Warren Commission (07 of 26): Hearings Vol. VII (of 15) (part 4 of 6)

Warren Commission (07 of 26): Hearings Vol. VII (of 15) (part 4 of 6)

Mr. BARNES. The lobby and the place where the arrest was made.

Mr. BELIN. It was after that that you then went to investigate that major automobile accident?

Mr. BARNES. Yes.

Mr. BELIN. Now after you investigated or took pictures at this major automobile accident, then what did you do?

Mr. BARNES. I returned to the city hall.

Mr. BELIN. What did you do when you returned to the city hall?

Mr. BARNES. We started working out the evidence and developing negatives of all the photos that were taken at the Kennedy assassination site and also at the Tippit site.

Mr. BELIN. Who were you working with at that time?

Mr. BARNES. We had just about all the manpower of the crime scene search section working.

Lt. J. C. Day, myself, Detective R. L. Studebaker, Detective J. B. Hicks, and Detective R. W. Livingston.

Mr. BELIN. Did you know about what time of the day you were doing this?

Mr. BARNES. We started on it, I would say, roughly after I returned to the city hall. It was getting close to 4 o'clock.

Mr. BELIN. Where was this work done?

Mr. BARNES. In the crime scene search section of the identification bureau.

Mr. BELIN. On what floor is that?

Mr. BARNES. It is on the fourth floor of the city hall.

Mr. BELIN. On the fourth floor, were there any people other than police personnel?

Mr. BARNES. Not where we were; no.

Mr. BELIN. When you got there, did you see what the situation was on the third floor?

Mr. BARNES. Yes; we could.

Mr. BELIN. What was the situation on the third floor?

Mr. BARNES. Turmoil of news media, photographers.

Mr. BELIN. What do you mean by turmoil?

Mr. BARNES. Well, they just all of them trying to get up in there where they could get a shot.

Mr. BELIN. By a shot, you mean a picture?

Mr. BARNES. Yes; a photo. Any photos they might get for the newspapers.

In case they should get a view, they wanted to be there at the time. I presume that is what they were there for.

Mr. BELIN. Was Oswald on the third floor at the time?

Mr. BARNES. Yes.

Mr. BELIN. Did they have wires coming through the windows for television cameras, or not?

Mr. BARNES. There was wires running all over the city hall; cables.

Mr. BELIN. Cables?

Mr. BARNES. Yes.

Mr. BELIN. What about stands for lights, were they there, too?

Mr. BARNES. That's right, they come up with lights and also TV cameras to cover.

Mr. BELIN. When you say city hall, really the third floor that we are talking about is exclusively used by the police department, is that correct?

Mr. BARNES. Yes.

Mr. BELIN. All right, do you have any estimate of the number of newspaper people there were on the third floor at that time?

Mr. BARNES. It would be a guess. I wouldn't want to venture to guess, because it would be just strictly guesswork.

Mr. BELIN. More than 20?

Mr. BARNES. Yes.

Mr. BELIN. More than 50?

Mr. BARNES. I am not saying. I don't know.

Mr. BELIN. All right, in any event, you were working on the fourth floor?

Mr. BARNES. Yes.

Mr. BELIN. Then where did you go?

Mr. BARNES. Later we went to the third floor, to the office of Captain Fritz.

Mr. BELIN. What did you go to Captain Fritz' office for?

Mr. BARNES. To make a paraffin test of Lee Harvey Oswald's hand.

Mr. BELIN. About when would this have been, approximately, if you know?

Mr. BARNES. I tell you, the time didn't mean anything there, and it was after I returned to the city hall, and after 6 o'clock.

Mr. BELIN. Sometime after 6 o'clock?

Mr. BARNES. Yes.

Mr. BELIN. Did Captain Fritz call you up and tell you to come down and make the paraffin test?

Mr. BARNES. He didn't talk to me. I was advised to go to that office to help make the paraffin test.

Mr. BELIN. By your supervisor?

Mr. BARNES. Yes.

Mr. BELIN. Who would that have been?

Mr. BARNES. Lt. J. C. Day.

Mr. BELIN. Now is this the usual procedure when you are going to make a paraffin test, to go to an office such as Captain Fritz' office to do it?

Mr. BARNES. No.

Mr. BELIN. What would the usual procedure be?

Mr. BARNES. If he is alive, they usually bring them to our bureau.

Mr. BELIN. That would be to bring them up to the fourth floor?

Mr. BARNES. Yes.

Mr. BELIN. This would have necessitated, I would assume, moving the prisoner from Captain Fritz' office through the hallway up to the fourth floor?

Mr. BARNES. It would.

Mr. BELIN. Were there any people in the hallways at this time, or did anyone tell you why?

Mr. BARNES. Well----

Mr. BELIN. That is, tell you why they were going to make a paraffin test down in Captain Fritz' office rather than in your laboratory?

Mr. BARNES. No, sir; nobody said anything to me about it.

Mr. BELIN. Was there any particular problem that you saw insofar as taking the prisoner up to your office from Captain Fritz' office?

Mr. BARNES. Yes; you would have to take him through the throng of newspapermen and photographers who were in the hallway.

Mr. BELIN. What is the fact as to whether this might have presented a security problem in any way?

Mr. BARNES. It would.

Mr. BELIN. What equipment did you take down to make this paraffin test?

Mr. BARNES. I took paraffin, the paraffin kit that we have which consists of gauze and paraphernalia that we need to make the test.

Mr. BELIN. Was this your permanent equipment or your portable equipment? When I say your permanent, I mean your inplace equipment?

Mr. BARNES. It is the same equipment we use up in our bureau, working under makeshift conditions.

Mr. BELIN. When you use the phrase "makeshift conditions"----

Mr. BARNES. Just like putting up a portable camping ground to cook on. We have our benches to work on up at the crime scene search section which makes it handier to work with.

Mr. BELIN. Would the quality of the test be the same?

Mr. BARNES. Yes; I think so. The quality would be the same, just takes a little more time and inconvenience.

Mr. BELIN. When you got down there, what did you do and see? First of all, who was in the room?

Mr. BARNES. Detective Dhority and Detective Leavelle.

Mr. BELIN. Is that L-e-a-v-e-l-l-e?

Mr. BARNES. Right. And Lee Harvey Oswald.

Mr. BELIN. Did you have any discussion, or did you hear Lee Harvey Oswald say anything or anyone say anything to Lee Harvey Oswald while you were there?

Mr. BARNES. No conversation.

Mr. BELIN. What did you do?

Mr. BARNES. We got our equipment and got the paraffin melted, and while it was being prepared, we told him that we would have to make a paraffin cast of his hand.

Mr. BELIN. What did he say to that?

Mr. BARNES. It was okay with him.

Mr. BELIN. Did he say anything as to any other comments he had about the paraffin test?

Mr. BARNES. None other than he stated to me, "What are you trying to do, prove that I fired a gun?"

And I said, "I am not trying to prove that you fired a gun. We have the test to make, and the chemical people at the laboratory, at the city-county laboratory will determine the rest of it."

Mr. BELIN. What is the purpose of a paraffin test?

Mr. BARNES. The purpose is to find out if there is any nitrates on your hands.

Mr. BELIN. Officer, how many years have you personally made paraffin tests?

Mr. BARNES. Since 1956.

Mr. BELIN. What is the procedure by which you determine whether or not there are any nitrates on one's hand?

Mr. BARNES. The analyses are made at Parkland Hospital by their personnel.

Mr. BELIN. Do they analyze the wax?

Mr. BARNES. They analyze the wax that I remove from his hands after the casts are made.

Mr. BELIN. Well, if you were to take a paraffin or make a paraffin test on one of my hands, you would take melted hot wax and put it over my hands?

Mr. BARNES. It wouldn't be hot wax. It would have to be at a degree where it would be melted. Take a paint brush, small paint brush, dip it into the paraffin, and paint your hand as you would be painting a wall, and you build this paraffin up around and around your hand, front and back, until you get a layer approximately a quarter of an inch thick.

Then you wrap the hands in gauze, just a layer of gauze around it for reenforcement purposes such as you would put steel and concrete to reenforce it, and then on top of this gauze we put another layer of paraffin. In fact, several layers of paraffin on top of the gauze to round it out to make it more firm so that when we remove this paraffin from around his hands, we take a pair of surgical scissors and cut down each side, and it slips off just like you were removing a glove.

Mr. BELIN. You would make two cuts then, one along the side of the little finger and one along the side of the thumb?

Mr. BARNES. Well, really it is a =V=-cut on the thumb and forefinger, and a straight parallel line down the left- or right-little finger.

Mr. BELIN. On the side of the palm of the hand?

Mr. BARNES. Right.

Mr. BELIN. Have you done any reading as to what this test shows and what its limitations are at all?

Mr. BARNES. Well, yes; the purpose of it is when you put the heated paraffin on the hand, for the nitrates which might be on the hand, to be stuck to the paraffin that you place on there.

This paraffin that you place on the hand--I will rephrase this a little bit.

When you put the paraffin on your hand, the nitrates that might be on your hands will stick to the paraffin as it cools, and when you remove the paraffin, then this nitrate or powder residue which might be on the hands will be hardened into the paraffin and will slip off with the paraffin.

Mr. BELIN. Now when you say nitrates, I believe you used the word "residue"?

Mr. BARNES. Powder residue and nitrates.

Mr. BELIN. Is nitrate a compound which is in gunpowder residue?

Mr. BARNES. That is what they call the dermal nitrate test, I believe is the correct name that they give it.

Mr. BELIN. Does gunpowder generally have included in it some sort of nitrate compound?

Mr. BARNES. Yes.

Mr. BELIN. If I were firing a pistol, would this pistol leave a nitrate on my hands that would be detectable by the paraffin test?

Mr. BARNES. It should, unless it is awful tight.

Mr. BELIN. What do you mean by "awful tight"?

Mr. BARNES. You could have an automatic which very easily could keep you from having nitrate on your hands.

Mr. BELIN. Well, let's assume that we were taking a .38 caliber pistol. You have seen the pistol which Lee Harvey Oswald had in his possession at the time he was apprehended.

Let's assume I were firing that pistol. Would it leave some residue on my hand?

Mr. BARNES. It should.

Mr. BELIN. Suppose I were to wash my hands between the time I fired it and the time you took the paraffin test?

Mr. BARNES. It would hurt the test.

Mr. BELIN. It would cut down the test?

Mr. BARNES. Yes.

Mr. BELIN. Now if I were firing it, would it necessarily show on both hands? Suppose I were right-handed?

Mr. BARNES. Depends on the location of your left hand.

Mr. BELIN. Well, generally from your experience, is there any particular location for a right-handed person to keep his hand when he is firing a pistol?

Mr. BARNES. Police officers are taught to keep their left hand near the pistol handle.

Mr. BELIN. As an element of controlling it?

Mr. BARNES. As an element of controlling, and also an element which, if you should get wounded in your right shoulder, you would have the left hand to take the gun.

Mr. BELIN. If you keep it near then, I assume that you would get the nitrate on the other hand, too, or not?

Mr. BARNES. Very likely that you would.

Mr. BELIN. Suppose I were unloading a pistol and taking the cartridge case out and putting them in my left hand or handling the chamber where the cartridge cases had been, would this leave nitrate deposits on my hand?

Mr. BARNES. It is possible.

Mr. BELIN. Suppose you were to examine my hands and you were to find no nitrate deposits at all. Would you say that this conclusively shows that I did not fire a pistol?

Mr. BARNES. No.

Mr. BELIN. Well, does it conclusively show I had not fired a pistol within the last 6 or 8 or 10 hours?

Mr. BARNES. No.

Mr. BELIN. Why do you say that?

Mr. BARNES. Well, a lot would depend what kind of pistol.

Mr. BELIN. Well, suppose it were a .38 caliber pistol?

Mr. BARNES. Then it would depend on whether you had cleaned your hands or whether you had had gloves on.

Mr. BELIN. Well, suppose I were to tell you I didn't have gloves on.

Mr. BARNES. Had you washed your hands?

Mr. BELIN. Well, would this make much of a difference?

Mr. BARNES. Washing your hands would make a difference.

Mr. BELIN. All right, now, suppose you were to examine me for firing a rifle such as a bolt-action rifle rather than an automatic or semiautomatic. Would you expect to find nitrate residue on my hands that a paraffin test would show?

Mr. BARNES. Chances are smaller on a rifle than it would be with a revolver.

Mr. BELIN. Why?

Mr. BARNES. Because your chamber is enclosed.

Mr. BELIN. What difference does that make?

Mr. BARNES. The powder couldn't get out like a pistol where the cylinder is open, and there is no casing around the cylinder of a revolver, and the chamber of a rifle, it is enclosed with the metal all the way around.

Mr. BELIN. Well, I operate the bolt on the rifle, does that make a difference about letting the gas or residue escape?

Mr. BARNES. No; all your explosives have already gone down the barrel. It is not coming down the side when you operate the chamber. There is no pressure there.

Mr. BELIN. What you are saying then is, that it is the pressure at the time of firing in an open chamber that creates the major portion of this residue?

Mr. BARNES. That's right.

Mr. BELIN. If you were to have a positive nitrate test on a person's hands, and by positive, I mean it would show the presence of nitrate, would you say, without knowing anything about the firearm that the person fired, that it was more likely that he had fired a .38 caliber revolver, or a bolt-action rifle?

I mean a nonautomatic revolver?

Mr. BARNES. Let me get your question to see if I am correct. If there were nitrates present?

Mr. BELIN. Yes.

Mr. BARNES. In my own mind would I come to the conclusion that it would probably come from a revolver? Rather than a rifle?

Mr. BELIN. Well, nonautomatic revolver, as opposed to a rifle. Which would be more likely?

Mr. BARNES. The revolver would be more likely.

Mr. BELIN. Now you said that you took the paraffin casts off the hands. Do you generally take it of both hands when you take a paraffin test?

Mr. BARNES. Yes; we do.

Mr. BELIN. When you take a usual paraffin test, do you take it of any other part of the body other than the hands?

Mr. BARNES. No.

Mr. BELIN. In this case, did you take it of any other portion of the body other than the hands?

Mr. BARNES. Yes; I did.

Mr. BELIN. What other portion of the body did you take it of?

Mr. BARNES. The right side of his cheek and face.

Mr. BELIN. The right side of Lee Harvey Oswald's cheek and face?

Mr. BARNES. Yes.

Mr. BELIN. Who directed you to take it there?

Mr. BARNES. Captain Fritz.

Mr. BELIN. Did he particularly say why he wanted it taken there?

Mr. BARNES. I didn't ask the questions why he wanted it. I was ordered to take it from him, and I took it because I had the order to take the test.

Mr. BELIN. Was there an order to take the left cheek also, or not?

Mr. BARNES. No.

Mr. BELIN. How long did you say that you had been making paraffin tests?

Mr. BARNES. Since 1956.

Mr. BELIN. Roughly, how many of those do you do in a month on an average?

Mr. BARNES. It would be hard to say. If I hit it lucky, I won't make too many. If it hits on some other man's duty. It would be hard to say how many I have made over a period of time. I can say that I have made many.

Mr. BELIN. Over these years, do you think you have made as many as 100?

Mr. BARNES. It would be hard to say. I am not going to go into any actual figures because it would be guesswork.

Mr. BELIN. Well, let me ask you this. Of the paraffin tests that you have made, how many have you made of a cheek or cheeks?

Mr. BARNES. One.

Mr. BELIN. Was that with Lee Harvey Oswald?

Mr. BARNES. It was.

Mr. BELIN. Other than that, you have never made a paraffin test of anyone's cheek?

Mr. BARNES. No.

Mr. BELIN. Any particular reason why you might not have in any other case?

Mr. BARNES. It has never been requested of me before.

Mr. BELIN. Based on your knowledge and information about the science of paraffin tests, do you know whether or not it is a common practice or not a common practice to make it of one cheek?

Mr. BARNES. It is not a common practice.

Mr. BELIN. Any particular reason it is not a common practice, that you can think of or know of?

Mr. BARNES. Firing a revolver, should he fire a revolver, I would say the revolver most likely would be far enough away where powder residue wouldn't reach his cheek?

Mr. BELIN. What about a rifle?

Mr. BARNES. Firing a rifle, you get your chamber enclosed with steel metal around it, and the chances of powder residue would be very remote.

Mr. BELIN. Have you fired a bolt-action rifle at all before?

Mr. BARNES. Many times.

Mr. BELIN. How close would the chamber be to the cheek as you would be looking through the sight of the gun.

Mr. BARNES. Be several inches to the rear of the chamber.

Mr. BELIN. Would this have any effect on the paraffin test at all?

Mr. BARNES. It sure would.

Mr. BELIN. What about telescopic sights? Would that push your face back further or not?

Mr. BARNES. Push it even further back.

Mr. BELIN. Would this have an effect on the paraffin test?

Mr. BARNES. The further you get from the chamber, the less possibility of getting powder residue on it would be.

Mr. BELIN. When you made the paraffin cast on the cheek, did you also paint it on with this brush that you are talking about?

Mr. BARNES. I did.

Mr. BELIN. To about a quarter of an inch thickness?

Mr. BARNES. Not quite that much.

Mr. BELIN. When you put the gauze on?

Mr. BARNES. Yes.

Mr. BELIN. And you put some more paraffin on?

Mr. BARNES. Yes.

Mr. BELIN. Then what did you do? Did you cool it with water, or let it naturally harden by room temperature?

Mr. BARNES. Nature cools it from room temperature.

Mr. BELIN. Then you removed it from the cheek?

Mr. BARNES. Yes.

Mr. BELIN. Did you need a scissors when you removed it from the cheek?

Mr. BARNES. No.

Mr. BELIN. What did you do with these paraffin tests after you made them?

Mr. BARNES. I placed them in a manila, large manila envelope separately.

Mr. BELIN. Then what did you do?

Mr. BARNES. I walked out of Captain Fritz' office, and I had a couple of patrolmen trying to weed their way through the news media so that I could have walking room to get to the elevator to get back to the fourth floor, the ID bureau.

Mr. BELIN. The news media had the third floor pretty well jammed at that time?

Mr. BARNES. I would say it was pretty well jammed.

Mr. BELIN. About what time of the night was this?

Mr. BARNES. Approximately 9 o'clock, I would say, approximately.

Mr. BELIN. Did Lee Harvey Oswald say anything to you as you were removing these casts, that you remember?

Mr. BARNES. Very little, other than what I repeated to you before, that he knew what I was trying to do, and that I was wasting my time, that he didn't know anything about what we were accusing him of.

Mr. BELIN. Did Lee Harvey Oswald leave Captain Fritz' office at that time or did he stay there?

Mr. BARNES. I didn't go back, I couldn't tell you.

Mr. BELIN. He didn't come out with you, did he?

Mr. BARNES. No.

Mr. BELIN. Were any remarks of any kind made to you by any of the people in the hallway, nonpolice officers, as you left the office? Questions or remarks or what have you?

Mr. BARNES. Yes.

Mr. BELIN. What did they say?

Mr. BARNES. They kept storming questions at me, "What have you got in that sack, what have you got in that sack, you owe it to the news media to give it to us, what have you got in that sack?"

Mr. BELIN. Would this just come from one person?

Mr. BARNES. All of them.

Mr. BELIN. About how many of them were there at that time?

Mr. BARNES. They had the hallways blocked.

Mr. BELIN. Did you reply to them at all or not?

Mr. BARNES. I didn't answer.

Mr. BELIN. You then went up to the fourth floor to the lab, is that correct?

Mr. BARNES. That is true.

Mr. BELIN. What did you do then?

Mr. BARNES. I initialed the cast, sealed them, and placed them in our locked evidence room.

Mr. BELIN. Where did they go after that?

Mr. BARNES. They go to our city-county laboratory for analysis.

Mr. BELIN. Where is that city-county laboratory?

Mr. BARNES. At Parkland Hospital.

Mr. BELIN. Do you know when they went there?

Mr. BARNES. The following morning.

Mr. BELIN. Did you get the results from this analysis at all?

Mr. BARNES. The results were obtained by our bureau. I didn't get the results.

Mr. BELIN. Do you know what these results were?

Mr. BARNES. I understand--I haven't seen them personally--but I understand they are positive, the ones of his hands.

Mr. BELIN. By positive, you mean they showed the presence of nitrates?

Mr. BARNES. They showed the presence of nitrates.

Mr. BELIN. What about the one on the cheek?

Mr. BARNES. The one of his cheek was negative.

Mr. BELIN. Were any conclusions made because of either the positive results from the test on his hands or the negative result on the test of the cheek?

Mr. BARNES. In my own mind, I didn't expect any positive report from the cheek to start with. But to cut down criticism and to satisfy the public and to show the world that we tried to cover it very well, we did it for possibly any future--I don't know how to word it--any complaints that might come later on.

Mr. BELIN. By complaints, you mean people that might----

Mr. BARNES. Might question why you did or why you didn't do it on something this big. We felt like the public should know that we done the best that we knew how.

Mr. BELIN. Even though you didn't expect to have results?

Mr. BARNES. I didn't personally, and I am the one that made it.

From my experience with paraffin casts and from my experience in shooting rifles, common sense will tell you that a man firing a rifle has got very little chance of getting powder residue on his cheek.

Mr. BELIN. Have you ever made a paraffin cast of your cheek after you fired a rifle?

Mr. BARNES. No; I have not.

Mr. BELIN. Have you ever made a paraffin test of anyone else's cheek after that person fired a rifle?

Mr. BARNES. I believe I am on record that that is the first paraffin test I ever made of a cheek.

Mr. BELIN. Have you ever read periodicals discussing the paraffin test? Any limitations of its use to determine whether or not a person fired a rifle by making a cast of the cheek?

Mr. BARNES. No; I haven't read anything about it.

Mr. BELIN. Basically then, your reasons for reaching this conclusion are your own personal reasons?

Mr. BARNES. That's right.

Mr. BELIN. What you earlier described as the chamber being an enclosed chamber, is that it?

Mr. BARNES. That is true.

Mr. BELIN. Which you said that the gases would not come out of under pressure, and when the chamber would be open for the ejection of a shell from a bolt-action rifle, at that time there would be no bad pressure?

Mr. BARNES. All your pressure is gone forward through your barrel. There is no pressure on the chamber when you operate it after the shot is fired.

Mr. BELIN. In contrast with a nonautomatic revolver, when I pull the trigger, is the back of the chamber open then?

Mr. BARNES. It is open.

Mr. BELIN. Is there any other information or opinion you can give us with regard to the paraffin tests that might be relevant. Anything you can think of, whether or not I have asked it?

Mr. BARNES. I believe you have covered just about everything.

Mr. BELIN. I call myself a country lawyer, and I don't know.

Mr. BARNES. I am a country boy. I was raised on the farm myself.

Mr. BELIN. Well, maybe we both have something in common.

Mr. BARNES. Still live there.

Mr. BELIN. Sergeant, did you make any other tests or obtain any other evidence or information from Lee Harvey Oswald other than the paraffin that you made?

Mr. BARNES. I obtained palm prints from Lee Harvey Oswald.

Mr. BELIN. When did you do this?

Mr. BARNES. Immediately before we made--no, immediately after, I am sorry, immediately after we made the paraffin test.

Mr. BELIN. I would assume you did it afterwards?

Mr. BARNES. That is right. It was after we made the tests.

Mr. BELIN. Now, when you used the phrase a while ago--I mean that when we were discussing shortly before we were taking this deposition just what you did do insofar as your being involved in this investigation----

Mr. BARNES. That's right.

Mr. BELIN. In that discussion did I in any way tell you what to say, or did you just tell me what you did in the nature of the proceedings here?

Mr. BARNES. I told you just what I did. I haven't been prompted by no one.

Mr. BELIN. Now, what did you do when you took the palm print?

Mr. BARNES. We took them back upstairs to the ID bureau for comparison purposes.

Mr. BELIN. At the time you carried back the paraffin casts?

Mr. BARNES. No. We came back and got the palm prints after I delivered the paraffin tests upstairs.

Mr. BELIN. Again, would this be normal procedure to take a palm print in Captain Fritz' office as opposed to your own laboratory?

Mr. BARNES. No; it would be something different. Usually we have them coming up to our identification bureau for that purpose.

Mr. BELIN. Any particular reason that you know of why Lee Harvey Oswald wasn't brought up to your identification bureau?

Mr. BARNES. Yes.

Mr. BELIN. What?

Mr. BARNES. Security.

Mr. BELIN. Because of the people in the hall?

Mr. BARNES. The news media in the hallways, and danger of removing Lee Harvey Oswald through the mass of newspapermen.

Mr. BELIN. Did the newspapermen say anything to you as you went down the hallway to Captain Fritz' office?

Mr. BARNES. Everytime that you went through there they asked you all kinds of questions on what you had and what were you doing and how much longer is it going to take, and what have you proved.

Mr. BELIN. Did you answer any of these questions?

Mr. BARNES. No; I did not.

Mr. BELIN. What did you do when you got back in the office in Captain Fritz' office? What did you find there? Who did you find in Captain Fritz' office when you came back?

Mr. BARNES. Same two officers that I mentioned, besides Detective Dhority and Detective Leavelle.

Mr. BELIN. Was Lee Oswald present?

Mr. BARNES. Lee Oswald was present.

Mr. BELIN. Did you have any conversation with Oswald at that time?

Mr. BARNES. None other than telling him that I had to have palm prints of his hand.

Mr. BELIN. Did he have anything to say about that?

Mr. BARNES. Cooperative.

Mr. BELIN. What is the fact as to whether he made any objection to the taking of any palm prints?

Mr. BARNES. None whatsoever.

Mr. BELIN. Did he request that he have an attorney present at all, or not?

Mr. BARNES. He didn't request one. He would not sign the fingerprint card when I asked him. We have a place on this card for the prisoner's signature, and I asked him would he please sign that, and he said he wouldn't sign anything until he talked to an attorney.

Mr. BELIN. Did he ask for an attorney or say anything about an attorney when you took the paraffin test?

Mr. BARNES. None to me.

Mr. BELIN. What did you say when he said he would not sign the fingerprint card?

Mr. BARNES. That was all right with me.

Mr. BELIN. Did you just take the palm prints, or did you also take fingerprints?

Mr. BARNES. We took both.

Mr. BELIN. What is your process of doing that?

Mr. BARNES. Rolling his hands, an ink roller over his palm, and then we have a metal cylinder bar about an inch in diameter that we place the card on and then roll his hands to make it print on the fingerprint card.

Mr. BELIN. Have you ever taken palm prints before?

Mr. BARNES. Many times.

Mr. BELIN. Based on your knowledge and information, what is the fact as to whether or not palm prints are distinct means of identification of a person?

Mr. BARNES. Just as good as fingerprints The only thing that I could add to that would be, there is no way of classifying palm prints, where with fingerprints, we have the system where we classify them and can go look them up.

Mr. BELIN. Is there anything else that you can offer with reference to the investigation of the assassination or the shooting of Officer Tippit other than the paraffin test and the palm and fingerprint tests that you took?

Mr. BARNES. None that I can think of right now, other than printing pictures of both killings.

Mr. BELIN. Do you remember anything else that Lee Oswald said other than the fact he would not sign his name to the card?

Mr. BARNES. He had very little to say.

Mr. BELIN. Is there anything else you can think of, whether I have asked it or not, that in anyway might be relevant to this investigation here?

Mr. BARNES. Not that I can think of at this time.

Mr. BELIN. Now were you on duty on Sunday morning, November 24?

Mr. BARNES. No; I was not.

Mr. BELIN. Was there any general comment among the police officers, what I call the line officers, about the presence of the press in the police headquarters building during this period of time?

Mr. BARNES. Yes; we discussed it.

Mr. BELIN. Without mentioning any names which might embarrass any individual, and without necessarily quoting yourself, what was the general nature or tenor of that discussion?

Mr. BARNES. Disgusted.

Mr. BELIN. Was there any objections that were voiced about this, or not?

Mr. BARNES. Yes; there were.

Mr. BELIN. What is the fact as to whether or not the presence of the press in any way affected the handling of this matter by the police department?

Mr. BARNES. It would be just like you carrying on your work in your office when you had it full of newspapermen or anybody else, as far as that is concerned.

Mr. BELIN. Were there people other than newspapermen generally in the police headquarters?

Mr. BARNES. It is hard to tell just who was who.

Mr. BELIN. Now you were not there at the time of the shooting of Lee Harvey Oswald by Jack Ruby, were you?

Mr. BARNES. No; I was not.

Mr. BELIN. Did you see the television showing of the film that ran during the--during that time?

Mr. BARNES. Yes; I did.

Mr. BELIN. You have had some experience, you said earlier, as a photographer, I believe, is that correct?

Mr. BARNES. Yes.

Mr. BELIN. What is the fact as to whether or not the presence of light such as you say you saw in the movie film that you saw--what is the fact as to whether or not the presence of these lights would affect the ability of officers protecting Lee Harvey Oswald to discern movements of people?

Mr. BARNES. Very much.

Mr. BELIN. In what way?

Mr. BARNES. Blinding them. The flash from the many cameras that were present in the basement of the city hall, the lights set up by your TV cameramen, all of this would work against the officers in safeguarding any prisoner.

Mr. BELIN. Is there anything else you can think of with reference to the security matters of Lee Harvey Oswald that might be relevant here other than your statements about the press and the problems of light?

Mr. BARNES. Other than the movement of him with the throngs of press men, which the security I thought was very good.

Mr. BELIN. Anything else you can think of right now?

Mr. BARNES. None that I can think of at this time.

Mr. BELIN. Is there anything else that you care to add in this deposition that might in any way be helpful or relevant?

Mr. BARNES. I think this pretty well covers it.

Mr. BELIN. Well, we want to thank you very much for your cooperation in coming down here, sergeant.

Mr. BARNES. I am glad to come. Hate to come under these circumstances.

Mr. BELIN. We hate to be here under these circumstances. It is not a pleasant job for any of us, but it is a job that has to be done. All right, sir.

I forgot to say that you have a right to, if you like, to read your deposition and sign it, or else you can waive reading and have the court reporter send it to us in Washington.

Mr. BARNES. I believe I will come back and let her show it to me, and I will sign it then.

TESTIMONY OF J. B. HICKS

The testimony of J. B. Hicks was taken at 3:10 p.m., on April 7, 1964, in the office of the U.S. attorney, 301 Post Office Building, Bryan and Ervay Streets, Dallas, Tex., by Messrs. Joseph A. Ball and Samuel A. Stern, assistant counsel of the President's Commission.

Mr. BALL. Please stand up and hold up your right hand.

(Witness complying.)

Mr. BALL. Do you solemnly swear the testimony you will give here today will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?

Mr. HICKS. I do.

Mr. BALL. Will you state your name, please, and your address?

Mr. HICKS. J. B. Hicks, 4318 Matilda, Dallas.

Mr. BALL. What is your occupation?

Mr. HICKS. I am with the police department, city of Dallas.

Mr. BALL. You are with the special section of the department?

Mr. HICKS. The identification bureau; yes, sir.

Mr. BALL. How long have you been with the identification bureau?

Mr. HICKS. Let's see, about, a little over 7 years now.

Mr. BALL. Tell me about yourself--where you were born.

Mr. HICKS. I was born in Irving, Tex., which is a suburb out here of Dallas, September 29, 1918.

Mr. BALL. What was your education?

Mr. HICKS. I finished high school, sir.

Mr. BALL. Then what did you do?

Mr. HICKS. Then--you mean where I went to work and from there?

Mr. BALL. Yes.

Mr. HICKS. I worked a short while for Sanger Bros., I believe 3 or 4 months or so, then I was employed by Higgenbotham-Bailey Logan Co. which is a wholesale company here in Dallas; from there I went to work with the police department where I have been for a little over 22 years now.

Mr. BALL. What kind of work do you do with the crime lab?

Mr. HICKS. I do the usual, oh, photography work, fingerprint comparisons, darkroom work and anything that might come under the crime lab; the crime scene, search duties.

Mr. BALL. You work under Lieutenant Day?

Mr. HICKS. I work under Lieutenant Day; yes, sir.

Mr. BALL. On November 22, 1963, were you on duty?

Mr. HICKS. No, sir; I was off duty that day.

Mr. BALL. But you were called back to duty?

Mr. HICKS. Yes, sir.

Mr. BALL. What time of day?

Mr. HICKS. I had--my wife, I believe it was called me from her work. She had heard of the happening and knowing that I was off, of course, she figured I would be called, so when she called me, I called in to Lieutenant Knight, who is also in the identification bureau, and told him that I was getting ready and if they needed me to report, to call me and tell me where to go to, and so he did. Oh, I don't know exactly how long it had taken place and the exact time that he did call me. The time right there, I can't recall. I know I did get to work somewhere around 3.

Mr. BALL. Where did you go to work, at the crime lab?

Mr. HICKS. No, sir; they told me to report directly to Elm and Houston.

Mr. BALL. Did you go down there?

Mr. HICKS. Yes, sir.

Mr. BALL. When you went down there what did you find?

Mr. HICKS. Lieutenant Day--well, first I saw Chief Lumpkin, who told me Lieutenant Day was there in the building and to report to him on the sixth floor, I believe it was and he and Detective Studebaker, I believe it was were the two that were still on that particular floor.

Mr. BALL. Day and Studebaker?

Mr. HICKS. Yes.

Mr. BALL. Did you do some work with them?

Mr. HICKS. Yes; there was--well, no. Lieutenant Day was dusting several items around there for fingerprints at the time and Mr. Studebaker had taken some pictures and was still taking a few others. I assisted him in moving the equipment back and forth and I don't know, I don't believe I actually took any of the pictures upstairs; however, I was there when some of them were taken.

Mr. BALL. There were three exploded cartridge hulls on the floor, weren't there?

Mr. HICKS. Yes; I am not sure; I believe they had already been picked up and removed when I arrived.

Mr. BALL. Do you know who picked them up?

Mr. HICKS. No, sir; I don't know off hand.

Mr. BALL. Did you later see them in your laboratory?

Mr. HICKS. I believe I saw one of the particular ones there that night.

Mr. BALL. You did?

Mr. HICKS. Yes, sir.

Mr. BALL. Did you examine it?

Mr. HICKS. No, sir; I did not. I think Lieutenant Day had all of them.

Mr. BALL. Do you do ballistics work in your laboratory?

Mr. HICKS. No, sir; we have no facilities for firing or testfiring any of the guns there.

Mr. BALL. Did you do any identification work on either the assassination of President Kennedy or the investigation of Tippit's murder?

Mr. HICKS. Do you mean as far as fingerprints?

Mr. BALL. Yes; and things of that sort.

Mr. HICKS. Let me see now, I took a set of Oswald's prints from him that night some time. I do not recall.

Mr. BALL. 9 o'clock or so?

Mr. HICKS. It was some time in that area.

Mr. BALL. Where were you when you took the prints?

Mr. HICKS. I was in Captain Fritz' office. In other words, I made those on an inkless pad. That's a pad we use for fingerprinting people without the black ink that they make for the records.

Mr. BALL. What else did you do there?

Mr. HICKS. I was one of the two who made the paraffin cast on Oswald.

Mr. BALL. You and who else?

Mr. HICKS. Sergeant Barnes.

Mr. BALL. Have you ever done that before, the paraffin cast?

Mr. HICKS. Oh, yes, sir.

Mr. BALL. Did Oswald protest any or did he permit you to do that?

Mr. HICKS. No, sir; he was willing and had no comment on it as far as the making of them.

Mr. BALL. Did you test the paraffin cast; did you make any test on it?

Mr. HICKS. No, sir; that's done by the lab at Parkland Hospital which Lieutenant Alexander, I believe is in charge there.

Mr. BALL. But you did not do it yourself?

Mr. HICKS. No, sir.

Mr. BALL. What has been your experience with paraffin casts? How accurate are they in determining whether or not a person has fired a firearm previously?

Mr. HICKS. My own personal opinion is that it is not an exact conclusive evidence that, if you are familiar with that test, anything containing nitrate might show up on a test of that sort.

Mr. BALL. Is it usual to find any trace of nitrate on the face if a rifle has been fired?

Mr. HICKS. That is the first time that I had the opportunity to make a paraffin test on a person's face.

Mr. BALL. You never made one before?

Mr. HICKS. Never before.

Mr. BALL. The other tests were always on the hands?

Mr. HICKS. Yes, sir.

Mr. BALL. Was there some reason for that?

Mr. HICKS. I had never had the occasion arise that I know of where anyone had that suggested, that a paraffin test be made of a cheek. On other occasions they were only interested in the hand.

Mr. BALL. Did you do anything else with respect to the investigation?

Mr. HICKS. I don't recall anything outstanding that I did in the investigation further there. Now, I know we were all pretty well busy there until about 2 or 2:30 in the morning but most of it was, I would imagine regular officework and just back and forth if someone had asked did we get a picture of this and picture of that; well, I can't recall any other particular item that I might have done.

Mr. BALL. Were you present when Oswald was arraigned in the identification bureau?

Mr. HICKS. No, sir; I left just a few minutes before that, I understand.

Mr. BALL. What time did you leave; do you know?

Mr. HICKS. I left it was shortly after 2. I don't know the exact time, maybe 2:15.

Mr. BALL. You think he was arraigned after you left?

Mr. HICKS. I am rather certain that he was because I believe I would have known about it had he been arraigned before I left because there is only one door in our office to go out and had any other group been there, I would have noticed it, I believe.

Mr. BALL. Did you talk to Oswald any?

Mr. HICKS. I only asked him his name when I made his fingerprints and I did not question him or go to any details on talking to him.

Mr. BALL. You were not present at any showups of Oswald?

Mr. HICKS. No, sir.

Mr. BALL. Did you make any fingerprint study in this case or palmprint study?

Mr. HICKS. No, sir--any comparisons to the prints that we had?

Mr. BALL. Yes.

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

Mr. BALL. You did not compare the prints you took of Oswald with any specimen that might have been taken from the Texas School Book Depository?

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

Mr. BALL. Did you ever see a paper sack in the items that were taken from the Texas School Book Depository building?

Mr. HICKS. Paper bag?

Mr. BALL. Paper bag.

Mr. HICKS. No, sir; I did not. It seems like there was some chicken bones or maybe a lunch; no, I believe that someone had gathered it up.

Mr. BALL. Well, this was another type of bag made out of brown paper; did you ever see it?

Mr. HICKS. No, sir; I don't believe I did. I don't recall it.

Mr. BALL. I believe that's all, Mr. Hicks.

Mr. HICKS. All right.

Mr. BALL. This will be written up and submitted to you for signature if you want, or you can waive signature; which do you prefer?

Mr. HICKS. Well, when would I have to come back to sign this?

Mr. BALL. Probably next week sometime.

Mr. HICKS. Well, that will be all right.

Mr. BALL. Suit yourself, either way. If you want to waive signature it's all right with us or if you want to come back.

Mr. HICKS. I will come back.

Mr. BALL. All right, she will notify you. Thanks very much.

TESTIMONY OF HARRY D. HOLMES

The testimony of Harry D. Holmes was taken at 4 p.m., on April 2, 1964, in the office of the U.S. attorney, 301 Post Office Building, Bryan and Ervay Streets, Dallas, Tex., by Mr. David W. Belin, assistant counsel of the President's Commission.

Mr. BELIN. Sir, would you rise and raise your right hand and be sworn. Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you are about to give will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?

Mr. HOLMES. I do, sir.

Mr. BELIN. Would you please state your name for the record?

Mr. HOLMES. Harry D. Holmes.

Mr. BELIN. Where do you live, Mr. Holmes?

Mr. HOLMES. 1711 McManus, Dallas, Tex.

Mr. BELIN. What is your occupation?

Mr. HOLMES. Postal inspector.

Mr. BELIN. For the U.S. Post Office Department?

Mr. HOLMES. Yes, sir.

Mr. BELIN. How old are you?

Mr. HOLMES. I am 57.

Mr. BELIN. What is your educational background? Did you go to high school here?

Mr. HOLMES. I graduated from high school in Kansas City, and went 2 years to William Jewell College at Liberty, Mo., and went almost through my third year in Kansas City. Went to dental college in Kansas City.

Mr. BELIN. Then what did you do?

Mr. HOLMES. Well, all that time I was working in the post office as a clerk, and about that time the war broke out and I went into the Postal Inspection Service in April 1942, and have been a postal inspector ever since.

Mr. BELIN. Have you been in Dallas ever since then?

Mr. HOLMES. No; I came here July 1, 1948. I have been here ever since.

Mr. BELIN. Where were you on November 22, 1963, around noon or so. That is the day of the assassination?

Mr. HOLMES. I was in my office on the fifth floor of the terminal annex building, located at the corner of Houston and Commerce Streets, Dallas, Tex.

Mr. BELIN. Houston and Commerce Streets in Dallas. Now, where is Commerce with relation to Elm?

Mr. HOLMES. Commerce, Main, Elm--two blocks.

Mr. BELIN. So Commerce would be two blocks south of Elm?

Mr. HOLMES. That's right.

Mr. BELIN. On what corner is your building?

Mr. HOLMES. It is on the northeast corner.

Mr. BELIN. The northeast corner?

Mr. HOLMES. Yes; well, now, wait a minute.

Mr. BELIN. I mean the building itself.

Mr. HOLMES. This is the reflecting pool, and here is the underpass, comes down like this, and this is Elm, and this is Main, and this is Commerce, and my building is right here. Right here is the School Book.

Mr. BELIN. This is north?

Mr. HOLMES. Yes; that is "cattywampus." This would be the southwest corner.

Mr. BELIN. All right. You have now corrected your testimony by drawing a diagram. What corner is this?

Mr. HOLMES. Southwest.

Mr. BELIN. On what side of the building is your office where you were sitting?

Mr. HOLMES. On the north side.

Mr. BELIN. From your office looking north, what building would you see?

Mr. HOLMES. The Texas School Book Depository Building. And I am on the fifth floor of my building.

Mr. BELIN. Were you on the fifth floor about the time the motorcade was coming down Main Street?

Mr. HOLMES. Yes, sir.

Mr. BELIN. Did you see the motorcade turn from Main onto Houston?

Mr. HOLMES. Yes; I did.

Mr. BELIN. What direction did it turn on Houston?

Mr. HOLMES. It turned north on Houston to Elm, and then turned left on Elm.

Mr. BELIN. To go down to the triple underpass?

Mr. HOLMES. That's right.

Mr. BELIN. About how fast was the motorcade going when you saw it, if you have any estimate on it?

Mr. HOLMES. I would say 15 miles an hour.

Mr. BELIN. Would you describe what you saw and heard then?

Mr. HOLMES. As it came out of Main Street, the President was sitting on the right in the back seat. His wife was on the left. Governor Connally, whom I also recognized, was sitting on the right of the middle seat.

Mr. BELIN. Were you looking with the aid of any optical instrument?

Mr. HOLMES. I had a pair of 7-1/2 x 50 binoculars. They were acknowledging the applause of the crowd and kind of waving, but not standing up. This is a short block.

Mr. BELIN. From Main to Elm?

Mr. HOLMES. To Elm is really not more than a good full block, but the motorcade turned north on Houston and went to Elm and turned left on Elm where it started on a downgrade to what we refer to as a triple underpass. As it turned in front of the School Book Depository, I heard what to me sounded like firecrackers, and it was my recollection that there were three of them.

I had my binoculars on this car, on the Presidential car all the time. I realized something was wrong, but I thought they were dodging somebody throwing things at the car like firecrackers or something, but I did see dust fly up like a firecracker had burst up in the air.

Mr. BELIN. Where did you see the dust?

Mr. HOLMES. Off of President Kennedy and I couldn't tell you which one of the cracks of the firecracker resulted in this.

Mr. BELIN. Do you have any recollection of the amount of time that elapsed between each of the three sounds?

Mr. HOLMES. I have tried to set a time, but it just escapes me. Honestly, I couldn't say. They were rather rapid. Say 20 seconds or something like that.

Mr. BELIN. You mean 20 seconds elapsed between all three, or less than 20 seconds?

Mr. HOLMES. Possibly 20 seconds, or half a minute and then crack and kind of a lapse and then another crack. I wouldn't want to swear to that. I have tried to recall it.

Mr. BELIN. Was there more time between the first and the second one, or between the second and third?

Mr. HOLMES. I couldn't tell you that.

Mr. BELIN. What did you see after that?

Mr. HOLMES. Mr. Kennedy leaned over against his wife, Mrs. Kennedy, as this thing, firecracker, looked like, come out. The car almost came to a stop, and Mrs. Kennedy pulled loose of him and crawled out over the turtleback of this Presidential car and was almost off of the back of the turtleback when a man from a car next to it came running up and I never--I got the impression in one way that she was trying to help him on the bumper.

I got the impression in another way that he was trying to push her back in the seat for fear she would fall and hurt herself. It was so quick that that was my impression, and in fact we discussed it. There was several of us looking out of the window, why she was going out over this car, and we were arguing that she was trying to help the Secret Service man or the Secret Service man was trying to get her back in the car, and this was our impression.

Policemen jumped off of the motorcycles that were along the route and with drawn pistols started rushing into the crowd. I saw many people down on the ground, and I have one particular couple in mind that I had watched on a bench, sitting on a park bench that the man had this woman down. I remember my impression at the time that he was trying to take a gun away from her, or something, and by that time I decided maybe there was a gun involved in it instead of firecrackers.

He had her down on the ground. But then it later developed that he was trying to protect her from the shots. But then I didn't know that at the time. And I did watch her as they got up. Then different people hid around behind pillars in this arbor.

Mr. BELIN. Then what did you see happen?

Mr. HOLMES. Then just people went from every direction hunting around the railroad yard and among the cars parked in the area. I saw a policeman rushing into the School Book Depository Building.

Mr. BELIN. Was this a motorcycle policemen?

Mr. HOLMES. I did definitely see motorcycle policemen, one of--one or two or three--with their white helmets, and these motorcycle uniforms rushed up in the crowd with drawn pistols. And I thought maybe they might have been shooting to frighten the people.

Mr. BELIN. Where did the noise sound like it came from?

Mr. HOLMES. It reverberated among the buildings and I couldn't tell you. It sounded like from the crowd over there.

Mr. BELIN. Anything else happen that afternoon that you think is important insofar as the investigation of the assassination is concerned?

Mr. HOLMES. I watched for hours from that vantage point up there with my binoculars, hoping I would see someone running across the railroad tracks, or maybe that I could get word to the police as to where they were, because it was like a birdseye view of the panorama of the whole area.

Mr. BELIN. Did you see anyone run across the railroad track?

Mr. HOLMES. No. I saw nothing suspicious and I am a trained suspicioner.

Mr. BELIN. I want to see what the court reporter has down in her notes.

Now, what was the next contact you had with anything connected with the assassination or the investigation?

Mr. HOLMES. I never quit. I didn't get to bed for 2 days.

Mr. BELIN. Tell us what you did that you feel might be important that we should record here.

Mr. HOLMES. Of course I was in contact with the chief inspector in Washington, who was listening to the radio reports, and I remember once he called and he said, "Well, now, could the shots have come from the terminal annex building. Has your office been shaken out, the annex." Of course we gave that attention but there was nothing of any nature there of any importance. I was doing all I could to help other agencies.

One of the box clerks downstairs came up after an hour or so when the radio reports came in about the apprehension of Lee Oswald following the shooting of Officer Tippit, and said, "I think you ought to know, Mr. Holmes, that we rented a box downstairs to a Lee Oswald recently, and it is box number so-and-so".

That was my first tip that he had a box downstairs in the terminal annex. That box is No. 6225.

Mr. BELIN. I am handing you what has been marked as Holmes Deposition Exhibit No. 1. I will ask you to state what this is.

Mr. HOLMES. That is a photo copy of the original box rental application completed by Lee H. Oswald covering box No. 6225, which he completed on November the 1st, 1963.

Mr. BELIN. Where it says, date of application, that you gave, is it not?

Mr. HOLMES. Yes.

Mr. BELIN. I notice over here in--a notation on the side 11-22-63, with some initials on it. Do you know what that is?

Mr. HOLMES. Those are my initials and they indicate that I took the original box application from the post office records on that date.

Mr. BELIN. What did you do with it?

Mr. HOLMES. I turned it over to an FBI agent at a later date. I don't know when.

Mr. BELIN. Did any particular employee ever remember actually dealing with Lee Oswald?

Mr. HOLMES. He could not recall what the man looked like. He couldn't identify him from what he later saw his pictures in the paper. He could not identify him as actually being the man that rented the box, because I have talked to him about it.

Mr. BELIN. Now, on Deposition Exhibit 1, for the name of the firm or the corporation, it says, "Fair Play for Cuba Committee" and "American Civil Liberties Union," is that correct?

Mr. HOLMES. That's correct.

Mr. BELIN. And kind of business, it says, "nonprofit," is that correct?

Mr. HOLMES. That's correct.

Mr. BELIN. Then business address, there is a dash running through there, and home address is "3610 North Beckley," is that correct?

Mr. HOLMES. That's correct. That is the address he gave as the residential address when he rented the box.

Mr. BELIN. Then there is a signature "Lee H. Oswald," with the date of November 1, 1963?

Mr. HOLMES. This clerk told me that the man definitely filled this thing out himself.

Mr. BELIN. Does the clerk remember seeing it?

Mr. HOLMES. Yes.

Mr. BELIN. There is a stamp, which I assume is your post office stamp, that says on there, "Date box opened, November 1, 1963," and the box number is written in as "6225".

Mr. HOLMES. That's right.

Mr. BELIN. There--is there less charge for a nonprofit organization box than there is for anything else?

Mr. HOLMES. No. That box went closed for lack of payment of rent on December 31.

Mr. BELIN. What year?

Mr. HOLMES. Of 1963.

Mr. BELIN. After you found out that this was his box, did you keep any surveillance on it?

Mr. HOLMES. We kept a 24-hour, round-the-clock surveillance from about well into Sunday, I think, 3 days.

Mr. BELIN. That is the Sunday that Lee Harvey Oswald was shot?

Mr. HOLMES. Yes, sir.

Mr. BELIN. How many box keys were given out, according to your records, for the box?

Mr. HOLMES. One.

Mr. BELIN. Was that one ever turned back to you?

Mr. HOLMES. No.

Mr. BELIN. When was that?

Mr. HOLMES. Didn't the police have it? I saw it--yes.

Mr. BELIN. You saw it at the police department?

Mr. HOLMES. I asked them about it, and he asked could this be it? I had taken the duplicate key with me to see if I could match it. They have numbers on them and I did. The detective pulled it out and said, "Is this it," in the presence of Captain Fritz, and I matched the numbers, and it was.

Mr. BELIN. Were the numbers the same for the box number as the key number?

Mr. HOLMES. No; it was a key number. Fritz kept it with the evidence.

Mr. BELIN. Anything else about this box or the application, Deposition Exhibit 1 here?

Mr. HOLMES. Only that an occasional Russian newspaper was received in that box after we began to watch it from then on until it was closed. No first-class mail. What is "The Daily Worker," sir? It's been the "Daily Worker," now.

Mr. BELIN. There was some newspaper that came? Well--some American newspaper?

Mr. HOLMES. It is what used to be "The Daily Worker," came, and a couple of Russian newspapers came there.

Mr. BELIN. Anything else?

Mr. HOLMES. From Minsk. That was her hometown, Marina's hometown in Russia.

Mr. BELIN. Is there anything else in connection with this box and this application that you care to talk about?

Mr. HOLMES. No.

Mr. BELIN. Then what was the next thing that you had contact with pertaining to the assassination?

Mr. HOLMES. Saturday morning----

Mr. BELIN. This would be November 23?

Mr. HOLMES. Twenty-third. I came into the lobby of the terminal annex, and the postal inspector that was on duty mentioned that the FBI agent had called to inquire as to how they could obtain an original post office money order.

He said he had told them that they would have to get it in Washington, but would have to know the number of the post office money order.

So he was worrying then as to how he could get that number.

So I knew about the post office money order. They said that Oswald--they said that also this FBI agent had passed on the information that, I don't know whether he told him or I called the FBI after--I went on up to my office, but somewhere I got the information that the FBI had knowledge that a gun of this particular Italian make and caliber had been purchased from Klein's Sporting Goods in Chicago, that it had been purchased, and the FBI furnished me the information that a money order of some description in the amount of $21.95 had been used as reimbursement for the gun that had been purchased from Klein's in Chicago, and that the purchase date was March 20, 1963. I immediately had some men begin to search the Dallas money order records with the thought that they might have used a U.S. postal money order to buy this gun.

I didn't have any luck, so along about 11 o'clock in the morning, Saturday, I had my boys call the postal inspector. Oh, wait a minute, let's back up.

I had my secretary go out and purchase about half a dozen books on outdoor-type magazines such as Field and Stream, with the thought that I might locate this gun to identify it, and I did.

Mr. BELIN. You have what magazine?

Mr. HOLMES. Field and Stream of November 1963.

Mr. BELIN. You found a Field and Stream magazine of just November 1963?

Mr. HOLMES. It was the current magazine on the rack.

Mr. BELIN. You got it to look for a gun and identified it in this magazine? Is this the page? I will call it Holmes Deposition Exhibit 2.

Mr. HOLMES. Here, page 98.

Mr. BELIN. Well, it is on the back of a page numbered 98, is that right?

Mr. HOLMES. That's right.

Mr. BELIN. Or the front side. I am marking on the top of it, "Holmes Deposition Exhibit 2."

Was that the page you tore out?

Mr. HOLMES. Yes, sir.

Mr. BELIN. I notice there is a magazine or there is a number of guns identified on that page.

Mr. HOLMES. Yes, sir.

Mr. BELIN. I see one circled in red, is that correct?

Mr. HOLMES. That's correct.

Mr. BELIN. Who circled that in red?

Mr. HOLMES. I did.

Mr. BELIN. Then I see that it is a picture with a gun with a scope on it and it says, "6.5 Italian carbine," in big black letters. And underneath it says, "Late military issue. Only 40 inches overall. Weighs 7 lbs. Shows only slight use, test-fired and head spaced, ready for shooting. Turned-down bolt 6-shot, clip fed, rear sight." And it is marked "$12.78."

Mr. HOLMES. With scope, it is $19.95.

Mr. BELIN. There is a number. That $12.78 says "C20-1196." And underneath that it says, "C20-750, carbine with brand new 4x-3/4" diameter (illustrated) $19.95." Is that right?

Mr. HOLMES. That's correct.

Mr. BELIN. Then on the lower right-hand corner of the page there is a kind of place for clipping out of coupons. It is marked "Klein's Sporting Goods at 227 West Washington Street, Chicago 6, Illinois," then there is a place for a box to be checked. It says, "cash customers, send check or money order in full. Unless otherwise specified, send $1.00 postage and handling on any size order ... $1.50 on shotgun and rifles."

Then there is a place at the bottom of the page. It is a place for putting the name and address and the city and State, is that correct?

Mr. HOLMES. That's correct.

Mr. BELIN. Now I notice on a piece of scrap paper you have taken the $19.95 which would be the exact amount for the rifle with the scope, and then added the $1.50 for the charge that the coupon says for postage and handling and you come up with a total of $21.45.

I thought you said the FBI said $21.95?

Mr. HOLMES. He had, and that was the amount of money order I had been looking for. So I had my postal inspector in charge call our Chicago office and suggested that he get an inspector out to Klein's Sporting Goods and recheck it for accuracy, that if our looking at the right gun in the magazine, they were looking for the wrong money order.

Mr. BELIN. So what happened?

Mr. HOLMES. So in about an hour Postal Inspector McGee of Chicago called back then and said that the correct amount was $21.95--$21.45--excuse me, and that the shipping--they had received this money order on March the 13th, whereas I had been looking for March 20.

So then I passed the information to the men who were looking for this money order stub to show which would designate, which would show the number of the money order, and that is the only way you could find one.

I relayed this information to them and told them to start on the 13th because he could have bought it that morning and that he could have gotten it by airmail that afternoon, so they began to search and within 10 minutes they called back and said they had a money order in that amount issued on, I don't know that I show, but it was that money order in an amount issued at the main post office, which is the same place as this post office box was at that time, box 2915 and the money order had been issued early on the morning of March the 12th, 1963.

Mr. BELIN. To whom?

Mr. HOLMES. They are issued in blank. He has to fill it in.

Mr. BELIN. Does it say the name of the person who is purchased--purchasing----

Mr. HOLMES. No; you don't get----

Mr. BELIN. He had to fill it in himself?

Mr. HOLMES. Yes.

Mr. BELIN. You mentioned another post office box, and a new number there. When was that?

Mr. HOLMES. Just now?

Mr. BELIN. Yes, No. 2915?

Mr. HOLMES. That is the box he had rented at the main post office before he went to New Orleans?

Mr. BELIN. When you say the main post office, what city and State?

Mr. HOLMES. Dallas, Tex.

Mr. BELIN. When did you learn about this, if you remember?

Mr. HOLMES. I don't know that I can tell. Some clerk was passing information to me and also it could have been that McGee, this inspector said it was sent to box 2915, in Dallas. I couldn't tell you when I first realized he had this box.

Mr. BELIN. I hand you what has been marked "Holmes Deposition Exhibit 3," and ask you to state what that is?

Mr. HOLMES. That is a photostatic copy of the original box rental application covering the rental of box 2915, at the main post office in Dallas, Tex., which shows that it was completed on October the 9th, 1962. The applicants name was Lee H. Oswald, home address, 3519 Fairmore Avenue, Dallas, Tex. Signed Lee H. Oswald. It shows that the box was closed on May 14, 1963.

Mr. BELIN. Now, it is stamped date box opened, October 9, 1962. And that is the same date that it appears to be written in handwriting at the bottom of it.

Mr. HOLMES. That's correct.

Mr. BELIN. All right. Now, you found this postal money order and then what did you do?

Mr. HOLMES. Off the record, let me ask you something. I questioned him about this box and all the angles with it during this interview.

Mr. BELIN. I am going to get to that.

Mr. HOLMES. I didn't know whether you wanted to put it in there.

Mr. BELIN. I am going to get to that. Then what did you do?

Mr. HOLMES. I gave that information to my boss by telephone. He called Washington immediately. Of course this information included the money order number. This number was transmitted by phone to the chief inspector in Washington, who immediately got the money order center at Washington to begin a search, which they use IBM equipment to kick out this money order, and about 7 o'clock Saturday night they did kick out the original money order and sent it over by, so they said, by special conveyance to the Secret Service, chief of Secret Service at Washington now, and it turned out, so they said, to be the correct money order. I asked them by phone as to what it said on it, and it said it had been issued to A. J. Hidell, which to me then was the tip that I had the correct money order. Up to then I didn't know whether I had the correct money order or not.

Mr. BELIN. How did you know about the use of the name A. J. Hidell?

Mr. HOLMES. When the box was opened in the name of Lee H. Oswald. Because for two reasons. I--one is, when he rented the post office box in New Orleans, he used the name of A. J. Hidell as one of the persons entitled to receive mail in that box.

Mr. BELIN. At that time did you know about that?

Mr. HOLMES. Yes.

Mr. BELIN. All right, what else?

Mr. HOLMES. In his billfold the police had found a draft registration card in the name of A. J. Hidell on his person at the time of his arrest, and I had seen it.

Mr. BELIN. Anything else now about this money order? Do you have a record of the number of the money order?

Mr. HOLMES. No; I don't.

Mr. BELIN. All right, what was the next thing you did in connection with the investigation of the assassination?

Mr. HOLMES. Well, throughout the entire period I was feeding change of addresses as bits of information to the FBI and the Secret Service, and sort of a coordinating deal on it, but then about Sunday morning about 9:20----

Mr. BELIN. Pardon me a second. (Discussion off the record.) Anything else now, Mr Holmes?

Mr. HOLMES. I might cover the record of his rental of the post office box in New Orleans. Do you want me to go into that?

Mr. BELIN. All right, go ahead.

Mr. HOLMES. The box rental records at New Orleans show that on June the 3d, 1963, post office box 30061 was rented to L. H. Oswald. Let me see there. Some of my information comes at times I see 30061 and at times I see 30016. I had it two places. One is a written memorandum on that new setup, and the other is what I took over the phone, and both of them show 61.

Mr. BELIN. All right, go ahead.

Mr. HOLMES. I think I got a copy.

Mr. BELIN. That is all right, you can go ahead.

Mr. HOLMES. This is at the Lafayette Square Station in New Orleans. At that time he showed his home address as 657 French Street, New Orleans. On this box rental application card, he showed as being entitled to also receive mail in the box, Marina Oswald, and A. J. Hidell. This box was closed on September 26, 1963, with instructions to forward mail addressed to 2515 West Fifth Street, Irving, Tex.

At the time this information was checked out in New Orleans by Postal Inspector Joe Zarza, two copies of the newspaper called "The Militant," were found in the box, which had not yet been forwarded. But there was a slipup. I hate to admit that.

Mr. BELIN. Anything else?

Mr. HOLMES. I presume my next part in connection with this was when I joined the interrogation period of Oswald on Sunday morning of November 24 at about 9:30 a.m.

Mr. BELIN. All right, now. Let me ask you this. Just what was the occasion of your joining this interrogation? How did you happen to be there?

Mr. HOLMES. I had been in and out of Captain Fritz' office on numerous occasions during this 2-1/2-day period.

On this morning I had no appointment. I actually started to church with my wife. I got to church and I said, "You get out, I am going down and see if I can do something for Captain Fritz. I imagine he is as sleepy as I am."

So I drove directly on down to the police station and walked in, and as I did, Captain Fritz motioned to me and said, "We are getting ready to have a last interrogation with Oswald before we transfer him to the county jail. Would you like to join us?"

I said "I would."

We went into his private room and closed the door, and those present were Captain Will Fritz, of the Dallas Police Department, Forrest V. Sorrels, local agent in charge of Secret Service, and Thomas J. Kelley, inspector, Secret Service, from Washington, and also about three detectives who were not identified to me, but simply were guarding Oswald who was handcuffed and seated at Will Fritz' desk.

Mr. BELIN. All right, now. Will you state if you remember--do you have a written memorandum there of that interview?

Mr. HOLMES. Yes, sir.

Mr. BELIN. I wonder if you would just let me ask you: When did you make your written memorandum?

Mr. HOLMES. On December 17, 1963.

Mr. BELIN. I wonder if, using your memorandum to refresh your recollection, you would just say what was said by any of the people there and just cover the whole thing? I will take it up section by section. Just start out. This started around 9:30, is that it, on Sunday morning?

Mr. HOLMES. Yes, sir. Now, this is my impression, not what he said.

Mr. BELIN. I notice the first paragraph, you have an impression on that? I wonder perhaps what we might do is, I am going to see if I have a copy of this, and if I can, to attach just as a--is this an extra copy that you have here?

Mr. HOLMES. Yes; I guess you can. Let me tear that top off.

Mr. BELIN. I am going to mark this as "Holmes Deposition Exhibit No. 4." This is a memorandum of your interview?

Mr. HOLMES. That I dictated on December 17, 1963.

Mr. BELIN. That is about 4 weeks after the interview took place; is that correct?

Mr. HOLMES. That's correct.

Mr. BELIN. Do you have any notes from which you dictated this interview?

Mr. HOLMES. I had a few notes. I had no reason for such a statement except that about that time the FBI asked me--they learned that I had been in on this interrogation, and asked me if I would object to giving them a statement as to what went on in that room, and this is my statement. Part of it was from notes and part of it was from memory.

Mr. BELIN. Now, I notice--well, you might just, without even looking at the memorandum, first just give us your general impression of what went on there.

Mr. HOLMES. There was no formality to the interrogation. One man would question Oswald. Another would interrupt with a different trend of thought, or something in connection, and it was sort of an informal questioning or interrogation.

Oswald was quite composed. He answered readily those questions that he wanted to answer. He could cut off just like with a knife anything that he didn't want to answer.

And those particular things that he didn't want to answer were anything that pertained with the assassination of the President or the shooting of Officer Tippit. He flatly denied any knowledge of either.

He was not particularly obnoxious. He seemed to be intelligent. He seemed to be clearminded. He seemed to have a good memory, because in questioning him about the boxes, which I had original applications in front of me, he was pretty accurate. He knew box numbers and he answered these questions readily and answered them truthfully, as verified by the box rental applications that I had in front of me.

Mr. BELIN. What was Oswald wearing at the time you saw him?

Mr. HOLMES. He was bareheaded. He had a sport shirt on and slacks, pair of trousers.

Mr. BELIN. What color trousers?

Mr. HOLMES. Sort of a medium. On the light side I would say.

Mr. BELIN. What color shirt?

Mr. HOLMES. I don't recall. It was not a loud shirt. It was not outstanding. I don't know what color actually he had on. I do know, I can tell you when he put on the black sweater and all that.

Mr. BELIN. He put on a black sweater?

Mr. HOLMES. Toward the end--that is the last thing on my memorandum.

Mr. BELIN. Now, do you remember Captain Fritz showing a map, showing Oswald a map of the city of Dallas which had been recovered from his room?

Mr. HOLMES. He didn't show the map. He only mentioned the map and asked him about a certain map that had markings on it, and Oswald said, "Well, I presume you have reference to a map that I had in my room that had some X's on it."

And, he said, "Well, tell us about that one. Why were the X's on there? What did that designate?"

And he said that, "I have no automobile. I have no means of conveyance. I have to walk from where I am going most of the time. And I had my applications in with Texas Employment Commission. They furnished me names and addresses of places that had openings like I might could fill, and neighborhood people had furnished me information on jobs I might could get. I was seeking a job, and I would put these markings on this map so that I could plan my itinerary around with less walking, and each one of those represented a place where I went and interviewed for a job."

And he said, "You can check each one of them out if you want to."

Then Captain Fritz mentioned the X at the intersection of Elm and Houston.

Well, he said, "That is the location of the Texas School Depository and I did go there and interview for a job. In fact, I got a job there." He said, "That is all the map amounts to."

Mr. BELIN. Is there anything else about that aspect of the interrogation?

Mr. HOLMES. I believe not.

Mr. BELIN. Do you remember Inspector Kelley asking Oswald about his religious views?

Mr. HOLMES. Yes. Someone, and I don't recall who, asked the first question on that, but you got that Lenin business in there.

Mr. BELIN. I am deliberately asking you these questions before we get to your memorandum, and I am just trying to get your memory first.

Mr. HOLMES. All right. Someone asked him about what his beliefs were, and he said, "Well," about him being a Communist something. Someone referred to his communism, and he said, "I am not a Communist. I am a Marxist." And they said, what is the difference between Communist and Marxist, and he said, "Well, a Communist is a Lenin Marxist, and I am a true Karl Marxist."

So, this Secret Service inspector asked, "What religion are you?" In other words, I mean, "What faith are you, as far as religion?" And he said, "I have no faith." And then he said, "I suppose you mean the Bible."

"Yes, that is right."

"Well," he said, "I have read the Bible. It is fair reading, but not very interesting. But, as a matter of fact, I am a student of philosophy and I don't consider the Bible as even a reasonable or intelligent philosophy. I don't think much of it," he said.

Mr. BELIN. Did anyone there ask him if Cuba would be better off since the President was assassinated? Do you remember anything about that?

Mr. HOLMES. I don't recall a question on that.

Mr. BELIN. Do you remember anyone asking him a question about the rifle, or there was a picture of Oswald holding a rifle. Do you remember anything about that?

Mr. HOLMES. Yes. They said, "We have a picture of you holding"--actually it came up before then in an interrogation of him about this rifle that came to this post office box.

They asked him, "Do you own a rifle?" He said, "No."

Well, "Have you shot a rifle since you have been out of the Marines?"

He said, "No." Then he backed up and said, "Well, possibly a small bore, maybe a .22, but not anything larger since I have left the Marine Corps."

"Do you own a rifle?"

"Absolutely not. How would I afford a rifle. I make $1.25 an hour. I can't hardly feed myself."

Then he said, "What about this picture of you holding this rifle?"

"Well, I don't know what you are talking about."

He just cut it off. As I recall, he refused to even acknowledge there was such a picture. They had none of these exhibits in the room.

Mr. BELIN. You didn't have the picture at the time in the room when you were there?

Mr. HOLMES. No.

Mr. BELIN. Did anyone say anything about his living on a so-called Neely Street, that you remember? Or Captain Fritz, did he say that he told Oswald that friends had visited him there and that friends had seen Oswald there? Do you remember at this time anything about that?

Mr. HOLMES. I don't remember his answer to it, whether he did answer.

Mr. BELIN. Was anything--pardon me.

Mr. HOLMES. I remember Fritz, I think, describe the fellow, and he just ignored it. He was vague about it.

Mr. BELIN. Do you remember any statements that Oswald made about any fight in New Orleans about Marxism or fair play for Cuba or anything? Does that ring a bell with you?

Mr. HOLMES. I knew all about it, and I knew the police records and all, but I don't know that it was brought up in that room at that time.

Mr. BELIN. Was anything in that room--was he asked about knowing Alek Hidell? Or anything about Alek Hidell?

Mr. HOLMES. I brought it up first as to did he ever have a package sent to him from anywhere. I said, "Did you receive mail through this box 2915 under the name of any other name than Lee Oswald," and he said, "Absolutely not."

"What about a package to an A. J. Hidell?"

He said, "No."

"Well, did you order a gun in that name to come there?"

"No, absolutely not."

"Had one come under that name, could this fellow have gotten it?"

He said, "Nobody got mail out of that box but me; no, sir." "Maybe my wife, but I couldn't say for sure whether my wife ever got mail, but it is possible she could have."

"Well, who is A. J. Hidell?" I asked him.

And he said, "I don't know any such person."

I showed him the box rental application for the post office box in New Orleans and I read from it. I said, "Here this shows as being able to receive, being entitled to receive mail is Marina Oswald." And he said, "Well, that is my wife, so what?"

And I said also it says "A. J. Hidell."

"Well, I don't know anything about that."

That is all he would say about it.

Then Captain Fritz interrupted and said, "Well, what about this card we got out of your billfold? This draft registration card, he called it, where it showed A. J. Hidell."

"Well, that is the only time that I recall he kind of flared up and he said, "Now, I have told you all I am going to tell you about that card in my billfold." He said, "You have the card yourself, and you know as much about it as I do." And he showed a little anger. Really the only time that he flared up.

Mr. BELIN. Was there ever any mention at the time you were there of the fact that he had a right to have a lawyer present? Do you remember anything about that at all, or not?

Mr. HOLMES. I don't recall.

Mr. BELIN. Did he ever ask to have a lawyer present? Do you remember anything about that at all?

Mr. HOLMES. Oh, yes; they talked about a lawyer, and he said he had----

Mr. BELIN. What was the conversation? Who said what?

Mr. HOLMES. I don't know who started the conversation, but it had gotten into "Do you have an attorney?" He said, "No."

"Well, do you want an attorney?"

And he said, "No." Then he said, "Well, I tried to get a fellow from New York." But he said he wasn't able to get hold of him.

And I think he is a Civil Liberties Union lawyer. He mentioned something about he looks after their interests in New York. I don't remember the name, but they discussed that.

Mr. BELIN. Would it be something like Abt?

Mr. HOLMES. Yes; short name. That could well be it.

Mr. BELIN. Anything else? Did he ever ask for any other lawyer or for any lawyer?

Mr. HOLMES. No.

Mr. BELIN. Do you remember that while this was going on if the chief of police came to the office?

Mr. HOLMES. Yes. Along toward the end of the interrogation several people kept milling around outside of Captain Fritz' office and I noticed the chief of police out there, and they would rap on the door, and once in a while crack the door and look in, and gave all the appearance of being impatient.

But Captain Fritz is a quiet and deliberate sort of individual and said, "Don't worry about the men. If you got any more questions, ask him."

Mr. BELIN. Who would be the people knocking and tapping on the window and would be impatient?

Mr. HOLMES. It was Chief Curry, and I didn't recognize the others, but there were people who later took him on downstairs, so they were waiting. They wanted to make this transfer, is what it was. In fact, the captain mentioned, he said, "We are going to have a little while to talk. I don't know how long, because they want to effect this transfer."

And everybody assumed that that was why they were getting impatient outside about, they wanted to go ahead and complete the transfer.

Mr. BELIN. Were there glass walls on Captain Fritz' office?

Mr. HOLMES. Yes; with venetian blinds.

Mr. BELIN. Were the venetian blinds closed?

Mr. HOLMES. They were closed, but you could see around the edges and through and every once in a while someone would lift a blind, and once in a while they would crack the door and look in.

Mr. BELIN. Were the venetian blinds inside or outside, or do you know?

Mr. HOLMES. I don't know, to tell you the truth.

Mr. BELIN. About how big was the office?

Mr. HOLMES. Just about as wide as this is.

Mr. BELIN. You want to pace it off here?

Mr. HOLMES. I would say 10 by 15, personally, feet.

Mr. BELIN. How many doors?

Mr. HOLMES. One door.

Mr. BELIN. Were there any other people outside there that morning other than the police officers, that you know of?

Mr. HOLMES. I recognized a couple of FBI agents. I couldn't call their names.

Mr. BELIN. Any press people that you recognized?

Mr. HOLMES. No.

Mr. BELIN. All right, now.

Mr. HOLMES. Of course, when we speak of outside Fritz' office, it is still an inclosure where you go out another door to go into the hall where the public mills around. He had a suite of rooms.

Mr. BELIN. You had one of the rooms in that suite?

Mr. HOLMES. Yes. In fact, he is in charge of all the rooms, but he has one private office of his own, and that is where we were.

Mr. BELIN. You do remember Chief Curry coming in?

Mr. HOLMES. Yes.

Mr. BELIN. Do you remember any conversation that transpired between Chief Curry and Captain Fritz?

Mr. HOLMES. As Chief Curry came in, someone handed some clothes on a hanger. It was maybe a sports shirt and a couple of pair of slacks, and I recall there were two sweaters and he said, "I will just take one of those sweaters." They gave him one sweater that he did not like. No, he said, "Give me the black one."

So he takes it, a little slip-over sweater. So, while he was putting that on, Chief Curry came around the other side of the desk and took Will Fritz over in the corner and they bowed their heads and discussed in an undertone. Apparently, I got the impression they weren't trying to hide anything from us, but they didn't want Oswald to overhear what they were saying. They were mumbling in an undertone and I didn't distinguish one thing that was said.

Mr. BELIN. Did Oswald ask to have a sweater or some clothes brought in?

Mr. HOLMES. Yes. Well, I don't know that he asked. I will take that back. I don't know that he asked. All I know, they handed it in and said, "Do you want any of those clothes, or do you want to change your clothes?"

And he said, "I will take one of the sweaters." They gave him the wrong sweater and he didn't like that and he asked for the other. And they uncuffed him and he slipped his arm in and they handcuffed him back up, and that is the only change. It was a black slipover kind of =V=-neck sweater.

Then they walked him out of the office and I stayed in the office with the two Secret Service men.

Mr. BELIN. So you didn't accompany Oswald when they left?

Mr. HOLMES. No.

Mr. BELIN. When did you first learn that Oswald had been shot?

Mr. HOLMES. I told Sorrels, I said, "I have my car down the street. Let's go down to my office, because it is directly across the reflecting pool from this School Depository Building and from the sheriff's office and entrance where they will take him in. Let's go down to my office and we can look at it from my window and have a better eye view in case anything happens." And he said, "Well, I have my car down there too, and I will need to have it to get back to my office, so I will just take my own car."

So, I immediately went downstairs and got in my car and proceeded to my office, which probably took me ten minutes.

When I got to the sidewalk of the terminal annex I parked my car and walked right in the door. One of the inspectors who was watching this box, they still had the surveillance on the box--said, "Well, they got Oswald now."

I said, "What are you talking about?"

"Well, they have shot Oswald."

They had a radio sitting there going. I said, "That is not right. That is misinformation, because it hasn't been 5 or 7 or 8 minutes that I left him in his presence and he was very much alive then." And just then they kept talking on the radio, and I got to listening, and sure enough, they shot him.

Mr. BELIN. Where was your car parked? Was it parked in the basement where they were going to transfer Oswald?

Mr. HOLMES. No; out on the street.

Mr. BELIN. Now, did you ever talk to Captain Fritz or any police officer about Oswald getting shot?

Mr. HOLMES. I haven't talked or discussed this in any way.

Mr. BELIN. Not since then with any other police officer?

Mr. HOLMES. No, sir.

Mr. BELIN. Was there anything said in that interrogation of Lee Harvey Oswald pertaining to the Fair Play for Cuba Committee, that you remember?

Mr. HOLMES. When I was discussing with him about rental application for Box No. 6225 at the terminal annex, I asked him if he had shown that anyone else was entitled to get mail in that box and he said, "No."

I said, "Who did you show as your--what did you show as your business?

And he said, "I didn't show anything."

I said, "Well, your box rental application here says, 'Fair Play for Cuba Committee and the American Civil Liberties Union'."

Well, he said, "Maybe that is right, I did put them on there."

I said, "Did they, anyone, who paid for the box?"

He said, "I paid for it out of my own personal money."

"Did you rent it in the name of these organizations?"

And he said, "No."

He said, "I don't know why I put it on." He wouldn't talk about it.

Mr. BELIN. Did you talk about whether he believed in the Fair Play for Cuba Committee?

Mr. HOLMES. No; we didn't get into that. We did discuss the organization of it in New Orleans, and I got the impression that Captain Fritz was trying to get out of him the fact that he was the head man or the president of it, and he kept evading that and would be real evasive. But finally he admitted that he was, he said, "Actually, it was a loosely organized thing and we had no officers, but probably you could call me the secretary of it because I did collect money." In other words, "Secretary-Treasurer, because I did try to collect a little money to get literature and work with."

Then I asked--oh, he mentioned, too, he said, "In New York they have a well organized or a better organization."

Well, I asked him, or one of us asked him about, "Is that why you came to Dallas, to organize a cell of this organization in Dallas?" And he said, "No, not at all."

"Did you work on it or intend to organize here in Dallas?

"No," he said, "I didn't. I was too busy trying to get a job." That is about all he said about it.

Mr. BELIN. Did anyone say anything about Oswald saying anything about his leaving the Texas School Book Depository after the shooting?

Mr. HOLMES. He said, as I remember, actually, in answer to questions there, he mentioned that when lunchtime came, one of the Negro employees asked him if he would like to sit and each lunch with him, and he said, "Yes, but I can't go right now." He said, "You go and take the elevator on down." No, he said, "You go ahead, but send the elevator back up."

He didn't say up where, and he didn't mention what floor he was on. Nobody seemed to ask him.

You see, I assumed that obvious questions like that had been asked in previous interrogation. So I didn't interrupt too much, but he said, "Send the elevator back up to me."

Then he said when all this commotion started, "I just went on downstairs." And he didn't say whether he took the elevator or not. He said, "I went down, and as I started to go out and see what it was all about, a police officer stopped me just before I got to the front door, and started to ask me some questions, and my superintendent of the place stepped up and told the officers that I am one of the employees of the building, so he told me to step aside for a little bit and we will get to you later. Then I just went on out in the crowd to see what it was all about."

And he wouldn't tell what happened then.

Mr. BELIN. Did he say where he was at the time of the shooting?

Mr. HOLMES. He just said he was still up in the building when the commotion--he kind of----

Mr. BELIN. Did he gesture with his hands, do you remember?

Mr. HOLMES. He talked with his hands all the time. He was handcuffed, but he was quiet--well, he was not what you call a stoic phlegmatic person. He is very definite with his talk and his eyes and his head, and he goes like that, you see.

Mr. BELIN. Did Oswald say anything about seeing a man with a crewcut in front of the building as he was about to leave it? Do you remember anything about that?

Mr. HOLMES. No.

Mr. BELIN. You don't remember anything about that. Did he say anything about telling a man about going to a pay phone in the building?

Mr. HOLMES. Policeman rushed--I take it back--I don't know whether he said a policeman or not--a man came rushing by and said, "Where's your telephone?"

And the man showed him some kind of credential and I don't know that he identified the credential, so he might not have been a police officer, and said I am so and so, and shoved something at me which I didn't look at and said, "Where is the telephone?"

And I said, "Right there," and just pointed in to the phone, and I went on out.

Mr. BELIN. Did Oswald say why he left the building?

Mr. HOLMES. No; other than just said he talked about this commotion and went out to see what it was about.

Mr. BELIN. Did Oswald say how he got home, if he did get home?

Mr. HOLMES. They didn't--we didn't go into that. I just assumed that they had covered all that. Nobody asked him about from the minute he walked out the door as to what happened to him, except somebody asked him about the shooting of Tippit, and he said, "I don't know what you are talking about."

He said, "The only thing that I am in here for is because I popped a policeman in the nose in a threatre on Jefferson Avenue, which I readily admit I did, because I was protecting myself."

Mr. BELIN. Because he was what?

Mr. HOLMES. "Protecting myself."

Mr. BELIN. Now, I want you now to take a look for the first time during our interview here at Holmes Deposition Exhibit 4, and thus far you have been testifying just from memory, is that correct?

Mr. HOLMES. Yes; sir.

Mr. BELIN. Now, I notice that it starts out, that it is in an informal memorandum that you put together, and then the second paragraph you have the general impression that Oswald appeared confused or in doubt.

I wonder if you would read that second paragraph and see if there is anything that you remember to elaborate on at this time.

Mr. HOLMES. Read it aloud or to myself?

Mr. BELIN. No; to yourself, and see if there is anything you can remember to elaborate.

Mr. HOLMES. The only part I have not covered would be the impression that I received that he had disciplined his mind and his reflexes to a point where I doubt if he would even have been a good subject to a polygraph test, a lie detector.

Mr. BELIN. Anything else you would care to elaborate?

Mr. HOLMES. I believe not.

Mr. BELIN. Well, I wonder then if you would take a look at the second paragraph that begins "P.O. Boxes."

That is really the third paragraph on the page.

Mr. HOLMES. No; I think I have, if I remember that pretty well.

Mr. BELIN. All right, you take a look at the next paragraph, which is the last paragraph on the first page.

Mr. HOLMES. I believe there would be nothing to elaborate or change on it.

Mr. BELIN. Turn to page 2 on the first paragraph of the next page.

Mr. HOLMES. The only thing there that I haven't covered would be that the reason these various post office boxes wherever he went was that it was much easier to have his mail reach him through post office forwarding orders than it was to try to get somebody over in Russia to change the address on a newspaper.

Mr. BELIN. By the way, did he talk about anything at all about his life in Russia?

Mr. HOLMES. He mentioned only that he met his wife in Minsk. That was her home town.

Mr. BELIN. Anything else?

Mr. HOLMES. It seemed like it was a dance. He met her at a dance, he told us.

Mr. BELIN. Anything else?

Mr. HOLMES. That he took these two local newspapers for her benefit, because it was local news to her and that was the reason he was getting those papers. She enjoyed reading about the home folks.

Mr. BELIN. Anything else about Russia? Did he ever say anything about going to Mexico? Was that ever covered?

Mr. HOLMES. Yes. To the extent that mostly about--well--he didn't spend, "Where did you get the money?" He didn't have much money and he said it didn't cost much money. He did say that where he stayed it cost $26 some odd, small ridiculous amount to eat, and another ridiculous small amount to stay all night, and that he went to the Mexican Embassy to try to get this permission to go to Russia by Cuba, but most of the talks that he wanted to talk about was how he got by with a little amount.

They said, "Well, who furnished you the money to go to Mexico?"

"Well, it didn't take much money." And it was along that angle, was the conversation.

Mr. BELIN. Did he admit that he went to Mexico?

Mr. HOLMES. Oh, yes.

Mr. BELIN. Did he say what community in Mexico he went to?

Mr. HOLMES. Mexico City.

Mr. BELIN. Did he say what he did while he was there?

Mr. HOLMES. He went to the Mexican consulate, I guess.

(Discussion off the record.)

Mr. BELIN. Now, with regard to this Mexican trip, did he say who he saw in Mexico?

Mr. HOLMES. Only that he went to the Mexican consulate or Embassy or something and wanted to get permission, or whatever it took to get to Cuba. They refused him and he became angry and he said he burst out of there, and I don't know. I don't recall now why he went into the business about how mad it made him.

He goes over to the Russian Embassy. He was already at the American. This was the Mexican--he wanted to go to Cuba.

Then he went to the Russian Embassy and he said, because he said then he wanted to go to Russia by way of Cuba, still trying to get to Cuba and try that angle and they refused and said, "Come back in 30 days," or something like that. And, he went out of there angry and disgusted.

Mr. BELIN. Did he go to the Cuban Embassy, did he say or not?

Mr. HOLMES. He may have gone there first, but the best of my recollection, it might have been Cuban and then the Russian, wherever he went at first, he wanted to get to Cuba, and then he went to the Russian to go by Cuba.

Mr. BELIN. Did he say why he wanted to go to Cuba?

Mr. HOLMES. No.

Mr. BELIN. Did--this wasn't reported in your interview in the memorandum that you wrote?

Mr. HOLMES. No.

Mr. BELIN. Is this something that you think you might have picked up from just reading the papers, or is this something you remember hearing?

Mr. HOLMES. That is what he said in there.

Mr. BELIN. All right; I want to go back to page 2 of this memorandum.

I believe we went through the first paragraph on page 2 when you said that there wasn't anything you cared to add there other than what is reported on this Holmes Deposition Exhibit 4?

Mr. HOLMES. Except what he mentioned about it was easier about the forwarding orders of newspapers. Otherwise, no change.

Mr. BELIN. Now, what about the next paragraph on page 2?

Mr. HOLMES. I think I have covered that.

Mr. BELIN. All right, then. The next paragraph on page 2, which is the third and last paragraph on the page.

Mr. HOLMES. I believe I have mentioned the fact that he was evasive about whether he was actually a member of the American Civil Liberties Union. In this statement I have mentioned that he was evasive about it.

Mr. BELIN. Does that statement cover everything, or is there anything you care to add to that statement?

Mr. HOLMES. I can't think of anything of any particular importance there.

Mr. BELIN. Then turn to page 3, the first paragraph. Is there anything you can or care to add to that paragraph that isn't covered right here?

Mr. HOLMES. All right as is.

Mr. BELIN. What about the second paragraph on page 3?

Mr. HOLMES. I have covered that.

Mr. BELIN. What about the third paragraph which begins with "Marine Corps Service."

Mr. HOLMES. I don't believe that I discussed that yet.

Mr. BELIN. You haven't discussed it, but is there anything you care to add other than what is written on there?

Mr. HOLMES. No.

Mr. BELIN. Did he indicate anything else about Governor Connally?

Mr. HOLMES. No. I have covered that in there. In fact, I got the distinct impression that he showed no flareup, no animosity when Connally's name was mentioned. He simply considered him--somebody was shuffling the papers around, and he had no particular animosity toward him. I remember that distinctly.

Mr. BELIN. Did he seem to have any animosity toward President Kennedy?

Mr. HOLMES. No.

Mr. BELIN. Now, take a look at the first paragraph on page 3 and read that and see if there is anything you care to add to that?

Mr. HOLMES. No; I believe not.

Mr. BELIN. What about the fifth paragraph on the page?

Mr. HOLMES. I haven't discussed that.

Mr. BELIN. Is there anything you would care to add to that?

Mr. HOLMES. No, sir. That is as he stated it.

Mr. BELIN. What about the last paragraph on page 3?

Mr. HOLMES. That is as I recall it at the time.

Mr. BELIN. Now, in the last paragraph on page 3, it says that when asked why he went to visit his wife on Thursday night, whereas he normally visited her on the weekends, and he said on that particular weekend there was going to be a party for children. They were having a house full of children and he didn't want to be around at such a time. And, therefore, he made the weekly visit on Thursday night?

Mr. HOLMES. That's right.

Mr. BELIN. Did anyone question him about curtain rods, that you remember?

Mr. HOLMES. Yes.

Mr. BELIN. What was that about curtain rods?

Mr. HOLMES. Asked him if he brought a sack out when he got in the car with this young fellow that hauled him and he said, "Yes."

"What was in the sack?"

"Well, my lunch."

"What size sack did you have?"

He said, "Oh, I don't know what size sack. You don't always get a sack that fits your sandwiches. It might be a big sack."

"Was it a long sack?"

"Well, it could have been."

"What did you do with it?"

"Carried it in my lap."

"You didn't put it over in the back seat?"

"No." He said he wouldn't have done that.

"Well, someone said the fellow that hauled you said you had a long package which you said was curtain rods you were taking to somebody at work and you laid it over on the back seat."

He said, "Well, they was just mistaken. That must have been some other time he picked me up."

That is all he said about it.

Mr. BELIN. Were there any other questions asked about curtain rods.

Mr. HOLMES. I don't recall.

Mr. BELIN. All right, I turn to the top of page 4, which is the next paragraph, and I see that you have this recorded in your memorandum. You have this all recorded here except you don't mention the sentence about the curtain rods?

Mr. HOLMES. So that has been elaborated on in that paragraph.

Mr. BELIN. All right, anything else you care to elaborate on that first paragraph on page 4?

Mr. HOLMES. I believe not.

Mr. BELIN. All right, the second paragraph on page 4 pertaining to his whereabouts at the time of the shooting. Would you care to elaborate on that?

Mr. HOLMES. I believe it is just about as I have stated. No elaboration.

Mr. BELIN. Then the third paragraph on page 4 was about an A. J. Hidell identification card. Would you care to read that and see if there is anything on that?

Mr. HOLMES. I believe not.

Mr. BELIN. By the way, where did this policeman stop him when he was coming down the stairs at the Book Depository on the day of the shooting?

Mr. HOLMES. He said it was in the vestibule.

Mr. BELIN. He said he was in the vestibule?

Mr. HOLMES. Or approaching the door to the vestibule. He was just coming, apparently, and I have never been in there myself. Apparently there is two sets of doors, and he had come out to this front part.

Mr. BELIN. Did he state it was on what floor?

Mr. HOLMES. First floor. The front entrance to the first floor.

Mr. BELIN. Did he say anything about a Coca Cola or anything like that, if you remember?

Mr. HOLMES. Seems like he said he was drinking a Coca Cola, standing there by the Coca Cola machine drinking a Coca Cola.

Mr. BELIN. Anything else?

Mr. HOLMES. Nothing more than what I have already told you on it.

Mr. BELIN. Anything else that you care to add to the third paragraph on page 4?

Mr. HOLMES. I believe not.

Mr. BELIN. Now, here in the fourth paragraph, which is the last paragraph of page 4, the last paragraph of your memorandum, anything else you care to add to that?

Mr. HOLMES. I believe not.

Mr. BELIN. Is there anything else that we haven't covered that you think might be helpful here and you think we ought to talk about, Mr. Holmes? Have you found now in your records the money order number that was involved in the purchase of the rifle?

Mr. HOLMES. The money order number that was found in Washington and matched the original money order was number 2-202-130-462, issued at the main office in Dallas, Tex., on March 12, 1963, in the amount of $21.45.

Mr. BELIN. Do you have any information on the money order for the pistol or how the pistol was paid for, or was there a money order?

Mr. HOLMES. No, sir.

Mr. BELIN. Now, Mr. Holmes, I wonder if you could try and think if there is anything else that you remember Oswald saying about where he was during the period prior or shortly prior to, and then at the time of the assassination?

Mr. HOLMES. Nothing more than I have already said. If you want me to repeat that?

Mr. BELIN. Go ahead and repeat it.

Mr. HOLMES. See if I say it the same way?

Mr. BELIN. Yes.

Mr. HOLMES. He said when lunchtime came he was working in one of the upper floors with a Negro.

The Negro said, "Come on and let's eat lunch together."

Apparently both of them having a sack lunch. And he said, "You go ahead, send the elevator back up to me and I will come down just as soon as I am finished."

And he didn't say what he was doing. There was a commotion outside, which he later rushed downstairs to go out to see what was going on. He didn't say whether he took the stairs down. He didn't say whether he took the elevator down.

But he went downstairs, and as he went out the front, it seems as though he did have a coke with him, or he stopped at the coke machine, or somebody else was trying to get a coke, but there was a coke involved.

He mentioned something about a coke. But a police officer asked him who he was, and just as he started to identify himself, his superintendent came up and said, "He is one of our men." And the policeman said, "Well, you step aside for a little bit."

Then another man rushed in past him as he started out the door, in this vestibule part of it, and flashed some kind of credential and he said, "Where is your telephone, where is your telephone, and said I am so and so, where is your telephone."

And he said, "I didn't look at the credential. I don't know who he said he was, and I just pointed to the phone and said, 'there it is,' and went on out the door."

Mr. BELIN. Anything else?

Mr. HOLMES. I believe not.

Mr. BELIN. Mr. Holmes, when we first met, we sat down and I practically started taking testimony right away, is that correct?

Mr. HOLMES. Yes, sir.

Mr. BELIN. Is there anything in the short conversation we had before we started taking testimony about this matter that we haven't discussed here on the record?

Mr. HOLMES. No, sir.

Mr. BELIN. For the record, I would like to offer as a part of this deposition Holmes Exhibits 1, 2, 3, and 4, and in addition, I don't know for the record, but I would like to offer--at some of the depositions we have had delays, but will you have copies made, madam reporter?

And one final thing, you have the right, if you want, to come back and read the deposition and sign, or else you let it go to us without signing or coming back without reading it. Do you want to waive it or come back?

Mr. HOLMES. I will waive it.

Mr. BELIN. One other thing. I better mark this as Holmes Deposition, Exhibit 5.

Mr. HOLMES. I want to save that.

Mr. BELIN. Mr. Holmes, I hand you Holmes Deposition Exhibit 5 and ask you to state if you will what this is.

Mr. HOLMES. It is a circular-type sheet simulating a wanted circular as put out by the post office department or the FBI showing a profile view. That is two separate views of President Kennedy.

Mr. BELIN. The one that says "Wanted for Treason"?

Mr. HOLMES. Underneath his picture in large type is "Wanted for Treason."

Mr. BELIN. How did you get ahold of this document, or what is the fact involved?

Mr. HOLMES. This was handed to me by one of the postal supervisors who brought it to my office stating that it had been brought in by one of the carriers that found it in a collection box on his route.

Mr. BELIN. On what day, do you know, offhand, in relation to the assassination?

Mr. HOLMES. He brought that in the afternoon of the assassination, November 22.

Mr. BELIN. Do you know how many of these were passed out?

Mr. HOLMES. No; except that it came from various sources. They were being passed out at neighborhood shopping centers, and numerous of them were brought in. This supervisor said that they had dozens of them down there, that it had come in by the carrier.

Mr. BELIN. I believe you also said that--is there anything else in regards to Holmes Deposition Exhibit 5 you care to add?

Mr. HOLMES. I believe not.

Mr. BELIN. Now, you showed us your deposition Exhibit 1, this application for a post office box dated November 1, 1963, of Lee Harvey Oswald, and you said this was at the terminal annex?

Mr. HOLMES. Yes, sir.

Mr. BELIN. How can you tell?

Mr. HOLMES. Because I recognized it as being the application, and also--I mean the application that I obtained at the terminal annex, and also the 6,000 designates that series of boxes at the terminal annex.

Mr. BELIN. And you also showed me an application for box 5475, dated November 7, 1963. Is that also the terminal annex?

Mr. HOLMES. Yes, sir.

Mr. BELIN. This was taken out by whom?

Mr. HOLMES. That is an application taken out by Jack Ruby on November 7, 1963, showing his firm name as being Earl Products; business, merchandising.

Mr. BELIN. We will put this as Holmes Deposition Exhibit 6. Do you know of any connection of your own knowledge between Jack Ruby and Lee Harvey Oswald?

Mr. HOLMES. No, sir; I know of none.

Mr. BELIN. Anything else you can say about Holmes Deposition Exhibit 6?

Mr. HOLMES. I believe not.

Mr. BELIN. Other than the fact that within a week of one another these two applications were taken out at the same post office?

Mr. HOLMES. That is the only significance that it has, as far as I am concerned.

Mr. BELIN. We will offer in evidence Holmes Deposition Exhibits 5 and 6, in addition to 1 through 4.

Let the record show that the original of Holmes Deposition Exhibit 5 will be returned to Mr. Holmes, and we will just for our records have copies made by the court reporter.

Mr. HOLMES. I have a photocopy machine in my office.

Mr. BELIN. Mr. Holmes, you have also asked me to make a photostatic copy of Holmes Deposition Exhibit 2 and you keep the original. This would be satisfactory for our purposes. This is the advertisement you cut out. Do you suppose you could get this to the court reporter yourself? Would you take the photostats?

Mr. HOLMES. Yes.

Mr. BELIN. Mr. Holmes, we want to certainly thank you for all the cooperation you have given the President's Commission.

TESTIMONY OF JAMES W. BOOKHOUT

The testimony of James W. Bookhout was taken at 11:15 a.m., on April 8, 1964, in the office of the U.S. attorney, 301 Post Office Building, Bryan and Ervay Streets, Dallas, Tex., by Mr. Samuel A. Stern, assistant counsel of the President's Commission.

Mr. STERN. Will you please rise.

Do you swear that the testimony you are about to give shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. I do.

Mr. STERN. Sit down, please.

Mr. STERN. State your name, please.

Mr. BOOKHOUT. James W. Bookhout. Do you want my home address?

Mr. STERN. Yes.

Mr. BOOKHOUT. 7048 Cornelia Lane, Dallas, Tex.

Mr. STERN. What is your occupation, Mr. Bookhout?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. Special agent of the Federal Bureau of Investigation.

Mr. STERN. How long have you been with the Federal Bureau of Investigation?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. Little over 22 years.

Mr. STERN. How long have you been assigned to the Dallas office?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. Since about 1945.

Mr. STERN. Were you on duty on November 22?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. Actually, I was on leave on that particular date. However, I had been requested to come to the office to handle some expedited dictation in a particular case. Having completed that, I left the office and proceeded to the Mercantile National Bank, where I transacted some personal business. Upon leaving the bank, it was momentarily expected that the President's motorcade would pass that area. I stood there for a few minutes, and as the motorcade passed I was actually unable to personally observe the President, due to the crowd on the sidewalk. While waiting for the crowd to thin, in order to cross the street, several separate sirens on the police squad cars were heard proceeding in the direction of the county courthouse. While crossing the street, some citizen with a transistor radio stated that it had just been announced that shots had been fired at the President's motorcade.

I immediately proceeded toward the office and observed two agents coming from the direction of the office, who advised that the office was trying to contact me and I was to proceed to the homicide and robbery bureau of the Dallas Police Department.

I immediately proceeded to the homicide and robbery bureau and contacted my office and was advised that I was to maintain liaison with the homicide and robbery bureau.

Mr. STERN. Did you then go to the police headquarters?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. Yes; as I said, I went to the homicide and robbery bureau after contacting the Dallas office.

Mr. STERN. What then occurred at the police headquarters? Let me ask you this: How soon after you arrived there was Oswald brought in?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. Well, it was some little time, as I recall, the next pertinent instance was a report that the Dallas Police officer had been shot, and that was in the Oak Cliff area. Captain Fritz had not returned to the office at that time. When he did return, and subsequently Oswald was apprehended in the Texas Theatre, information was passed to Captain Fritz as to the name of the suspect that they had apprehended on the Tippit shooting, and at that time he stated that that was the suspect that they were looking for on the killing of the President.

Mr. STERN. Did the name Lee Harvey Oswald mean anything to you at that time?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. No. Captain Fritz went on to explain that Oswald was an employee of the Texas Book Depository, who they had ascertained left his employment there subsequent to the shooting incident.

Mr. STERN. And sometime after this he was brought to the police headquarters?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. Yes.

Mr. STERN. Were you present when he was brought in?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. Yes.

Mr. STERN. Can you describe his physical condition?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. I can recall one of the officers that brought him in was Paul Bentley. He is a polygraph operator in the identification division of the Dallas Police Department, and Bentley was limping, and Oswald had one eye that was swollen and a scratch mark on his forehead.

Mr. STERN. Did you observe any other bruises?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. None.

Mr. STERN. Was he handcuffed?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. Yes.

Mr. STERN. Was he walking by himself, or being held by police officers?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. To my recollection there was an officer on each side of him that had ahold of his arms.

Mr. STERN. Was he struggling?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. No; just walking in, you know what I mean.

Mr. STERN. Yes.

Mr. BOOKHOUT. In a normal fashion.

Mr. STERN. Then what occurred, that you observed?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. I believe he was taken directly into Captain Fritz' office and the interview started at that time with Captain Fritz, and two homicide officers.

Mr. STERN. Were you present?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. I was not in the office at that time. I called our office, advised them he had been brought in, and that the interview was starting and shortly thereafter Mr. Shanklin, our SAC called back and said the Bureau wanted the agents present in the interview and that Hosty, James P. Hosty, I believe was to sit in on the interview, and I was to also be present with Hosty. So, at that time, we asked Captain Fritz to sit in on the interview, and that was approximately 3:15 p.m.

Mr. STERN. How long had the interview gone on before you were present?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. Very shortly. I would give a rough estimate of not more than 5 to 10 minutes at the most.

Mr. STERN. How long did that first interview last?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. A little under an hour.

Mr. STERN. Was it interrupted at any point, if you remember?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. Well, what I am thinking, we have got several interviews here. I know from time to time I can't recall whether it was this interview, or subsequent interviews Captain Fritz would have to leave the office for a second or two. By "office," I mean the immediate office that the interview was being conducted in, but still within the homicide and robbery office.

Mr. STERN. Did the interviewing continue when he was out of the room, or did you wait for his return?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. No; it would continue.

Mr. STERN. By whom was the interview conducted?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. Primarily it was conducted by Captain Fritz and then before he would leave from one point to another he would ask if there was anything we wanted to ask him particularly on that point.

Mr. STERN. By "we," you mean Agent Hosty and yourself?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. Right.

Mr. STERN. What was Oswald's demeanor in the course of this interview? Did he seem in control of himself, excited, or calm? Can you describe his conduct?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. He was very arrogant and argumentative. That is about the extent of the comment on that.

Mr. STERN. Is this as to you and Hosty, or also Captain Fritz? Did he differentiate in his conduct between Captain Fritz and the two of you?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. Now--no; that would apply to everyone present.

Mr. STERN. Did he answer all questions put to him or did he refuse to answer the questions?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. No; there would be certain questions that he refused to comment about.

Mr. STERN. When this happened was the question pressed, or another question asked?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. Anyone asking the--another question would be asked.

Mr. STERN. What sort of question would he refuse to answer? Was there any pattern to his refusing?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. Well, now, I am not certain whether this would apply then to this particular interview, the first interview or not, in answering this, but I recall specifically one of the interviews asking him about the Selective Service card which he had in the name of Hidell, and he admitted that he was carrying the card, but that he would not admit that he wrote the signature of Hidell on the card, and at that point stated that he refused to discuss the matter further. I think generally you might say anytime that you asked a question that would be pertinent to the investigation, that would be the type of question he would refuse to discuss.

Mr. STERN. Would you say he had a pretty good idea of what might be incriminating and what not incriminating?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. Well, I think that would call for an opinion, and I can only report the facts to you, and based on the example of the type of questions that I had commented on that he refused to answer, you will have to draw your own conclusion on that.

Mr. STERN. Fine. I am just trying to get at whether he seemed in command of himself and alert, and whether he handled himself responsibly from his own viewpoint, but if you don't want to venture an opinion, that's fine.

When you first joined the interview, did you advise him that you were an agent of the FBI, and did you say anything about warning him that evidence--that anything he said might be used?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. Yes; that was done by Agent Hosty.

Mr. STERN. Did he, at that point, or later say anything specifically regarding the FBI?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. Yes.

Mr. STERN. Tell us what that was.

Mr. BOOKHOUT. He accused the FBI of, generally, unfair tactics in interviewing his wife on some previous occasion.

Mr. STERN. Was this directed specifically at either you or Hosty, or to the general----

Mr. BOOKHOUT. It was directed against Hosty.

Mr. STERN. He did not, Oswald did not indicate that he knew Hosty himself, did he?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. No.

Mr. STERN. But, there was a complaint about an interview, or interrogation of Marina Oswald?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. Right.

Mr. STERN. Did he say anything about FBI interviews of him that had occurred in the past, any complaint about such interviews?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. I don't know that that would be in this particular interview, but in one of the interviews which has been reported he stated that he had been interviewed at Fort Worth, Tex., by agents upon his return to the United States from Russia, and he felt that they had used unfair means of interviewing him, or something. Those are not his exact words, but that is the impression he conveyed.

Mr. STERN. Unfair in what respect?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. I don't know.

Mr. STERN. Did he say?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. No.

Mr. STERN. Tell us the nature of his complaint.

Mr. BOOKHOUT. I think he probably used the expression, "Unfair tactics," or something in their interviews.

Mr. STERN. Yes. Did he indicate that he felt that the interview that was then going on was unfair in any way? Did he complain about that?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. No, he didn't complain about the interview. He made a complaint or two, as I recall, that one of the interviews that has been reported, in fact, I believe it was in this first interview he complained about his hands being handcuffed behind his back, and asked Captain Fritz to remove the handcuffs. Captain Fritz had one of his officers uncuff his hands from behind his back and recuff them in front and asked him if that was more satisfactory and he stated that it was.

Mr. STERN. Any other aspect of his treatment that he complained of?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. I recall one of the interviews that he complained about the lineup that he was in, that he wasn't allowed to wear a jacket similar to jackets worn by others in the lineup.

Mr. STERN. Did this occur at the lineup or subsequently?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. This was in one of the interviews in Captain Fritz' office.

Mr. STERN. Referring to a lineup that had----

Mr. BOOKHOUT. Subsequently been held--previously been held.

Mr. STERN. During the first interview was he asked whether he had ever been in Mexico, and if so, by whom?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. Yes; I recall Hosty asking him if he had ever been in Mexico.

Mr. STERN. What did he say?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. He said he had not. I believe he mentioned he had been in Tijuana, Mexico, I believe, but I believe the question was whether he had ever been in Mexico City.

Mr. STERN. Was he asked about an organization called the Fair Play for Cuba Committee, and if so, by whom?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. Yes, he was asked if he belonged to that. I don't recall specifically who raised the question.

Mr. STERN. What did he say?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. He said he was a member of it, and was secretary of the New Orleans branch. I believe he said the headquarters was in New York City.

Mr. STERN. Was there much discussion of this, or just the identification?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. Well, now, that is another instance where he balked on answering a question. He was asked who the officers were, and at that point he said he refused to discuss the matter further.

Mr. STERN. Was he asked his residence address in Dallas and did he give it?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. Yes; he furnished the address of 1026 North Beckley.

Mr. STERN. Did he say that he was living there under another name, or was another name and particularly the name O. H. Lee mentioned at all in this connection?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. He was asked why he was using the name Lee at this address, and he attempted to pass it off by stating that the landlord was an old lady, and his first name was Lee and she just had gotten it in her head that he was Mr. Lee. He never did explain about the initials O. H.

Mr. STERN. Was he asked whether he had shot the President, or Officer Tippit?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. Yes; he was asked that, and denied shooting either one of them, or knowing anything about it.

Mr. STERN. Was he asked whether he was carrying a pistol at the time he was in the Texas Theatre?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. Yes; that was brought up. He admitted that he was carrying a pistol at the time he was arrested. He claimed that he had bought this some time ago in Fort Worth.

Mr. STERN. He said he had gotten it in Fort Worth?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. That is my recollection, and there again, in trying to follow through on that line of thought, he refused to answer any further questions as to whereabouts in Fort Worth he had bought it.

Mr. STERN. Did he talk about his arrest and his resistance of arrest at the Texas Theatre?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. He admitted fighting with the officer at the time of the arrest, but I don't recall any explanation as to why he was doing it.

Mr. STERN. Did he admit that he might have been wrong in doing that, or say anything to that effect?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. Seemed to me like he made the comment that the only thing he was guilty of, or the only thing he could be charged with would be the carrying of a concealed weapon, and of resisting the arrest.

Mr. STERN. When he was asked about involvement in the assassination of President Kennedy, or the shooting of Officer Tippit, how would you describe his denials?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. Well, I don't know exactly how to describe it, but as I recall, he spoke very loudly. In other words, he was--he gave an emphatic denial, that is about all I can recall on it.

Mr. STERN. I believe that in the report you filed on this first interview, you or Agent Hosty, who joined in the report with you, used the adverb "frantically" to describe his denial of an involvement. Does that refresh your recollection as to that? Would you use that word now, or was that your word?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. No; that was written by Hosty, and that would be his expression of describing it.

Mr. STERN. Do you think "emphatically," is perhaps the more descriptive word now?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. Well, that would be the way I would describe it. As I said, he spoke----

Mr. STERN. I am not trying to put words into your mouth.

Mr. BOOKHOUT. He spoke loudly.

Mr. STERN. I am most interested in getting the tone of this interrogation and his state, the way he conducted himself, and that is why I ask this question, and there is something of a difference between saying a man is acting frantically as opposed to his acting emphatically.

Mr. BOOKHOUT. Well, I suppose the word, "frantically," would probably describe it. In other words, I said that he spoke loudly. There just wasn't a normal type of denial. He was--it was more than that. That is the reason I say that probably "frantically," might be a descriptive word.

Mr. STERN. Did that occur only in connection with questions about whether he had shot the President, or was the general tone of this interrogation, as far as he was concerned, at that level?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. No; he wouldn't use the same expression of speech in answering all questions. He would have certain kinds there, and certain types of questions that he would apparently have stronger feelings on.

Mr. STERN. Do you recall at any time his pounding on the desk, or making any other physical gestures of that kind?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. I don't recall him pounding on the desk; no, sir.

Mr. STERN. Now, this interview, as I understand, took approximately an hour?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. That's correct.

Mr. STERN. According to this report, you and Agent Hosty entered the interviewing around about 3:15 p.m., and it ended at 4:05.

Mr. BOOKHOUT. That would be correct.

Mr. STERN. Were these times that you or Hosty would have recorded at that moment in the ordinary course of your participation?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. That's correct. There was no log made of it, as such, but those were the times recorded for that particular interview.

Mr. STERN. Your normal practice is to get times down pretty accurately in matter of this----

Mr. BOOKHOUT. Try to.

Mr. STERN. And did you make the record of these times, or did Agent Hosty?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. I can say that I did. Whether he did or not, I don't know.

Mr. STERN. Incidentally, normally, do you preserve those notes or destroy them when you make a formal report?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. They will be, normally, destroyed at the time you make your--what we refer to as an interview report.

Mr. STERN. And in this case, did you destroy your notes?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. That's correct.

Mr. STERN. So, you have no notes respecting this whole matter?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. No, other than the reported interviewing report.

Mr. STERN. Yes; when the first interview was concluded, it was, as I understand it, to take Oswald before a lineup?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. That's correct.

Mr. STERN. Did you go with the police taking Oswald?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. No; I didn't go with them. In other words, it was strictly, as far as we were concerned, a police operation. I did proceed to the lineup room and observed it for the purpose of maintaining our liaison and keeping up with what was going on.

Mr. STERN. Do you recall how many people were in the lineup?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. It was a four-man lineup.

Mr. STERN. Did you know any of the other people?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. No.

Mr. STERN. Do you recall now their physical characteristics, as related to Oswald's physical characteristics? Were they same size as he, or noticeably larger or smaller?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. I observed that the lineup consisted of four men who were numbered from left to right, one through four. Oswald was No. 2 in the lineup. All the individuals appeared to be of the same general age, height, and weight, and they were white American males.

Mr. STERN. What about the dress of all the people in the lineup?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. I cannot recall specifically what the dress was, but there was nothing obviously different between their dress.

Mr. STERN. From your experience as an FBI agent, from your experience in policework, I take it you observed nothing about this lineup that was out of the ordinary?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. That's correct.

Mr. STERN. Did you hear what the witnesses who were present at the lineup said about the lineup?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. No; I did not.

Mr. STERN. When the lineup was concluded, what happened next, as far as you were concerned?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. I returned to the homicide and robbery bureau.

Mr. STERN. Was Oswald brought back there, or taken elsewhere?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. I don't recall specifically whether he was brought back to the homicide and robbery bureau, or placed in jail, but I do know that I didn't interview him any more that day.

Mr. STERN. Did you have any further contact with him that day? Friday?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. No.

Mr. STERN. When did you next see Oswald?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. Well, it would be on the morning of November 23, 1963, in the homicide and robbery bureau.

Mr. STERN. This was another interrogation?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. Yes.

Mr. STERN. Conducted by Captain Fritz?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. That's correct.

Mr. STERN. Do you recall who else was present, and you may refer any time to your reports to refresh your recollection.

Mr. BOOKHOUT. All right; that will be the interrogation that was in the presence of myself, T. J. Kelley of the U.S. Secret Service, David B. Grant, U.S. Secret Service, Robert I. Nash, U.S. marshal, and Detectives Billy L. Senkel and Fay M. Turner from the homicide and robbery bureau, Dallas Police Department. This interview was conducted, primarily, by Captain Fritz.

Mr. STERN. Did you ask any questions in the course of this interview?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. Yes.

Mr. STERN. What were they, and what were the responses, if you recall?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. One specific question was with regard to the selective service card in the possession of Oswald bearing a photograph of Oswald and the name Alek James Hidell. Oswald admitted he carried this selective service card, but declined to state that he wrote the signature of Alek J. Hidell appearing on same. Further declined to state the purpose of carrying same, and--or any use he made of same.

Mr. STERN. Did Oswald say anything in the course of this interview with regard to obtaining a lawyer?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. Yes, it was in this interview that he mentioned he wanted to contact Attorney Abt [spelling] A-b-t, New York City. I recall Captain Fritz asked him if he knew Abt personally and he said he did not, but he explained that he knew that Abt had defended the Smith Act cases in 1949, or 1950, and Captain Fritz asked him if he knew how to get ahold of Mr. Abt, and he stated that he did not know what his address was, but he was in New York.

I recall that Captain Fritz explained to him that he would allow him to place a long distance call for Abt, and he explained to Oswald how to ask the long distance operator to trace him down and locate him, even though Oswald didn't even know his address or telephone number.

Mr. STERN. Did he actually make the call in your presence?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. No; he didn't make the call in my presence. The next interview that we had with him, I recall that Captain Fritz asked him if he had been able to contact Mr. Abt. Oswald stated that he had made the telephone call and thanked Captain Fritz for allowing him to make the call, but actually, he had not been able to talk to Abt. He wasn't available. Wasn't in his office or something----

Mr. STERN. Was he complaining about not having counsel furnished, or did he seem satisfied with the effort to reach Abt?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. No; he made no complaint about not being furnished an attorney. Actually, there was a good deal of conversation on that point, and he stated that he did not want any Dallas attorney representing him, and said that if he couldn't get in touch with Mr. Abt, that he would probably contact someone with the Civil Liberties Union, and have them furnish an attorney. I recall sometime during November 22 or 23, I believe it was, the head of the Dallas Bar Association appeared at the homicide and robbery bureau and requested permission to talk to Oswald. Captain Fritz gave him that permission, and when he got through talking to Oswald and came back in and told Captain Fritz that he had seen him, and that Oswald did not want anybody from Dallas to represent him.

Mr. STERN. You heard this?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. Yes; that was in my presence. I don't recall the name of the attorney, but I was there at the time or during that conversation.

Mr. STERN. Can you tell us approximately how long this Saturday morning interview took?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. Well, that would be approximately an hour. No interview that I participated in lasted over an hour, and I think roughly this one probably started around 10:35 in the morning and lasted for approximately an hour.

Mr. STERN. All right. What was his physical appearance at this time?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. His appearance was no different than it was on the 22d.

Mr. STERN. You saw no other bruises?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. No.

Mr. STERN. Did he seem rested, or tired?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. I saw no difference in his appearance on the 23d than it was on the 22d.

Mr. STERN. How about the way he handled himself? Was he any calmer, any more communicative Saturday morning than he had been Friday afternoon?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. Well, I think that he might not have been quite as belligerent on the 23d as he was on the 22d. But he still refused to discuss certain points indicated above, selective service card being one point that I recall. I remember he was asked if he would take a polygraph, and he said he would not, that it had always been his practice not to agree to take a polygraph.

Mr. STERN. Did he suggest that he had been asked before to take a polygraph?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. He made some comment along the line that it had never been his policy--before, to take a polygraph.

Mr. STERN. But he didn't elaborate on it?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. He didn't elaborate on it.

Mr. STERN. Did he make any further comment at this interview about his interviews with the FBI, or their interviews of his wife?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. I think probably this is the one I referred to a while ago. Yes, it would be in this interview that he made further comment that on the interview of Ruth Paine by the FBI, regarding his wife, that he felt that his wife was intimidated. Also, in this interview that he made mention as previously stated above that he had arrived about July 19, 1962, from Russia, and was interviewed by the FBI at Fort Worth, Tex.

He stated that he felt that they had overstepped their bounds and used various tactics in interviewing him.

Mr. STERN. Did he specify what the tactics were?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. No; he did not.

Mr. STERN. In your report before this interview you mentioned that he again denied shooting President Kennedy, and apparently said that he didn't know until then that Governor Connally had been shot?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. That's correct. That was his statement, that he denied shooting President John F. Kennedy on November 22, 1963, and commented that he did not know that Governor John Connally had been shot.

Mr. STERN. Did you form any impression about whether he was genuinely surprised? Did he look genuinely surprised to you, or how did you feel about that? I am just asking for your impression. If you don't have one, say so.

Mr. BOOKHOUT. No; I have no impression on that. I arrived at no conclusion.

Mr. STERN. What did he say at this interview with respect to the purchase of a rifle, or possession of a rifle?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. Generally, he stated that he didn't own a rifle, hadn't ever made any mail order purchase of one.

Mr. STERN. Now, did anything transpire that you observed concerning Oswald between the end of that morning interview on Saturday, and the next interview of Oswald?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. No.

Mr. STERN. You stayed at the police headquarters in that period performing liaison functions?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. Yes.

Mr. STERN. You did not observe another lineup?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. No; there were other lineups.

Mr. STERN. But you did not participate?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. But I did not observe.

Mr. STERN. Or observe?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. Any others.

Mr. STERN. Now, approximately when did the next interview occur?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. The interview at about 6:30 p.m., on November 23, 1963.

Mr. STERN. How long did this interview last?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. Not over an hour.

Mr. STERN. Who conducted this interview?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. Captain Fritz.

Mr. STERN. Did you ask any questions, that you recall?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. I don't recall asking any specific questions during this interview.

Mr. STERN. It was at this interview, was it not, that Oswald was shown photographs of himself holding a rifle and wearing a pistol in a holster?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. That's correct.

Mr. STERN. What was his comment about the photograph?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. His comment, as I recall, he was asked if this was his photograph, and his comment was that the head of the photograph was his, but that it could have been superimposed over the body of someone else. He pointed out that he had been apparently photographed by news media numerous times in proceeding from the homicide and robbery bureau to the lineup and back, and that is how they probably got the photograph of his face, and he went into a long discussion of how much he knew about photography, and knew that this--his face could be superimposed over somebody else's body holding the gun and pistol and so forth.

Mr. STERN. Now, was his appearance and demeanor at this interview----

Mr. BOOKHOUT. No different than it was during the previous interviews.

Mr. STERN. Did he have any comment at this interview about counsel?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. None other than at the outset of being first asked if that was his photograph, he first made the statement that he wouldn't make any comment about it without the advice of counsel, but then subsequently is when he went into the story about his face had been superimposed over somebody else's body.

Mr. STERN. Did he complain in the course of this interview about the way in which the lineup had been conducted?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. This is the interview in which he--a previously mentioned comment here was made to the effect that he had not been granted a request to put on a jacket similar to those worn by some of the other individuals in some previous lineups.

Mr. STERN. In each of these interviews was he generally taken through the same questions or similar questions, or were the interviews addressed to different areas?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. More or less, they had been to a specific area. For instance, in this last interview we are talking about, that was more or less confined to this photograph.

Mr. STERN. Yes. Did he ever complain that, "We have been over that ground before," or make any such statement?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. No; I don't recall anything along that line, but I can recall one subject matter probably in the first interview where he talked about his method of transportation after leaving the Texas Book Depository, having gotten on a bus, and then that subject was taken up again, as I recall, in the second interview, expressed the same answer at that time, and then subsequently to that interview he backed up and said that it wasn't actually true as to how he got home. That he had taken a bus, and due to the traffic jam he had left the bus and got a taxicab, by which means he actually arrived at his residence.

Mr. STERN. Had he been confronted by the driver of the taxicab, or been told that they had located the driver of the taxicab before he changed his story, or did he volunteer the story of the taxi?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. I don't recall specifically whether he was confronted with that or not.

Mr. STERN. All right. Do you recall whether in the course of any of the interrogations any official, anyone present suggested in any way to Oswald that things would be better for him if he told the truth, if he confessed? Was he ever offered any inducement--any suggestion made that he would be better off if he told the full story?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. I can't recall anything along that line. I don't recall any type of inducement whatsoever.

Mr. STERN. In each interview in which you participated, did you warn him about the possible use of his statement against him?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. I personally did not at each interview, but I can say that at each interview he was warned. He was warned numerous times by Captain Fritz and his rights were fully explained to him.

Mr. STERN. What sort of warning would Captain Fritz give him, generally?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. He gave a warning consisting of the fact that he did not have to make any statement, that any statement he made could be used against him in court, and he had the right to consult with an attorney, generally, that was the rights that were explained to him, as I recall.

Mr. STERN. This was said at each session at which you were present?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. This was given at once each time, and the question would come up later on, I mean, he would repeat himself, that, you don't have to make any statement--and so forth.

Mr. STERN. Did you observe anytime any physical or mental coercion of Oswald by anyone?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. None whatsoever.

Mr. STERN. Off the record.

(Discussion off the record.)

Mr. STERN. Now, back on the record. This interview on late Saturday afternoon, was about 6 or 6:30, is that correct?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. This one started about 6:30 p.m. And I would say it lasted about an hour.

Mr. STERN. I see. So, that is 7:30?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. Yes.

Mr. STERN. Was there any further interview that day that you participated in?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. None that I recall.

Mr. STERN. Did you see Oswald again anytime after that interview concluded?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. Now, yes; on the morning of November 24, 1963, I observed him in interview with Captain Fritz and numerous other officers in the homicide and robbery bureau. Captain Fritz--I did not participate in this interview. It had already started before I arrived.

Mr. STERN. Did you notice anything unusual about his appearance?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. No.

Mr. STERN. Did you see Oswald again?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. I stayed there in the office of the homicide and robbery bureau. When I refer to "office" I mean the overall office, and inside of that office is a private office of Captain Fritz. The interview was being conducted in the private office. There is a glass partition or glass--well, say glass partition on one side of the office that you can see what is going on inside there. I took a seat adjacent to this glass area in the office proper of the homicide and robbery bureau, and watched Oswald during the interview that was going on. About--well, I don't know what time specifically, it was after 11 o'clock, as I recall, the interview terminated. I asked Captain Fritz if he had--if Oswald made any admissions, and he stated that he had not made any. Shortly thereafter he was taken out of the homicide and robbery bureau. I remained in the homicide office.

Mr. STERN. Did you see him again?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. Next time I saw him was after a report came out over the intercom system for any homicide and robbery officers to report to the city hall basement. I proceeded to the basement after learning from Lieutenant Baker in the homicide and robbery bureau, who had made a telephone call to the dispatcher to inquire what was going on, that Oswald had been shot.

When I arrived in the basement I asked where was Oswald, and they said that he was in the jail office. I asked who had shot him, and I was told an individual by the name of Jack Ruby. I asked where he was. They said, they have already taken him up to the jail.

Mr. STERN. Fine.

Mr. BOOKHOUT. Just shortly thereafter the ambulance came, and I observed them roll Oswald out of the jail office on the stretcher and that is the last----

Mr. STERN. I would like to clear up one point, Mr. Bookhout, about the number of interviews on Saturday. Your present recollection is that there were how many in which you participated?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. Two on Saturday.

Mr. STERN. One at about what time and the other at what time?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. One was about 10:35 a.m., and the second one was about 6:30 p.m.

Mr. STERN. You do not now recall any separate interview at about 12:30 on Saturday?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. I don't specifically recall any separate interview at that time. I checked the record before coming over and the interviews that I have mentioned are the only ones I have in the report.

Mr. STERN. Would you describe briefly the conditions in the corridor outside the homicide and robbery area.

Mr. BOOKHOUT. On November 22 and 23, the hallway in front of the homicide and robbery bureau located on the third floor of the city hall building was jammed with news media. From the elevator area to the end of the hallway, extending on past the homicide and robbery bureau entrance.

Mr. STERN. Could you hear anything from the hallway when you were in the interrogation room?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. No; there were two Dallas Police officers on duty at the entrance to the homicide and robbery bureau, who required you to identify yourself being that--before being allowed entrance into the bureau. The interviews of Oswald were conducted in the private offices of Capt. J. W. Fritz, located within the same bureau, and the door to the private office was closed, and we did not hear any commotion going on outside in the halls while the interviews were in progress.

Mr. STERN. Did Oswald ever say anything that you heard about the press and conditions in the hallway?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. The only thing I recall offhand is the incident mentioned previously about the press undoubtedly taking his photograph when he was going and coming from the homicide and robbery bureau.

Mr. STERN. I think that covers all the questions I have, Mr. Bookhout. Thank you very much for coming here.

Mr. BOOKHOUT. You are welcome.

Mr. STERN. If there is anything that occurs to you that I haven't asked about and you think the Commission should know, I would be delighted to have you tell me.

Mr. BOOKHOUT. I can't think of anything that I could add to what you have already heard.

Mr. STERN. Now, our reporter will transcribe your testimony and can make a copy available for you to read and sign. If you think it is accurate, you can waive that if you desire, and she will then send it directly to the Commission. It makes no difference at all to the Commission which you elect.

Mr. BOOKHOUT. I think that as far as I am concerned, it would be all right.

Mr. STERN. Fine. Then you will waive?

Mr. BOOKHOUT. My idea--the purpose--only purpose I would have would be just to help you if there are any typographical errors in there.

Mr. STERN. Fine. And thank you for coming in today.

Mr. BOOKHOUT. All right.

TESTIMONY OF MANNING C. CLEMENTS

The testimony of Manning C. Clements was taken at 10:15 a.m., on April 8, 1964, in the office of the U.S. attorney, 301 Post Office Building, Bryan and Ervay Streets, Dallas, Tex., by Mr. Samuel A. Stern, assistant counsel of the President's Commission.

Mr. STERN. Good morning, Mr. Clements. Will you rise and raise your right hand, please.

Do you swear that the testimony you are about to give will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?

Mr. CLEMENTS. I do.

Mr. STERN. Would you please sit down. State your name and address.

Mr. CLEMENTS. Manning C. Clements, 5542 Montrose [spelling] M-o-n-t-r-o-s-e Drive, Dallas, Tex.

Mr. STERN. What is your occupation, Mr. Clements?

Mr. CLEMENTS. I'm a special agent of the Federal Bureau of Investigation.

Mr. STERN. How long have you been a member of the Federal Bureau of Investigation?

Mr. CLEMENTS. Twenty-three years and approximately 4 months.

Mr. STERN. How long have you been assigned to the Dallas office?

Mr. CLEMENTS. Since April 1952.

Mr. STERN. On November 22, 1963, were you on duty as a special agent?

Mr. CLEMENTS. I was.

Mr. STERN. Did your duties that morning before noon concern the visit of the President?

Mr. CLEMENTS. No.

Mr. STERN. Will you relate to us what happened when you first heard the news of the shooting of the President?

Mr. CLEMENTS. I arrived at the office following lunch and shortly thereafter heard of the shooting at the motorcade, and my superior instructed me to go to the office of the chief of police. I was to offer the services of the Federal Bureau of Investigation for whatever use the police might find them of benefit.

Mr. STERN. What did you do then?

Mr. CLEMENTS. I went to the police station, arriving there at approximately 1 o'clock. I immediately contacted the office of the chief. I found that he was out. I contacted Capt. Glen King, his administrative assistant, and Captain Lunday, who was also on duty in the chief's office. Contacted Art Hammet, the public relations representative, who was occupying the desk in the outer office of the chief. I informed each of them as to the reason for my presence and that any requests that they might have for FBI assistance, information or otherwise, could be given to me and I would in turn, relay their request to our Dallas office.

Mr. STERN. What occurred next?

Mr. CLEMENTS. During the course of the next several hours I was in occasional contact with various representatives of the police department, in contact with my own office by telephone. Served more or less as a liaison officer to relay instructions to any other FBI agents who were on the premises.

Mr. STERN. When did you first hear of the arrest of Lee Harvey Oswald?

Mr. CLEMENTS. I can't fix the exact time. I am certain that I heard almost immediately after the arrest, because I learned from police personnel of the shooting of Officer Tippit, and thereafter, when they received radio reports, I was generally aware of such report. So, I became aware of the arrest of Oswald, I would say, approximately coincidentally with the front office, or with the police department learning of the arrest.

Mr. STERN. At that time his name meant nothing?

Mr. CLEMENTS. Repeat that.

Mr. STERN. His name meant nothing to you?

Mr. CLEMENTS. No.

Mr. STERN. Were you present when he was brought into the police headquarters?

Mr. CLEMENTS. No.

Mr. STERN. When did you first see Oswald?

Mr. CLEMENTS. I am, at this moment, uncertain of whether I saw him prior to personally interrogating him. I don't believe that I did.

Mr. STERN. Did you know that he was being interrogated, and that other special agents of the FBI were present?

Mr. CLEMENTS. It was my understanding that he was being questioned and that FBI agents were participating.

Mr. STERN. You were, then, pursuing other functions?

Mr. CLEMENTS. Yes.

Mr. STERN. And they were, again, liaison activities?

Mr. CLEMENTS. Liaison--primarily.

Mr. STERN. Were you, Mr. Clements, the conduit for any information that the FBI had concerning Oswald, to the Dallas Police Department?

Mr. CLEMENTS. No.

Mr. STERN. I understand that you participated in an interrogation of Oswald. Would you tell me about that?

Mr. CLEMENTS. Sometime during the evening I did go to the homicide bureau office for some purpose I don't immediately recall, and there I saw one of our other agents, James Bookhout, and I asked him if anyone had, to his knowledge, taken a detailed physical description and detailed background information from Oswald. He told me that such description and background data had not been obtained, and suggested that I do it. I learned from Bookhout, as I recall, that Oswald was, at the time, in a small office, the door of which was closed.

I sought out Captain Fritz, in charge of the homicide bureau, or one of his ranking officers and asked if there was any objection to my interviewing Oswald in the regard mentioned.

I was told there was no objection. I entered this room and found that Oswald was in the room, and being guarded by two officers who I presumed to be members of the Dallas Police Department, but whom I did not personally know.

Mr. STERN. They were not interrogating him?

Mr. CLEMENTS. No; they were apparently just sitting on guard duty.

Mr. STERN. Then what happened?

Mr. CLEMENTS. I introduced myself to the officers whose names I do not believe that I got, and also introduced myself to Oswald. Exhibited my credentials and told him that I would like to obtain from him some physical description, background, biographical data. He was agreeable, and I began my interview with him.

Mr. STERN. Can you approximate the time of day that this occurred--roughly?

Mr. CLEMENTS. I would say the interview began roughly at 10 p.m.

Mr. STERN. How long did it last? And was it interrupted?

Mr. CLEMENTS. I estimate the overall interview was approximately 30 or 35 minutes. I was interrupted twice, perhaps, during the interview, being informed that he was being taken out for a lineup. While he was gone I examined the contents of his wallet which was there on the desk, and identified to me as Oswald's wallet. When he returned I continued the interview.

Mr. STERN. Approximately how long was he gone?

Mr. CLEMENTS. I would estimate 10 or 15 minutes.

Mr. STERN. So, that the total amount of time that you spent with him was something like 20 minutes?

Mr. CLEMENTS. That would be a rough estimate.

Mr. STERN. Did you see him again after that interview?

Mr. CLEMENTS. Yes; I saw him next at a time which I estimate was 11:30 p.m., the 22d. It was at a time when he was being taken to the basement of the city hall to a press conference. I saw him as he was being taken to the third floor from the offices of the homicide bureau, and I went to the basement myself arriving there before he did, and I saw him as he was being brought into the room where the press conference was held, and during the course of the press conference.

Mr. STERN. Did you see him again at any time after that press conference?

Mr. CLEMENTS. No.

Mr. STERN. What was his physical condition, as you observed it when you----

Mr. CLEMENTS. He----

Mr. STERN. When you entered the room to interrogate him?

Mr. CLEMENTS. I observed a bruise, a bruise in the vicinity of one of his eyes. I believe minor scratches on his face. I saw no evidence that he was suffering from any physical pain or anything of that sort.

Mr. STERN. Was he handcuffed?

Mr. CLEMENTS. Yes.

Mr. STERN. With his hands in front or behind?

Mr. CLEMENTS. Hands were in front.

Mr. STERN. Did he seem alert, or otherwise?

Mr. CLEMENTS. He seemed alert.

Mr. STERN. Will you now tell, Mr. Clements, as much as you can recall of your interrogation of Oswald at that time?

Mr. CLEMENTS. I informed him of the purpose of my interview. He made no objection. I proceeded to get his name in full. I asked him questions as to his date and place of birth, height, weight, color of his hair and eyes, and as to the existence of any permanent scars or marks. As to the identities of close relatives, their addresses and occupations, and asked him as to his own occupation, residence, attempting to get them in chronological order, and asked as to his past occupations.

Mr. STERN. Did you review with him the contents of his wallet and ask him questions on any of it?

Mr. CLEMENTS. I questioned him as to the fictitious, and obviously fictitious selective service card, which I found in his wallet. I recognized it as being fictitious card from the fact that the photograph was mounted on the card, and that there were obvious erasures in typing of information on the card itself. The card was in the name of an Alek James Hidell, but bore the photograph of Oswald.

Mr. STERN. What did he say about that card?

Mr. CLEMENTS. He declined to answer any questions as to the reason of his possession of it.

Mr. STERN. Were there any other questions you put to him that he refused to answer?

Mr. CLEMENTS. Toward the conclusion of the interview and after he had been absent and returned I continued with the questions of past residence and past occupations. He responded to my questions. At a time when I asked him as to his present occupation he hesitated and told me that he thought the obtaining of his description and background information had become somewhat prolonged. He said that he had refused to be interviewed by other law enforcement officers previously, and that he had no intention of being interviewed by me. He continued that he knew the tactics of the FBI. He stated there was a counterpart or a similar agency in Russia, that I was using the soft touch, where the approach of a Russian agency would be different, but the tactics would be the same.

Mr. STERN. At that point did he stop answering questions?

Mr. CLEMENTS. No; at that point I asked the same question that I had asked previously, and he answered.

Mr. STERN. Did the interview continue beyond that?

Mr. CLEMENTS. That was substantially the end of the interview.

Mr. STERN. Were there other persons present besides the two Dallas police officers who were guarding him?

Mr. CLEMENTS. No.

Mr. STERN. At either time, either before or after he had been withdrawn from the lineup?

Mr. CLEMENTS. No.

Mr. STERN. Did he seem hostile or resentful or irritated by the fact that you were an FBI agent?

Mr. CLEMENTS. He did not state that, if that were the case. He was courteous, responsive as to any question. Volunteered little information.

Mr. STERN. But volunteered very little information. Did he seem a person in command of himself?

Mr. CLEMENTS. He seemed to be in command of himself both physically and mentally. He had what appeared to me to be a slightly haughty or arrogant attitude.

Mr. STERN. Did he complain to you about the treatment he was receiving?

Mr. CLEMENTS. No.

Mr. STERN. Did he say anything to you about obtaining counsel, whether he had tried to?

Mr. CLEMENTS. He said nothing whatsoever in that regard.

Mr. STERN. Did he say anything about any effort on his part to reach his family that had been unsuccessful?

Mr. CLEMENTS. No; he did not.

Mr. STERN. At the conclusion of your interview, did you leave the office in which he was being guarded and leave him behind?

Mr. CLEMENTS. Yes; I did.

Mr. STERN. When you next saw him at this press conference in the basement, can you describe the conditions in that room? How many people were present?

Mr. CLEMENTS. The corridor on the third floor was quite crowded, and when I reached the basement there were, I would estimate, perhaps 50 people, all told, including officers, members of the press, perhaps others. There was a crowded condition I would say.

Mr. STERN. Quite a great deal of noise?

Mr. CLEMENTS. I don't recall any great amount of noise. Although, I do recall that members of the press were attempting to get Oswald to respond to questions.

Mr. STERN. How did he seem at that time?

Mr. CLEMENTS. I saw no difference in his appearance to that at the time I had talked with him.

Mr. STERN. Did he then seem to you to be in command of himself, and alert?

Mr. CLEMENTS. Yes; he did.

Mr. STERN. Mr. Clements, did you make a record of your interview with Oswald?

Mr. CLEMENTS. I did.

Mr. STERN. How soon after the interview did you dictate that memorandum?

Mr. CLEMENTS. The following day, November 23, 1963.

Mr. STERN. And have you reviewed that memorandum to refresh your memory of what occurred?

Mr. CLEMENTS. I have.

Mr. STERN. And you had no further contact, or didn't observe Oswald, Mr. Clements, as I understand it, from the time of the press conference until he was, himself, killed on November 24?

Mr. CLEMENTS. That's correct.

Mr. STERN. Thank you very much.

Mr. CLEMENTS. Yes.

Mr. STERN. The reporter will transcribe your testimony. You can, if you wish, review a copy of the transcript and sign it, or waive your signature and the reporter will send it directly to the Commission, whichever you prefer.

Mr. CLEMENTS. I think I would prefer to review it after it is typed.

Mr. STERN. Fine.

The reporter will get in touch with you and give you an opportunity to review it.

Thank you very much for coming in.

TESTIMONY OF GREGORY LEE OLDS

The testimony of Gregory Lee Olds was taken at 4:05 p.m., on April 8, 1964, in the office of the U.S. attorney, 301 Post Office Building, Bryan and Ervay Streets, Dallas, Tex., by Mr. Samuel A. Stern, assistant counsel of the President's Commission.

Mr. STERN. Will you stand and raise your right hand, please.

Do you solemnly swear that the evidence you are about to give shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?

Mr. OLDS. I do.

Mr. STERN. Sit down, please, Mr. Olds. For the record will you state your name and address.

Mr. OLDS. Gregory Lee Olds, 1316 Timberlake, Richardson, Tex.

Mr. STERN. What is your profession?

Mr. OLDS. I am an editor of a weekly newspaper.

Mr. STERN. Where?

Mr. OLDS. In Richardson.

Mr. STERN. What is your connection with the Dallas Civil Liberties Union?

Mr. OLDS. I am its President.

Mr. STERN. Were you its president in November of 1963?

Mr. OLDS. Yes.

Mr. STERN. Can you tell us what transpired on November 22, in connection with your efforts and the efforts of your organization to assure that Lee Harvey Oswald was not being denied his right to counsel?

Mr. OLDS. Yes. I got a phone call about 10:30 that night from one of our board members saying they had been called by the President of the Austin affiliate who was concerned about the reports that were being circulated on the air. I think Oswald was directly quoted as saying he had not been given the opportunity to have counsel, and the suggestion was made that it might be well to check into this matter, and I believe I called this--I first called the police department to inquire about this, and finally talked to Captain Fritz, Capt. Will Fritz, and was--raised the question, and he said, "No--" that Oswald had been given the opportunity and declined. And I called--then I called the board member back who had called me----

Mr. STERN. Excuse me. Did Captain Fritz say that Oswald did not want counsel at that time, or that he was trying to obtain his own counsel?

Mr. OLDS. What I was told, that he had been given the opportunity and had not made any requests. So, I called our board member back and conferred with him and he suggested that we go down and see about it at the police department, in person, to get further assurances. And he and I and two others of our organization met down there at the Plaza Hotel lobby about 11:15, directly across the street from the police station, and we discussed the matter there, and I called Mayor Earle Cabell at his office, but was told that he was busy at the moment so we went then over to the police station, and we got in there. Let's see, it was up on the--I guess the third or fourth floor, wherever Oswald was being questioned, and Chuck Webster, a lawyer--professor of law, who was known to the other three men with me said he had been there a good part of the time since the assassination, and that--we told him what we were there for, and he said he thought he knew who we could see to get our assurances. Did you have something?

Mr. STERN. No.

Mr. OLDS. We went to--first, we talked--conferred with Captain King, I believe is the right name, who is, I believe, assistant to the chief of police. I'm not sure on that. We all went in with Mr. Webster, and this was shortly after 11:35, or 11:40, and Captain King was, at this time, talking to somebody and said that Oswald had just been charged with the assassination of President Kennedy. He had here--earlier been charged with the assassination--I mean the murder of the policeman, Tippit, and we told Captain King what we were there for, and he said, he assured us that Oswald had not made any requests for counsel. And we went outside of the office and went downstairs, at least--I didn't, but two of the others, I believe, went downstairs to the basement where Justice of the Peace David Johnston was. He was the one that had held the--I believe an arraignment, I believe is the right term, at 7:30 when the first charge of murder was filed against Oswald, and he also assured us that there had been an opportunity of--Oswald's rights had been explained, and he had declined counsel. Said nothing beyond that. I think that was the extent of our inquiry.

Mr. STERN. What happened next?

Mr. OLDS. Also we were--I believe Chief Curry was quoted to us as having said some--also that Oswald had been advised of his rights to counsel. I am not sure who told me that. I believe that it was Mr. Webster. That was about all. We felt fairly well satisfied that Oswald probably had not been deprived of his rights, so, we then broke up. I think the other men went home, and I went downstairs. I heard that there was going to be a press conference, so I thought I could stand in on that and--do you want me to go ahead and detail that?

Mr. STERN. Yes, this was----

Mr. OLDS. This was right at midnight, I think, when Oswald was brought in.

Mr. STERN. Brought in where?

Mr. OLDS. This was a squadroom and I am not sure what the term is. It is in the basement of the police station. That was being used as a pressroom. I believe it is some sort of a classroom or something of that sort. He was brought in there. I suppose a hundred reporters standing around on tables, and I understand Ruby was there at the time, too, up near the front.

Mr. STERN. You don't know that, though?

Mr. OLDS. I don't remember seeing him.

Mr. STERN. Do you know Ruby?

Mr. OLDS. No; I don't. No; I remember someone saying what he was supposed to have said when--and helped somebody answer a question. I forget what it was, and Oswald came in, and he was there about 5 minutes----

Mr. STERN. Were you permitted to enter this room without displaying any identification?

Mr. OLDS. Yes; I wasn't stopped at all. Nobody seemed to pay--it was pretty well confused around there, and nobody questioned me at all.

Mr. STERN. Would you have been known to the police as a newspaperman?

Mr. OLDS. I had never been in the police building. No one had any way of knowing who I was, or what my business was.

Mr. STERN. Did you have to identify yourself to get into this building to begin with?

Mr. OLDS. No; no problem getting into the building. No one in the lobby, and I don't believe there was anyone at all until you get up to the third or fourth floor where the police department section of the building begins.

Mr. STERN. What were the conditions of this room and the scene?

Mr. OLDS. Well, you mean the room where the press conference was held, where Oswald came in? It was very noisy, and when Oswald came in it was very confusing. The reporters were yelling at each other to get out of the way, and they were, the photographers were having a very bad time with it, and people kept crowding toward the front and standing on tables so that they could see and hear and Oswald was there such a brief time, and was not able to be heard beyond the first row of reporters who were circled around him. Thereafter reporters were interviewing reporters who were on the front row to see what had been said, and some sort of confusion existed, and enough of--oh, probably 50 reporters standing around there, and it was a very confusing situation it seemed. And Oswald had to be brought through the hall on his way from the interrogation room to his cell, so, he couldn't avoid being seen, and it was at this time that he was making the statements that were being quoted.

Mr. STERN. Did you observe this?

Mr. OLDS. No; I didn't. I saw this on television, but I could imagine it from that.

Mr. STERN. How did he look to you when he was at this press conference?

Mr. OLDS. He looked remarkably composed and determined. He had a--I remarked afterwards that I would have been very much distraught, and he seemed very well self-contained and determined and maintained his innocence. I heard that, and beyond that scratch above--on his forehead and the eye that was swollen and the little--he looked all right.

He looked a little tired, of course, and I think his clothes were dirty, but he looked remarkably in good shape, I thought.

Mr. STERN. Did this give you any further assurance that--about the right to counsel question?

Mr. OLDS. Possibly so, it was----

Mr. STERN. I don't want to put the idea in your head.

Mr. OLDS. Well, I know, but we had the idea that Oswald was not being accurate when he said he had been denied, because in our dealings with the police here, we have had reason to believe that they are very careful of this sort of thing. And certainly in a case of this notoriety, certainly, our tendency was to believe that, but I have always been sorry that we didn't talk with Oswald, because it was not clear whether we would be permitted to see him that night or not.

Mr. STERN. But, you did not ask to see him?

Mr. OLDS. No; we did not, which I think was a mistake on my part.

Mr. STERN. Did anything transpire on Saturday, November 23?

Mr. OLDS. Not so much. I was watching television most of the day and then the matter of counsel was raised, I think, during that day. During the--I suppose when Oswald was being transferred in the hall again, and--let's see--this is when Mr. Nichols went down late this afternoon, I think around 5:30, and he reported after that that he had seen Oswald in respect to the same reasons that we had for going down there Saturday night, to see if he wanted some sort of legal representation, and to make sure whether or not he was denied--being denied it, and he said that he was satisfied that--in essence, Oswald told Nichols he was satisfied with the situation. I can detail this conversation if you would like, as it was told to me.

Mr. STERN. No.

Mr. OLDS. Well, that was the essence of what was found out.

Mr. STERN. Was there any mention of the American Civil Liberties Union?

Mr. OLDS. Yes; it was at this time that we first heard the idea that Oswald might be a member of the American Civil Liberties Union, and this surprised us, because we felt we would have had a record of it in our files, but there is often a lapse of time when a member moves from one area to another and it takes some time to transfer him to the local affiliate. To make sure of this I called the national office in New York City, and it was night, of course there was no one there, but I finally got a number of one of the staff members and talked to him at his home in New Jersey and told him about it, and he said, he would check on the matter. Have somebody in New York, who lived near the office to go in and see about it, and he did and they found no such record at that time.

However, it was later discovered that on November 4, he had sent a check for $2 to the office, which was, I believe, discovered 3 weeks later.

Mr. STERN. Mr. Olds, I think that covers the matters that I am interested in. Is there anything further that you would like to tell us? Anything that you----

Mr. OLDS. Possibly later after this matter was disposed of, we became interested in the legal status of Oswald's wife, Marina, and a story in the New York Times, I believe December 19, said something to the effect that perhaps she was being held incommunicado and in some way illegally detained. Anyway, her status was not clear as far as the reporter was concerned, and our national office in New York City got a number of inquiries both by phone and personal calls and letters, telegrams, and they asked us in turn then, to see what we could find out about it. After a certain amount of negotiations with the Secret Service and FBI and so on, we sent a letter to Mrs. Oswald and she later wrote us that she was content with her situation, and was very happy with her status, in fact, it was for her interest.

Mr. STERN. Well, thank you very much, Mr. Olds for coming in today.

The reporter will transcribe your testimony and you will then be notified when it is available and afforded an opportunity to read it and sign it. If you would like to waive that that is possible and the reporter would send the transcript directly to the Commission.

Mr. OLDS. I will be glad to sign it. Do you want me to come down here and do that?

Mr. STERN. Yes.

Mr. OLDS. When do you think it might be?

Mr. STERN. It should be within the next week or so.

Mr. OLDS. All right, fine.

Mr. STERN. Thank you very much.

TESTIMONY OF H. LOUIS NICHOLS

The testimony of H. Louis Nichols was taken at 9:30 a.m., on April 8, 1964, in the office of the U.S. attorney, 301 Post Office Building, Bryan and Ervay Streets, Dallas, Tex., by Mr. Samuel A. Stern, assistant counsel of the President's Commission.

Mr. STERN. Good morning, Mr. Nichols. Will you stand and raise your right and be sworn.

Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you are about to give will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?

Mr. NICHOLS. I do.

Mr. STERN. Sit down, please. As you know the President's Commission has been instructed by President Johnson to inquire into all the facts surrounding the assassination of President Kennedy. This morning I would like to cover with you what you know about Lee Harvey Oswald, whom I understand you interviewed at the Dallas Police Headquarters.

Would you state your name and business address?

Mr. NICHOLS. H. Louis Nichols. 1200 Republic Bank Building, Dallas.

Mr. STERN. What is your profession?

Mr. NICHOLS. I am an attorney.

Mr. STERN. And how long have you been a member of the bar?

Mr. NICHOLS. Since 1939.

Mr. STERN. What bars are you a member of?

Mr. NICHOLS. State Bar of Texas, and admitted to practice in the Northern District of Texas, Federal Court.

Mr. STERN. What position do you presently hold with the Dallas Bar Association?

Mr. NICHOLS. I am a member of the board of directors for the Dallas Association, at the present time. During 1963, I was President of the Dallas Bar Association.

Mr. STERN. During the calendar year, 1963?

Mr. NICHOLS. Yes.

Mr. STERN. I see. Would you relate for us, Mr. Nichols, in your own words, what occurred respecting Lee Harvey Oswald and your inquiry whether he had the opportunity to avail himself of counsel during the period of his detention, which began on November 22, 1963?

Mr. NICHOLS. Sometime in the afternoon on Saturday the 23d of November, as I best recall, in the neighborhood of about 2 o'clock, I received a phone call from a lawyer friend of mine in Dallas who asked me if I knew whether or not Mr. Oswald was represented by an attorney.

I told him I did not. He said he had received a phone call from an eastern lawyer, dean of one of the law schools in the East, who told him that the news media up there were saying that Oswald could not get a lawyer to represent him in Dallas, and he wanted to know if I knew anything about the situation. I told him I had not been following it too closely on television, because I was out Friday and then out with my boy on Saturday morning and didn't know really whether or not he had a lawyer.

And he said, well, that was the information he had received, and wanted to know what I knew about it, and if he didn't have a lawyer, or wasn't able to get one whether or not the bar association could, or would do anything about it. I told him I didn't know what the situation was, but that I would be glad to look into it, and--it had been less than 24 hours since Mr. Oswald had been arrested. In order to refresh my memory as to what the requirement of the State law is, and since I don't practice criminal law, I called a lawyer friend of mine in Dallas who is a criminal lawyer and asked him just to tell me offhand what the obligation was to appoint lawyers in criminal cases, if a person did not have someone to represent him, and he told me that the obligation was only to appoint counsel after a man had been indicted, and that, as he understood it, since Mr. Oswald had not been indicted there was no legal obligation to appoint an attorney.

I also received another call shortly thereafter from another lawyer friend of mine in Dallas who said he had received a call from a dean of a law school. One of the calls was from one dean of one law school. The other was from another. I have forgotten which schools they were, and I don't remember which called first with regard to the various deans, but he wanted to know from me whether or not the bar association was doing anything. Whether Oswald had a lawyer. And whether or not if he didn't have one, we should do anything about getting him one, and I told him I had had a previous telephone call from another friend of mine, and that I had made some inquiry, and at this time I did not know whether Oswald had a lawyer or was getting a lawyer, but that I was going to make some inquiry to find out about it. After talking to the second friend about it who called, I then called Mr. Henry Wade, the district attorney, to see whether or not he knew whether or not Oswald was represented by a lawyer or not.

I did not know for sure at that time whether he was, simply because I had no way of knowing whether he was represented or not. I hadn't talked to anybody who was really informed, and I called Mr. Wade. He said he didn't know for sure whether he was or not, as far as he knew he hadn't been contacted by any lawyer who purported to represent Oswald. I asked him whether or not either he or anybody in his office had been advised that Oswald wanted a lawyer, or had made a request for a lawyer, and he said as far as he knew he had not asked for a lawyer. I asked him too, as he was going up there, and I asked him if Oswald requested a lawyer and didn't have a lawyer would he tell him that the Dallas Bar Association would get a lawyer if he needed one.

By that time I had time to think about what I thought my obligation should be, and realizing that under the circumstances maybe some people might overlook the fact that Oswald had rights that needed to be protected at the same time, and if he didn't have a lawyer, regardless of what the legal obligation was to appoint him a lawyer, we, the bar association, ought to look into the matter.

Mr. Wade said he was going to go up there later on in the evening and he would talk to his assistants who were in closer contact than he was, and if Oswald wanted a lawyer--asked for a lawyer or wanted a lawyer appointed--he would tell him of my conversation. I then called Glen King, and a captain on the police force that I knew. I used to work for the city attorney's office, and still represent the city credit union and have a brother on the police force, so, I have known many of these people for many years. I called Captain King and asked him whether or not Oswald was represented by an attorney, if he knew if there was an attorney up there, or anybody who had been up there representing him, and Captain King said that as far as he knew there had been no one representing him, and as far as he knew, Oswald had not asked for a lawyer. He had not asked for the right to call a lawyer, and--or had not asked that a lawyer be furnished to him--and Captain King said, "If he does, I am certainly going to call you and let you know, because we want to be sure if he wants a lawyer he gets one. We don't want it to be a situation of anybody saying that we deprived him of the right to have a lawyer."

I said, "Well, Glen, if you know at any time that he asks for a lawyer, or wants a lawyer, or needs a lawyer, will you tell him that you have talked to me, as president of the bar association, and that I have offered to get him a lawyer if he wants one."

And Glen said, "Well, I'll just throw it back to you. You come down and talk to him. I would be glad to have you talk to him."

I said, "I didn't know whether I wanted to or not at this point." I hadn't quite decided at that point whether we could do something about it, and I didn't know whether Oswald had his own attorney, but I told Captain King if I decided to take him up on his offer I would come and see him.

It was about 3:30 or 4 o'clock. By that time I had talked to a criminal lawyer, I had talked to Mr. Wade, I had talked to these two lawyer friends of mine in trying to decide what, if anything I should do.

Up to that time I had not been told by any of these people that Oswald had asked for a lawyer, or been denied a lawyer, or even knew whether he had a lawyer. None of them knew for sure. I didn't--I then received a call from another lawyer who was a professor out at S.M.U., and he wanted to know whether or not the bar association was doing anything about getting a lawyer for Oswald. I told him what had transpired, what I had done, and I hadn't decided what should be done at this time, if anything by me, as president of the bar association.

He seemed to think that it would be advisable and would be helpful if I would go up and satisfy myself personally as to whether or not Oswald had any lawyer, wanted a lawyer or was asking for a lawyer and hadn't been able to get one, and I told him that I had not decided what to do, so, I sat around and decided if it had to be done. It seemed like enough time had gone by, and enough uncertainty among the people I talked to as to whether or not he had a lawyer or had asked for a lawyer that I decided I might as well go up and talk to him, so, I cleaned up and went on up to the city hall. That was probably 5:30 or so in the afternoon.

Mr. STERN. City hall is where he was confined?

Mr. NICHOLS. City hall in Dallas, where Oswald was confined. Having worked there I knew where the chief's office was.

I knew Captain King, the administrative assistant to the chief, and his office was in the same place so, I went to the third floor of the city hall, now called the Police and Courts Building.

The building in which the police department is located and the jail is located, and where I assumed Oswald was at that time. I went up to the third floor, and when I got off the elevator there was just a whole mob of reporters and photographers and television cameras and cables and so forth stretched out on that floor. Cables running in both directions, and I went down into the chief's office, which is the eastern end of the building, and when I went in there, there were a number of people in his office, in the reception room, three or four people back in the chief's office, Chief Curry's office, a number of people, and I asked one of the officers in the reception room if Captain King was there and he said, "Well, he didn't think so."

About that time Chief Curry looked up and saw me, and he knew me and motioned me in, and I went in there and he introduced me to one of the FBI agents who was there, and I told him I was up there as president of the bar association looking for Captain King. I had talked to him earlier and I had come up there to see whether or not Mr. Oswald had a lawyer, or needed a lawyer, or wanted the Dallas Bar Association to do anything.

The chief said that he was glad to see me and would take me up to see Oswald himself and, so, we immediately left his office and started to another part of the building, and he asked me where I wanted to talk to him. If I wanted to be taken to a room or some place, or what would be convenient with me, and I told him that any place would be all--I just wanted to visit with the man and see what his situation was with regard to him having a lawyer. So, we then went through a door on the third floor and got into the elevator and went up to the sixth floor, and the chief again asked me where I wanted to talk to him. I said, "Well, just any place."

By that time we had gotten to a portion of the jail that was separated by bars and a door. Beyond that door were three separate cells, and there was an officer seated outside one, and then we went through the first door and got to that point and Mr. Oswald was in the center of the three cells, no one being in the other two, and there was an officer seated outside there. The chief had the officer open the door, and he introduced me to Oswald, and told him my name and said that I was the president of the Dallas Bar Association and had come up to see him about whether or not he needed or wanted a lawyer, and then the chief stepped back and--I don't really know how far away. He was at least--he was far enough removed where I couldn't observe him or see him there in the cell. The officer stayed just right outside the door there. I reintroduced myself to Oswald and told him my name, and that I was president of the Dallas bar, and that I had come up to see him about whether or not he had a lawyer, or needed a lawyer, or wanted a lawyer, and suggested that he sit down.

So, he sat on one bunk and I sat on the other. Maybe 3 or 4 feet apart. When I got there he was lying on a bunk, and then he stood up when I came in and then he sat on one bunk and I sat on the other, much as you and I are seated here, only actually, a little bit closer, and I asked him if he had a lawyer, and he said, "Well, he really didn't know what it was all about, that he was--had been incarcerated, and kept incommunicado," and I said, "Well, I have come up to see whether or not you want a lawyer, because as I understand--" I am not exactly sure what I said there, or whether he said something about not knowing what happened to President Kennedy, or I said that I understood that he was arrested for the shot that killed the President, and I don't remember who said what after that. This is a little bit vague.

I had covered that point in detail, and I don't recall exactly, but in any event, our conversation was such that I informed him that I was there to see whether or not he had a lawyer, or wanted a lawyer, and he said--he asked me first did I know a lawyer in New York named John Abt, and I don't know if it is A-b-t, or A-p-t.

Mr. STERN. I believe it is A-b-t.

Mr. NICHOLS. I believe it is. In New York City, I said I didn't know him, and he said, "Well, I would like to have him to represent me," and at some period I believe prior to that, either in talking to the police, or talking to--must have been talking to either Captain King or the chief--I had been told that some effort had been made to get hold of Mr. Abt, and that he was in Connecticut at his home, and maybe, and I have forgotten who said who was trying to get ahold of him. At least, I did vaguely know that someone was trying to get ahold of him, but I told Mr. Oswald I didn't know him. He said, "Well, that is the man he would like to have represent him." Then he asked me if I knew any lawyers who were members of the American Civil Liberties Union, and he said, "Well, I am a member of that organization, and I would like to have somebody who is a member of that organization represent me." And I said, "I'm sorry, I don't know anybody who is a member of that organization."

Although, as it turned out later, a number of lawyers I know are members. Two or three of them called me later. He said, "Well, if I can't get either one of those, and if I can----"

Mr. STERN. That is either----

Mr. NICHOLS. "Either Mr. Abt or someone who is a member of the American Civil Liberties Union, and if I can find a lawyer here who believes in anything I believe in, and believes as I believe, and believes in my innocence"--then paused a little bit, and went on a little bit and said, "as much as he can, I might let him represent me."

I said, "What I am interested in knowing is right now, do you want me or the Dallas Bar Association to try to get you a lawyer?"

He said, "No, not now."

He said, "You might come back next week, and if I don't get some of these other people to represent me, I might ask you to get somebody to represent me."

I said, "Well, now, all I want to do is to make it clear to you, and to me, whether or not you want me or the Dallas Bar Association to do anything about getting a lawyer right now."

And he said "No."

I was satisfied in my own mind that he knew what he was doing, and that he didn't want me or the Dallas Bar Association to do anything right now. So, I left, and as I left the chief asked me whether or not I wanted to make a statement to the press, and I said, "Well, I don't know whether I do or not. I don't know whether it is the thing to do or not." And he said, "Well, they are going to be right outside the door there, and if you want to say anything this would be an opportunity to do it."

He said, "Incidentally, I am very glad you came up here. We don't want any question coming up about us refusing to let him have a lawyer. As far as I know, he has never asked for one. He has never asked to call one."

And I believe the chief mentioned that Mr. Abt's name, but he said, "He has never asked us to call him."

He said, "Do you think we have an obligation?" And I said, "I don't know."

He said, "I am glad that you came down and talked to him. At least that takes a problem off of us about not furnishing him a lawyer."

And so, we--about that time we stepped out of the door and there was just a whole swarm of photographers and cameramen standing right there. Right outside the door on the third floor. They came out in the third floor, reached back down in the third floor, and the chief told them who I was, and what I had been up there for, and oh, for 4 or 5 minutes, what turned out to be live television interview, whether or not--they asked me if I thought he was guilty, and if he had admitted anything, and I told them that I didn't ask him, and he didn't tell me, and they merely wanted to know the reason I was up here, and that interview is something, I assume, that you have, or will be made available. I don't remember exactly what transpired, and then--but they asked me what his attitude was, whether he was belligerent and--or scared, and to me, he appeared to be neither belligerent nor scared. He appeared to be a man that was pretty calm, I thought, under the circumstances. He appeared to me that he knew where he was and pretty much what his rights were with regard to being represented, and he knew apparently--at least the conversation was that if he didn't get somebody to represent him that he wanted that he could always fall back on the bar association, or somebody, and I had told him that I would see him next week if he wanted me to, and I satisfied myself at least, to the extent, that the man appeared to know what he was doing. He did not appear to be irrational. He appeared to be calm. He turned down my offer of help, and I felt like at that point that was all I needed to do, and this was later Saturday afternoon, and I had no inkling that anything else, except maybe that the next week if he didn't get a lawyer I might hear from him, or check into it, and that's all I know about Mr. Lee Harvey Oswald.

Mr. STERN. That's quite a complete statement. Let's just cover a few details. What was his physical condition, as you observed it?

Mr. NICHOLS. Well, he had a little scratch, or bruise over one eye. I have forgotten whether over the left or right, but other than that, as I recall, there were no indication of any other injuries or marks on him that I could tell. He was dressed, I believe, in a white T-shirt and slacks, and appeared to me to be in normal condition. I mean, there was nothing obviously wrong with him from a physical standpoint, as I could observe.

Mr. STERN. Did he seem well rested, or tired?

Mr. NICHOLS. No; he seemed all right. When I went in there he was lying on his back and he got up and he didn't--he looked like he was calm, and was rested, and it--didn't appear to have--now this is a guess, and my own observation, did not appear to me to have been mistreated. I was interested in observing whether or not he--it looked like he had been mistreated, because, as a lawyer, I anticipate perhaps that he--if he had been mistreated, or might claim he had been mistreated it was something I should have observed at that time, and I observed nothing to indicate that.

Mr. STERN. He, I gather, used the word "incommunicado" to describe----

Mr. NICHOLS. Yes; that was his word.

Mr. STERN. Did he elaborate on that, or any--or indicate to you that he had not been able to see members of his family or other people of his choice?

Mr. NICHOLS. No; he did not say that he had been refused anything. Just didn't elaborate, and I really didn't ask him at that point. My inquiry was intentionally very limited. I merely wanted to know whether he had a lawyer, if he had a lawyer then I had no problems.

If he asked for a lawyer and they did not offer him one, that was contrary to what I had been told, because I had been told, as far as the police were concerned, and Mr. Wade, as he recalled, that the man had never asked for a lawyer. Nor had he asked to call a lawyer, for the right to call a lawyer, so that I was interested in knowing whether or not he had a lawyer and whether or not he had requested a lawyer and been refused, because the story up east was that he couldn't get a lawyer to represent him, and I knew that that wasn't true, because I know Dallas lawyers, and I know that if the man had to have a lawyer, we could have gotten one for him. So, I didn't go into the other questions, or whether or not he wanted to see his family and hadn't been permitted. I really was concerned about whether or not he had a lawyer or wanted a lawyer, or whether we had any obligations to furnish him one.

Mr. STERN. Yes; I see. Did he elaborate on his statement to you that he preferred a lawyer who believed in what he believed in, or was this as----

Mr. NICHOLS. Not at all. He said--I didn't ask him, because I didn't know any lawyers--and I didn't know what he believed in, and I really wasn't concerned at that stage in the man's beliefs or what he had done or not done, actually, I just wanted--the man was in jail, and it occurred to me that it would be easy to overlook his rights at that time in view of the great emotion and somebody ought to determine whether or not he wanted a lawyer, and I decided as president of the bar association maybe that was my job to do it, so, I went up there to see about it.

Mr. STERN. You say he said he wanted a lawyer who believed in his innocence?

Mr. NICHOLS. As much as he could.

Mr. STERN. As he could?

Mr. NICHOLS. Yes.

Mr. STERN. Did he elaborate?

Mr. NICHOLS. No; and I didn't ask him to elaborate on it because at that stage I didn't know to what extent I would, or wanted to, or should become embroiled in the facts. I wanted to know whether he needed a lawyer, and I didn't anticipate that I would be his lawyer, because I don't practice criminal law. They asked me, the newspapers did, and I honestly don't know what my answer would have been if they had asked me, "Well, will you represent him?"

We can debate about that now until doomsday. All I know is when I went up to talk to him I did not anticipate being the lawyer, because I don't practice criminal law, although, when I talked to Henry Wade he said, jokingly, I hope it was jokingly, and if the guy wants a lawyer he was going to request the judge that he appoint me and the president of the criminal bar association to represent him. I took that to be not a serious suggestion, because he knows that I don't practice criminal law, although, on reflection that probably would have been a good recommendation, since generally, I suppose, that if they appointed the president of the bar association they couldn't say that he was getting inferior representation. I am not bragging about that, but normally, I think that would be the normal reaction that if they appointed the president of the criminal bar association and the president of the local bar association then at least the man would be represented.

Mr. STERN. What is the practice in this jurisdiction regarding the appointment of counsel for indigents accused in criminal cases?

Mr. NICHOLS. Basically, I think that would follow the statutes which provide that where it comes to the attention of the court, that a man charged with a felony is not represented by an attorney that the court will appoint an attorney to represent him. The statute further provides that the attorney appointed to represent indigents be paid $25 a day for each day actually present at the trial of the case in court, and not to exceed $100 for the handling of an appeal. The usual procedure is, I believe, when it comes to the attention of the judge that an accused in jail is not represented by an attorney--I am talking about a felony case now--or a man, whether he is in jail or not, if he makes requests of the court to appoint him a lawyer, the judges of the criminal district court will, and do appoint lawyers to represent those people.

Mr. STERN. But, ordinarily, the appointment is handled by the judiciary?

Mr. NICHOLS. Yes.

Mr. STERN. And there is no, I take it, organized system of the bar association to represent indigents?

Mr. NICHOLS. Well, the criminal--there are two bar associations in Dallas. One is the criminal bar association, the other is the Dallas Bar Association, and you may belong to both, or neither, or either one. The criminal bar association did, last year, attempt to create and establish a fund to defray some investigative expenses of lawyers appointed to represent indigents. One of the programs which I had hoped to get really underway last year when I was president was to, and we had a committee working on it, was to provide more lawyers who would be willing to accept appointments to represent indigent defendants in the criminal cases. My idea was that if we had 100 or 200 lawyers who would say, "If I am requested to, or appointed by the court, I will represent these people." And it was my desire to have a large number of lawyers who would do that. The committee, unfortunately, bogged down and I got involved in other matters that I guess I considered more urgent to me, and didn't pursue that, but I did go down and talk to one of the judges last year just to see what the procedure was because I was interested, and the judges do appoint these people, I mean, do appoint attorneys to represent these people, and I talked to one of the judges and he said that they have never yet had an occasion where he needed a lawyer to represent a defendant that they haven't been able to get one. So, although some of these lawyers may do this more than others, as far as I know, none of them have refused because it was too much of an imposition on them.

Mr. STERN. Your activities with respect to Oswald were unusual, though, and not pursuant to any established arrangement?

Mr. NICHOLS. That's right.

Mr. STERN. Something you did because of the nature of the case, and the questions that had been raised, and your own questions about his treatment?

Mr. NICHOLS. That's correct.

Mr. STERN. Did you, Mr. Nichols, make any notes of your activities on November 23, 1963, either at the time, or did you at any later time have occasion to prepare a written report of your activities?

Mr. NICHOLS. I did not make any notes at the time, and I didn't make any notes as such, subsequently, after Mr. Oswald was killed. And why, I don't know. It didn't occur to me to do so. Later Mr. Leon Jaworski, a Houston, Tex., attorney, called me and said that he was going to go to Miami, Fla., to the meeting of American Trial Lawyers, and had been asked to make a report of some sort on the Oswald matter and he asked me if I would write him a letter outlining what I had done in connection with interviewing Oswald, and attempting to see whether or not he wanted the Dallas Bar Association to provide counsel. I did, at that time, write a letter to Mr. Jaworski outlining as I recalled at that time exactly what transpired. Later the president of the Houston Bar Association, George Barrow, called me and said he was going to make a little talk in Houston, or write a little article in a publication and would like to know what I had done, and he knew about the letter I had sent to Jaworski, and wanted to know if I would send him a copy of my letter to him, or outline what I had done. I said it would be easier to give him a copy of the letter I had written to Leon, because I have it, so I sent him a copy and those are the only notes I made or statements that I have made in writing regarding this transaction except I did reproduce a copy of the letter to Mr. Jaworski, which I furnished to you.

Mr. STERN. I show you now a copy of the letter dated February 10, 1964, to Mr. Jaworski. Is that the copy you furnished to me?

Mr. NICHOLS. That is the copy I furnished to you, and the copy of the letter which I wrote to Mr. Jaworski on that date.

Mr. STERN. Would you initial each of the four pages of that photostatic copy, please, which we'll attach to your deposition as Exhibit A.

Thank you, sir. I believe that completes all the questions I have, Mr. Nichols. Thank you very much for coming in today.

Mr. NICHOLS. You certainly are welcome.

Mr. STERN. The court reporter will transcribe the deposition and we can furnish a copy of it to you for your review and signature, or the reporter can send the transcript directly to the Commission without your review, if you care to waive----

Mr. NICHOLS. I would like to have a copy of it, if I may do so, and I understand that it will be available at some expense, whatever it costs--I want to furnish it to the bar association for their records.

Mr. STERN. Fine.

TESTIMONY OF FORREST V. SORRELS

The testimony of Forrest V. Sorrels was taken at 9:45 a.m., on May 7, 1964, at 200 Maryland Avenue NE., Washington, D.C. by Mr. Samuel A. Stern, assistant counsel of the President's Commission. Mr. David W. Belin, assistant counsel for the President's Commission, and Mr. Fred B. Smith, Deputy General Counsel, U.S. Treasury Department were present.

Mr. STERN. Good morning, Mr. Sorrels.

Mr. SORRELS. Good morning, sir.

Mr. STERN. You understand that this is a continuation of your deposition, and that you are still under oath?

Mr. SORRELS. Yes, sir.

Mr. STERN. Yesterday you covered with Mr. Hubert the events that transpired from the time of the shooting of Lee Harvey Oswald forward.[1]

[1] That portion of the deposition of Forrest V. Sorrels appears in another volume, and can be found by consulting the Index.

I would like to go back now with you and cover the advance preparations for the President's trip, and come up to the time of the shooting of Oswald.

Mr. SORRELS. Yes, sir.

Mr. STERN. Would you tell us first something of your experience in Presidential protection work through the course of your career in the Secret Service?

Mr. SORRELS. Yes, sir; the first real assignment that I had in connection with Presidential work was in 1936, at Dallas, Tex., when President Roosevelt came there, and there was a parade downtown, motorcade out to the Cotton Bowl at Fair Park, where he made a talk, and then from there to the Adolphus Hotel for luncheon, and from the Adolphus Hotel to Lee Park, where he unveiled a monument, and then motored to Fort Worth, Tex., where there was a reception committee that met him on the lawn at the Texas Pacific Railroad Station, and then motored to a park in Fort Worth where he made a talk, and then continued on out to his son Elliott's ranch, west of Fort Worth.

During the time that President Roosevelt was in office, there were a number of times that he came to Fort Worth to visit his son.

One in particular that I recall was during the Second World War, when it was necessary that his travels be kept secret, and we were able to get him into his son's home and visit the airplane factory where the B-36 was manufactured there at Fort Worth, and get him out of town, and it was some 2 hours after that before any reporter ever found out and called our office inquiring about the President.

I have been to Washington on inaugurations two times that I can recall, the last one being at the time that President Kennedy was inaugurated.

I have been assigned on surveys in connection with inaugurations. I have been in Mexico on three different occasions when the President visited there, to Mexico City, Monterey, the last one being at Falcon Dam, when the dam was dedicated by the two Presidents of Mexico and the United States.

Mr. STERN. That was President Eisenhower?

Mr. SORRELS. Yes, sir.

Mr. STERN. Have you worked on visits by President Kennedy to Texas before this?

Mr. SORRELS. Yes, sir; there were two visits that he made there--one a very short notice one of a matter of a few hours, when he came to Dallas to visit Mr. Rayburn in Baylor Hospital. Then when he came to Bonham, at the time Mr. Rayburn was buried--we had the assignments in connection with that.

Mr. STERN. These were informal trips, without publicity?

Mr. SORRELS. There was publicity. For example, the one that he came to the hospital, it wasn't announced until about 10 o'clock in the morning that he would be there.

He came there, I guess, a little over 2 or 3 hours after that--just a very quick trip, and not much time to make any preparation.

But, fortunately, everything went real good.

Mr. STERN. Mr. Sorrels, is there any significant difference that occurs to you in the protective arrangements, including the advance arrangements, for the November trip to Dallas by President Kennedy, and this trip you were telling us about that President Roosevelt made to Dallas, which involved a similar motorcade, in 1936, I believe you said?

Mr. SORRELS. No, sir.

Mr. STERN. About the same advance preparation?

Mr. SORRELS. Yes, sir.

Mr. STERN. Protective organization?

Mr. SORRELS. Yes, sir.

Of course in the one that President Roosevelt came there, it was more functions and more places to go, including two cities.

Mr. STERN. Yes. But----

Mr. SORRELS. But the actual preparation was along the same lines.

Mr. STERN. You have been following a procedure and pattern as long as you have been doing this kind of work?

Mr. SORRELS. Yes, sir.

Mr. STERN. It has been pretty much the same procedure?

Mr. SORRELS. That is correct, sir.

Mr. STERN. When you know that a President is coming to the area under your jurisdiction, what arrangements do you try to work out with the Police Department?

Mr. SORRELS. We will have a conference with the Chief of Police and his key personnel, usually when it is determined what the program is going to be.

In some instances where there has to be a meeting with the advance man from the White House detail, and for the local committee and the plans are not entirely solid, we have found that to bring the police in at that time is a little bit premature, because I have known of instances where we have had such meetings and the orders have been cut, and then they had to be changed, because of some change.

So, insofar as is possible, the meeting with the police is held at a time when we know pretty much what the program is going to be. And that procedure is followed in every instance.

In some instances, as I mentioned a moment ago there, when President Kennedy came to the Baylor Hospital, we didn't have very much time--it is something we have to work out very rapidly, and which was done in this instance with the Chief of Police and his key men, and the security was set up on a very, very short notice.

Mr. STERN. But normally, when you have the time, you like, as I understand it, to try to make your arrangements----

Mr. SORRELS. Oh, yes; as far in advance as possible, because we realize that it is quite a task for them, because they have got many men involved, and many things that have to be taken into consideration, so that their orders can be properly drawn and the men dispatched to the proper places with a knowledge of what they are supposed to do.

Mr. STERN. But you do try to have the trip or the motorcade route, if there is to be a motorcade, pretty well worked out before you go to the police?

Mr. SORRELS. We usually have an idea what we would like to do, and we, of course, confer with the police because they may have in instances knowledge that we don't have about a certain area that it might not be appropriate to use or to go into.

Mr. STERN. Let's see if we can relate this now to President Kennedy's trip to Dallas in November.

When did you first hear that he was to make this trip, Mr. Sorrels?

Mr. SORRELS. On November 4, 1963, I received a long distance call from Special Agent in Charge Gerald A. Behn, of the White House Detail, stating that the President would probably visit Dallas about November 21, and that there had been a couple of buildings suggested, one of them being the Trade Mart, which he understood had about 60 entrances to it, and six catwalks over the area where the luncheon would be. And that the second choice that had been suggested then was the Women's Building at the State Fair Grounds. That was another place referred to as a trade center, which is actually Market Hall, which is across the street from the Trade Mart.

He instructed that I make a survey of these buildings and report back to him the conditions.

Mr. STERN. What did you do?

Mr. SORRELS. Accompanied by Special Agent Robert A. Stewart of my office, we went to the Trade Mart and looked the situation over there, and we did find that there were entrances coming into, you might call it, a courtyard where the luncheon was to have been--entrances coming into that area. And that there were two suspension bridges or catwalks on the second floor and on the third floor.

The outside entrances were no particular problem, but it did mean that it would take quite a bit of manpower to cover each one of the entrances that could come on to the balcony, you might say, that was entirely around on the second and the third floors.

We then went to the Market Hall, which was ideal insofar as security measures were concerned, in that there were only three outside entrances, and it was a huge hall, 107,000 square feet, with no columns, and you could seat about 20,000 people in there.

But there was another function going to be there at that time--the American Bottling Association was going to have, as I recall, an exhibit there. So that part was out.

We then went to Fair Park, where we made a survey of the Women's Building. It is a place where they have exhibits during the fair of all kinds of handiwork and things like that.

That building had about 45,000 square feet in it, and you could seat about 5,000 people in it. Securitywise it wasn't bad at all, because there were two end openings to the building, and there was actually an area where you could drive a car in there. But the building was not satisfactory for that type of function--the President of the United States coming there--because the ceilings were quite low, the air-conditioning equipment and everything was all exposed, there were many steel suspension supports throughout the area.

I then returned to my office and telephoned to Mr. Behn and informed him of my findings and told him that securitywise the Women's Building appeared to be preferable, but that it wasn't a very nice place to take the President.

Then----

Mr. STERN. What did you tell him about the Trade Mart?

Mr. SORRELS. I told him that there were many entrances there and that it would pose a problem manpowerwise to have the proper security there.

Mr. STERN. But did you indicate to him that this could be handled?

Mr. SORRELS. I don't recall whether I specifically said it could be or not. Definitely I was under the impression that if the place was chosen, we would take the necessary precautions and would have it properly manned.

Mr. STERN. You did not, in any event, tell him that you didn't think the Trade Mart would be a safe place?

Mr. SORRELS. No, I don't recall I told him it would not be a safe place, no, sir.

Mr. STERN. When did all this happen, Mr. Sorrels? Was it immediately after November 4?

Mr. SORRELS. Yes, it was on November 4.

Mr. STERN. What was the next event in your advance preparations for the President's trip?

Mr. SORRELS. On November 13, Special Agent Winston G. Lawson, from the White House detail, and Mr. Jack Puterbaugh, had arrived at Dallas the evening before, and they came to my office, and we then went to the office of Mr. A. W. Cullum, President of the Chamber of Commerce, and we then went to the Trade Mart, and then to the Women's Building at the State Fairgrounds.

Mr. STERN. Mr. Sorrels, would you look at this Xerox copy of a two-page memorandum which appears to be signed by you, dated November 30, 1963, and carries the identifying number CO-2-34030. Can you identify that for me, please?

Mr. SORRELS. Yes, sir; that is a memorandum which was prepared by me on November 30, 1963.

Mr. STERN. Did you make this memorandum in the ordinary course of your work, or were you specially instructed to make it?

Mr. SORRELS. As I recall it, I was instructed to make the report, but it is a procedure we ordinarily follow in making memorandums of such surveys, in confirmation of the phone calls.

Mr. STERN. Did you make it from notes that you had or from memory?

Mr. SORRELS. Both, sir.

Mr. STERN. Did you preserve the notes from which this was made, or destroy them?

Mr. SORRELS. No, I preserved them. I have them here--regarding the phone call and the notes that I made, regarding the survey at the Trade Mart and Women's Club.

Mr. STERN. May I see them, please?

Mr. SORRELS. Yes, sir.

Mr. STERN. And this covers what you have just been telling us about in connection with the selection of the luncheon site for the President's visit?

Mr. SORRELS. Yes, sir.

Mr. STERN. Have you reviewed your memorandum of November 30 recently, Mr. Sorrels, in preparation for your testimony here?

Mr. SORRELS. Yes, sir.

Mr. STERN. Is there any respect in which you would like to change anything that is in the memorandum in view of your further consideration of the events described?

Mr. SORRELS. There is only one point there, about the date that we went by the police station.

Mr. STERN. Where is that covered in your memorandum?

Mr. SORRELS. That is in the last paragraph on the first page, where it is stated that on November 15, that we went to the office of the Chief of Police Curry.

I was under the impression that it was possibly the day before. I could be in error on that.

Mr. STERN. In any event, it was after Mr. Lawson had arrived, and that was on November 13?

Mr. SORRELS. Yes. I might state here that I had previously received two phone calls from Chief of Police Jesse Curry about the President's trip there. He was, of course, wanting to get the information as soon as possible, so that they could start their preparations. And he actually called me before Mr. Lawson got there, and he called me again after Mr. Lawson had gotten there, before we had gone to see him. And I explained to the chief that, on the first call, there would be someone from the White House detail coming to Dallas, and he requested that I get in touch with him just as soon as he got there.

On the second call, I told him that the man from the White House detail had arrived, but that we were still working on the plans, that it was not definitely known at that time where the luncheon was going to be, and that just as soon as it was determined where the luncheon was going to be, that we would then get in touch with him.

And it was at my suggestion to Mr. Lawson that we go by the Police Department on the first time, because I did not want the chief to feel that we were leaving him out in the dark, so to speak. And, for that reason, I suggested that we go by at the time we did--because, actually, we were still in the process of having these meetings to work out the final plans, and so forth.

Mr. STERN. That is the visit you refer to in this last paragraph on page 1?

Mr. SORRELS. That is right.

Mr. STERN. Your memorandum, Mr. Sorrels, gives me enough information on many of the points we are interested in, and I don't think we have to cover those, unless you would like to add something to them.

I would like to have you tell us about the selection of the motorcade route, what you had to do with that, and what you know of that.

Mr. SORRELS. After it was determined that there was going to be a motorcade, which was actually after Mr. Lawson got there, we had discussed the ways to get to the Trade Mart, and one of my questions was why don't we bring the President from the Texas Hotel to the Trade Mart by motorcade.

Mr. STERN. Texas Hotel----

Mr. SORRELS. In Fort Worth--because I knew we would be able to pick the President up at the Texas Hotel in Fort Worth, and by motor get him to the Trade Mart in a shorter time than it would take him to go from the Texas Hotel to the Air Force Base, and go by plane to Love Field, and from Love Field go to the Trade Mart.

But that was ruled out because the previous plans were that he was to come by plane. And, of course, it would not have been practical to have brought him by motor from Fort Worth if there was going to be a downtown parade, because it would have meant coming in from the west side of the city, and we would have to go right back to the west side of the city to get to the Trade Mart, which would have meant a complete loop through the downtown section.

So when it was determined that there was going to be a downtown parade, Mr. Lawson, of course, wanted to know which would be the best route to take him to the Trade Mart from Love Field.

So Mr. Lawson and I drove what I thought would be the best route and the most direct route to the Trade Mart, bearing in mind that there would be a parade through the downtown section.

So we drove that route. And then later on we had the police go with us, and we went over the same route.

There were some discussions as to one section, whether it would be better to get onto what we have known as the Central Expressway there, and come off of it into Main Street. But that was ruled out because of safety measures, going into the expressway, and it would only be for such a short distance.

Another thing, too, they wanted as many people as possible to see him, that would not have any opportunity to see him on the Central Expressway.

So the route that we chose was from Love Field approach to Mockingbird Lane, left on Mockingbird Lane to Lemmon, down Lemmon to Turtle, right on Turtle Creek to Cedar Springs, left on Cedar Springs to Harwood, right from Harwood on Main Street, continue down Main Street to Houston Street, and then make a right-hand turn to Elm Street and then under the underpass to Stemmons Expressway, which was the most direct route from there and the most rapid route to the Trade Mart.

Mr. STERN. Excuse me--you said right-hand turn to Elm. I think you mean left.

Mr. SORRELS. A right-hand turn on Houston--I am sorry--and a left-hand turn on Elm.

Now, Elm is one way going west in the direction which we would have gone, but that street is not the street that they use for parades.

Main Street is right through the heart of the city. It is the best choice for parades. It gives an opportunity for more people--tall buildings on the side of the street--and it is almost invariably--every parade that is had is on Main Street. The one in 1936, when President Roosevelt was there, was the same route in reverse, so to speak.

We came up on Houston Street from Union Station, turned right on Main Street, right on Main Street, through the very heart of the town.

Mr. STERN. And went right past the School Book Depository then on Houston Street?

Mr. SORRELS. Just within 1 block of it, because we were coming, in that instance, from the Union Station, which is south of the Depository, to Main Street, right on Main Street, which is just 1 block from the Depository.

Mr. STERN. I take it, then, that once you were told there was to be a motorcade, and approximately 45 minutes was allotted to the motorcade, this route pretty well mapped itself, apart from the question whether to use the expressway or Harwood Street to get on to Main Street, is that right?

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

Mr. STERN. Why didn't you route the motorcade on Main Street under the triple overpass and on to Stemmons Freeway that way, instead of going to Houston and Elm?

Mr. SORRELS. Well, because you cannot get to the entrance to Stemmons Expressway on Main Street. The traffic is not routed that way. It is impractical.

On the other side of the first underpass there is a section built up to prevent cars from cutting in from Main Street to get over to Elm Street there. And if a person would go from--try to go from Main Street over to Stemmons Expressway, they would have to either hurdle this built-up place there, island, you might call it, or an extension of an island----

Mr. STERN. Do you know what this built-up place is constructed of?

Mr. SORRELS. It is, I am sure, asphalt, or concrete--probably concrete. You would have to go down on Main Street, pass where you would ordinarily turn off, and then come back against traffic, which would be one way that way, and make a hairpin turn, and come back and get on there. It just is not done.

Mr. STERN. Could that reverse-S turn which you have described have been done conveniently with a car the size of the Presidential limousine?

Mr. SORRELS. No, it would not be convenient with an ordinary car, because it would be a very sharp hairpin turn, and the place that is built there is there specifically to prevent anyone from getting over on the wrong way there.

Mr. STERN. When you laid out the motorcade route and drove over it--and I take it you drove over it several times--

Mr. SORRELS. Yes, sir.

Mr. STERN. Did you consider or discuss with Mr. Lawson the possibility of any danger to the President from the buildings along the route?

Mr. SORRELS. Well----

Mr. STERN. Did you think about any of the buildings as presenting any particular problem?

Mr. SORRELS. All buildings are a problem, as far as we are concerned. That, insofar as I have been concerned--and I am sure that every member of the Service, especially the Detail--that is always of concern to us. We always consider it a hazard. During the time that we were making this survey with the police, I made the remark that if someone wanted to get the President of the United States, he could do it with a high-powered rifle and a telescopic sight from some building or some hillside, because that has always been a concern to us, about the buildings.

Mr. STERN. Do you recall any further conversation, any further remarks in that conversation? Did anybody respond to that remark? Only if you recall.

Mr. SORRELS. I don't recall any particular response. Probably there was confirmation of that fact, because I think that anyone that has had any experience in security measures would have the same opinion. I don't recall anyone specifically making any comment like that.

Mr. STERN. But there was no suggestion that anything might be done to minimize that risk?

Mr. SORRELS. Nothing more than what we always do--try to scan the windows, and if we see something suspicious, take proper action.

Mr. STERN. When you went over the parade route with the police officials, did they confirm your view that this was the proper route to use?

Mr. SORRELS. Yes, they did.

Mr. STERN. And there was no concern expressed by them that some other route might be better for some reason?

Mr. SORRELS. No, sir; no, sir.

Mr. STERN. I would like you now, Mr. Sorrels, to tell us something of the Protective Research activities that took place in preparation for the President's visit to Dallas, that you recall.

Mr. SORRELS. At that time, we had no known Protective Research subjects that we were making periodic checks on in that area. Mr. Lawson informed me that he had checked with PRS, and that was confirmed.

However, bearing in mind the incidents that had taken place some time before with Mr. Stevenson, I had instructed Special Agent John Joe Howlett, to work with the Special Services Bureau of the Police Department, and I also conferred by phone with the chief of police at Denton, Tex., because some of those individuals who were involved in the Stevenson affair were going to college there.

Mr. STERN. What was the Stevenson affair, as far as you knew?

Mr. SORRELS. That was an instance where a number of people were at a theatre, as I recall it, theatre building, when Mr. Stevenson came out, and they were there with placards, and one woman is alleged to have hit him over the head with a placard, and another individual spat upon Mr. Stevenson, and also a police officer that took him into custody. And I did not want any such instance to happen when the President of the United States was there.

Mr. STERN. How soon had that happened before the President's visit?

Mr. SORRELS. I don't remember. It was probably some 60 days, maybe, before.

It was quite some time before.

But within recent time. And so Mr. Anderson, chief of police, informed me that he had an informant that was keeping in touch with the situation. I arranged with the Dallas Police Department for Lieutenant Revill to accompany Special Agent Howlett to Denton, and confer with the police there, and to also get photographs of these individuals.

When we were conferring with Mr. Felix McKnight, the managing editor of the Dallas Times Herald, I learned that--from him--that they had photographs taken at the Stevenson incident. So arrangements were made whereby Special Agent Howlett and the members of the Dallas Police Department, together with the informant in the case, would view those films, so that there could be pointed out to them individuals known to have been in the incident.

We had duplicate pictures made, and they were furnished to the special agent assigned to the Trade Mart, and were shown to the police officers that were assigned out in that area.

Mr. STERN. Did anything else occur in the field of Protective Research?

Mr. SORRELS. That is all I can recall at the present time.

Now, we had received, I think, some time before, a report from the FBI of an individual that might be considered a subject that we should check into. On October 30, Special Agent Vince Drain of the FBI reported a person, a member supposedly of the Ku Klux Klan in Denison, Tex., who might be suspected as a person that might try to cause some trouble if and when the President came to that area.

Lieutenant Revill got a photograph of that individual and he was checked on, and it was determined that he would not be in that area at that time.

Mr. STERN. Did the FBI report anything else to your office?

Mr. SORRELS. On the morning of November 21, as I recall it, Special Agent Hosty came to the office early in the morning with a number of handbills which bore a picture of the President of the United States, Mr. Kennedy, with the caption, "Wanted for Treason," with a number of numbered paragraphs supposedly outlining the reason.

Mr. STERN. Did your office make an investigation of that pamphlet?

Mr. SORRELS. I had previously received the information early in the morning from the sheriff's office that such handbills had been found on the streets. We contacted the police department, Lieutenant Revill, and they had a number of the handbills, and they were just found on the street. We could not from the police investigation or from our inquiries, find anyone that had seen anyone actually distributing them.

And we had no other leads on the handbills at that time.

Mr. STERN. Did the Dallas police give you any information of this nature--I am not referring specifically to the handbills, but to the Protective Research area, in advance of the President's trip?

Mr. SORRELS. Nothing more than what I believe I have outlined with Lieutenant Revill's department there.

Mr. STERN. Was there anything else that you recall involving any person or group that might present a danger to the President?

Mr. SORRELS. There was some individuals from Grand Prairie, Tex., that were mentioned to us by the police department that were known to be the type that might appear with handbills or placards--not handbills, but with placards in the area where the President might appear. And it developed that they did show up with placards at the Trade Mart, and they were taken into custody by the police department.

Mr. STERN. Did your office also take steps to assure that there would be no interference with free speech and lawful public demonstrations?

Mr. SORRELS. Yes, we discussed with the police what action would be taken if people showed up with placards and attempted to interfere. And it was very definitely stated that if they had placards, just the mere fact that they had placards would not cause them to be picked up. But that we did not want them close enough to where the President would come or where he would be that these might be used to cause any harm to the President or the Vice President or members of their families.

There had recently been passed in Dallas an ordinance making it unlawful for any person to interfere or attempt to interfere with or intimidate another from freely entering premises where a private or public assembly was being held. We obtained copies of that ordinance and studied them to see what action the police would be able to take in the event that any instance arose whereby this ordinance might need to be enforced.

Mr. STERN. Now, you have told us, Mr. Sorrels, that you had no record of any PRS subject that you were checking on in your office, and that Lawson advised you that he had been told of no subject in your area in his advance check before he left Washington. Did this surprise you, that there were no individuals who had previously been identified as potential threats to the President in the territory of the Dallas office?

Mr. SORRELS. No. We had records of some subjects that were in institutions, but they were not out where they would be available.

Mr. STERN. Had there been in the past, during your tenure in the Dallas office, PRS subjects who were not in institutions?

Mr. SORRELS. Oh, yes.

Mr. STERN. But there were none at this particular time?

Mr. SORRELS. That is right.

Mr. STERN. When the incident involving Ambassador Stevenson had occurred, did you consider obtaining information on the participants and referring that information to the Protective Research Section in Washington for their files?

Mr. SORRELS. Not unless the President or the Vice President would come to that area, I had no intention doing that, because there was no actual threat, nor was the President of the United States involved in name or otherwise, insofar as I knew, in connection with the Stevenson affair.

Mr. STERN. How has the cooperation been with local authorities and local officers of Federal agencies in advising you of any potential danger to the President?

Mr. SORRELS. We have received reports of phone calls and threats or something like that from time to time. I think that all of the Federal offices that come into any information about a threat concerning the President of the United States have certainly in the past, to my recollection--I don't recall any specific instance--but I do know we have received such reports.

Mr. STERN. And from the local police authorities?

Mr. SORRELS. I can't recall any specific instance, but I am sure that in the past there have been instances where such a report has been reported to us.

Mr. STERN. Have you made known to the local authorities the kind of information in which you would be interested in this area?

Mr. SORRELS. Yes. We have participated in the training schools of the Dallas Police Department, and the Fort Worth Police Department, the auxiliary schools conducted by the sheriff's office and the Dallas Police Department.

We have participated in schools at Austin, Tex., given by the Department of Public Safety to investigative officers, to sheriffs-elect, deputy sheriffs and other sheriffs.

We have participated at Texas A & M College, at College Station, Tex., in their program of police training, where they have students that are members of various police departments, and other law enforcement organizations that attend their classes.

And in our course of instruction, we have discussed with them the protective measures that are required and taken in connection with the protection of the President of the United States, members of his family, and the Vice President.

Mr. STERN. How is your liaison with the local police and local offices of Federal agencies?

Mr. SORRELS. I consider it very, very good.

Mr. STERN. In all respects?

Mr. SORRELS. In all respects; yes, sir.

Mr. STERN. Had you requested any local Federal agency, for example FBI or Internal Revenue, to participate in any way in the actual protection measures for the day of the President's visit?

Mr. SORRELS. I had offers from some of the other agencies, offering their services in case there was anything they could assist in.

The usual reply to that is that we are working with the local officials, police department, sheriff's department, Department of Public Safety, and we feel that we have sufficient manpower to take care of the program as we have in the past, and we have always suggested, in not only this instance but in other instances, that if any member of their department should hear of anything, or see anything unusual, that they felt we should know about, to please get in touch with us immediately, along those lines.

Mr. STERN. You felt, then, that the local police forces would supply all the outside assistance you needed for this visit?

Mr. SORRELS. Yes, sir; the Dallas Police Department, in my opinion, has some very good leaders, career men who have been there for many years, and due to the fact I have been located in Dallas for many, many years I know these people personally, and I have never yet called upon the Dallas Police Department, the Sheriff's Office, or the Department of Public Safety, for any assistance that we have not gotten and gotten cheerfully and willingly.

For example, the time that Mr. Kennedy came there to the hospital to see Mr. Rayburn, is a case where I could tell nobody until just a matter of 2 or 3 hours before the President would get there, that he was coming, because the afternoon before, when I heard that he was coming, it was supposed to have been off the record, and there was not supposed to be any publicity about it.

The next morning I got a call and said it would be announced at 10 o'clock in the morning.

Well, immediately after that I called Chief Curry and he met me at the hospital with some of his key men, and the arrangements were set up in a matter of minutes, you might say, arrangements for the street to be blocked by the hospital, for sufficient detectives and men to be around the area, in various places in the hospital, and arrangements were made to have the police cars to accompany us from the airport down there.

I consider that our relationship with the local enforcement agencies, not only in the Dallas area, but throughout Texas, is as good as it can be any place in the country.

Mr. STERN. On the occasion of President Kennedy's visit, they supplied all the manpower you felt was necessary?

Mr. SORRELS. Yes, sir.

Mr. STERN. Were all the police that had various functions along the motorcade route full-time policemen, Mr. Sorrels?

Mr. SORRELS. There may have been, and probably was, some auxiliary police which may have been along the route that the parade traveled on. I am not sure about that.

They do have reserves that they call in. But those reserves, they are not armed--they are in uniform, but they are not armed.

And my records do not show that there were auxiliary police there. But I do know that they use them on occasion.

Mr. STERN. Mr. Smith, if you have any questions on this aspect of our interview, please feel free to ask them, because I am going to turn now to the actual events of the day. I believe that the other advance preparations are covered adequately for our purposes in Mr. Sorrel's memorandum, which I am about to introduce.

Mr. SMITH. I have no questions.

Mr. STERN. Mr. Sorrels, I am going to mark this copy of your memorandum Exhibit 4, Deposition of F. V. Sorrels, May 7, 1964.

Would you initial each page, please?

(Brief recess.)

Mr. STERN. Mr. Sorrels, I would like to turn now to the morning of November 22 and get from you an account of what you observed as a passenger in the motorcade and thereafter.

In what car were you riding in the motorcade?

Mr. SORRELS. I was riding in what we call the lead car, which is the one immediately in front of the President's car.

Mr. STERN. What was your function in the lead car?

Mr. SORRELS. To be there with the special agent who had made the survey, and with the Chief of Police, and to observe the people and buildings as we drove along in the motorcade.

Mr. STERN. One of your responsibilities was to observe the buildings and the windows of the buildings?

Mr. SORRELS. Yes, sir.

Mr. STERN. Looking for what?

Mr. SORRELS. We always do that.

Mr. STERN. What would you be looking for?

Mr. SORRELS. Anything that to us might mean danger.

For example, if someone had an object that appeared to be a gun, or something like that--that, of course, would attract our attention. Or if someone appeared to have something they were fixing to throw or toss, we definitely would take cognizance of that immediately.

Mr. STERN. Do you recall remarking on anything you observed in the windows as you drove along Main Street?

Mr. SORRELS. Yes, I do; there was a tremendous crowd on Main Street. The street was full of people. I made the remark "My God, look at the people. They are even hanging out the windows." Because I had observed many people in the windows of the buildings as we were coming along.

Mr. STERN. Now, as you made the right turn from Main Street onto Houston Street, did you observe anything about the windows of any building in your view?

Mr. SORRELS. Yes, I did. Of course the Court House is on the right-hand side, and the windows there appeared to be closed.

Mr. STERN. To the right-hand side of Houston Street?

Mr. SORRELS. Of Houston Street; yes, sir.

The Book Depository, as we turned to the right on Houston Street, of course, was right directly in front of us, and just to the left side of the street. I saw that building, saw that there were some windows open, and that there were some people looking from the windows. I remember distinctly there were a couple of colored men that were in windows almost not quite to the center of the building, probably two floors down from the top. There may have been one or two other persons that I may have seen there. I don't recall any specific instance. But I did not see any activity--no one moving around or anything like that.

Mr. STERN. Do you think you had an opportunity to view all the windows of the building?

Mr. SORRELS. I did, yes; because it was right in front.

Mr. STERN. Do you recall seeing anything on the side of the building to your right, any of the windows on that side of the building--the far right side of the building?

Mr. SORRELS. Yes. There was at least one or two windows that were open in that section over there. I do not recall seeing anyone in any of those windows. I do not, of course, remember seeing any object or anything like that in the windows such as a rifle or anything pointing out the windows. There was no activity, no one moving around that I saw at all.

Mr. STERN. But you believe you could observe all of the windows on the side of the building facing you?

Mr. SORRELS. Yes. In other words, it is just right down at the end of the street.

Mr. STERN. Now, the car you were riding in was a closed car, was it not?

Mr. SORRELS. Yes, sir; it was a Ford sedan.

Mr. STERN. And you were in the rear seat?

Mr. SORRELS. Right rear.

Mr. STERN. Did the roof of the car obscure your view at all?

Mr. SORRELS. Oh, yes.

Mr. STERN. But you were still able to observe the whole building?

Mr. SORRELS. Yes. Of course I was sitting close to--as far over to the right as I could get, and I could look out the window. I could not, of course, look up and see any building straight up, or over to my left I would not have been able to see anything that was any higher than the view of the window on the left.

Mr. STERN. You didn't have your head actually out of the window?

Mr. SORRELS. No, sir; I did not. But the glass was down in the window.

Mr. STERN. As you turned into Houston Street, Mr. Sorrels, can you estimate how far in front of the President's car the lead car was?

Mr. SORRELS. Oh, probably about 30 feet--fairly close.

Mr. STERN. As you approached the Book Depository Building along Houston Street, did your ability to see all of the building diminish because of the angle of your vision and the roof of the car coming in the way?

Mr. SORRELS. Yes, it would have. The closer you got to it, looking out from the front part of the car, naturally your vision would diminish as you approach.

But we turned to the left on Main Street, and at that time just glancing by, I could see the side of the building from the window where I was sitting in the car.

Mr. STERN. I believe you mean left onto Elm Street.

Mr. SORRELS. Elm Street--I am sorry.

Mr. STERN. So that when you turned from Houston left onto Elm, you again had a look at the building?

Mr. SORRELS. Yes, sir; you see, as you make the turn--of course, as we pulled on down Elm Street, after having made the turn, it is actually more than a right angle turn. It bends even more to the left. And you can, of course, glance up like that as you go by. But as you go on by the building, the building is getting away from you, and unless you would turn clear on around and look out to the right, you would not be able to see the building after you got a little distance down Elm Street there.

Mr. STERN. Did you turn to your right and look at the building again as your car negotiated this turn onto Elm Street?

Mr. SORRELS. As the car was making the turn, yes, I was looking at the crowd, and just glancing up at the building as we made the turn.

Mr. STERN. Do you believe that you saw all of the windows on the building at that time?

Mr. SORRELS. As we were making the turn, yes, I would say that I saw all the windows in the building--just looked at the windows as we made the turn. But then I was looking at the people along the side of Elm Street, along each side.

Mr. STERN. Can you estimate, going back to the first turn into Houston Street, how long an opportunity you had to observe the building, in time?

Mr. SORRELS. On Houston Street?

Mr. STERN. Yes. As you turned right off Main onto Houston Street, the building first came into view.

Mr. SORRELS. That is right.

Mr. STERN. How long did you see the building before the roof obscured your view?

Mr. SORRELS. Of course I wasn't looking at it all the time. As we came to the right on Houston Street, of course, the building loomed up in front, and I just looked at it, and looking at the people along the side, and as we were making the turn I was just glancing like that, and saw the building.

I saw nothing unusual or any activity at that time. And then after making the turn, I did not look at the building any more, or in that direction, until after the first shot.

Mr. STERN. Are you saying that you only glanced at the building then, because you were looking at other things?

Mr. SORRELS. Yes. I looked at the building. I didn't study it intently and look at that and nothing else around there. I looked at the building, didn't see any activity, and looked at the people as we had been doing during the entire motorcade route.

Mr. STERN. Would this have been a matter of several seconds or longer than that, or can you estimate?

Mr. SORRELS. I think it would be a matter of seconds, yes.

Mr. STERN. It is rather a large building, with a number of windows along that side, is it not?

Mr. SORRELS. Yes; it is a good-sized building. I believe it is seven stories high.

Mr. STERN. And you think you had enough time, though, to see all the windows, or is it a general impression.

Mr. SORRELS. Just a general impression.

In other words, I did not specifically study any specific window or anything like that. It is just like you glance out and see the building there, you would see some open windows, and maybe some people in them--that is all. There wasn't any activity or anything like that that I saw.

Mr. STERN. Now, as you turned left from Houston onto Elm and looked again at the building, did you have as long a look this time as you had before?

Mr. SORRELS. No; because he was making a left-hand turn, and, of course, getting in front of the building, I just glanced out--just as we made the turn, just in a general way, you are looking at the crowd and the building, just a glance at it at that time.

Mr. STERN. And at this point you are traveling directly in front of the building?

Mr. SORRELS. Yes, sir.

Mr. STERN. I imagine it would have been difficult to look up and see the whole building.

Mr. SORRELS. No; I don't mean to say that after we made the turn I looked up and saw the whole building. But just as we made the turn I looked towards the building and saw people in front, and just glanced up--I would not say that I saw the entire building at all at that time.

Mr. STERN. And it is your testimony that you saw nothing unusual, that you observed no one there with a weapon?

Mr. SORRELS. No, sir.

Mr. STERN. Or any other implement?

Mr. SORRELS. No, sir.

Mr. STERN. That several windows were open on the side of the building at different places?

Mr. SORRELS. Yes, sir.

Mr. STERN. And that the only people you observed were at one particular location?

Mr. SORRELS. I recall distinctly about two floors down seeing two colored men there at the windows. I do not recall seeing--specifically seeing anyone else. There may have been some one other person over there. But I do not recall specifically seeing anyone on the right-hand side of the building, where the window was open. I do not recall that.

Mr. STERN. And the location of the two Negro men that you observed was in what part of the building?

Mr. SORRELS. I would say that it was about, oh, maybe a third of the distance from the right to the left, maybe not quite that far.

Mr. STERN. And about two stories down?

Mr. SORRELS. From the top; yes, sir.

Mr. STERN. And when did you observe these Negro men, when you first turned into Houston, or when you turned from Houston onto Elm?

Mr. SORRELS. I observed them first, when I first looked at the building I saw them, and I don't recall that I actually saw them again after that. When we were making the turn I glanced, and as you say, I would not have been able to see, I don't think all the way to the top of the building, unless I put my head almost out the window.

But I saw people out in front, and I would not say that I saw the people as I was making the turn or subsequent to that time.

Mr. STERN. When you looked at the crowd along Houston and Elm, did you notice anything unusual?

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

Mr. STERN. You have turned now onto Elm, Mr. Sorrels.

Mr. SORRELS. Yes, sir.

Mr. STERN. Why don't you tell us now in your own words and in as much detail as you remember exactly what you recall transpired next.

Mr. SORRELS. The crowd had begun to thin out after we made the turn on Elm Street there. As a matter of explanation, Elm Street goes at a downgrade--in other words, as I said a moment ago, it makes more than a left-hand--oblique left-hand turn. It curves back--I mean it is more of a sharp angle than a right angle. And then it swings down a little curve to go into the underpass.

There is a sidewalk and terrace that goes up to the right, increasing in height as you approach the underpass from the corner at Elm and Houston Streets.

We were running late, because the President arrived at Love Field late.

Mr. Lawson was particularly concerned, as we all are, in keeping the schedule.

I looked back to see how close the President's car was in making the turn, because we had begun to pick up speed after we made the left-hand turn.

Then I looked back to the right.

Mr. STERN. How close was the President's car?

Mr. SORRELS. At that time we were probably, oh, I would say, several car lengths ahead of it, because we had begun to pick up speed.

Mr. STERN. You think somewhat further than you estimated before?

Mr. SORRELS. As we came around Houston, yes, sir; came around on Houston, yes, because we had begun to pick up speed there. And I remember Mr. Lawson turned around and said, "I wish he would come on, because we are late now," or words to that effect.

And I expressed to him, I said, "Oh, we are not going to be very late."

And I looked at my watch, and it was just about 12:30.

And I said, "We are not going to be over 5 minutes late," and the Chief of Police, I believe, spoke up and said, "We are about 5 minutes away now."

And so they called on the radio to the Trade Mart that we were 5 minutes away.

And it seemed like almost instantly after that, the first shot was heard.

Mr. STERN. Now, did you recognize it at the time as a shot?

Mr. SORRELS. I felt it was, because it was too sharp for a backfire of an automobile. And, to me, it appeared a little bit too loud for a firecracker.

I just said, "What's that?" And turned around to look up on this terrace part there, because the sound sounded like it came from the back and up in that direction.

At that time, I did not look back up to the building, because it was way back in the back.

Within about 3 seconds, there were two more similar reports. And I said, Let's get out of here and looked back, all the way back, then, to where the President's car was, and I saw some confusion, movement there, and the car just seemed to lurch forward.

And, in the meantime, a motorcycle officer had run up on the right-hand side and the chief yelled to him, "Anybody hurt?"

He said, "Yes."

He said, "Lead us to the hospital."

And the chief took his microphone and told them to alert the hospital, and said, Surround the building. He didn't say what building. He just said, "Surround the building." And by that time we had gotten almost in under the underpass, and the President's car had come up and was almost abreast of us.

When I saw them get so close, I said, "Let's get out quick," or "Get going fast," or something to that effect. In other words, I didn't want them to pass us, because I knew we were supposed to be in front.

And that is when they floor-boarded the accelerator on the police car and we got out in front. And someone yelled loudly to go to the nearest hospital.

Mr. STERN. Let's stop there and go back, and then we will pick up again.

You testified that you heard three reports?

Mr. SORRELS. Yes, sir.

Mr. STERN. Are you pretty certain about that?

Mr. SORRELS. Positive.

Mr. STERN. And no more and no fewer?

Mr. SORRELS. No, sir.

Mr. STERN. Can you you tell us anything about the spacing of these reports?

Mr. SORRELS. Yes. There was to me about twice as much time between the first and second shots as there was between the second and third shots.

Mr. STERN. Can you estimate the overall time from the first shot to the third shot?

Mr. SORRELS. Yes. I have called it out to myself, I have timed it, and I would say it was very, very close to 6 seconds.

Mr. STERN. It sounds like you can still hear the shots.

Mr. SORRELS. I will hear them forever--it is something I cannot wipe from my mind ever.

Mr. STERN. And you had little doubt that this was gunfire at the time?

Mr. SORRELS. After--as I said before, on the first shot, it was too sharp to be a backfire of an automobile. It just didn't sound like that at all. And then, of course, the other two coming as quickly as they did, and the confusion, there was no question, because I said, "Get out of here," meaning to move out, because certainly if there is anything going on like that, we don't want to even be stationary or near stationary--it is to get out of the vicinity as quickly as we can from the source of danger. I thought in my mind--my thought was that I should maybe get out to try to help apprehend who it was and so forth. There was no chance for that, because we were moving too fast.

Mr. STERN. Now, as to the apparent source of these reports, did you feel that all three reports came from the same direction?

Mr. SORRELS. Yes. Definitely so.

Mr. STERN. And that direction, as nearly as you can place it, was what?

Mr. SORRELS. To the right and back. That is about the only way I can express it.

And, as I said, the noise from the shots sounded like they may have come back up on the terrace there. And that is the reason I was looking around like that when the first shot. And I continued to look out until the other two shots. And then I turned on around and looked back to where the President's car was, and that is when I saw some movement there, and the car just seemed to leap forward.

Mr. STERN. When you looked at the terrace to the right of Elm Street, did you observe any unusual movement?

Mr. SORRELS. No; I didn't see anything unusual at that time.

Mr STERN. Were you looking at that terrace when either the second or third shot was fired?

Mr. SORRELS. Yes; I was. And I saw just some movement of some people, but no firearms or anything like that, because we began to move out rather rapidly. And we were quite a ways down the street at that time.

Mr. STERN. How do you mean movement of people?

Mr. SORRELS. It seems I recall someone turned around and was going in the other direction, like moving away from the street. And that is all I can recall.

Mr. STERN. But you didn't observe anything that led you to feel that the shots might have been fired from that terrace there?

Mr. SORRELS. No, sir.

Mr. STERN. It sounded to you at first as though it came from there?

Mr. SORRELS. That is the way it sounded--back into the rear and to the right, back up in that direction. And in the direction, of course, of the building.

But the reports seemed to be so loud, that it sounded like to me--in other words, that was my first thought, somebody up on the terrace, and that is the reason I looked there.

As we were approaching the overpass there, Mr. Lawson remarked that there was an officer on the overpass there. I saw a police officer standing there, with two or three other persons over to his right.

Mr. STERN. Where is this?

Mr. SORRELS. On the overpass, on Elm Street, after we leave the corner of Elm and Houston.

There was no activity there. They were just standing there.

And I remarked, as I recall. "A policeman is there," or words to that effect, because Mr. Lawson had been checking, as well as myself, all of the overpasses, to see that the officer was there, because that is one of the specific things that was checked all the way through.

Mr. STERN. And you observed nothing unusual on the overpass?

Mr. SORRELS. No, sir.

Mr. STERN. Were the people on the overpass in a fairly tight group, or spread out over the overpass?

Mr. SORRELS. As I recall it, the police officer was about the center of the overpass on Elm Street, and then to his right--I mean to my right which would have been his left, there seemed to be, as I recall it, about three other persons up there that appeared to be workmen or dressed like that, and they were to his right.

They were not right close together, but standing within walking distance.

Mr. STERN. As far as you can recall, were all the people you saw on the overpass within the sight of the policeman on the overpass?

Mr. SORRELS. Oh, yes; they were in the same vicinity.

Mr. STERN. Do you have any reason to believe that any of these shots might have come from the overpass?

Mr. SORRELS. None whatsoever; no, sir.

Mr. STERN. And are you certain in your own mind that they did not come from the overpass?

Mr. SORRELS. Positive.

Mr. STERN. Do you have any reason to believe that the shots could not have come from the Book Depository Building?

Mr. SORRELS. No, sir.

Mr. STERN. Would shots from the Book Depository Building have been consistent with your hearing of the shots?

Mr. SORRELS. Yes; they would have.

Mr. STERN. What happened next, Mr. Sorrels?

Mr. SORRELS. We proceeded to Parkland Hospital just as fast as we could.

Mr. STERN. Did you go into the hospital?

Mr. SORRELS. No; I did not go into the hospital.

Of course the lead car was in front. We went around to the emergency entrance. I jumped out of the car, and I expected to see stretchers there, out waiting, but they were not. And I ran to the entrance door there, and at that time they began to bring stretchers out, and I said, "Hurry up and get those stretchers out," and someone else, probably one of the police officers, also said to hurry up and get the stretchers out.

There was a lot of confusion around at that time.

And they did get the stretchers out. And then Mr. Johnson--they brought him into the hospital, he rushed into the hospital. And they took Mr. Connally in, loaded him first, and then the President, and just as quick as they got in there, I immediately went into a police car that was leaving and asked them to take me to the building as fast as they could, and when I said the building I meant the one on the corner there, which was the Book Depository.

Mr. STERN. Why did you designate the Book Depository?

Mr. SORRELS. Because I wanted to get there and get something going in establishing who the people were that were in that vicinity. And upon arrival at the Book Store, we pulled up on the side, and I went in the back door.

Mr. STERN. Just a minute. Had you heard any mention of the Book Depository on police broadcasts as you drove to the hospital?

Mr. SORRELS. No; I never heard anything.

Mr. STERN. And, at this point, you were not certain that the shots came from the Book Depository?

Mr. SORRELS. No; I didn't know at that time.

Mr. STERN. You just wanted to get to that general area?

Mr. SORRELS. Yes, sir; because I knew that there would be witnesses around there, there would have to be somebody in that vicinity.

And upon arrival at the Book Depository, I went in the back door.

There were people moving around.

I asked, "Where is the manager here?"

Mr. STERN. Just a minute.

How much time do you think elapsed from the time the shots were fired until the time you returned to the Book Depository?

Mr. SORRELS. I don't believe it could have been over about 20 minutes, because we went to the hospital just as fast as we possibly could, and I wasn't there very long.

And we came back as fast as we could.

Of course we didn't get back as fast as we went out there, because traffic was moving.

The other way it was just cleared out to the Trade Mart. We had clear sailing from the time that the shots were fired until we got to the Trade Mart, because that was the route that we were going to go anyway. And that was cleared out.

But coming back, of course, there was traffic. We did come back under lights and siren, as fast as we could.

But there was traffic that slowed us up some.

Mr. STERN. So you estimate not more than 20 minutes?

Mr. SORRELS. I don't believe it could have been more than 20 or 25 minutes at the very most.

Mr. STERN. Then you arrived at the Book Depository Building, and did you see any police officers outside the building?

Mr. SORRELS. Yes; there were officers. I recall seeing officers. I could not say any specific one.

Now, as I came into the back of the building, there was a colored man standing on the rear platform, a loading platform. And he was just standing there looking off into the distance. I don't think he knew what happened.

And I said to him, "Did you see anyone run out the back?"

He said, "No, sir."

Did you see anyone leave the back way?

No, sir.

Mr. STERN. Did you get his name?

Mr. SORRELS. No, sir; I did not. I did not stop to do that, because I figured he was an employee of the building.

I went on the inside of the building and asked someone for the manager and they pointed to Mr. Truly.

I identified myself to Mr. Truly.

Mr. STERN. Just a minute.

Did you establish how long that man had been on the loading platform?

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

Mr. STERN. There was no policeman stationed at the loading platform when you came up?

Mr. SORRELS. I did not see one; no, sir.

Mr. STERN. And you were able to enter the building without identifying yourself?

Mr. SORRELS. Yes, sir.

Mr. STERN. Then you got inside the building and what did you do?

Mr. SORRELS. I asked for the manager, and I was directed to Mr. Truly. He was standing there.

I went up and identified myself to him. I said, "I want to get a stenographer, and we would like to have you put down the names and addresses of every employee of the building, in the building."

And I then walked on out the front door and asked, "Did anyone here see anything?"

And someone pointed to Mr. Brennan.

Mr. STERN. What was your purpose in asking for a list of the employees of the building?

Mr. SORRELS. Because I knew that they would have to be interviewed. I was trying to establish at that time without any delay, who all was in that building or was employed there, because I knew they would have to be talked to later.

In other words, I was looking for someone that saw something.

Mr. STERN. You were looking for potential witnesses?

Mr. SORRELS. Yes, sir.

Mr. STERN. And at that time you had no basis for suspecting any employee might be involved one way or the other?

Mr. SORRELS. No, sir; and I did not know at that time that the shots came from the building.

When I was--when Mr. Brennan was pointed out to me, I went up and told him who I was and asked him if he saw anything. And he told me what he had seen. And, at that time, that is the first time that I knew definitely that any shots had come from the building.

Mr. STERN. Now, what precisely did Mr. Brennan tell you?

Mr. SORRELS. Mr. Brennan said that he was standing across the street, watching the parade, and that he, of course, was looking in the direction where the President was, and he heard a sound which he thought at first was a backfire of an automobile. And that shortly afterwards there was another sound, and that he thought that somebody might be throwing firecrackers out of the building.

And he glanced up to the building, and that he saw a man at the window on the right-hand side, the second floor from the top.

And he said, "I could see the man taking deliberate aim and saw him fire the third shot," and said then he just pulled the rifle back in and moved back from the window, just as unconcerned as could be.

Mr. STERN. How did you happen to talk to Mr. Brennan?

Mr. SORRELS. I asked--I don't know who, someone there--"Is there anyone here that saw anything?" And someone said, "That man over there."

He was out in front of the building and I went right to him.

Mr. STERN. Did Mr. Brennan tell you anything else?

Mr. SORRELS. I asked him whether or not he thought he could identify the person that he saw, and he, of course, gave me a description of him, said that he appeared to be a slender man, he had on what appeared to be a light jacket or shirt or something to that effect, and that he thought he could identify him--said he was slender build. Because I was definitely interested in someone that had seen something that could give us some definite information.

And I also asked if he had seen anybody else, and he pointed to a young colored boy there, by the name of Euins. And I got him and Mr. Brennan, and I took them over to the sheriff's office where we could get statements from them.

Mr. STERN. What was the name of that young man?

Mr. SORRELS. Euins, I believe it is, or pretty close to that.

Mr. STERN. Did you interview Mr. Euins?

Mr. SORRELS. Yes, sir; I did. And he also said that he had heard the noise there, and that he had looked up and saw the man at the window with the rifle, and I asked him if he could identify the person, and he said, no, he couldn't, he said he couldn't tell whether he was colored or white.

Mr. STERN. Do you remember anything unusual about the way Mr. Brennan was dressed?

Mr. SORRELS. He was dressed as a workman, or a laborer, and he had on a hard hat.

Mr. STERN. Construction hat?

Mr. SORRELS. Yes, sir.

Mr. STERN. Did Mr. Brennan tell you anything else about anything else he had observed at that time?

Mr. SORRELS. I can't recall any specific thing.

Mr. STERN. Did he mention seeing any other person or persons in the windows of the Book Depository Building?

Mr. SORRELS. I don't recall whether he did or did not.

Mr. STERN. Did he say anything about observing anyone leave the Book Depository Building hurriedly after the shooting?

Mr. SORRELS. No, sir.

Mr. STERN. Did he point out to you precisely the window from which he said he saw the shot fired, the window in which he saw the sniper?

Mr. SORRELS. Yes, sir.

Mr. STERN. Where was that window in relation to the windows at which you saw several Negro men as you drove on Houston Street?

Mr. SORRELS. It was one floor above and a little bit to the right, as I recall it.

Mr. STERN. Can you give us these directions in terms of compass points?

Mr. SORRELS. Yes. That would be on the east side of the building.

Mr. STERN. So the window that Mr. Brennan pointed out to you was on the extreme east side?

Mr. SORRELS. Yes, sir.

Mr. STERN. And the window or windows at which you had observed several Negro men was more to the west?

Mr. SORRELS. A little bit more to the west--not very much--but to the west, on the floor below.

Mr. STERN. Are you certain in your mind about the floor below?

Mr. SORRELS. Yes, I am.

Mr. STERN. Is there any particular reason for that? You said before that you essentially glanced at the building, and didn't have very long to observe it, and you saw these men at the window.

What makes you certain about placing the men on any particular floor?

Mr. SORRELS. Well, because I remember that they were not near the top--I can just remember that--it seemed to me like two floors down from the top, as I recall having seen them. And, of course, when I got back to the building down there, there were windows open on the floor below at the place where I recall having seen the colored men.

Mr. STERN. So it was the open window afterwards that helped you recall?

Mr. SORRELS. That is right.

Mr. STERN. And are you certain that those were the same open windows?

Mr. SORRELS. Yes, I think they were. I don't have any reason to think otherwise.

Mr. STERN. Then you accompanied Brennan and Euins where?

Mr. SORRELS. To the sheriff's office, which was right across the street from the Book Depository.

Mr. STERN. Did you have any further conversation with them on the way over there?

Mr. SORRELS. Oh, yes; we discussed--I was talking to him on the way over there about what they saw and observed, and told them we would like to come in there where we could get their statements down in writing.

Mr. STERN. Did they tell you anything that you have not already told us?

Mr. SORRELS. Not that I recall.

The little colored boy mentioned he was there with another colored boy that ran off when this thing happened--at the first shot this boy ran off. He said he stayed there, but the other boy ran off. I didn't make any effort to get in touch with him, because he apparently saw nothing.

Mr. STERN. Then you took them into the sheriff's office?

Mr. SORRELS. Yes, sir.

Mr. STERN. What was going on in the sheriff's office?

Mr. SORRELS. At that time one of the deputy sheriffs was in the interrogation room taking a statement from some witness there. And I did not want to just stay there and wait too long, so I asked him would he also write up the statements on it--Mr. Brennan and the colored boy. And I then started out in the hall of the sheriff's office there with the idea of going back to see if I could locate other witnesses, when Chief Deputy Sheriff Mr. Allan Sweatt told me there was another witness across the hallway, near Mr. Sweatt's office--he is the polygraph operator there, and his office is not in the same area as the sheriff's office but across the hall--that there was an FBI agent taking a statement over there from a person.

So I accompanied him over there and hadn't been in there but just a few minutes until Mr. Sweatt came and called me out and says "Forrest, there are some people here I think you ought to talk to."

Mr. STERN. Whose statement was being taken by the FBI?

Mr. SORRELS. I don't recall. And, at that time----

Mr. STERN. Do you recall what their statement was--what their testimony was?

Mr. SORRELS. No, I don't, because I wasn't in there but just a very short time. And this FBI agent was questioning about what they had seen and so forth. I don't recall--it was being taken down at the time.

So I went out, and they had Mr. and Mrs. Arnold there. And Mr. Arnold, a young man, and his wife, very young, said that they were standing on the side of the street on Houston Street, there by the courthouse building, and that they--this is prior to the time of the arrival of the President there, some 20 to 25 minutes beforehand, he said.

Mr. STERN. This is the east side?

Mr. SORRELS. That would be the east side of Houston Street.

Mr. STERN. Are you certain about the name of this couple? I believe you said Arnold.

Mr. SORRELS. Well----

Mr. STERN. Could that have been his first name?

Mr. SORRELS. Yes, that could have been his first name.

Mr. STERN. Can you recall his second name?

Mr. SORRELS. I would know it if I heard it.

Mr. STERN. Could it have been Roland?

Mr. SORRELS. Yes, Roland is right.

Mr. STERN. What did they tell you?

Mr. SORRELS. He said that they were standing there waiting for the President to come by, and they were talking about security. And he said that right after that, that he looked up at this building over there, which is the Book Depository, and that there were a couple of windows open towards the west side, and that he saw a man standing in there with what appeared to be a rifle with a telescopic sight.

Mr. STERN. Towards the west side?

Mr. SORRELS. Yes--two windows towards the west side.

And that he remarked to his wife, "I guess that is a Secret Service man."

And I asked her if she saw it, and she said, no, that she had left her glasses home, and she is nearsighted, and she could not see him. And, of course, I asked him the description of the man. I asked him "How could you determine--what made you think it had a telescopic sight on it?"

He said, "Well, it seemed like it was wider on the light background."

I said, "How was he holding it?"

He said, port arms--he was standing several feet back away from the window.

And I asked him, "Could you identify that man?"

He said, "No, I could not."

Mr. STERN. Did Mrs. Roland confirm that he had discussed this with her?

Mr. SORRELS. She confirmed the conversation, but she said she could not see anything, because she didn't have her glasses.

Mr. STERN. Did Mr. Roland tell you he had seen anyone else in the windows of the Book Depository Building?

Mr. SORRELS. I don't recall that he did. I don't recall that at all. He may have, but I don't recall that.

Mr. STERN. Did he mention anyone on the sixth floor, and particularly on the extreme east side of the sixth floor?

Mr. SORRELS. No, I don't recall that he mentioned anyone there.

Mr. STERN. What was your impression of what he told you?

Mr. SORRELS. Well, of course, the thing that hit me first thing is why--he was right there by the sheriff's office, if he had just gone in there and said, Look, I saw a man with a rifle over there.

I said, "Why didn't you say something to somebody about it?"

He said, "I just thought he was a Secret Service man."

And at that time he appeared to be, as far as I was concerned, truthful about the matter.

Mr. STERN. You didn't have any reason to doubt him?

Mr. SORRELS. No.

Mr. STERN. And would the same be true of what Mr. Brennan told you, and Euins?

Mr. SORRELS. Yes, sir.

Mr. STERN. Did you look towards the window that Roland had pointed out from the spot at which he said he was standing, to see whether it was possible to observe from there someone standing several feet back from the window? Did you have occasion to check that?

Mr. SORRELS. Well, no, not specifically.

Later on I heard that he had--I believe in his statement that he wrote up down there at the sheriff's office, something about 15 feet back. And I thought to myself, well, I don't think you could see anybody that far back.

Mr. STERN. But he didn't tell you that?

Mr. SORRELS. No, he just said he was standing back of the window there, just kind of looking around there. He said after he saw him there, he didn't pay any more attention, because he just thought it was a Secret Service man.

Mr. STERN. What happened next?

Mr. SORRELS. There was another witness there that I started talking to--I don't recall the name now, because I told him to go in--somebody that saw a truck down there--this is before the parade ever got there--that apparently had stalled down there on Elm Street. And I later checked on that, and found out that the car had gone dead, apparently belonged to some construction company, and that a police officer had come down there, and they had gone to the construction company and gotten somebody to come down and get the car out of the way.

Apparently it was just a car stalled down there.

But this lady said she thought she saw somebody that looked like they had a guncase. But then I didn't pursue that any further--because then I had gotten the information that the rifle had been found in the building and shells and so forth.

At that time Mr. Harry McCormack, who is a reporter for the Dallas Morning News, and whom I have known for many years, came to me and says, "Forrest, I have something over here you ought to know about."

I said, "What have you got here?"

He said, "I have a man over here that got pictures of this whole thing."

I said, "Let's go see him."

So we went on to a building at the corner of Elm and Houston, on the east side of Houston, and across the street from the court house building there, and up to the office of a Mr. Zapruder, they have a dress manufacturing place there in that building. And he was there with another man connected with the business there, and apparently some magazine representatives there. And Mr. Zapruder was real shook up. He said that he didn't know how in the world he had taken these pictures, that he was down there and was taking the thing there, and he says, "My God, I saw the whole thing. I saw the man's brains come out of his head."

And so I asked Mr. Zapruder would it be possible for us to get a copy of those films.

He said, yes.

So then accompanied by Mr. Zapruder, and this other gentleman in the business there with him, whose name I don't recall at the moment, and Mr. McCormack, we went then to the Dallas Morning News Building, which is about three blocks from Mr. Zapruder's building, three or four blocks from there, with the idea of getting those films developed right away.

There was no one there that would tackle the job. We then went to the television section, WFAA, of the Dallas Morning News, to see if we could get them to handle it there, and they said, no, they would not attempt to do that, but they did assist us by calling Eastman Kodak Co., and they said if we came out there right away, that they would get right on it.

We got a police car, and went right on out to the Eastman Kodak Co., and while there I met another gentleman who had seen some still pictures, and I arranged with him for us to get copies of those.

Mr. STERN. What was his name--do you recall?

Mr. SORRELS. He is a salesman for the Ford Co. on West Commerce Street--Mr. Willis.

And so he said, yes, that he would be glad to furnish me with a copy of the pictures.

At that time, I made a phone call to my office, because I had not been in contact with them since we had departed from Love Field. I was informed that an FBI agent had called the office and said that Captain Fritz of the Homicide Bureau had been trying to get in touch with me, that he had a suspect in custody.

Mr. STERN. About what time was that?

Mr. SORRELS. That would be fairly close to 2 o'clock, I imagine.

Mr. STERN. About an hour after you had returned----

Mr. SORRELS. Yes. I would say that it was at least that long--maybe a little bit longer.

So when I got that information, I told Mr. Zapruder that I would contact him later and get the pictures, because I wanted to get right down to Captain Fritz' office.

So I left then with the same police car and had them take me to Captain Fritz' office.

And upon arrival there, there was many officers around there, there was already cameras out in the hall, tripods, and so forth, and all of the city hall down there. And there was a number of officers in the detective bureau office there, and Captain Fritz' office, which is an office within the large office, was closed, and the blinds were drawn in his office there.

I did not knock on the door or anything, because I did not want to interfere with him if he was talking to someone. So I just waited there until Captain Fritz opened the door, and he had a man who I later found out to be Oswald in custody at the time.

And I told Captain Fritz, I said, "Captain, I would like to talk to this man when I have an opportunity."

He said, "You can talk to him right now."

And he just took him on back around to the side of Captain Fritz' office, and there was a number of other officers there, might have been some FBI agents, too, there, because there were numbers of FBI agents around in that vicinity almost all the time from that time on. And some of the detectives there.

And I started talking to Oswald, started asking him some questions, and he was arrogant and a belligerent attitude about him.

And he said to me, "I don't know who you fellows are, a bunch of cops."

And I said, "Well, I will tell you who I am. My name is Sorrels and I am with the United States Secret Service, and here is my commission book."

I held it out in front of him and he said, "I don't want to look at it."

And he held his head up and wouldn't look at it at all. And he said, "What am I going to be charged with? Why am I being held here? Isn't someone supposed to tell me what my rights are?"

I said, "Yes, I will tell you what your rights are. Your rights are the same as that of any American citizen. You do not have to make a statement unless you want to. You have the right to get an attorney."

Aren't you supposed to get me an attorney?

No, I am not supposed to get you an attorney.

Aren't you supposed to get me an attorney?

I said, "No, I am not supposed to get you an attorney, because if I got you an attorney, they would say I was probably getting a rakeoff on the fee," or words to that effect, and kind of smiled and tried to break the ice a little bit there.

I said, "You can have the telephone book and you can call anybody you want to."

I said, "I just want to ask you some questions. I am in on this investigation. I just want to ask you some questions."

Mr. STERN. Was there anything further said about an attorney?

Mr. SORRELS. Not that I recall at that time. I don't recall anything further said about an attorney. I asked him where he worked. He told me worked at this Book Depository. And as I recall it, I asked him what his address was, and where he was living, and he explained to me that he was living apart from his wife, and that she was living over in Irving, Tex. I asked him, as I recall it, what his duties were at this Book Depository, and he said filling orders.

I asked him if he had occasion to be on more than one floor, and he said, yes.

I asked him if he had occasion to be on the sixth floor of the building. He said, yes, because they fill orders from all the floors.

But he said most of his activity was down on the first floor.

And I think I asked him whether or not he had ever been in a foreign country, and he said that he had traveled in Europe, but more time had been spent in the Soviet Union, as I recall it.

And then he just said "I don't care to answer any more questions."

And so the conversation was terminated.

Mr. STERN. Did he give you his address?

Mr. SORRELS. As I recall it, he did give me an address. I don't remember what it was offhand.

Mr. STERN. Then were you finished with your questions, or did he refuse to answer any more?

Mr. SORRELS. He just said, "I don't care to answer any more questions."

Mr. STERN. You wanted to ask him other questions?

Mr. SORRELS. Oh, yes.

Mr. STERN. And what happened then?

Mr. SORRELS. He was taken by the officers, as I recall it, and was taken out of that area and I suppose put back in jail.

Mr. STERN. Did you then talk to Captain Fritz?

Mr. SORRELS. Yes. As I recall it, I asked Captain Fritz whether or not he had gotten anything out of him or not, and Captain Fritz said that he hadn't been able--that he had not made any admissions or anything like that at that time, and that he was going to talk to him again.

That is all I recall that transpired at that time.

Of course I contacted the Chief's office, when I got that information as to who he was, and gave that information to them.

Mr. STERN. This is Chief Rowley?

Mr. SORRELS. I think I talked to Deputy Chief Paterni.

Mr. STERN. Of the Secret Service here in Washington?

Mr. SORRELS. Yes, sir.

Mr. STERN. Did anything else transpire between that time and the Friday night showup?

Mr. SORRELS. I did not talk to Oswald again, and I was around there. When I contacted Washington, I was informed that Inspector Kelley was being directed to be there, and he would be there later on that evening, that they had caught him out on the road, and he would come there to help out.

I also got information to Captain Fritz that I had this witness, Brennan, that I had talked to, and that I would like very much for him to get a chance to see Oswald in a lineup. And Captain Fritz said that would be fine.

So I instructed Special Agent Patterson, I believe it was, after I had located Brennan--had quite a difficult time to locate him, because he wasn't at home. And they finally prevailed upon his wife to try to help me locate him, and she, as I recall it, said that she would see if she could locate him by phone. I called her, I believe, the second time and finally got a phone number and called him and told him we would like for him to come down and arrange for him to meet one of our agents to pick him up at the place there. And when they came down there with him, I got ahold of Captain Fritz and told him that the witness was there, Mr. Brennan.

He said, "I wish he would have been here a little sooner, we just got through with a lineup. But we will get another fixed up."

So I took Mr. Brennan, and we went to the assembly room, which is also where they have the lineup, and Mr. Brennan, upon arrival at the police station, said, "I don't know if I can do you any good or not, because I have seen the man that they have under arrest on television," and he said, "I just don't know whether I can identify him positively or not" because he said that the man on television was a bit disheveled and his shirt was open or something like that, and he said "The man I saw was not in that condition."

So when we got to the assembly room, Mr. Brennan said he would like to get quite a ways back, because he would like to get as close to the distance away from where he saw this man at the time that the shooting took place as he could.

And I said, "Well, we will get you clear on to the back and then we can move up forward."

They did bring Oswald in in a lineup.

He looked very carefully, and then we moved him up closer and so forth, and he said, "I cannot positively say."

I said, "Well, is there anyone there that looks like him?"

He said, "Well, that second man from the left," who was Oswald--"he looks like him."

Then he repeated that the man he saw was not disheveled.

Now, mind you, Oswald had a slight wound over here, and he had a black eye, a bruised eye.

Mr. STERN. When you say "over here"----

Mr. SORRELS. Oh, on the left side. He had a mark on his forehead, and his left eye was a bit puffed.

Mr. STERN. How many other people were in the lineup?

Mr. SORRELS. As I recall it, there were five. In other words, all told there was five or six--I don't remember. I believe there were five.

Mr. STERN. Were the others reasonably similar to Oswald in height and physical appearance, and color?

Mr. SORRELS. Yes.

Mr. STERN. Dress?

Mr. SORRELS. I noted that to me I thought it was a very fair lineup, because they didn't have anyone that was a lot taller than he was, or anyone a lot shorter. They didn't have any big fat ones or anything like that.

In other words, to me it was a good lineup.

Mr. STERN. At that time, did Mr. Brennan say anything else to you that you have not told us, or to anyone else?

Mr. SORRELS. Not that I recall. He says, "I am sorry, but I can't do it. I was afraid seeing the television might have messed me up. I just can't be positive. I am sorry."

Mr. STERN. As far as you know, had Mr. Brennan been interviewed by anyone after he gave his statement to the deputy sheriff until the time you had him brought to the police headquarters?

Mr. SORRELS. No; not to my knowledge.

Mr. STERN. Was he then interviewed by anyone?

Mr. SORRELS. I couldn't say.

Mr. STERN. Did you arrange for him to return to his home?

Mr. SORRELS. As I recall it, I did. I told him "they will take you back to your home."

Mr. STERN. Immediately after the lineup?

Mr. SORRELS. Yes, sir.

Mr. STERN. Have you ever spoken to Mr. Brennan again after that day?

Mr. SORRELS. Yes; I have.

Mr. STERN. When was that?

Mr. SORRELS. We were assisting the Commission in locating witnesses to come to Washington, to the Commission, and I got in touch with him and arranged for him to go and procured his ticket and delivered his ticket to him.

Mr. STERN. And when you talked to him then, did he say anything that bears upon our inquiry that he hadn't said before?

Mr. SORRELS. Not that I recall.

Mr. STERN. Mr. Sorrels, when you were at the police headquarters, after this interview with Oswald that you have told us about, do you recall talking to any representative of the FBI?

Mr. SORRELS. Yes.

Mr. STERN. Who was that?

Mr. SORRELS. Now, let's get that question again, because I talked to them several times down there.

When was that you said?

Mr. STERN. After you interviewed Oswald.

Mr. SORRELS. Oh, yes, yes.

Mr. STERN. Do you know an FBI agent attached to the Dallas office named James Hosty?

Mr. SORRELS. Yes, sir; I do.

Mr. STERN. Did you talk to Mr. Hosty that you recall?

Mr. SORRELS. Not that I recall; no, sir.

Mr. STERN. Might you have spoken to him, or do you think you would remember that?

Mr. SORRELS. I think I would remember it.

Mr. STERN. Do you recall his being there?

Mr. SORRELS. I think I saw him there.

Now, whether it was on the 22d or not, but I think during along this period, I saw him there one time.

But I don't recall talking to Mr. Hosty at all down there.

Mr. STERN. Did any of the agents attached to your office tell you that they had talked to Hosty? Or that Hosty had told them anything?

Mr. SORRELS. Yes; I think Special Agent Patterson, I believe, said that he had seen Hosty down there, and that Hosty, I believe, had said that he had a file on Oswald.

Mr. STERN. Do you recall anything else that Agent Patterson told you that Mr. Hosty had told him?

Mr. SORRELS. No; I cannot recall anything else. Because I had information--had also gotten information from others. In other words, there was general information around the Police Department there that the FBI had a file on this individual.

Mr. STERN. Any other of your agents tell you that Hosty had said anything to them about Oswald that you can recall?

Mr. SORRELS. You mean at that specific date, regarding that specific date?

Mr. STERN. Either on Friday or on Saturday.

Mr. SORRELS. No. During the course of this thing, it was my understanding that--I don't remember how the information came to me--that Hosty had been checking on this Oswald, and that they had information or knew that he was in this building. I cannot pinpoint it any way specifically, because the information came several different times to that effect.

Mr. STERN. Now, you told us something of Oswald's physical appearance when you saw him at the interview.

Mr. SORRELS. Yes, sir.

Mr. STERN. And at the showup.

Mr. SORRELS. Yes, sir.

Mr. STERN. Did his appearance change in the course of that time?

Mr. SORRELS. Not that I recall.

Mr. STERN. Over that 3-day period, did you see any sign that force or any other form of coercion was used on Oswald by anyone?

Mr. SORRELS. No, sir.

Mr. STERN. Did you observe or hear of any intimidation of Oswald or the offer of any benefit to Oswald if he were to confess?

Mr. SORRELS. No, sir.

Mr. STERN. Did you participate in or observe any other interrogation of Oswald following your own brief interrogation?

Mr. SORRELS. Yes, sir.

Mr. STERN. When was that?

Mr. SORRELS. On the following day----

Mr. STERN. That is Saturday, the 23d?

Mr. SORRELS. Yes, sir; I sat in on part of an interview with him, with Captain Fritz. And then, again, on Sunday the 24th, just before he was shot.

Mr. STERN. Did the question of counsel come up again--that is, a lawyer for Oswald?

Mr. SORRELS. Yes. During the interview with Captain Fritz, when I was in there, he mentioned the fact that he wanted to get a man by the name of Abt, or some similar name like that. I never had heard of him before. Apt, or some similar name.

And Captain Fritz said, "Well, you can use the phone and you can call him."

Mr. STERN. When was this?

Mr. SORRELS. That was Saturday morning. And it is my understanding that Oswald did attempt to reach this man on the phone.

Mr. STERN. But you didn't observe it?

Mr. SORRELS. I did not observe that; no.

Mr. STERN. Did you hear him mention at any time a lawyer from the American Civil Liberties Union?

Mr. SORRELS. Yes. He said if he could not get this man--I wish I could remember his name--a very short name, Apt or something like that.

Mr. STERN. A-b-t?

Mr. SORRELS. Yes, A-b-t. Yes--if he couldn't get him, he wanted a lawyer supplied by the Civil Liberties Union.

Mr. STERN. What else occurred at the interview on Saturday that you can remember?

Mr. SORRELS. He was questioned about the rifle, because, at that time, as I recall it, it had been determined that the rifle had been purchased from Kleins in Chicago, and shipped to a person using the name of A. Hidell. And he was questioned by Captain Fritz along those lines. And he denied that the rifle was his. He denied knowing or using the name of A. Hidell, or Alek Hidell.

He was, of course, questioned about his background and he at that time still maintained an arrogant, defiant attitude. The questions were, of course, directed towards getting information. A lot of them he would not answer. And a lot of the answers, of course, were apparent falsehoods.

And he gave me the impression of lying to Captain Fritz, and deliberately doing so, maybe with an attempt to get Captain Fritz to become angered, because he, Oswald, would flare up in an angry manner from time to time.

Mr. STERN. But you think that was acting--not genuine?

Mr. SORRELS. That is the impression I got, that he was just deliberately doing that, possibly to agitate Captain Fritz and maybe get him to become angry, and maybe do or say something that he shouldn't do.

That is just the impression I gained from him. And the reason--I guess one reason I gained that impression is because on the last interview, on Sunday morning, Oswald seemed to have taken a little bit different attitude. In other words, he was talking a little bit freer--he wasn't giving out any information of any value particularly, but he wasn't flaring up like he did before.

Mr. STERN. Was that Sunday interview extended beyond any time that you know of that it was scheduled to end?

Mr. SORRELS. Yes; it was, because the papers seemed to have gotten the impression that he was going to be moved at exactly 10 o'clock in the morning, and Captain Fritz was talking to him even after 11 o'clock in the morning--we were still there. And I recall that Chief Curry came around and asked Captain Fritz how long he was going to be, or what was holding it up, or something like that, that they wanted to go ahead and get him moved as quick as they could.

Mr. STERN. Did be indicate or did you understand that they wanted to move him at 10 o'clock?

Mr. SORRELS. It was after 10 o'clock then, considerably. As a matter of fact, it was after 11 at that time. Captain Fritz remarked to me afterwards, he said, "Well, as long as it looks like he might talk, I hesitate to quit, or move him out at that time," and he told Chief Curry, "We will be through in a few minutes."

And shortly after that, Captain Fritz asked if anyone wanted to ask him any questions, and, at that time, the postal inspector had obtained a change of address card which Oswald had apparently filled out in which one of the names shown on that change of address card that was to receive mail at that particular address in New Orleans was named A. Hidell. And I desired to question Oswald about that thing, because he had denied purchasing this rifle under the name of A. Hidell, and he denied knowing anybody by the name of A. Hidell.

So I showed Oswald this change of address card and said to him, "Now, here is a change of address card that you filed in New Orleans," and he looked at it.

He did not deny that he had filed the card, because it was apparently in his handwriting, and his signature. And I said, "Now you say that you have not used the name of A. Hidell, but you show it on this card here as the name of A. Hidell, as a person to receive mail at this address. If you do not know anyone by that name, why would you have that name on that card?"

He said, "I never used the name of Hidell."

Mr. STERN. That was the last question he was asked?

Mr. SORRELS. As far as I know.

Mr. STERN. And then what happened?

Mr. SORRELS. He was told that they were going to move him to the county jail, and he requested that he be permitted to get a shirt out of his--the clothes that had been brought in, that belonged to him, because the shirt he was wearing at the time he had been apprehended was taken, apparently for laboratory examination. And so Captain Fritz sent and got his clothes and, as I recall it, he selected a dark colored kind of a sweater type shirt, as I recall it. And then he was taken out, and, at that time, as I recall it, Inspector Kelley and I left and went up to--I say up--down the hall to the executive office area of the police department, and to the office of Deputy Chief Batchelor.

And we remained in that vicinity. I looked out the window, and saw the people across the street, on Commerce Street, people were waiting there. And I saw an individual that I know by the name of Ruby Goldstein, who is known as Honest Joe, that has a second-hand tool and pawnshop down on Elm Street, and everyone around there knows him. He was leaning on the car looking over in the direction of the ramp there at the police station. And we were just waiting around there.

And for a few minutes I was talking to one of the police officers that was on duty up there in that area. And he had made the remark, "talking about open windows, I see one open across the street over there" at a building across the street.

I looked over there. I didn't see any activity at the window. And we had walked out into the reception area of the executive office of the Chief of Police there when this same police officer said that he just heard that Oswald had got shot in the stomach in the basement by Jack Rubin, as I understood at that time, R-u-b-i-n--who was supposed to run a night club.

Inspector Kelley and I then went just as hurriedly as we could to the basement.

Mr. STERN. As I understand it, Mr. Sorrels, you covered all the relevant information from this point of time on with Mr. Hubert yesterday.

Mr. SORRELS. Yes. And actually back just a little bit.

Mr. STERN. Is there anything that has occurred to you since your interview with Mr. Hubert that you would like to add now, to amplify anything you said yesterday to him?

Mr. SORRELS. We were trying to establish something about the time yesterday morning that this transpired and so forth. And I could not fix any exact time.

But knowing the fact that Oswald, I believe, is reported to have been shot at 11:21, I believe it is, and the fact that when we got into the basement of the City Hall there at a time when Oswald was still on the floor there, and was being given artificial respiration, as I said yesterday, and I immediately called my headquarters office in Washington and told them about Oswald being shot by Jack Rubin, a night club operator. And they asked me, of course, to get additional information and call them back.

And from that telephone call, which went through very rapidly, I went back upstairs--didn't tarry there at all. And Oswald was still there when I left and went back upstairs to Captain Fritz' office, because my thought was to talk to this man Jack Rubin as fast as I could.

Captain Fritz was not there. They said he went to the hospital. I asked where Ruby was. They said he was up on the fifth floor. I said I would like to talk to him. And I was sent with an officer to the jail elevator, went right on up there. So----

Mr. STERN. Have you been able to establish the time of your phone call to Deputy Chief----

Mr. SORRELS. No, I have not been able to establish it. But after thinking the thing over, and the fact that Oswald was still there at the time this call was made, I would say that that phone call was probably made between 11:25 and 11:30, I would say.

Mr. STERN. Fine.

Mr. Sorrels had you discussed with any official of the Dallas Police the plans to move Oswald during a scheduled daylight hour, before the move was made?

Mr. SORRELS. When I heard that he was supposed to be moved at 10 o'clock in the morning, I said to Captain Fritz--and as I recall this conversation--I said to him, "Captain, I wouldn't move that man at an announced time. I would take him out at 3 or 4 o'clock in the morning, when there is nobody around."

And Captain Fritz said, "Well, the chief has gone along with these people," talking about the press and television people, and said that he wanted to continue going along with them and cooperating with them all he can. And that was all that was said about that.

I did not make that suggestion, or have a conversation like that with Chief Curry, as I recall, because I did not want to appear that I was trying to tell them how to run their business.

Mr. STERN. What were conditions like in the third floor corridor of police headquarters from Friday through Sunday?

Mr. SORRELS. Mr. Stern, you would almost have to be there to see it, to actually realize the conditions. The press and the television people just, as the expression goes, took over. I would almost every time I went up there, definitely after the 22d, I would have to identify myself to get in past the entrance of the elevator on the third floor, if I was going to the chief's office or the deputy chief's office or Captain Fritz' office. You would have to elbow your way through, and step over tripods and cables and wires, and every time almost that I would come out of Captain Fritz's office, the minute the door opened, they would flash on those bright lights, and I got where I just shadowed my eyes when I walked down there to keep the light from shining in my eyes. They had cables run through one of the deputy chief's office, right through the windows from the street up the side of the building, across the floor, out to the boxes where they could get power--they had wires running out of that, had the wires taped down to keep people from actually falling or stumbling over the wires. And it was just a condition that you can hardly explain. It was just almost indescribable.

I know at one time when Mr. Jim Underwood of KRLD, that is the Dallas Time Herald Television Station down there, was in Captain Fritz' office with Jack Ruby's sister, and a lady friend of hers, trying to arrange for her to get up to talk to Jack Ruby, that the police officer who was stationed at the door to the detective's office had a terrific time keeping them--I thought they were going to barge on in there. They were yelling like mad--because Mr. Underwood was in there, and one of them was there yelling--"if he has got a right to be in here, we have a right to be in there."

Just as loud as he could. And Mr. Underwood had to leave Captain Fritz' office and say, "Listen, fellows, I am not going upstairs. I am trying to make arrangements for this woman to see her brother--I am not going upstairs."

That was just the situation you were booked up against there.

And, of course, every time you would turn around, they would ask me something, and I would say, "No comment, I don't have any comment to make."

And I don't think at any time you will see that there is any statement made by the newspapers or television that we said anything because Mr. Kelley, the Inspector, told me "Any information that is given out will have to come from Inspector Peterson in Washington."

Finally, after they found out I would not say anything, they didn't bother me any more.

Many times when I would be going into the third floor area there, they would start to stop me, and a lot of the guys that would know me would say, "That is Sorrels of the Secret Service."

That happened more than once.

And, of course, I would have to go ahead and identify myself. The officers that were on duty that had seen me before would recognize me and pass me through.

Mr. STERN. Can you estimate how many press representatives there were in that corridor?

Mr. SORRELS. I am not too good in estimating anything like that, but there were dozens of them.

Mr. STERN. Was any effort made to restrict them to a far part of the corridor, or to remove them from the floor entirely that you know of?

Mr. SORRELS. Not that I know of.

Mr. STERN. Did you ever learn why this was not done--did you ever ask?

Mr. SORRELS. No, I did not. I just thought to myself--well, if this was being handled in a Federal building, this situation would not exist. That is what I thought.

But, of course, that is a public building. I thought to myself--well, they are in here, and the chief would have a heck of a time getting them out. That is just my own thoughts about the thing, because I do know that the Dallas Police Department, the Dallas Sheriff's Office, they do try to go along with the press and everything like that.

After this thing happened, Mr. Felix McKnight, who I mentioned before, who is a personal friend of mine, executive editor of the Dallas Times Herald, he said to me, "Forrest, those people should have been out of there, and that includes us."

Of course the thing was all over then. I would imagine that Chief Curry or anybody else that would have tried to have gotten them out of there would have really had a tough time and they probably would have really blasted them in the press.

Mr. STERN. Mr. Sorrels, that covers the ground that I wanted to ask you about.

Is there anything you would like to add to anything you said this morning with respect to the advance preparations, the actual events in front of the Book Depository, your return there, anything that elapsed while you were at the police headquarters from Friday afternoon through Sunday morning--or with respect to anything you told Mr. Hubert about yesterday?

Just take a moment and think about it.

And if there is anything you would like to amplify or add to what you have said that you think the Commission should know, please tell me.

Mr. SORRELS. I cannot recall anything right now, Mr. Stern.

Mr. STERN. I would like you to identify this one page memorandum entitled "Statement of Forrest V. Sorrels, Special Agent in Charge, U.S. Secret Service, Dallas, Tex., November 28, 1963."

I have marked this "Exhibit 5," deposition of F. V. Sorrels, May 7, 1964.

Mr. SORRELS. Yes, sir; that is a copy of a statement that I wrote up.

Mr. STERN. Would you initial that for me, please?

Mr. SORRELS. Yes.

Mr. STERN. Would you review the statement and see if there is anything you would like to add to it?

I think you might just tell us what it covers.

Mr. SORRELS. This is a statement which was written up by me on November 28, 1963, relating the fact that the presidential motorcade----

Mr. STERN. The statement will be in the record, Mr. Sorrels. I meant just tell us the subject matter of it.

Mr. SORRELS. Relating to the events that I observed when the presidential motorcade went from Love Field until the time that I left the Parkland Hospital to go to the Texas School Book Depository.

Mr. STERN. Is there anything you want to add to that statement that you have not already told us--because we have gone into this in much greater detail now.

Mr. SORRELS. No, not that I can recall, because as you say we went into it in more detail.

Mr. STERN. Thank you very much, Mr. Sorrels. We appreciate very much your coming to Washington to help us.

Mr. SORRELS. I want to express my appreciation to you and to the Commission for permitting me to not come on the week of the 19th, due to the fact that my little daughter had to go to the hospital. I certainly appreciate your consideration in letting me come at a later date.

Mr. STERN. We were very happy we could arrange that, and we are glad to know she is well.

Mr. SORRELS. Thank you, sir.

TESTIMONY OF WILLIAM J. WALDMAN

The testimony of William J. Waldman was taken on May 20, 1964, at 4540 West Madison Street, Chicago, Ill., by Mr. David W. Belin, assistant counsel of the President's Commission.

William J. Waldman, called as a witness herein, having been first duly sworn, was examined and testified as follows:

Mr. BELIN. Would you please state your full name?

Mr. WALDMAN. William J. Waldman.

Mr. BELIN. And where do you live, Mr. Waldman?

Mr. WALDMAN. 335 Central Avenue, Wilmette, Ill.

Mr. BELIN. Is that a suburb of Chicago?

Mr. WALDMAN. It's a suburb of Chicago.

Mr. BELIN. And what is your occupation?

Mr. WALDMAN. Vice president of Klein's Sporting Goods, Inc.

Mr. BELIN. How long have you been with Klein's?

Mr. WALDMAN. Approximately 12 years.

Mr. BELIN. And in your capacity as vice president, what are your general areas of work?

Mr. WALDMAN. Supervising office, warehouse, and retail operations, participating in the merchandising and advertising.

Mr. BELIN. What kinds of products does Klein's sell?

Mr. WALDMAN. Sporting goods in the majority, with some few specialty items which appeal to the male consumer.

Mr. BELIN. Would these include goods such as fishing items or hunting items?

Mr. WALDMAN. Yes.

Mr. BELIN. What is the fact as to whether or not included in the products handled by Klein's are rifles?

Mr. WALDMAN. Would you restate the question?

Mr. BELIN. Does Klein's Sporting Goods, Inc., handle rifles in their line of sporting goods?

Mr. WALDMAN. They do.

Mr. BELIN. For the record, we would like to have a little bit more of your overall background. Were you originally born in Chicago?

Mr. WALDMAN. No; I was born in Sedalia, Mo., November 16, 1912. Education: I don't know just what you're after.

Mr. BELIN. Well, you went through high school?

Mr. WALDMAN. I completed high school, attended Carnegie Institute of Technology, New York University. I don't know the nature of how far you want this developed.

Mr. BELIN. Well, you had some college work then?

Mr. WALDMAN. Yes.

Mr. BELIN. And after you got out of college, what did you do?

Mr. WALDMAN. I got out of college and I was employed by Sears and Roebuck, Spiegel's, Inc., and various other employment, served in the U.S. Army, Air Corps branch.

Mr. BELIN. This is during World War II?

Mr. WALDMAN. During World War II. Following which I was employed for a brief period in a family business, and subsequently by Klein's Sporting Goods.

Mr. BELIN. Mr. Waldman, I hand you what is being marked as Waldman Deposition Exhibit 1 and ask you to state if you know what this is.

Mr. WALDMAN. I do.

Mr. BELIN. Could you please tell us what that statement constitutes?

Mr. WALDMAN. This constitutes a purchase order of Klein's directed to Crescent Firearms Co. for Italian Carcano rifles prepared on January 2, 19--, oh, wait a minute; hold that a moment, January 24, 1963, calling for 200 units at a cost of $8.50.

Mr. BELIN. Now----

Mr. WALDMAN. I haven't finished.

Mr. BELIN. Let me just ask you this preliminary question: This is a photostatic copy of a document, is it not?

Mr. WALDMAN. It is.

Mr. BELIN. And is the original copy, or was the original copy prepared by someone under your direction or supervision?

Mr. WALDMAN. The original was prepared under a system which I originated and this particular order was not prepared at my direction. It would be--the merchandise was ordered in a routine basis at a time in which it was needed, and----

Mr. BELIN. Do you know who the person is that filled out this order?

Mr. WALDMAN. Yes; his initials are so indicated as "M. W."

Mr. BELIN. Would that be the name at the lower left-hand corner of Exhibit 1?

Mr. WALDMAN. It is.

Mr. BELIN. And that is who?

Mr. WALDMAN. Mitchell W. Westra.

Mr. BELIN. At that time was he an employee of your company?

Mr. WALDMAN. He was.

Mr. BELIN. Was he under your jurisdiction and supervision?

Mr. WALDMAN. He was not under my direct supervision, no. He was under the direct supervision of Sam Kasper.

Mr. BELIN. And where is Sam Kasper now?

Mr. WALDMAN. He may or may not be here.

Mr. BELIN. I don't mean this afternoon. Is he with the company?

Mr. WALDMAN. He is the vice president of our company.

Mr. BELIN. He is the other vice president of the company?

Mr. WALDMAN. Correct.

Mr. BELIN. All right. Now, you started to go into the detail of what Deposition Exhibit 1 constituted. I just wonder if you will pick up where you left off here.

Mr. WALDMAN. Yes; on the same form we show a record of the receipt of the rifles in question, specifically this extreme right-hand column which is filled in, indicating that on February 22, delivery was made to us by Lifschultz Trucking Co. I might explain the difference in the two dates here.

Mr. BELIN. Go ahead.

Mr. WALDMAN. The February 21 date is the date in which the merchandise came to our premises whereas the date of February 22, is the date in which they were officially received by our receiving department.

Mr. BELIN. Your receiving department checks each order to see that the physical contents match the stated shipment on the invoice; is that correct?

Mr. WALDMAN. They don't necessarily see that they match because they frequently do not match, but they determine actually how much was received by us.

Mr. BELIN. Now, I notice on Waldman Deposition Exhibit No. 1 a date--well, I might read everything under the column of description; it says Italian Mannlicher-Carcano, Model 91TS, bolt action 6-shot rifle; and then cal.--that's for caliber--6.5, and then there is an "X" and 52 mm Italian-select, clean, and test-fired, changed to Beretta Terni M19, then a slash line 38 EFF, and then the date of 4/16/62. Explain that date and that description.

Mr. WALDMAN. Yes; this general style of rifle was made by a number of different manufacturers over a period of time and there were minor modifications made by--developed by each of the manufacturers.

Mr. BELIN. Would this be similar to a number of manufacturers making the Springfield rifle in this country?

Mr. WALDMAN. As for example, the different manufacturers making the Springfield rifle. Basically, the weapons were of the same general design, but as I say, there were details that were different.

We originally had ordered one style of Carcano rifle, one that was known as the Model 91TS. As time went on, we changed to another model known as the Model 91/38EFF, this on April 13, 1962.

Mr. BELIN. Now, I also note on Waldman Deposition Exhibit No. 1, under the item number--some letters here or numbers----

Mr. WALDMAN. C20-T749.

Mr. BELIN. What does that signify?

Mr. WALDMAN. This is an identification number assigned by us for internal operating purposes.

Mr. BELIN. Would this be something akin to a catalog number?

Mr. WALDMAN. Yes.

Off the record now. Can I speak without being----

Mr. BELIN. Yes.

(Whereupon, discussion was had off the record.)

Mr. BELIN. On the record.

Now, Mr. Waldman, you just requested to go off the record and told me that this is, the number that you read is not necessarily the only number that is assigned to one of these model rifles. Do you ever have any other numbers assigned to them?

Mr. WALDMAN. Yes.

Mr. BELIN. What would be the occasion for assigning a different number?

Mr. WALDMAN. When the rifle is offered and sold together with a scope and mount, we assign a different catalog number which describes the rifle, the scope and the mount.

Mr. BELIN. Did you ever sell any of these particular rifles with scopes and mounts?

Mr. WALDMAN. Yes.

Mr. BELIN. Were these scopes and mounts purchased from the same source as the rifle itself?

Mr. WALDMAN. No.

Mr. BELIN. Mr. Waldman, on Waldman Deposition Exhibit No. 1, does the date April 13, 1962, have anything to do with the time with which you received orders from customers of Klein's for any of these rifles?

Mr. WALDMAN. That date has no reference to our activity with consumers as such. It only indicates in our buying of these rifles we changed from one model to another, both models being very similar.

Mr. BELIN. Both being the Mannlicher-Carcano 6.5 caliber rifle?

Mr. WALDMAN. Correct.

Mr. BELIN. I'm going to hand you what has been marked as Waldman Deposition Exhibit 2 and ask you to state if you know what that is.

Mr. WALDMAN. I do.

Mr. BELIN. What is it?

Mr. WALDMAN. This is a delivery receipt from the Lifschultz Fast Freight covering 10 cases of guns delivered to Klein's on February 21, 1963, from Crescent Firearms.

Mr. BELIN. I note that there is some handwriting on Waldman Deposition Exhibit No. 2 that says. "Klein's Sporting Goods, Inc., J. A. Mueller, 2-21-63." Would that be one of your employees at that time?

Mr. WALDMAN. He was. Mr. Mueller was in charge of our receiving department at that time.

Mr. BELIN. And do you know how many guns or rifles would have been packed in each carton or case?

Mr. WALDMAN. Referring to the various delivery receipts, copies of which we have, these are packing slips, incidentally, not receipts; these were packing receipts included in each case. It was indicated there were 10 rifles in each case.

Mr. BELIN. I'm going to hand you what has been marked as Waldman Deposition Exhibit No. 3 and ask you to state if you know what this is.

Mr. WALDMAN. Yes; these are memos prepared by Crescent Firearms showing serial numbers of rifles that were shipped to us and each one of these represents those rifles that were contained in a case.

Mr. BELIN. Now, you earlier mentioned that these were packed with the case.

Mr. WALDMAN. Well, I would like to correct that. This particular company does not include these with the cases, but sends these memos separately with their invoice.

Mr. BELIN. Now, again, Waldman Deposition Exhibit No. 3 is a photostatic copy. Do you have the actual copies that came to you in front of you at this time?

Mr. WALDMAN. I do.

Mr. BELIN. And is Waldman Deposition Exhibit No. 3 an accurate photostat of these other copies?

Mr. WALDMAN. It is.

Mr. BELIN. I notice that there are numbers on each of these papers with 10 serial numbers each. I see here No. 3672, 3504 on the first photostat of Waldman Deposition Exhibit No. 3. Do you see that?

Mr. WALDMAN. I do.

Mr. BELIN. I'm going to ask you to search through these 10 photostats and see if you find any invoice number that has on it a serial number, C-2766.

Mr. WALDMAN. Crescent Firearms delivery memo No. 3620 covering carton or case No. 3376 does have a--indicate a rifle bearing serial No. 2766.

Mr. BELIN. Well, is it 2766 or is there a prefix to it?

Mr. WALDMAN. There is a prefix, C-2766.

Mr. BELIN. And you see that as also a part of Waldman Deposition Exhibit No. 3; I believe you are reading from the actual document in your possession which Waldman Deposition Exhibit No. 3 is a photostat of; is that correct?

Mr. WALDMAN. That's correct.

Mr. BELIN. When a shipment of rifles is received, what is your procedure with regard to recordkeeping on the serial numbers of the rifles?

Mr. WALDMAN. We assign to each rifle a control number which is a number used by us to record the history of the gun while it is in our possession and until it is sold, thus each rifle will be tagged with both this control number and with the serial number of the rifle which is stamped on the--imprinted on the gun by the manufacturer.

Mr. BELIN. Do you have the same--does the same manufacturer give different serial numbers for each weapon that the manufacturer makes?

Mr. WALDMAN. The gun manufacturers imprint a different number on each gun. It's stamped into the frame of the gun and serves as a unique identification for each gun.

Mr. BELIN. Well, I hand you what has been marked as Waldman Deposition Exhibit No. 4 and ask you to state if you know what this is.

Mr. WALDMAN. This is the record created by us showing the control number we have assigned to the gun together with the serial number that is imprinted in the frame of the gun.

Mr. BELIN. Now, this is a photostat, I believe, of records you have in front of you on your desk right now?

Mr. WALDMAN. That's correct.

Mr. BELIN. Do you find anywhere on Waldman Deposition Exhibit No. 4 the serial number C-2766?

Mr. WALDMAN. Yes.

Mr. BELIN. And what is your control number for that?

Mr. WALDMAN. Our control number for that is VC-836.

Mr. BELIN. Now, I'm going to hand you what has been marked as Waldman Deposition Exhibit No. 5 and ask you to state if you know what this is.

Mr. WALDMAN. This is an invoice rendered us by Crescent Firearms on their date February 7, 1963, for one hundred each 6.5 Italian rifles.

Mr. BELIN. Is there anything on that invoice that shows how the rifles were shipped to you?

Mr. WALDMAN. It's indicated as having been shipped by the North Penn Transfer-Lifschultz and that there were 10 cases or cartons.

Mr. BELIN. Does it show whether or not this invoice was paid?

Mr. WALDMAN. It shows that payment was made on March 4, 1963.

Mr. BELIN. Mr. Waldman, were you ever contacted by any law enforcement agency about the disposition of this Mannlicher-Carcano rifle that had the serial number C-2766 on it?

Mr. WALDMAN. Yes; on the night of November 22, 1963, the FBI contacted our company in an effort to determine whether the gun had been in our possession and, if so, what disposition we had made of it.

Mr. BELIN. Do you know how the FBI happened to contact you or your company?

Mr. WALDMAN. The FBI had a record of a gun of this type and with this serial number having been shipped to us by Crescent Firearms.

Mr. BELIN. Do you mean that Crescent Firearms gave the FBI this information?

Mr. WALDMAN. Well, I--I must assume that's the case. I don't know it for a fact.

Mr. BELIN. All right. What did you and your company do when you were contacted by the FBI?

Mr. WALDMAN. We met with the FBI in our offices.

Mr. BELIN. Was this on Friday evening, November 22?

Mr. WALDMAN. On Friday evening, November 22.

Mr. BELIN. Did the FBI indicate at what time, what period that they felt you might have received this rifle originally?

Mr. WALDMAN. We were able to determine from our purchase records the date in which the rifle had been received, and they also had a record of when it had been shipped, so we knew the approximate date of receipt by us, and from that we made--let's see, we examined our microfilm records which show orders from mail order customers and related papers, and from this determined to whom the gun had been shipped by us.

Mr. BELIN. Are these microfilm records part of your customary recording of transactions of your company?

Mr. WALDMAN. Yes; they are.

Mr. BELIN. I'm handing you what has been marked as an FBI Exhibit D-77 and ask you if you know what this is.

Mr. WALDMAN. This is a microfilm record that--of mail order transactions for a given period of time. It was turned over by us to the FBI.

Mr. BELIN. Do you know when it was turned over to the FBI?

Mr. WALDMAN. It was turned over to them on November 23, 1963.

Mr. BELIN. Now, you are reading from the carton containing that microfilm. Do you know whose initials are on there?

Mr. WALDMAN. Yes; the initials on here are mine and they were put on the date on which this was turned over to the FBI concerned with the investigation.

Mr. BELIN. You have on your premises a machine for looking at the microfilm prints?

Mr. WALDMAN. Yes.

Mr. BELIN. And you can make copies of the microfilm prints?

Mr. WALDMAN. Yes.

Mr. BELIN. I wonder if we can adjourn the deposition upstairs to take a look at these records in the microfilm and get copies of the appropriate records that you found on the evening of November 22.

Mr. WALDMAN. Yes.

(Whereupon, the following proceedings were had at the microfilm machine.)

Mr. BELIN. Mr. Waldman, you have just put the microfilm which we call D-77 into your viewer which is marked a Microfilm Reader-Printer, and you have identified this as No. 270502, according to your records. Is this just a record number of yours on this particular shipment?

Mr. WALDMAN. That's a number which we assign for identification purposes.

Mr. BELIN. And on the microfilm record, would you please state who it shows this particular rifle was shipped to?

Mr. WALDMAN. Shipped to a Mr. A.--last name--H-i-d-e-l-l, Post Office Box 2915, Dallas, Tex.

Mr. BELIN. And does it show any serial number or control number?

Mr. WALDMAN. It shows shipment of a rifle bearing our control number VC-836 and serial number C-2766.

Mr. BELIN. Is there a price shown for that?

Mr. WALDMAN. Price is $19.95, plus $1.50 postage and handling, or a total of $21.45.

Mr. BELIN. Now, I see another number off to the left. What is this number?

Mr. WALDMAN. The number that you referred to, C20-T750 is a catalog number.

Mr. BELIN. And after that, there appears some words of identification or description. Can you state what that is?

Mr. WALDMAN. The number designates an item which we sell, namely, an Italian carbine, 6.5 caliber rifle with the 4X scope.

Mr. BELIN. Is there a date of shipment which appears on this microfilm record?

Mr. WALDMAN. Yes; the date of shipment was March 20, 1963.

Mr. BELIN. Does it show by what means it was shipped?

Mr. WALDMAN. It was shipped by parcel post as indicated by this circle around the letters "PP."

Mr. BELIN. Does it show if any amount was enclosed with the order itself?

Mr. WALDMAN. Yes; the amount that was enclosed with the order was $21.45, as designated on the right-hand side of this order blank here.

Mr. BELIN. Opposite the words "total amount enclosed"?

Mr. WALDMAN. Yes.

Mr. BELIN. Is there anything which indicates in what form you received the money?

Mr. WALDMAN. Yes; below the amount is shown the letters "MO" designating money order.

Mr. BELIN. Now, I see the extreme top of this microfilm, the date, March 13, 1963; to what does that refer?

Mr. WALDMAN. This is an imprint made by our cash register indicating that the remittance received from the customer was passed through our register on that date.

Mr. BELIN. And to the right of that, I see $21.45. Is that correct?

Mr. WALDMAN. That's correct.

Mr. BELIN. Is there any other record that you have in connection with the shipment of this rifle other than the particular microfilm negative frame that we are looking at right now?

Mr. WALDMAN. We have a--this microfilm record of a coupon clipped from a portion of one of our advertisements, which indicates by writing of the customer on the coupon that he ordered our catalog No. C20-T750; and he has shown the price of the item, $19.95, and gives as his name A. Hidell, and his address as Post Office Box 2915, in Dallas, Tex.

Mr. BELIN. Anything else on that negative microfilm frame?

Mr. WALDMAN. The coupon overlays the envelope in which the order was mailed and this shows in the upper left-hand corner the return address of A. Hidell, Post Office Box 2915, in Dallas, Tex.

There is a postmark of Dallas, Tex., and a postdate of March 12, 1963, indicating that the order was mailed by airmail.

Mr. BELIN. Can you see the actual cancelled stamp in the upper right-hand corner?

Mr. WALDMAN. Yes.

Mr. BELIN. And the stamp itself says "United States Airmail"?

Mr. WALDMAN. That's correct.

Mr. BELIN. And underneath that, someone has written "airmail"; is that correct?

Mr. WALDMAN. That's true.

Mr. BELIN. And someone has written it addressed to you; is that correct?

Mr. WALDMAN. That's right.

Mr. BELIN. And is it possible on this machine to make prints of these negatives?

(Whereupon, it was attempted to make copies of said documents.)

Mr. BELIN. I think the record should show that all of this testimony has been taken upstairs with the court reporter present in front of the actual microfilm machine itself; is that correct?

Mr. WALDMAN. That's correct.

Mr. BELIN. Now, let us adjourn to your office and continue the taking of this testimony, please.

(Whereupon, the following proceedings were had at the office where the deposition originally commenced.)

Mr. BELIN. Mr. Waldman, I'm going to mark what has FBI Exhibit D-77 on it as Waldman Deposition Exhibit No. 6, being the container with your initials and the microfilm record itself, which you placed on the microfilm reader and about which you have just testified upstairs.

Now, I'm going to hand you what has been marked as Waldman Deposition Exhibit No. 7 and ask you to state if you know what this is.

Mr. WALDMAN. This is a copy made from our microfilm reader-printer of an order received by Klein's from a Mr. A. Hidell, Post Office Box No. 2915, in Dallas, Tex. I want to clarify that this is not the order, itself, received from Mr. Hidell, but it's a form created by us internally from an order received from Mr. Hidell on a small coupon taken from an advertisement of ours in a magazine.

Mr. BELIN. This Waldman Deposition Exhibit No. 7 is a print from the microfilm negative which we just viewed upstairs; is that correct?

Mr. WALDMAN. That's correct.

Mr. BELIN. And Waldman Deposition Exhibit No. 8 is also a print from the microfilm record we viewed upstairs showing the actual coupon and the envelope in which the coupon was enclosed; is that correct?

Mr. WALDMAN. That's correct.

Mr. BELIN. And do you have any general advertising program whereby you advertise in gun magazines?

Mr. WALDMAN. We do.

Mr. BELIN. Can you just give us one or more of the magazines in which this coupon might have been taken?

Mr. WALDMAN. Well, this coupon was specifically taken from American Rifleman Magazine, issue of February 1963. It's identified by the department number which is shown as--now, if I can read this--shown as Department 358 on the coupon.

Mr. BELIN. And that number also appears in the address on the envelope to you, is that correct, or to your company?

Mr. WALDMAN. That's correct.

Mr. BELIN. Now, I believe that you said the total amount was $19.95, plus $1.50 for shipping charges, or $21.45; is that correct?

Mr. WALDMAN. The $1.50 is for both shipping charges and handling.

Mr. BELIN. I hand you what has been marked as Commission Exhibit No. 788, which appears to be a U.S. postal money order payable to the order of Klein's Sporting Goods, and marked that it's from a purchaser named A. Hidell, and as the purchaser's street address is Post Office Box No. 2915, and the purchaser's City, Dallas, Tex.; March 12, 1963: and underneath the amount of $21.45, the number 2,202,130,462. And on the reverse side there appears to be an endorsement of a bank.

I wonder if you would read that endorsement, if you would, and examine it, please.

Mr. WALDMAN. This is a stamped endorsement reading "Pay to the order of the First National Bank of Chicago," followed by our account No. 50 space 91144, and that, in turn, followed by "Klein's Sporting Goods, Inc."

Mr. BELIN. Do you know whether or not that is your company's endorsement on that money order?

Mr. WALDMAN. It's identical to our endorsement.

Mr. BELIN. And I hand you what has been marked as Waldman Deposition Exhibit No. 9 and ask you if you can state what this is.

Mr. WALDMAN. This is our endorsement stamp which reads the same as that shown on the money order in question.

Mr. BELIN. You have just now stamped Waldman Deposition Exhibit No. 9 with your endorsement stamp?

Mr. WALDMAN. Correct.

Mr. BELIN. Do you have any way of knowing when exactly this money order was deposited by your company?

Mr. WALDMAN. I cannot specifically say when this money order was deposited by our company; however, as previously stated, a money order for $21.45 passed through our cash register on March 13, 1963.

Mr. BELIN. You're reading from Waldman----

Mr. WALDMAN. From a Mr. A. Hidell of Post Office Box No. 2915, from Dallas, Tex.

Mr. BELIN. And you are now reading from Waldman Deposition Exhibit No. 7?

Mr. WALDMAN. As indicated on Waldman Deposition Exhibit No. 7. Now, we cannot specifically say when this money order was deposited, but on our deposit of March 13, 1963, we show an item of $21.45, as indicated on the Xerox copy of our deposit slip marked, or identified by--as Waldman Deposition Exhibit No. 10.

Mr. BELIN. And I have just marked as a document what you are reading from, which appears to be a deposit with the First National Bank of Chicago by your company; is that correct?

Mr. WALDMAN. That's correct.

Mr. BELIN. And on that deposit, one of the items is $21.45, out of a total deposit that day of $13,827.98; is that correct?

Mr. WALDMAN. That's correct.

Mr. BELIN. Now, when we examined Waldman Deposition Exhibit No. 1, you had a control number of which the last four numbers were T749, and when you shipped the rifle, you had the control number with the last four numbers as T750; otherwise the control number is the same. Could you tell us what accounts for the difference?

Mr. WALDMAN. Yes; these numbers that you referred to are not control numbers, as previously stated. These are known as catalog numbers. The number C20-T749 describes a rifle only, whereas the catalog No. C20-T750 describes the Italian carbine rifle with a four-power scope, which is sold as a package unit.

Mr. BELIN. Do you remember what the rifle would have cost without the scope?

Mr. WALDMAN. As I recall, it was either $12.78 or $12.95.

Mr. BELIN. Would the advertisement run in the Rifleman's Magazine of February 1963, have given the purchaser the option to buy with or without the scope, if you remember?

Mr. WALDMAN. Without specific reference to the ad, I would say that it did. Most usually we did.

Mr. BELIN. And the purchaser would signify his preference in what manner?

Mr. WALDMAN. The customer designates whether he wants the rifle only or whether he wants the rifle with the scope by his selection of catalog numbers.

Mr. BELIN. When this rifle came to your company, was the scope already mounted on it when you got it from Crescent?

Mr. WALDMAN. No.

Mr. BELIN. Who put the scope on the rifle?

Mr. WALDMAN. The scope was mounted on the rifle in our gun shop, most probably by a gunsmith named William Sharp.

Mr. BELIN. Would Mr. Sharp drill whatever holes were necessary for the mounting and do the actual mounting then himself?

Mr. WALDMAN. Yes.

Mr. BELIN. Would Mr. Sharp or anyone else in your company in any way sight in the sight, whether it would be boresighting or actual firing with the sight?

Mr. WALDMAN. No; it's very unlikely in an inexpensive rife of this sort that he would do anything other than roughly aline the scope with the rifle.

Mr. BELIN. Do you have any records which show where you purchased the scope?

Mr. WALDMAN. It's reasonably certain the scope was purchased from Martin B. Retting, Inc., 1129 Washington Boulevard. Culver City, Calif.

Mr. BELIN. Would it have any identification on the scope itself, if you know?

Mr. WALDMAN. It's most probable it carried the name "Ordnance Optics."

Mr. BELIN. Now, Mr. Waldman, perhaps we'd better further identify the microfilm which show your control numbers. We marked the microfilm as Waldman Deposition Exhibit No. 6. Do you have any control numbers on this at all which indicate which microfilm this is?

Mr. WALDMAN. This is our film No. 38, which covers our transactions Nos. 269688 through 270596.

Mr. BELIN. And I believe that you already testified to the control number or transaction number that appears on Waldman Deposition Exhibit No. 7 as being number what?

Mr. WALDMAN. 270502.

Mr. BELIN. Mr. Waldman, referring to Waldman Deposition Exhibit No. 3, which are the serial numbers of the 100 rifles which were made in this shipment from Crescent Firearms to you, and Waldman Deposition Exhibit No. 5, which is the invoice from Crescent Firearms which has stamped on it that it was paid by your company on March 4, is there any way to verify that this payment pertained to rifles which are shown on Waldman Deposition Exhibit No. 3?

Mr. WALDMAN. The forms submitted by Crescent Firearms showing serial numbers of rifles included in the shipment covered by their invoice No. 3178 indicate that the rifle carrying serial No. C-2766 was included in that shipment.

Mr. BELIN. Now, those forms----

Mr. WALDMAN. Those forms are your exhibit captioned Waldman Deposition Exhibit No. 3. Now, our payment voucher No. 28966 of March 1, 1963, which is your Waldman Deposition Exhibit No. 5 shows in the lower portion, second column from the left, the number 3178, which ties in with Crescent Firearms invoice No. 3178.

Mr. BELIN. And you have before you a carbon copy of a check that was written by your company to Crescent Firearms in the amount of $850, and attached to it, the attachment that shows it's for invoice No. 3178?

Mr. WALDMAN. That's correct.

Mr. BELIN. Mr. Waldman, do your records show whether or not the rifle was shipped with the scope mounted on it or is there any way that you know whether or not it was?

Mr. WALDMAN. Our catalog No. C20-T750, which was the number indicated on the coupon prepared by A. Hidell, designates a rifle with scope attached. And we would have so shipped it unless the customer specifically specified that he did not wish to have it attached. There is nothing in our records to indicate that there was any request made by the customer, and therefore we would have every reason to believe that it was shipped as a rifle with scope mounted.

Mr. BELIN. Do you know whether or not the rifle would have been broken down in shipment or whether or not it would have been shipped fully assembled?

Mr. WALDMAN. It was customary for us to ship all of these rifles and scopes fully assembled, and I would have no reason to believe that this particular one would have been shipped otherwise.

Mr. BELIN. And do you know in what kind of a container it would have been shipped?

Mr. WALDMAN. It was customary for us to ship these rifles with scopes attached in a corrugated cardboard carton made for us by the Rudd Container Corporation of Chicago.

Mr. BELIN. About how long would that carton be in size, if you know?

Mr. WALDMAN. Approximately 60 inches.

Mr. BELIN. Did you ever furnish any samples of this carton or any wrapping paper or tape to the FBI?

Mr. WALDMAN. Yes; we did furnish a sample of the carton together with the type of sealing tape that was generally used and such craft paper that may have been used for inner cushioning packing.

Mr. BELIN. Mr. Waldman, when we testified upstairs in front of the microfilm machine, was the microfilm itself more clear or less clear than the photostats or prints that have been made from it?

Mr. WALDMAN. More clear.

Mr. BELIN. So it would be possible to read items on the microfilm itself that might not come out clear on the printed copies?

Mr. WALDMAN. That's correct.

Mr. BELIN. Mr. Waldman, the President's Commission on the Assassination of President Kennedy appreciates all the cooperation which your company, and in particular you, have given to this situation. And we know that it's not a happy situation to you, and that the gun could have been purchased anywhere. As it happens, this particular gun was purchased with your company, and we want to thank you very much for your cooperation.

Mr. WALDMAN. Thank you.

Mr. BELIN. Do you want to see the deposition before you sign it? Mr. Waldman, you have the right to read the deposition and sign it before anything further is done with it, or you can waive the signing of it, whatever you like.

Mr. WALDMAN. It would be well for me to read this because of the possibility of a transposition of numbers or other errors in the recording.

Mr. BELIN. All right. (To reporter.) Perhaps you can keep the original copy here, if you would, and give it to Mr. Waldman and mail the other copies directly to us in Washington, and then could you make whatever corrections there are and send it directly to us in Washington, and I'll give you my name if you would mail it to my attention.

TESTIMONY OF MITCHELL J. SCIBOR

The testimony of Mitchell J. Scibor was taken on May 20, 1964, at 4540 West Madison Street, Chicago, Ill., by Mr. David W. Belin, assistant counsel of the President's Commission.

Mitchell J. Scibor, called as a witness herein, having been first duly sworn, was examined and testified as follows:

Mr. BELIN. Would you please state your name for the record?

Mr. SCIBOR. Mitchell J. Scibor.

Mr. BELIN. And where do you live?

Mr. SCIBOR. 2942 North Sayre Avenue, Chicago, Ill.

Mr. BELIN. What is your occupation?

Mr. SCIBOR. Employed by Klein's Sporting Goods.

Mr. BELIN. In what capacity?

Mr. SCIBOR. General operating manager.

Mr. BELIN. Were you so employed on or about November 22, 1963?

Mr. SCIBOR. Yes.

Mr. BELIN. Were you at any time on that date contacted by any law enforcement agency with regard to a particular rifle, Serial No. C-2766?

Mr. SCIBOR. Yes.

Mr. BELIN. And could you tell us the circumstances surrounding this?

Mr. SCIBOR. I got a call Friday evening, November 22, asking if it would be possible to get at the records--at our records to see if that gun had been in our possession or sold by us. I got permission from one of the executives to open the store and view our records, and I came down here somewhere between 10 and 11 o'clock.

Mr. BELIN. And what did you do when you got down here?

Mr. SCIBOR. We went in with the Government men and--just before we went in, Mr. Waldman came down and we came in and he took over as far as getting--trying to find the information that we needed.

Mr. BELIN. How did you try to find that information?

Mr. SCIBOR. By looking in our microfilm records of sales of merchandise for that particular gun.

The FBI furnished us with information stating that we had received the gun from Crescent Firearms.

Mr. BELIN. Well, did you look at the microfilms of your purchasers or your sales or what?

Mr. SCIBOR. Yes; we used two machines and looked at the microfilms of our sales until we had found that particular gun with the serial number.

Mr. BELIN. You were upstairs when Mr. Waldman was looking at the microfilm of which a printed copy is Waldman Deposition Exhibit No. 7; is that correct?

Mr. SCIBOR. Correct.

Mr. BELIN. And on Waldman Deposition Exhibit No. 7, there is a Serial No. C-2766?

Mr. SCIBOR. Correct.

Mr. BELIN. Was this serial number on Waldman Deposition Exhibit No. 7 the first contact you had on Friday evening that led you to believe that you had shipped this particular rifle?

Mr. SCIBOR. That's correct.

Mr. BELIN. When did you discover or find out this information, if you know--strike the question.

I believe you said you got down here about 10 o'clock that night?

Mr. SCIBOR. Between 10 and 11.

Mr. BELIN. And then you started going through your microfilm records?

Mr. SCIBOR. Right.

Mr. BELIN. About when did you actually find the microfilm of which Waldman Deposition Exhibit No. 7 is a print?

Mr. SCIBOR. About 4 o'clock in the morning, as far as I can remember.

Mr. BELIN. You then turned this information over to the FBI?

Mr. SCIBOR. Mr. Waldman did.

Mr. BELIN. Now, I'm going to hand you what has been marked as Waldman Deposition Exhibit No. 4 and ask you to state if you know what this is.

Mr. SCIBOR. Yes; it's a copy of our receiving record which we use to identify firearms or guns by assigning a weapon a particular booking number or control number along with the serial number so at a future date we can identify that particular gun.

Mr. BELIN. Have you ever seen Waldman Deposition Exhibit No. 7 before?

Mr. SCIBOR. Yes.

Mr. BELIN. I notice the date and the notations in the upper left-hand corner, RR-1243; underneath that, the date 2-22-63. Do you know what that has reference to?

Mr. SCIBOR. Yes; the "RR" stands for receiving record No. 1243, and that merchandise was booked or actually received by our receiving department on 2-22-63.

Mr. BELIN. Does it show from whom it was received?

Mr. SCIBOR. Yes; Crescent Firearms.

Mr. BELIN. And underneath the "Crescent Firearms," what does it say?

Mr. SCIBOR. Italian Carcano T38. 6.5 Italian caliber rifle.

Mr. BELIN. Now, there are some notations in the upper right-hand corner, what does that have reference to?

Mr. SCIBOR. Those are notations strictly for the receiving department. I have the men back there keep these in rotation so that I can always fill--in the same rotation as they come out of.

Mr. BELIN. And did you do any of that writing at all?

Mr. SCIBOR. No.

Mr. BELIN. What is the fact as to whether or not these serial numbers are assigned by people under your supervision?

Mr. SCIBOR. Repeat that.

Mr. BELIN. Well, do you have any supervision or control over the people making the entries on the serial numbers and your control numbers?

Mr. SCIBOR. Yes.

Mr. BELIN. I don't believe we went into your background, general background. You might state where you were born and what educational background you have, for the record.

Mr. SCIBOR. I was born in Chicago, November 27, 1920. I finished 4 years of high school, 6-1/2 years in the Marine Corps, and Klein's Sporting Goods.

Mr. BELIN. You're married?

Mr. SCIBOR. I have been with Klein's for 18 years.

Mr. BELIN. You have been with Klein's for 18----

Mr. SCIBOR. Approximately 18 years.

Mr. BELIN. And you're married?

Mr. SCIBOR. Married and two children.

Mr. BELIN. Where is Waldman Deposition Exhibit No. 4 filed customarily?

Mr. SCIBOR. That is filed in a desk drawer back in the receiving department, which I designated that those should be filed.

Mr. BELIN. Do you have any master control ledger or book of any kind that has these control numbers on them?

Mr. SCIBOR. Yes. One copy is sent to what we call the booking department, and those are put into a master book, control book.

Mr. BELIN. Are you required by law to keep records of serial numbers of guns?

Mr. SCIBOR. Yes.

Mr. BELIN. And do you find on Waldman Deposition Exhibit No. 4 your control number for a rifle with the serial number C-2766?

Mr. SCIBOR. Yes.

Mr. BELIN. What is your control number?

Mr. SCIBOR. VC-836.

Mr. BELIN. How are these serial numbers obtained for placement on Waldman Deposition Exhibit No. 4?

Mr. SCIBOR. Directly off the guns.

Mr. BELIN. Does someone actually look at the gun?

Mr. SCIBOR. Yes; someone looks; visually they are taken off the guns.

Mr. BELIN. We want to thank you very much, sir, for your cooperation in helping obtaining this information.

TESTIMONY OF HEINZ W. MICHAELIS

The testimony of Heinz W. Michaelis was taken at 10 a.m., on May 11, 1964, at 1200 North Soto Street, Los Angeles. Calif., by Mr. Joseph A. Ball, assistant counsel of the President's Commission. Mr. George A. Rose, president of George Rose & Co., was present.

Mr. BALL. Will you state your full name for the record, please?

Mr. MICHAELIS. Heinz W. Michaelis, M-i-c-h-a-e-l-i-s.

Mr. BALL. What is your first name?

Mr. MICHAELIS. Heinz, H-e-i-n-z.

Mr. BALL. Heinz Michaelis.

Mr. Michaelis, you received a letter last week from Mr. Rankin, counsel for the Commission, did you not?

Mr. MICHAELIS. Yes.

Mr. BALL. That was what date that you received it?

Mr. MICHAELIS. I received it on Thursday.

Mr. BALL. That would be----

Mr. MICHAELIS. 11--the 7th.

Mr. BALL. The 7th of May. And you were invited to give your testimony today by way of this deposition, weren't you?

Mr. MICHAELIS. Yes.

Mr. BALL. You are willing to do so, are you not?

Mr. MICHAELIS. Yes.

Mr. BALL. And you understand that the purpose of the inquiry is to inquire into the facts surrounding the assassination of President Kennedy in Dallas on November 22, 1963?

Mr. MICHAELIS. Yes.

Mr. BALL. What is your address?

Mr. MICHAELIS. 5227 West Olympic Boulevard.

Mr. BALL. In Los Angeles?

Mr. MICHAELIS. Los Angeles.

Mr. BALL. And your business address?

Mr. MICHAELIS. Pardon me. Correction. 5755. I am sorry.

Mr. BALL. And your business address?

Mr. MICHAELIS. 1200 North Soto, Los Angeles.

Mr. BALL. Have you recently changed your business address?

Mr. MICHAELIS. Yes.

Mr. BALL. From what address?

Mr. MICHAELIS. From 1225 South Grand Avenue.

Mr. BALL. Are you employed, self-employed, or do you work for some company?

Mr. MICHAELIS. I work for the George Rose & Co.

Mr. BALL. What business is the George Rose & Co. engaged in?

Mr. ROSE. You work for Merchanteers.

Mr. MICHAELIS. Oh, pardon me; Merchanteers, Inc.

Mr. BALL. Your immediate employer is Merchanteers, Inc.?

Mr. MICHAELIS. Merchanteers, Inc.

Mr. BALL. Is that associated with the George Rose & Co.?

Mr. MICHAELIS. Yes.

Mr. BALL. In what business is Merchanteers, Inc., engaged?

Mr. MICHAELIS. Merchanteers, Inc. has mail order----

Mr. ROSE. Mail order and management.

Mr. MICHAELIS. And management.

Mr. BALL. And does it do work for George Rose & Co.?

Mr. MICHAELIS. Do I work for George Rose & Co.?

Mr. ROSE. Yes.

Mr. BALL. Well, Merchanteers, Inc.--it is the mail order agency for George Rose & Co., is it?

Mr. ROSE. No; may I clarify it?

Mr. BALL. Yes; well, I better have him, and then I may ask you to clarify it.

Mr. ROSE. Yes; all right.

Mr. BALL. Tell me what you know of the relationship between George Rose & Co. and Merchanteers?

Mr. MICHAELIS. Well, Merchanteers. Inc. is a mail-order business. But, it is also a management company and makes out the paychecks for employees from the George Rose & Co.

Mr. BALL. I see. Now, what business is George Rose & Co. engaged in?

Mr. MICHAELIS. George Rose & Co. are wholesalers and sell to retail stores.

Mr. BALL. What do they sell?

Mr. MICHAELIS. Musical instruments, cutlery, firearms, watches, clocks, and various others.

Mr. BALL. Does George Rose & Co. engage in any mail-order business?

Mr. MICHAELIS. Yeah; we get mail orders, too.

Mr. BALL. You take mail orders as George Rose & Co.?

Mr. MICHAELIS. Yes.

Mr. ROSE. Wholesale.

Mr. BALL. At wholesale?

Mr. MICHAELIS. Wholesale, yeah.

Mr. BALL. Now, there is also a company called Seaport Traders, isn't there?

Mr. MICHAELIS. Seaport Traders is another mail-order business.

Mr. BALL. It is another mail-order business?

Mr. MICHAELIS. Correct.

Mr. BALL. Do you work for them?

Mr. MICHAELIS. Only in a supervisory position.

Mr. BALL. That is the company that you work for. Merchanteers, you say?

Mr. MICHAELIS. Merchanteers; yes.

Mr. BALL. Is it Merchanteers, Inc.?

Mr. MICHAELIS. Merchanteers, Inc.; yes.

Mr. BALL. They manage the business of Seaport Traders?

Mr. MICHAELIS. That is correct.

Mr. BALL. Now, last fall did the Federal Bureau of Investigation visit your place of business and inquire as to the sale of a certain Smith & Wesson revolver?

Mr. MICHAELIS. Correct.

Mr. BALL. About what date?

Mr. MICHAELIS. I believe it was November the 30th, a Saturday.

Mr. BALL. And in searching your records for any such sale, to what particular record did you first look?

Mr. MICHAELIS. We started first, after having received the serial number, through our serial number book for this particular type of gun.

Mr. BALL. Now, what serial number did the FBI give you?

Mr. MICHAELIS. V, as in victory, 510210-65248.

Mr. BALL. Now, those two numbers signify what?

Mr. MICHAELIS. The first number, V510210, is commonly described as the butt number, while the second number, 65248, usually is described as the crane number.

Mr. BALL. Now, the serial numbers are stamped where on the gun?

Mr. MICHAELIS. As mentioned before, the first number is on the butt of the gun.

Mr. BALL. I see.

Mr. MICHAELIS. And also it appears on the lower part of the barrel.

Furthermore, it appears also on the outside rim of the cylinder of the gun. In other words, the first number, 510210, appears three times on the gun.

Mr. BALL. And that is usually known as the serial number of the gun; is that right?

Mr. MICHAELIS. Yes. But, we are--it is required that since Smith & Wesson revolvers carry two kinds of serial numbers, also to list the so-called crane number.

Mr. BALL. Is that also known as the assembly number, the crane number?

Mr. MICHAELIS. I am not familiar with the word assembly number, but it might be possible.

Mr. BALL. What is the meaning of the word crane?

Mr. MICHAELIS. The crane is when you flip off the cylinder, inside is a crane and there is a number on the stem, which is the second number.

Mr. BALL. Do you maintain a record of all sales of guns in a book?

Mr. MICHAELIS. Yes; in this book here.

Mr. BALL. You have the book before you, do you not?

Mr. MICHAELIS. Yes.

Mr. BALL. That is a black, looseleaf notebook; looseleaf notebook with a black cover. Is that correct?

Mr. MICHAELIS. Correct.

Mr. BALL. And you keep that in handwriting, or by typewriting?

Mr. MICHAELIS. Handwriting.

Mr. BALL. Do you keep a typewritten or handwritten record?

Mr. MICHAELIS. Handwritten.

Mr. BALL. When the agent from the Federal Bureau of Investigation called on you on Saturday, November 30, 1963, you looked to your book that carries a record in handwriting of your sales?

Mr. MICHAELIS. Yes.

Mr. BALL. And did you find this record of this particular gun?

Mr. MICHAELIS. Yes.

Mr. BALL. I hand you here a document which is identified as FBI Laboratory No. D-191, being a photostat. Do you recognize this?

Mr. MICHAELIS. Yes.

Mr. BALL. Will you compare that with the page in your notebook?

Mr. MICHAELIS. It is the same.

Mr. BALL. And that is identified in your notebook as Case No. 3?

Mr. MICHAELIS. Case No. 3.

Mr. BALL. What is the significance of the words "Case No. 3"?

Mr. MICHAELIS. It is a listing of a case which we received.

Mr. BALL. Of a case, a particular case, of guns; is that correct?

Mr. MICHAELIS. Correct.

Mr. BALL. It also has a 99 enclosed in a circle. What is the significance of that?

Mr. MICHAELIS. I presume that is the contents, the piece contents of the case.

Mr. BALL. You found, therefore, a record in your notebook, and that would indicate what? That you had sold the gun at some time?

Mr. MICHAELIS. That is correct.

Mr. BALL. Now, I would like to offer and have marked this photostat of a page of the looseleaf notebook, which is identified as Case No. 3, as Exhibit No. 1 to this deposition of Mr. Michaelis.

(Whereupon the document last referred to hereinabove was marked to the Michaelis deposition as Commission Exhibit No. 1 for identification by the notary public.)

Mr. BALL. Now, from that looseleaf notebook were you able to determine from what source you bought the gun?

Mr. MICHAELIS. Yes.

Mr. BALL. Can you tell me now where you bought the gun and when?

Mr. MICHAELIS. Yes. Yes.

Mr. BALL. And from whom?

Mr. MICHAELIS. Excuse me.

Mr. BALL. Now, you have before you now a file?

Mr. MICHAELIS. Yes, sir.

Mr. BALL. And does it refer to this particular purchase of 99 guns?

Mr. MICHAELIS. No. We bought altogether 500 guns.

Mr. BALL. 500? And what is the file, the title, that you are now showing?

Mr. MICHAELIS. Empire Wholesale.

Mr. BALL. All right. Now, tell me what you found as to the source of this gun; where you bought it and from whom.

Mr. MICHAELIS. We bought it from Empire Wholesale Sporting Goods, Ltd., 360 Craig Street West, Montreal 1, Quebec.

Mr. BALL. And what date did you buy it?

Mr. MICHAELIS. Invoice No. 1181 dated October 13, 1962.

Mr. BALL. And it was shipped to you by the Empire Wholesale Sporting Goods, Ltd., on what date?

Mr. MICHAELIS. It went--it was on 10/19/62, in St. Albans, Vt., and from then on it was directed to our place of business, which was at that time 1225 South Grand Avenue. However, the merchandise in question did not arrive before January 3, 1963.

Mr. BALL. Is that the date it did arrive?

Mr. MICHAELIS. Yes. It was received January 3, 1963.

Mr. BALL. Off the record.

(Discussion held off the record.)

Mr. BALL. Now, when this gun was first received, what was the length of its barrel?

Mr. MICHAELIS. Five inches.

Mr. BALL. And was it changed?

Mr. MICHAELIS. It was changed.

Mr. BALL. To what?

Mr. MICHAELIS. To a 2-1/4-inch barrel.

Mr. BALL. How did you happen to do that?

Mr. MICHAELIS. Well, we gave the guns out to Mr. L. M. Johnson and instructed him to make up the guns as far as barrel lengths are concerned to our specifications.

Mr. BALL. Why did you shorten them from 5 to 2-1/4 inches? Explain to me for the record.

Mr. MICHAELIS. Because we have quite frequently calls for the Smith & Wesson revolvers with shorter barrels such as 2-1/4 inch or 4 inch.

Mr. BALL. Did you shorten all of the consignment that you received?

Mr. MICHAELIS. No.

Mr. BALL. Just a certain number?

Mr. MICHAELIS. Yes, sir.

Mr. BALL. Now, this particular gun was shortened, then, from 5 to 2-1/4?

Mr. MICHAELIS. Correct.

Mr. BALL. Mr. Johnson's number--and is that M. L. Johnson?

Mr. MICHAELIS. Yes; just a minute. Or L. M. It is M. L.

Mr. BALL. And what is his address?

Mr. MICHAELIS. At that time, 13440 Burbank Boulevard, Van Nuys, Calif.

Mr. BALL. Now, that gun was sold, was it not, pursuant to a mail order?

Mr. MICHAELIS. Yes; mail order.

Mr. BALL. I hand you a document which has been marked Commission Exhibit No. 135. Will you examine that and tell me whether or not you ever saw that before?

Mr. MICHAELIS. I saw it the first time on November the 30th.

Mr. BALL. The first time?

Mr. MICHAELIS. Yes, sir.

Mr. BALL. And where did you find that? Where was it when you saw it on November 30?

Mr. MICHAELIS. It was attached to our invoice No. 5371, in the records, the red copy.

Mr. BALL. Now, this particular mail order, did you have anything to do with filling that order?

Mr. MICHAELIS. No.

Mr. BALL. What is your position here? Do you have charge of the office?

Mr. MICHAELIS. I am manager.

Mr. BALL. You are manager of the office?

Mr. MICHAELIS. That is correct.

Mr. BALL. And all of these records are under your control, are they?

Mr. MICHAELIS. Well, not particularly at that time because my actual supervision of the Seaport Traders, Inc., activities started later during the year. I mean in September and October, when the girl in charge left.

Mr. BALL. At least in November you were in charge and in possession of all of the records of the Seaport Traders?

Mr. MICHAELIS. That is correct.

Mr. BALL. You have no personal knowledge, then, of the transaction by which the gun was shipped and sold?

Mr. MICHAELIS. Not prior to the first investigation.

Mr. BALL. But you are providing me with records which were under your control as of November 1963?

Mr. MICHAELIS. Yes; correct.

Mr. BALL. Now, can you tell me who would have actually received the mail order through the mail and who would have filled the order and shipped it? Do you know what person would have done this?

Mr. MICHAELIS. There are various operations. The order was received by----

Mr. ROSE. I probably would have opened it.

Mr. MICHAELIS. Yes; Mr. Rose usually opens the mail and distributes the mail. This particular order would have gone to the person in charge at that time of the Seaport Traders, who was Emma Vaughn.

Mr. BALL. Who?

Mr. MICHAELIS. Emma Vaughn, V-a-u-g-h-n.

Mr. BALL. Then what would have happened?

Mr. MICHAELIS. She would have processed the order in writing up invoice No. 5371. After 1 week she gave out the order to the order filler and packer.

Mr. BALL. What is the name?

Mr. MICHAELIS. This is a title, order filler and packer. She is one person.

Mr. BALL. What is that last word?

Mr. MICHAELIS. Packer.

Mr. BALL. Packer. I see.

Mr. MICHAELIS. And the order was shipped on March the 20th, 1963.

Mr. BALL. You have been testifying from a record which you have before you?

Mr. MICHAELIS. That is correct.

Mr. BALL. And that is a paper which has been marked for identification by the Federal Bureau of Investigation DL-28, Seaport Traders, Inc., No. A-5371.

Is that correct? You have been testifying from information contained on that?

Mr. MICHAELIS. Correct.

Mr. BALL. That was in your records, was it, as of November 30, 1963?

Mr. MICHAELIS. Yes; it was.

Mr. BALL. Will you tell me, describe that document and tell me its significance in your business?

Mr. MICHAELIS. This particular document is, after the order is processed, filed in our records under the name of the respective customer.

Mr. BALL. You mean after the revolver that was ordered by this mail order coupon, 135, has been packed and shipped, this invoice A-5371, is filed as a permanent record, is it, of the shipment?

Mr. MICHAELIS. Correct; filed under the name of the respective customer.

Mr. BALL. Now, this shows the words A. J. Hidell, P.0. Box 2915, Dallas, Tex. This appears on this invoice A-5371, does it not?

Mr. MICHAELIS. Yes.

Mr. BALL. It is described as an S. & W. .38 special, 2-inch Commando. What is the meaning of that?

Mr. MICHAELIS. Two inch is the barrel length. Commando is a description which we more or less gave because we have another 2-inch gun at a higher price and, in order that the order filler is able to identify between the two types, we have this type described as Commando.

Mr. BALL. Now, the No. 510210. What is the significance of that number?

Mr. MICHAELIS. It is the serial number of the gun in question.

Mr. BALL. And it shows deposit, $10. Balance c.o.d., $19.95. What is the significance of that?

Mr. MICHAELIS. We received, together with the order, the amount of $10 in cash. Since the sales price is $29.95, the merchandise was shipped with a c.o.d. for the balance of $19.95.

Mr. BALL. Does this invoice show the date it was shipped?

Mr. MICHAELIS. Yes.

Mr. BALL. What was that?

Mr. MICHAELIS. March 20.

Mr. BALL. 1963?

Mr. MICHAELIS. 1963.

Mr. BALL. Does it also show which one of your companies shipped it?

Mr. MICHAELIS. The Seaport Traders, Inc.

Mr. BALL. I would like to have this document marked, Invoice No. A-5371, as the Exhibit No. 2 to the deposition of Mr. Michaelis.

(Whereupon the document last referred to hereinabove was marked to the Michaelis deposition as Commission Exhibit No. 2 for identification by the notary public.)

Mr. BALL. Now I also show you a white copy of invoice No. A-5371 which has been marked on the face as DL-27. Can you tell me what that document is?

Mr. MICHAELIS. This document is the first copy of the invoice No. 5371 which is kept in the office as permanent record and is filed in the numerical order.

Mr. BALL. Can you tell me what your business custom was in March of 1963 with reference to the preparing of invoices, original invoice and copies, and shipping an item which had been ordered by mail?

Mr. MICHAELIS. The order received by mail is written up and invoiced in quadruplicate on a snap-out form. The first white copy remains in the office and is filed on a numerical order.

The second copy is used as a packing slip whereby the upper part of the invoice is torn off and used as a shipping label and the lower part used as a packing slip.

The third copy is filed permanently in the office under the name of the respective customer after the order has been shipped.

The fourth copy is the acknowledgment of the order copy and lists on the back side a statement which has to be signed by the respective customer.

Mr. BALL. What statement?

Mr. MICHAELIS. A statement to the effect, I believe that it said that the buyer states that he is a citizen of the United States, and that he has never been convicted in any court of the United States, territories, possessions, et cetera. Do you want me----

Mr. BALL. Well, now, this fourth copy that has on the back this statement by the customer, is that mailed to the customer?

Mr. MICHAELIS. It is mailed to the customer, but not in this particular case. Indicated on the invoice are three X's, which indicates that we have already a statement to this effect on file because this particular mail order coupon has already the statement, and the name of the witness.

Mr. BALL. Now, the particular mail-order coupon that you refer to is Commission No. 135, and it has on it the statement required together with the witness?

Mr. MICHAELIS. With the witness; that's right.

Mr. BALL. And that witness' name is what?

Mr. MICHAELIS. Well, I identify it as D-r-i-t-t-a-l.

Mr. BALL. That's right. You are right.

Mr. MICHAELIS. Yes.

Mr. BALL. Then in this instance the fourth copy did not go to the purchaser?

Mr. MICHAELIS. Did not go to the purchaser; that is correct.

Mr. BALL. And the first copy is in white and is the one which you have identified?

Mr. MICHAELIS. Yes.

Mr. BALL. And we will mark that as Exhibit 3.

(Whereupon the document last referred to hereinabove was marked to the Michaelis deposition as Commission Exhibit No. 3 for identification by the notary public.)

Mr. BALL. The second copy is in red, is that correct?

Mr. MICHAELIS. The second copy is in yellow.

Mr. BALL. Yellow. That is the packing slip copy?

Mr. MICHAELIS. Correct.

Mr. BALL. The third copy is in red?

Mr. MICHAELIS. Correct.

Mr. BALL. And that is the one you have identified as Exhibit 2, is that correct?

Mr. MICHAELIS. Yes; that's correct.

Mr. BALL. And in this instance the fourth copy was not used, is that correct?

Mr. MICHAELIS. That is correct.

Mr. BALL. Exhibits 2 and 3 were also found as a part of your original records when you investigated, or looked through your records at the request of the Federal Bureau of Investigation on November 30, 1963. Is that correct?

Mr. MICHAELIS. Correct.

Mr. BALL. I will show you another document here which is a slip of red paper marked "Railway Express Agency" which has been heretofore identified with an FBI Exhibit No. DL-29. What is that document?

Mr. MICHAELIS. Just a minute. I have to get the original. Now, this exhibit number----

Mr. BALL. It is given a No. DL-29. Will you describe it, please?

Mr. MICHAELIS. Yes; that is a copy of the receipt which we got from the Railway Express Agency showing that on March 20, 1963, one carton with a pistol was shipped to A. Hidell, P.O. Box 2915, Dallas, Tex. It shows, furthermore, that Railway Express is instructed to collect a c.o.d. fee of $19.95. And it shows furthermore the number of the original receipt, which is 70638.

Mr. BALL. Number of original receipt? Which receipt?

Mr. MICHAELIS. Of the Railway Express receipt.

Mr. BALL. Is this it here?

Mr. MICHAELIS. Yes.

Mr. BALL. Original receipt, Railway Express receipt, is that correct?

Mr. MICHAELIS. Yes.

Mr. BALL. Does it identify the invoice in any way?

Mr. MICHAELIS. No.

Mr. BALL. Except by name, is that right?

Mr. MICHAELIS. Except by name.

Mr. BALL. And does it describe the article shipped?

Mr. MICHAELIS. Only in broad terms.

Mr. BALL. What?

Mr. MICHAELIS. One carton consisting of a pistol.

Mr. BALL. One carton, pistol. I see. I would like to have this marked as Exhibit 4, being the pink copy of a Railway Express receipt.

(Whereupon the document last referred to hereinabove was marked to the Michaelis deposition as Commission Exhibit No. 4 for identification by the notary public.)

Mr. BALL. Now, a document identified as No. DL-30 by the Bureau of Investigation, receipt No. 70638. Will you describe that for me, please?

Mr. MICHAELIS. This document is required in addition by the Railway Express Agency for all c.o.d. shipments, and indicates again the name of the consignee, his address, and lists our invoice number which is, in this case, No. 5371. It directs the Railway Express Agency to remit the amount to be collected to Seaport Traders, Inc. The amount of the c.o.d. is $19.95, and the service charge has to be collected from the consignee.

Mr. BALL. I would like to have that marked as Exhibit 5.

(Whereupon the document last referred to hereinabove was marked to the Michaelis deposition as Commission Exhibit No. 5 for identification by the notary public.)

Mr. BALL. Now, Exhibit 4 has been described as a Railway Express Agency receipt. Exhibit 5, which is an additional document entitled "A brief of information for c.o.d. shipment, Railway Express Agency," those were in your files when you searched for information regarding the sale of this pistol as of November 30, 1963. Is that correct?

Mr. MICHAELIS. Correct.

Mr. BALL. Is there anything in your files which shows that the Railway Express did remit to you the $19.95?

Mr. MICHAELIS. The fact that the exhibit number--may I see this green one?

Mr. BALL. Five.

Mr. MICHAELIS. Was attached to the red copy of the invoice.

Mr. BALL. Red copy of the invoice being----

Mr. MICHAELIS. No; was attached to the red copy of the invoice, exhibit number----

Mr. BALL. Two.

Mr. MICHAELIS. Indicates that the money was received.

Mr. BALL. I see. Now, these documents were delivered to the Federal Bureau of Investigation by you, were they not?

Mr. MICHAELIS. Through Mr. Wood; yes.

Mr. BALL. And these documents, Exhibits 2 to 5, inclusive, are original documents, are they not?

Mr. MICHAELIS. Yes.

Mr. BALL. Exhibit 1 being a photostat of the page in your looseleaf notebook?

Mr. MICHAELIS. Correct.

Mr. BALL. Which carries the record of the sale, record of the item?

Mr. MICHAELIS. Correct.

Mr. BALL. And does anybody in your organization that you know of have any personal knowledge of packing this particular gun and shipping it?

Mr. MICHAELIS. I doubt very much that the packer would remember this particular parcel.

Mr. BALL. About how many guns of this type do you sell and ship out of here in a year?

Mr. MICHAELIS. In 1 year?

Mr. BALL. Yes; just a general estimate.

Mr. MICHAELIS. For Seaport Traders?

Mr. ROSE. That type of gun--we sell more .22's.

Mr. BALL. Well, about how many?

Mr. MICHAELIS. Seaport Traders, I would say that--this is a rough guess, Mr. Ball. This particular type, that Seaport Traders might have sold maybe 120 in a year; 120, 150 in a year.

Mr. BALL. Would that be sold through mail order, or both mail order----

Mr. MICHAELIS. I am talking about particularly mail-order business from Seaport Traders.

Mr. BALL. 120 or 125?

Mr. MICHAELIS. 120, 150, of this particular type of gun.

Mr. BALL. Is there anything else that you know about this particular transaction that you would like to tell me?

Mr. MICHAELIS. No, sir; I believe I answered all the questions of this transaction.

AFFIDAVIT OF J. C. CASON

The following affidavit was executed by J. C. Cason on May 22, 1964.

AFFIDAVIT

PRESIDENT'S COMMISSION ON THE ASSASSINATION OF PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY

STATE OF TEXAS, County of Dallas, ss:

I, J. C. Cason, President and Treasurer, of the Texas School Book Depository declare the following statements:

The Texas School Book Depository was organized in 1908 as a sole proprietorship and continued in this manner until 1927 when it was incorporated under the laws of the State of Texas.

The Corporation's offices are located at Elm and Houston Streets, Dallas, Texas, and its warehouse and storage plant are located at 1917 North Houston Street, Dallas, Texas. It neither owns nor operated any other buildings in Dallas or in any other city.

The present officers are: J. C. Cason, President and Treasurer; and O. V. Campbell, Vice President and Secretary. The Directors are: J. C. Cason, O. V. Campbell and R. S. Truly. The Shareholders of all outstanding Capital Stock are J. C. Cason and O. V. Campbell.

The Corporation acts as an independent agency for a group of thirty-three publishers to warehouse and distribute textbooks to the various schools in the states of Texas, Oklahoma, Arkansas, Louisiana, and New Mexico. It has no other business activity other than that afore mentioned. It is not connected in any way with any state or municipal government and operates solely as a private Corporation with a Charter from the State of Texas.

Signed the 22d day of May 1964.

(S) J. C. Cason, J. C. CASON.

AFFIDAVIT OF C. N. DHORITY

The following affidavit was executed by C. N. Dhority on May 12, 1964.

AFFIDAVIT

PRESIDENT'S COMMISSION ON THE ASSASSINATION OF PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY

STATE OF TEXAS, County of Dallas, ss:

Before me, Mary Rattan, a Notary Public in and for said County, State of Texas, on this day personally appeared Detective C. N. Dhority, Dallas Police Department, who after being by me duly sworn, on oath deposes and says:

The night of November 22, 1963 Captain J. W. Fritz gave me three 6.5 rifle hulls and told me to give them to Lt. J. C. Day in the Crime Lab. Captain J. W. Fritz told me to have Lt. Day to dust them for prints and return one of the 6.5 hulls to him. I took these three 6.5 rifle hulls to Lt. Day and gave them to him in an envelope which had been previously marked by Det. R. M. Sims. Lt. Day dusted the shells for prints and gave me one back. I returned this 6.5 shell back to Captain J. W. Fritz.

Signed this 12th day of May 1964.

(S) C. N. Dhority, C. N. DHORITY.

TESTIMONY OF ROY S. TRULY

The testimony of Roy S. Truly was taken at 2:30 p.m., on May 14, 1964, in the office of the U.S. attorney, 301 Post Office Building, Bryan and Ervay Streets, Dallas, Tex., by Mr. Joseph A. Ball, assistant counsel of the President's Commission.

Mr. BALL. Now, Mr. Truly, this is a continuation of your deposition. I took the last one and you have been sworn and I don't know that it is exactly necessary for you to take the oath again, since this is a continuation of the deposition. I took the last one, didn't I?

Mr. TRULY. Oh, no; I gave a statement that was under oath.

Mr. BALL. Oh, no; this is a deposition. You appeared before the Commission--that's right.

Mr. TRULY. Mr. Belin took my sworn deposition also about a week before I went up there when you both were in Dallas and he also took a recorded deposition.

Mr. BALL. Yes; that was just an investigation, an inquiry. We didn't record that. You weren't under oath then. Will you stand up and be sworn? Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you are about to give before this Commission will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?

Mr. TRULY. I do.

Mr. BALL. Now, will you state your name, please?

Mr. TRULY. Roy S. Truly.

Mr. BALL. And you are superintendent of the Texas School Book Depository?

Mr. TRULY. That's correct.

Mr. BALL. Is that your title?

Mr. TRULY. And a director of the Depository.

Mr. BALL. You have been employed by the Depository for a number of years?

Mr. TRULY. Since 1934; since 1934.

Mr. BALL. You testified before the Commission in Washington, you say, on the 24th of March 1964; did you not?

Mr. TRULY. That's right.

Mr. BALL. Your testimony is filed in volume 28, I believe, of the Commission here. There are certain matters which have come to the attention of the Commission since then that I would like to inquire about, and that's the reason we are taking your deposition, which will be in addition to the testimony you have already given.

Do you recall anytime that you saw any guns in the Texas School Book Depository Building?

Mr. TRULY. Yes; I did.

Mr. BALL. Prior to November 22, 1963?

Mr. TRULY. Yes; I saw two guns on November 20.

Mr. BALL. Whose guns were they?

Mr. TRULY. They belonged to Mr. Warren Caster.

Mr. BALL. Now, before inquiring into the circumstances of seeing two guns that belonged to Mr. Warren Caster on November 20, 1963, I'll ask you whether or not you ever at anytime before that time or after that time saw guns in the Texas School Book Depository Building?

Mr. TRULY. Never before.

Mr. BALL. Never before, and between that date Wednesday, November 20, and Friday, November 22, did you ever see any guns in the Texas School Book Depository Building?

Mr. TRULY. I did see guns in there after the assassination.

Mr. BALL. That is, you saw guns of police officers?

Mr. TRULY. Of the police officers.

Mr. BALL. Carried by police officers?

Mr. TRULY. Yes; and I saw a rifle being carried from the building.

Mr. BALL. In other words, a rifle was found on the sixth floor?

Mr. TRULY. Yes.

Mr. BALL. You saw that in place on the sixth floor?

Mr. TRULY. No; I did not.

Mr. BALL. You didn't?

Mr. TRULY. I only saw the rifle as they were going out the front door.

Mr. BALL. Before the assassination, was there any other occasion besides the one we are inquiring about, when you saw guns in the Texas School Book Depository Building?

Mr. TRULY. Never.

Mr. BALL. On November 20, 1963, you saw two guns owned by Mr. Warren Caster, can you tell me where and when and the circumstances under which you saw these guns?

Mr. TRULY. It was during the lunch period or right at the end of the lunch period on November 20. Mr. Caster came in the door from the first floor and spoke to me and showed me two rifles that he had just purchased. I looked at these and picked up the larger one of the two and examined it and handed it back to Mr. Caster, with the remark that it was really a handsome rifle or words to that effect, at which time Mr. Caster explained to me that he had bought himself a rifle to go deer hunting with, and he hadn't had one and he had been intending to buy one for a long time, and that he had also bought a .22 rifle for his boy.

Mr. BALL. Did you handle the .22 rifle?

Mr. TRULY. Not that I recall.

Mr. BALL. You did see it, though?

Mr. TRULY. I did see it.

Mr. BALL. Was it out of the carton?

Mr. TRULY. The carton was open, I believe, and I saw it. I don't recall picking it up or taking it out of the carton, but I could see it lying in the bottom part of the carton.

Mr. BALL. And you did take the large rifle out?

Mr. TRULY. And raised it to my shoulder and go through the motion of sighting it, but not cocking it--just looking at it.

Mr. BALL. Who else was there besides you and Mr. Caster?

Mr. TRULY. Well, the only person I can recall being there was Mr. Shelley.

Mr. BALL. And what is his position with the Texas School Book Depository?

Mr. TRULY. He is manager of the miscellaneous department.

Mr. BALL. Was this in the open warehouse?

Mr. TRULY. Yes; right at the front. Mr. Caster had placed the cartons on the counter near the front door and that's where the rifles were when I saw them, and I picked one up out of the cartons.

Mr. BALL. And were they employees of the Texas School Book Depository company on the first floor at that time?

Mr. TRULY. Yes; they were--as I recall the time--that the boys had probably gone back to work and could have been walking around before they went in the shipping department.

Mr. BALL. That would have been about what time of the day?

Mr. TRULY. I'd say around 1 o'clock--very close to it. It could have been a little after or a little before. The boys go back to lunch at 12:45, so there I'm not too clear.

Mr. BALL. What happened to these two rifles, Mr. Truly, that Mr. Caster got during the noon hour?

Mr. TRULY. They were placed back in the carton and Mr. Caster carried them out of the lobby door with him. That's the last I saw them.

Mr. BALL. Did you ever see them again?

Mr. TRULY. Never--never.

Mr. BALL. Did you ever see from that day until Friday, November 22, did you ever see those guns in the School Book Depository Building?

Mr. TRULY. No, sir; I never did.

Mr. BALL. Now, you recall that in your testimony before the Commission you told them that at some time after the shooting, you advised Captain Fritz of the name of Lee Oswald and his address in Irving?

Mr. TRULY. Yes, I did.

Mr. BALL. And in order to place the time of it, was it before or after the rifle had been found on the sixth floor?

Mr. TRULY. I wouldn't know. I think it must have been around the time the rifle was found, because I was not on the sixth floor at that time, but when I told--let's go back a few minutes--pardon me--I told Chief Lumpkin a good many minutes after we came down from the roof and he went ahead and gave some orders to two or three policemen surrounding him and then said, "Let's go up and tell Captain Fritz."

Mr. BALL. Now, what did you tell Chief Lumpkin when you came down from the roof of the building?

Mr. TRULY. When I noticed this boy was missing, I told Chief Lumpkin that, "We have a man here that's missing." I said, "It may not mean anything, but he isn't here." I first called down to the other warehouse and had Mr. Akin pull the application of the boy so I could get--quickly get his address in Irving and his general description, so I could be more accurate than I would be.

Mr. BALL. Was he the only man missing?

Mr. TRULY. The only one I noticed at that time. Now, I think there was one or two more, possibly Charles Givens, but I had seen him out in front walking up the street just before the firing of the gun.

Mr. BALL. But walking which way?

Mr. TRULY. The last time I saw him, he was walking across Houston Street, east on Elm.

Mr. BALL. Did you make a check of your employees afterwards?

Mr. TRULY. No, no; not complete. No, I just saw the group of the employees over there on the floor and I noticed this boy wasn't with them. With no thought in my mind except that I had seen him a short time before in the building, I noticed he wasn't there.

Mr. BALL. What do you mean "a short time before"?

Mr. TRULY. I would say 10 or 12 minutes.

Mr. BALL. You mean that's when you saw him in the lunchroom?

Mr. TRULY. In the lunchroom.

Mr. BALL. And you noticed he wasn't over there?

Mr. TRULY. Well, I asked Bill Shelley if he had seen him around and he said No.

Mr. BALL. Now, you told Chief Lumpkin that there was a man missing?

Mr. TRULY. Yes; and he said, "Let's go tell Captain Fritz." Well, I didn't know where Captain Fritz was.

Mr. BALL. Now, did you tell Chief Lumpkin the man was missing before or after you called to the warehouse and got the name?

Mr. TRULY. No, I called the warehouse beforehand.

Mr. BALL. You didn't talk to any police officer before you called the warehouse and got the address?

Mr. TRULY. Not that I remember.

Mr. BALL. You did that on your own without instructions?

Mr. TRULY. That's right.

Mr. BALL. So, when you talked to Chief Lumpkin, you at that time had in your possession there the address of Lee Oswald in Irving?

Mr. TRULY. That's right, I had scribbled it down on a piece of map or something so I would remember it.

Mr. BALL. That is the address that he had put on his application form for employment?

Mr. TRULY. That's right.

Mr. BALL. And did you know of any other address?

Mr. TRULY. I didn't know of any other address at all.

Mr. BALL. Of Lee Oswald?

Mr. TRULY. I supposed that's where he was living.

Mr. BALL. Where was Captain Fritz when you saw him?

Mr. TRULY. He was on the sixth floor in the area where they found the rifle.

Mr. BALL. And was the rifle there at the time?

Mr. TRULY. No, I never saw the rifle.

Mr. BALL. Was this after or before the rifle had been taken from the building?

Mr. TRULY. It was before the rifle had been taken from the building.

Mr. BALL. And do you know whether it was before or after the rifle was found?

Mr. TRULY. Apparently the rifle had been found before I got to the sixth floor, but just how early, I don't know.

Mr. BALL. But you had heard that the rifle was found, had you, by your talk with Fritz?

Mr. TRULY. That's--I don't know--I learned it was found while I was on the sixth floor.

Mr. BALL. While you were on the sixth floor?

Mr. TRULY. While I was on the sixth floor.

Mr. BALL. In other words, you went with Chief Lumpkin to the sixth floor, didn't you?

Mr. TRULY. Yes.

Mr. BALL. And what was your purpose of going there?

Mr. TRULY. My purpose in going there was to inform Captain Fritz that this boy was missing and give him his telephone number, and his Irving address, at the suggestion of Chief Lumpkin, who accompanied me.

Mr. BALL. Did you give Captain Fritz this name and address?

Mr. TRULY. Yes, I did.

Mr. BALL. Was it while you were there that you learned the rifle had been found?

Mr. TRULY. I don't remember who I learned this from----

Mr. BALL. I didn't ask you that, I'm talking about time only.

Mr. TRULY. That was while I was on the sixth floor is when I learned the rifle was found, but I did not see it.

Mr. BALL. All right. Now, was it before or after you told Captain Fritz the name and address of Lee Oswald, that you learned that the rifle was found?

Mr. TRULY. I can't remember, I believe it was afterwards.

Mr. BALL. You are sure it was after you told Captain Fritz--after what, you tell me?

Mr. TRULY. I told--well, when Chief Lumpkin and I went to the sixth floor, Captain Fritz was standing in the area where I later learned they had found the gun, and Chief Lumpkin told Captain Fritz that Mr. Truly had something to tell him, which I would like to tell him, so he stepped over 4 or 5 feet to where I was, away from the other men--officers and reporters, I would say, that were on the floor, and I repeated the words to Captain Fritz.

Mr. BALL. What did you tell him?

Mr. TRULY. I told him that we had a man missing--I told him what his name was and his Irving address and he said, "All right, thank you, Mr. Truly. We will get right on it," or words to that effect, and so I left the sixth floor shortly.

While I was up there, just as I left Captain Fritz, a reporter walked over and said, "What about this fellow Oswald?" And I said, "Where did you learn the name 'Oswald'?" Because I had talked rather low to Captain Fritz and I said, "He's just an employee here," and I left, and sometime--someone informed me that they had found the gun. I don't know who it was.

Mr. BALL. About that time?

Mr. TRULY. It was along about that time, as near as I can remember, and I went back down to the first floor and I don't think I was up on the sixth floor any other time that day. I possibly could have been, but I don't recall it, because I was besieged by reporters and everybody else on the first floor, and talking to officers and so forth and I had no occasion to go back up there.

Mr. BALL. Now, about what time of day would you say is your best estimate that you told Captain Fritz of the name "Lee Oswald" and his address?

Mr. TRULY. My best estimate would be a little before 1 o'clock--10 minutes.

Mr. BALL. The gun wasn't found until after 1 o'clock?

Mr. TRULY. It wasn't found until after 1 o'clock?

Mr. BALL. No, it wasn't found until after 1 o'clock. I won't tell you exactly the time the gun was found, but I will say that the gun was not found until after 1 o'clock.

Mr. TRULY. Well, I may be mistaken about where I learned they had found the gun. I thought it was on the sixth floor--it could have been some other place.

Mr. BALL. Captain Fritz said you didn't tell him that until after the gun was found and that seems to correspond with your memory too, is that correct?

Mr. TRULY. It sure does, because I remember clearly that Captain Fritz was over at where the gun was found and I'm sure they must have found it or he wouldn't have been standing in that area when we came up there.

Mr. BALL. Now, if the gun was found after 1 o'clock, when was it that you discovered that Lee Oswald wasn't there?

Mr. TRULY. I thought it was about 20 minutes after the shooting--the assassination, but it could have been longer.

Mr. BALL. In other words, you thought originally it might have been 10 minutes of 2 or so that you learned that?

Mr. TRULY. Ten minutes to 1.

Mr. BALL. Ten minutes to 1?

Mr. TRULY. It was around 1 o'clock--that period of time after I came down from the sixth floor to the first floor was rather hazy in my memory.

Mr. BALL. You think it might have been after 1 when you first noticed he wasn't there?

Mr. TRULY. I don't think so--I don't feel like at was. It could have possibly been so.

Mr. BALL. Well, if the gun was not found before 1:10, if it wasn't found before that, can you give me any estimate?

Mr. TRULY. That seems to be a longer time after the assassination.

Mr. BALL. You didn't wait 20 minutes from the time you learned Lee Oswald's address until the time you told Captain Fritz, did you?

Mr. TRULY. No, sir; I did stand there on the first floor waiting until Chief Lumpkin got through talking for a few minutes.

Mr. BALL. Tell me about how many minutes you think it was from the time you obtained the address of Lee Oswald until you told Captain Fritz the name and address?

Mr. TRULY. I think it was immediately.

Mr. BALL. Immediately?

Mr. TRULY. Immediately, after I called to the warehouse and got his name and address in Irving, I turned around and walked over and told Captain Fritz at that time.

Mr. BALL. Chief Lumpkin?

Mr. TRULY. Yes; Chief Lumpkin.

Mr. BALL. Yes; Chief Lumpkin.

Mr. TRULY. And I remember Chief Lumpkin talking to two or three officers and I stepped back and he went ahead and told them a few things--it could have been 2 or 3 or 4 minutes.

Mr. BALL. Not over that?

Mr. TRULY. I don't believe so, and then he came to me and said, "All right, Mr. Truly, let's go up and see Captain Fritz and tell him this."

Mr. BALL. Then, if the gun wasn't found until after 1:10, you think it might have been as late as 1:05 or so before you discovered that Oswald wasn't there?

Mr. TRULY. It could be--it could have been.

Mr. BALL. You have no exact memory as to the time you discovered he was not there?

Mr. TRULY. No, sir; I didn't believe after thinking things over--it was over in 15 or 20 minutes after the shots were fired, but after retracing my trip to the roof and the time delay and back, I would have to say that it was farther along in the day than I had believed, so it could have been 1 or 1:05 or something like that.

Mr. BALL. Before you discovered Oswald wasn't there?

Mr. TRULY. That's right, and at such time that you have information of the officers taking the names of the workers in the warehouse over in and around the wrapping tables, it was at such time that I noticed that this boy wasn't among the other workers.

Mr. BALL. You remember you had seen him on the second floor, didn't you?

Mr. TRULY. That's right.

Mr. BALL. That's when you were with Officer Baker?

Mr. TRULY. That's right.

Mr. BALL. Now, you heard that Tippit had been shot, didn't you?

Mr. TRULY. Not after--until after I had told Chief Lumpkin and Captain Fritz and come back down to the first floor, then I learned that he had been shot. The first I learned of it--there was a young officer ran in the front door and told another officer, possibly a lieutenant, that there was an officer shot in Oak Cliff and that was all I knew at that time. I did not know that they had captured Oswald then. Later on a newspaper reporter told me.

Mr. BALL. Now, you say that you knew that Givens was not there afterwards?

Mr. TRULY. I knew he wasn't there at the time of the shooting because I had seen him walk across the street--up the street.

Mr. BALL. Toward what?

Mr. TRULY. Up Elm Street across Houston.

Mr. BALL. Toward Main--down toward Main?

Mr. TRULY. I saw him walking on the north side of Elm, crossing Houston--on the north side of Elm crossing Houston. However, at that time I saw two other boys with him and I later learned, I believe, that it was James Jarman and possibly Harold Norman--there were two or three--they were all standing in the crowd close to myself and they started across Houston Street up Elm. I didn't see them turn over to the right across Elm.

Mr. BALL. Wait a minute--you saw Norman and Jarman with Givens in front of the Texas School Book Depository Building first, didn't you?

Mr. TRULY. Right; sometime earlier--a good deal--a little while before the shooting--I believe they were the three.

Mr. BALL. Did you see Jarman and Norman going across Elm?

Mr. TRULY. I'm pretty sure there was the three of them.

Mr. BALL. And Jarman and Norman say that they went back into the building?

Mr. TRULY. Well, apparently they did, but I saw them out there--I noticed them there on the corner and starting across the street, but whether they completed it--I don't know.

Mr. BALL. Where is the last place you saw Givens?

Mr. TRULY. The last place I remember seeing Givens was in the middle of the crossing, in the middle of Houston Street.

Mr. BALL. Walking in which direction?

Mr. TRULY. Walking east.

Mr. BALL. Walking east on the north side of Elm?

Mr. TRULY. North side of Elm--he had not completely crossed the street--Houston Street.

Mr. BALL. Now, did Givens come back to the building later?

Mr. TRULY. I didn't see him--later on he did.

Mr. BALL. When--how much later?

Mr. TRULY. Much later--I suppose--I don't know his actions during that day.

Mr. BALL. Did he come back to the building?

Mr. TRULY. No.

Mr. BALL. After the shooting?

Mr. TRULY. I can't say--I think he came back to the front of the building--I can't answer for sure whether he came in the building--I know he was at the police station later on.

Mr. BALL. I think that's all right now.

(The deposition of the deponent Truly was adjourned from Room 301 Federal Building, Dallas, Tex., and continued at the office of the deponent Truly in the Texas School Book Depository Building, 411 Elm Street, Dallas, Tex., as follows:)

Mr. BALL. Mr. Truly, when you came into the building with Officer Baker you tried to look up the elevator shaft, didn't you?

Mr. TRULY. Yes; I sure did.

Mr. BALL. And where did you see the elevators?

Mr. TRULY. On the fifth floor--both of them on the same floor.

Mr. BALL. They were both up on the fifth floor?

Mr. TRULY. Yes.

Mr. BALL. You are sure of that?

Mr. TRULY. I am sure, because their bottoms were level.

Mr. BALL. When you went up to the floor, was there an elevator on any of the floors?

Mr. TRULY. When I reached the fifth floor, the east elevator was there, but west one was not.

Mr. BALL. Do you know where it was?

Mr. TRULY. No; I don't. I didn't look, I just remember it wasn't upstairs, so it was down below me somewhere.

Mr. BALL. You took the east elevator?

Mr. TRULY. I took the east elevator load to the seventh floor.

Mr. BALL. That's all.

Mr. TRULY. Fine.

TESTIMONY OF WARREN CASTER

The testimony of Warren Caster was taken at 2 p.m., on May 14, 1964, in the office of the U.S. attorney, 301 Post Office Building, Bryan and Ervay Streets, Dallas, Tex., by Mr. Joseph A. Ball, assistant counsel of the President's Commission.

Mr. BALL. Mr. Caster, would you please stand up and take the oath?

Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you are about to give before this Commission will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?

Mr. CASTER. I do.

Mr. BALL. Will you state your full name, please?

Mr. CASTER. Warren Caster.

Mr. BALL. And where do you live?

Mr. CASTER. 3338 Merrell.

Mr. BALL. What is your business?

Mr. CASTER. Textbook publishing.

Mr. BALL. Are you with some company?

Mr. CASTER. Yes; I am assistant manager for Southwestern Publishing Co. with offices at 411 Elm Street.

Mr. BALL. You have offices in the Texas School Book Depository Building?

Mr. CASTER. Yes.

Mr. BALL. You rent those offices from the Texas School Book Depository?

Mr. CASTER. The offices are furnished in connection with our work with the Depository.

Mr. BALL. Will you tell me something about yourself, where you were born and where you were raised and educated?

Mr. CASTER. Yes; I was born in New Mexico, educated in New Mexico, received my college degrees at New Mexico Highlands University at Las Vegas, N. Mex. I taught school in New Mexico from 1939 until I started to work with Southwestern Publishing Co. in 1952. There was a period of about 2 years that I spent in the U.S. Navy.

Mr. BALL. And have you had your offices since 1952 in the Texas School Book Depository Building?

Mr. CASTER. The offices have been in the Texas School Book Depository Building, but not in this particular building here. We have occupied three places since I have been with the Southwestern Publishing Co.

Mr. BALL. Your office is on which floor?

Mr. CASTER. Second floor.

Mr. BALL. Did you ever bring any guns into the School Book Depository Building?

Mr. CASTER. Yes; I did.

Mr. BALL. When?

Mr. CASTER. I believe it was on Wednesday, November 20, during the noon hour.

Mr. BALL. Whose guns were they?

Mr. CASTER. They were my guns.

Mr. BALL. And what kind of guns were they?

Mr. CASTER. One gun was a Remington, single-shot, .22 rifle, and the other was a .30-06 sporterized Mauser.

Mr. BALL. Who owned them?

Mr. CASTER. I had just purchased them during the noon hour that day.

Mr. BALL. Well, tell us about it--what were the circumstances of the purchase?

Mr. CASTER. Well, I left the Depository during the noon hour and had lunch and, while out for the lunch hour, I stopped by Sanger-Harris sporting goods department to look for a rifle for my son's birthday--I beg your pardon, Christmas present--son's Christmas present, and while I was there I purchased the single-shot .22--single shot--and at the same time was looking at some deer rifles. I had, oh, for several years been thinking about buying a deer rifle and they happened to have one that I liked and I purchased the .30-06 while I was there.

Mr. BALL. And did they box them up?

Mr. CASTER. They were in cartons; yes.

Mr. BALL. And then you went back to work, I guess?

Mr. CASTER. Yes; I picked both rifles up in cartons just like they were, this was during the noon hour, and as I entered the Texas School Book Depository Building on my way up to the buying office, I stopped by Mr. Truly's office, and while I was there we examined the two rifles that I had purchased.

Mr. BALL. Did you take them out of the carton?

Mr. CASTER. Yes; I did.

Mr. BALL. Who was there besides you and Mr. Truly?

Mr. CASTER. Well, I'm not really sure who was there. I think you were there, Bill, and Mr. Shelley was there--and Mr. Roy Truly. The only people that I know about, in any event, were there; there were workers there at the time, but I'm not quite sure how many. I couldn't even tell you their names. I don't know the Texas School Book Depository workers there in the shipping department.

Mr. BALL. In that office, though, Truly's office, how many were there?

Mr. CASTER. We weren't in Mr. Truly's immediate office, we were just there over the counter.

Mr. BALL. In the warehouse?

Mr. CASTER. We were there in the hall--just right there over the counter in front of the warehouse; that's right.

Mr. BALL. And did you take the guns out of the carton?

Mr. CASTER. Yes; I did. They were removed from the carton.

Mr. BALL. Did you handle them?

Mr. CASTER. Yes; I did.

Mr. BALL. Did anybody else handle the guns?

Mr. CASTER. Mr. Truly handled them and I'm not sure whether Mr. Shelley had the guns in his hands or not; I'm not positive.

Mr. BALL. How long a time were you there with the guns, and by time, just estimate it.

Mr. CASTER. Well, it couldn't have been more than 10 minutes.

Mr. BALL. What did you do with the guns after that?

Mr. CASTER. I put them back in the carton and carried them up to my office.

Mr. BALL. And what did you do with them after that?

Mr. CASTER. I left at the end of the working day, oh, around 4 o'clock and took the guns in the cartons and carried them and put them in my car and carried them home.

Mr. BALL. Did you ever have them back in the Texas School Book Depository Building thereafter?

Mr. CASTER. They have never been back to the Texas School Book Depository Building since then.

Mr. BALL. Where were those guns on November 22, 1963?

Mr. CASTER. The guns were in my home, 3338 Merrell Road.

Mr. BALL. I think that's all. This will be written up and you will be asked to come in and it will be submitted to you for signature and you can correct it if you wish.

Mr. CASTER. That's all right.

Mr. BALL. Any corrections you make, make them in pen and ink and initial it and sign it. I want to thank you very much for giving this testimony.

Mr. CASTER. I thank you very much.

TESTIMONY OF EDDIE PIPER

The testimony of Eddie Piper was taken at 4 p.m., on May 14, 1964, at the Texas School Book Depository Building, Dallas, Tex., by Mr. Joseph A. Ball, assistant counsel of the President's Commission.

Mr. BALL. You understand since this is a continuation of your deposition you are under oath still?

Mr. PIPER. Thank you; I appreciate it.

Mr. BALL. Your deposition has been taken?

Mr. PIPER. Yes; that's right.

Mr. BALL. I'm going to just ask you a few questions.

Mr. PIPER. Sure, that's all right.

Mr. BALL. You told us that after the shooting you came out onto the floor?

Mr. PIPER. That's right.

Mr. BALL. And the first people that you saw on the floor after the shooting was who?

Mr. PIPER. Mr. Truly and some fellow--I really don't know who it was; like I say, it was some fellow that was with Mr. Truly.

Mr. BALL. Some fellow; how was he dressed?

Mr. PIPER. Oh, I don't know.

Mr. BALL. Was he an officer?

Mr. PIPER. Yes; I believe he was an officer.

Mr. BALL. A police officer?

Mr. PIPER. Yes; a police officer.

Mr. BALL. Did he have a white helmet on?

Mr. PIPER. No; I don't think so. I didn't pay any attention to it. I was already excited over the shooting or something when he came running into the building.

Mr. BALL. And what did Truly and this--some fellow do?

Mr. PIPER. Well, Mr. Truly and this fellow run up the steps. He just hollered for the elevator and I said, "I don't know where it is at," and I'm still standing over there by that table and he ran up--on up the steps with this police officer--him and another fellow and I was standing there and the people began swarming out and around--different ones coming in, but it was where nobody could come out.

Mr. BALL. They were the first ones to go up the steps?

Mr. PIPER. That's right.

Mr. BALL. Had anybody come down the steps before they went up the steps?

Mr. PIPER. No, sir.

Mr. BALL. They weren't the first ones to come down?

Mr. PIPER. Yes; and when the elevators come down--I really don't know who brought the elevators down, but I know nobody ever come down the steps.

Mr. BALL. Did you ever see Vicki Adams come down the steps?

Mr. PIPER. No, sir; I don't know about that, if she said she did, it was after I got over here and walked over to the back door.

Mr. BALL. Did Vicki Adams come down before Truly and the man went up the steps?

Mr. PIPER. No, sir, no, sir; she didn't do it.

Mr. BALL. Did you at anytime after the shooting miss Lee Oswald--did you notice he wasn't around?

Mr. PIPER. No, sir; I didn't notice it until the lineup. You know, I just figured all the people was there.

Mr. BALL. You did notice it at the lineup, did you?

Mr. PIPER. Yes.

Mr. BALL. Tell us about that.

Mr. PIPER. I did notice it in the lineup.

Mr. BALL. What do you mean by the lineup?

Mr. PIPER. I mean, when they lined us all up and told us to give our name and address and just to go home.

Mr. BALL. You say "they"; who do you mean?

Mr. PIPER. The detective--whoever it was.

Mr. BALL. The police?

Mr. PIPER. Yes; they had the building all surrounded. They went to locking the doors back and front and told us to all come up and then go home, and I told him, I says, "I've got to go down in the basement and get my clothes," and he said, "You can go down and get your clothes and come on back up here, but give me your identification and your name and tell us where you are staying," and everybody heard me say that, I guess, and he let us out of the building, one by one, and I went on out the front door.

Mr. BALL. Did you say something to anybody about not seeing Oswald there?

Mr. PIPER. No, sir; I didn't say it, but I just saw he wasn't in the lineup--I didn't tell anyone because I didn't see him.

Mr. BALL. Just tell us what did you notice?

Mr. PIPER. I noticed he was not in the lineup.

Mr. BALL. You noticed that he was not in the lineup?

Mr. PIPER. Yes.

Mr. BALL. But you didn't mention it to anybody?

Mr. PIPER. No, sir; I didn't mention it but I knows he wasn't in the lineup, and Charles--I don't know whether he was, but he went out for lunch.

Mr. BALL. Was Charles Givens there?

Mr. PIPER. I couldn't remember seeing him. He went out for lunch and I don't remember whether he come out from the building again or not because I was getting dressed to get out of there myself.

Mr. BALL. That's all.

Mr. PIPER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

TESTIMONY OF WILLIAM H. SHELLEY

The testimony of William H. Shelley was taken at 3 p.m., on May 14, 1964, in the office of the U.S. attorney, 301 Post Office Building, Bryan and Ervay Streets, Dallas, Tex., by Mr. Joseph A. Ball, assistant counsel of the President's Commission.

Mr. BALL. Mr. Shelley, you have been sworn and this will be a continuation of your deposition. You are still under oath, you understand that?

Mr. SHELLEY. Yes, sir.

Mr. BALL. Do you recall seeing a couple of guns in the Texas School Book Depository Building on the 20th of November 1963?

Mr. SHELLEY. Yes, sir.

Mr. BALL. Where?

Mr. SHELLEY. Just outside Mr. Truly's office on the will-call counter.

Mr. BALL. And how did they get there?

Mr. SHELLEY. Mr. Warren Caster had just purchased them and brought them in and stopped by to see us.

Mr. BALL. Did you handle the guns?

Mr. SHELLEY. I held the .22.

Mr. BALL. And was there another make of gun too--there was, wasn't there?

Mr. SHELLEY. Yes; I believe there was a .30-06 Mauser that had been converted. It was a foreign make converted to a .30-06

Mr. BALL. Did you handle that?

Mr. SHELLEY. No.

Mr. BALL. What happened to the guns?

Mr. SHELLEY. Well, we looked them over, like you do any new toy, and he puts them back in the box and goes out of the door.

Mr. BALL. And did you ever see them again?

Mr. SHELLEY. No, sir.

Mr. BALL. Had you ever seen any guns in that building before that date?

Mr. SHELLEY. No, sir.

Mr. BALL. Did you ever see any guns in that building between that date and the time the President was shot?

Mr. SHELLEY. No, sir.

Mr. BALL. On November 22, 1963, the day the President was shot, when is the last time you saw Oswald?

Mr. SHELLEY. It was 10 or 15 minutes before 12.

Mr. BALL. Where?

Mr. SHELLEY. On the first floor over near the telephone.

Mr. BALL. Did you ever see him again?

Mr. SHELLEY. At the police station when they brought him in.

Mr. BALL. Did you see him in the building at anytime after 12?

Mr. SHELLEY. No.

Mr. BALL. Did you at anytime after the President was shot see Oswald in the building?

Mr. SHELLEY. No, sir.

Mr. BALL. Did you at anytime after the President was shot tell Oswald to go home?

Mr. SHELLEY. No, sir.

Mr. BALL. Did you tell anybody to go home?

Mr. SHELLEY. No.

Mr. BALL. You didn't tell anybody to leave the building at all?

Mr. SHELLEY. No, sir.

Mr. BALL. Now, you recall going up to the sixth floor after the shooting, do you?

Mr. SHELLEY. Yes.

Mr. BALL. Did you go over to the southeast corner of the building where there was a window open?

Mr. SHELLEY. Not all the way; they had it blocked off.

Mr. BALL. Did you at a later time go over there?

Mr. SHELLEY. No, sir; not for several days afterwards.

Mr. BALL. Did you several days afterward go over there?

Mr. SHELLEY. After they released us to go back to work in the corner. We kept out for several days.

Mr. BALL. When you went back there, were there two Rolling Readers on top of a larger box?

Mr. SHELLEY. No, sir; those were carried in by the local authorities. The boxes--the Rolling Readers were there.

Mr. BALL. They were?

Mr. SHELLEY. But the boxes that they were originally packed in were gone--they had been carried up to the police station.

Mr. BALL. You have seen pictures of the window, haven't you?

Mr. SHELLEY. Oh, yes.

Mr. BALL. With the larger box on the floor and two Rolling Readers on the top?

Mr. SHELLEY. Yes, sir.

Mr. BALL. One Rolling Reader resting in the sill of the window?

Mr. SHELLEY. Yes.

Mr. BALL. Now, the Rolling Readers were stacked three aisles away, I believe you testified, haven't you, before?

Mr. SHELLEY. I'm not sure how many aisles we moved all that stock now, but it was at least three aisles.

Mr. BALL. Away from the southeast corner?

Mr. SHELLEY. Yes; they were at least half way across the building from this corner.

Mr. BALL. Had you ever instructed anybody to take two Rolling Readers over there?

Mr. SHELLEY. No, sir.

Mr. BALL. Would it have been unusual for two Rolling Readers to be out of the stack and over there?

Mr. SHELLEY. Very unusual, because they are different size cartons from everything else.

Mr. BALL. You mean from everything else in the southeast corner?

Mr. SHELLEY. Well, from any box on that floor.

Mr. BALL. They were?

Mr. SHELLEY. Yes; they were little boxes. The rest of them are pretty good sized.

Mr. BALL. You had had a special place for the Rolling Readers?

Mr. SHELLEY. Yes, sir.

Mr. BALL. Then, the two Rolling Readers that were over in the southeast corner were out of place, were they?

Mr. SHELLEY. They sure were.

Mr. BALL. Had you ever seen them out of place before?

Mr. SHELLEY. No, sir.

Mr. BALL. Had you ever seen those Rolling Readers in that corner before?

Mr. SHELLEY. No, sir.

Mr. BALL. Now, we have seen pictures of a large box on the floor.

Mr. SHELLEY. Yes, sir.

Mr. BALL. Do you recognize that?

Mr. SHELLEY. Yes, sir.

Mr. BALL. What is that?

Mr. SHELLEY. You mean the one under the Rolling Readers?

Mr. BALL. The one under the Rolling Readers.

Mr. SHELLEY. It was a carton of "Think and Do" books, first-grade level.

Mr. BALL. "Think and Do" books?

Mr. SHELLEY. Yes, sir.

Mr. BALL. Of the first-grade level?

Mr. SHELLEY. Yes.

Mr. BALL. Those cartons were larger than the Rolling Readers, aren't they?

Mr. SHELLEY. About four time as large.

Mr. BALL. Can you describe their size in inches?

Mr. SHELLEY. I would say they are around 22 long, 18 wide, and 20 tall, approximately.

Mr. BALL. What would you say is the size--was the size of the Rolling Reader?

Mr. SHELLEY. It's about 12 inches long--6 by 6.

Mr. BALL. Now, was there a place where things and those books were usually stacked on the sixth floor?

Mr. SHELLEY. Yes, sir.

Mr. BALL. Where?

Mr. SHELLEY. Along the west wall all the way across.

Mr. BALL. You had been doing work up there that day, had you?

Mr. SHELLEY. Yes; I mean the east wall; I'm sorry.

Mr. BALL. Had they ever been in the west wall?

Mr. SHELLEY. No, sir; when we moved in that building we put them on the west wall.

Mr. BALL. On the west wall?

Mr. SHELLEY. On the west wall; I mean the east wall.

Mr. BALL. Then, the "Think and Do" books were on the east wall?

Mr. SHELLEY. Yes.

Mr. BALL. And piled how many cartons high?

Mr. SHELLEY. Well, there were some of them as high as eight high.

Mr. BALL. Then, this carton of "Think and Do" books that was on the floor, near the window, under the two Rolling Readers, was stacked--would have been stacked along the east wall?

Mr. SHELLEY. No; that was a new title and we didn't have a place for it and it had been set up on the west wall and when we started laying the floor, we had to move all of the stock over there, including that particular type.

Mr. BALL. Then, when you moved the stock, where did you move these "Think and Do" book cartons?

Mr. SHELLEY. They are on the south side--along the south side of the building. We just had a big line of stock, you know; the first thing that was pulled out, we would roll it onto the southeast corner, and then the row went right on back toward the west wall.

Mr. BALL. Along the west wall?

Mr. SHELLEY. We started rolling it east and then it went back west and as you fill in an order, it goes back west, you see.

Mr. BALL. There was also a carton of books where they found some handprints and they cut a piece out of the top; do you remember that? Don't you?

Mr. SHELLEY. Yes.

Mr. BALL. Do you recognize that carton?

Mr. SHELLEY. That was another carton of "Think and Do" books--sixth grade.

Mr. BALL. Where were those cartons usually stacked?

Mr. SHELLEY. They were stacked in the southeast corner on the east wall.

Mr. BALL. About where that was found, was it not?

Mr. SHELLEY. Yes.

Mr. BALL. Now, the "Think and Do" books for the first-grade level, that was underneath the two Rolling Readers; was that out of place?

Mr. SHELLEY. Yes.

Mr. BALL. How far away from the place where those books were usually stacked?

Mr. SHELLEY. Where they were previously stacked was over near the west wall.

Mr. BALL. But where you had rolled them to; how far was it?

Mr. SHELLEY. Oh, about 3 feet.

Mr. BALL. About 3 feet?

Mr. SHELLEY. Yes.

Mr. BALL. And the "Think and Do" books, sixth-grade level, where the piece had been cut out to examine for his palmprint, was it in its proper place?

Mr. SHELLEY. Well, all that stock was stacked clear to the south wall on the east side and some cartons had been moved and stacked on top of some more. There was an empty spot there and this one particular carton was sitting on it there.

Mr. BALL. By itself?

Mr. SHELLEY. Yes; by itself. By the side where the rest of them were.

Mr. BALL. Now, Lee Oswald was a checker, wasn't he?

Mr. SHELLEY. An order filler.

Mr. BALL. An order filler?

Mr. SHELLEY. Yes, sir.

Mr. BALL. And do you recall that when he came to work he used a clipboard to put his orders on; is that correct?

Mr. SHELLEY. Yes, sir; all of the boys do.

Mr. BALL. All the boys use clipboards?

Mr. SHELLEY. Yes.

Mr. BALL. Do you know where Oswald got the clipboard he used?

Mr. SHELLEY. Well, it was a piece of cardboard, actually, with a clip on it and it was homemade--he could have made it himself.

Mr. BALL. You don't know who made it?

Mr. SHELLEY. No; I'm not for sure.

Mr. BALL. Were you present when the clipboard was found on the sixth floor?

Mr. SHELLEY. It was Frankie Kaiser that found that and came down and told me and I told Mr. Pinkston with the FBI.

Mr. BALL. Did you go up and look at it?

Mr. SHELLEY. I went up with him and he got it.

Mr. BALL. Did you see a name on it?

Mr. SHELLEY. I think it had Frankie's name on it--Frankie Kaiser's name. He said he thought that might have been one he had made before--he was all times making them.

Mr. BALL. I believe that's all. Your other deposition is going to come down here and you can sign it at the same time you sign this one.

Mr. SHELLEY. OK; I was coming back up the next day and we were awful busy down there is the reason I didn't.

Mr. BALL. Anyway, it will come down for your signature and you can look it over and, if you have any corrections to make, correct them and initial them. That's all, and thank you.

Mr. SHELLEY. All right; thank you.

TESTIMONY OF EDWARD SHIELDS

The testimony of Edward Shields was taken at 4:25 p.m., on May 14, 1964, at the Texas School Book Depository Building, Dallas, Tex., by Mr. Joseph A. Ball, assistant counsel of the President's Commission.

Mr. BALL. Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you are about to give before this Commission will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?

Mr. SHIELDS. I do.

Mr. BALL. State your name.

Mr. SHIELDS. Edward Shields.

Mr. BALL. Where do you live?

Mr. SHIELDS. I live now at 1432 Stirling. I was living at 414 Cleaves Street.

Mr. BALL. What is your occupation?

Mr. SHIELDS. I work in the shipping department, but some guy put it down that I worked as a shipping clerk. I do receiving and shipping with the shipping department.

Mr. BALL. Of what company?

Mr. SHIELDS. With the Texas School Book Co. at 1917 North Houston, at the warehouse.

Mr. BALL. That's how far from the building that is at the corner of Houston and Elm?

Mr. SHIELDS. Well, I'd say about three blocks down to this old building.

Mr. BALL. How long have you worked for the Texas School Book Co.?

Mr. SHIELDS. It will be 14 years the 14th of August.

Mr. BALL. But you work in the warehouse?

Mr. SHIELDS. I do.

Mr. BALL. On November 22, 1963, were you out watching the parade pass by?

Mr. SHIELDS. I was.

Mr. BALL. For what time?

Mr. SHIELDS. I'd say from about 5 to 12 to about 10 after 12; I mean, about 5 to 12 to 10 after 12--I heard the shooting.

Mr. BALL. The shooting was at 12:30.

Mr. SHIELDS. It was--that's when we was standing there watching the parade when it came through.

Mr. BALL. How did you get around to see him before?

Mr. SHIELDS. We just got on the parking lot there because we go up there and sit down there and talk with James Tracey.

Mr. BALL. Who is James Tracey?

Mr. SHIELDS. He was the manager of the lot--there's somebody else there now.

Mr. BALL. That lot is where?

Mr. SHIELDS. It's near Record and Elm.

Mr. BALL. Near Record and Elm?

Mr. SHIELDS. Yes.

Mr. BALL. You say you go up there to a parking lot?

Mr. SHIELDS. Well, we go over there every day at noon and talk to the fellow that ran it, but that's not the same fellow there now.

Mr. BALL. But had you, prior to November 22, 1963, had it been your custom of going over there to see him at noon?

Mr. SHIELDS. I had been going by there every day at noon.

Mr. BALL. What about Givens?

Mr. SHIELDS. I would be going some days when he wouldn't go, but I would see him--James Tracey--every day at noon.

Mr. BALL. On November 22, did you go over there?

Mr. SHIELDS. I was there--yes; I was there.

Mr. BALL. Approximately what time?

Mr. SHIELDS. That was around 5 to 12--that would be to 5 after 12.

Mr. BALL. What about Givens?

Mr. SHIELDS. He was there at noon after he had eaten his lunch, I mean, he come on up there.

Mr. BALL. Did you see the President's motorcade?

Mr. SHIELDS. I sure did.

Mr. BALL. Where was it when you saw it?

Mr. SHIELDS. I was just standing right around there at Mullendorf's Cafe.

Mr. BALL. At what address?

Mr. SHIELDS. On Record and Main.

Mr. BALL. Who was with you?

Mr. SHIELDS. Givens.

Mr. BALL. And did you hear any shots?

Mr. SHIELDS. Yes; I heard the shots.

Mr. BALL. And what did you and Givens do after you heard the shots?

Mr. SHIELDS. I said, "The President has been shot"; we walked back to the lot and where Tracey was. I heard one shot and then a pause and then this repetition--two shots right behind the other, and I thought it was backfire from a car and I said, "Someone shot the President."

Mr. BALL. You said, "Someone shot the President"?

Mr. SHIELDS. That's right, I did. I didn't know what had happened.

Mr. BALL. Then what did you do?

Mr. SHIELDS. Well, Givens run down here--right down here.

Mr. BALL. He ran down here to this building?

Mr. SHIELDS. He ran down to the next corner.

Mr. BALL. And what was the next corner?

Mr. SHIELDS. That was on Elm and Houston.

Mr. BALL. Did you come with him?

Mr. SHIELDS. No; I did not--he had me to stay there at the lot.

Mr. BALL. And they all ran down there?

Mr. SHIELDS. Yes.

Mr. BALL. Did you see Givens again?

Mr. SHIELDS. Yes; we came back to the building--he and Tracey.

Mr. BALL. Then what did you do?

Mr. SHIELDS. We came back down to the Texas School Book Depository Building here and tried to get in the building and they wouldn't let no one in--he couldn't get in and I went on back to the warehouse.

Mr. BALL. What did Givens do?

Mr. SHIELDS. Well, they came and got him because he was working here and I was at the warehouse.

Mr. BALL. Did you see him leave with the police?

Mr. SHIELDS. No; I didn't. I was at the warehouse and he had come here.

Mr. BALL. I believe that's all. This will be written up and you will be asked to sign it and to make any corrections that you wish, you may make them in your own handwriting, and somebody will call you from the U.S. attorney's office and let you know when to come up.

Mr. SHIELDS. OK.

Mr. BALL. Thank you very much.

Mr. SHIELDS. OK.

TESTIMONY OF SAM GUINYARD

The testimony of Sam Guinyard was taken at 10:15 a.m., on April 2, 1964, in the office of the U.S. attorney, 301 Post Office Building, Bryan and Ervay Streets, Dallas, Tex., by Mr. Joseph A. Ball, assistant counsel of the President's Commission.

Mr. BALL. Will you stand up, Sam, and hold up your right hand? 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. GUINYARD. Yes.

Mr. BALL. Will you state your name and address for the record?

Mr. GUINYARD. Sam Guinyard.

Mr. BALL. That's [spelling] G-u-i-n-y-a-r-d, and what is your address--where do you live?

Mr. GUINYARD. 2815 South Ervay Street.

Mr. BALL. Where were you working on November 22, 1963?

Mr. GUINYARD. On East Jefferson--501 East Jefferson.

Mr. BALL. Where is that?

Mr. GUINYARD. Harris Motor Co.

Mr. BALL. A used-car lot?

Mr. GUINYARD. Yes.

Mr. BALL. What kind of work were you doing?

Mr. GUINYARD. Porter.

Mr. BALL. How old are you, Sam?

Mr. GUINYARD. I am 28.

Mr. BALL. And where were you born?

Mr. GUINYARD. In Ennis.

Mr. BALL. Ennis, Tex.?

Mr. GUINYARD. Yes.

Mr. BALL. Where did you go to school?

Mr. GUINYARD. Ennis and Hillsboro.

Mr. BALL. And how far through school did you go?

Mr. GUINYARD. Well, I got to the sixth grade.

Mr. BALL. What have you done since then, what kind of work have you done mostly?

Mr. GUINYARD. Compress work.

Mr. BALL. What is that?

Mr. GUINYARD. Press cotton--pressing cotton.

Mr. BALL. When did you come to Dallas?

Mr. GUINYARD. Well, I have been back in Dallas ever since 1957. I lived in Plainview about 13 years.

Mr. BALL. At--what kind of work have you done since you came to Dallas?

Mr. GUINYARD. Well, a porter in a carlot.

Mr. BALL. A porter in a carlot?

Mr. GUINYARD. Yes.

Mr. BALL. Have you ever been in any kind of trouble in your life?

Mr. GUINYARD. No, sir; nothing but a little poker fines that otherwise I paid and I got a couple of tickets in my life.

Mr. BALL. Now, on the day of November 22, 1963, that's the day the President was killed, what were you doing?

Mr. GUINYARD. Working there.

Mr. BALL. And you heard about it, that he had been shot? Didn't you?

Mr. GUINYARD. Yes; at the time I did.

Mr. BALL. What were you doing and where were you then when you heard that?

Mr. GUINYARD. In Oak Cliff at 501 East Jefferson.

Mr. BALL. What were you doing?

Mr. GUINYARD. Polishing and waxing a station wagon.

Mr. BALL. And did something else happen that day that you remember?

Mr. GUINYARD. Yes, sir.

Mr. BALL. What?

Mr. GUINYARD. Well, this was when Oswald shot the policeman.

Mr. BALL. Tell me what you heard--I just want to know what you were doing and what you heard?

Mr. GUINYARD. Well, he was about--I guess----

Mr. BALL. Now, wait a minute, were you polishing cars when you heard something?

Mr. GUINYARD. When I heard a shot.

Mr. BALL. You heard a noise?

Mr. GUINYARD. Yes.

Mr. BALL. And it sounded like shots?

Mr. GUINYARD. Yes.

Mr. BALL. How many?

Mr. GUINYARD. I heard three.

Mr. BALL. Where did the sound come from?

Mr. GUINYARD. Right behind me, north of me--behind me.

Mr. BALL. What street is north of you?

Mr. GUINYARD. Tenth.

Mr. BALL. You were on what street--your carlot faces what street?

Mr. GUINYARD. It faces Jefferson and 10th.

Mr. BALL. And 10th Street is north?

Mr. GUINYARD. Yes; and I was in the back--I was about half way right in the back.

Mr. BALL. The cross street is Patton Street?

Mr. GUINYARD. Yes.

Mr. BALL. What did you do when you heard the shots?

Mr. GUINYARD. I raised up trying to see where they were coming from, where the sound was coming from.

Mr. BALL. Then what did you do?

Mr. GUINYARD. I was looking--trying to see and after I heard the third shot, then Oswald came through on Patton running--came right through the yard in front of the big white house--there's a big two-story white house--there's two of them there and he come through the one right on the corner of Patton.

Mr. BALL. Could you see down to the corner of 10th and Patton to the house?

Mr. GUINYARD. I seen him when he come between the two houses, come around in front of the last house to get on Patton Street to come out to Jefferson.

Mr. BALL. Where were you when you saw this?

Mr. GUINYARD. Where was I?

Mr. BALL. Yes.

Mr. GUINYARD. I was there at the back, right at the alley back there about as far from Patton Street as--about twice as far from here as to that window.

Mr. BALL. Then, you were about 10 feet from Patton Street?

Mr. GUINYARD. Yes, sir.

Mr. BALL. So that you could look up Patton Street?

Mr. GUINYARD. Yes.

Mr. BALL. North on Patton?

Mr. GUINYARD. Yes.

Mr. BALL. And you saw a man, did you?

Mr. GUINYARD. Yes.

Mr. BALL. What did you see him doing?

Mr. GUINYARD. He came through there running and knocking empty shells out of his pistol and he had it up just like this with his hand.

Mr. BALL. With which hand?

Mr. GUINYARD. With his right hand; just kicking them out.

Mr. BALL. He had it up?

Mr. GUINYARD. Yes; he had it up just like this.

Mr. BALL. How was he kicking them out?

Mr. GUINYARD. He was rolling them with his hand--with his thumb.

Mr. BALL. Rolling them with his thumb?

Mr. GUINYARD. Checking them--he had the pistol up just like this [indicating].

Mr. BALL. Did he use his left hand any?

Mr. GUINYARD. No; I never did see him use his left hand.

Mr. BALL. He didn't?

Mr. GUINYARD. No, sir.

Mr. BALL. And where was he with reference to the corner of Patton and 10th when you saw him?

Mr. GUINYARD. Where was he?

Mr. BALL. Yes.

Mr. GUINYARD. Just as he come around the corner on Patton, he cut through the yard and missed the corner on 10th and Patton and cut through the yard.

Mr. BALL. He cut through the yard of the house on the corner of 10th and Patton?

Mr. GUINYARD. That's right.

Mr. BALL. That would be the southeast corner, wouldn't it?

Mr. GUINYARD. The west--southwest corner--the southeast corner is where he started across, but he come out on Patton on the southwest corner.

Mr. BALL. In other words, when you first saw him he was cutting across the yard of the house on the southeast corner?

Mr. GUINYARD. Yes, sir.

Mr. BALL. That's the white house?

Mr. GUINYARD. Yes; the big two-story white house.

Mr. BALL. Did he cross Patton?

Mr. GUINYARD. No, sir; he come down Patton until he got to about 5 feet from the corner of Jefferson and then he turned across and went across to the west corner on Jefferson.

Mr. BALL. What side of the street did you see him coming down on?

Mr. GUINYARD. He was on the left side--when he come down--it would be the east side.

Mr. BALL. Did you see Mr. Callaway there?

Mr. GUINYARD. We was together; yes, sir.

Mr. BALL. You were together?

Mr. GUINYARD. Yes, sir; he was at the front and I was at the back.

Mr. BALL. You and Callaway were standing at the alleyway?

Mr. GUINYARD. Yes.

Mr. BALL. The alleyway that runs along the north side of the lot?

Mr. GUINYARD. Yes.

Mr. BALL. Now, where was Oswald when he passed you going south toward Jefferson?

Mr. GUINYARD. Well, he was between the alley and the driveway coming off Patton.

Mr. BALL. And he was across the street from you, wasn't he?

Mr. GUINYARD. No; he was on this side of the street.

Mr. BALL. You were on the east side of the street?

Mr. GUINYARD. Yes, sir; and he was too--he was on the east side of the street until he got across our driveway and then he got onto the west side.

Mr. BALL. How close was he to you when you saw him?

Mr. GUINYARD. I guess he was about 10 feet from me--maybe.

Mr. BALL. About 10 feet?

Mr. GUINYARD. Yes, sir.

Mr. BALL. Mr. Callaway has told us and we measured it with a tape measure, that Oswald was on the west side of the street, and we measured it and he figured it was about 55 feet from him when he passed.

Mr. GUINYARD. Well, he crossed over after he crossed the driveway.

Mr. BALL. Well----

Mr. GUINYARD. Mr. Callaway followed him, you see, we was together--he was my boss at that time and he followed him.

Mr. BALL. Callaway?

Mr. GUINYARD. Yes; trying to see which way was he going.

Mr. BALL. And then, which way did he go after he got to Jefferson?

Mr. GUINYARD. He went west on Jefferson--on the right-hand side--going west.

Mr. BALL. And what did Callaway do?

Mr. GUINYARD. He turned around and run back to the street and we helped load the policeman in the ambulance.

Mr. BALL. He ran back up to 10th Street, did you say?

Mr. GUINYARD. Yes.

Mr. BALL. Did you go with him?

Mr. GUINYARD. Right with him.

Mr. BALL. Did you see a police car there?

Mr. GUINYARD. Yes.

Mr. BALL. What did you see besides the police car?

Mr. GUINYARD. The police that was laying down in the front of the car.

Mr. BALL. A policeman?

Mr. GUINYARD. Yes.

Mr. BALL. Was he dead or alive at that time?

Mr. GUINYARD. He looked like he was dead to me.

Mr. BALL. What did you do?

Mr. GUINYARD. Helped put him in the ambulance.

Mr. BALL. You stayed there until the ambulance came?

Mr. GUINYARD. Yes, sir.

Mr. BALL. Were you there when the truck came up that was driven by Benavides?

Mr. GUINYARD. Yes, sir.

Mr. BALL. He came up right after this?

Mr. GUINYARD. Yes; he came up from the east side--going west.

Mr. BALL. And then what did you do after that?

Mr. GUINYARD. Well, we stood there a while and talked and I called him Donnie, he picked up all them empty hulls that come out of the gun.

Mr. BALL. Who did--Benavides?

Mr. GUINYARD. Yes.

Mr. BALL. Did you pick them up--any of them?

Mr. GUINYARD. He picked them up--I didn't pick them up--I was there with him.

Mr. BALL. You were there?

Mr. GUINYARD. I was there with him.

Mr. BALL. You were there when he picked them up?

Mr. GUINYARD. Yes.

Mr. BALL. Where were they?

Mr. GUINYARD. Laying across the yard as he kicked them out all around the sidewalk.

Mr. BALL. Were they anywhere near the bushes?

Mr. GUINYARD. No, sir; there was just this little old shrub that was in the yard just laying down through the yard--that little old shrub that was there.

Mr. BALL. Later that day, did you go down to the police department?

Mr. GUINYARD. Yes, sir; I went down that night.

Mr. BALL. That same night?

Mr. GUINYARD. Yes.

Mr. BALL. Whom did you go down with?

Mr. GUINYARD. Me and Ted.

Mr. BALL. You and who?

Mr. GUINYARD. Ted--Ted Callaway.

Mr. BALL. Ted Callaway?

Mr. GUINYARD. Yes.

Mr. BALL. And where did you go when you went to the police station?

Mr. GUINYARD. I went to the identifying office.

Mr. BALL. You went into a place where there were police officers?

Mr. GUINYARD. Yes, sir.

Mr. BALL. And how did you identify him--tell me what happened to you, what you saw?

Mr. GUINYARD. Well, I just saw him.

Mr. BALL. Well, were you in a big room?

Mr. GUINYARD. Yes--in a big room.

Mr. BALL. With police officers?

Mr. GUINYARD. Yes, sir.

Mr. BALL. And what did you see?

Mr. GUINYARD. I don't understand you.

Mr. BALL. Did you see some men up ahead of you?

Mr. GUINYARD. Yes--four men.

Mr. BALL. Four men?

Mr. GUINYARD. Yes--four men--handcuffed together.

Mr. BALL. What did you say?

Mr. GUINYARD. They was handcuffed together.

Mr. BALL. They was handcuffed?

Mr. GUINYARD. Yes; all four of them.

Mr. BALL. Were they of different sizes?

Mr. GUINYARD. Well, they was pretty close together--there wasn't much difference in size.

Mr. BALL. In height--they were about the same?

Mr. GUINYARD. About the same.

Mr. BALL. Were they all about the same color?

Mr. GUINYARD. No, sir; they wasn't all about the same color.

Mr. BALL. All about the same color?

Mr. GUINYARD. No, sir; they wasn't all about the same color.

Mr. BALL. Did you say anything to any police officer there after you saw them?

Mr. GUINYARD. I talked to one--with the detective--after he came out there.

Mr. BALL. What did you tell him--I mean in this room--as you saw these four men up there?

Mr. GUINYARD. He just asked me reckon I could identify them and I said I sure could.

Mr. BALL. What did you tell him?

Mr. GUINYARD. I just told him I sure could.

Mr. BALL. What did you say to him about it?

Mr. GUINYARD. Well, I didn't say anything--I was just waiting on them to bring them in.

Mr. BALL. After they brought them in and after you looked at them, what did you tell the police officers?

Mr. GUINYARD. I told them that was him right there--I pointed him out right there. That was him right there.

Mr. BALL. Do you remember where he was standing in the lineup--what number he was?

Mr. GUINYARD. I don't know what his number was, but I can tell you where he was standing at.

Mr. BALL. Where was he standing?

Mr. GUINYARD. He was standing--the second man from the east side, and that lineup was this way [indicating] and he was the second man from that there end.

Mr. BALL. And did you tell any police officer that you thought that was the man?

Mr. GUINYARD. Yes, sir.

Mr. BALL. Whom did you tell; what police officer was it?

Mr. GUINYARD. I don't know his name.

Mr. BALL. You don't know his name?

Mr. GUINYARD. No, sir; I don't know his name but I know him now if I would see him.

Mr. BALL. Before you went in there, did the police officers show you any pictures?

Mr. GUINYARD. No, sir.

Mr. BALL. Did the police officer say anything to you before you went in there?

Mr. GUINYARD. No, sir.

Mr. BALL. Did he say that he thought they had the man that killed the police officer?

Mr. GUINYARD. No, sir; he didn't tell me that.

Mr. BALL. Did you hear Ted Callaway say anything before you said you thought that was the man?

Mr. GUINYARD. No, sir.

Mr. BALL. Were you with Ted at the time?

Mr. GUINYARD. Yes, sir.

Mr. BALL. How close was Ted to you?

Mr. GUINYARD. Oh--sitting about like that.

Mr. BALL. You mean 3 or 4 feet away from you?

Mr. GUINYARD. Yes; something like that.

Mr. BALL. How was this man dressed that had the pistol in his hand?

Mr. GUINYARD. He had on a pair of black britches and a brown shirt and a little sort of light-gray-looking jacket.

Mr. BALL. A gray jacket.

Mr. GUINYARD. Yes; a light gray jacket and a white T-shirt.

Mr. BALL. A white T-shirt?

Mr. GUINYARD. Yes; a white T-shirt on under it.

Mr. BALL. Now, he had a light gray jacket on?

Mr. GUINYARD. And a brown shirt on.

Mr. BALL. And a white T-shirt on?

Mr. GUINYARD. Underneath it, because this brown shirt was open at the throat and the white T-shirt under it like this [indicating].

Mr. BALL. That's all I've got to examine you about now, except to show you these clothes, and they are upstairs. We will go up now and take a look at them.

(At this time Counsel Ball, the witness Guinyard and the reporter Oliver left the deposing room on the third floor of the Federal Building and resumed in a deposing room on the fourth floor of the Federal Building and the deposition proceedings continued as follows:)

Mr. BALL. Sam, I'll show you an exhibit here, which is a piece of clothing and which is marked Commission Exhibit No. 150. Have you ever seen this before?

Mr. GUINYARD. Yes, sir.

Mr. BALL. When and where?

Mr. GUINYARD. In Oak Cliff.

Mr. BALL. Did you ever see anybody wearing it?

Mr. GUINYARD. Yes, sir.

Mr. BALL. Who?

Mr. GUINYARD. Oswald.

Mr. BALL. Where?

Mr. GUINYARD. Oak Cliff.

Mr. BALL. Tell me a little more about it.

Mr. GUINYARD. In Oak Cliff and down in the courtroom.

Mr. BALL. Where?

Mr. GUINYARD. Down in the examining room.

Mr. BALL. When this man came down Patton Street toward Jefferson with his gun, you have mentioned he had a shirt on?

Mr. GUINYARD. Yes, sir.

Mr. BALL. You described that shirt as a brown shirt?

Mr. GUINYARD. Yes.

Mr. BALL. Does this look anything like the shirt?

Mr. GUINYARD. It looks just like it does.

Mr. BALL. You saw that shirt before?

Mr. GUINYARD. Yes.

Mr. BALL. Where?

Mr. GUINYARD. Down at the city hall.

Mr. BALL. At the police station?

Mr. GUINYARD. Yes.

Mr. BALL. And what did you tell them when they showed you this shirt?

Mr. GUINYARD. I told them that that's the shirt he had on.

Mr. BALL. Now, the next exhibit here is Commission Exhibit No. 162; have you ever seen this before?

Mr. GUINYARD. That's the jacket.

Mr. BALL. This is a gray jacket?

Mr. GUINYARD. Yes; that's the gray jacket.

Mr. BALL. It has a zipper on it?

Mr. GUINYARD. Yes.

Mr. BALL. You say that's the jacket?

Mr. GUINYARD. Yes; that he had on in Oak Cliff when he passed the lot.

Mr. BALL. That the man with the pistol had on?

Mr. GUINYARD. Yes, sir.

Mr. BALL. I have no further questions for you, Sam, and I thank you for coming down, and you can go home now.

Mr. GUINYARD. Thank you.

AFFIDAVIT OF LT. J. C. DAY

The following affidavit was executed by Lt. J. C. Day on May 7, 1964.

AFFIDAVIT

PRESIDENT'S COMMISSION ON THE ASSASSINATION OF PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY

STATE OF TEXAS, County of Dallas, ss:

Before me, Mary Rattan, a Notary Public in and for said County, State of Texas, on this day personally appeared Lt. J. C. Day, Dallas Police Department, who, after being by me duly sworn, on oath deposes and says:

When testifying before the President's Commission, I stated I did not remember who returned the two spent 6.5 hulls and envelope to my possession on the night of November 22, 1963. Since returning to Dallas Detective C. N. Dhority has called my attention to the fact he brought the three hulls in the envelope to me and asked me to check them again for fingerprints even though I had checked them when they were picked up on the sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository about 1:20 p.m. November 22, 1963 by Detective R. M. Sims and myself and placed in a manila envelope. Since talking to Dhority I remember now that he was the one who returned the shells to me about 10:00 p.m. and stated that his office wanted to retain one. He left me two shells and the envelope that Detective Sims and I had previously marked. It was then that I scratched my name on the two shells that were released at 11:45 p.m. to Agent Vince Drain along with the rifle and other evidence.

Signed this 7th day of May 1964.

(S) J. C. Day, J. C. DAY.

AFFIDAVIT OF LT. J. C. DAY

The following affidavit was executed by Lt. J. C. Day on June 23, 1964.

AFFIDAVIT

PRESIDENT'S COMMISSION ON THE ASSASSINATION OF PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY

STATE OF TEXAS, County of Dallas, ss:

Before me, Mary Rattan, a Notary Public in and for said County, State of Texas, on this day personally appeared Lt. J. C. Day, Dallas Police Department, who, after being by me duly sworn, on oath deposes and says:

The following affidavit is made to clear up confusion regarding the three spent 6.5 hulls, commission numbers 543, 544, and 545, found by the 6th floor window of the Texas School Book Depository on November 22, 1963. The hulls were picked up by Detective R. M. Sims and Lieutenant J. C. Day and placed in an envelope. Detective R. L. Studebaker was also present. The envelope was marked and dated by Sims and Day. Detective Sims took the hulls after they were checked for fingerprints by Day. The third hull, commission number 545, was later released directly to the FBI by the Dallas Police Department Homicide Division. At 10:00 P.M. November 22, 1963, Detective C. N. Dhority brought the three hulls in the marked envelope back to Lieutenant Day in the Identification Bureau office to recheck for prints. Dhority retained one hull, commission number 545 and left the other two, commission numbers 543, 544 along with the envelope with me to be sent to the FBI. Vince Drain, FBI agent, took custody at 11:45 A.M. the same day. When I appeared before the commission April 22, 1964, I could not find my name on one of the hulls, identified as commission number 543, and thought this was the hull that had been retained by Dhority. On June 8, 1964, the three hulls, commission numbers 543, 544, and 545, were back in Dallas and were examined by Captain G. M. Doughty and myself at the local FBI office. Close examination with a magnifying glass under a good light disclosed that my name "Day" was on all three hulls, at the small end. Also GD for Captain George Doughty was on two of them. Commission numbers 543 and 544 were the first two sent to Washington on November 22, 1963. They have Doughty's initials where he marked the hulls as they were released to Vince Drain at 11:45 P.M. on November 22, 1963 by Doughty and Day. The third hull, commission number 545, does not have Doughty's mark, but is plainly marked "Day". In Washington, I had numbers 543 and 545 switched because I didn't find my name on number 543. I can identify commission numbers 543, 544, and 545 from my name on them, as the three hulls found on the sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository on November 22, 1963. As to the time I scratched my name on the hulls, I do not remember whether it was at the window when picked up or at 10:00 P.M. November 22, 1963, when they were returned to me by Dhority in the marked envelope. It had to be one or the other, because this is the only time I had all three hulls in my possession. Both Detective R. L. Studebaker and Detective R. M. Sims, who were present at the window when the hulls were picked up, state I marked them as they were found under the window.

Signed this 23d day of June 1964.

(S) J. C. Day, J. C. DAY.

AFFIDAVIT OF THOMAS J. KELLEY

The following affidavit was executed by Thomas J. Kelley on June 1, 1964.

AFFIDAVIT

PRESIDENT'S COMMISSION ON THE ASSASSINATION OF PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY

CITY OF WASHINGTON, District of Columbia, ss:

I, Thomas J. Kelley, being first duly sworn do upon oath depose and state:

I am an Inspector in the United States Secret Service assigned to Secret Service Headquarters in Washington, D.C. On November 22, 1963, I was not in the City of Dallas at the time of the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. I was instructed through Deputy Chief Paul Paterni to go to Dallas directly from Lexington, Kentucky, where I had been engaged in a special assignment and arrived on Friday evening in Dallas at approximately 10:30 p.m.

I attended a total of four interviews with Lee Harvey Oswald, all of which were held in the office of Captain J. W. Fritz of the Homicide Bureau of the Dallas Police Department. Three of these interviews occurred on November 23 and the fourth on November 24. (Prior to my arrival in Dallas, Oswald had been interrogated on November 22.)

Subsequent to these interviews I dictated summaries from my notes of the subject matter discussed and these dictated summaries were transmitted to Chief James J. Rowley on November 29 and December 1, 1963.

Copies of these written summaries are attached to this affidavit as exhibit A and incorporated by reference herein and made a part hereof. The summary of my last interview with Oswald which occurred on Sunday, November 24, 1963, was the first portion of a four-page memorandum which included in addition to the report of the interview, my report on the circumstances immediately following the murder of Lee Harvey Oswald.

I hereby certify that the attached memoranda constitute my total written memoranda of the interviews with Lee Harvey Oswald at which I was present. I have no additional recollection at this time which I can add to the attached memoranda. I further certify that these memoranda accurately summarize my notes and recollections from these interviews.

Dated this 1st day of June 1964.

(S) Thomas J. Kelley, THOMAS J. KELLEY.

AFFIDAVIT OF J. W. FRITZ

The following affidavit was executed by J. W. Fritz on June 9, 1964.

AFFIDAVIT

PRESIDENT'S COMMISSION ON THE ASSASSINATION OF PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY

STATE OF TEXAS, County of Dallas, ss.:

Before me, Mary Rattan, a Notary Public in and for said County, State of Texas, on this day personally appeared J. W. Fritz, Dallas Police Department, who, after being by me duly sworn, on oath deposes and says: I wish to supplement the evidence given by me on Wednesday, April 20, 1964, before the President's Commission on the Assassination of President Kennedy, as follows:

The Spent Rifle Hulls

Three spent rifle hulls were found under the window in the southeast corner of the 6th floor of the Texas School Book Depository Building, Dallas, Texas, on the afternoon of November 22, 1963. When the officers called me to this window, I asked them not to move the shells nor touch them until Lt. Day of the Dallas Police Department could make pictures of the hulls showing where they fell after being ejected from the rifle. After the pictures were made, Detective R. M. Sims of the Homicide Bureau, who was assisting in the search of the building, brought the three empty hulls to my office. These were delivered to me in my office at the police headquarters. I kept the hulls in an envelope in my possession and later turned them over to C. N. Dhority of the Homicide Bureau and instructed him to take them to Lt. Day of the Identification Bureau. I told Detective Dhority that after these hulls were checked for prints to leave two of them to be delivered to the FBI and to bring one of them to my office to be used for comparison tests here in the office, as we were trying to find where the cartridges had been bought. When Detective Dhority returned from the Identification Bureau, he returned the one empty hull which I kept in my possession. Several days later, I believe on the night of November 27, Vince Drain of the FBI called me at home about one o'clock in the morning and said that the Commission wanted the other empty hull and a notebook that belonged to Oswald. I came to the office and delivered these things to the FBI. We have Mr. James P. Hosty's receipt for these items in our report.

Reference to the Testimony of Roger Craig

I don't remember the name Roger Craig, but I do remember a man coming into my outer office and I remember one of my officers calling me outside the door of my private office. I talked to this man for a minute or two, and he started telling me a story about seeing Oswald leaving the building. I don't remember all the things that this man said, but I turned him over to Lt. Baker who talked to him. Lee Harvey Oswald was in my office at this time. I don't remember anything about Lee Harvey Oswald jumping up or making any remarks or gestures to this man or to me at this time, and had I brought this officer into my inner office I feel sure that I would remember it. There were other officers in my inner office at the time, and I have found no one who knows about the remarks that you have asked about.

Signed this 9th day of June 1964.

(S) J. W. Fritz, J. W. FRITZ.

TESTIMONY OF MRS. MARY JANE ROBERTSON

The testimony of Mrs. Mary Jane Robertson was taken at 12:20 p.m., on May 28, 1964, in the office of the U.S. attorney, 301 Post Office Building, Bryan and Ervay Streets, Dallas, Tex., by Mr. Leon D. Hubert, Jr., assistant counsel of the President's Commission.

Mr. HUBERT. This is the deposition of Mrs. Mary Jane Robertson.

Mrs. ROBERTSON. Right.

Mr. HUBERT. Mrs. Robertson, my name is Leon D. Hubert, and I am a member of the advisory staff of the general counsel on the President's Commission on the Assassination of President Kennedy. Under the provisions of Executive Order 11130, dated November 29, 1963, the joint resolution of Congress No. 137, and the rules of procedure adopted by the President's Commission in conformance with the Executive order and the joint resolution, I have been authorized to take a sworn deposition from you. I state to you now that the general nature of the Commission's inquiry is to ascertain, evaluate, and report upon the facts relevant to the assassination of President Kennedy and the subsequent violent death of Lee Harvey Oswald. In particular, as to you, Mrs. Robertson, the nature of the inquiry today is to determine what facts you know about the death of Oswald and any other pertinent facts you may know about the general inquiry.

Now, Mrs. Robertson, I believe that you appear here today by virtue of a general request made to you by Mr. J. Lee Rankin, general counsel of the President's Commission, in a letter addressed by him to Chief Curry, asking Chief Curry to request that you come here. Under the rules adopted by the Commission, you are entitled to a 3-day written notice prior to the taking of this deposition, but the rules adopted also provide that a witness may waive this 3-day notice if he sees fit to do so. Now, I must first ask you if you wish to receive the 3-day notice, or whether you are willing to waive it?

Mrs. ROBERTSON. I am quite willing to.

Mr. HUBERT. Will you rise then, and raise your right hand so that I may administer the oath?

Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you are about to give will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?

Mrs. ROBERTSON. Yes; I do.

Mr. HUBERT. Will you please state your full name, please, ma'am?

Mrs. ROBERTSON. My name is Mary Jane Robertson or Mrs. Jim G. Robertson, as I go by.

Mr. HUBERT. What is your present residence address?

Mrs. ROBERTSON. 619 Lacewood, L-a-c-e-w-o-o-d [spelling] Drive, in Dallas, of course.

Mr. HUBERT. And your occupation?

Mrs. ROBERTSON. I am classified as a clerk-typist with the city civil service.

Mr. HUBERT. That's Dallas?

Mrs. ROBERTSON. Yes--Dallas--and I work in the special service bureau of the Dallas Police Department.

Mr. HUBERT. In other words, you are a civil service employee but assigned to the Dallas Police Department?

Mrs. ROBERTSON. Right.

Mr. HUBERT. How long have you been so assigned?

Mrs. ROBERTSON. Just about a year and a half--October the 1st I started to work there, so just about a year and a half.

Mr. HUBERT. Now, were you there on Friday, November 22, 1963?

Mrs. ROBERTSON. Yes.

Mr. HUBERT. The day the President was killed?

Mrs. ROBERTSON. Yes; I certainly was.

Mr. HUBERT. Do you remember what time you went to work there and what time you left?

Mrs. ROBERTSON. Yes; at that time I was coming to work at 7:15 and leaving at 4:15--those were my hours.

Mr. HUBERT. At 7:15 in the morning?

Mrs. ROBERTSON. At 7:15 in the morning and leaving at 4:15 in the afternoon. Now, as to the exact time I left that afternoon, I cannot tell you to the minute because, well, further on in the testimony you will probably want to ask, but Jack Revill, Lieutenant Revill, asked me to take a letter for him, the exact time of which I cannot tell you, but I do remember this very well--my husband had a vacation. He had been on a hunting trip and he was at home, so when Jack asked me to write this letter I went in and phoned home and I said, "I might run just a few minutes late because I don't know if this will be a long letter or a short letter, or what it will consist of," and I did have the car, and ordinarily I would have been home, say, leaving the office at 4:15, in 20 or 25 minutes, you know, but I did get home more or less around 5 o'clock--which was the usual time. I mean, I didn't run, you know, real late or anything, but that part--I definitely remember, and my husband does, too.

Mr. HUBERT. And the letter of Lt. Jack Revill you just talked about was the thing that caused you to be delayed?

Mrs. ROBERTSON. That was what I stayed to write--yes.

Mr. HUBERT. And that is a fact?

Mrs. ROBERTSON. That is a fact.

Mr. HUBERT. So, that was the last thing you did that day?

Mrs. ROBERTSON. Yes; when I completed the letter.

Mr. HUBERT. Normally, you would have left at 4:15?

Mrs. ROBERTSON. Yes; and I am saying that I didn't run too much after 4:15--the point of it--now, exactly what time I started on that--I don't know.

Mr. HUBERT. Normally, how long would it take you to get to your home from your office?

Mrs. ROBERTSON. Well, you see, if I leave at 4:15 I make a little better time than if you wait until 4:30 because the more traffic starts then, and it's hard to say exactly, but I go on the freeway, and it's probably 20 minutes and if it's heavy traffic probably 25--you know what I mean?

Mr. HUBERT. Would it be fair to state, then, that you probably left at about 4:30?

Mrs. ROBERTSON. I would assume so. Now, I'm not saying to the very minute or anything like that, but I am saying that approximately--if it was after 5 o'clock, it was very shortly after when I got in the car, you know, I did not run what you would call late by hours or so.

Mr. HUBERT. Now, I'm going to show you two documents, but I want to identify them with reference to your deposition, so I am marking a document which has been already identified as Commission Exhibit No. 838, as follows: "Dallas, Texas, May 28, 1964, Exhibit No. 1, of the deposition of Mrs. Mary Jane Robertson," and I am signing my name below that, all of which appears in the left margin, and I am doing precisely the same to the other document, which bears the identification, Commission Exhibit No. 709, except that I am marking this as Exhibit No. 2 of the deposition of Mary Jane Robertson, signing my name to that.

Now, Mrs. Robertson, I would ask you to look at Exhibit No. 1 and Exhibit No. 2 which are identified and ask you if that is the letter to which you have previously referred as having been written or typed by you for Lieutenant Revill?

Mrs. ROBERTSON. I didn't this--because I know nothing about this down here [indicating].

Mr. HUBERT. You are pointing to Exhibit No. 1 and you are covering with your hand the affidavit portion?

Mrs. ROBERTSON. Yes.

Mr. HUBERT. You say you know nothing about that?

Mrs. ROBERTSON. No.

Mr. HUBERT. The letter itself, you have noticed that they are actually identical, one appears to be an original and the other a copy?

Mrs. ROBERTSON. That's right--I was trying to see if there was a difference.

Mr. HUBERT. Do you remember writing these letters yourself?

Mrs. ROBERTSON. Why, yes; I wrote them.

Mr. HUBERT. Is there anything on the letter that identifies you as having written them, I mean like the usual little marks put on the letter by a stenographer?

Mrs. ROBERTSON. No; that's something I always do, but what I mean, the state of confusion--well--I'm sure you can't have a conception of the state of confusion that office was in--our main secretary was out, she had a dental appointment and she had left earlier that morning, there were only two girls in the office and the two deskmen.

Mr. HUBERT. Well, you do identify the letter?

Mrs. ROBERTSON. Definitely--I identify the letter.

Mr. HUBERT. You identify it from the sense of it or what?

Mrs. ROBERTSON. Well, this is something that I did not memorize verbatim, and could not have repeated--what I mean--per word, but I could have told you the general gist of the letter, is what I mean, yes--the actual facts.

Mr. HUBERT. Was it dictated to you?

Mrs. ROBERTSON. Lieutenant Revill came in and said, "Mary Jane, I would like for you to take a letter," and like I said, our stenographer was out of the office on an appointment, and I said, "Of course, now, Jack, this has been a hard day and you know I don't take shorthand and if you will be patient with me and let me write it out in longhand, I will be happy to do it for you." That is when I made my phone call home, and so he said, "Well, you take your time," and he said, "I know you don't take shorthand and that's quite all right," and I had him even spell such names so as to be certain of--you know--the agent's name and all like that. He sat across the desk from me, as we are doing here.

Mr. HUBERT. In other words, it was written out in your hand?

Mrs. ROBERTSON. Yes; now, Jack, as I remember--I speak of him, we are very informal in our office, as Lieutenant Revill--Lieutenant Revill, as I recall, did have several papers or rough drafts that possibly he had written out or something, but he did speak verbally to me and I wrote in my own handwriting and I used a shorthand notebook. I wrote in my own handwriting.

Mr. HUBERT. And then you used your own handwriting for the purpose of writing the letter?

Mrs. ROBERTSON. That's correct.

Mr. HUBERT. What did you do with your own handwriting notes?

Mrs. ROBERTSON. Anything like that I always take and I tear up and put in the wastebasket.

Mr. HUBERT. And you think that's what happened here?

Mrs. ROBERTSON. Well, I'm certain it did.

Mr. HUBERT. But you don't know the existence of those notes now, is what I am getting at?

Mrs. ROBERTSON. No, sir.

Mr. HUBERT. Do you know how many copies you made?

Mrs. ROBERTSON. There again, I could not swear to you under oath exactly. Ordinarily we make an original and five. Now, whether Lieutenant Revill just might have said that an original and three will be enough, I cannot tell you.

Mr. HUBERT. You don't know how many you made?

Mrs. ROBERTSON. No--I cannot--I absolutely do not remember that.

Mr. HUBERT. But the normal practice would have been to make more than one copy?

Mrs. ROBERTSON. More than the original?

Mr. HUBERT. More than the original and one copy--normally you would write the original and how many copies?

Mrs. ROBERTSON. Now, by this going to the captain that is not necessarily so. Anything we address to the chief we would have definitely more than one carbon copy, but for little instances like that, I cannot remember--Lieutenant Revill just might have said "an original and one will be enough."

Mr. HUBERT. Do you recall that he did say so?

Mrs. ROBERTSON. I do not--absolutely.

Mr. HUBERT. And you don't really know how many you did make?

Mrs. ROBERTSON. I cannot tell you--I cannot remember.

Mr. HUBERT. When the letter was finished, what happened to it?

Mrs. ROBERTSON. I called Lieutenant Revill, as well as I can remember, I called him into my office. Now, I might have gone into his office, but I took it directly to him. I waited and let him read it and let him proof it over to see it and I know he questioned me--he said, "Are you sure this is the correct way to spell assassination?" And I said, "Yes, sir; I looked it up in the dictionary," and he read the letter and then as I remember, I got my personal belongings together and I left the building then.

Mr. HUBERT. So, you handed the original and copy or copies to him?

Mrs. ROBERTSON. Directly to Lieutenant Revill.

Mr. HUBERT. And you don't know what he did with it, to your own knowledge?

Mrs. ROBERTSON. Oh, no; I left the building.

Mr. HUBERT. Do you know anything about what the figures in the lower right-hand corner on Exhibit 1, that is to say, Commission Exhibit No. 838, mean?

Mrs. ROBERTSON. Yes; I do.

Mr. HUBERT. What do they mean?

Mrs. ROBERTSON. The captain has files of copies and that is his own, and his own personal file. In fact, he gave me a letter, a photostat, which he said it would be quite all right to show that that is his own and that that appears on his file, you know what I mean, the way he has it set up.

Mr. HUBERT. You are talking about what?

Mrs. ROBERTSON. The O-1 is what I'm talking about.

Mr. HUBERT. Now, you are showing me a document that is exactly the same actually, it seems to be a photostatic copy of Exhibits Nos. 1 and 2, that you have just testified to.

Mrs. ROBERTSON. That's right, this is in the captain's files.

Mr. HUBERT. This is from the captain's flies and in the left-hand side it shows "WPG"?

Mrs. ROBERTSON. That's Capt. W. P. Gannaway.

Mr. HUBERT. And then over on the right-hand side it has "O-1" and you say that those are his initials on the left-hand side, and on the right-hand side is what, that is his indexing?

Mrs. ROBERTSON. Correct--this is not in the outside file or anything, it's in the captain's office.

Mr. HUBERT. Would that indicate that there is another copy other than the two that you have just testified to, being Commission Exhibits Nos. 838 and 709?

Mrs. ROBERTSON. Well, sir, will you phrase that again, I don't understand it?

Mr. HUBERT. Well, you will notice that in Commission Exhibits Nos. 838 and 709, both of which have been identified, respectively, as Exhibits Nos. 1 and 2 for this deposition, do not have on the left-hand side the initials of Captain Gannaway. Now, it could be that this document you have just showed me is another copy or another photostat initialed?

Mrs. ROBERTSON. Sir, I don't know. He called me in his office yesterday and handed me the letter and I read it. I said, "Yes, Captain Gannaway, this is the letter. I assume I typed it because this is the contents of the letter that I typed."

Mr. HUBERT. And you remembered it?

Mrs. ROBERTSON. Yes; so he handed it to me and he said, "Well, take this along," and he said, "This, of course, Mary Jane, you well know----"

Mr. HUBERT. You are talking about the "O-1"?

Mrs. ROBERTSON. The O-1, I don't ask questions, but I mean, he has a file, of course, of the documents pertaining to this and so he said, "Would you return the letter to me when you return from taking your deposition?"

Mr. HUBERT. He didn't authorize you to let me have this letter that you have just showed me?

Mrs. ROBERTSON. No; he did not.

Mr. HUBERT. Well, as I said before, I think you will agree with me that this letter seems to be exactly the same as the other two, with the exception that on the one that you have produced there are in the left-hand corner, the initials WPG, which you say you identify as being the initials of Captain Gannaway?

Mrs. ROBERTSON. That's correct.

Mr. HUBERT. Can you tell us anything about the other markings and symbols on the bottom of Commission Exhibit No. 838? I refer first to seemingly a rubber stamp in a square called "Indexed date 4-27-4" and the initial "S." Can you tell me what that means?

Mrs. ROBERTSON. I have no idea in the world, sir. I have never seen a stamp like that.

Mr. HUBERT. And then below that, the initials "Int," this being in writing, and then "2965-34," do you know what that means?

Mrs. ROBERTSON. I have no idea. Now, there again is our O-1, which would be in our captain's files. Now, whether this is something pertaining--I do not know whether this is something pertaining to his files only, this subject matter.

Mr. HUBERT. But in any case, from your own knowledge, except for the O-1, as to which you have already testified, the rubber stamp and the other figures in the lower right-hand corner in Exhibit No. 1 in this deposition, being Commission Exhibit No. 838, as to those you know nothing about?

Mrs. ROBERTSON. I know nothing, sir. Once I handed the letter to Lieutenant Revill, then I never saw the letter again until I was called into the captain's office yesterday. I remember it in my mind, but as far as seeing the actual document, I had not seen the actual document, I mean a copy of it or anything.

Mr. HUBERT. Do you think it would be possible for you to call Captain Gannaway and see if he would give you authority to let me have that copy that you have shown us or perhaps take a photostat of it; can you do that?

Mrs. ROBERTSON. Yes; I will do that.

Mr. HUBERT. Suppose we take a few minutes recess, then, and you call Captain Gannaway and ask him if we might have that copy.

Mrs. ROBERTSON. All right; I will.

(At this point the proceedings of the deposition of Mrs. Robertson were recessed, during which time Mrs. Robertson made the call heretofore referred to, and the proceedings were continued as hereinafter shown.)

Mr. HUBERT. Mrs. Robertson, you have attempted to reach Captain Gannaway to see if he could give you permission to either let me have a photocopy made of this letter which you showed me, or else have a copy of that made, but at the moment you have not been able to reach him.

Suppose we do this. I have already asked you all the questions that I would ask you about the document, and suppose we do it this way--that if you do secure permission to give it to me, then when it is delivered at a later time today or at the latest, tomorrow, I will mark it as Exhibit No. 3 of your deposition, do you understand?

Mrs. ROBERTSON. Yes.

Mr. HUBERT. By simply writing my name and the date and then all of the testimony which you have previously given as to that document heretofore, but which did not refer to a numbered exhibit will apply to Exhibit No. 3; is that all right? Do you understand what I mean?

Mrs. ROBERTSON. Yes--I see--I understand what you mean.

Mr. HUBERT. Now, I understand that Captain Gannaway, from what you told me, called you in yesterday and spoke to you about this. Has anyone else spoken to you about this recently, at any time?

Mrs. ROBERTSON. No, captain--I assume it was from this letter that was addressed to the chief requiring my testimony on this--the captain just said I was needed and that I had a choice of Thursday or Friday and which would be more convenient?

Mr. HUBERT. Yes; I understand, and then he asked you if you remembered it?

Mrs. ROBERTSON. He asked me first if I remembered the letter, and I said, "Yes, very well," and I repeated the gist of the contents to him.

Mr. HUBERT. That was the only time anyone had spoken to you about the letter?

Mrs. ROBERTSON. Well, when Lieutenant Revill went to Washington, I believe, he went a matter of a week or 2 weeks ago and he said at that time when he came back, when he returned from Washington, he said, "Mary Jane, you know they may need your testimony on it," and I said, "Well, that's fine. I certainly remember the day, and I certainly remember the incident," and other than that there has been no discussion.

Mr. HUBERT. And there is no doubt in your mind that it was written, as you say, on the afternoon of November 22, approximately between the hours of 4 and 4:30 p.m.?

Mrs. ROBERTSON. I would say that it was written more between--yes--about then, because I was thinking from the--actually the time he started giving it to me and all that--actually the typing and waiting for him to proofread it and all like that--that I am sure--because I went directly home to my family and told my husband that I had typed the letter.

Mr. HUBERT. And there can be no doubt about it being November 22, either?

Mrs. ROBERTSON. No doubt in the world.

Mrs. HUBERT. All right, Mrs. Robertson, thank you very much. As soon as you find out from Captain Gannaway, perhaps you can arrange some way to get the document delivered?

Mrs. ROBERTSON. Shall I personally have to deliver that to you, or can it be sent by one of the officers? Is there a requirement about it?

Mr. HUBERT. Just so that it is identified more particularly with your testimony, if you get permission to hand me that document, or deliver it in person, that's all that will be necessary.

Mrs. ROBERTSON. Well, I'm quite sure the captain will not object.

Mr. HUBERT. If you want to send it over, I would like you to place your name on it just so that we will know it is the document we are talking about, because after all, this is going to be read by people later, and we know what we are talking about, but we must make it clear that others will know from the whole record what it is.

Mrs. ROBERTSON. I see, sir.

Mr. HUBERT. Thank you, very much, and I appreciate your assistance.

Mrs. ROBERTSON. All right.

TESTIMONY OF LYNDAL L. SHANEYFELT

The testimony of Lyndal L. Shaneyfelt was taken at 3:40 p.m., on June 12, 1964, at 200 Maryland Avenue NE., Washington, D.C., by Mr. Melvin Aron Eisenberg, assistant counsel of the President's Commission.

(The oath was administered by the reporter.)

Mr. SHANEYFELT. I do.

Mr. EISENBERG. Could you state your full name, Mr. Shaneyfelt?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; Lyndal L. Shaneyfelt.

Mr. EISENBERG. And you have testified before the Commission in this proceeding before?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; I have.

Mr. EISENBERG. We will not rehearse your qualifications again, since you have already been accepted as an expert in the field in which you are going to be questioned today.

Mr. Shaneyfelt, I hand you a photograph marked Shaneyfelt Exhibit No. 1, consisting of a photograph of Lee Harvey Oswald holding a rifle, and I ask you whether you prepared that photograph?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; I did.

Mr. EISENBERG. Is this a photograph of an existing Commission exhibit?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; this is a copy of the small photograph that is a part of Commission Exhibit No. 133.

Mr. EISENBERG. That would be 133-A?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. I don't recall whether it is A or B.

Mr. EISENBERG. I hand you photographs of Commission Exhibits Nos. 133-A and 133-B and ask if this serves to refresh your recollection as to whether Shaneyfelt Exhibit No. 1 is a photograph of 133-A or 133-B?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; Shaneyfelt Exhibit No. 1 is a copy of the Commission Exhibit No. 133-A.

Mr. EISENBERG. Now, Mr. Shaneyfelt, I hand you the cover of Life magazine, issue of February 21, 1964, which I have labeled Shaneyfelt Exhibit No. 2, and I ask you if this is a photograph which you have previously examined in connection with earlier testimony given by you to the Commission?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct.

Mr. EISENBERG. I hand you page 80 of the same issue of Life, which is labeled Shaneyfelt Exhibit No. 3, and I ask you the same question, that is, whether this is the photograph you have previously discussed in connection with earlier testimony?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; it is.

Mr. EISENBERG. Now, for the record, I am using duplicate originals rather than the actual exhibits, because the actual exhibits are now being printed up by the Government Printing Office.

Mr. Shaneyfelt, I hand you the front page of the Detroit Free Press, issue of February 17, 1964, containing a picture similar to Shaneyfelt Exhibit No. 1, and the other pictures thus far referred to--and I am labeling this Detroit Free Press page Shaneyfelt Exhibit No. 4--and ask you whether you have examined the picture of Lee Harvey Oswald and a rifle appearing on that exhibit?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; I have.

Mr. EISENBERG. Did you compare this picture with 133-A or Shaneyfelt Exhibit No. 1, your reproduction of 133-A?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; I did.

Mr. EISENBERG. What was your conclusion on the basis of that comparison?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. I found that the reproduction of the photograph of Oswald holding the gun on Shaneyfelt Exhibit No. 4 has insufficient detail to warrant positive identification as being the same photograph as Shaneyfelt Exhibit No. 1.

However, I did find that the photograph in the newspaper, Exhibit No. 4, is consistent in all respects with the photograph which is Exhibit No. 1, except for variations in retouching that are a normal part of the process of making halftone reproductions from photographs for newspapers. I further found that there was nothing in these photographs to indicate that they are other than the same photograph.

Mr. EISENBERG. Now, when you say that the only variations appear to be variations in retouching, that would be based on the conclusion that they were the same photograph, is that correct?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes.

Mr. EISENBERG. Could you describe those variations which are apparently due to retouching, Mr. Shaneyfelt?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes. There is an area to the right of Oswald's head and shoulder, to my left as I look at the photograph, that has been airbrushed or otherwise altered, to intensify the outline of the shoulder, which would be Oswald's shoulder.

In addition there is retouching around the stock of the rifle, and along the other portions of the rifle where it crosses Oswald's body, that has been added to intensify the detail in that portion of the photograph.

Mr. EISENBERG. When you say "around the stock," could you specify as to whether you mean the top, bottom, end, or all three or any two of those boundaries?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. In Shaneyfelt Exhibit No. 4 there is retouching on both the top and bottom and butt of the stock, and also a highlight running along the top of the gun from the bolt forward toward the muzzle.

There is an additional highlight along the bottom of the gun just forward of the trigger assembly between the trigger assembly and the hand.

Mr. EISENBERG. Now, there is a highlight on Shaneyfelt Exhibit No. 1 running near the top of the barrel or receiver, is that correct--terminating at Oswald's left hand?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes.

Mr. EISENBERG. What is the relation between the highlight at the top of the barrel or receiver in Shaneyfelt Exhibit No. 4 and the highlight just referred to in Shaneyfelt Exhibit No. 1?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. In Exhibit No. 1, that highlight along the bolt of the gun is in two parts, and the highlight in the photograph or the reproduction of the photograph, Exhibit No. 4, is a continuous highlight.

Mr. EISENBERG. Is it your opinion that the highlight in Shaneyfelt Exhibit No. 4 is based upon the highlight in Shaneyfelt Exhibit No. 1?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes.

Mr. EISENBERG. But it differs, at least, in that it makes a continuous highlight where none appears in Shaneyfelt Exhibit No. 1, is that your testimony?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct.

Mr. EISENBERG. Now, in Shaneyfelt Exhibit No. 1, a telescopic sight is apparent on the rifle, and no such sight is apparent in Shaneyfelt Exhibit No. 4. Do you have any opinion as to the reason for the lack of a sight appearing on Shaneyfelt Exhibit No. 4?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes.

Mr. EISENBERG. Could you give that opinion?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. I believe that the sight does not appear in the reproduction of the photograph on Shaneyfelt Exhibit No. 4, because it was not retouched to intensify the detail of the sight, and, therefore was lost in the engraving process. I do not believe that there was any retouching over the sight in order to purposely obliterate it from the reproduction in Exhibit No. 4.

Mr. EISENBERG. Now, is there generally a loss of detail in reproduction of illustrations appearing in newspapers, Mr. Shaneyfelt?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; there is. This is apparent in other areas of this photograph when compared with Shaneyfelt Exhibit No. 1, in areas of Oswald's shirt, where wrinkling appears in Exhibit No. 1, and is lost in the reproduction. Also, the wrinkles in the dark areas of the trousers are not reproduced in the halftone process, but this detail is lost by the process.

Mr. EISENBERG. What is this halftone process which you mention?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. This is the halftone process by which a continuous tone photograph, such as Exhibit No. 1, is photographed through a screen so that it can be broken up into a dot pattern of black dots on a white background and white dots on a black background to give the appearance of a continuous tone in the printed newspaper reproduction. And this is the only means by which a continuous-tone photograph can be reproduced.

Mr. EISENBERG. Why is it called a halftone process?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. I don't really know the answer but I would assume that it is because it gives you the tones in between black and white, or the halftones.

Mr. EISENBERG. Now, a loss of detail is inherent in this process, is it?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is true, particularly in regard to newspaper reproductions, where a relatively coarse screen is used in making the halftone. In a magazine publication, where a higher quality of printing is used, and a better quality of paper is used, it is possible to use a finer screen and thereby retain a greater amount of the detail.

Mr. EISENBERG. Now, referring once more to the highlight running along the top of the weapon, and terminating at Oswald's left hand in Shaneyfelt Exhibit No. 4; when you compare this exhibit with Shaneyfelt Exhibit No. 1, does it appear that that highlight actually runs along the top of the weapon?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. In the reproduction of the photograph on Exhibit No. 4, the impression is given that the highlight is along the top of the rifle, because you see no additional detail above that highlight along the top of the gun.

Mr. EISENBERG. Now, if you compare that with Shaneyfelt Exhibit No. 1, where a similar highlight appears, does that highlight actually denote the top of the weapon, or is any detail above the highlight apparent in Shaneyfelt Exhibit No. 1?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. On Shaneyfelt Exhibit No. 1, the highlight does not denote the top of the weapon. There is detail present that shows other areas of the gun, the breech, above the highlight.

Mr. EISENBERG. Now, would you say then that detail of the weapon itself, that is, the upper part of the weapon, had been lost along with detail representing the telescopic sight?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct.

Mr. EISENBERG. Bringing your attention back to Shaneyfelt Exhibits Nos. 2 and 3, which are the Life photographs, how did these photographs compare with Shaneyfelt Exhibit No. 4, the Detroit Free Press photograph?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. The primary difference is in the retouching. In the area above and behind Oswald's right shoulder, the background has been retouched out on Exhibit No. 4, the Detroit Free Press. In the Life magazine reproduction, Exhibit No. 2, the background has been left in, and the retouching has been added to the shirt area around the right shoulder to enhance the detail along in that area.

The Life magazine reproduction, Exhibit No. 2, also has retouching around the scope of the rifle in order that it will not blend into the dark shirt that Oswald was wearing and thus be lost in the reproduction process; this has not been done in Exhibit No. 4. The retouching along the top of the rifle stock is generally similar, in that it is in a straight line from the butt of the stock to the bolt. However, Exhibit No. 4 has a different type of retouching along the end or butt of the stock and the bottom of the stock or the lower edge of the stock between the butt and the trigger guard. Highlights along the top and bottom of the breech area are different in Exhibit No. 4 than in Exhibit No. 2.

There is a dark shadow between the legs of Oswald that is about halfway between the knee and the crotch that has been left in the reproduction of Exhibit No. 4, but has been retouched out of the Life magazine reproduction, Exhibit No. 2. These are the primary variations in the retouching on the two exhibits.

Mr. EISENBERG. Does the highlight running at or near the top of the receiver or barrel in the bolt area show a continuous or an intermittent form in Commission Exhibit No. 2?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Commission Exhibit No. 2 shows a break in the highlight along the bolt, and is reproduced very close to the original photograph, which is Exhibit No. 1.

In fact, this area was probably not retouched, or this highlight was probably not retouched, for the Life magazine reproduction.

Mr. EISENBERG. Now, you also mentioned that the retouching along the stock was different when Shaneyfelt Exhibit No. 2 is compared with Shaneyfelt Exhibit No. 4. Could you go into a little bit of detail on that difference?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; I mentioned that the highlight along the top from the butt to the bolt is generally similar in that it is in a straight line. Although the rifle itself is actually curved along that area, they both have been retouched in a relatively straight line along the top edge of the stock. There has been a white or light line added along the butt of the stock where it crosses Oswald's leg in Exhibit No. 4 and this has not been done in Exhibit No. 2. In addition, a white outline has been drawn in along the bottom edge of the stock as it runs from the butt to the trigger guard in Exhibit No. 4. This has not been done in Exhibit No. 2.

Mr. EISENBERG. Now, Mr. Shaneyfelt, when retouching is effected, is it performed on a negative or on a print?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Retouching for newspaper reproduction is almost always done on the print.

Mr. EISENBERG. And what about magazine reproductions?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. This would also be true of magazine reproductions.

Mr. EISENBERG. And would that explain how Shaneyfelt Exhibits Nos. 2 and 4 could differ from each other, even though they were apparently both taken from the same print, originally from the same print, of which Shaneyfelt Exhibit No. 1 is a photograph?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; that would explain the difference.

Mr. EISENBERG. That is--could you go into detail on that? Could you elaborate that answer? By what process would the result of a reproduction of the same print differ, as reproduced in two different media or two different magazines or newspapers?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Well, the primary variation would be in the retouching that has been added. Different publications and different retouch artists would handle a photograph differently, and add different retouching to them. Therefore, these would be the main variations which you would have between two different reproductions. In addition there can also be differences in the quality of the engraving, as there are differences in quality of many things. A newspaper reproduction is made with a coarser screen and gives less detail than a magazine reproduction that uses a finer screen and, therefore, reproduces more detail. These are some of the basic things that would affect these reproductions and make variations in the reproductions.

Mr. EISENBERG. Now, Mr. Shaneyfelt, I hand you page 80 of Newsweek magazine, issue of March 2, 1964, also containing a photograph like those we have been examining, and this is marked Shaneyfelt Exhibit No. 5, and I ask you whether you have examined that photograph?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; I have.

Mr. EISENBERG. Can you give us your conclusions, please?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. I found that the photograph reproduced in the Newsweek magazine, issue of March 2, 1964, which has been marked as Shaneyfelt Exhibit No. 5, is the same in all general characteristics as the photograph that has been marked as Commission Exhibit No. 133-A, and I found no differences to suggest that it is other than the same photograph----

Mr. EISENBERG. Yes?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Except for variations in retouching.

Mr. EISENBERG. I take it that your testimony concerning Shaneyfelt Exhibits Nos. 4 and 5 is that due to some loss of detail it is impossible to say that these photographs are identical to Shaneyfelt Exhibit No. 1--or rather Exhibit No. 133-A, on which Shaneyfelt Exhibit No. 1 is based--in the same way you can say that a fingerprint is identical to a given fingerprint impression; is that correct?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct. I was not able to positively identify them, because of this loss of detail.

Mr. EISENBERG. What is your opinion as to the probability that they are identical, bearing in mind that it is impossible to make an absolute unqualified determination of identity?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. They may very well be identical since I found no significant differences other than the retouching.

Mr. EISENBERG. Is there much doubt in your mind?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Very little.

Mr. EISENBERG. Apart from the factors which have been mentioned so far as apparently due to retouching, and those factors which you have not yet discussed but will, was there any difference between the reproductions and the original, between the apparent reproductions and the original? That is, was lighting the same, position, and so forth?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; I found them to be the same in all of these general characteristics as to lighting and position of hands and position of body, their relation to the background. I found no differences whatsoever.

Spotted a typo or a problem in this chapter? Tell us