about it he retracted it to some extent but I guess you all have got records of those television broadcasts or at least can get them.

Mr. RANKIN. Do you remember whether he said just what was in this Exhibit No. 709 or something less than that or more or what?

Mr. WADE. I don't remember. You see, things were moving fast, and it is hard, there are so many things going on. I will go on to my story.

Mr. RANKIN. Yes.

Mr. WADE. I will answer anything, of course.

Mr. RANKIN. You can tell us the rest that you said to Chief Curry and he said to you at that time, first.

Mr. WADE. I asked him how the case was coming along and as a practical matter he didn't know. You probably have run into this, but there is really a lack of communication between the chief's office and the captain of detective's office there in Dallas.

Mr. RANKIN. You found that to be true.

Mr. WADE. For every year I have been in the office down there. And I assume you have taken their depositions. I don't know what the relations--the relations are better between Curry and Fritz than between Hanson and Fritz, who was his predecessor. But Fritz runs a kind of a one-man operation there where nobody else knows what he is doing. Even me, for instance, he is reluctant to tell me, either, but I don't mean that disparagingly. I will say Captain Fritz is about as good a man at solving a crime as I ever saw, to find out who did it but he is poorest in the getting evidence that I know, and I am more interested in getting evidence, and there is where our major conflict comes in.

I talked to him a minute there and I don't believe I talked to Captain Fritz. One of my assistants was in Fritz's office. I believe I did walk down the hall and talk briefly, and they had filed, they had filed on Oswald for killing Tippit.

Mr. DULLES. Which assistant was that?

Mr. WADE. Bill Alexander. There was another one of--another man there, Jim Allen, who was my former first assistant who is practicing law there in Dallas and frankly I was a little surprised of seeing him there, he is a real capable boy but he was there in homicide with Captain Fritz. They were good friends.

And I know there is no question about his intentions and everything was good, but he was just a lawyer there, but he had tried many death penalty cases with Fritz--of Fritz's cases.

But he was there. Your FBI was there, your Secret Service were there in the homicide.

Mr. RANKIN. Who from the FBI, do you recall?

Mr. WADE. Well, I saw Vince Drain, a special agent that I knew, and Jim Bookhout, I believe, and there was Mr. Kelley and Mr. Sorrels--Inspector Kelley of the Secret Service, Sorrels, Forest Sorrels.

I might tell you that also, to give you a proper perspective on this thing, there were probably 300 people then out in that hall.

You could hardly walk down the hall. You just had to fight your way down through the hall, through the press up there.

Mr. RANKIN. Who were they?

Mr. WADE. The television and newsmen. I say 300, that was all that could get into that hall and to get into homicide it was a strain to get the door open hard enough to get into the office.

Mr. RANKIN. Did you say anything to Chief Curry about that?

Mr. WADE. No, sir; I probably mentioned it but I assume you want--whether I meant he ought to clean them out or not. I didn't tell him he should or shouldn't because I have absolutely no control over the police. They are a separate entity. They have a municipality, and they work under a city manager.

Mr. RANKIN. Did you say anything to Chief Curry about what should be told the press about investigation, how it was progressing or anything of that kind?

Mr. WADE. Yes; I think that is the brief conversation, that is the last I talked to Curry that night. I may have talked to--but that is all I recall. I left thereafter, and went on out to dinner.

Mr. RANKIN. About what time did you leave?

Mr. WADE. 7, 7:30, something like that. I got home, say, 9:30 or 10, after eating dinner, and I believe I talked to the U.S. attorney or at least I saw it come on the radio that they are going to file on Oswald as part of an international conspiracy in murdering the U.S. President, and I think I talked to Barefoot Sanders. He called me or I called him.

Mr. RANKIN. I wanted to get for the record, Mr. Wade, who would be trying to file like that.

Mr. WADE. I don't know. All I know it wasn't me. It was told to me at one time that the justice of the peace said something about it and another one, one of my assistants, Alexander had said something about it and I have talked to both of them since and both of them deny so I don't know who suggested it or anything but it was on the radio and I think on television.

I know I heard it and I am not sure where.

Mr. RANKIN. Can you tell us whether it was from your office or from a Federal office that such an idea was developing as far as you know?

Mr. WADE. Well, on that score it doesn't make any sense at all to me because there is no such crime in Texas, being part of an international conspiracy, it is just murder with malice in Texas, and if you allege anything else in an indictment you have to prove it and it is all surplusage in an indictment to allege anything, whether a man is a John Bircher or a Communist or anything, if you allege it you have to prove it.

So, when I heard it I went down to the police station and took the charge on him, just a case of simple murder.

Mr. DULLES. Is that of Tippit or of the President?

Mr. WADE. No; of the President, and the radio announced Johnston was down there, and Alexander, and of course other things, and so I saw immediately that if somebody was going to take a complaint that he is part of an international conspiracy it had to be a publicity deal rather--somebody was interested in something other than the law because there is no such charge in Texas as part of--I don't care what you belong to, you don't have to allege that in an indictment.

Mr. RANKIN. What do you mean by the radio saying that Johnson was there? Do you mean President Johnson?

Mr. WADE. No; that is the justice of the peace whose name is Johnston.

Mr. RANKIN. I see.

Mr. WADE. Yes; Justice of the Peace David L. Johnston was the justice of the peace there.

So, I went down there not knowing--also at that time I had a lengthy conversation with Captain Fritz and with Jim Alexander who was in the office, Bill Alexander, Bookhout because another reason I thought maybe they were going to want to file without the evidence, and then that put everything on me, you know.

If they didn't have the evidence and they said, "We file on him, we have got the assassin" I was afraid somebody might take the complaint and I went down to be sure they had some evidence on him.

Mr. RANKIN. Have you told us all that you said to the U.S. attorney when you talked to him at that time?

Mr. WADE. So far as I know. I know that concerned that point, you know.

Mr. RANKIN. Well, did he say anything to you about that point?

Mr. WADE. Well, I think he asked me was that--I don't think Barefoot was real conversant, I guess is the word with what the law is in a murder charge.

I told him that it had no place in it and he said he had heard it on the radio and didn't know whether it would be--thought it might because some--if it was not necessary, he did not think it ought to be done, something to that effect so I went down there to be sure they didn't.

I went over the evidence which they--when I saw the evidence, it was the evidence as told to me by Captain Fritz.

Mr. RANKIN. This conversation you have described you had when Jim Alexander was there and the others?

Mr. WADE. Yes; I first asked Jim Allen, a man whom I have a lot of confidence in, do they have a case and he said it looks like a case, you can try.

Mr. RANKIN. Is that the case about the assassination?

Mr. WADE. Yes; we are talking entirely about the assassination.

On the Tippit thing, I didn't take the charge on that and I think they had some witnesses who had identified him there at the scene, but I was more worried about the assassination of them filing on somebody that we couldn't prove was guilty.

Mr. RANKIN. Did you discuss the evidence that they did have at that time with Captain Fritz?

Mr. WADE. Yes, sir.

Mr. RANKIN. Will you tell us what evidence you recall?

Mr. WADE. I have made no notes but roughly he gave the story about him bringing the gun to work, saying it was window rods from the neighbor, someone who had brought him to work. He also said there were three employees of the company that left him on the sixth floor. He told about, the part about, the young officer running in there right after the assassination and Oswald leaving after the manager said that he was employed there. Told about his arrest and said that there was a scuffle there, and that he tried to shoot the officer.

I don't know--I think I am giving you all this because I think a little of it may vary from the facts but all I know is what Fritz told me.

He said the Dallas police had found a palmprint on the underside of the gun of Oswald. At that time, the FBI was standing by to fly the gun to the laboratory here in Washington which incidentally, they didn't find, but I assume the Commission has interviewed Senator--not Senator--Day, the fingerprint man of the Dallas police but I have learned since that he probably can't identify the palmprint under there but at that time they told me they had one on it.

They said they had a palmprint on the wrapping paper, and on the box, I believe there by the scene. They did at least put Oswald there at the scene.

Mr. RANKIN. Will you clarify the palmprint that you are referring to on the rifle?

Was it on the underside of the rifle, was it between the rifle and the stock or where was it as you recall?

Mr. WADE. Specifically, I couldn't say because--but he said they had a palmprint or a fingerprint of Oswald on the underside of the rifle and I don't know whether it was on the trigger guard or where it was but I knew that was important, I mean, to put the gun in his possession.

I thought we had that all the time when I took the complaint on the thing.

Let me see what else they had that night. Well, they had a lot of the things they found in his possession. They had the map, you know, that marked the route of the parade. They had statements from the bus driver and the taxicab driver that hauled him somewhere.

I think they varied a little as to where they picked him up but generally they had some type of statement from them.

That is generally what they gave me now.

Mr. RANKIN. That is all you recall as of that time?

Mr. WADE. Yes, sir.

Mr. RANKIN. Did you give any report to the press then about----

Mr. WADE. No; I will tell you what happened then.

Mr. RANKIN. Yes, sir.

Mr. WADE. As we walked out of the thing they started yelling, I started home, and they started yelling they wanted to see Oswald, the press.

And Perry said that he had put him in the showup room downstairs. Of course, they were yelling all over the world they wanted a picture of Oswald. And I don't know the mob and everybody ended up in the showup room. It is three floors below there.

Mr. RANKIN. Still Friday night?

Mr. WADE. Yes, sir.

Mr. RANKIN. About what time?

Mr. WADE. I would say around midnight roughly. It would--it could be either way an hour because I went down there around 11 o'clock, 10:30 or 11, some roughly and I don't know what the time element was but I would say around midnight.

So, they started interviewing Fritz and Curry, and I started to leave and Fritz said, "Well, we will get--" either Fritz or Curry said, "We will show him up down there," he said, "This is Mr. Wade, the district attorney."

He kind of introduced me to the press. I didn't say anything at that time but down in the basement they started to put Oswald--I went down there with them. They started to put Oswald in the lineup down there.

Mr. RANKIN. Will you describe that briefly to the Commission?

Mr. WADE. Well, I don't know whether you have seen--it is a room larger than this and you have a glass here on this side. Behind that glass they have a place out here where they walk prisoners in through there and you can see through this side but you can't see through that side. I think that is the way it is set up.

Senator COOPER. You mean observers can see?

Mr. WADE. Observers can see, but the defendants or suspects can't see through or at least can't identify.

Mr. RANKIN. Do you remember who else besides Lee Harvey Oswald was in the showup?

Mr. WADE. No; I am just telling you about the showup room. Now, they had had showups on him but I wasn't there at any of those, but this was, the purpose of this, was to let the press see Oswald, if I understand it.

And the police were yelling, "Everybody wants to see him, wants a picture of him." They started in the screened-in portion and a howl went up that you can't take a picture through that screen. Then they had a conference with, among some of them, and the next thing I knew I was just sitting there upon a little, I guess, elevated, you might say a speaker's stand, although there were 300 people in the room, you couldn't even actually get out, you know.

Mr. RANKIN. Did they ask you whether they should do this?

Mr. WADE. I don't think I said yea or nay to the thing so far as I know, because it was--and I actually didn't know what they were doing until, the next thing I knew they said they were going to have to bring him in there.

Well, I think I did say, "You'd better get some officers in here or something for some protection on him."

I thought a little about, and I got a little worried at that stage.

So about 12 officers came in and they were standing around Oswald, and at this time I looked out in the audience and saw a man out there, later, who turned out to be Jack Ruby. He was there at that scene.

Mr. RANKIN. How did you happen to pick him out?

Mr. WADE. Well, I don't know. He had--I had seen the fellow somewhere before, but I didn't know his name, but he had a pad, and the reason I remember him mostly----

Mr. RANKIN. You mean a scratch pad?

Mr. WADE. He had some kind of scratch pad. The reason I mentioned him mostly, I will get into him in a minute and tell you everything about him. He was out there about 1 minute, I would say, and they took pictures and everything else and Oswald was here and the cameras were in a ring around him, and as they left----

Mr. RANKIN. Excuse me. Where was Ruby from where you told us where Oswald was?

Mr. WADE. Well, he was, I would say, about 12 feet. I am giving a rough----

Mr. RANKIN. When you saw him----

Mr. WADE. We went all through this at the trial, and it varied on where Ruby was, but when I saw him he was about four rows back in the aisle seat, standing up in the seat.

Mr. RANKIN. Were there press men around him?

Mr. WADE. All kinds of press men around him, and also press men 10 deep between him and Oswald.

Now, one of their--you mentioned the gun awhile ago--one of their defenses in the trial was if he had a gun, he had a gun there, he could have killed him if he wanted to. It is the first I heard him say that he didn't have a gun that you mentioned awhile ago. So when I got--when they got through, they started asking him questions, the press.

Senator COOPER. Wait a minute. How close were the nearest people in the audience to Oswald?

Mr. WADE. I would say they were that far from him.

Senator COOPER. How far is that?

Mr. WADE. Three feet.

Senator COOPER. You mean some of the reporters and photographers were within 3 feet of him?

Mr. WADE. They were on the ground, they were on the ground, and they were standing on top of each other, and on top of tables, and I assume in that room there were 250 people. It was just a mob scene.

Senator COOPER. I believe I have seen the room. Isn't it correct that at the end where the showup is held that is an elevated platform?

Mr. WADE. There is a platform up there where the microphone is.

Senator COOPER. Was he standing up on the platform?

Mr. WADE. No, he was not at the platform.

Senator COOPER. Was he on the floor level?

Mr. WADE. He was in the floor level in the middle. If I understand, that was the first or second time I had ever been in the room.

Senator COOPER. Were there people around him, surrounding him?

Mr. WADE. People were on the floor in front of those desks.

Senator COOPER. But I mean, were they, were people on all sides of him?

Mr. WADE. No; they were all in front of him. They were all in front of him, and you had a ring of policemen behind him, policemen on all sides of him. It was just the front where they were, and that is the way I recall it, but I knew they had a line of policemen behind him, and the place was full of policemen, because they went up and it turns out later they got all the police who were on duty that night. They were plain clothes police, most of them, maybe they had a uniform or two, a few of them.

So they started----

Senator COOPER. Excuse me one moment.

Mr. WADE. Yes, sir.

Senator COOPER. Can I make a statement? I will have to go to my office for a few minutes. I hope to return in about 20 minutes, and I will ask Mr. Dulles to preside in my place, and I will return.

Mr. WADE. Thank you, sir.

(At this point, Senator Cooper withdrew from the hearing room.)

Mr. DULLES. Proceed.

Mr. RANKIN. Will you proceed?

Mr. WADE. Yes, sir; so they said, "Have you filed on him?" At that stage, started yelling has he been filed on, and I said yes, and filed on for murder with malice, and they asked Judge Johnston, is there--they asked him something.

Then they started asking me questions everywhere, from all angles.

Mr. RANKIN. Under your practice, what do you mean by file on him? Is that something different than an arraignment?

Mr. WADE. Well, of course, it is according to the terminology and what you mean by arraignment. In Texas the only arraignment is when you get ready to try him. Like we arraigned Ruby just before we started putting on evidence. That is the only arraignment we have, actually.

Mr. RANKIN. I see. You don't bring him before a magistrate?

Mr. WADE. Well, that is called--you can have an examining trial before the magistrate to see whether it is a bailable matter. At that time, I don't believe he had been brought before the magistrate, because I told David Johnston as we left there, I said, "You ought to go up before the jail and have him brought before you and advise him of his rights and his right to counsel and this and that," which, so far as I know, he did.

But at that meeting you had two attorneys from American Civil Liberties Union.

Mr. RANKIN. Which meeting?

Mr. WADE. That Friday night meeting, or Friday night showup we had better call it, midnight on Friday night. I believe it was Greer Ragio and Professor Webster from SMU. I saw them there in the hall, and Chief Curry told me that they had been given an opportunity or had talked with Oswald. I am not sure. I was under the impression that they had talked with them but, of course, I didn't see them talking with him.

Mr. RANKIN. Did you talk to them about it?

Mr. WADE. Yes; I told them that he is entitled to counsel, that is what they are interested in on the counsel situation, and anybody, either them or anybody else could see him that wanted to.

Mr. RANKIN. What did they say then?

Mr. WADE. Mr. Rankin, I will tell you what, there was so much going on I don't remember exactly. The only thing was I got the impression they had already talked with them somewhere, but I don't know whether they told me or the chief told me or what. Like I say, it was a mob scene there, practically, and they were standing in the door when I--they were in the meeting there.

Let me get a little further and go back to--I don't know whether I answered your question and if I don't it is because I can't, because I don't know--I will tell you what happened the next day.

Mr. RANKIN. Let's finish with the showup now.

Mr. WADE. Yes. They asked a bunch of questions there. I think if you get a record of my interview that you will find that any of the evidence----

Mr. DULLES. Which interview is that?

Mr. WADE. With the press, midnight, radio, television, and everything else. I think if you will get a copy of that you will find they asked me lots of questions about fingerprints and evidence. I refused to answer them because I said it was evidence in the case. The only thing that I told them that you might get the impression was evidence but is really not evidence, I told them that the man's wife said the man had a gun or something to that effect. The reason, maybe good or bad, but that isn't admissible in Texas. You see a wife can't testify. It is not evidence, but it is evidence but it is inadmissible evidence actually is what it was. So I think if you find anything in that interview that deals with the evidence you are going to feel that it dealt only with that piece of testimony of Marina Oswald, which someone had told me she said about the gun was missing from the house, which I think later was corroborated.

Mr. RANKIN. At that time, had you filed on the assassination?

Mr. WADE. Yes, sir; we had filed upstairs prior to this. He had been filed on for murder with malice.

Mr. RANKIN. But he hadn't been brought before the justice of the peace or magistrate yet on that complaint, had he?

Mr. WADE. The justice of the peace was there in the office and took it in the homicide. Oswald was in homicide, also, but he is in a separate office.

Like I told you, I never did see Oswald except in that lineup downstairs. That was the first time I had seen him.

Mr. RANKIN. Was that when you told the justice of the peace that he ought to have him before him to tell him his rights and so forth?

Mr. WADE. Yes; it was some time during that hour, this went on for about an hour down there, everything.

Well, during that interview somebody said, and the thing--Oswald belonged to, was he a Communist, something generally to that effect.

Mr. RANKIN. They asked you that?

Mr. WADE. I was asked that. And I said, well, now, I don't know about that but they found some literature, I understand, some literature dealing with Free Cuba Movement. Following this--and so I looked up and Jack Ruby is in the audience and he said, no, it is the Fair Play for Cuba Committee. Well, he corrected me, you see, to show you why I got attracted to his attention, why someone in the audience would speak up and answer a question.

Mr. DULLES. You hadn't known him before?

Mr. WADE. I had never known him, to my knowledge. He is a man about town, and I had seen him before, because when I saw him in there, and I actually thought he was a part of the press corps at the time.

Mr. RANKIN. Were any of your assistants or people working for you there at that showup?

Mr. WADE. I don't believe there were any of them there now. If there is any of them, it is Alexander, because he is the only one down there, but I think he is still up in homicide.

I will go further on that, some of my assistants know him, but he was in my office 2 days before this with a hot check or something where he was trying to collect a hot check or pay someone. I think he was trying to pay someone else's hot check off, I don't know what it was, I didn't see him. He talked to my check section. I found this out later.

Mr. RANKIN. By "he" you mean----

Mr. WADE. Ruby, Jack Ruby.

Mr. RANKIN. Yes.

Mr. WADE. He was in another office of mine, since this all came out, he was in there with a bunch of the police, we were trying a case on pornography, some of my assistants were, and my assistant came in his office during the noon hour after coming from the court, this was 2 or 3 days before the assassination and Ruby was sitting there in his office with five or six Dallas police officers. In fact, he was sitting in my assistant's desk and he started to sit down and asked who he was and the officer said, "Well, that is Jacky Ruby who runs the Carousel Club," so he had been down there.

I don't know him personally--I mean I didn't know who he was. It was one of these things I had seen the man, I imagine, but I had no idea who he was, and I will even go further, after it was over, this didn't come out in the trial, as they left down there, Ruby ran up to me and he said, "Hi Henry" he yelled real loud, he yelled. "Hi, Henry," and put his hand to shake hands with me and I shook hands with him. And he said, "Don't you know me?" And I am trying to figure out whether I did or not. And he said, "I am Jack Ruby, I run the Vegas Club." And I said, "What are you doing in here?" It was in the basement of the city hall. He said, "I know all these fellows." Just shook his hand and said, "I know all these fellows." I still didn't know whether he was talking about the press or police all the time, but he shook his hands kind of like that and left me and I was trying to get out of the place which was rather crowded, and if you are familiar with that basement, and I was trying to get out of that hall. And here I heard someone call "Henry Wade wanted on the phone," this was about 1 o'clock in the morning or about 1 o'clock in the morning, and I gradually get around to the phone there, one of the police phones, and as I get there it is Jack Ruby, and station KLIF in Dallas on the phone. You see, he had gone there, this came out in the trial, that he had gone over there and called KLIF and said Henry Wade is down there, I will get you an interview with him.

Mr. RANKIN. Who is this?

Mr. WADE. KLIF is the name of the radio station.

You see, I didn't know a thing, and I just picked up the phone and they said this is so and so at KLIF and started asking questions.

But that came out in the trial.

But to show that he was trying to be kind of the type of person who was wanting to think he was important, you know.

Mr. RANKIN. Did you give him an interview over the telephone to KLIF?

Mr. WADE. Ruby?

Mr. RANKIN. No.

Mr. WADE. I answered about two questions and hung up, but they had a man down there who later interviewed me before I got out of the building. But they just asked me had he been filed and one or two things.

Mr. DULLES. It was a KLIF reporter that you gave this to, not Ruby?

Mr. WADE. Not Ruby. Ruby was not on the phone, he had just gone out and called him and handed the phone to me. I thought I got a call from somebody, and picked it up and it was KLIF on the phone.

Mr. RANKIN. On the pornography charge, was Ruby involved in that?

Mr. WADE. No, sir; I don't know why he was down there, actually. But there were six or seven police officers, special services of the Dallas police were officers in the thing and I don't know whether he was just interested in it or what he was down there for but he was down there, and I didn't know him. He has tried to leave the impression that he had known me a long time but it is one of those things, I have been in politics and sometimes there are a lot of faces I know that I don't know actually who they are, but I didn't know who he was and he actually introduced himself to me that night.

Well, that is about all I can recall of that night.

I went home then.

Mr. RANKIN. You have told us all you remember about the showup?

Mr. WADE. I told you all, and, of course, all I know about it as far as my interview with the press. You can get more accurate, actually, by getting a transcript of it because I don't remember what all was asked, but I do remember the incident with Ruby and I know I told them that there would be no evidence given out in the case.

At that time, most of it had already been given out, however, by someone. I think by the police.

Now, the next morning, I don't know of anything else until the next morning. I went to the office about 9 o'clock.

Mr. DULLES. Could I ask a question?

Mr. WADE. Yes, sir.

(Discussion off the record.)

Mr. RANKIN. Do you have any particular transcript that you are speaking about?

Mr. WADE. No; I don't have anything. The thing about it is this was taken, this was on television and radio and all the networks. They had everything there set up and that is the only--that is the first of, I think, three times I was interviewed, but it was Friday night around between 12 and 1 o'clock. It was actually Saturday morning between 12 and 1.

Mr. RANKIN. So there were a number of networks, possibly, and a number of the radio stations and television stations from the whole area?

Mr. WADE. The whole area and it actually wasn't set up for an interview with me. It was an interview, what I thought, with Fritz and Curry, and I thought I would stay for it, but when they got into the interviewing, I don't know what happened to them but they weren't there. They had left, or I was the one who was answering the questions about things I didn't know much about, to tell you the truth.

Has that got it cleared? Can I go to the next morning?

I will try to go a little and not forget anything.

The next morning I went to my office, probably, say, 9 o'clock Saturday morning. Waiting there for me was Robert Oswald, who was the brother of Lee Harvey Oswald. You probably have met him, but I believe his name is Robert is his brother.

I talked to him about an hour.

Mr. RANKIN. What did you say to him and what did he say to you?

Mr. WADE. Well, we discussed the history of Lee Harvey Oswald and the--one of the purposes he came to me, he wanted his mother, Oswald's mother, and wife and him to see Oswald.

Mr. RANKIN. Did he say this to you?

Mr. WADE. Yes; but we had already set it up, somebody, I don't know whether my office or the police, but he was set up to see him that morning at 11 o'clock, I believe, or 12 o'clock, some time.

Mr. RANKIN. Did you do anything about it?

Mr. WADE. Yes, sir; I checked to see if it was arranged. I called Captain Fritz and told him that he wanted to see him, and he said they were going to let him see him. I don't know. I don't know the name, but it was either 11 o'clock or 12 o'clock Saturday morning.

I don't know whether he had requested or not, but that was the first time I had seen him. I don't know why he came to my office, but I used it to try to go into Lee Harvey Oswald's background some, and I also told him that there is a lot involved in this thing from a national point of view, and I said, "You appear to be a good citizen," which he did appear to me, "and I think you will render your country a great service if you will go up and tell Oswald to tell us all about the thing." That was part of the deal of my working for a statement from Oswald which didn't pan out, of course. Because I was going to interview Oswald Sunday afternoon when we got him into the county jail and I was going to attempt to get a statement from him.

Mr. RANKIN. Did Robert tell you anything about Lee Harvey Oswald's background at that time?

Mr. WADE. He told me about in Europe, how in Russia, how they had had very little correspondence with them and he wrote to them renouncing or telling them he wanted to renounce his American citizenship and didn't want to have anything else to do with him. He said later that one of the letters changed some, I mean back, and then he said he was coming home, coming back and he had married and kind of his general history of the thing and he came back and I believe stayed with this Robert in Fort Worth for 2, 3, or 4 months. Now I say this is from memory, like I don't have--and they had helped him some, and said that Marina, the thing that impressed her was most your supermarkets, I think, more than anything else in this country, your A. & P. and the big, I guess you call them, supermarkets or whatever they are.

And he told me something about him going to New Orleans, but I gathered that they were not too close. I believe he told me this, that he hadn't seen him in close to a year prior to this, or a good while.

Now, it seemed to me like it was a year, and he said their families, they didn't have anything in common much, and he said, of course--I said "Do you think"--I said, "the evidence is pretty strong against your brother, what do you think about it?" He said, "Well, he is my brother, and I hate to think he would do this." He said, "I want to talk to him and ask him about it."

Now, I never did see him. Roughly, that is about all I remember from that conversation. We rambled around for quite a bit.

I know I was impressed because he got out and walked out the front of my office and in front of my office there were 15 or 20 press men wanting to ask him something, and he wouldn't say a word to them, he just walked off.

I told him they would be out there, and he said, "I won't have anything to say."

Mr. DULLES. Was this the morning after the assassination?

Mr. WADE. Yes, sir; Saturday morning.

Mr. DULLES. About what time?

Mr. WADE. I would say between 9 and 10 is when I talked with him.

And so the main purpose in the office, we believed, the main purpose of me and the lawyers in the office were briefing the law on whether to try Oswald for the murder of the President, whether you could prove the flight and the killing of Officer Tippit, which we became satisfied that we could, I mean from an evidentiary point of view.

Mr. RANKIN. By "we" who do you mean, in your office?

Mr. WADE. Well, I think I had seven or eight in there, Bowie, and Alexander, and Dan Ellis, Jim Williamson, but there was a legal point.

My office was open, but that, with reference to this case, there were other things going on, but in reference to this case, this is what we spent our time trying to establish whether that would be admissible or not.

Mr. RANKIN. Did you consult with any Federal officers in regard to how you should handle the case or what you should say about it at any time?

Mr. WADE. No; I didn't discuss, consult with any of them. I did talk to some of the FBI boys and I believe there was an inspector.

Mr. RANKIN. Secret Service?

Mr. WADE. No.

Mr. RANKIN. FBI?

Mr. WADE. There was an inspector of the FBI who called me two or three times. I don't remember.

Mr. RANKIN. Did they tell you how to handle the case in any way?

Mr. WADE. I don't think so. I mean it wasn't really up to them.

Mr. RANKIN. The only time you ever talked to Barefoot Sanders about it was in regard to this conspiracy, possibility of, that you have already described?

Mr. WADE. Frankly, that is hard to say. I think we talked off and on every day or two about developments in it, because, you see, well, I don't know whether we talked any more but before the killing by Ruby, but we had nearly a daily conversation about the files in the Oswald case, what we were going to do with them. You see, they were going to give them all to me, and at that stage we didn't know whether it was going to be a President's Commission or a congressional investigation or what. After the President's Commission was set up, I arranged through him and Miller here in the Justice Department that rather than give the files to me, to get the police to turn them over to the FBI and send them to you all, or photostat them and send them to you all.

Barefoot and I talked frequently, but I don't know of anything significant of the Oswald angle that we discussed, and we spent the last 2 months trying to get some of the FBI files to read on the Ruby trial. I mean we talked a lot but I don't know anything further about Oswald into it or anything on Ruby of any particular significance.

Mr. RANKIN. Was Barefoot Sanders suggesting how you should handle the Oswald case except the time you already related?

Mr. WADE. I don't recall him doing, suggesting that.

Mr. RANKIN. Any other Federal officers suggesting anything like that to you?

Mr. WADE. The only thing I remember is the inspector of the FBI whom I don't think I ever met. I was there in the police one time during this shuffle, and I think it was some time Saturday morning, and he said they should have nothing, no publicity on the thing, no statements.

Now, I don't know whether that was after Ruby shot Oswald or before, I don't know when it was, but I did talk with him and I know his concern which was that there was too much publicity.

Mr. RANKIN. And he told you that, did he?

Mr. WADE. At some stage in it. I am thinking it was Sunday night which I know I talked with him Sunday night, but we are not that far along with it yet. But I don't know whether I talked to him previously or not.

Mr. RANKIN. That is the only conversation of that type that you recall with any Federal officer?

Mr. WADE. That is all I recall. I am sure Barefoot and I discussed the publicity angle on it some, but I don't remember Barefoot suggesting how we handle it, but neither one of us knew whether it was his offense or mine, to begin with, for 2 or 3 hours because we had to select it.

Mr. RANKIN. Do you know what Barefoot said about publicity when you did discuss it with him?

Mr. WADE. I don't recall anything.

Mr. RANKIN. All right.

What happened next, as you recall?

Mr. WADE. I was going home. I went by the police station to talk to Chief Curry.

Mr. RANKIN. Did you discuss the evidence then?

Mr. WADE. Well, at that time--you see, Chief Curry knew very little of the evidence at that stage. He should have known, but he didn't. But I discussed the thing with him and I told him there was too much evidence being put out in the case from his department, that I wish he would talk to Fritz and have no further statements on it.

Mr. RANKIN. What did he say about that?

Mr. WADE. He said, "That is fine. I think that is so."

Mr. RANKIN. Now, going back just a moment, you spoke out about a map earlier that you had been told they had as evidence, do you recall, of the parade route. Did you look at the map at the time?

Mr. WADE. I don't think I ever saw the map.

Mr. RANKIN. You don't know what it contained in regard to the parade route?

Mr. WADE. I was told by Fritz that it had the parade route and it had an X where the assassination took place and it had an X out on Stemmons Freeway and an X at Inwood Road and Lemon, is all I know, a circle or some mark there.

Mr. RANKIN. But you have never seen the map?

Mr. WADE. So far as I know, I have never seen the map. I don't know even where it was found, but I think it was found in his home, probably. But that is my recollection. But I don't even know that. I told Chief Curry this.

Then I walked out, and Tom Pettit of NBC said, "We are all confused on the law, where we are really on this thing."

Mr. RANKIN. What did you say?

Mr. WADE. At that time I said, "Well, I will explain the procedure, Texas procedure in a criminal case," and I had about a 10-minute interview there as I was leaving the chief's office, dealing entirely with the procedure, I mean your examining trial and grand jury and jury trial. I mean as to what takes place. You see, they had all kinds of statements and other countries represented and they were all curious to ask legal questions, when bond would be set and when it would be done.

Mr. RANKIN. Did you discuss the evidence at that time?

Mr. WADE. No, sir; I refused. You will find that I refused to answer questions. They all asked questions on it, but I would tell them that is evidence and that deals with evidence in the matter.

Mr. RANKIN. Did you tell them why you wouldn't answer those questions?

Mr. WADE. I told them we had to try the case, here, and we would have to try the case and we wouldn't be able to get a jury if they knew all the evidence in the case.

You will find that in those interviews most, I think. I haven't seen them. As a matter of fact, didn't see them myself even. But I went home that day, and----

Mr. DULLES. That day is Saturday?

Mr. WADE. Saturday; yes, sir.

Mr. RANKIN. About what time? Do you recall?

Mr. WADE. I guess I got home 2:30 probably. I must have eaten on the way home or somewhere.

Mr. RANKIN. In the afternoon?

Mr. WADE. Yes, sir; and I know I was amazed as I walked through the television room there and saw Chief Curry with that gun. You see, at that time they had not identified the gun as his gun, but he was telling about the FBI report on it.

Mr. RANKIN. Will you just describe what you saw there at that time?

Mr. WADE. Well, I know he was in a crowd, and it seems to me like he had the gun, but on second thought I am not even sure whether he had the gun, but he was tracing the history of how that the gun was bought under the name, under an assumed name from a mail-order house in Chicago and mailed there to Dallas, and that the serial number and everything that had been identified, that the FBI had done that, something else.

I believe they said they had a post office box here, a blind post office box that the recipients of that had identified as Oswald as the guy or something that received it.

In other words, he went directly over the evidence connecting him with the gun.

Mr. RANKIN. You say there was a crowd there. Who was the crowd around him?

Mr. WADE. Newsmen. You see, I was at home. I was watching it on television.

Mr. RANKIN. I see. Did you do anything about that, then? Did you call him and ask him to quit that?

Mr. WADE. No; I felt like nearly it was a hopeless case. I know now why it happened. That was the first piece of evidence he got his hands on before Fritz did.

Mr. RANKIN. Will you explain what you mean by that?

Mr. WADE. Well, this went to the FBI and came to him rather than to Captain Fritz, and I feel in my own mind that this was something new, that he really had been receiving none of the original evidence, that it was coming through Fritz to him and so this went from him to Fritz, you know, and I think that is the reason he did it.

So I stayed home that afternoon. I was trying to think, it seems like I went back by the police station some time that night, late at night.

Mr. RANKIN. This way of giving evidence to the press and all of the news media, is that standard practice in your area?

Mr. WADE. Yes; it is, unfortunately. I don't think it is good. We have just, even since this happened we have had a similar incident with the police giving all the evidence out or giving out an oral confession of a defendant that is not admissible in court. You know, oral admissions are not generally admissible in Texas. And they gave all the evidence out in it.

Mr. RANKIN. Have you done anything about it, tried to stop it in any way?

Mr. WADE. Well, in this actually, in the same story they quoted me as saying, I mean the news quoted me as saying they shouldn't give the information out, that is the evidence, we have got to try the case, we will get a jury, it is improper to do this, or something to that effect. So far as taking it up with--I have mentioned many times that they shouldn't give out evidence, in talking to the police officers, I mean in there in training things, but it is something I have no control over whatever. It is a separate entity, the city of Dallas is, and I do a little fussing with the police, but by the same token it is not a situation where--I think it is one of your major problems that are going to have to be looked into not only here but it is a sidelight, I think, to your investigation to some extent, but I think you prejudice us, the state, more than you do the defense by giving out our testimony.

You may think that giving out will help you to convict him. I think it works the other way, your jurors that read, the good type of jurors, get an opinion one way or another from what they read, and you end up with poor jurors. If they haven't read or heard anything of the case--well, not generally the same type of juror.

The only thing I make a practice of saying is that I reviewed the evidence in this case in which the State will ask the death penalty, which may be going too far, but I tell them we plan to ask the death penalty or plan to ask life or plan to ask maximum jail sentence or something of that kind.

Mr. RANKIN. Did you say that at any time about the Oswald case?

Mr. WADE. Oh, yes, sir; I have said that about both Oswald and Ruby.

Mr. RANKIN. When did you say it about the Oswald case?

Mr. WADE. I guess it was Friday night probably. I was asked what penalty we would ask for.

Mr. RANKIN. When the police made these releases about the evidence, did they ever ask you whether they should make them?

Mr. WADE. No, sir; like I told you. I talked Saturday morning around between 11 and 12, some time. I told him there was entirely too much publicity on this thing, that with the pressure going to be on us to try it and there may not be a place in the United States you can try it with all the publicity you are getting. Chief Curry said he agreed with me, but, like I said about 2 hours later, I saw him releasing this testimony.

Mr. RANKIN. Did you consult any State officials about how you should handle either the Oswald or the Ruby case?

Mr. WADE. I don't know. It seems like I talked to Waggoner Carr that night, but I don't remember.

Didn't we talk some time about it?

I don't know whether it was consulting about how to try it or anything. But I know I talked to Waggoner's office some time within 2 or 3 days, but I don't know whether it was before the Ruby assault or not. But he doesn't actually----

Mr. RANKIN. Does the Texas attorney general have any jurisdiction to tell you how to try such cases?

Mr. WADE. No sir; I think Waggoner will agree with that. They don't have any jurisdiction to try criminal cases other than antitrust, but I assume we would ask for their assistance if we wanted it. We don't generally, and I don't, the law doesn't contemplate that.

Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Carr didn't try to tell you in any way how to handle either case?

Mr. WADE. Not that I know of.

Mr. CARR. Off the record.

(Discussion off the record.)

Mr. DULLES. May we proceed.

Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Wade, will you give us the substance of what Mr. Carr said to you and what you said to him at that time?

Mr. WADE. All I remember--I don't actually remember or know what night it was I talked to him but I assume it was that night because he did mention that the rumor was out that we were getting ready to file a charge of Oswald being part of an international conspiracy, and I told him that that was not going to be done.

It was late at night and I believe that is----

Mr. DULLES. It must have been Saturday night, wasn't it?

Mr. WADE. No; that was Friday night.

Mr. DULLES. Friday night.

Mr. WADE. And I told him, and then I got a call, since this happened, I talked to Jim Bowie, my first assistant who had talked to, somebody had called him, my phone had been busy and Barefoot Sanders, I talked to him, and he--they all told that they were concerned about their having received calls from Washington and somewhere else, and I told them that there wasn't any such crime in Texas, I didn't know where it came from, and that is what prompted me to go down and take the complaint, otherwise I never would have gone down to the police station.

Mr. RANKIN. Did you say anything about whether you had evidence to support such a complaint of a conspiracy?

Mr. WADE. Mr. Rankin, I don't know what evidence we have, we had at that time and actually don't know yet what all the evidence was.

I never did see, I was told they had a lot of Fair Play for Cuba propaganda or correspondence on Oswald, and letters from the Communist Party, and it was probably exaggerated to me.

I was told this. I have never seen any of that personally. Never saw any of it that night. But whether he was a Communist or whether he wasn't, had nothing to do with solving the problem at hand, the filing of the charge.

I also was very, I wasn't sure I was going to take a complaint, and a justice of the peace will take a complaint lots of times because he doesn't have to try it. I knew I would have to try this case and that prompted me to go down and see what kind of evidence they had.

Mr. RANKIN. Will you tell us what you mean by taking a complaint under your law.

Mr. WADE. Well, a complaint is a blank form that you fill out in the name, by the authority of the State of Texas, and so forth, which I don't have here, but it charged, it charges a certain person with committing a crime, and it is filed in the justice court.

The law permits the district attorney or any of his assistants to swear the witness to the charge. The only place we sign it is over on the left, I believe sworn to and subscribed to before me, this is the blank day of blank, Henry Wade, district attorney.

Over on the right the complainant signs the complaint. We mean when we say take or accept a complaint is when we swear the witness and we draw it up ourselves and word it and take it.

Mr. RANKIN. Is that what you did in the Oswald-Ruby case?

Mr. WADE. Yes, sir; we did that. Now, as a practical matter that is not really filing the complaints. The complaint is not really legally filed until a justice of the peace takes it and records it on his docket.

Now, it goes to the justice of the peace court to clear the whole thing up and his purpose, he has--the law says you shall take him immediately before a magistrate, which is the justice of the peace.

The courts have held that it is not necessary in Texas, but there is a statute that says that, and then he--his purpose is to hold an examining trial to see whether it is a bailable case or not.

Then he sends it to the grand jury and the grand jury hears it and returns an indictment or a no bill and then it is in a certain court set with a docket number and then it is ours to try.

Does that answer some of the questions?

(At this point, Senator Cooper returned to the hearing room.)

Mr. RANKIN. Which route did you follow in regard to the Oswald case?

Mr. WADE. The same route. I accepted the complaint on him in the homicide department, and gave it to David Johnston, the justice of the peace who was there incidentally, or there in the homicide department.

But I didn't actually type it up. I don't know who actually typed it up, somebody typed it up, but we file about a 100 a year, murders "did with malice aforethought."

It was a straight murder indictment, murder with malice charge, and that was the procedure we followed in the Oswald case.

Mr. RANKIN. Why did you not include in that complaint a charge of an international conspiracy?

Mr. WADE. Well, it is just like I said, it is surplusage to begin with. You don't need it. If you allege it you have to prove it. The U.S. attorney and the attorney general had called me and said that if it wasn't absolutely necessary they thought it shouldn't be done, and---

Mr. RANKIN. By the "attorney general" who do you mean?

Mr. WADE. Mr. Carr. And actually it is never done. I mean, you see that got clear, apparently you had the press writing that up, radio or whoever was saying that was--had no idea about what murder was.

Now, to write in there, assume he was, assume we could prove he was, a Communist, which I wasn't able to prove because all I heard was he had some literature there on him and had been in Russia, but assume I knew he was a Communist, can I prove it, I still wouldn't have alleged it because it is subject actually to be removed from the indictment because it is surplusage, you know, and all a murder indictment, the only thing that a murder indictment varies on is the method of what they used, did kill John Doe by shooting him with a gun or by stabbing him or by drowning him in water or how, the manner and means is the only thing that varies in a murder indictment, all other wordage is the same. Does that clear that up?

(Discussion off the record.)

Senator COOPER. As I understand it, under Texas law there is no crime which is denominated under the term "international conspiracy."

Mr. WADE. No, sir.

Senator COOPER. I assume that conspiracy is a crime in Texas, isn't it, conspiracy to commit a crime?

Mr. WADE. Conspiracy is a crime. It is a joining together of a group, your conspiracy where they enter into an agreement to commit a crime, and that is usually the one is indicted as a conspirator, the one who doesn't participate in the crime.

Senator COOPER. My point is, though, that conspiracy is a crime under Texas law?

Mr. WADE. Yes, sir; conspiracy to commit murder is a crime.

Senator COOPER. Yes.

Let me ask this question.

Mr. WADE. Yes, sir.

Senator COOPER. As I understand it then, one of the reasons that no warrant of indictment was rendered upon, touching upon an international conspiracy is that there is just no such crime in Texas as an international conspiracy?

Mr. WADE. There was no such crime. If it was any such crime it would be a Federal rather than a State offense. If there is such crime as being a part of an international conspiracy it would deal with treason rather than murder, I would think.

But there is no such thing as being a part of any organization that makes that it is a crime to commit murder. This was a straight murder charge.

If we would have had four or five co-conspirators who conspired with him, planned the thing and could prove it we would have. That would have been a conspiracy to, conspiracy to commit murder.

Senator COOPER. But conspiracy is not essential to the crime, to describe the person accused as belonging to any organization?

Mr. WADE. No, sir; it is not necessary and it is entirely what they call surplusage.

Senator COOPER. Now the last question, was there any evidence brought to you or any evidence of which you had knowledge upon which you could base an indictment or a warrant for conspiracy to commit murder in this case?

Mr. WADE. No, sir; you mean parties other than Oswald?

Senator COOPER. Yes.

Mr. WADE. No. I might say on that score, to clear that up, I haven't seen any evidence along that line. I haven't even seen any of the correspondence that they had, allegedly had with the Communist Party here in New York or the Fair Play for Cuba, I haven't seen his little black book where he is supposed to have had the Russian Embassy's telephone numbers in it which I am sure you all have gone into it.

I never did see the book, none of that.

Of course, I have been told by a lot of people and undoubtedly a lot of it was exaggerated that he was a Communist, and you have had people say he was a Communist who might say I was a Communist, you know, if they didn't agree with me on something, so I have absolutely no evidence that he was a Communist of my own knowledge, I have heard a lot, of course.

Mr. DULLES. What you are saying in this last answer relates to the present time, not only the way your knowledge has----

Mr. WADE. At that time and up to the present.

Mr. DULLES. Rather than the day of assassination.

Mr. WADE. I have no evidence myself now that he was a Communist, or ever was a Communist, and I never did see what evidence that they had on him there gathered on him. I never saw any of the physical evidence in the Oswald case other than one or two statements, and I think I saw the gun while they were taking it out of there bringing it to Washington, because I told them at that stage, they didn't want to take it out, didn't want to let the FBI have it and I told them I thought they ought to let them bring it on up here that night and get it back the next night.

There was arguing over that. I am getting off, rambling around, but their argument over that was they were still trying to identify the gun through a pawn broker or something like that and the police wanted to keep it but I said, "Let it go up there and they said they would have it back the next afternoon."

Mr. RANKIN. Have you ever had any evidence that Oswald was involved with anyone else in actually shooting the President?

Mr. WADE. Well, I will answer that the same way. I have absolutely no evidence myself.

Now, of course, I might have some type of opinion or some connection with reference to the Fair Play for Cuba and these letters that they told me about. If that was so there may have been some connection or may not, but I have no evidence myself on it.

Mr. RANKIN. Do you have any evidence as to whether Jack Ruby was involved with anyone else in the killing of Oswald?

Mr. WADE. No, sir; I have no evidence on that. We have some and I think you have them all, some 8 or 10 witnesses who have said they had seen Ruby and Oswald together at various times.

Some of them were, I know one of them during the trial was a lawyer there in Dallas, which I presume you all got his four-page statement, said he heard them discussing killing Connally a week before then, came out to my house and that had been sent to the FBI, and that was during the trial, and I gave him a lie detector which showed that he didn't have, this was a fanciful thing.

That, I can't think of his name, some of you all may know it, but he is a lawyer there in Dallas.

Mr. RANKIN. You found that was not anything you could rely on.

Mr. WADE. I didn't use him as a witness and after giving him the polygraph I was satisfied that he was imagining it. I think he was sincere, I don't think he was trying--I don't think he was trying to be a hero or anything. I think he really thought about it so much I think he thought that it happened, but the polygraph indicated otherwise.

Mr. DULLES. Did you have any other evidence than the polygraph on this point that he was not telling the truth or that this was a fiction?

Mr. WADE. No, but I didn't--but I did see a report where the FBI interviewed the girl that was allegedly with him in Ruby's place in October, and she didn't corroborate all of it. I think she did say he was in there but I am not even sure of that. I didn't interview her but I just read a report on it.

I read where they checked with the Department of Public Safety and they did not, were not able to--he said he reported all this to the Department of Public Safety, and I don't think they found any record of him reporting it. It is very difficult to get him to come in to see me. He didn't just walk in, this went on for a month, I kept hearing that there was a certain person knew about it and I kept telling him to come on and talk to me and he finally came out to my house late one night.

The reason I think he actually must have thought it was so, but--I wasn't too interested in that theory of the case on this thing because I had a theory on this Ruby case from the start because I, even before you are going to get into some of these officers' testimony in a minute, but when this happened I was going home from church, and my own mind I said I believe that was Jack Ruby who shot him because from that Friday night, and from my theory has been from that Friday night, when he saw him there he made up his mind to kill him if he got a chance and I have had that--I didn't even know about Dean's testimony which you are going to hear today, I didn't know about his testimony until the day before I put him on the stand because I had not been preparing the evidence, I had been picking a jury for 2 weeks but that was my theory from the start.

We had a waitress that I think you are all familiar with that was out at B&B Cafe at 3 a.m. on the 22d who said she served Ruby and Oswald there.

B&B Cafe on Oak Lane, I know you have got that, I have seen it somewhere.

I don't think she was ever given a polygraph test. You have about four homosexuals, I think that is probably the word, that have said they have seen them together places. There was some indication that Ruby was either bisexual or homosexual, but at least, I think they testified to that in the trial, I think by mistake.

Belli asked the man, meant to ask him another word and says, he meant to say homicidal tendencies and he said homosexual tendencies and his one witness said yes, sir.

That is in the record which you will get of the trial, I guess.

Mr. RANKIN. I understood you to say when you came home from church, after the killing of Oswald that you thought it was Ruby before you had heard that it was Ruby.

Mr. WADE. You see, they announced Dallas businessman kills him.

Mr. RANKIN. Yes.

Mr. WADE. I took my family, I was in church with the family. I took them on home and on the way down there they kept--they didn't say who it was but this ran through my mind, a businessman.

I said that must be Jack Ruby the way he looked. He looked kind of wild to me down there Friday night the way he was running everywhere, you know, and I said to myself that must be him. I didn't tell my wife. You can't prove that. It is one of those things, that was my theory that he was likely the one. I couldn't, you know, out of a million people I couldn't say he was the one but when they announced his name I will say it didn't surprise me.

Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Chairman, what do you want to do about Mr. Carr?

Senator COOPER. Mr. Wade, can you name to the Commission the names of the persons who told you or who stated in your presence that they had seen Lee Oswald and Jack Ruby together?

Mr. WADE. Well----

Senator COOPER. Start out with the first one, his name.

Mr. WADE. If anybody would mention the lawyer's name, I know him--he has run for the legislature a number of times.

Senator COOPER. A lawyer who lives in Dallas?

Mr. WADE. A lawyer in Dallas, and he has--we have, he made a four-page affidavit about this thing, and mailed it to J. Edgar Hoover.

Senator COOPER. You can supply his name.

Mr. WADE. We can supply his name and I would supply you with copies of his affidavit which I think you have.

Don't you have it, isn't that up here?

Senator COOPER. Without going into that in a moment, you can refresh your recollection and supply to the Commission the name of this lawyer.

Mr. WADE. Yes, sir.

Senator COOPER. Had he talked to you?

Mr. WADE. Yes, sir.

Senator COOPER. What did he say? Did he make a written statement to you or just talk to you?

Mr. WADE. He handed me a written statement. He said, "The day after this happened I made this," it was a copy of a written statement, he said, "I sent this to J. Edgar Hoover in Washington." I am talking to him, we will say, the 10th to the 20th of February, the first time I talked with him.

He said, "I sent this to the FBI, to J. Edgar Hoover, special delivery air mail within a day or two after the assassination," and he left that and as far as I know I have got a copy of that, he left it with me.

He talked to me at length there at my house, just us, and I would say at 11 o'clock at night, it was on a Sunday night I know, but what Sunday night I don't know. It was on a Sunday night in February. I read that statement over. It is a rather startling thing. It didn't ring true to me. It all deals with a conversation between Oswald and Ruby about killing John Connally, the Governor of Texas, over, he says, they can't get syndicated crime in Texas without they kill the Governor.

I know enough about the situation, the Governor has practically nothing to do with syndicated crime. It has to be on a local, your district attorney and your police are the ones on the firing line on that, and they discussed at length killing him, how much they are going to pay him, "He wants five thousand, I believe or half of it now, and half of it when it is done."

Don't you have this memorandum?

Mr. RANKIN. Yes.

Mr. WADE. There is no use of me trying to give it to you.

Senator COOPER. I was just personally trying to get your recollection about it.

Mr. WADE. He told me this is what happened, and I said, "I can't put you on the stand without I am satisfied you are telling the truth because," I said, "We have got a good case here, and if they prove we are putting a lying witness on the stand, we might hurt us," and I said, "The only thing I know to do I won't put you on the stand but to take a polygraph to see if you are telling the truth or not."

He said, "I would be glad to." And I set it up and I later ran into him in the lawyers' club there and he handed me another memorandum which amplified on the other one, which all have been furnished to the attorney general or if we didn't lose it in the shuffle.

This was during the trial actually, and then when the man called me he took a lie detector. There was no truth in it.

That he was in the place. He was in the place, in Ruby's Carousel, but that none of this conversation took place. He said he was in one booth and Ruby was in another booth.

Senator COOPER. Did anyone else tell you that they had seen Ruby and Oswald talking together?

Mr. WADE. No one else personally has told me this.

Senator COOPER. You mentioned a girl.

Mr. WADE. No, I never talked to her but we had the Dallas Police take an affidavit from her and so did the FBI of that which is in all your files. What her name is, I just know it is a waitress out at the B&B Cafe. She lived in Mesquite, Tex., and some of my people interviewed her and she told them the same thing she told the FBI.

The other information was in your FBI reports of where people or somebody who claimed he had seen them together in a YMCA, if I recall correctly, and another one in a store.

The report indicated these, all these people were homosexuals as I believe, or there was an indication of that.

I have an interview, in answering your question, in Lynn's first, but this is the only one I have talked personally about it. But the rest of them I got from reading the FBI and police files.

Senator COOPER. Lynn?

Mr. WADE. I believe that is his first name, and he is a lawyer there.

Senator COOPER. He is the lawyer?

Mr. WADE. That is the lawyer I am thinking about, I am trying to think of his name while I sit here.

Senator COOPER. Have you ever talked to anyone or has anyone ever talked to you or in your presence about Oswald and named any other person, other than Ruby, who they claimed were connected with Oswald in the assassination of President Kennedy?

Mr. WADE. Senator, I don't believe anyone has talked to me. I have received, I guess 5,000 letters about this thing from all over the country, which I have down there. I remember somebody wrote me from West Virginia and said that in West Virginia that Oswald was in a used car business and Ruby was across the street from him.

Well, I furnished this information to the investigative agencies but as far as personally, I don't know of any. I have had a lot of letters that said they were connected but not based on anything.

Senator COOPER. But leave Ruby out now for a moment, did anyone ever tell you that Oswald was connected with persons other than Ruby in the assassination of President Kennedy?

Have you heard the names of any other persons who it is claimed had something to do with the assassination of President Kennedy?

Mr. WADE. I don't know of any names. Of course, like I said there was the head of the Fair Play for Cuba, whatever his name was, was mentioned. Everything I know on that score was from the police. When I went up there Friday night and again I believe it was Saturday night or Sunday, they told me that they just talked like he was the biggest Communist, they had all kinds of evidence that he was a Communist, and that he was working with other people.

I believe Captain Fritz told me once that he showed at the time that Oswald bristled most was when they would talk about Castro. Apparently he was more friendly to Castro than he was for instance to Khrushchev, I am using those in broad terms.

Senator COOPER. Of course, once Oswald was killed, then your duties were connected with the prosecution of Ruby.

Mr. WADE. Yes, sir.

Senator COOPER. And there wasn't any occasion for you then to search out----

Mr. WADE. I had this, Senator.

Senator COOPER. Other persons.

Mr. WADE. I had this, Senator, I had this, when he was killed and they tried to give me the files. I told them no, to give them to the FBI because we couldn't try him, and I went to work on Ruby and actually wouldn't know it.

From what I picked up it appeared to me there was no question that he received his inspiration on this and maybe other help from somewhere.

Senator COOPER. That is what I am driving at here. You know there have been statements made that other persons could have been connected with Oswald in the assassination of President Kennedy.

Do you have any facts to give the Commission which would bear upon that question that any person other than Oswald was in any way connected with the assassination of President Kennedy?

Mr. WADE. I have no facts that I can give you on it. It is one of these things, and the reason I gave you what my opinion on the thing was, I have read what the U.S. World News and Report said the Commission is going to say, and also this deal out in Japan, you know, where they said that he was not instantaneous, impulsive, I believe, killer of the President, which sounded silly to me.

I mean he planned the thing. He practiced shooting, and he had his inspiration from somebody else. Whether he had a--was working with someone, I don't know. I never did know, it was rumored all over town that they had an airplane there to carry him out of town. I am sure you all have checked into that but I never know whether they did or not.

There seemed to have been something misfired in the thing if there was anybody tried to get it. I don't think there was anybody with him in the shooting but what you are getting at is if there was anyone back of him.

I always felt that the minimum was an inspiration from some cause, and the maximum was actual pay, but like you asked for evidence, I don't have any.

Senator COOPER. Did you ever hear about any evidence that there was an airplane stationed any place there?

Mr. WADE. They ran it in the newspapers that an airplane was supposedly to pick him up but nobody ever found the airplane, so far as I know. You have had every kind of rumor, this has been a thing that has been, that the press has been most inaccurate in a lot of things they have reported, and it is because of the pressure from their offices to get a Ruby story.

We have reporters down there coming down and said, "My office said to write something on Ruby today, what are we going to write."

And it has been so very irresponsible.

Like I said, I have no evidence and the only thing where I get my impression is reading and hearing people talking but I haven't actually figured it wasn't any of my business on Oswald, that I had a problem, a big one of trying Ruby and I have concentrated all of my efforts on that and when we had anybody of this nature we would refer them to the FBI or some other agency.

Senator COOPER. Thank you.

Mr. DULLES. You referred, Mr. Wade, to some testimony or some evidence that Oswald was at one time in the Carousel when Ruby was there.

Was that solely from this lawyer whose testimony you have mentioned?

Mr. WADE. The only one of my personal knowledge that I talked with was from the lawyer. He told me he was there with a certain girl, a stripper, and Ruby and Oswald were in an adjoining booth. There is lots of other people, I think your master of ceremonies, they had him on television and said he had seen them there but later on said he hadn't when they got to interviewing him. But my own personal knowledge that you are all interested in was that one man who told me that.

Mr. RANKIN. Was there anyone either from the State or Federal Government that urged you not to state a crime of international conspiracy if you found one was present?

Mr. WADE. No; not in that light. It is like I mentioned to you what Mr. Carr and Mr. Sanders both inquired, said they had heard on the radio about this or talked with someone in Washington about it, and I told them right off that whether it was so or not doesn't make any difference. It wouldn't be alleged. I mean if I had known he was a Communist I wouldn't have alleged it. I mean, suppose I knew he was a Communist, and signed a statement he was a Communist. That was a time when the press blew up when they had nothing else to talk about at the time, actually.

The answer to your question is "No."

Mr. RANKIN. Was any statement made by you as to whether or not there was any international conspiracy, conspiracy with Oswald about the assassination?

Mr. WADE. No, sir; I don't think there was. I think in one of those interviews you will find that I said they found some literature or something from the Fair Play for Cuba at his home, something to that effect. If I did anything, that was all that was said, in one of those interviews.

Mr. RANKIN. Did anybody ask you to say anything one way or another about that?

Mr. WADE. If they did I don't remember it. I am sure they asked that, but I am talking about, I mean in all these interviews, that was the thing where they were trying to prove a connection or something, you know, and I told them I knew nothing about it.

Mr. RANKIN. But no officials asked you to say anything about it publicly or otherwise?

Mr. WADE. No, sir; not that I recall.

Mr. RANKIN. Did anybody ask you at any time not to say that a foreign government was involved if you found it was or anything about that?

Mr. WADE. Your FBI man may have. I don't know. I talked to him two or three times. I wish I could think of his name because I don't think I ever met him. He was an inspector out of Washington.

Mr. DULLES. He is not our FBI man, he is the FBI. We are an independent commission.

Mr. WADE. I see. But he had talked with me something, I think his conversation, as I recall, largely dealt with the giving out of information. He was concerned about it and so was I, and where we had the longest conversation was, I will run through Sunday, and get me up to it real fast because I talked to him Sunday night. We haven't covered one of my television interviews.

After I went down to the police station and I will take this real fast if it is all right with you all, they told me that Oswald had been shot and I was there in the Chief's office when he died, when Oswald died and the Chief says I have got to go out here and announce it.

So as he went out for a press conference, I went down the back door, went home and went to bed because I was tired and disappointed actually because we got even interested in trying Oswald, and I didn't mean to have anything else further to say.

I woke up about 5 o'clock and a national commentator was giving the Dallas police hell, me hell, and just about everybody hell, and saying that I had said that the case, there would be nothing further on the case, it would be closed, in which I had never even had a television interview, I don't know where they got it.

Somebody might have said that. I don't know but it wasn't me because I hadn't talked to anybody.

And then I went out to dinner and got to thinking, I said, well now, the Dallas police did have a breakdown in security here, and they are taking a beating and I am taking a beating, but they did have the right man according to my thinking, so I went down to the police station and got all the brass in there but Chief Curry and I said this stuff, people are saying on there you had the wrong man and you all were the one who killed him or let him out here to have him killed intentionally, I said somebody ought to go out in television and lay out the evidence that you had on Oswald, and tell them everything.

It had been most of it laid out but not in chronological order.

Mr. RANKIN. When was this now?

Mr. WADE. This was 8 o'clock roughly on the 24th. Sunday night. I sat down with Captain Fritz and took a pencil and pad and listed about seven pieces of evidence from my own knowledge and I was going to write it down. They got hold of Chief Curry and he said no, that he had told this inspector of the FBI that there would be nothing further said about it.

I asked Chief Batchelor and Lumpkin, they were all there, I said you all are the ones who know something about it, I said if you have at least got the right man in my opinion the American people ought to know.

This is evidence you can't use actually, because he is dead. You can't try him. And the upshot of that was the police wouldn't say a word and refused actually to furnish me any more of the details on this.

I mean what the seven points. I went on out there in from front of the cameras and ran them through those points. Actually my purpose in it was, good or bad was, because the Dallas police were taking a beating because they had solved the crime and had good evidence and I told them it was good but I did leave out some things and I was a little inaccurate in one or two things but it was because of the communications with the police.

I didn't have the map, incidentally. I wanted the map at that time but forgot all about it, and I ran through just what I knew, which probably was worse than nothing.

It probably would have been better off without giving anything, because we didn't give what all we had.

Mr. DULLES. Do you remember the elements of inaccuracy that got into this statement of yours?

Mr. WADE. I think I told them about the palmprint on the bottom of the gun, that Lane has made a great issue of and I still think I was right on it but he has made an issue. I think Oswald snapped the pistol over there in the jail or at least in the theater where they arrested him. There was a question of whether the gun had been snapped or not and I was told it was, you all may have seen the gun; I never have seen the gun. You had--I might have at that stage said what bullets are supposed to hit whom. That might have been somewhat inaccurate then but that is all I can think of.

I don't think there is any basic thing. But my purpose in that, and I know the minute I got off that television, inspection called me and said please say nothing further about this case.

Well, you see, at that stage----

Mr. DULLES. Who was it that called you?

Mr. WADE. The inspector at FBI called me in the police station. He was the one the police had talked to. He was the man from Dallas down there. It wasn't Shanklin, Shanklin was in charge of the office.

But I told him what my purpose was but apparently someone told him. I gathered since he had delivered a message, apparently someone had told him to have me quit talking about it. But my purpose on that was, I never did think that the people or the television were giving the right facts on the thing and they were making believe that probably they didn't have the right one, that the Dallas police had him in there to kill him, they even had commentators saying practically that, don't you know.

So, I did that entirely--not anything for me. You may think I wanted to be on television. I didn't care a thing about being because I don't run for office in New York and Washington and other places, but I thought the police needed, because their morale was awfully low and they were at fault in Ruby killing him.

There was undoubtedly a breakdown on security there in the basement.

Mr. RANKIN. On the seven points were any of them that were new that hadn't already been told to the public?

Mr. WADE. To tell you the truth, I don't know. I think there were some of them that hadn't been but I think most of them had. But I couldn't see at this stage the evidence on this thing, nobody, the situation where you had an assassination, and a dead person and another case pending, and it was against my interest actually, to trying Ruby, it would be a whole lot better trying Ruby if he killed the wrong man than if he killed the assassin of the President, but I was trying to establish that this was the assassin of the President.

And I didn't give all the evidence, and I don't know whether there was anything new or not because I didn't see much of television during all this time. I don't actually know everything that was given out, and there was so much in the papers that I didn't have time to read them, so I didn't know for sure what all the police had given out.

Senator COOPER. Substantially then, you were laying out to the public the facts which had led you to issue a warrant for Oswald as the killer of President Kennedy?

Mr. WADE. That was the purpose of that interview.

You also have to--I don't know where you gentlemen were, but you have to get a picture of what was going on. You had, of course, there in Dallas, you had threats on people's lives everywhere.

As a matter of fact, it ran over the radio that I had been assassinated, for 2 hours, on Monday morning. I wasn't listening to the radio. My wife called me up--called me up and I denied it. [Laughter.]

Mr. WADE. But you had lots of things of that kind. And I thought you needed some type of, somebody--and your whole thing was wrong with this whole deal, you had no one in charge of the thing. You had the police, the FBI, the Secret Service, the Department of Justice, my Department, Waggoner Carr's department, but no one had any say to offer the rest of them.

Mr. RANKIN. Tell us how that affected it. You had the jurisdiction of the crime itself.

Mr. WADE. Of the trial of the case.

Mr. RANKIN. And the police department, what jurisdiction did they have?

Mr. WADE. They had the jurisdiction, the primary responsibility for the investigation of the assassination, and--they had the primary job of finding out who did it and getting the evidence. They were assisted, the Secret Service, of course, had the job of protecting the President. The FBI, they have criminal, pretty general, investigation, I am not sure, but they were in on it, they were all there, and assisting. It was a deal where nobody had any actual control over another person.

Mr. RANKIN. Had the State authorities any jurisdiction or effect on the operation?

Mr. WADE. You mean the State?

Mr. RANKIN. Of Texas.

Mr. WADE. They actually had none. They had no authority. The Governor has no authority in a situation like this nor the attorney general other than in a vague sort of way, as the police, I guess they had the police powers to some extent of maintaining order but you didn't need the National Guard or anything. I mean this was more dealing with a situation of information. I think this situation is true in many States, in practically all of them.

Mr. RANKIN. Was that confusing, did that make it harder to try to solve the crime and handle the problems?

Mr. WADE. It did; very much so. Your press was the most confusing thing. I mean you couldn't get in the police station. I mean I just barely could get into the police station myself for stomping over the press and you had a lot of reporters, not like the reporters we usually deal with down there. I mean we don't have trouble usually with the local press, people we pretty well know.

We would tell them what is going on, and they will go on, but these people just followed everybody everywhere they went, and they were throwing policemen on the corner, if he made a statement about he saw someone running that way dressed maybe like the killer--they ran all that on. They were just running everybody. There was no control over your public media. It made it worse since all television networks were on the assassination all--24 hours, I mean all day. And there was no central thing from--there was no central person who had any control of handling the thing that information was given out. You see they interviewed some of your patrolmen who were giving out evidence, you know, some of your foot patrolmen on the corner, they were interviewing anybody.

Mr. RANKIN. Would it help or hinder the handling of such a crime of the killing of the President if it was a Federal crime, in your opinion?

Mr. WADE. Well, offhand, I think probably it would, but----

Mr. RANKIN. It would help?

Mr. WADE. I think it would help, but you are going to have the same situation. I am thinking if you had, if it is a Federal crime, for instance, it is still murder in Texas. If Captain Fritz and the Dallas police had arrested this man, the FBI wouldn't have had him. I don't care if it was a Federal crime. We have bank robberies where there is joint jurisdiction. The one that gets him, if it is the State police or the city police gets them, they file with me and if the FBI gets them they file with the Federal.

Mr. RANKIN. You need more control over the police investigation in order to carry out your duties, is that----

Mr. WADE. Of course; my idea if you had it to do over, it is easy to do that, but I think you need someone where all the information is channeled through one person. If anything is given out and getting an intelligent person, not just a police officer, you know. Now, your city manager of Dallas is a newspaper man, Elgin Crull, he would have been an ideal person and he was there but I don't think he ever said anything in any way. He was there in the middle of all that thing.

Mr. RANKIN. Is the lawyer that you referred to in answer to Senator Cooper's questions Carroll Jarnegan?

Mr. WADE. Carroll Jarnegan is his name; yes, sir. Let me mention another thing for the record here. I don't know whether it is mentioned. Saturday, most of my day was spent in talking to Dean R. G. Storey, and the dean of the Harvard Law School, raising, wondering what the situation was with reference to attorneys for Oswald.

Mr. RANKIN. What Saturday are you talking about?

Mr. WADE. Saturday the 23d, 1963; November 23. I told them that, all of them, we had calls from various people, and most of them was from people here in the East calling lawyers there in Dallas rather than me, and them calling me.

Mr. RANKIN. What were they saying to you about that?

Mr. WADE. Well, they were very upset, one, in looking at American justice where the man didn't have an attorney, as apparently, and two, that too much information was being given to the press too, by the police and by me, some of them had said, and that is what prompted me probably to talk to Chief Curry about the thing, because I had received some of those calls.

I told them they ought to appoint the president of the bar association and the president of the Criminal Bar Association to represent him.

Mr. RANKIN. Who did you tell that to?

Mr. WADE. Told that to Mr. Paul Carrington and also to Mr. Storey, I believe.

I believe they are the two that discussed it more at length with me.

Mr. RANKIN. Do you know whether anything was done about that?

Mr. WADE. Yes.

Mr. RANKIN. What?

Mr. WADE. They got ahold of Louis Nichols who is the president of the Dallas Bar Association. They got ahold of the president of the Criminal Bar Association, but they had started a Tippit fund in the meantime, and practically every lawyer was scared they were going to be appointed, you know, and they had gone and subscribed to that fund so they were having much trouble getting a lawyer appointed.

Now, I must go a little further and tell you that under Texas law that is an improper time to appoint them. The only one who can actually appoint him is the judge after indictment under the Texas law, no one else has really authority.

Louis Nichols, I talked to him, the president of the bar, and he was trying to get some criminal lawyer to go down there with him, and I said, "Go down there yourself and talk to him because they are raising just so much cain about it and see what they want and tell him you will get him a lawyer."

Senator COOPER. You are speaking now about a lawyer for Oswald?

Mr. WADE. Yes; for Oswald.

This was around noon or some time on Saturday, noon, early afternoon. This went on all day. He called me back and said, "I have talked to him and told him I would get him a lawyer, that I would represent him or get him a lawyer." Louis Nichols is a civil lawyer, not actually a criminal lawyer.

He says, "He doesn't want but one lawyer, John Abt, in New York."

Mr. RANKIN. Who is he?

Mr. WADE. He is an attorney in New York.

Mr. RANKIN. You said he didn't want any attorney?

Mr. WADE. Lee Harvey Oswald told Nichols and Nichols told me this. He said that. Nichols then said he told him, along with the police they would try to get ahold of Mr. Abt, which they did. I think, I think maybe the press found him before the lawyers found him. But he says something that he didn't have time or something, as I understand it. This was all reported in the press. He had said the second person he wanted, Lee Harvey Oswald told Nichols the second person he wanted, was some lawyer out in Chicago with the American Civil Liberties Union, his name I don't know what it was, but Nichols would know.

He said, "If I can't get either one of those I will help get a local lawyer," because that was all done Saturday, with reference to his obtaining a lawyer.

I wanted to get that because I think you probably knew it and get it in the record anyhow.

Mr. RANKIN. Now going back to this telephone conversation with Mr. Carr that you referred to, do you remember anything else that Mr. Carr said to you at that time?

Mr. WADE. I don't actually even remember, you know, he said that he had had a call from Washington, I don't actually remember anything about that. I remember he said that about this charge that this is going. "This would be a bad situation, if you allege it as part of a Russian, the Russian conspiracy, and it may affect your international relations, a lot of things, of the country," and I said it was silly because I don't know where the rumor started but I will see even if it was so we could prove it, I wouldn't allege it. Isn't that about it, the way you recall it, Mr. Carr?

Senator COOPER. We will call him in a minute.

Mr. WADE. O.K.

Mr. RANKIN. Was he during that conversation saying anything to you about not alleging it if it were true?

Mr. WADE. No, sir; it was a question of, he had heard we were going to allege it and he asked me about it and I said it is silly. I had heard something, I think, about it, about the same time.

And to no one, if it was part of it, no one said they necessarily wanted to hush the thing up, but it was a situation where the minute they mentioned what their problem was, it sounded silly to me, I said whether he is a member of the Communist Party or not is not important in this charge.

Senator COOPER. Was there any official, anyone on your staff or any persons charged with law enforcement in Dallas, or any U.S. district attorney in Dallas or anyone connected with his office, to your knowledge ever suggest that there should be a charge of conspiracy?

Mr. WADE. None to my knowledge.

Now, I will say in some of these conversations, like I said, I don't know whether it was with Waggoner Carr or Barefoot Sanders, they said, one said, "Well, David Johnston, the J. P. has said this," and the other one has said, "Bill Alexander, one of your assistants who was up at the police department said it."

I asked them both about it and they both denied it.

Senator COOPER. Did anyone ever say to you in the event there was a charge of conspiracy who would be named other than Oswald?

Mr. WADE. No; there is no other names, there is no other name that I know of that has ever been mentioned to me as being part of the conspiracy.

The question we are talking about here, if I understand it, being that Oswald, as a part of an international conspiracy, did murder John Fitzgerald Kennedy. And there is no other names of co-conspirators, we have had lots of leads run down upon it. Somebody at the penitentiary down there, a colored person, at least the word to us, that he had told the guard he had hauled Oswald away from there, you all probably got this, but we interviewed him down there.

He was just talking and wanting to come back to Dallas. But there had been lots of things of that kind but to my knowledge none of them have actually been proven out.

Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Wade, I don't think you have quite finished the--all of your--hour-by-hour description of what happened up through the killing of Mr. Oswald.

Mr. WADE. I thought I had hit it. The only thing I can't remember now is the Saturday night.

It seemed like I was down at the police station Saturday night. Why I don't know and maybe for a short while and don't recall everything that happened. That was Saturday, 23d of November, and there is nothing, the charge had already been taken, and I think probably I was on my way home and just stopped by to see what was going on.

At that time there wasn't anything going on and I went home.

Mr. RANKIN. Did you do anything more about the press and TV and radio people crowding into the police station than you have already described?

Mr. WADE. No; you see--I have been in that building probably once every 2 years.

It is the other end of town from my building. I never go up there and I don't think it is my business what goes on up there. Maybe it should be, but I have never been considering it. I think I have enough problems down at my end of the street.

Mr. RANKIN. In any event you didn't do anything.

Mr. WADE. I didn't tell them anything, I could see the confusion they were getting into but I don't know of anything that I told about, but what if I did, I had no control over it. It was one of those things I just figured I was the one who didn't have the say in it.

Mr. RANKIN. What did you do on Sunday, the 25th?

Mr. WADE. Well, went to church.

Mr. RANKIN. The 24th.

Mr. WADE. I went to church, my family and I went to Dr. W. J. Martin's nondenominational church. It has 27 different denominations, very bright fellow, if you are in Dallas you ought to go and hear him.

And as I walked out somebody said they shot Oswald. So I took--turned on the radio and took my wife and kids home, and went down to the police station.

There were still fragments of the story coming in, and we would still get every kind of story out of them, and we got down there at I guess 1:30. He died and then like I said, I think all I told the press, they asked me as I left there, a few of them what we would do on Ruby and I said we would ask the death penalty on him, and then I left and I went home and then I followed it that night and giving them what evidence I had.

Mr. RANKIN. Did you have anything to do with a lawyer by the name of Tom Howard in connection with that?

Mr. WADE. No, sir; Tom Howard had filed some kind of writ of habeas corpus, assault to murder, and I never did see him. I saw Bob Stinson, another lawyer on a corner and he said he and Robey were going to represent him, which, I don't think they did, but they said they were and so I went on home, and then when he died, we had a murder case, and we took it to the grand jury the next morning, I believe, on Monday morning and indicted him, turned it into Judge Joe Brown's court and I was there, and as the grand jury walked in he said, "When are you going to hear Ruby?"

And I said, "I already have got the indictment here," and I said, then I went right back and asked the judge to transfer it over to Judge Henry King's court or Frank Wilson's court.

Mr. RANKIN. Do you know what happened to that habeas corpus of Tom Howard's?

Mr. WADE. No.

Mr. RANKIN. You didn't have anything to do with it?

Mr. WADE. I understand from hearsay it disappeared or somewhere down there but we don't have anything to do with writs. But they don't come through our office. You see that is directed by the judge. I heard or at least Decker or somebody told me they never could find the writ but there was some writ for assault to murder originally issued.

And then, of course, after he died and the murder charge was filed, well, that would actually be out of date.

Senator COOPER. Was it a writ of habeas corpus to bring Oswald before a court?

Mr. WADE. No. Jack Ruby.

Senator COOPER. Jack Ruby.

Mr. WADE. It was actually, they have two kinds of writs, one of them is where they set a bond on it and another one is what they have called a dry writ which says, "You file on him or bring him before me at such and such a time."

Which one it was I don't know. As a matter of fact, I thought there was a bond set on it, but I told the chief, I said, "You can hold him, we don't want to release him until you know whether the person dies or not because then he wouldn't be a bailable case," assault to murder is bailable.

I never saw the writ or anything. I just heard somebody say there is a writ on him.

(At this point, Chairman Warren entered the hearing room.)

Mr. RANKIN. Did you ever help Ruby about any of his troubles of any kind?

Mr. WADE. Not that I know of.

Mr. RANKIN. Prior to this occasion?

Mr. WADE. No; I think we have had him for a liquor violation or something, but if we have--like I say, I never knew him. I think that they have had some charges against him.

As a matter of fact, they had two pistol charges against him but I don't think they ever reached my office.

Mr. RANKIN. Do you know what charges they were about pistols?

Mr. WADE. Carrying a concealed weapon and if I understand the record I think we checked it out and they dismissed them up in the police force.

There was one liquor case that was dismissed in my office by an assistant who is no longer there which I have read the reports on and don't have any recollection of it either way.

Mr. RANKIN. Did you know Eva Grant?

Mr. WADE. No, sir.

Mr. RANKIN. Ruby's sister. Do you know Sam Ruby?

Mr. WADE. I knew none of them, none of the Ruby family, and didn't know Jack Ruby. I think he claims that he had known me or something or other but if he had, it is one of those things where you see somebody and I didn't know his name or anything when I saw him that night or didn't know who he was. I thought he was a member of the press, actually.

Mr. RANKIN. Did it come to your attention that there was some claim that Oswald was an agent of one of the intelligence agencies of Government?

Mr. WADE. I heard that talk down there. It was talk some----

Mr. RANKIN. Do you know who was talking that?

Mr. WADE. I don't know. I have been up here once before, and some of the press were--I don't remember, some of the press mentioned that they had two voucher numbers in his book there that indicated he was working for the FBI or the CIA. I know nothing about them, don't think anybody in my office does. I think maybe Alexander mentioned it some, but Alexander is not a great lover of the FBI. They fuss all the time openly, so I don't know. I know nothing about it myself because I never have seen the book and I don't know whether they have even got any numbers in there but they were supposed to have two numbers in there as a voucher number of $200 from some Government agency but like I say, supposed to.

I never saw it and heard it, talk, but I am sure you all know more about it than I do.

Mr. DULLES. By voucher you mean an entry or something of that kind, what kind of a voucher?

Mr. WADE. I think it was called a voucher number, it was voucher 209, which doesn't make sense. I believe it was a low number. It doesn't make sense for a government to have a voucher number that low.

Mr. RANKIN. What book are you referring to?

Mr. WADE. The little black book that Oswald had in his possession at the time he was arrested.

Mr. RANKIN. That was his memorandum book, in which he had a list of numbers of various people and addresses and so forth, is that what you referring to?

Mr. WADE. Yes; and I never have seen the book myself. As a matter of fact, I am trying to get some photos of it, trying to but I haven't gotten them yet.

Mr. RANKIN. Now what agency was it rumored he was a member of?

Mr. WADE. It was rumored he worked first for the FBI and then for the CIA.

Mr. RANKIN. Is that all you have heard?

Mr. WADE. As a matter of fact, I don't think I had ever heard that until Waggoner Carr called me and told me--I don't think I ever heard that. I did check into it a little, and they were talking it some, and they have actually written it up in the newspapers by rumors or a story or two--rumors of the thing.

Mr. RANKIN. Is that the report by the reporter Hudkins?

Mr. WADE. I believe it is. On the Houston paper, Hudkins. I believe we got that introduced in the Ruby trial on the change of venue motion.

Mr. RANKIN. Is there anything more that you know about that matter?

Mr. WADE. I know absolutely nothing about it. I might say, I was under the impression, I think when I talked to you and the Chief Justice before, that, you see I was in the FBI, and I was under the impression and I think maybe I told you all that we didn't list our informant by name. The FBI have been kind enough to send down some of my old vouchers on paying informants back in, down in South America, and I see that we did list them by name which I--probably may, if I said otherwise it was just my recollection on the thing but in that case I was listing informants from South America that we were paying when I was there.

Mr. RANKIN. There was one other report by Goulden, reporter of the Philadelphia Inquirer. Did that ever come to your attention in regard to this matter?

Mr. WADE. No; but I know him. He used to be a reporter in Dallas, but I don't know what it was, if you will tell me about it.

Mr. RANKIN. Apparently it was the same thing.

Mr. WADE. Different angle.

Mr. RANKIN. From Hudkins' report that had been picked up.

Mr. WADE. He is more reliable than Hudkins but I know absolutely nothing about that. Like I say, I have heard rumors and conversation and I will even put it further, I don't think Alexander knows anything about it, my assistant, although he doesn't fully admit all that. I think he would like to talk a little about it but I don't think he knows anything of his own knowledge.

Mr. RANKIN. Have you inquired of him?

Mr. WADE. I have asked him about it and he gives me nothing in the way of evidence.

Mr. RANKIN. Did you prepare the complaint in regard to Jack Ruby yourself?

Mr. WADE. I don't believe I did. I don't believe I had anything to do with it. If I did, my name will show on it but I don't think I had anything to do with it.

Mr. RANKIN. Did you give any information to the press about what you had in regard to that prosecution, and the nature of the evidence?

Mr. WADE. No; not that I know of. Of course, they all saw it on television, you know. We have got in--to bring you through the whole story, I said practically nothing about this thing for about 3 weeks or a month, but we had a lawyer on the other side who came into town and every time he was met at the airport he would make statements.

Mr. RANKIN. Who was that?

Mr. WADE. Mr. Melvin Belli, and he had his psychiatrist on the television, all his witnesses, said what he was going to prove and it got to a situation where I had to do a little talking in self-defense, and so we did later on have some statements more or less in answer to his. It was entirely too much trying of that in the newspapers but a situation where we couldn't let his psychiatrist go on there and prove he had been insane on the jury without at least our saying we had some evidence that he was sane.

Mr. RANKIN. Did you have anything to do with the preparation of the case for trial?

Mr. WADE. Yes, to some extent. You see I had four assistants to assist me in the trial.

Mr. RANKIN. Who were they?

Mr. WADE. Jim Bowie, Frank Watt, and Bill Alexander. I read most of the reports on it. I mean I had most of what I did was read things on it because my main job in the trial as we started out was for me to pick the jury, which I did, I think I have some ability along that line, and do a great deal of the cross examination and the final argument. That is what I do in the cases I participate in usually.

Mr. RANKIN. Yes.

Mr. WADE. Alexander spent the 2 weeks we were picking a jury in viewing the witnesses. I never talked to any of the witnesses. After the first half a day of testimony I was very disappointed in the way the witnesses were being put on the stand; if this is of interest to you.

Mr. RANKIN. Tell us what happened.

Mr WADE. I told him, I said, on this case we are going on this theory, I want everybody who saw Ruby from the time of the assassination of President Kennedy down to the time he killed Oswald, I want to prove where he was every minute of the time that I can and then we will take it from there and put the films on there and show what happened there and then afterward. We are going on the theory that he is a glory seeker and a hero because I was convinced that was the motive of the killing.

I put on seven witnesses, and about six of them testified against us, I think, or made poor witnesses saying if they saw him down in the Dallas News where he was 2 minutes in a stare that never made any sense.

Some of them said they thought there was something wrong with him and none of them were the type of witnesses that I wanted testifying for the State.

Mr. RANKIN. Who were they?

Mr. WADE. Well, you can check the first seven witnesses in the case. You had three from the Dallas News who testified, and so during that noon hour, I was convinced, whether right or wrong that Alexander had been more interested in talking to the press.

In my office our biggest problem was keeping the press out of the office, and so I just would have to bar them from my office, I mean personal property. He wouldn't do it. He liked to talk to them.

So, I said, "Get all these witnesses in during the noon hour and let me talk to them."

I put all the witnesses on the next morning. I talked to all the officers, I talked to Officers Dean, McMillon, Archer, King never had talked with them about the case before and I talked with them then and I put all of them on next morning.

Mr. RANKIN. Tell us what starting with--which one did you talk to first, Archer, Dean, or McMillon.

Mr. WADE. I think I talked to all of them at first in a body. I talked to----

Mr. RANKIN. I see.

Mr. WADE. I had them all in there and said "Now what do you know about the case?" because a lot of them I didn't know what they knew.

Mr. RANKIN. What did they say?

Mr. WADE. As a matter of fact, I wasn't familiar with Dean's testimony until he told me right there a day before he testified. Then he showed me the memorandum that he had made on the thing. I talked with him there and I put Archer on the next morning and McMillon on, who stayed all day. They cross-examined him from 11:30 until 5:30. Then I put King on, and then Dean, I believe the next morning, and we rested. But they told me just what they testified to in the trial which I don't know whether I can give all of it but I can tell you roughly that McMillon and Archer were partners and heard Ruby say some things, "I hope I killed the sonofabitch."

Mr. RANKIN. When?

Mr. WADE. Within about a few seconds after the killing and then upstairs then, "I meant to shoot three times but you all got me before I did."

Incidentally, you may not know it but their psychiatrist corroborated that statement.

Mr. RANKIN. Who was that?

Mr. WADE. Dr. Guttmacher on cross-examination. We asked Dr. Guttmacher, "Well, didn't Ruby tell you that he meant to shoot three times?"

He said, "Yes; and he told me that."

He said, "One time he told me that." He also said at one time he told him otherwise but he corroborated that portion of it. Then it seemed like there was something else said. Archer said to him as he got up in the jail, "I believe he is going to die, Jack." I may be getting these wrong, but they are roughly--he said something about, "You fellows couldn't do it," or talking about the police, and, I believe that was Archer and McMillon.

Maybe you all being lawyers, in Texas this is not admissible unless it is part of the res gestae. Mr. Belli sent into McMillon all conversations in the jail that happened 4 hours later.

Under our law if one side goes into a conversation we can bring out anything in the conversation, the rest of the conversation. That is a rule of law in Texas, I don't know whether it is that way everywhere else, and so that was the theory that made Dean's testimony admissible because had been in the jail--time varies from 20 minutes to an hour, depending on who you are listening to.

Senator COOPER. I have to go to a quorum call.

(At this point, Senator Cooper left the hearing room.)

Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Wade, could you tell us a little more clearly what was involved in regard to this testimony? Did the defense start introducing testimony concerning these conversations, is that what you are telling us?

Mr. WADE. The defense cross-examined McMillon--you see McMillon and Archer stayed with Ruby until 4 o'clock that afternoon when he was turned over to Captain Fritz or roughly. I am giving a rough hour of 4 o'clock.

Mr. RANKIN. Where did they stay with him?

Mr. WADE. In the jail. They were--I don't say both of them were there but they were assigned there and another person. The three of them or two of them were there at all times, along with your jailers, they were inside the jail.

During this time he went into conversations, for instance he said, "Didn't I tell you that he left his dog out in the car?" He said, "Yes, they did," but this is something that happened an hour and a half after they had been in jail.

Mr. RANKIN. By "he" there you mean Ruby?

Mr. WADE. Ruby.

And they said also, "Didn't he tell you about going to the Western Union," and he said, "Weren't you there when Sorrels and Dean came up there, and what was the first thing that Sorrels asked him."

Mr. RANKIN. Did they say when that was?

Mr. WADE. Well, you are going to find your time varies from 20 minutes to an hour, depending on whether it is a defense theory or our theory, but----

Mr. RANKIN. After what?

Mr. WADE. After the killing of Oswald.

Mr. RANKIN. Yes.

Mr. WADE. I think Dean, I would rather you get the record, and you can get it accurate, but I think he said it was some time before 20 minutes to 12 or some time before 12. Well, the killing happened at 11:21, I think. That seems to be the best time, 11:21.

Mr. RANKIN. Did they describe what the conversation was with Ruby when Sorrels and Dean were there?

Mr. WADE. They told, if I recall, what Sorrels asked him and he asked him "What did you do it for, Jack?" or something; they knew that part of it but they weren't present during that conversation between--they were in the room but I may say not within hearing distance. They heard part of what was said but not all of the conversation.

Mr. RANKIN. By "they" who do you mean?

Mr. WADE. I am talking about McMillon and Archer.

Mr. RANKIN. What did they hear?

Mr. WADE. Well, that is all I know that was testified to. Now, whether they heard anything else I don't know. But that is all I know, the beginning of the conversation.

They had heard previous to this coming up there the conversation about Jack, "I think he is going to die," and Jack answered some question, I believe he said, "You couldn't do it, somebody had to," or something like that. Jack Ruby, I am referring to.

Mr. RANKIN. Where did that occur?

Mr. WADE. That occurred as they arrived on the floor where the jail is, the fifth floor, I believe, of the jail.

Mr. RANKIN. Then what else could they testify to?

Mr. WADE. That was about all we used them for, actually, that was the last that we put on, but they asked them some questions of what happened. Didn't he tell Captain Fritz something at 4 o'clock that afternoon, but our testimony from them actually that amounted to anything quit when they came on to the floor there of the jail. That is McMillon and Archer.

Shortly thereafter, Dean's testimony came on and only--I am kind of anticipating your questions on this.

Mr. RANKIN. Where was Dean then?

Mr. WADE. They were in the jail. Dean----

Mr. RANKIN. Who else?

Mr. WADE. Sorrels, Forest Sorrels. I am not testifying as a fact but this was all told to me, of course, by Dean and Sorrels.

Mr. RANKIN. Yes.

Mr. WADE. The following day during the noon hour I found for the first time that Sorrels was present in the jail. I told the sheriff there I would like to talk to Sorrels and he came down there and he and Dean and I talked in my office.

Mr. RANKIN. That is the following day?

Mr. WADE. That is Thursday before we rested the case on Friday.

Mr. RANKIN. Will you tell us the approximate date that you talked to him?

Mr. WADE. It seems like we started on the 17th, and this was 2 weeks----

Mr. RANKIN. 17th of what month?

Mr. WADE. Of February.

Maybe we started on the 10th, because they ended on the 14th, 17th to the 14th, I would say this was around the 6th of March roughly, a day or two either way.

I sat down there to talk to Dean and Sorrels because we was going to put--and Sorrels showed me a copy of his report made on that incident which I didn't keep a copy but I am sure you all have a copy of it or it will be available to you.

I read it over, and essentially from what Dean said, and him were the same with other than the, I think the only variance was the part which was strong testimony where Dean said that Ruby said, "The first time I thought of killing him was Friday night or thought about killing him was Friday night in the lineup."

Mr. RANKIN. Sorrels didn't have that in his statement, did he?

Mr. WADE. He didn't have that in his statement, and I, to go back a little bit, I asked Sorrels how he got up in the jail and he said he didn't know, and he said he didn't actually know Dean there sitting in my office.

I think he finally decided Dean was the one but he didn't know him. I think it is pretty obvious that Dean, because they went in an unusual entrance to the jail from the third floor, from the chief's office, and he says there are two guards standing on each side of him which none of the others corroborate, unless they are talking about jail guards in the building, but there was no police in uniform supposed to be up on that floor but Sorrels said that he saw two police guards on each side of him.

But I asked Sorrels, I said, "How can you account for it?" I had already talked to Dean. I said, "I am getting ready to put him on the stand."

I said, "How are you going to--what are you going to say if you go on the stand on this?"

He said, "Well, I called my office in Washington and they wanted me to find out two things: One, whether there was any connection between Oswald and Ruby from Ruby, and two, whether Ruby had any confederates or co-conspirators."

He said, "Those were the two things I went to find out and I dwelled on those entirely."

He said, "These other officers were there and when I left they were still questioning," and he said, "I couldn't say whether that happened, I don't remember hearing it, I just can't say that I heard it," and so the defense lawyers talked to Sorrels that night about testifying and didn't use him.

Of course, I thought probably they were going to use him on this one thing, but there were so many other things in the statement that were the same as what Dean has testified to about, something about being a hero, Jew hero, or something in the statement, which Sorrels had that in his statement.

He had practically everything in the statement, but this is one thing that he didn't have in there, as I recall.

I couldn't find it and asked him about it and he said he couldn't say it. He said there were a lot of things in there but he was interested in knowing only two things.

Mr. RANKIN. Did you examine Dean's statement in regard to this matter?

Mr. WADE. Well, I read it there that day. It is a very short one, you know. Of course, there is more than one statement.

Mr. RANKIN. Yes; did you look at his prior statements at that time?

Mr. WADE. I think I had all of his statements. He was in charge of security in the basement. All statements, this all came out on cross-examination, dealt entirely with the matter of security, what was done to secure the basement.

Mr. RANKIN. Did he say anything in regard to this premeditation in the prior statement?

Mr. WADE. I don't think he did, and I don't think he actually said anything about how Ruby got in in that prior statement. I may be wrong, I don't remember even going into the conversation with Ruby.

Mr. RANKIN. What did Dean tell you at the time that you asked him about the later statement?

Mr. WADE. He told me that he had been asked to submit a report dealing with the security of the basement, and that that first report was the security problem.

Mr. RANKIN. What did he say about that, the security?

Mr. WADE. Well, he said that, he told me, that when he heard the shot that he thought a policeman had shot him because he didn't think there was anybody else in the basement. He said he thought a policeman had shot him, just got mad and the cop shot him for killing Officer Tippit.

I don't know whether that was in the statement or not but he told me that. I actually read that, that security, we were not too interested in that because from our point of view, because there is no question the security wasn't good. Something happened somewhere.

Mr. RANKIN. Did you learn from Dean how Ruby got into the basement?

Mr. WADE. I learned the way he told him he got in.

Mr. RANKIN. How was that?

Mr. WADE. On walking in on Main Street, the ramp down on Main Street. And I was under the impression he told a lot of other people that. But if he had been in that basement a long time it would have helped us a lot to know it. It would have shown more premeditation, but I don't think he actually had been in long from what I know about the case.

But Ruby told Dean in his statement that he got in by going to the Western Union and walking there and the cop was helping a car go out into it. I don't know whether that is Dean, that is somebody's statement, that he went in that ramp and was there maybe a minute or two before they brought him out.

Mr. RANKIN. Did Dean tell you why he left out of his prior statements the statement about premeditation or prior thinking about killing Oswald?

Mr. WADE. Well, he was cross-examined about that, and told me also that he wasn't asked about it. That that wasn't part of what his report concerned. I mean, you have to keep in mind Dean is a uniformed officer. He is sergeant, had nothing to do with the investigation of the crime. He just happened to be the one who was sent up there to show Sorrels how to get in the jail and out, you know. He wasn't an investigative officer.

Now, McMillon and Archer are detectives, you know, but he is not. He is a uniformed man.

Mr. RANKIN. What did McMillon tell you about his statement?

Mr. WADE. He just told me what his testimony was. I didn't actually talk to him over 30 minutes, I don't guess, during the noon hour and I was talking to all of them. I had the various statements he made, some of what he said was in the statements and some wasn't, so I don't remember--but the same story was where he was and what he was supposed to do and one dealt with security and the other dealt with statement that he had made. Dean and McMillon and any of them didn't think these statements were admissible while he was in the jail.

Mr. RANKIN. Did McMillon make a statement about premeditation?

Mr. WADE. He had in his statement that he meant to shoot three times, which was premeditation, but I don't think he thought about it Friday night.

Mr. RANKIN. What about Archer, did he have anything in his statement about Friday night in his prior statements?

Mr. WADE. No, sir; I don't think he did. He did have about the intending to shoot three times.

Mr. RANKIN. When Dean was telling you about this statement about planning to shoot Oswald on Friday night, was he telling you that Ruby had told him that?

Mr. WADE. Yes.

Mr. RANKIN. He didn't tell that to Sorrels?

Mr. WADE. I think he said he told it to both of them. I think that the question on that, he said when he saw the snarl on his face he first thought about killing him. Now the snarl on his face could have been Friday night or Saturday night.

Mr. DULLES. That is on Oswald's face?

Mr. WADE. On Oswald's face.

And I think that, I am not sure of this, but I think that Sorrels remembers saying something about the snarl on his face. But I think the question was whether they were talking before the time of the shooting of Oswald or whether they was talking about Friday night and it is Dean's impression that when he saw the snarl on his face is when he first thought about killing him.

I don't think he ever testified he planned to kill him or anything. I think he said that is the first time he thought about killing him.

Mr. RANKIN. What I wanted to get clear for the Commission was whether Ruby was telling this in answer to questions from Dean or in answer to questions from Sorrels?

Mr. WADE. I think largely Sorrels. I think at the end Dean asked him one or two questions, mostly about how he got in, I think. I think that is what Dean was asking him about. But I think actually that this came out in the conversation while Sorrels was at least taking the lead in questioning him.

And I think, my recollection is at the end, as Sorrels got through and walked on over to the elevator, he asked him how he got in the jail or something on that score rather than on this subject.

Now, Dean is under the impression that all this came out while Sorrels was there. But I don't think Sorrels, at least, didn't have it in his notes and I don't think he would say it didn't happen but he didn't remember it, you know.

Mr. RANKIN. Did you make any further investigation of this addition or change in the statements of Dean and these other people?

Mr. WADE. I don't think there is any change in the statement. I think you are asking a kind of a misleading question.

I think that first report dealt entirely with the security in the basement of the thing.

Mr. RANKIN. You don't think that purported to relate what the conversation was?

Mr. WADE. Up in the jail, I don't think, you may have it there, and I may be wrong. I never questioned him any more because like I said from the time of the killing of Lee Harvey Oswald I thought that Friday night was the time, in my own mind, that is what I thought, he had thought about killing him. I don't say he said he would go arm himself, but in my own mind I had that feeling all along and I thought it was the first time he had thought about it, that is where I discounted all the other theories there was a connection between them because I saw him there and talked to him, and saw his excited demeanor, and so you asked me did I question him any more, he finally told me, what I actually thought were the facts and I do now incidentally.

Mr. RANKIN. You have already testified that you thought it was Jack Ruby before you even knew the name.

Mr. WADE. Well, you may--I may have stressed a little saying thought. When I was driving down there they said Dallas businessman kills him, without his name.

But in my own mind I said it must have been that Jack Ruby that was down there the night before. I mean I was just talking to myself, there wasn't nobody there. But like I say, one of those things, I might be more truthful to say it ran through my mind rather than to say I thought.

Mr. DULLES. You didn't say that to your wife?

Mr. WADE. I didn't say it to a soul. I went down there alone. I took her home. We don't live four or five blocks and I drove downtown myself, and it entered my mind and I will say when they announced it I wasn't too surprised. I mean I had or thought about him as a possibility.

Mr. RANKIN. Now, did you get any assistance from the FBI, Secret Service, and other agencies in the handling of these cases?

Mr. WADE. Practically none. I never have seen the Secret Service file. This Sorrels is the only one I talked with and I saw his report although I never did get a copy of it. The FBI let us examine, I believe all their files, I am not sure, but we couldn't take possession of them and we had to send somebody up there to run through them and dictate on them, and undoubtedly they helped us some in the trial.

They helped us in this way. If you had a witness on the stand--I was cross-examining and I would say, well now, you talked to the FBI and he would say yes, sir, and they really picked up when they knew they had talked to the FBI and then I would say didn't you tell them this and they would usually admit it.

Mr. RANKIN. Do you know whether the files of the--of either of these agencies or both of them were made available to the police in connection with the two cases?

Mr. WADE. It is a one-way deal usually with the FBI, you know. They don't usually tell you anything about their files but I say they did show us their files on this, and whether they showed them to the police I have no idea.

I will say they turned their files to the U.S. attorney and let me send somebody up there to look at it, 4,500 pages of it.

But that was about a week before the trial, and during the picking of the jury when we were still going through them.

Mr. RANKIN. Did you learn anything during your investigation of the Ruby case about the billfold and the ignition case in the car?

Mr. WADE. Of Ruby's car?

Mr. RANKIN. Yes.

Mr. WADE. No.

Mr. RANKIN. That didn't come to your attention?

Mr. WADE. You know they found a lot of stuff in his car and a lot of stuff on his person. I might say this--there are only two pieces of evidence found on him I wanted to introduce during the trial and until this day I never have found either one of them.

I don't know where they are. The police say they gave them to us, and I know they didn't. One was the receipt from the Western Union which we never, can't find the original of that or a copy, which I think you all have a copy of it.

The second one was he had in his possession a "Lifeline Deal on Heroism," telling about everybody had to take things into their own hands and be a hero.

We later got a copy of that because the night before the killing he gave that to the Weird Beard up at KLIF, radio station, and told him that we had to have some heroes, that was the night before the killing.

We got a copy of what the article was but one of them, two or three copies were in his possession but I never could find one to introduce.

I never did know for sure whether to introduce it because there was a lot of good American patriotism in the thing and, of course, there is a lot of other that is complete hogwash, you know, and you don't know how a jury is going to read part of it and like it and the other part not, but the title of it was "Heroism" and he talked to the Weird Beard, this was in testimony, that somebody had to be a hero.

This was the night before the killing.

This was in before, this was before the jury, and said he gave him an article, the title of it was "Heroism," that he never did read.

Mr. RANKIN. Have you supplied to the Commission all the information that you have or has come to your attention with regard to the assassination of the President?

Mr. WADE. I don't know of anything. As far as I know, I have. I never did get any information on the assassination of the President. I requested them to send it up here to begin with.

Mr. RANKIN. And all you have in regard to Jack Ruby, too.

Mr. WADE. Everything I know of.

Like I said I let them take those pictures of the physical evidence last week, and there are supposed to be some things that I don't know where it is. It is not in my office, I think the police have lost them actually or at least they are up there and I don't think anybody is trying to hide anything but it is just a situation there is so much that it just got lost in the shuffle.

Mr. RANKIN. So, far as you know it has all been supplied then?

Mr. WADE. As far as I know it has. I don't know--I know of nothing in my files that you don't have, and if there is you sure are entitled to have it. I am not sure about this letter you mentioned from the lawyer, the affidavit but I am pretty sure you all have that but I know I got that during the trial and stuck it in my desk somewhere and I don't even know where it is but it will be available.

Mr. RANKIN. In any of these press conferences that you have described did you ever say anything about the type of rifle that was thought to be involved in the killing of the President?

Mr. WADE. I think that was one of the inaccuracies that Sunday night on the thing.

Mr. RANKIN. What did you say about it?

Mr. WADE. I think I said I thought it was a Mauser or I thought--was one of those things I didn't know what it was. It was an Italian gun, I think and I really thought I was giving them Italian but Mauser is a German gun, isn't it?

But I think you have that--it was a situation, I don't contend I was right on that because it was a situation somebody asked me that and that is what I thought I was telling them and I never--all my information came from the police and actually somebody said originally it was a Mauser but it turned out it was not.

Mr. RANKIN. You learned it was not.

Mr. WADE. Oh, yes; there was no question, I am not contending whatever I said was so on that because I got it all secondhand from someone else.

Mr. RANKIN. Did you learn that the Mauser-type rifle was similar in the type of action to the gun that was involved. Did that ever come to your attention?

Mr. WADE. I think someone told me that but I am not an expert on guns. I don't believe I ever saw this gun except from a distance. I think that Saturday night--Friday night, the 22d when they were taking it to Washington, I saw somebody take it through homicide and give it to the FBI and from a distance, I never did examine it.

Mr. RANKIN. In your testimony you were not entirely sure as to whether Chief Curry had the gun during the press conference?

Mr. WADE. No; I am not. I remember seeing some officer wave that gun around. I was tying it into Chief Curry but it could have been the day before, because that gun actually should have still been in Washington on the 23d.

Mr. RANKIN. Yes.

Mr. WADE. I am deducting, I think probably that I saw someone else with the gun, rather than Chief Curry.

Mr. RANKIN. Did you in any press conference describe anything about paraffin tests?

Mr. WADE. I told them they gave him paraffin tests. I believe that--I am not positive what I told them, but what I was told, they found paraffin on one hand--powder showed positive on one hand. I don't know which one, but I remember the police told me the paraffin test was positive on one hand. I don't know which hand.

Mr. RANKIN. Did you indicate what that meant in terms of the effect on crime or its investigation?

Mr. WADE. Well, of course, it meant that a man had fired a gun if they find powder on his hands. I assume I have told them that. I think that was Sunday night when we were laying out the evidence, so far as I know. I don't think that was prior to his being killed. It was, it shouldn't have been done, but I think that was Friday night.

Mr. RANKIN. That is all I have, Mr. Chief Justice. Mr. Dulles has a few questions.

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Dulles, do you have some questions you would like to ask Mr. Wade?

Mr. DULLES. Mr. Chief Justice, Mr. Ford, believing I was the only one going to be here during the interrogation--during the entire session this morning--gave me a few questions and asked me to tell you he was very sorry he could not be here today, but he will be here tomorrow.

The CHAIRMAN. Yes.

Mr. DULLES. A great many of these questions have already been covered. I will just run over them briefly.

You have testified as to a telephone call that the attorney general received from Washington, what he told you about that. Did you have anything further to add to that?

Mr. WADE. No, sir; I believe we have covered that all right. I was trying to think. In the course of this thing, during all this investigation, I have talked to Cliff Carter in the White House, or at least he used to be, but I don't think we talked then on it. I think it was later, the next day, and then 2 or 3 days later, as I recall, but I believe right after they got back to Washington, I got a call from Cliff Carter wondering whether they had the person, or something, but Cliff was one of President Johnson's aides.

Mr. DULLES. Yes.

Mr. WADE. And I have talked with him later, I think, on, I don't know, I don't think it concerned any of these problems, but I am just talking out loud with you, but we have covered that fully and, I believe, the attorney general told you that he had talked to somebody in the White House about it and called me, I think that is where he told me where he had----

Mr. DULLES. There were no other messages other than these messages that you mentioned with Cliff Carter, is that right?

Mr. WADE. Yes; I talked to him, but I don't think it concerned this problem. I think it was on a--as a matter of fact, I think it was after Ruby had shot Oswald when I talked to him, but it is one of those things I can't remember. I hope you don't think I am trying not to tell you, I don't mind telling you anything, but talking to you that I got a call every 5 minutes, and so I don't know, mostly the press calling, you know.

Mr. DULLES. Was the conduct of the investigation of the assassination hindered by any possible overlapping of jurisdiction between Federal, State, and local authorities? You have dealt with that in a general way. Do you have anything more to say on that point?

Mr. WADE. Well, I think the investigation of the assassination was carried on in a rather cooperative manner between all the agencies concerned. I think this cooperation was more than generally you would have. It was born out of a feeling that all the agencies were to some extent on the spot, I think, your FBI, your Secret Service. I think that bred cooperation rather than antagonism. I don't know of any antagonism. I think the biggest fault with the investigation was your press and television.

I don't think there is any question that you people up here deal with it. But you take a chief of police, a little chief of police, or a little district attorney down there who is not used to having all, everybody, calling you all hours of the night and asking you questions, and then if you sneeze, write a front page story about what you said, with no way to deny it, you know, and I think the press was the biggest thing that caused--I don't think they ever ought to have been in the police department to begin with. I would have liked to have kept them out of the courtroom. The judge announced that he was going to have them in the courtroom, but I was instrumental in keeping them out.

Mr. DULLES. When we were in Dallas, it was suggested to us that the press, radio, and news media kind of took possession of city hall there, and it was a question of throwing them out by force of arms or leaving them there. Do you have any comment on that?

Mr. WADE. I don't know how they got in. I don't see how they could run those big cables right through the chief of police's office there without somebody giving them permission. However, I have no way of knowing how they got in.

Mr. DULLES. It was suggested to us that the chief of police was out at the airport and did not get back, and found them in there when he got back at 3 o'clock.

Mr. WADE. How they got in I have no idea, but the whole mechanics of the thing--for instance, in the homicide office, the whole office--you probably have seen it--I don't imagine it is as big as this room. It is cut up into little offices.

Mr. DULLES. I was in there; yes.

Mr. WADE. If you know, when I went into the office, went into that office there Friday night, you had to push people back to open the door to get out. You had police having to move the crowd, and they were just stacked down that corridor, and it was a situation that should not have developed.

Of course, you have a situation where the press yell that the American people have a right to know their President had been assassinated. I don't say there are not two sides to the situation, but I think when they get to interfering with the processes of law there is bound to be a middle ground or some way to work it out. I can't solve it.

Mr. DULLES. So far as you know, have all documents of any evidence, of any kind whatsoever, collected by State and local authorities in Texas been turned over to the Federal authorities and the President's Commission?

Mr. WADE. So far as I know they have. We have either sent it to the Commission or to Mr. Waggoner Carr, and I assume whatever he gets he sends to you all. I don't know of any documents; I don't know whether--you don't have a transcript of the trial, but that will be testimony.

The CHAIRMAN. How long was the transcript, Mr. Wade?

Mr. WADE. I don't know how many pages. I don't think--we don't have our copy of it. We ordered a copy, and so--he filed a pauper's oath, so I don't have any idea how long it will be. It was about 2 weeks of testimony, an argument, and also 2 weeks of picking the jury. They took all that down, all questioning of prospective jurors, so all that will be in the transcript.

The CHAIRMAN. Will that all be in the record on appeal?

Mr. WADE. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. Have they made any extra copies, do you know?

Mr. WADE. I know they are making some extra copies that have been bought by individuals, I believe Life magazine, some of those magazines have ordered a copy.

The CHAIRMAN. I see; yes.

Mr. WADE. We are having to pay for ours. We are having to pay for ours, and, of course, we will handle that, we will use that when briefing our case on appeal.

The CHAIRMAN. Do you know what it will cost? You don't know that yet?

Mr. WADE. I think--we think--our copy will be $3,000. I mean I have got that figure in my mind, because the Commissioners' Court kicked about us having to pay court reporters who are working for the county, but I think the court reporters wrote the law, but I have got in mind $3,000, but that is a copy. The original usually is twice that much, but of course, a copy is all you would want. But you can write Mr. Jimmy Muleady. He is the official court reporter of that court.

Mr. DULLES. You have testified with regard to the Hudkins and Goulden rumors that the FBI or CIA or some other Federal agency might have employed Oswald. One or the other of those correspondents indicated that he got his information from some high official that he refused to identify--he or they--refused to identify. Do you know anything about that?

Mr. WADE. No; Hudkins, as I recall, wrote in his article--I don't know who the high official is, but I imagine they are basing it on me or the police or someone--Hudkins put in his article, you know he wrote all this stuff, he is a wild writer, and he said, "Henry Wade said he doubted whether it would be public information" or something.

Well, he came running into me one day there and said, "Now, I have got all kinds of evidence that he is working for the FBI."

And I said, "Well, fine, I have none myself," and he said, "What would you think about it?"

I said, "Well, you are getting onto a situation that I don't know whether it ought to be public information or not." I mean, I asked, suppose he did, I don't know whether it would be something that ought to be written or not, well, more or less trying to get him not to write the article, and I said, "Assuming it is so, I don't see you are doing any good writing it."

So he quoted from that. That is all the conversation I had with Hudkins, and you can get that--I haven't seen the Goulden article, and didn't talk with him. I haven't seen Joe Goulden--I assume it is Joe Goulden. He left Dallas and went with a Philadelphia paper. So if it is the situation, if I have seen it I don't remember anything about it, if he wrote a story.

But the high official, all I can tell you anything on that, I have absolutely no evidence myself or any personal knowledge that he worked for the FBI or any Federal agency, and the only thing I have heard are rumors on the subject, and none of them that has got anything to base it on that I know of.

Does that cover that?

Mr. DULLES. That covers that.

You referred to the statement attributed to you made prior to Oswald's killing that the case against him was closed. I understand you say that was not correct, you did not make that statement.

Mr. WADE. That is right. To the best of my knowledge, I never said that. I mean that is what burned me up more than anything, more than any other statement on television when I saw it. I had not been on television. They have written this in the Dallas papers and some woman wrote in and said she saw me say it on television. But I would like to see a picture of it because the case never had actually been opened as far as--I mean, we weren't investigating the case. I think that night I told them, of course he is dead, there is no way of trying him. But the purpose, one other purpose in that interview Sunday night was to point out that I am sure the agencies will go on investigating it for the benefit of posterity, and I actually, if not in that interview, the following day, said I agreed with some Congressmen who said they thought they ought to have a Federal investigation on a national level of this thing.

Mr. DULLES. Do you know whether any other Texas officials made any such statement?

Mr. WADE. I don't know whether anybody did. They quoted the chief of police. They quoted Fritz on it, and then they started quoting me on it, which is all saying that. But so far, to the best of my knowledge, I never told anybody the case was closed, and I really think that Fritz must have said something about it, and then people think the captain of detectives and the district attorney and the chief are all about the same, and it finally drifted over to me because I left the police station and never had a word to say until that night when I was on television.

Mr. DULLES. Do you know whether there were any official transcripts made of the various interrogations of Oswald from the time he was captured to the time of his killing?

Mr. WADE. If there are any, I have never seen them. I have asked for them, but you are dealing with a man who not only doesn't make transcripts, but doesn't even make notes. Captain Fritz is the one who interrogated him most of the time, and if you--if there is any written evidence of what he said it must be from the FBI or the Secret Service or someone who interviewed him. I assume they make a record of what he said to them.

Mr. DULLES. If any transcript was made we would have had it, would we not? So far as you know?

Mr. WADE. The only thing I know I never have seen one, and I don't have one of an interview, and I don't know of any--you should have it, but you are dealing with Fritz there who interviewed Ruby, and Melvin Belli went right into the conversation with Ruby, and Belli at 4 o'clock that afternoon made everything admissible, and we couldn't get a thing, couldn't put Fritz on the stand because he couldn't remember anything that was helpful. I mean, he could remember Ruby rambling around the situation, but I don't know of any transcript like that that I have that you don't have.

Mr. DULLES. In your talks, going back to your talks, with Mr. Carter at the White House----

Mr. WADE. Carter; yes.

Mr. DULLES. Carter--did any questions come up in these conversations about not raising the issue that he was a Communist or that there might be a conspiracy or something of that kind?

Mr. WADE. No, sir; that conversation, I'm rather sure sometime Friday afternoon, and he called me and said, "Are they making any progress on the case?" You see, Cliff Carter and I are close personal friends. I have known him, and they were all upset, and I said, "I don't know. I have heard they have got some pretty good evidence." I think that is the only conversation I had with him.

Somebody told me, Mr. Carr, I believe, or Barefoot Sanders, that they had had some conversations with some Washington officials, and I have got an impression it was the State Department, but it might have been--that they--concerning the international conspiracy angle. I didn't discuss it because it was silly, I mean the whole thing was a silly deal.

I mean, if you would prove he was a Communist, suppose he gave a statement he was a Communist, I wouldn't have put that in a murder charge because I had to prove it.

Mr. DULLES. That is all I have, Mr. Chief Justice.

The CHAIRMAN. I think that is all, Mr. Wade. Thank you very much for your cooperation.

Mr. WADE. I appreciate what you all are doing and your problems you have got up here. I know if I were in your place I would hate to listen to somebody like me talk 5 hours.

The CHAIRMAN. All right. We will recess until 2 o'clock.

(Whereupon, at 12:50 p.m., the President's Commission recessed.)

Afternoon Session

TESTIMONY OF PATRICK T. DEAN

The President's Commission reconvened at 2 p.m.

(Chairman Warren presiding and Mr. Dulles present.)

The CHAIRMAN. All right, gentlemen.

Do you have a statement?

Mr. RANKIN. Sergeant Dean asked if he couldn't appear before the Commission and testify. We took his deposition in Dallas, and he asked, when he signed his deposition, whether he couldn't appear personally, so we are permitting him to do this.

The CHAIRMAN. We are very happy to have you, Sergeant. Will you raise your right hand and be sworn, please?

You solemnly swear the testimony you are about to give before the Commission shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?

Mr. DEAN. I do.

The CHAIRMAN. Be seated, please.

Mr. Rankin, you may examine the witness.

Mr. RANKIN. Sergeant, will you give us your name, your address, please?

Mr. DEAN. Patrick T. Dean. I live at 2822 Nicholson Drive in Dallas.

Mr. RANKIN. Are you connected with the police department in Dallas?

Mr. DEAN. Yes, sir.

Mr. RANKIN. What is your position?

Mr. DEAN. I am a sergeant on patrol.

Mr. RANKIN. How long have you been an official in the police department?

Mr. DEAN. Eleven and a half years.

Mr. RANKIN. Will you tell us briefly any training or experience you have had?

Mr. DEAN. Well, I worked as a patrolman for 5 years. Then I was promoted to sergeant and remained in the patrol division. I have since been in the patrol division the rest of the time.

Mr. RANKIN. You have given us your deposition, have you not, Sergeant?

Mr. DEAN. Yes, sir.

Mr. RANKIN. And is that correct and true as far as anything you know?

Mr. DEAN. Yes, sir.

Mr. RANKIN. Is there any part of it that you want to change or correct or modify?

Mr. DEAN. No, sir; I feel the main reason I wanted to appear before the Commission was about the 20 or 25 minutes that was off the record that I feel I would like the Commission to have on the record, and this is between Mr. Griffin and I. He was the original one who started my deposition.

Mr. RANKIN. Well, do you want to tell that at this time?

First, is there anything about what you said on the record that was not correct?

Mr. DEAN. No, sir.

Mr. RANKIN. And the truth?

Mr. DEAN. No, sir.

Well, Mr. Griffin had questioned me about 2 hours, or maybe a little longer. There was no problems at all, no difficulties. And after that length of time, a little over 2 hours, Mr. Griffin desired to get off the record, and he advised the court reporter that he would be off the record and he could go smoke a cigarette or get a Coke, and he would let him know when he wanted him to get back on the record.

Well, after the court reporter left, Mr. Griffin started talking to me in a manner of gaining my confidence in that he would help me and that he felt I would probably need some help in the future.

My not knowing what he was building up to, I asked Mr. Griffin to go ahead and ask me what he was going to ask me. He continued to advise me that he wanted me to listen to what he had to say before he asked me whatever question he was going to ask me. I finally told him that whatever he wanted to ask me he could just ask me, and if I knew I would tell him the truth or if I didn't know, I would tell him I didn't know.

Mr. Griffin took my reports, one dated February 18, the subject of it was an interview with Jack Ruby, and one dated November 26, which was my assignment in the basement.

He said there were things in these statements which were not true and, in fact, he said both these statements, he said there were particular things in there that were not true, and I asked him what portions did he consider not true, and then very dogmatically he said that, "Jack Ruby didn't tell you that he entered the basement via the Main Street ramp."

And, of course, I was shocked at this. This is what I testified to, in fact, I was cross-examined on this, and he, Mr. Griffin, further said, "Jack Ruby did not tell you that he had thought or planned to kill Oswald two nights prior."

And he said, "Your testimony was false, and these reports to your chief of police are false."

So this, of course, all this was off the record. I told Mr. Griffin then this shocked me, and I told him it shocked me; that I couldn't imagine what he was getting at or why he would accuse me of this, and I asked him, and Mr. Griffin replied he didn't or he wasn't at liberty to discuss that particular part of it with me, and that he wasn't trying to cross-examine me here, but that under cross-examination he could prove that my testimony was false, and that is when I told Mr. Griffin that these are the facts and I can't change them. This is what I know about it.

I quoted Ruby just about verbatim, and since he didn't believe me, and I was saying they were true, we might as well terminate the interview.

Mr. Griffin then got back on the record, or before he did get back on the record, he said, "Well now, Sergeant Dean, I respect you as a witness, I respect you in your profession, but I have offered my help and assistance, and I again will offer you my assistance, and that I don't feel you will be subjecting yourself to loss of your job," or some words to that effect, "If you will go ahead and tell me the truth about it."

I again told Mr. Griffin that these were the facts and I couldn't change them, so with that we got back on the record.

Mr. RANKIN. Did you ask Mr. Griffin to ever put this part that was off the record on the record?

Mr. DEAN. No, sir; I didn't.

Mr. RANKIN. Why didn't you at that time?

Mr. DEAN. Well, now the discussion was, I said, "Mr. Griffin, I have waived my rights for an attorney, of which I don't feel like I need one." I still don't feel like I need one.

The CHAIRMAN. And you do not need one either Sergeant.

Mr. DEAN. True.

The CHAIRMAN. You will get along all right.

Mr. DEAN. Thank you.

I said, "I have come over here with the idea of giving you all the information that I have." In fact, I had some additional information that I had gotten the night before, and it was a call that I had received from some man in Victoria, Canada, who said he had a reel of movie film that he had taken of the assassination.

I got this man's name, where he called from, had the police department in Victoria check to crisscross the number, and I gave him the name--well, all the information as to where the call had originated from, his name, also this man's attorney, he had given me his name, and I told him that the reason the man had called, had called especially for me at the police department, was that he had a reel of movie film that he had taken the day of the assassination and that these--or the camera was on the President at the time of the assassination, and he described to me the position as to where he was, which was across and in trajectory of the line of fire, and that he felt that in addition to the assassination that he had gotten the School Book Depository.

I told Mr. Griffin at the time that I had told this man--I can't remember his name, the FBI has gotten it, and at the time I gave it to Mr. Griffin, I told this man on the telephone from Victoria that night that he should send these things, this film, that he said wasn't developed, to the Warren Commission.

He said, that is when he told me that he had contacted his attorney in Victoria and that his attorney's name was Batter, and he spelled it for me, B-a-t-t-e-r, and his attorney had advised him not to send this information to the Warren Commission but to contact someone in Dallas and send it to them.

This man told me that he had read something about my testimony and that he asked me would it be all right for him to send it to me, and I told him, "Yes," and I said I was supposed to go back to the Warren Commission and he could send it to me, and I would make it available for them.

This was just additional information that I told Mr. Griffin that I was--this is an example--I was there to help them in any way I could.

Mr. RANKIN. Now, the differences in your testimony that Mr. Griffin was discussing with you off the record, you have gone into that in detail on the record, haven't you, in your deposition?

Mr. DEAN. Yes; I believe I have, about how Ruby entered the basement or how he told me how he entered the basement. Also that he had thought two nights prior when he saw Lee Oswald on a showup stand with a sarcastic sneer on his face is when he decided if he got the chance he would kill him. This was the thing that I testified in court about. I was cross-examined in court.

Mr. RANKIN. And you have explained all that in your deposition, haven't you?

Mr. DEAN. I believe so; I am not certain.

Mr. RANKIN. And did he ask you about why you didn't have your--this information about his planning to shoot Oswald the night before, or on the Friday----

Mr. DEAN. Now, are you asking did Mr. Griffin ask me why I didn't----

Mr. RANKIN. Why you didn't put it in your February--in your statement before the February 18 one?

Mr. DEAN. Yes, sir; I believe he did, and I explained to him this wasn't the subject--the subject of that November 26 report was my assignment. I didn't put any of the conversation as to what Mr. Sorrels and I talked to Mr. Ruby about. I did put at the closing paragraph, I think, and I have a copy of it here, that my main concern was how he got into the basement and how long he had been there because I was in charge of the security of the basement.

Mr. RANKIN. So you didn't put it in your prior reports?

Mr. DEAN. No, sir; this was later on. Chief Curry--I think probably it was February 18--and I think I probably wrote it that day, called me to his office and asked me had I heard all the interview of Ruby and Sorrels, and I told him that I did, and he asked me could I remember it pretty well, and I said, "Yes, I believe I can remember most all of it," and that is when Chief Curry told me that, he said, "Well, you are going to have to testify to it because Mr. Sorrels can't because he says he didn't warn Mr. Ruby when he was questioning him.

Well, this was fine with me. I wrote the report. This was February 18.

Mr. RANKIN. Did you tell Mr. Griffin at that time that you thought it was unimportant or had some other reason for not including it?

Mr. DEAN. I believe that I told him that the investigation, the focal point, was as to how he got into the basement. There was an officer, and I knew who the officer was, I assigned him there myself, and I felt this was more of a part of the investigation in which it was investigated--Officer R. E. Vaughan was investigated as to whether or not he let Ruby into the basement or saw him in the basement, and, of course, he was cleared of this. I know of no--the only information I passed on about that was when Jack Ruby told me how he entered. I told my superiors and then they carried it on from there as far as the investigation.

Mr. RANKIN. And about his planning to shoot him prior to the day that----

Mr. DEAN. Now, this wasn't--the only time that I put that in the report was February 18.

Mr. RANKIN. Yes; did you explain to Mr. Griffin in your prior testimony why you didn't put it in?

Mr. DEAN. I believe that I did; I am not sure.

Mr. RANKIN. Do you want to add anything to that, just anything that you wanted, to the Commission?

The CHAIRMAN. Do you recall whether you were asked that specific question or not, Sergeant? May I ask, Mr. Rankin, was he asked that question, and did he answer it?

Mr. RANKIN. I have to look at the record to be sure.

Mr. Chief Justice, in answer to your question, he was asked about what was the first time that he had given this information and if this was the date. He was not asked for any explanation as to why he didn't give it at any earlier time.

The CHAIRMAN. Then we can't blame him if he didn't answer why.

Mr. RANKIN. No; I just wanted to find out if he wanted to add anything at this time that would complete the record.

The CHAIRMAN. Yes; all right.

Mr. DEAN. Well, my main concern has been in some way this got out to the papers. The only thing I told the papers was that I can't give any statement. I said I have no comment, and I feel that the accusation started with my denial because I haven't had an opportunity to deny it. The story came out in the papers and it has been on the radio several times, and, in fact, several times since the original, some weeks or so after the paper learned of it of the so-called rift, as they put it.

They had the one side of it that he accused me of lying. He didn't use the word "lie," he just said, "These are false statements, and when you testified in court you testified falsely." He didn't use the word "lying," and a lot of papers have since then used the word "lying."

I feel like the accusation is a lot stronger than my denial because I haven't denied it. I haven't made any statement at all to press or radio or any news media. I just told them it will have to come from the Warren Commission or some other source.

Mr. RANKIN. What I was asking, Sergeant, was whether there is anything that you would like to tell the Commission or add to your testimony about why it wasn't in the earlier statement prior to February 18 that you haven't already told us.

Mr. DEAN. Well, I don't think I would like--if I could, I would like to know why Mr. Griffin had accused me of perjury. Of course, this is something for you people to know, but I just--he wouldn't discuss it with me.

The CHAIRMAN. Well, Sergeant, I want to say to you that, of course, without knowing what your conversation was with Mr. Griffin, I have never talked to Mr. Griffin about this. I didn't know that you had this altercation with him, but I want to say this: That so far as the jurisdiction of this Commission is concerned and its procedures, no member of our staff has a right to tell any witness that he is lying or that he is testifying falsely. That is not his business. It is the business of this Commission to appraise the testimony of all the witnesses, and, at the time you are talking about, and up to the present time, this Commission has never appraised your testimony or fully appraised the testimony of any other witness, and furthermore, I want to say to you that no member of our staff has any power to help or injure any witness.

So, so far as that conversation is concerned, there is nothing that will be binding upon this Commission.

Mr. DEAN. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. But, as I say, I don't know what your conversation was with Griffin, but I am just telling you as to what the limitations of the members of our staff are.

Mr. DEAN. Yes, sir; thank you. That is about all I had.

Mr. RANKIN. That is all I have, Mr. Chief Justice.

The CHAIRMAN. Well, thank you, Sergeant, for coming and feeling as you do, I am glad you had the frankness to come and talk to the Commission, and offer to testify concerning it.

Mr. DEAN. Thank you. I appreciate the opportunity.

The CHAIRMAN. All right, Sergeant.

Mr. DEAN. Thank you. It is nice to have met you.

Mr. RANKIN. Waggoner, do you want to take the stand for a minute about that conversation?

The CHAIRMAN. You are going to ask the General about it?

Have you been sworn?

TESTIMONY OF WAGGONER CARR

Do you solemnly swear the testimony you are about to give before the Commission shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?

Mr. CARR. I do.

The CHAIRMAN. Be seated, please.

Proceed, Mr. Rankin.

Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Carr, will you state your name and position for the record?

Mr. CARR. I am Waggoner Carr, attorney general of the State of Texas.

Mr. RANKIN. And you are a practicing lawyer, are you?

Mr. CARR. Yes, sir; before I was elected, I was practicing law in Lubbock, Tex. Now, of course, being attorney general, this has taken me out of the private practice. Prior to that I graduated from law school at the University of Texas, had my pre-law with a BBA degree from Texas Tech. I have been an assistant district attorney for the 72nd judicial district in Texas; county attorney of Lubbock County for 2 years; served in the Texas House of Representatives for 10 years, the last 4 of those years being as Speaker of the House, and was elected attorney general in 1960.

Mr. RANKIN. You are the same Waggoner Carr who has participated from time to time in observing these hearings and cooperating with the Commission regarding its work?

Mr. CARR. Yes.

Mr. RANKIN. Insofar as the State of Texas is concerned?

Mr. CARR. Yes.

Mr. RANKIN. Were you here when Henry Wade was testifying with regard to a conversation between himself and yourself, this morning?

Mr. CARR. Yes, sir.

Mr. RANKIN. Would you relate to us that conversation as you recall it, both what you said and what he said?

Mr. CARR. As I recall, it was around 8 or 9 o'clock at night on November 22, 1963, when I received a long-distance telephone call from Washington from someone in the White House. I can't for the life of me remember who it was.

A rumor had been heard here that there was going to be an allegation in the indictment against Oswald connecting the assassination with an international conspiracy, and the inquiry was made whether I had any knowledge of it, and I told him I had no knowledge of it.

As a matter of fact, I hadn't been in Dallas since the assassination and was not there at the time of the assassination.

So the request was made of me to contact Mr. Wade to find out if that allegation was in the indictment.

I received the definite impression that the concern of the caller was that because of the emotion or the high tension that existed at that time that someone might thoughtlessly place in the indictment such an allegation without having the proof of such a conspiracy. So I did call Mr. Wade from my home, when I received the call, and he told me very much what he repeated to you today, as I recall, that he had no knowledge of anyone desiring to have that or planning to have that in the indictment; that it would be surplusage, it was not necessary to allege it, and that it would not be in there, but that he would doublecheck it to be sure.

And then I called back, and--as I recall I did--and informed the White House participant in the conversation of what Mr. Wade had said, and that was all of it.

Mr. RANKIN. Was there anything said to you at any time by anybody from Washington that if there was any evidence that was credible to support such an international conspiracy it should not be included in the indictment or complaint or any action?

Mr. CARR. Oh, no; absolutely not. There was no direct talk or indirect talk or insinuation that the facts, whatever they might be, should be suppressed. It was simply that in the tension someone might put something in an indictment for an advantage here or disadvantage there, that could not be proved, which would have very serious reaction, which the local person might not anticipate since he might not have the entire picture of what the reaction might be.

Mr. RANKIN. Thank you. That is all I have, Mr. Chief Justice.

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Attorney General, I don't know whether you will be testifying on any other subject before the Commission or not, but in the event that you do not, and both of us are not here in the Commission again at the same time, I want to say to you for the record that from the very beginning of our investigation your cooperation has been complete, it has been enthusiastic, and it has been most helpful to the Commission.

The Commission and I all appreciate it very much indeed.

Mr. CARR. Well, thank you, sir. I will say this, that it has been a very pleasant experience for us, and I think set a good example of how a State government and a Federal Government can cooperate together where we have common objectives such as this, where we are trying to determine the facts and nothing else.

Mr. DULLES. May I add my voice to that, Mr. Chief Justice?

The CHAIRMAN. Yes; indeed, you may.

Mr. DULLES. I know that has been true as far as I am personally concerned, and during our trip to Dallas, Mr. Carr was of great help to us.

Could I ask just one question?

The CHAIRMAN. Yes, indeed.

Mr. DULLES. Was there any indication in the call from the White House as to whether this was a leftist, rightist, or any other type of conspiracy or, as far as you recall, was just the word "conspiracy" used?

Mr. CARR. As far as I recall, it was an international conspiracy. This was the idea, but I don't know whether the word "Communist" was used or not, Mr. Dulles. It could have been, or maybe I just assumed that if there was a conspiracy it would only be a Communist conspiracy. I don't know which it was, but it was a perfectly natural call.

The circumstances that existed at the time, knowing them as I did, and the tension and the high emotion that was running rampant there, it was not inconceivable that something like that could have been done, you understand, without any thought of harming anyone or any thought of having to prove it, as long as you didn't know that under our Texas law you have to prove every allegation made in an indictment. If you didn't know that, it might seem logical that someone might put something like that into an indictment, factual or not.

Mr. DULLES. Thank you very much.

Mr. CARR. But there was no such thing going on.

The CHAIRMAN. Well, General, I think that will be all then. Thank you very much.

Mr. CARR. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. The Commission is adjourned.

(Whereupon, at 2:50 p.m., the President's Commission recessed.)

Tuesday, June 9, 1964

TESTIMONY OF RICHARD EDWARD SNYDER, JOHN A. McVICKAR, AND ABRAM CHAYES

The President's Commission met at 10 a.m., on June 9, 1964, at 200 Maryland Avenue NE., Washington, D.C.

Present were Chief Justice Earl Warren, Chairman; Senator John Sherman Cooper, Representative Gerald Ford, and Allen W. Dulles, members.

Also present were William T. Coleman, Jr., assistant counsel; W. David Slawson, assistant counsel; Charles Murray, observer; and Dean Robert G. Storey, special counsel to the attorney general of Texas.

TESTIMONY OF RICHARD EDWARD SNYDER

(Members present at this point: Chief Justice Warren, and Mr. Dulles.)

The CHAIRMAN. Gentlemen, the Commission will come to order. Mr. Coleman, would you make a statement as to the purpose of the meeting this morning?

Mr. COLEMAN. Mr. Chief Justice, the first witness is Mr. Richard E. Snyder, who is presently first secretary in the American Embassy in Tokyo, Japan, and was second secretary and consul, American Embassy, Moscow, U.S.S.R., in 1959, and remained in that post in Moscow through at least the middle of 1961.

Mr. Snyder will be asked to testify concerning Lee Harvey Oswald's actions when he came into the American Embassy in Moscow on October 31, 1959, and stated that he desired to renounce his U.S. citizenship, the actions which the Embassy took at that time, and the information which it gave to the State Department.

Mr. Snyder also handled the interview of Oswald when he appeared at the Embassy in July of 1961, and had his passport returned to him, and will be asked to testify about the return of the passport.

Mr. Snyder will also be asked to identify for the record the various Embassy dispatches and State Department instructions which were exchanged concerning Oswald in 1959, 1960, and to the middle of 1961.

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Snyder, it is customary for us to read a statement of that kind to the witness, so you will be apprised of what we are going to interview you about.

Will you please rise and raise your right hand and be sworn?

Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you are about to give before this Commission shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?

Mr. SNYDER. I do, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. You may be seated.

Mr. Coleman will conduct the examination.

Mr. COLEMAN. Mr. Snyder, will you state your name for the record.

Mr. SNYDER. Richard Edward Snyder.

Mr. COLEMAN. And what is your present address?

Mr. SNYDER. 118 Geary Drive, South Plainfield, N.J.

Mr. COLEMAN. Are you presently employed by the Federal Government?

Mr. SNYDER. Yes, sir.

Mr. COLEMAN. In what capacity?

Mr. SNYDER. As a Foreign Service officer of the Department of State.

Mr. COLEMAN. Where are you presently stationed?

Mr. SNYDER. In Tokyo, American Embassy.

Mr. COLEMAN. Directing your attention to the fall of 1959, were you employed by the Federal Government at that time?

Mr. SNYDER. Yes, sir.

Mr. COLEMAN. Where were you stationed?

Mr. SNYDER. At the Embassy in Moscow.

Mr. COLEMAN. What was your title?

Mr. SNYDER. Second secretary and consul, sir.

Mr. COLEMAN. I take it that you have had called to your attention a copy of the joint resolution which was adopted by Congress with respect to the Commission.

Mr. SNYDER. Yes, sir.

Mr. COLEMAN. And I also take it that since you have been back in the country that you have had an opportunity to look at the various State Department files dealing with Oswald.

Mr. SNYDER. Yes, sir.

Mr. COLEMAN. Calling your attention to the date of October 31----

Mr. DULLES. Could I ask one question, Mr. Coleman, about that? What previous posts had you had before going to Moscow?

Mr. SNYDER. Well, my first post in the Foreign Service----

Mr. DULLES. I am interested as an old Foreign Service officer.

Mr. SNYDER. I see. I served for a brief time in HICOG in Frankfurt, Germany and then for about 2 years in Munich, in the consulate general, which was my first post in the Foreign Service.

My second post, I spent 1 year in the boondocks of Japan, in Niigata, on the Sea of Japan, in a one-man cultural center.

Mr. DULLES. As a Foreign Service officer?

Mr. SNYDER. As a Foreign Service officer; yes, sir. I was assigned to this duty at a time when USIS was still part of the State Department, and when I reached my post it had already been separated, so I was on loan to them. And then a year and a half in Tokyo. Then a summer and an academic year at Harvard, in Russian area studies.

Mr. DULLES. In what school there?

Mr. SNYDER. In Littauer.

Mr. DULLES. Did you learn Russian at that time?

Mr. SNYDER. No; I had had Russian in college before.

Mr. DULLES. So you speak Russian fairly fluently?

Mr. SNYDER. Fairly fluently; yes, sir.

Mr. DULLES. And then Moscow was your next post?

Mr. SNYDER. And then Moscow for 2 years; yes, sir.

Mr. DULLES. What 2 years?

Mr. SNYDER. July of 1959 to July of 1961. I arrived there just before the Vice President.

Mr. COLEMAN. Directing your attention, sir, to October 31, 1959, did you have occasion to see Lee Harvey Oswald on that day?

Mr. SNYDER. Yes, sir.

Mr. COLEMAN. Had you ever seen him before?

Mr. SNYDER. No, sir.

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

Mr. COLEMAN. Had you ever heard about him before?

Mr. SNYDER. No.

Mr. COLEMAN. Could you state for the Commission just what happened when you saw Mr. Oswald on October 31. 1959, indicating the time of day, what he said, and what you did?

The CHAIRMAN. Before you answer that question, may I say that this is Congressman Ford, a member of the Commission.

This is Mr. Snyder of the State Department now stationed in Tokyo, and who was stationed at the Embassy in Moscow when Oswald attempted to defect.

Representative FORD. Thank you.

Mr. SNYDER. Well, as for the time of day, I am afraid I draw a blank. I can make some assumptions as to the time of day, for what they are worth.

But since I told Oswald--and you will come to this, I think, a little later on--that the Embassy was closed theoretically at the time, I presume this was a Wednesday afternoon or perhaps a Saturday afternoon, but I just don't recall.

Mr. COLEMAN. For the record, I think it was a Saturday, sir.

Mr. SNYDER. Was it a Saturday?

So, at any rate--if it had been a morning, I could not have used this particular approach with him. So I presume it was an afternoon.

Oswald came into the Embassy without prior announcement. He didn't call or in any other way communicate with us, to the best of my knowledge.

Mr. DULLES. You had no way of knowing he was in Russia?

Mr. SNYDER. I had no previous knowledge of his presence; no, sir.

At any rate, he came in to me cold, so to speak. I was told that an American wanted to see me, wanted to see the consul. And I am not sure whether I went out and brought him in or whether he was taken into my office by someone else. At any rate, this was my first meeting with Oswald.

I will be glad to give you such recollections as I have as to his general demeanor and this sort of thing, if you would like.

Mr. COLEMAN. Yes, sir.

Mr. SNYDER. And I might inject at this point something which I mentioned to Mr. Slawson before our session began, and that is that I reviewed the files, our own files, on Oswald, enough to refresh my memory as to the basic facts and the chronology of events and this sort of thing, but I have attempted not to go too deeply into details with the thought that what the Commission is interested in, presumably, is what I honestly remember at the time and not so much what may have been planted in my mind by reviews since that time.

As to his general appearance, I do recall that he was neatly and very presentably dressed. I couldn't say offhand whether he was dressed in a suit and shirt, though I think probably he was. At any rate, he presented a nice physical appearance.

I presume that he was well shaven. Otherwise, I would not have had this feeling about him--that he, in general, was competent looking.

He was extremely sure of himself. He seemed to know what his mission was. He took charge, in a sense, of the conversation right from the beginning. He told me in effect that he was there to give up his American citizenship. I believe he put his passport on my desk, but I am not sure. I may have asked for it. In general, his attitude was quite arrogant.

Mr. DULLES. Could I ask one question there? When you say you presume you asked for it, you mean you asked to see it--you didn't ask to take it from him?

Mr. SNYDER. No, I asked to see it. If he didn't put it on the desk, then I asked for it early in the game--one way or the other.

He told me, among other things, that he had come to the Soviet Union to live, that he did not intend to go back to the United States, that this was a well thought out idea on his part. He said, again in effect, "Don't bother wasting my time asking me questions or trying to talk me out of my position."

He said, "I am well aware"--either he said, "I am well aware" or "I have been told exactly the kind of thing you will ask me, and I am not interested, so let's get down to business"--words to that effect.

Well, he was a very cocksure young man at that time.

I am not sure that he sat at all throughout the interview, but certainly in the early part of it he did not.

I asked him--I recall asking him to take a seat, and he said, no, he wanted to stand. He may have relented later on.

At any rate, I did nevertheless probe about and elicited a bit of information about him which was in my report to the Department of State.

Mr. COLEMAN. Sir, was anyone else present at the time you were talking to Mr. Oswald?

Mr. SNYDER. No; I believe Mr. McVickar was in the next room. But there was no one in the room with us at that time.

Mr. COLEMAN. How long did the interview with Mr. Oswald last, approximately?

Mr. SNYDER. Well, I would have to pull it out of the air, really. It would be on the order of magnitude of half an hour. It might have extended to three-quarters of an hour, something of this sort.

Mr. COLEMAN. Other than the passport, did he give you any other piece of paper?

Mr. SNYDER. Yes, yes; he did. He gave me a written statement saying something along the line of what I have said he mentioned to me orally. That is, that he had come to the Soviet Union to live, that he desired to renounce his citizenship, that he was going to become a citizen of the Soviet Union, words to that effect.

Mr. DULLES. We have that written statement, do we not?

Mr. COLEMAN. I have marked as Commission Exhibit No. 913 a photostatic copy of a handwritten letter which is signed by Lee H. Oswald, and ask you whether that is a copy of the letter that Oswald gave you on October 31, when he appeared at the Embassy?

(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 913 for identification.)

Mr. SNYDER. Yes; I would say it is, sir.

Mr. COLEMAN. After he gave you the letter and the passport, did he do anything else?

Mr. SNYDER. No; after his initial statement of purpose and intent, and after giving me this statement, the interview was then pretty much in my hands. He was, I would say, a reluctant interviewee from there on.

He had announced initially his desire not to discuss the matter with me, but simply to get on with the business for which he had come and, therefore, anything else that was to be said was up to me to get said.

Mr. COLEMAN. Did you at that time go through whatever formalities are required for a person to renounce his citizenship?

Mr. SNYDER. No; I did not.

Mr. COLEMAN. What does an American citizen have to do at the Embassy to renounce his citizenship?

Mr. SNYDER. Well, the law requires, in general, that an American citizen, to renounce his citizenship, must appear before--I am not sure whether the law confines it to a consular officer--but at any rate must appear, in the case of the Foreign Service, appear before a consular officer, and swear to an affidavit in the proper form, something of this order. In practical terms, it means that the consul draws up a statement, the content of which--the exact wording of which is contained in our regulations, and has the person swear to it in his presence.

Mr. COLEMAN. Well, did Mr. Oswald ask for such an affidavit?

Mr. SNYDER. I don't think he asked for such an affidavit in those terms. I am not sure that he understood that completely, what the procedure was. But he did ask to renounce his citizenship.

Mr. COLEMAN. Well, did you provide him with the affidavit?

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

Mr. COLEMAN. Why didn't you provide him with the affidavit at that time?

Mr. SNYDER. Well, as the consul and, of course, the responsible person at the time, it didn't seem to me the sensible thing to do--in the sense that--I can't, I suppose, speak for all consuls, but it is sort of axiomatic, I think, in the consular service that when a man, a citizen comes in and asks to renounce his citizenship, you don't whip out a piece of paper and have him sign it. This is a very serious step, of course, an irrevocable step, really, and if nothing else you attempt to provide enough time for--to make sure that the person knows what he is doing. You explain, for one thing, what the meaning of the act is; and, secondly, again speaking for myself--I cannot speak for the Foreign Service in this--provide a little breather, if possible make the man leave your office and come back to it at a later time, just to make sure--for what value there is in making sure--that the man's action is not something completely off the top of his head.

Representative FORD. Mr. Chairman, would it be helpful for the record to have put in the record at this point whatever the law is in this regard, and whatever the Department regulations are on this point?

The CHAIRMAN. That may be done; yes.

Mr. COLEMAN. I would like to say, sir, at 2 o'clock the Legal Adviser to the State Department is coming in, and he is going to put it in at that time.

Mr. DULLES. May I ask a question at this point?

Mr. COLEMAN. If you want it in now, we can indicate the sections which are applicable.

Representative FORD. I think there ought to be some citation at this point, because the witness is talking specifically about the process of the law and the regulations.

The CHAIRMAN. Do you have the law there, Mr. Snyder--is that the law?

Mr. SNYDER. I brought nothing with me, myself.

The CHAIRMAN. I saw a book there that you were looking at, and I thought that would suffice.

Mr. SNYDER. Shall I read the section of law, sir?

This is the Immigration and Nationality Act, section 349(a)(6).

Section 349(a) states, "From and after the effective date of this Act, a person who is a national of the United States, whether by birth or naturalization, shall lose his nationality by"--then section 6 under that, subsection, states, "making a formal renunciation of nationality before a diplomatic or consular officer of the United States in a foreign state in such form as may be prescribed by the Secretary of State."

Mr. COLEMAN. Sir, the Secretary of State has promulgated regulations which are found in 22 Code of Federal Regulations, sections 50.1 and 50.2 and they are also reproduced in 8 Foreign Affairs Manual, section 225.6.

Basically, as I understand it, those regulations provide the form in which the citizen is to make the renunciation, and it is to be done in four copies, and then one copy is to be given to the person who makes the renunciation. Is that your understanding?

Mr. SNYDER. This is my understanding; yes, sir.

Representative FORD. Are those forms available? Are they printed up, or do you have to draft them? What is the circumstance?

Mr. SNYDER. They are not printed forms, to my knowledge, Mr. Ford--at least I have never seen a printed form. The only time that I have used them in my Foreign Service experience I have had them typed up on the spot.

The CHAIRMAN. You may continue, Mr. Coleman.

Mr. DULLES. We ought to have in the record, Mr. Chief Justice, a copy of that form--either here or later.

The CHAIRMAN. As I understood, someone from the State Department is coming here to testify on the procedures, and the witness did not bring anything with him, he says.

Mr. SNYDER. That is right, sir.

Mr. COLEMAN. Mr. Snyder, when you were talking to Mr. Oswald on October 31, 1959, did he say anything with respect to applying for Soviet citizenship?

Mr. SNYDER. Yes; this was contained in his written statement, for one thing, and I believe that he also stated this to me orally.

Mr. COLEMAN. Did he say anything with respect to having any information since he had been in the Marine Corps that he would be willing to make available to the Soviet Union?

Mr. SNYDER. Yes; he did. He stated again, in effect, that he would make available to the Soviet authorities or to the Soviet Union what he had learned concerning his speciality--he was an electronics specialist of some sort, a radar technician--at any rate, he would make available to the Soviet Union such knowledge as he had acquired while in the Marine Corps concerning his specialty.

He volunteered this statement. It was rather peculiar.

Mr. COLEMAN. You say that the interview lasted about a half an hour. I take it he then left. Did he say he was going to return?

Mr. SNYDER. No; I don't believe he did. He gave no particular indication of when he would return, if he would return, or this sort of thing.

Mr. COLEMAN. Do you recall just what he said when he left your office?

Mr. SNYDER. No, sir.

Mr. COLEMAN. I show you a document----

Mr. DULLES. Could I ask one question there? Did he take his passport or did he leave it?

Mr. SNYDER. No; I kept it.

Mr. DULLES. You kept the passport?

Mr. SNYDER. Yes, sir.

Mr. COLEMAN. I show you a document which has been marked Commission Exhibit No. 908, and it is a Foreign Service dispatch dated November 2, 1959. This is from Embassy, Moscow, to the Department of State, Washington. It is signed by Edward L. Freers, but on the first page there is an indication it was actually drafted by you. Do you recall drafting the original of that document?

Mr. SNYDER. Yes, sir.

(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 908 for identification.)

Mr. COLEMAN. That statement was drafted within a day or two after you had the interview with Mr. Oswald. I take it it reflects what happened at that time.

Mr. SNYDER. Yes, sir.

Mr. DULLES. Was there any cabled report of this incident?

Mr. SNYDER. Yes; I cabled a report on the 31st, Mr. Dulles. Commission Exhibit No. 908 is a somewhat fuller report, 2 days later.

Mr. COLEMAN. To answer Mr. Dulles' question, I show you a document which has been marked Commission Exhibit No. 910, which purports to be a copy of a cable from Moscow to the Secretary of State, and ask you whether that is the cable which was sent off on October 31, 1959.

(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 910 for identification.)

Mr. SNYDER. Yes, sir.

Mr. COLEMAN. I also had marked, and I would like to show you, Commission Exhibit No. 909, which is a copy of a telegram from American Embassy, Tokyo, to Secretary of State, dated November 27, 1963. This telegram purports to be an interview which the Ambassador in Tokyo had with you immediately after the assassination in which you attempted to recall what happened on October 31, 1959, when Mr. Oswald appeared at the Embassy.

(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 909 for identification.)

Mr. COLEMAN. I ask you if you can identify that telegram?

Mr. SNYDER. Might I just inject something? I notice in my reports, on my first interview with Oswald, that I mention the Petrulli case. You might at this time or later on wish to refer to the Petrulli case.

Mr. DULLES. Mr. Chairman, this cable is very short and quite significant. I wonder if it could not be read into the record at this point, just for the continuity of the record.

Mr. SNYDER. There is a slight problem of classification on these, Mr. Dulles. I don't know how public the records are.

Mr. DULLES. Maybe you could paraphrase it, then. You mean it is a question of codes?

Mr. SNYDER. It is a question of code security; yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. If this is in the record, it will be published.

Mr. COLEMAN. Off the record.

(Discussion off the record.)

The CHAIRMAN. Back on the record.

Mr. COLEMAN. Would you be kind enough to read Commission Exhibit No. 910 into the record?

Mr. SNYDER. In paraphrase?

The CHAIRMAN. Paraphrase, yes; in your own way.

Representative FORD. Of course keeping the intent of what was said precisely as it was sent.

Mr. SNYDER. Yes, sir.

A person appeared at the Embassy today, October 31, identified himself as Lee Harvey Oswald, and stated that he had come to renounce his American citizenship. He was the bearer of U.S. passport No. 1733242, date of issuance September 10, 1959, which showed him to be unmarried and gave his age as 20, or which showed him to be 20--it gives his date of birth. Mr. Oswald stated that he had applied for Soviet citizenship in Moscow. He stated that he had entered the Soviet Union from Helsinki, Finland, on October 15. He said that he had contemplated this action for the previous 2 years. The main reason given was that "I am a Marxist." He has a mother living at 4936 Collinwood Street, Fort Worth, Tex., which was also his last address.

His attitude was arrogant and aggressive. He stated that he had recently been discharged from the Marine Corps. He also volunteered the information that he had offered to the Soviet authorities any information which he had acquired as an enlisted radar operator in the Marines.

In view of the Petrulli case, the Embassy proposes to delay completing the renunciation procedure until the action of the Soviet authorities on his request for Soviet citizenship is known or the Department advises.

A dispatch follows.

The press has been informed.

The CHAIRMAN. Would the Commissioners like to see the document itself?

Mr. COLEMAN. Mr. Snyder, could you tell the Commission what the Petrulli case was?

Mr. SNYDER. Yes. The Petrulli case I remember quite well.

Mr. Petrulli was an American citizen who came into the Embassy some weeks before, I believe, asking to renounce his American citizenship. Mr. Petrulli hung around Moscow for quite some time, again a number of weeks, and perhaps as long as 3 weeks or a month. He had entered the Soviet Union as a tourist, I believe.

It is not clear what intent he had when he arrived.

But, at any rate, he did apply for Soviet citizenship while in Moscow, and he did come into the Embassy, and was interviewed by me to renounce his American citizenship. I did not, in accordance with the thinking which I outlined to you earlier--I did not accept his renunciation the first time he came in, but did accept it when he subsequently appeared, and insisted that is what he wanted to do.

The case had a--I might skip over the minor details, but it had a rather rapid denouncement, when the Soviet authorities, after having looked him over for a number of weeks, decided they did not want him as a citizen or resident of the Soviet Union. And when we subsequently learned, that is I learned, from my reporting to the Department, and correspondence with them, that Mr. Petrulli had been discharged from the Armed Forces some time earlier on, I believe, a 100-percent mental disability--the Soviet, I think it was the head of the consular section of the Soviet Foreign Ministry, called me into the Foreign Ministry one day and said words to the effect that an American citizen Mr. Petrulli, has overstayed his visa in the Soviet Union, he is living here illegally, and "We request that you take steps to see that he leaves the country immediately."

I told the Soviet official that to the best of my knowledge Mr. Petrulli was not then an American citizen, he having executed a renunciation of citizenship before me.

The Soviet official said in effect, "As far as we are concerned, he came here on an American passport, and we ask that you get him out of here."

Well, again to end what was a long, involved and terribly time-consuming story at the time, it was determined by the Department that Mr. Petrulli's renunciation was null and void because he was not competent, and therefore he was an American citizen, and we shipped him home.

The Petrulli case, as I say, was very much in my mind when Mr. Oswald showed up.

Mr. COLEMAN. After you sent the telegram, which is Commission Exhibit No. 910, to the State Department, I take it that the first word that you received from the State Department is a telegram which I have marked as Commission Exhibit No. 916.

(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 916 for identification.)

Mr. SNYDER. Yes.

Mr. COLEMAN. Now, by paraphrasing, could you read the second paragraph of that telegram into the record?

Mr. SNYDER. "For your information, in the event that Mr. Oswald insists on completing a renunciation of his United States citizenship, the Embassy is precluded by the provisions of section 1999 of the Revised Statutes from withholding the right to do so without regard to the status of his application for citizenship which is pending before the Soviet government and without regard to the Petrulli case."

Mr. COLEMAN. At the same time that you were notifying the State Department that Oswald had appeared, someone in the Embassy also sent a telegram to the Navy Department, didn't he, advising that Oswald, a former Marine, had appeared at the Embassy and stated that he was a radar operator in the Marine Corps, and that he had offered to furnish the Soviets the information he possessed on radar.

I have marked as Commission Exhibit No. 917 this telegram and ask you whether that is the telegram that went forth to the Navy Department.

(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 917 for identification.)

Mr. SNYDER. I don't recall that I saw this telegram at the time. But I would say from the content of it, and the form, that it is clearly a telegram sent by the naval attaché of the Embassy to his home office.

Mr. COLEMAN. We also have had marked as Commission Exhibit No. 918 the telegram which the Navy sent in reply to Commission Exhibit No. 917.

Spotted a typo or a problem in this chapter? Tell us