Warren Commission (14 of 26): Hearings Vol. XIV (of 15) (part 5 of 6)

Warren Commission (14 of 26): Hearings Vol. XIV (of 15) (part 5 of 6)

Mr. GRIFFIN. Do you have any examples of this from the period that you worked with him at Earl Products?

Mr. RUBY. Well, this——

Mr. GRIFFIN. Let’s just focus on that for a while.

Mr. RUBY. He was with me only a short period.

Mr. GRIFFIN. What examples do you have from that period?

Mr. RUBY. I know from Earl Products is when he had that fight.

Mr. GRIFFIN. What else?

Mr. RUBY. That I know of. Other instances, I can’t think of because as I said he went around with an older group of fellows than I did. We didn’t run around together. And not only that, I was married then, and you know he has been a bachelor all his life so he went to places——

Mr. GRIFFIN. You traveled with him, didn’t you in the early forties you traveled with Jack, didn’t you?

Mr. RUBY. Yes; a little bit.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Now, look back on that experience, if you can, do you remember any episodes from that?

Mr. RUBY. Actually, you must understand I didn’t travel with him. I only met him every weekend. He traveled by himself, and I traveled by myself, and we got together on weekends and then we would only see each other Friday night and then he would go on.

And we traveled through the East mostly.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Mr. Ruby, you have brought certain papers with you, and Mr. Hubert is now in the room, and I want to bring him up to date a little bit on where we are, and we have been talking sometime about your brother’s obsession, as I think you call it, with his position in society as a person of Jewish background, and you indicated to me that you really only fully became aware of this problem since your brother shot Oswald, but that you have thought about it considerably since then, and that you have brought with you certain papers in connection with it.

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. GRIFFIN. I wonder first if you can first identify a paper in your hand, if you will identify that paper, and I will give it an exhibit number.

Mr. RUBY. What would you call this——

Mr. GRIFFIN. You are handing me——

Mr. RUBY. This document.

Mr. GRIFFIN. A document that consists of 30 typewritten pages purporting to have been prepared by a man named Sol Dann, 1820 David Stott Building, Detroit 26, Mich. This is a Xerox copy and on the first page I am going to write your name “Earl Ruby Deposition, June 3, 1964, Exhibit No. 1” and I will ask you if you will state for the record what that is.

(Earl Ruby Exhibit No. 1 was marked for identification.)

Mr. RUBY. Well, this I would like to get into the record if I can.

Mr. GRIFFIN. What is Exhibit No. 1 and then I will mark this other thing that you gave me.

Mr. RUBY. This is only what I want to state.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Exhibit No. 1, tell us what that is. In a general fashion tell us what that consists of.

Mr. RUBY. Well, this is as was stated, prepared by Mr. Dann as to why or one of the reasons, that Ruby, that is Jack Ruby, shot Oswald.

Mr. GRIFFIN. All right. Now, you have also handed me a handwritten penciled set of papers consisting of three pages.

Mr. RUBY. I was going to read that, is that all right?

Mr. GRIFFIN. Certainly.

Mr. RUBY. That was my intention if it is all right with you.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Do you have a statement you would like to make for the record?

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. GRIFFIN. All right, go ahead then.

Mr. RUBY. I am filing this document with you because it explains why I need the help of the United States, and more especially, your help.

My brother, Jack, was deprived, and is presently being deprived, of his constitutional and civil rights. The hatred and bigotry in Dallas, Tex., resulted in the assassination of our President. It almost cost the lives of our present President, Mr. Johnson, and others.

With all the protection that this Government could give it could not guard against and prevent the assassination.

My family and myself are unable to cope with that situation and it may result in my brother’s death.

As pointed out in this document, my brother, Jack, is being made the scapegoat of this horrible situation. I, therefore, need, and respectfully request, your assistance in order that those guilty of this atrocity, either because of their acts or omission, gross negligence, or commission shall not go unpunished or undisciplined.

I don’t think that my brother, who had nothing to do with the assassination of the President, should be the only one punished. My family as well as myself have almost exhausted all of our resources in an effort to protect my brother’s civil rights, but now I am calling upon you for the help we need.

That is it.

Mr. HUBERT. I suggest you put the document in the record as well.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Do you mind, Mr. Ruby, if we would put that in the record?

Mr. RUBY. No; this I didn’t use.

Mr. GRIFFIN. I will mark the three pages from what you have just read.

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. GRIFFIN. I have marked them “Earl Ruby Deposition, June 3, 1964, Exhibit No. 2,” and that is on the first page. I think on the second page I will write Exhibit No. 2, and on the third page I will write Exhibit No. 2.

I will ask you if we may keep this and include this as part of our permanent record.

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Let me hand you Exhibit No. 2 and ask you if you will sign it on the first page and initial each of the other pages.

(Earl Ruby Exhibit No. 2 was marked for identification.)

Mr. HUBERT. Mr. Ruby, may I ask, this is addressed to whom, this Exhibit No. 2, which you actually read into the record. Who are you addressing it to?

Mr. RUBY. To the Commission.

Mr. HUBERT. To the Commission. It is your desire that we see that the members of the Commission receive that document, is that correct?

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. HUBERT. That is to say both your letter and the attachment?

Mr. RUBY. Yes; both.

Mr. HUBERT. I notice that Exhibit No. 1 which is the long one of 30 pages, has the name Sol Dann.

Mr. RUBY. Sol Dann.

Mr. HUBERT. I also notice he didn’t sign it. Did he actually prepare it?

Mr. RUBY. Yes; he did.

Mr. HUBERT. Have you read it?

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. HUBERT. Do you concur in what he says then?

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. HUBERT. Is there any reason why he didn’t sign it?

Mr. RUBY. No; I didn’t even notice it, to be honest with you.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Let me ask Mr. Ruby, I will hand him back Exhibit No. 1, and ask you if you will simply sign that on the first page, so we may have it properly marked for the record.

Mr. HUBERT. Let me ask you about Exhibit No. 2. This is in pencil?

Mr. RUBY. Yes; I didn’t think that you would want it so I, of course, didn’t——

Mr. HUBERT. When did you write this Exhibit No. 2?

Mr. RUBY. Yesterday.

Mr. HUBERT. It is your own handwriting?

Mr. RUBY. Yes, yes.

Mr. HUBERT. All right.

I will have photostats made of this.

Mr. RUBY. If it doesn’t take, I can rewrite it in ink in 5 or 10 minutes.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Let me ask you some questions to get the background of this document which we have marked here as Exhibit No. 1.

First of all, would you tell us how you happened to know Mr. Dann?

Mr. RUBY. His daughter teaches Hebrew in the school where my daughter attends, and his daughter impressed on him, after several conversations to contact me, and see what he could do to help us because he has been very active in helping I should say, the minority groups of any organization.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Can you tell us what Mr. Dann does for a living?

Mr. RUBY. He is an attorney.

Mr. GRIFFIN. In Detroit?

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. GRIFFIN. How old a man is Mr. Dann?

Mr. RUBY. I would say 55. That is a guess, of course.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Did you know Mr. Dann before his daughter talked with you about——

Mr. RUBY. His daughter didn’t talk with me. She talked with him and finally convinced him to contact me and see what he could do to help us.

Mr. GRIFFIN. When did Mr. Dann first contact you?

Mr. RUBY. Shortly after the verdict was passed.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Now, do you know what efforts Mr. Dann made after talking with you, to talk with other people in order to prepare this document?

Mr. RUBY. Yes; he talked with many other people, the psychiatrists, he talked with Dr. West. He talked with Dr. Smith, the chief counsel, he talked, with Mr. Charles Bellows, the consultant on the case.

He talked to a psychiatrist by the name of Tanay in Detroit, and he mentioned several other people but I don’t recall their names.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Can you——

Mr. RUBY. Excuse me; he also talked to my brother in Dallas, Sam.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Did you say he talked with your brother Jack?

Mr. RUBY. No; he talked to Eva. But he talked to Dr. West and Dr. Smith and Bellows who spent a lot of time with Jack, of course, altogether.

Mr. GRIFFIN. You indicated to Mr. Hubert that this Exhibit No. 1 had been read by you and that it generally reflected your views.

Mr. RUBY. Yes; yes, sir.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Can you tell us in your own words generally what is set forth in Exhibit No. 1?

Mr. RUBY. Well, it goes into, it explains Jack’s thinking along the Jewish problem, and his obsession and his love of President Kennedy, his going out of the way to try to be an exceptionally good guy by helping gentiles as much as he possibly could, and in any way he could. It also explains happenings at the trial. The withholding of evidence by District Attorney Henry Wade that should have been presented to the court. That my brother had received psychiatric help when he was 10 years old and none of the family knew it except the FBI, who had turned this information over to Wade.

However, Wade never permitted this to be used at the trial, and it also goes into telling of many cases that were reversed because of incidents similar to those which took place at my brother Jack’s trial, and states for these many reasons that the verdict should be reversed for all of these mistakes or negligence or whatever you may call it on the part of the court and the State’s attorney.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Is it correct, do I have the correct understanding then, that in a sense we can break this down into two parts: One part of the document deals with the facts that have to do with Jack’s obsession?

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. GRIFFIN. And the other part has to do with the legal errors in the trial?

Mr. RUBY. Yes; right—correct.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Let me direct myself to some of the factual issues that are raised by Exhibit No. 1. I have made some notes here as you have been talking, and I want you, after we cover this, to tell me if I have left anything out that you think is important, but I want to try to cover this in orderly fashion. I am going backward though.

One issue that you raised here was that District Attorney Wade had withheld certain psychiatric evidence at the trial that had been turned over to him by the FBI.

Mr. RUBY. By the FBI.

Mr. GRIFFIN. And that was that your brother Jack had received psychiatric help at age 10 and none of the family members knew about it?

Mr. RUBY. That is right.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Let me ask you to tell us what your present understanding is now as to how Jack happened to get this psychiatric treatment, and where it was administered, and for how long, and the other details?

Mr. RUBY. I don’t know that but the FBI gave that information to Wade, and Tonahill has that information in Dallas but I don’t have the exact dates.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Well, do you know where he got the psychiatric aid?

Mr. RUBY. In Chicago.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Do you know what institution?

Mr. RUBY. No.

Mr. GRIFFIN. You say Tonahill has this information?

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Do you know how this evidence happened to be given, or let me ask you this, how do you know this evidence was given by the FBI to Mr. Wade?

Mr. RUBY. Tonahill.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Tonahill has told you?

Mr. RUBY. Yes; that it was given to Wade by the FBI.

Mr. GRIFFIN. How did Tonahill learn about this?

Mr. RUBY. That I don’t know.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Did Tonahill——

Mr. RUBY. Well, he handled all the contacts with the FBI.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Tonahill did?

Mr. RUBY. Yes; more or less.

Mr. GRIFFIN. It is your understanding that the work of the trial team was divided up in such a way that only Tonahill dealt with the FBI, for the most part?

Mr. RUBY. Yes; as far as I know.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Now, so you have no personal information, further personal information, at this time about this psychiatric help which Jack got at age 10?

Mr. RUBY. No.

Mr. GRIFFIN. When Jack was 10 was he living in the home?

Mr. RUBY. In a foster home, yes; so far as I can understand.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Well, that would have made you 6, is that right?

Mr. RUBY. Would have made me 6.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Where were you living at age 6?

Mr. RUBY. To tell you the truth, I don’t know but I think I was living in Chicago, of course, and I don’t remember the name. I think the name of the people were Speeves, but I don’t know if I went to the farm, they sent me to a farm for a year, whether I was on a farm at the time but anyhow we weren’t together those years.

Mr. GRIFFIN. For how many years were you separated from the rest of the family as a child?

Mr. RUBY. To tell you the truth, I don’t know when it started. I would say 5, 6 years maybe. I was in three foster homes that I remember all together. I know I was on a farm, and then at two foster homes that I can distinctly remember.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Do you remember how old you were when you returned to the home of your family, your mother’s and father’s home?

Mr. RUBY. Well, I think it was in 1928, 1928, so I must have been 13 years old.

Mr. GRIFFIN. And that would have made Jack 17.

Mr. RUBY. Seventeen; I am not sure whether it was—I just don’t remember. It has got to be a little before that. Because I went to that Shepherd School for a few years, it had to be there from 1925 to 1928, but I don’t know exactly.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Were you living in the home when you went to the Shepherd School?

Mr. RUBY. You mean was I living with the family?

Mr. GRIFFIN. Yes.

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Was Jack living with the family at that time?

Mr. RUBY. Yes; that is when we were all brought back together.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Had Jack finished high school at that time?

Mr. RUBY. No, no; Jack didn’t finish high school.

Mr. GRIFFIN. No; but was Jack still attending school when he returned to the home?

Mr. RUBY. Yes; he was.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Are you able to recall how long Jack continued to attend school after you returned to the family, to your family?

Mr. RUBY. No; I know he graduated from that Shepherd School but when I don’t know. As far as I know he graduated from that school and then he went to Marshall High School for a while and then he dropped out.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Another thing that you mentioned that we were discussing in Exhibit 1, that Mr. Dann had assembled some facts and had discussed Jack’s efforts to show that the Jews are good people by himself helping gentiles.

Now I want you to go back and comb your recollection of the period you lived with and worked with Jack for incidents when you can recall of your own knowledge of Jack helping gentiles, or helping people in general, let’s not limit it to Jews or gentiles.

Mr. RUBY. Well, even when we were in business, we had that problem which came up several times, where he would take some of the merchandise, like our pens that we were using, and salt and pepper shakers, and almost every day or two he would take a load of samples. When I asked him he would say, “Well, a nice guy here or there and I gave him one or two, what difference does it make”, in the meantime he was giving them out all the time. If anybody wanted one he would just give it to them. But at that time no remark was made as far as I can remember as to why he did it.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Would you be able to give us names of any people who, you know might have been the beneficiaries of this?

Mr. RUBY. I wouldn’t remember, because I wouldn’t know where, but most of this took place or a great part of it anyhow in Dallas, and the names of those I think we could get.

Mr. GRIFFIN. How about as far as you are concerned, of course, you knew him in Chicago, how about people that you can think of that Jack would have extended these kindnesses to in Chicago?

Mr. RUBY. I couldn’t remember any names because there was no reason to remember this, and this goes back so far. It is 20 years at the earliest.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Well, you also mentioned that your brother had a great love for President Kennedy. Can you give us some examples of that?

Mr. RUBY. Well, I didn’t realize it, I mean, because I haven’t been with him since the Kennedy family and Kennedy himself, to really become involved in politics because he was in Dallas and I was in Chicago and in Detroit. However, I know that when they, I think it was the Dallas Morning News printed that full page, whatever you call that, statement——

Mr. GRIFFIN. The black bordered advertising?

Mr. RUBY. Yes; the black bordered advertising which more or less definitely insulted the President, he went to the paper and asked them if they needed the money so bad that they had to print such a horrible thing even though the other paper had turned it down.

And I think you know he was so upset about seeing that sign on the roadside about “Impeach Earl Warren” that in the middle of the night he got his roommate out and got Jerry Crafard, I think his name was, to take a picture of it.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Do you know why he was upset about it?

Mr. RUBY. Well, he couldn’t see why anything like that could happen. Here is another great man, and he just couldn’t understand it.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Are you surmising this or did——

Mr. RUBY. Well, I talked to George Senator who was his roommate, he said he was infuriated that a sign like that should be put up. And that was brought out in the trial, of course, and proved.

Then he on the night of the assassination, or rather on the afternoon he immediately closed the club, and when he was asked if he—what about the other night club owners because there is another, I think one or two clubs on the same block as his, yes, there are two more, whether they are going to close or not, in a statement he made, he doesn’t care if they close or not, he is going to be closed in respect to the President.

Then he went to the services at the synagogue in Dallas.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Do you know how long he was at that service?

Mr. RUBY. I don’t know how long, but I know that he broke down terribly there.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Did you talk to anybody who——

Mr. RUBY. I heard it from the Rabbi who was there, that he was—of course, most of the people there were broken up but he was most unusual because he was in deep tears, he really was. And he was so upset and so disgusted with this situation that he called my sister Eileen in Chicago and told her this is a good time to get out of Dallas. He is ashamed of it, that this thing could happen there, and he will probably—he wants to come up to Chicago for a few days, you know, to visit with her. Well, she discouraged him from coming up. He wanted to come to Chicago, and he also called my brother Hy in Chicago after the assassination, and told him how terrible it was, and he thinks he is going to get out of Dallas, he is coming back to Chicago altogether.

He also called his good friend, this was all brought out in the trial, not all of it but most of it, although those last two incidents about him calling my brother and my sister were never entered into evidence. We couldn’t understand that.

He also called a fellow in California, Al Gruber, I think is his name, and Gruber said he just couldn’t talk. He just couldn’t talk he was so broken up.

So we know he was really broken up, and he must have really loved him because otherwise you just don’t do these things. And the fact that he went to the newspaper and complained to them for even taking the ad, and I mean nobody else did this.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Do you have any examples of his conduct in Dallas before the President was shot that would show his feeling toward President Kennedy?

Mr. RUBY. No; We don’t have—nothing that I know of. We don’t have anything that I know of.

Mr. GRIFFIN. I wonder if you can give us some more examples of——

Mr. RUBY. There is a bit about his patriotism that might mean something.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Tell us about that.

Mr. RUBY. This happened many years ago. They were playing the Star Spangled Banner in the stadium in Chicago before all sporting events, and a friend who was with him, a fellow by the name of Mr. Kolitz told me this himself, he was smoking.

Mr. GRIFFIN. What is Mr. Kolitz’s first name?

Mr. RUBY. Ira. He was smoking when the Star Spangled Banner was playing and my brother insisted he put out his cigarette, that it wasn’t in good taste to be smoking when the Star Spangled Banner was being played.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Your brother didn’t approve of smoking either, did he?

Mr. RUBY. No; he didn’t smoke at all. Well, neither do I, for that matter. But this I didn’t find out about until a couple of months ago because I ran into this party in Chicago, and you know talking about these things, and he says, “How could they accuse your brother of being a Communist”, and then he related this incident to me. He says, “I remember, you know at the stadium when this happened, and he actually insisted I put the cigarette out.”

Mr. GRIFFIN. Did Jack in your dealings with him, did he strive to be important and did he strive for recognition, things like that?

Mr. RUBY. I would say, well, he tried to be a success. He always wanted to be a success in life.

Mr. GRIFFIN. What was his idea of being a success?

Mr. RUBY. Oh, having a family and being happily married and earning a steady living.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Did he talk to you about his desires to have a family?

Mr. RUBY. Oh, yes; on a few occasions. Once when he had financial failure and he was terribly depressed back in the early fifties, I think, he came to Chicago. He was just terribly depressed and he says, “Well, it looks like it is the end for me.” And, you know, he had no—he was penniless, and I tried to help him out again there. I was trying to look around for a business for him, to be truthful with you because we were doing pretty well, making a living, a good living, and I thought I could help him out but he decided to go back to Dallas again.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Well now, there have been reports that Jack was the kind of a person who liked, who wanted everybody to know him and liked to be a big shot, some people might say. Did you have any experiences with him that would indicate anything about those kind of observations?

Mr. RUBY. Well, he was pretty well known in Chicago. He always was a good athlete, a good ballplayer. He was a very great swimmer, and he was very close to Barney Ross, so I would say—and he had many friends, so he was pretty well liked, and maybe some people would get the impression that he was a big shot but actually I don’t think he ever went out of the way to try to show people he was a big shot.

However, maybe I didn’t notice it because I am his brother. And he was my older brother, and so maybe I just didn’t notice it.

Mr. GRIFFIN. I wonder if you can explain what seems to be on the one hand signs of his obsessions about being a Jew, such as you pointed out as fighting the Bundists and things like that, and on the other hand, what appears to be a lack of regular devotion to going to church services every week and keeping the religious home, and so forth?

Mr. RUBY. Well, the reason for that is I am more or less the same way as I explained before because in the breaking up of our home we were drawn away from this life, you see. I was living with—on a farm—I was living with gentile people and there wasn’t any synagogue there to go to, and so we drifted away from the services. And because before that we used to go to the Hebrew school, before our home was broken up, we all went to Hebrew school.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Did you learn Hebrew?

Mr. RUBY. Oh, sure. Jack and—we went only until our home was broken up.

Mr. GRIFFIN. When you were living in your home, did your parents keep a kosher home?

Mr. RUBY. Oh, yes; definitely.

Mr. GRIFFIN. It was a kosher home?

Mr. RUBY. Oh, yes; definitely. Oh, sure.

Mr. GRIFFIN. To what extent was it a kosher home?

Mr. RUBY. We would call it orthodox, you know, change of dishes and all that.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Dietary rules?

Mr. RUBY. Sure; that is right. Sure, sure. But, of course, when we——

Mr GRIFFIN. What language was spoken in the home?

Mr. RUBY. To our parents Yiddish, you would call it.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Did your parents speak English?

Mr. RUBY. Very little; very few words.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Are you willing to make this statement that your conversations with your parents were always in Yiddish?

Mr RUBY. No, no; I can’t say that because my father spoke a little English.

Mr. GRIFFIN. How about with your mother?

Mr. RUBY. My mother I would say in her conversations she threw in a word here or there in English; about 95 percent was Yiddish. My father picked up more English words because, in fact, he was working as a carpenter, and being out among English-speaking people more than, more so than my mother who was home all the time, he had an opportunity to learn some English words.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Now, when the children got older, the family continued to live together, as I understand it, there was a home where all of the unmarried children and the parents lived?

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. GRIFFIN. In that home up until the time that your mother died, did you observe, were the dietary practices observed all the time?

Mr. RUBY. Oh, yes; sure. Every Passover we changed the dishes, and so on.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Yes; but that is just once a year. What about on a daily basis, did you observe every day the dietary——

Mr. RUBY. Well, you don’t observe it every day.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Well, some homes do.

Mr. RUBY. I don’t understand.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Some homes keep separate dishes for meat and dairy products.

Mr. RUBY. Yes; we had separate dishes until my mother passed away.

Mr. GRIFFIN. How about the regularity of attending church services, temple services, did you go every week to temple services?

Mr. RUBY. No, no; not all of us. I know I didn’t. My sisters did. My sister did.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Which sister?

Mr. RUBY. Marion. My father did until he became ill, you know, and then he passed away.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Was there any resentment in the home toward the practices that were maintained by your parents there, failure to converse regularly in English and perhaps their old world habits?

Mr. RUBY. I don’t understand.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Which is common in all families, I think, in which the practices that are observed in the home are not the kind of practices that you see on television or in the movies. Was there resentment among any of the children toward the fact that here was a home in which a foreign language was spoken, and practices were observed which did not appear to be the same practices as the people who were on top in American society?

Mr. RUBY. Yes; I would say so. However, my mother insisted that we follow the lines of the Orthodox Jew.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Did any of you object to that insistence by your mother?

Mr. RUBY. No; nothing because there wasn’t too much to object to, because it was the same food. I mean there is really nothing—however, if we would take the wrong utensil, you know, because there are two separate ones, we would be bawled out for taking the wrong one.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Well, Jack during the time that he was in Chicago lived for various periods outside the home, didn’t he?

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. GRIFFIN. For example, I believe he lived with either Sam Gordon or Alex Gruber in a separate apartment in Chicago in the early thirties. Do you recall that?

Mr. RUBY. I know he lived with Gruber but I don’t know how long.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Well——

Mr. RUBY. Because it was in the early thirties, I was going to high school.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Was there any particular reason why Jack did not want to live with the family?

Mr. RUBY. None that I can remember. There may have been, but I may not be, you know, I wasn’t aware of it.

Mr. GRIFFIN. He also was away from Chicago from about 1933 to 1937.

Mr. RUBY. Yes; I think he went to ’Frisco to work there; yes. I think he went there. I think my sister was there or he went first, I don’t remember.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Did you know his friend Leon Cooke?

Mr. RUBY. Yes; very well.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Was Leon Cooke of Jewish background?

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Were you familiar with Jack’s activities with Leon Cooke in the labor union?

Mr. RUBY. A little bit. I think I knew——

Mr. GRIFFIN. What can you tell us about that, what—how long did Jack work in the union?

Mr. RUBY. Well, I know as far as I know, I think he helped organize it. It was Leon Cooke’s idea. Leon Cooke was an attorney and his father, Mr. Cooke, was a scrap iron and junk handler, and for some reason or another of his own thinking he decided that it would be a good idea to organize a union because the—although he was doing very well as an attorney without it, the workers in this industry were being paid, I think at that time, 10 cents or 15 cents an hour, and it was actually slave wages practically, as you can easily understand, and so they organized the union or how they go about it I don’t even know, but they did, Leon Cooke and Jack helped organize it, but I think Leon did all the legal work.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Do you know of anybody else who helped in the organizing efforts?

Mr. RUBY. Even I went out once to hand out those flyers, you know, “join the union.”

Mr. GRIFFIN. Where did you hand them out and what would you do?

Mr. RUBY. Well, they would come out from work and I would just hand it to them, as they leave the plant, just hand it to them.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Did you ever make any personal contacts with members, with employees?

Mr. RUBY. No; never. I just——

Mr. GRIFFIN. Were there any other people that you know of who worked in the union with Jack?

Mr. RUBY. I think my brother Hy worked for a little while in the union.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Did Sam work in the union?

Mr. RUBY. I don’t think so. I only went there on very rare occasions, very rare. I may have been to one or two meetings in all. I didn’t get paid for it either, just, you know, kicks just to hand out the flyers, that is all.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Can you think of any other people who were involved in the union?

Mr. RUBY. Well, I know John Martin, he was the president.

Mr. GRIFFIN. He is the fellow who was killed?

Mr. RUBY. No; he shot Leon Cooke.

Mr. GRIFFIN. He shot Leon Cooke. Is John Martin still living?

Mr. RUBY. I don’t know. I know there was another fellow but I can’t think of his name. There was a fellow by the name—I can’t think of their names. They had odd names. Of course, that goes back in the thirties, I think, right in there somewhere. I don’t even remember where it was.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Was Leon Cooke a fellow about your brother’s age?

Mr. RUBY. Yes; I think so.

Mr. GRIFFIN. So Jack would have been in the late twenties at the time that he and Leon formed the union?

Mr. RUBY. I don’t know. I don’t know what year it was even. I don’t even remember.

Mr. GRIFFIN. It was in the late thirties, wasn’t it.

Mr. RUBY. I don’t know. I really don’t know.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Do you know of any girls that Jack dated?

Mr. RUBY. In Chicago?

Mr. GRIFFIN. Yes.

Mr. RUBY. Offhand not even one because he was, as I said, 4 years older than I was and we didn’t run around together. I know of the one he went with in Dallas, which was, I think she was—I don’t know if she testified at the trial or not.

Mr. GRIFFIN. That is Alice Nichols?

Mr. RUBY. Alice Nichols.

Mr. GRIFFIN. She is not a Jewish girl, is she?

Mr. RUBY. No.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Did it seem to be Jack’s practice to get interested in women who are, what do you call them, shiksas?

Mr. RUBY. No; I really don’t know because I don’t know too much. You see he traveled in a different—I am trying to think. When he was going to Marshall High School that is when you usually start going with girls. I don’t recall those days because I was too young.

Mr. GRIFFIN. What I am interested in exploring with you, if you can in a somewhat objective fashion, is some of the contrast between evidence you have shown us with his obsession with the fact that he was a Jew, and other indications that, for example, his dating girls who were gentiles and his living outside of the home away from the Jewish practices which might indicate that he had some desire to escape his Jewish background. Did you see any evidence of that?

Mr. RUBY. No; that I wouldn’t—because believe it or not, when my mother passed away and also my father, you know, we have to go say services, we are supposed to say services for a year every day and I didn’t keep it up, but he did.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Jack went to services after your——

Mr. RUBY. Mother died.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Every day?

Mr. RUBY. Every day as far as I know.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Where was this temple that he attended services at?

Mr. RUBY. Well, there was one, I know, up——

Mr. GRIFFIN. Were these temples in Chicago?

Mr. RUBY. One was in Chicago, I can’t think of the name.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Your mother died while Jack was still in Chicago. When was that?

Mr. RUBY. 1944.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Jack was in the service?

Mr. RUBY. That is right.

Mr. GRIFFIN. How did you know he did that?

Mr. RUBY. He told us he went to services. You can say services there too as long as the chaplain——

Mr. GRIFFIN. Would he have to go before a rabbi or chaplain of some sort?

Mr. RUBY. Really not necessarily; it is not—because they say if it isn’t available, you can still say the prayer.

Mr. GRIFFIN. This could be something he could have done on his bunk, his cot in the Army?

Mr. RUBY. I don’t know. There he had access to a chaplain though because it wasn’t a large camp.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Yes.

Mr. RUBY. When I say you don’t have access, I am thinking of overseas where it might be a small unit, like where I was there wasn’t a Jewish chaplain.

Mr. GRIFFIN. What I am trying to get at is this occurred while he was in the service. In order for him to properly observe mourning for your mother would he have had to have done something so that somebody else would have to be aware he was doing this other than Jack simply telling them. Would he have done something in his area where he lived or light a candle or would he have gone to a chaplain or gone in some place and prayed where people could have seen him. What would there have been observed by other people?

Mr. RUBY. I don’t know. How can I answer that. I wasn’t with him.

Mr. GRIFFIN. But you know what the requirements are of the Jewish faith to properly observe mourning for people.

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. GRIFFIN. What would some of the things have been that Jack would have had to have done?

Mr. RUBY. Just say the prayer, to read it out of the book or if you know it from memory, by that time after a while you know it from memory.

Mr. GRIFFIN. And he could have repeated that to himself?

Mr. RUBY. It is possible. But if a rabbi or services are available that is where you usually go. But if you are at a remote place where it isn’t possible to have services then you can say it.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Do you actually recall Jack telling you that he was going to services for your mother?

Mr. RUBY. Yes; definitely.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Where did he tell you that he went?

Mr. RUBY. He just said he was carrying on the services but I don’t remember now. This happened 20 years ago.

Mr. GRIFFIN. What I am trying to get at is your not saying that you recall him telling you he went to a chapel or to a synagogue or a temple.

Mr. RUBY. No; all he said was that he said services.

Mr. GRIFFIN. I see.

Mr. RUBY. But as to where I didn’t think it was at that time necessary to question him.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Are there any other examples of this concern with his religious heritage?

Mr. RUBY. Well, I told you about he read all the books or as many books as he could on the Jewish atrocities, whatever you might call them.

Mr. GRIFFIN. He did this down in Dallas?

Mr. RUBY. He did this in Dallas that I know, my sister told me. In fact, when I went there he had several books.

Mr. GRIFFIN. What kind, do you remember the names of the books?

Mr. RUBY. He had one called “Eva” and “Exodus”, and another one there that he was reading, and then he would give them away after he finished. I can’t think of the other one. It was still there while I was there.

Mr. GRIFFIN. When was this that you observed “Eva” and “Exodus”?

Mr. RUBY. Right after the incident I went down there.

Mr. GRIFFIN. I see. So after the incident he was reading “Eva” and “Exodus”?

Mr. RUBY. No, no; it was before. I saw the books after but he had been reading them before because they were in my sister’s apartment. She had taken everything from his apartment.

Mr. GRIFFIN. So it is your understanding that he had certain religious type books?

Mr. RUBY. Oh, yes.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Books on Jews in the apartment that he was living in?

Mr. RUBY. Right; definitely. In fact, he went out of his way as I stated before, to go and listen to lectures at the synagogue on the Jewish problem and the atrocities in Germany, and they showed films, real detailed films on what actually took place and he made it a point to be there.

Mr. GRIFFIN. When did this occur?

Mr. RUBY. This happened before the incident.

Mr. GRIFFIN. How long before?

Mr. RUBY. I don’t know. I don’t know. But my brother Sam told me about this just last week that when his mother-in-law, his wife’s mother, was down in Dallas, Jack insisted she come along to see these films and hear the lecture.

You see, as I said, I have to get these, some of these things through a third party because I am in Detroit.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Sure, sure. I want to get them straight as to where you got them so we can follow them out.

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Do you recall, this is on another subject, that at one time when you were questioned about why Jack and you had a falling out with respect to Earl Products, that you stated that Jack was not spending full time on the business, and that was one of the reasons?

Mr. RUBY. Well, we didn’t think so. This was Sam’s and my opinion.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Can you tell us what was happening?

Mr. RUBY. Well, we wanted him to sell our products that we were manufacturing, and he was, seemed to be always getting involved with selling somebody else’s product. Of course, there was a commission involved or whatever it was, but I didn’t—we didn’t approve of it. We wanted to push our products and so, of course, he and Sam had a real runout or whatever you call it and then we finally decided to buy him out.

Mr. GRIFFIN. What other products was he selling?

Mr. RUBY. Well, I think he was selling costume jewelry. Well, we don’t manufacture that. We wanted him to devote his entire interest into the company.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Would costume jewelry, could it be considered a companion line for anything you were selling. Would he go into the same stores to sell costume jewelry?

Mr. RUBY. You possibly could, you possibly could, but it was our opinion that he should devote all of his time to our products.

Mr. GRIFFIN. What was Jack’s responsibility in Earl Products?

Mr. RUBY. He was actually the sales manager.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Did he have employees working in there?

Mr. RUBY. I was just going to add, he didn’t have any, he was the only one.

Mr. GRIFFIN. He managed himself?

Mr. RUBY. Yes; and he was a good salesman, too.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Did this——

Mr. RUBY. Anyhow, with leading too we weren’t hitting it off so good, and my sister Eva was asking him to come down to Dallas, so between everything we finally decided to buy him out and he took his money and went down there.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Did his sales activities require him to spend most of his time outside of the place of business?

Mr. RUBY. Of course; oh, yes.

Mr. GRIFFIN. How much of your sales were on a mail-order basis and how much was this direct selling that Jack may have been involved in?

Mr. RUBY. Well, at this time, the time he was handling the sales, there was very little mail order. It was mostly accounts that he had secured or we had in one way or another.

Mr. GRIFFIN. What area?

Mr. RUBY. Like Mar-Din.

Mr. GRIFFIN. That was in St. Louis, wasn’t it?

Mr. RUBY. No, no; in Chicago.

Mr. GRIFFIN. In Chicago?

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Did he travel outside the Chicago area?

Mr. RUBY. Not too much; not too much, if I recall. I don’t recall. I don’t think he traveled too much.

I think, now that I think of it, that was one of our problems. We wanted him to go down or go out of town, to Milwaukee or any of the other cities, even close by, and definitely St. Louis where we eventually sold Katz Drug which is a big and good account for us and they turned out to be a pretty fair account. And anyhow as I said one thing led to another. Eva was wanting him in Dallas and he wasn’t getting along too well with us so it was decided to buy him out.

Mr. GRIFFIN. The only other topic I want to cover with you now is the circumstances behind you changing your name from Rubenstein to Ruby. Did Mr. Hubert cover that with you?

Mr. RUBY. Sort of. Well, first off, there are two reasons. First of all, we were, I think, very conscious of the Jewish name of Rubenstein, and we had worked for another Jewish fellow who we all looked up to, an elderly fellow who had been very successful in business and his name was Stanley Eisenberg and he said, “When you send out mail orders you shouldn’t use a Jewish name because of the—some people won’t order even if they can use the merchandise,” and anyhow he suggested we use a different name, and so we finally decided since they were calling us Ruby anyhow, with that in mind, and business reasons, that is, and we finally decided to—Sam and I did first, you know.

Mr. GRIFFIN. You did.

Mr. RUBY. Yes; and Jack did it down in Dallas.

Mr. GRIFFIN. How much time elapsed between when you and Sam changed your name and Jack changed his?

Mr. RUBY. Gee, I don’t know.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Did you ever discuss with Jack the reasons for his changing his name?

Mr. RUBY. No.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Do you have any idea why he changed his name?

Mr. RUBY. No; it never came up. We never discussed it as far as I can remember, we just never discussed that.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Is my understanding correct then that the changing of your name and Sam’s name was directly tied with your activity in connection with Earl Products, and thus since Hyman didn’t have any connection with Earl Products and Jack didn’t have any connection with Earl Products at the time you two changed your name, why there was no reason for those two at that time to change their name?

Mr. RUBY. Well, Hyman never changed his name, as you know.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Yes; I know that.

Mr. RUBY. I really don’t know the reason for Jack. He may have had the same reason but since he did it there, and we never brought it up it just never was brought into our conversations, that I can remember. We may have—at that time it was nothing important to us, and it happened along about 15–16 years ago, I think. I think we changed ours in 1947, I don’t even remember.

Mr. GRIFFIN. I think we can finish this off here now. I want to hand you what has been marked as “Washington, D.C., June 3, 1964, deposition of Earl Ruby, Exhibit No. 3.” This is a copy of a report which was prepared by two FBI agents, White and Lee of an interview they had with you on November 25 in Chicago, which consists of two pages. The pages are numbered at the bottom 171 and 172. I want to hand it to you and ask you if you had a chance to read that?

Mr. RUBY. Yes; I have.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Are there any changes or corrections that you think ought to be made in that?

Mr. RUBY. Well, here in the first paragraph it says, “In 1946 his brothers Jack Ruby” I think, I am not sure of the date. I think it was 1947, and Jack didn’t change his name when we did. He changed it later in Dallas.

Mr. GRIFFIN. All right. Let’s read into the record the part you are talking about. In the second paragraph you are talking about the sentence which reads, “He said that in 1946 his brothers Jack Ruby and Sam Ruby along with himself legally changed their names from Rubenstein to Ruby for business purposes.”

Now the correct date of your changing your name is when?

Mr. RUBY. I think it was 1947.

Mr. GRIFFIN. And in any event Jack did not change his name at the same time that you did?

Mr. RUBY. That is correct.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Okay. Take your time and refer to them—you have notes, refer to them.

Mr. RUBY. Down here in the sixth paragraph it says, “following military service Jack returned to Chicago where he resided for several months and was not employed to his, Earl Ruby’s knowledge,” that is not correct.

When Jack came back from the service we immediately took him in as a partner in Earl Products Co., so that is wrong. And then they said about 1946. I think in 1947 he went to Dallas. However, I am not sure of that. You probably have that date.

I see on this next to the last paragraph where it says Earl Ruby stated he could give no reason why Jack Ruby shot Oswald except Jack is highly—is a highly emotional type and may have thought he was doing everyone a great service, I don’t remember that, the exact words. I don’t think I would have made that statement completely. I mean——

Mr. GRIFFIN. Did you have some feeling at the time that Jack may have thought he was doing a service to the country?

Mr. RUBY. To tell you the truth, I was so upset that I may have made the statement but I am not sure. You know I was—when was this, this was the next day, right, Monday?

Mr. GRIFFIN. Yes.

Mr. RUBY. That is it for this one. Some of them are almost exact duplicates.

Mr. GRIFFIN. I am going to hand you what has been marked as “Washington, D.C., June 3, 1964, deposition of Earl Ruby Exhibit 4.” And that purports to be an interview that Mr. Robichau and Mr. Wilson of the FBI had with you on November 25 in Southfield, Mich. It consists of six pages and they are numbered consecutively at the bottom 173 to 178.

Have you had a chance to read that over?

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Would you indicate what changes or corrections should be made thereon?

Mr. RUBY. Well, in the fourth paragraph I am not certain as to whether my father was born in Russia and as to whether my mother was born in Poland. I think my older sisters and brothers know more about that than I do.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Was the experience of your mother and father in Europe a topic which was discussed very often in the home?

Mr. RUBY. My father’s experiences were, in telling about the hardships of it and the persecutions of the Jews.

I have one other correction here.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Yes.

Mr. RUBY. In the fifth paragraph it states here that Jack was employed by Earl Products after he first left the service. He wasn’t employed. He was a part owner. It clarifies it in the next sentence, however.

Now, on page 2, the third paragraph this states here that I may have said that A. Weinberg was a fourth removed cousin, but I find that that is not so. She never was a cousin of ours.

And then on page 5 in the first paragraph it states that from 1939 to 1942 I was employed as a carpenter at building the barracks at Great Lakes. The date is incorrect. I worked there from, on in the year of 1942.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Would you want to take a pen and cross that off and correct it properly and then initial it, initial your deletion there?

Mr. RUBY. In the last sentence on page 6 it states that Earl and his three brothers had their names legally changed from Rubenstein to Ruby during 1947. That is incorrect. It should be Earl and Sam and Earl’s wife, Marge. Shall I change it?

Mr. GRIFFIN. Yes; why don’t you?

Why don’t you sign that on the first page then. Sign Exhibit No. 4.

I will give you Exhibit No. 3 and ask you to sign that.

One other thing that occurred to me before we go on here. We have obtained various birth records and so forth, and in trying to identify which record pertains to which child, I noticed that your parents—actually your given names were Hebrew names.

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Is my understanding correct that your given Hebrew name was Isadore?

Mr. RUBY. No; actually I was, the name listed was, Izzy, on my birth record. Is that what you are referring to?

Mr. GRIFFIN. Yes.

Mr. RUBY. Izzy, I-z-z-y, that is me.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Do you recall what the given names of your various sisters are? Could you relate those to us?

Mr. RUBY. No; I couldn’t. Eileen I think was Ida, I think. The others I don’t know. You have to talk to one of the older members of the family.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Incidentally, also in Exhibit No. 3, I noticed that you had, somebody has put some penciled mark numbers, were those your marks and did you wish to comment on those?

Mr. RUBY. Yes, it is just an error there—that should be scrap iron and junk handlers.

Mr. GRIFFIN. All right, it is corrected for the record, you just state it for the record.

Mr. RUBY. Here is a repetition of that other one where it says I stated he was doing every one a great service. I don’t remember saying that and I am just not sure.

Mr. GRIFFIN. All right.

Let me hand you what has been marked as Exhibit No. 5 and has been further marked “Washington, D.C., June 3, 1964, deposition of Earl Ruby” which purports to be a copy of an interview with you also at South Field, Mich., on November 26, 1963, with special agents Robichau and Wilson.

The exhibit consists of six pages, numbered in sequence 11 through 16. I will hand it to you and ask you if you have any corrections that you want to make in that?

Mr. RUBY. Here again on page 5 it states I worked at the building—the barracks at Great Lakes from 1942. It was only during 1942. Shall I change it?

Mr. GRIFFIN. Yes; if you wish.

Do you want to sign Exhibit No. 5?

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. GRIFFIN. I am going to hand you what has been marked for identification as “Washington, D.C., June 3, 1964, deposition of Earl Ruby Exhibit No. 6.” This is a copy of an interview which Agent Robichau purports to have had with you on November 27 in Detroit, Mich.

Would you want to look at that and tell us if there are any changes or corrections that you would make?

Mr. RUBY. No; no corrections. Shall I sign it?

Mr. GRIFFIN. All right, fine.

I will hand you what has been marked for identification as “Exhibit No. 7, Washington, D.C., June 3, 1964, deposition of Earl Ruby.” This purports to be a copy of an interview report prepared by Special Agent George Parfet of the FBI. The interview took place with you on November 28 in Chicago. It consists of two pages and it is numbered at the bottom pages 15 and 16.

Would you want to look at that and tell us if there are any changes or corrections that you would care to make?

Mr. RUBY. Here on page 2 it mentioned that I had never heard of Jack being mentally ill or depressed. However, I know he was depressed several years ago.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Did you know that at the time you gave that interview report, gave that interview?

Mr. RUBY. Yes; I knew he was depressed but I didn’t understand it completely. I didn’t know that it was called depression at that time.

Mr. GRIFFIN. How did it appear, how would you have described it at that time?

Mr. RUBY. Well, that he wouldn’t shave and he wouldn’t bathe, and he wouldn’t go out, but at that time I didn’t know what it was called. But after thinking it over, when he came up to Chicago once, he was terribly depressed, as I stated before.

Mr. GRIFFIN. How would you have described him at the time you saw him— what would you have said was the matter with him?

Mr. RUBY. Well, I was just—let me see what words I can use to describe it—I would have said he was disgusted, not knowing that actually he was depressed until I really learned what the word “depressed” means.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Was his attitude one more of hostility or belligerence toward what had happened rather than one of submission?

Mr. RUBY. No; it was one of submission. He wouldn’t go any places as I stated. He didn’t want to wash or clean himself up and I had to more or less force him to get in the shower and things of that sort.

Mr. GRIFFIN. What about the things he said, though. Were these—you used the term “disgust”—did he speak in the manner of someone who was disgusted would speak?

Mr. RUBY. Well, he didn’t even have much to say, if I recall. He didn’t even have much to say. He tried to keep to himself.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Where did he live at that time?

Mr. RUBY. I mean in my presence. In other words, he would go in another room or sit in a chair and just sit there without making—just thinking to himself about whatever was going through his mind. He was listless.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Were you married at that time?

Mr. RUBY. Yes, I was married.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Did Jack come and live with you?

Mr. RUBY. No, no.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Where did he live at the time?

Mr. RUBY. He came to the family and that is where I came to see him. In fact, he was so depressed that I took him to try to cheer him up, I had to go to New York for a business trip, a show that was taking place there and I took him for a ride, we were driving anyhow, and I thought it would pep him up a little bit, you know, to go on a trip. But it didn’t help much.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Was your attitude toward him this time one of sympathy or couldn’t you figure out what was eating this guy?

Mr. RUBY. No; I would say he was. I just thought he was disgusted with things, little realizing that he was in a state of depression.

Mr. GRIFFIN. But were you sympathetic toward him at the time?

Mr. RUBY. Oh, yes; as I said, that is why I took him on the trip. I tried to encourage him. I told him “Maybe we can find something for you to get into,” as I mentioned before, “Some business we can get you started in or something.”

However, he decided, as I stated before, to go back to Dallas.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Did he ever tell you why he decided to go back to Dallas?

Mr. RUBY. I don’t recall, he may have, but I can’t recall just now.

I see another, the last paragraph on page 2. I didn’t even remember that conversation with the agent.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Would you read the paragraph?

Mr. RUBY. It states here, “Earl Ruby was specifically asked regarding his residence in New Haven, Conn., in 1940. He has stated that he had never been in New Haven, Conn., in his life and in that period was engaged in the drycleaning business on Cicero Avenue in Chicago.”

Mr. GRIFFIN. Is that statement a correct statement?

Mr. RUBY. When we were selling we used to travel the east coast but I would have only been there—I don’t remember being there, but if I had been there, I would have been there only for a day. I think he asked me if I lived there for any length of time, if I recall, but I am not sure. I don’t recall this——

Mr. GRIFFIN. Were you in the drycleaning business on Cicero Avenue at that time?

Mr. RUBY. As far as I know, yes; I had an independent cleaning route at that time. I used to call on friends and pick up their cleaning and deliver it right to their home.

Mr. GRIFFIN. You didn’t operate a cleaning plant?

Mr. RUBY. No, no; but this is where I worked out of. Maybe he just cut it short. I brought my cleaning to this plant in Chicago, on Cicero Avenue, in Chicago, they cleaned it and charged me a wholesale price and I added on a profit, of course.

Mr. GRIFFIN. I am going to hand you what has been marked as “Exhibit 8, Washington, D.C., June 3, 1964, deposition of Earl Ruby.” It consists of two pages numbered 210 and 211 and purports to be a copy of a report which Agent George Parfet prepared with respect to that interview he had with you on November 28 at South Field, Mich.

Mr. RUBY. I didn’t sign the other one.

(Earl Ruby Exhibits Nos. 5, 6, 7, and 8 were marked for identification.)

Mr. GRIFFIN. I will state for the record then, you have just signed Exhibit No. 7, and if you will look at Exhibit No. 8, tell us if there are any changes or corrections you would make in that.

Mr. RUBY. Here again it is almost a duplicate of the previous, what do you call it again, number?

Mr. GRIFFIN. Interview report.

Mr. RUBY. What is this?

Mr. GRIFFIN. That is Exhibit No. 8, and this is Exhibit No. 7 that I have here.

Mr. RUBY. The last paragraph again as stated in the previous one. They are almost identical.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Yes; it looks like they are identical copies and they were just included in different places in our materials.

Let me hand it to you then and let me ask you to sign it.

Mr. RUBY. Sign it anyhow?

Mr. GRIFFIN. Yes; Exhibit No. 8.

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Yes; Exhibit No. 8.

I finally hand you what has been marked for identification as “Exhibit No. 9, Washington, D.C., June 3, 1964, deposition of Earl Ruby.” This is a copy of a report which Agent Robichau made with you of an interview he had on December 2, 1963, at Detroit, Mich.

Would you tell us if you have any additions or corrections or changes to make in that?

Mr. RUBY. No; this is correct. That she is not related in any way to our family.

Mr. GRIFFIN. All right.

Now, that concludes all the questions that I have, and I presume that Mr. Hubert has or he would have come back in.

Are there any topics that we haven’t covered that you feel that we ought to—is there anything further that you would like to say? You have got the floor.

Mr. RUBY. Yes; I think, and this took place at the trial, and after the first policeman had testified as to statements made by my brother Jack, that evening when I saw Jack, he told me that he is going to the electric chair.

He said because he never made any of those statements, and now he knows what Wade has in mind, because if Wade wants to send you to the chair he can, and he always does, and that is why he has the record that he has.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Do you remember who the first policeman was who testified?

Mr. RUBY. No; I don’t. And he told me on several occasions that he never made the statements the police testified that he did make, and in fact, if the record will be checked, it is proved that the statement that Dean made couldn’t have been true—Officer Dean.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Why do you say that?

Mr. RUBY. Because at the time when he said he had been talking—that Jack made a statement, Jack, he is the one who said Jack told him 2 days before at 4 o’clock, I think the time was, that he stated, that Jack told him that he was going to get Oswald.

At that time Jack was at home with Eva, so Jack couldn’t have made that statement to him, and, of course, this has been brought out in the petition or motion for a new trial, so it is in the official record, so to say.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Now, when Jack talked to you the first night after, or after the first police officer testified, was that first police officer Sergeant Dean, or was that another police officer?

Mr. RUBY. No; that was another police officer. Dean was the last police officer, if I recall correctly.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Did Jack tell you what he did say?

Mr. RUBY. No; but he said he never made those statements.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Did Jack——

Mr. RUBY. He repeated it several times on different occasions. He said, “I never made that—any of those statements and I know how Wade operates. He is going to send me to the chair. Now I know what he has got in mind.”

Mr. GRIFFIN. Let the record reflect that I am going to give you a copy which we have made of your three-page statement which you have entered into the record and which is marked as Exhibit No. 2, and also a copy of Exhibit No. 1 which we have marked.

Mr. RUBY. You are giving that back to me because I have a copy of Exhibit No. 1.

Mr. GRIFFIN. You can have that copy back.

Mr. RUBY. OK.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Are there any other matters that you think ought to be covered that we haven’t covered?

Mr. RUBY. No; I can’t think of any. I think we have covered them all.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Let me ask you one last question which I started to ask some hours ago.

That is this: Between the time you first saw Jack in Dallas, and the last time you saw him in Dallas, what changes did you see in him, if any?

Mr. RUBY. I think as I stated, he lost probably 25 or 30 pounds, and he couldn’t seem to grasp or understand conversations or questions. I have talked to him many times on the phone since then, and he still thinks—in fact as of now, he don’t even think I am alive. He thinks they killed me and my family, my children.

Mr. GRIFFIN. When you first saw him in Dallas did he have these—did you have any trouble communicating with him, did he show any lack of understanding when you first saw him?

Mr. RUBY. No, no; it wasn’t—yes; I must change that. There was a slight hesitancy on his part to understand questions that I put to him. He would shake his head when I would ask him questions sometimes and as though he didn’t understand, and these were just ordinary questions of routine matters, just about the trial or Belli. We discussed Belli, and he said, even at the beginning there he said, “They don’t talk to me. Why don’t they talk to me longer,” and yet Belli was there for hours.

Mr. GRIFFIN. This wasn’t the very first time you saw him. This was on an occasion later?

Mr. RUBY. That is right. It had to be later.

Mr. GRIFFIN. All right. I have nothing more. And if you have nothing more I want to thank you very much for taking this time for us.

Mr. RUBY. I hope I can help you and I hope you can help us.

Mr. GRIFFIN. We want to assemble all the facts that we possibly can and prepare a report that will be as fair and as impartial as can be.

Mr. RUBY. You want me to check on that professor at Northwestern University, correct?

Mr. GRIFFIN. And if you would give us the names of those employees.

Mr. RUBY. The list I have on that. I can possibly get the information as to where my brother received the psychiatric treatment when he was about 10 years old. Do you want me to send that to you?

Mr. GRIFFIN. If you would get us that we would appreciate it, yes.

Mr. RUBY. Shall I mail it just here the same address?

Mr. GRIFFIN. Yes.

TESTIMONY OF MRS. EVA GRANT

The testimony of Mrs. Eva Grant was taken at 3:30 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. Mrs. Eva Grant was accompanied by her attorney, Phil Burleson.

Mr. HUBERT. This is the deposition of Mrs. Eva Grant. Mrs. Grant is represented by Mr. Phil Burleson, her attorney.

Mrs. Grant, my name is Leon D. Hubert. 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, issued by President Johnson, 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 that joint resolution, I have been authorized to take a sworn deposition from you. I state to you now that the general nature of this 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. Grant, the nature of the inquiry today is to determine what facts you know about the death of Oswald, and the life and activities of your brother, Jack Ruby, and any other pertinent facts that you may know about the general inquiry.

Now, Mrs. Grant, I believe that you appear here today by a request made to you by a letter from Mr. J. Lee Rankin, general counsel of the staff for the President’s Commission. I ask you now if you have received that letter?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes, sir.

Mr. HUBERT. Would you state to us, please, what the date of the letter is?

Mrs. GRANT. May 22.

Mr. HUBERT. And it was received by you on what date?

Mrs. GRANT. On the following date. I think, what is today—Thursday? I know I called here, it seems to me, Monday or Tuesday now.

Mr. HUBERT. In any case, you have no objection to the taking of this deposition at the present time?

Mrs. GRANT. No, sir.

Mr. HUBERT. Then, will you rise 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. GRANT. I do.

Mr. HUBERT. Will you state your full name, please, ma’am?

Mrs. GRANT. Well, I go under the name of Eva L. Grant.

Mr. HUBERT. How do you spell the first name?

Mrs. GRANT. Eva (spelling) E-v-a and “L.” Let me explain something to you—I married a man who used the name Grant, but the name, which you will notice, is Granovsky, but I married him under that name and I used that name for at least 25 years. I married in 1936, so you figure it out.

Mr. HUBERT. And how old are you, Mrs. Grant?

Mrs. GRANT. Fifty-five.

Mr. HUBERT. And where do you reside?

Mrs. GRANT. 3929 Rawlins, Dallas, Tex.

Mr. HUBERT. Are you at present occupied?

Mrs. GRANT. No.

Mr. HUBERT. Now, in the course of this investigation I hope to conduct it in this way, that I will question you concerning certain segments or blocks or questions that will relate to a subject.

Under the rules of the proceedings your counsel may make any objection at anytime and under the rules also he could ask you any questions that he wants to at the end of the whole hearing, but I think, for ease of handling, it would be better if he asked you his questions after we have finished a particular area or block. I will try to indicate to your counsel when I am passing from one to the other, so that we can stop there and let him ask the questions as to that block, but I invite you, Mr. Burleson, if I should overlook and pass on to the next block, and it is obvious to you that I am, will you please interrupt and we will then have your questions relative to that block, so that the whole of the matter will be together in that way.

I think that perhaps the first thing I should like for you to do is identify the statements that were made by you to the FBI in several interviews that they had of you. Now, for the purpose of identification, first I am marking these exhibits as follows, to wit: “Dallas, Tex., May 28, 1964, Exhibit 1 to the deposition of Eva Grant.” I have signed my name to that and placed my initials on each of the subsequent pages in the lower right-hand corner. That Exhibit No. 1 purports to be the report of an interview of you by FBI Agents Jack Peden and Gaston Thompson on November 25, 1963, consisting of seven pages, and I have previously handed this Exhibit 1 to you and your attorney with the request that you read it and make any notes you wish, because what we want to do now is to state whether this Exhibit 1 represents a correct version of your understanding of the facts, and I will now ask you—have you read Exhibit 1?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes; I have.

Mr. HUBERT. With the aid and assistance of your counsel, would you tell us please, ma’am, whether Exhibit 1 is correct, pointing out any incorrections—things that are incorrect—anything that is omitted?

Mrs. GRANT. I would have to see that again; may I?

Mr. HUBERT. Yes, ma’am.

Mr. BURLESON. Mr. Hubert, I might make a suggestion here since I have gone over it with her, possibly I could take her now and go into these areas?

Mr. HUBERT. That will be a good way to do it because my general question is whether or not it is a completely correct document, and, therefore, to the extent it is not, I think it would be best if you would take her over to show that.

Mrs. GRANT. Yes, sir.

Mr. HUBERT. May I suggest that you use a system of quoting the sentence to which you address yourself so it is clearly identified?

Mr. BURLESON. Mrs. Grant, on page 1 of this—it is correct to the best of your present memory, is it not?

Off the record.

(A discussion between Counsel Hubert and Counsel Burleson off the record.)

Mrs. GRANT (reading instrument referred to). Let me go ahead and say this now—you do want me to say it—when Jack looked at that Weissman ad, it seems to me this is what he said——

Mr. BURLESON. Wait, are you making reference to a specific sentence in here, or are you adding to something?

Mrs. GRANT. Well, I didn’t say here that he called. I think he was over there. I’m almost sure, but I may have said it—will you tell him about me? I was so sick—I mean—I was——

Mr. BURLESON. Well, we will get into that in just a minute. Is there anything in this—on this first page that is incorrect as you now view things?

Mrs. GRANT (reading). Well, you see, right here, “he said he contacted”—he was in the Dallas Morning News when the President was assassinated. He was placing his ads and he was in the building from 11 until, maybe, at 1:30, and that should have been put in here and I thought I told him that.

Mr. BURLESON. Well, let’s refer to that—on this last sentence on page 1, it starts out with, “She stated that Jack Ruby told her that he was at the Dallas Morning News which ran his advertisements and asked them. ‘Where in the hell do you get off taking an ad like that? Are you money hungry?’”

What do you want to say about that?

Mrs. GRANT. There was a fellow there that takes his ads and his name is Newman. I think his name is John Newman, and Jack was in that area where this all takes place and the telephones were ringing, and Jack says people were canceling their ads, you know, complete commercial ads and subscriptions and the place was a madhouse. He was in the Dallas Morning News—he went there, you see——

Mr. BURLESON. To this statement, though, that I have just quoted—your answer is what?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes: but he did call me from there—he was there.

Mr. BURLESON. That morning?

Mrs. GRANT. That’s right—he was in the Dallas Morning News and John knew——

Mr. BURLESON. So, when you use the word “contacted”——

Mrs. GRANT. They used that word—that isn’t even my word.

Mr. BURLESON. He had some contact with them is really my question—whether by being there in person or by telephone?

Mrs. GRANT. He bawled John Newman out.

Mr. BURLESON. All right; I think that clarifies that.

Mrs. GRANT. He said, “What in the hell?” And he says, “Well, I take orders from my superiors,” that’s what Jack said.

Mr. BURLESON. Is that the only change or the only thing that you want to add on the first page?

Mrs. GRANT (reads). Now, you see, let me explain this—he didn’t talk to the Times Herald until later in the day, as far as I know.

Mr. BURLESON. All right: let me ask you this—you are now talking about, in the second paragraph, starting with, “She advised that he told her he had called the Times Herald Newspaper in Dallas and they had advised him that they had turned down and refused to accept the same advertisement.” What about that?

Mrs. GRANT. Well, it seemed to be later in the day when all the commotion had died down and——

Mr. BURLESON. Later on Friday?

Mrs. GRANT. The same Friday, and if I know him, he probably was using the Dallas Morning News phone because he didn’t leave there until 1:30.

Mr. HUBERT. Now, is there anything else you want to revise or change on page 1?

Mrs. GRANT. Well, I would say they were at—you know, they came with that ad and they turned it down and that’s about it. It’s in there.

Mr. BURLESON. Is there anything else on page 1?

Mrs. GRANT. Well, that part there that he contacted——

Mr. BURLESON. Well, we have already gone over that.

Mrs. GRANT. He was in the Dallas Morning News when all this took place. It was the greatest commotion in history in that office, and he was crying, and he was standing against the wall, and he said there were people——

Mr. BURLESON. All right; is there anything else though?

Mrs. GRANT. No.

Mr. BURLESON. Off the record.

(Discussion between Counsel Burleson and the witness, Mrs. Grant.)

Mr. BURLESON. Now, on the record. On page 2, Mrs. Grant, are there some changes or revisions that you might want to make in connection with that? I direct your attention specifically to this statement, “He informed that early Thursday morning, November 21, 1963, Jack Ruby, as was his custom, placed advertisements in both Dallas papers concerning the entertainment to be offered at the Carousel and Vegas nightclubs, Dallas, Texas, which clubs he had an interest in.” Now, in reference to that, what do you want to add in reference to that? Was that actually the morning of the 22d after midnight of the 21st?

Mrs. GRANT. Well, there are many weeks out of the year he would go in on—which is Friday morning after 2:30 in the morning and it seemed to me this was an unusual week. I have been away from the Vegas Club which I usually take care of, but he went to the Vegas Club to pick up money and he was on the phone half of the night, he said, calling for a band.

Mr. BURLESON. But this date——

Mrs. GRANT. So, he never got that—that’s the wrong date.

Mr. BURLESON. That date really should be early Friday morning, November 22, 1963?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes.

Mr. BURLESON. Which would have been following Thursday. All right. Now, directing your attention——

Mrs. GRANT. Can I add in over here something. When he was at my apartment Friday the phone rang and Andy, who is our bartender, said, “Jack, call Don Safran.”

Mr. BURLESON. Just a minute, we are coming to that, but I want to direct your attention now to the next statement after the one I just read. “She advised that after President Kennedy was assassinated on November 22, 1963, he called the newspapers to change the advertisements to show that the club would be closed Friday, Saturday and Sunday, November 22d, 23d, and 24th, 1963.” Would you care to explain that just a little bit?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes; I heard him call the Dallas Morning News, because there was a paper coming out at 10 o’clock at night and it seemed to me that they said it was too late—the Dallas news—you know how it comes out?

Mr. BURLESON. The first edition?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes; but he said, anyway, put it in Friday, Saturday, and Sunday, and I heard——

Mr. BURLESON. And it was on the afternoon of November 22d?

Mrs. GRANT. That’s right.

Mr. BURLESON. That he called from your place?

Mrs. GRANT. That’s right.

Mr. BURLESON. He called both of the papers?

Mrs. GRANT. That’s right. Then, he called the Times Herald, but in between this, it seems that Andy called, who was in charge of the Carousel Club and he said, “Call Don Saffran.”

Mr. BURLESON. All right. Now, we are going to get onto that but is that all you wanted to say about what we have just talked about?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes.

Mr. BURLESON. The next immediate following statement says, “She said that Don Saffran (PH) a newspaper reporter for the Dallas Times Herald, called him and wanted to know if he was sure,” and I am continuing on page 3, “he was not going to operate those clubs on any of those three days. He pointed out that some of the other clubs apparently were not going to be closed for even one night.

“When Ruby heard that the other clubs were not going to be closed, he became quite upset and asked Don how anyone with any kind of conscience could dance and have a good time after the President had been killed. He ended up by telling Don that he did not care what anyone else did, that he was going to close for those three days.”

And that is the end of those several sentences. What do you want to add in your deposition about that?

Mrs. GRANT. Well, as I said, Andy called him and he called Don and he says, “I’m going to close tonight—tonight.” And this is what Don says, “Are you going to be closed Saturday and Sunday?” I don’t know what Jack said, I’ll be honest, at that time, but Jack—there was about a 3-minute hesitation and he says, “I’m calling him back,” and this is what I heard him say—he said, “Don this is Jack Ruby.” He said, “Listen, I will be closed for three days—tonight, Friday, Saturday, and Sunday,” and he says, “I don’t care when the other clubs close,” and he says, “We’re broke anyway so—”. In other words, he felt he can’t get any worse off than he is—it isn’t that he makes a million dollars—I mean, that was his attitude.

Mr. BURLESON. The rest of page 3, the following three paragraphs on page 3 appear to be correct; is that right?

Mrs. GRANT. But I wanted to clear this—you see, this wasn’t put in.

Mr. BURLESON. Well, let me ask you this: We are now referring to the first full or complete paragraph on page 3, which says, “Mrs. Grant displayed a page from the Dallas Morning News, dated Saturday, November 23d, 1963, in Section 1, Page 19, containing a one column ad approximately four inches in length, stating that the Carousel Club on Main Street, Dallas, would be closed Friday, Saturday, and Sunday.” What do you want to say about that?

Mrs. GRANT. Well, I understand the early edition didn’t have it yet.

Mr. BURLESON. All right. In reference to the next paragraph, it says, “Mrs. Grant recalled that on the day of the President’s assassination, November 22, 1963, Jack Ruby telephoned her at least eight times and made three personal visits to her apartment,”—what correction or change do you want to make?

Mrs. GRANT. I think he came twice—one time early in the day and once later in the afternoon with the groceries.

Mr. BURLESON. So, where you said “three times”——

Mrs. GRANT. It was only two times.

Mr. BURLESON. You think now that it was only two times?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes.

Mr. BURLESON. The rest of that paragraph appears to be correct?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes.

Mr. BURLESON. The next paragraph on page 3 appears to be correct?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes.

Mr. BURLESON. A continuation of the last paragraph on page 3 and on page 4, does it appear to be correct?

Mrs. GRANT (read). Could I add something here?

Mr. BURLESON. All right, in the last sentence of the first paragraph, at the top of the page, the statement appears, “She stated that he discussed sending flowers to the place near the spot where the President was assassinated and she feels sure that he did have flowers delivered to that spot?”

Mrs. GRANT. Well, we had a regular florist, called “Your Florist,” but I was in the hospital and he sent dried up, thrown out flowers that he charged, you know, a large amount of money for. I told him to get another florist, but he didn’t. He thinks he didn’t anyway—we are almost sure he didn’t.

Mr. BURLESON. Now, directing your attention to the first complete paragraph on page 4, which says, “Mrs. Grant informed that Jack Ruby was in her apartment on November 22d, 1963, from approximately 5:30 p.m. until approximately 7:15 p.m. and then he dressed and went to the synagogue for prayers.” What correction or addition do you want to make to that?

Mrs. GRANT. It was much earlier than 5:30—more like 4:30 at that time. You see, he was there earlier in the day, but I don’t remember whether it was much earlier—I think he came before he even went to the newspaper office.

Mr. BURLESON. “Somewhere around 4:30” should be “around 5:30”?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes; and he went home to dress. You see, he didn’t live at my place.

Mr. BURLESON. All right; 7:15 is about right?

Mrs. GRANT. That’s right.

Mr. BURLESON. Then he dressed—he went home to dress from your place before he went to the synagogue?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes; but I want to tell you. He looked so bad and he was so much a broken man and more confused and I really said something to this effect to him, I said, “Do you think you are able to drive?” He says, “Yes,” but instead of him going home, he went to Dealey Plaza and he was there sometime, because he didn’t get home until much later, and he didn’t get to the synagogue until almost all of the services were over, but he didn’t have any idea about time.

Mr. BURLESON. Now, as to this next paragraph on page 4, does it appear to be correct as written?

Mrs. GRANT. Well, in the case that he told me that he took what Larry——

Mr. BURLESON. And there are some other things written, but what is written there, does that appear to be correct?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes. [Reading.]

Mr. BURLESON. Let me go off the record just a second.

(Discussion between Mr. Burleson and the witness, Mrs. Grant, off the record.)

Mr. BURLESON. Is this what is right, here?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes; that is correct—he said he was up every night.

Mr. BURLESON. Is this correct, then?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes.

Mr. BURLESON. Now, as to the last paragraph on page 4 which starts on page 4, does that appear to be correct?

Mrs. GRANT (reading). Yes; he called Stanley from my home, and that’s why I know, and they were talking about these signs and he showed me——

Mr. BURLESON. Just read this, though, and tell me if this is correct.

Mrs. GRANT (reading). Yes.

Mr. BURLESON. All right. Now, as to the first complete paragraph on page 5, would you read that and see if that appears to be correct?

Mrs. GRANT (reading). You know, I don’t know if he was there twice Saturday or not.

Mr. BURLESON. Where?

Mrs. GRANT. At my apartment; you see, he was there from 3:30 on to 8 o’clock that evening—I know he spent about 4 hours.

Mr. BURLESON. That’s on the 23d?

Mrs. GRANT. That’s right. Whether he was there earlier, I don’t know. I know Friday he was there twice.

Mr. BURLESON. But to the best of your recollection and remembrance at this time, this is correct?

Mrs. GRANT. Well, he was there from close to about—I would say 3½ to 4 or 4 hours and 15 minutes for a Saturday.

Mr. BURLESON. And you say that it appears to be correct, the whole paragraph?

Mrs. GRANT. Now, this is what I want to get clear.

Mr. BURLESON. All right. Let me read something into the record. With the statement “She stated that from the remarks made by Ruby during the 10:20 p.m. telephone conversation, that she gained the impression that Ruby had been at his residence, 223 South Ewing (Apartment 207), Dallas, Texas, since a short time after leaving her place around 8 p.m. the same date.” Now, what do you want to say about that?

Mrs. GRANT. Well, I don’t know if it was Friday or Saturday. He said he was going to the station, and I’ll be honest with you, I didn’t question—radio, television, or police station because it didn’t make a bit of difference to me. I was too gone.

Mr. BURLESON. But that does not have anything to do with this, does it?

Mrs. GRANT. He didn’t mention what station—he mentioned a station, but I don’t know if he went to the radio station, television, or police station, and I don’t think—it seems to me it was on a Friday instead of Saturday.

Mr. BURLESON. But the statement, though, is correct as far as you know? It may not be complete, but it is correct as far as you know?

Mrs. GRANT. Well, here it says on Saturday, but it is not Saturday. I think it was Friday after the synagogue. I think he called me, and he was in Phil’s, and he was ordering sandwiches, and I think it was Friday. I’ll tell you the truth, I was so confused that night I don’t know how I got anything out of him.

Mr. BURLESON. All right. Let me direct your attention to the next paragraph: “At 11:30 p.m. that same night, he called and told her he had been at the station where he had talked to Henry Wade, the district attorney, Dallas County, Tex., and Russ Knight of radio station KLIF, Dallas, Tex.”

Mrs. GRANT. And that should have been Friday.

Mr. BURLESON. That should be Friday night?

Mrs. GRANT. I think they both occurred Friday night.

Mr. BURLESON. You think the reference in the preceding paragraph that we quoted should have been Friday night instead of Saturday night?

Mrs. GRANT. I’m sure when he left the synagogue he went to Phil’s, he ordered sandwiches and he called me from Phil’s, and he said he was going to a station. He may have told me Saturday what station he had been at, but at that time he did not tell me.

Mr. BURLESON. If this were in this paragraph I have just quoted about starting at about 11:30 p.m. that same night, that should be, then, Friday night?

Mrs. GRANT. I’m sure.

Mr. BURLESON. With that substitution there, is everything else in that paragraph true?

Mrs. GRANT. Well, he just said he was going to a station.

Mr. BURLESON. Did he tell you he talked with Henry Wade?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes; he did.

Mr. BURLESON. Did he tell you——

Mrs. GRANT. Wait a minute—the phone rang—wait a minute—there were a group of men. The phone rang and Jack was nearest the phone, wherever this takes place—where they interrogate people or talk to people—I haven’t a vague idea, but yet I have been up there. Someone said answer the phone and he picked up the phone and he said, “It’s for you, Henry.” He told me this on Saturday.

A man at a station, and this time I think—this was Friday night—that I know, and he said, “Can I talk to Henry Wade?” And I think it was Russ Knight on the other end of the phone who said, “Okay,” and they were giving Russ Knight, who was—now, I know it was with KLIF because he was with KLIF, but he didn’t tell me this until Saturday when he came over but I’ll be honest, he told me when he was going to a station on Friday I did not know whether it was radio, television, or police station—I know he was in Phil’s and he ordered a lot of sandwiches.

Mr. BURLESON. Would you read, then, with that explanation, and see if these two paragraphs are correct?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes; yes.

Mr. BURLESON. All right, let’s move on to the last paragraph on page 5, which continues on page 6. Would you read it and see if it is correct?

Mrs. GRANT (reading). You see, I’ll tell you—I know when he got home Saturday afternoon, he left me—I made dinner for him and he called me.

Mr. BURLESON. Was it about 12:40?

Mrs. GRANT. No; he called me before that, once again, I would say it was more like 10:30 or 10 o’clock—he was still at home—Saturday he was still home—10 o’clock.

Mr. BURLESON. All right; let me interrupt you—Eva—just a second, and let me read to you this paragraph starting on page 5 at the bottom, “Mrs. Grant stated that she next heard from her brother, Jack Ruby, about 12:40 a.m., Sunday, November 24. 1963, at which time he called her by telephone.” Now, you say that you heard from him sometime before 12:40?

Mrs. GRANT. This fits in here—this part here.

Mr. BURLESON. What I just read fits back up into the first paragraph?

Mrs. GRANT. No—on Saturday he left my home around 8 o’clock. I did not hear from him for about 2 hours, it seems that long anyway. He called and he said—I know exactly what he said—he said he was making liver that George bought and getting dressed.

Mr. BURLESON. That George Senator bought?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes.

Mr. BURLESON. And he was at home?

Mrs. GRANT. No; George was not at home.

Mr. BURLESON. I mean, Jack was at his apartment?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes; this was Saturday.

Mr. BURLESON. All right.

Mrs. GRANT. And in those 2 hours, I assume he took a shower and from the telephone messages he must have made five long-distance calls from what I heard—that is Saturday—I don’t know where he went, but I do know he called me back again and it was after midnight, and it was near 1 o’clock, as much as I could remember.

Mr. BURLESON. Would you continue on page 6, that continuation of the paragraph, and see if the rest of it is correct?

Mrs. GRANT. Well, this is what I said——

Mr. BURLESON. Now, let me read that into the record—just a second.

Mrs. GRANT. At 12:40 he was at home. From the way he talked I assumed he was at home.

Mr. BURLESON. Just a second, now. “She said she gained the impression that he was at his residence.”

Mrs. GRANT. For Saturday is it?

Mr. BURLESON. From—for Saturday night when he called you at 12:40?

Mrs. GRANT. That’s right.

Mr. BURLESON. Would you read the next sentence in there and see if that is correct?

Mrs. GRANT. That’s right.

Mr. BURLESON. Now, directing your attention to the next paragraph, which is the first complete paragraph on page 6, would you read that and see if that is correct?

Mrs. GRANT (reading). That is correct.

Mr. BURLESON. Now, the last paragraph on page 6, which continues on page 7—would you read that?

Mrs. GRANT. Okay. [Read.] That’s all right.

Mr. HUBERT. I am handing you and your attorney a document which has been identified as follows: That is to say, I have written in the margin of this document, this consisting of one page, the words, “Dallas, Tex., May 28, 1964, Exhibit No. 2 deposition of Eva Grant,” and I have signed my name and this purports to be of a telephone interview between you and the FBI agent Jack Peden on November 29 1963, and I will ask you if it is correct, if anything has been omitted, any corrections to be made or anything wrong about it in regards to the first paragraph, which says, “Mrs. Eva L. Grant, 3929 Rawlins, was telephonically contacted at the Vegas Club, 3508 Oak Lawn, Dallas, Tex., and she stated that she first came to Dallas Tex., in August of either 1942 or August 1943.”

Did you come here?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes; I stayed a very short while. It was during the war and I lived out in Oak Cliff—it seems to me on Ohio Street somewhere.

Mr. HUBERT. Would you say that you were really just passing through?

Mrs. GRANT. No; but I was just here for a couple of weeks and then I left and you see I was always on the way from Chicago to Los Angeles.

Mr. BURLESON. Are there any other changes or corrections in this that you want to make?

Mrs. GRANT. Well, this building—wasn’t—go back to 1945.

Mr. BURLESON. Let me read into the record the second paragraph, “She advised that a building was being erected at 1717 South Ervay, in Dallas, shortly after she arrived in Dallas, and she arranged to lease it.”

Mrs. GRANT. Yes; but that was not until 1945.

Mr. HUBERT. That was in 1945?

Mrs. GRANT. I’m sure the last part of it was 1945.

Mr. HUBERT. That was in 1945?

Mrs. GRANT. I’m sure the last part of 1945.

Mr. HUBERT. Is the last sentence in the second paragraph correct?

Mrs. GRANT. Well, yes; that’s correct—let me explain this—you see, when they say I went to the west coast, yes; but I didn’t stay there too long. I mean, it took me from 6 months to 8 months to come back.

Mr. BURLESON. Let me ask you this. In the last paragraph, Mrs. Grant stated that “she left Dallas in 1948 and went to the west coast. She informed that she returned to Dallas two or three times after 1948 and has made Dallas her home since April 1959”; is that correct?

Mrs. GRANT. I was here many more years than that.

Mr. BURLESON. All right, what is the true situation?

Mrs. GRANT. Even if I left, I wasn’t gone maybe a half a year or 8 months even, and then I came back and I stayed here again, and then Jack had another club called Hernando’s Hideaway, and I was here a year then, maybe 2 years. Gee, I was mostly here since 1948 than any place I have been.

Mr. BURLESON. But you did move to other places?

Mrs. GRANT. I went to Los Angeles or Chicago—no other place than that.

Mr. BURLESON. And with those additions and corrections, this is correct; is that right?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes; I mean—I wouldn’t call any other place my home.

Mr. BURLESON. All right, that’s all.

Mr. HUBERT. Now——

Mrs. GRANT. You know, of course, that I went on the road and came back.

Mr. BURLESON. All right.

Mr. HUBERT. I have marked for identification a document which purports to be an interview on December 2, 1963, of you by FBI Agent Jack Peden, and for purposes of identification I have marked it as follows: “Dallas, Tex., May 28, 1964, Exhibit No. 3 of the deposition of Eva Grant,” and I have signed my name and ask you the same comments with respect to that document?

Mrs. GRANT (examining instrument referred to). It’s going back so far—yes; this is correct, but there are a lot of things that happened, other things.

Mr. HUBERT. Yes; we understand that.

Mr. BURLESON. But this is correct as far as it goes, and as far as it states?

Mrs. GRANT. That’s right.

Mr. BURLESON. There are other matters, but we won’t go into those at this particular time—this is true and correct?

Mrs. GRANT. I mean, if you look at those States, and then look at those, you would think I was in both places at one time, but it wasn’t like that.

Mr. BURLESON. All right, but this is true as far as it goes?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes; of course, there are some—who remembers everything—I had a little restaurant.

Mr. HUBERT. Now, we’ll get to the next document, which is a report of an interview on December 31, 1963, between FBI Agent Gaston Thompson and yourself, which I have marked for identification, “Dallas, Tex., May 28, 1964, Exhibit No. 4, deposition of Eva Grant,” and I have signed my name, and I ask you if that is correct and if there are any additions or omissions, and if so please state what you think is incorrect as to that document?

Mrs. Grant (read instrument referred to).

Mr. BURLESON. I will ask you about the first paragraph—is it correct?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes.

Mr. BURLESON. Now, getting to the second paragraph, I’ll ask you if it is correct?

Mrs. GRANT. Well, that’s what I told them because that’s what I thought—they told me he wasn’t dead.

Mr. BURLESON. Have you heard anything since then to the contrary?

Mrs. GRANT. I have not spoken to anybody—to anybody who knows where he is—whether he is dead, outside of what his name, Clements here told me they found him—he’s alive.

Mr. BURLESON. Directing your attention to the sentence in the second paragraph that says, “Frank had a sister named Rose Solomon in Los Angeles,” is that correct?

Mrs. GRANT. No; instead of sister, it should be aunt. He only had one sister and no other living relatives I would know.

Mr. BURLESON. Other than Rose Solomon, who is an aunt and not a sister?

Mrs. GRANT. It seems it was his mother’s sister, and that was the closest family.

Mr. BURLESON. Other than one change there, as far as this statement is concerned, it is true and correct?

Mrs. GRANT. That is right—that’s right.

Mr. BURLESON. Off the record.

(Discussion between Counsel Burleson and Hubert.)

Mr. HUBERT. Now, let’s proceed along these lines. What I would like to know is something of the family background, Mrs. Grant.

Mrs. GRANT. I’m ashamed to tell you.

Mr. HUBERT. For instance, your mother’s name?

Mrs. GRANT. Let me explain the situation, even with my family, my mother’s fathers’ name was Rutkowfsky.

Mr. HUBERT. Let me handle it this way—if you will just answer my questions, then at the end of each one of these blocks of questions, your attorney will be able to clarify anything he wants to.

Mrs. GRANT. But this is something—there has been a mixup in the family. A lot of times my sister would say her name was——

Mr. HUBERT (interrupting). If you will just answer my question and then we will move on this way. What was you mother’s name?

Mrs. GRANT. Fanny.

Mr. HUBERT. Do you remember what her last name was prior to her marriage?

Mrs. GRANT. That’s what I’m trying to remember.

Mr. HUBERT. You said it was Rutkowfsky, is that correct?

Mrs. GRANT. I think my mother’s mother was married twice. Sometimes they used the name as Turek [spelling] T-u-r-e-k, but her father’s name was Rutkowfsky—he was a doctor of medicine in Zimbrola, Poland.

Mr. HUBERT. Did your mother have any brothers or sisters?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes.

Mr. HUBERT. Would you name them, please, if you remember?

Mrs. GRANT. One was Sarah—they are dead—do you still want the names?

Mr. HUBERT. Yes, ma’am—did she marry anyone?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes, I know the name real good—wait a minute—isn’t that terrible—Moskowitz [spelling] M-o-s-k-o-w-i-t-z.

Mr. HUBERT. Did any of your mother’s relatives——

Mrs. GRANT. There is another one.

Mr. HUBERT. All right, go ahead.

Mrs. GRANT. Her brother lived until a couple of years ago. His name was Harry Rutland, and after he arrived in this country, which is 65 years ago, I would say, or close to that time, he changed his name from Rutkowfsky to Rutland, and he lived for 45 years in Denver, Colo., and he died in, let’s say, the last 3 or 4 years, I don’t remember.

Mr. HUBERT. Did the sister that you mentioned come to the United States?

Mrs. GRANT. Oh, yes, sir.

Mr. HUBERT. All three of the children?

Mrs. GRANT. At different times they arrived.

Mr. HUBERT. Came to the United States and settled in the United States; is that right?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes.

Mr. HUBERT. Was there any communication between your mother and her sisters and brothers after they came here?

Mrs. GRANT. Oh, yes.

Mr. HUBERT. They were your aunts, in fact?

Mrs. GRANT. Oh, we were very close when they were alive. Let me say there was a great family, but they were killed out in Europe.

Mr. HUBERT. All of these people are dead now and have been for some time?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes.

Mr. HUBERT. Now, turning to your father’s side of the family, what was your father’s name?

Mrs. GRANT. His name was Joseph Rubenstein.

Mr. HUBERT. Did he have any brothers and sisters?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes; he had a brother that came over 2 years later. His name was Abraham.

Mr. HUBERT. What happened to him?

Mrs. GRANT. He died 7 years ago or 6 years ago.

Mr. HUBERT. Did he live in the United States?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes; he did, in Chicago.

Mr. BURLESON. He had settled here too, then?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes, he did.

Mr. HUBERT. What was your father’s employment?

Mrs. GRANT. He was a carpenter.

Mr. HUBERT. Did he work for anyone as a regular proposition?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes; he worked for the U.S. Government during World War I. Baltimore, Md.; he built barracks, he was a union member for 55 years.

Mr. HUBERT. Did he belong to any other clubs?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes—he came from a town called Sokovosolover, Poland.

Mr. HUBERT. Do you know how to spell that?

Mrs. GRANT. Oh, we could never get it right, it’s a case of “Sokovosolover”—we could never get it right, but there is a town there by that name and he was born in that town. Let me explain this—his people, country people, came to this country. From that particular stay, they formed this club. It was called Verein, and it was a social meeting or group where all the people from this little town and families would get together and there are still some in existence, believe it or not, and probably in Chicago and I have a cousin, my father’s nephew is still alive. His name is Abraham Rubenstein.

Mr. HUBERT. And this was a club formed in Chicago by the people of this village who all came to the United States?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes—that’s right, they did come at different times.

Mr. HUBERT. It was a social and cultural get-together?

Mrs. GRANT. It was a social meeting club, where all the people from this little town and their families could get together and there are still some in existence believe it or not. And I have a cousin—my father’s nephew is still alive. His name is Abraham Rubenstein by the way.

Mr. HUBERT. And this was a club formed in Chicago by the people of this village who all wanted to enter into the United States?

Mrs. GRANT. That’s right—they had come at different times.

Mr. HUBERT. It was a social and a cultural proposition?

Mrs. GRANT. It was a get-together to know they are alive and they have bought a cemetery where you can in due time——

Mr. HUBERT. Did you attend any of the meetings?

Mrs. GRANT. Oh, yes.

Mr. HUBERT. Was there anything political about them?

Mrs. GRANT. No—I’m going to tell you.

Mr. HUBERT. Well, just tell me.

Mrs. GRANT. Honest to God, there wasn’t—they drank and they danced.

Mr. HUBERT. But would you answer my question as to whether or not there was any political activity discussed—the answer is what—yes or no?

Mrs. GRANT. You may write to the man—Abraham Rubenstein, he is still alive.

Mr. HUBERT. I just want to know whether your impression and your attendance at the meetings of the club indicate to you whether this group at any time had any political implication whatsoever?

Mrs. GRANT. No, no; not that I would know of.

Mr. HUBERT. You never observed any? Of any kind?

Mrs. GRANT. Never.

Mr. HUBERT. Could you tell us something of Jack’s youth and education and his childhood—you were older than he was and therefore, you are able to observe it, I would think.

Mrs. GRANT. I am 2 years older and how far back do you want to go—do you want me to go?

Mr. HUBERT. What kind of education did he have?

Mrs. GRANT. I think he went about a year and a half to high school.

Mr. HUBERT. Were your parents separated?

Mrs. GRANT. My parents were separated—yes.

Mr. HUBERT. When did they separate?

Mrs. GRANT. In the spring of 1921.

Mr. HUBERT. That was when Jack was about 10 years old?

Mrs. GRANT. Let’s see, if he was born in 1911—yes.

Mr. HUBERT. Who did Jack and you live with—your father or your mother?

Mrs. GRANT. Well, I went to live—my mother has—these people don’t live there any more, in Maywood, Ill., my mother’s niece—the daughter of this Sarah Moskowitz, Bertha Miller, I went to live with her for a while. Then my father took an apartment, such as it was and I went to live with him for a while, and—you want to know?

Mr. HUBERT. What about Jack himself?

Mrs. GRANT. Now, this is something that there is a haziness about it—two of my brothers were put on a farm with some people. It seems to me—I don’t know which two—went to Woodstock, Ill., and one went to a place called West Chicago or Chicago Heights and I have forgotten whether Jack was by himself and Earl and Sammy went to a place. Then later on it seemed to me Jack went to stay with a family, maybe a year later, called the Michelles—he admired them.

Mr. HUBERT. Well, is it fair to state that apparently the family broke up; is that correct?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes—well, my mother had a nervous breakdown. That was the first time, because of the dissension in the home because of my father’s activities of drinking.

Mr. HUBERT. Is your father an alcoholic?

Mrs. GRANT. Well, he lived until 89—how can we prove it—you know, we never knew if he was drunk or sober, but he drank plenty.

Mr. HUBERT. When did he die?

Mrs. GRANT. I would say in 1958 or 1959. I have just forgotten now, I’ll be honest about it.

Mr. HUBERT. Do you recall whether Jack himself was involved in some sort of juvenile court proceedings?

Mrs. GRANT. We all were. In the State of Illinois, when parents separated, I think there is such a thing as you are under the jurisdiction of the juvenile court, because I went to court several times. I don’t think—I think I was probably 12 or 13 years old—I don’t know. I remember going to a very famous court and I can’t think of the judge’s name.

Mr. HUBERT. Well, what I’m trying to get at is this——

Mrs. GRANT (interrupting). Not for being bad or anything.

Mr. HUBERT. That’s exactly what I want to get at. In other words, these juvenile court proceedings resulted, you say, from the mere fact that you had a broken home and not from the fact——

Mrs. GRANT (interrupting). The Jewish Aid Society——

Mr. HUBERT. Just a minute, let me finish the question—this did not reflect that the juveniles involved, whether it was you or Jack——

Mrs. GRANT. Or anyone else.

Mr. HUBERT. Or anyone else had been in any trouble such as we call today—juvenile delinquency; is that correct?

Mrs. GRANT. That’s right.

Mr. HUBERT. And your statement to me is that although you yourself have been in these proceedings——

Mrs. GRANT (interrupting). I have been in front of the judge.

Mr. HUBERT. It has not been because of juvenile delinquency; is that correct?

Mrs. GRANT. Well, there was a big——

Mr. HUBERT. Just answer my question, I think you can answer my question.

Mrs. GRANT. I have been there several times in front of a judge and my mother was there and the kids were there, and truthfully, it’s all so vague I can’t remember.

Mr. HUBERT. Do you remember that in his youth Jack was called by the nickname “Sparky”?

Mrs. GRANT. Oh, yes.

Mr. HUBERT. Could you tell us how he acquired that name?

Mrs. GRANT. Well, there was a horse called “Sparky” that was the slowest darn horse you ever saw and it was a joke, you know, in the funny papers, and they would rib him about him. Jack was short and fat and stocky. He wobbled when he walked, from the time I remember he was 5 years old, until the time he was 8, and it seemed shortly after that he acquired that name and that burned him up, and from then on he has become very fast with his fists and he started hitting fellows—well—the fellows who probably kept calling him “Sparky”, let’s say, but these were all little boys—8, 9, 11 or 10.

Mr. HUBERT. And that’s how he got the name “Sparky”?

Mrs. GRANT. As much as I remember.

Mr. HUBERT. From two sources—from the horse named “Spark Plug” or the comic strip that had a horse named “Spark Plug” and from the fact that he, as a child, reacted quickly to taunts of his young friends?

Mrs. GRANT. Well, he changed, but the name stuck with him still.

Mr. HUBERT. Yes; I understand that, but we are just talking about how he acquired the name.

Mrs. GRANT. Yes.

Mr. HUBERT. How would you describe the neighborhood in which you were raised, generally, and the conditions under which you were generally raised?

Mrs. GRANT. Well, when you discuss people who come from the old country, that was the best neighborhood they could afford to live in. Two doors down were some very wealthy people—the Katzen family. My father was a carpenter and he worked—he tried to work all the time. There wasn’t work always available, but it was considered a poor neighborhood, but I’ll tell you—went with him four blocks away to look over other neighborhoods.

Mr. HUBERT. Well, as you recall it now, would you classify it as a good neighborhood, or a bad neighborhood, or what? Because, you see, we are trying to get some background information here.

Mrs. GRANT. Okay. We lived in a block where the houses have two-story buildings. In one block between the both sides I will say there was 150 children between the ages of 4 and 15, because these families have large groups and most of the families have 6 children or 8 and some of them had 12.

Mr. HUBERT. You are familiar with the modern term “a slum neighborhood,” would you characterize it like that?

Mrs. GRANT. Not really a slum because those who had more money next door lived better, but there were worse neighborhoods. I don’t know how much worse. I admit to you often we talked about it. I don’t say the middle class people lived there. It was below the middle class, but yet it wasn’t the poorest class.

Mr. HUBERT. When did you marry, Mrs. Grant?

Mrs. GRANT. I married March 30, 1930, to Hyman Magid in Chicago.

Mr. HUBERT. And I think there was a child born of this marriage?

Mrs. GRANT. Oh, yes; that’s Ronnie Magid.

Mr. HUBERT. Now, that child is what age?

Mrs. GRANT. He will be 33 next month.

Mr. HUBERT. And you were divorced from Mr. Magid?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes; I was.

Mr. HUBERT. What year?

Mrs. GRANT. I think it was 1934 in Chicago.

Mr. HUBERT. What was Mr. Magid’s, your husband’s, occupation?

Mrs. GRANT. Well, you really want to know—that’s a catchy question. He went into business with his father and his father owned a meat market, but that was later on. He really took up—he was a college graduate and he did electrical work, but he never worked at it. He didn’t adapt himself to it for some reason or other.

Mr. HUBERT. What did he do for a living, then?

Mrs. GRANT. As far as I know he was a butcher.

Mr. HUBERT. No; I mean at that time.

Mrs. GRANT. He went to school when I married him and after that he worked with his father.

Mr. HUBERT. In a butcher shop?

Mrs. GRANT. That’s right, it was during the depression.

Mr. HUBERT. Where did you live during the time of your marriage?

Mrs. GRANT. I lived with my mother-in-law on Kolin Avenue.

Mr. HUBERT. In Chicago?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes.

Mr. HUBERT. Now, after your divorce, I think you went to the west coast, is that correct?

Mrs. GRANT. Jack went there first.

Mr. HUBERT. What year was that?

Mrs. GRANT. I think it was in 1934 in January, I mean, it seems to me it was that year.

Mr. HUBERT. You had been divorced?

Mrs. GRANT. That’s when he went there. I didn’t go there until later.

Mr. HUBERT. Jack went first?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes, he did.

Mr. HUBERT. And he must have been a man about 21 or 22 at that time?

Mrs. GRANT. It could be.

Mr. HUBERT. This was in 1934?

Mrs. GRANT. Don’t hold me to 1934 or 1935. I’m so confused. I know it was either one of the years, and he went there right after the first of the year, and I followed 6 months later.

Mr. HUBERT. Do you know why he went there?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes, he went to work. There was no work in Chicago and there was boys out there that said there was jobs—that there was a lot of jobs available in San Francisco.

Mr. HUBERT. Did you live with him when you went out?

Mrs. GRANT. Oh, yes—yes, I did; we occupied an apartment.

Mr. HUBERT. It was you and Jack and your son?

Mrs. GRANT. My son—I put him in a private school and Jack helped me pay for him.

Mr. HUBERT. What was Jack’s occupation on the west coast?

Mrs. GRANT. He got a newspaper crew—sometimes he worked for the Call Bulletin, which is a famous Hearst paper, the Examiner, and sometimes he gave us the crew and he worked for the—there was a news—it was called the San Francisco News and sometimes we worked for the Chronicle. You see, there is a system——

Mr. HUBERT. Well, when you say you worked for them, in what capacity?

Mrs. GRANT. We solicited for subscriptions door to door. It was during the height of the depression.

Mr. HUBERT. This was sort of a door-to-door operation that you and he had, was it?

Mrs. GRANT. Well, he was a better salesman. He was always guiding me, you know, let me put it this way—there was good money in it considering the times, because they were paying 90 cents an order and we would go out and get 8 or 10 or 15 orders a day, which you couldn’t get in any other job, and our obligations were great. My son’s expenses were $65 a month and my brother helped support half of the fellows that didn’t work—who wouldn’t do this.

Mr. HUBERT. When you say your “brother” you mean Jack?

Mrs. GRANT. I mean Jack—Jack was the only one out there.

Mr. HUBERT. When did you leave California?

Mrs. GRANT. Well, I married Frank Grant in San Francisco in 1936, and I think we stayed around another year or a year and a half.

Mr. HUBERT. But did you still reside with Jack then after you married?

Mrs. GRANT. For a while he did—yes, he did.

Mr. HUBERT. He lived with you?

Mrs. GRANT. We had a four-room apartment and my son was home then with us.

Mr. HUBERT. Did Jack have any other occupations during the time you were on the west coast other than that which you have described?

Mrs. GRANT. I don’t remember out there anything but for the newspapers, you know, and first he came to Los Angeles and he nearly starved to death. He became a singing waiter and someone told him—well, he said he was on his way to San Francisco but I think he didn’t have enough money or gas to get there—to San Francisco.

Mr. HUBERT. Were you subsequently divorced from Frank Grant?

Mrs. GRANT. Now—I’m divorced many years.

Mr. HUBERT. Yes, ma’am; that’s what I wanted to get. When were you divorced?

Mrs. GRANT. I think I filed in 1941.

Mr. HUBERT. But you left the west coast about what—1937?

Mrs. GRANT. No, I didn’t. I went down to Los Angeles with Frank Grant and I lived there. I may have went home on a trip to Chicago, which I did very often.

Mr. HUBERT. When did you leave the west coast permanently?

Mrs. GRANT. I think it was after the war broke out.

Mr. HUBERT. When did Jack leave the west coast?

Mrs. GRANT. He already left.

Mr. HUBERT. About what year, do you remember?

Mrs. GRANT. He may have left before 1940, but you see, he came back so many times and he and a fellow by the name of Harry Epstein started to sell premium items—a cedar chest with candy, if I remember, and they developed a company—I think it was called the Spartan Co.—the Spartan Novelty Co.

Mr. HUBERT. That was Jack and this fellow Epstein?

Mrs. GRANT. Harry Epstein—that’s as well as I remember.

Mr. HUBERT. Do you remember any of these other friends?

Mrs. GRANT. Who do you want me to remember?

Mr. HUBERT. I don’t know—you see—you must tell me.

Mrs. GRANT. Oh, you asked me—listen, I know all the fellows we knew in Chicago and went to school with and grew up with.

Mr. HUBERT. Well, perhaps you could name some of them that you remember.

Mrs. GRANT. Well, you see, there is a difference of friends and acquaintances. There are people, you knew, that we just knew they existed.

Mr. HUBERT. Well, I think what we want to know is the friends, of course, a lot of people you know, but those you would classify as being friends.

Mrs. GRANT. Well, he was an admirer of Barney Ross that was a good friend all through the years and Barney fought on the west coast. They were very close. Let’s see—while we were on the west coast we were very friendly with Izzy Kaplan, with Frankie Goldstein—you see, these people all worked in the newspaper—they were all working fellows at that time.

Mr. HUBERT. Were they from Chicago originally?

Mrs. GRANT. No; we met them out on the west coast soliciting for newspapers. In Chicago I could name hundreds of fellows—I don’t know—Al Kamin, do you know him—is he down on the list? He owned the Marlene Sales Co. at one time and I think that at one time—now, let me tell you the story about him. He and Jack were selling premiums and they went and made a plaque. They invested every dime they could get from my family, which was $1,500—my sister Marion and Earl—and this plaque, now, I don’t know if it was in that year or when it was done, but it was President Roosevelt’s head and they figured for an inducement to give away, that was a giveaway item. It was worth about $1 retail, whoever wanted it, but they were selling merchandise and Al Kamin had a place at 5 North Wabash or 5 South Wabash in Chicago. I don’t know—I was not there at the time, but I do know this plaque thing existed and I know another thing that they went into. You know, there were eight children and anyone who had a buck in the family, they went into a deal where they made something about this size [indicating], and it told about Pearl Harbor. I don’t know if you remember seeing that plaque. They sold quite a bit of them, but to them it was a giveaway. They sold quite a bit of merchandise—to induce these purchasers, they would give them 10 or 15 of them. It was like a certificate that the people shouldn’t forget Pearl Harbor. Now, that could have been—he wasn’t in the war yet, where Earl and Sammy was already in. He went in, I think, the last one. I may be wrong. I have forgotten—I’ll be honest about it, but they were merchandising and this man and he were in business.

Mr. HUBERT. Well, then did you move from the west coast back to Chicago prior to Pearl Harbor; you did, did you not?

Mrs. GRANT. I was on the west coast—he was gone. He was in Chicago and I think he was with Harry Epstein, I’m sure, in 1940 and in 1941 when the war broke out. Now, he has been back to California. Other members of the family came to visit my son and myself in 1940 and 1941, but he was already, I think, established with Harry Epstein. Harry would know something more about this than I do—I don’t remember, but I know they were selling merchandise.

Mr. HUBERT. Do you know of any acquaintenance or friends that Jack had who had been convicted of crimes?

Mrs. GRANT. Name them—I’ll admit to it if I know—yes—let me say this, we knew undesirable characters that grew up in our neighborhood.

Mr. HUBERT. You remember some of their names?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes.

Mr. HUBERT. Would you state them, please?

Mrs. GRANT. I don’t want it to be in the public library. These fellows are such nice fellows today, I heard. You know, if these things get out, they think we are degrading them. We were raised with a lot of people that become undesirables. They were people that lived in our neighborhood. Some went to school with us. I know of a fellow getting killed—he said his name was English—he was a bad character as far as we knew. He was 16 years old and I think they killed him on a swing somewhere in the area. We knew the family where they had three boys and I understand—I’m going to tell you about this family, because I told the Secret Service, Elmer Moore. His name was Lenny Patrick. Let me explain—we knew he existed. We never associated with him in our home or in our business or anything.

Mr. HUBERT. That’s what I wanted to ask you. You see, I have asked you if these people were your friends or not.

Mrs. GRANT. No; but they are people we know. We know their family—we see them, “How’s your mother, how’s your sister?”

Mr. HUBERT. But there was no close relationship between Jack and people with criminal records, is that right? Is that a fair statement?

Mrs. GRANT. If he knew any—maybe—I don’t know whoever went to jail—all of them.

Mr. HUBERT. No; I’m asking you what you know about it. Let me put it this way: Do you know of any people who were friendly with Jack, not merely knew him, but who were friendly with Jack, who you knew and he knew had a criminal record?

Mrs. GRANT. Well, I wouldn’t say he was unfriendly with them.

Mr. HUBERT. I didn’t ask you that—I’m asking you—was he friendly with any of them?

Mrs. GRANT. Well, he wasn’t associated socially or in business, yet you saw them—they were around. If you went to a nightclub or if you went to a bazaar.

Mr. HUBERT. No; I mean did they come to the home?

Mrs. GRANT. No.

Mr. HUBERT. Did they come and visit you and such as that?

Mrs. GRANT. No.

Mr. BURLESON. May I inject something in there—Jack didn’t visit in their home and they didn’t visit in yours and you didn’t have anything to do with them; is that correct?

Mrs. GRANT. Even their sisters or brothers who were nice, we didn’t have anything to do with them, yet we knew they turned out to be some pretty rough characters and I’m not going to deny that—Sam Yeres and Dave Yeres—let me say this, I knew of more than he knew.

Mr. HUBERT. Do you know of any contacts that he may have retained with any of these people after he left the Chicago area?

Mrs. GRANT. We saw them—and we encountered them—we talked.

Mr. HUBERT. Did they come to Dallas?

Mrs. GRANT. Oh, no—nobody I know. I know one did—wait a minute—Sam Yeres did.

Mr. HUBERT. When did he come to Dallas?

Mrs. GRANT. I don’t know—many years ago, but he is since dead and his brother is in Chicago.

Mr. HUBERT. Let’s take the last 8 or 9 or 10 years.

Mrs. GRANT. He may have died 10 years ago, for all I know.

Mr. HUBERT. Do you know of any people of the nature or character which you have described whom Jack may have known in the Chicago district whom he contacted or who contacted him in the past 10 years—to your knowledge—if you don’t know, you don’t know.

Mrs. GRANT. If they have, I didn’t know they were here, but I doubt if he would be friendly with them.

Mr. HUBERT. The answer is that you really don’t know?

Mrs. GRANT. I really don’t.

Mr. HUBERT. Do you want to ask anything about this segment?

Mr. BURLESON. Yes, please.

Mrs. Grant, your father only had one brother, is that correct?

Mrs. GRANT. He had a lot of brothers—they died in the old country. The only brother that came here as far as I knew was that one.

Mr. BURLESON. Was the one you told us about?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes.

Mr. BURLESON. Now, the juvenile court contacts that you and your brothers and sisters had were all a result of a broken home and not as a result of any type of misbehavior?

Mrs. GRANT. There has never been any criminal action in my family as much as I know.

Mr. BURLESON. Now, as to Jack’s recent last 10 years, you know of no contacts he has had either in person or by telephone——

Mrs. GRANT. I want to correct that.

Mr. BURLESON. With any person of an undesirable or criminal element?

Mrs. GRANT. Well, the way you look at it—now, the AGVA is a highly recognized organization in the world—it is the Actor’s Guild and Jack had a lot of trouble here with certain other nightclub owners. We had known that a certain individual has upped himself up from racketeering to this particular organization.

Mr. BURLESON. Who is that individual, do you know that individual’s name?

Mrs. GRANT. Now, as I know him, he used to be a cocktail lounge owner and he is in that slip. His name is Jack Yanover. We know his parents—I’ve known the man 40 years. He’s a man 65 years old.

Mr. BURLESON. He had some type of criminal element?

Mrs. GRANT. Let me tell you—to get into these union deals and everything, Jack—by the way you know Jack was a union organizer and became an officer, but the man he was connected with was a highly reputable lawyer. That’s why they killed him—Leon Cook. Jack himself never had any connections with gangsters for money, for business, for sociability. On the other hand, when we saw them we acknowledged them. When my father died——

Mr. BURLESON. Now, let me bring you up to the last 10 years—do you know of any telephone contacts Jack has had?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes.

Mr. BURLESON. With whom?

Mrs. GRANT. Here—I’m going to tell you—in the last year he has had so much aggravation in the club, that he called this Lenny Patrick. That was the last resort. He figured he might know somebody—this guy is not a holy man by far.

Mr. BURLESON. Lenny Patrick is not a holy man?

Mrs. GRANT. No: he’s not by far. He’s a gambler.

Mr. BURLESON. Jack called him for what purpose?

Mrs. GRANT. He called him for the purpose to see if he could fix him up with the union, so he could have amateur night the same as the other two fellows here.

Mr. BURLESON. It’s something to do with unions?

Mrs. GRANT. That’s right.

Mr. BURLESON. Now, let me ask you this—what about this friend of Jack’s—this Willie, do you know this man; what do you know about him?

Mrs. GRANT. Willie—he is considered——

Mr. HUBERT. How is it spelled?

Mrs. GRANT. [Spelling] M-c-W-i-l-l-i-e.

Mr. HUBERT. Oh, that’s Louis McWillie, is that who you mean?

Mrs. GRANT. I met him 8 or 9 years ago in the restaurant with Jack, and Jack told me that night or the next night that, “He’s a gambler,” in fact, I think he was the main guy at the high class club here, Cipango’s, he ran games over there at that club and it is highly recognized, and the town sort of overlooks him and they admire him—truthfully, if you met this man, you would think he is a doctor or a lawyer.

Mr. BURLESON. Jack has had some contact with him?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes; not in business. He was a nice fellow. I don’t know how well Jack knew him—I do know this man was getting a divorce. He was married to a much older lady and he went to Jack—he wanted Jack to talk to this lady to be sure she files a divorce, something to that effect, because I went with him to her home. He wasn’t there.

Mr. BURLESON. Jack also had contact by going on vacations with him, for instance?

Mrs. GRANT. Well; wait a minute. Jack was broke, as you know. That’s another thing, and he was so disgusted and so blue and it seemed it was the year my father was very ill, I think it was 1958, and that McWillie sent him a ticket to come to Havana, Cuba, and my sister was there—not the same time, but the same year, but there was no commotion with Havana, Cuba, then, and McWillie—the airlines has proved that this ticket was bought by this McWillie—that’s as much as I know.

Mr. BURLESON. He went down there and was it for some type of business that they had talked about?

Mrs. GRANT. I’ll tell you—I understand—now, this was told to me recently and I don’t even know if it’s so.

Mr. BURLESON. It wasn’t told to you by Jack?

Mrs. GRANT. I don’t even know who told me—it’s something about jeeps and I don’t know if I’m dreaming it or thinking it. McWillie was a gambler and they are running a game in the big casinos where all the bigwigs out of Miami come over for a couple of nights, and that was as much as I knew about it because I have never been to Florida or to that part of Florida.

Mr. BURLESON. Now, as far as you know, Jack and McWillie never had any business relationship, McWillie was just helping Jack out on a vacation?

Mrs. GRANT. Well, Jack was depressed and sick mentally then and we didn’t realize it.

Mr. BURLESON. Is that about the time he locked himself up?

Mrs. GRANT. No; he locked himself up before that.

Mr. BURLESON. Do you think of any other person or any other incident or anything else that you know concerning Jack and having any connection in the last 10 years with any one of the so-called criminal element?

Mrs. GRANT. Now, I know he went to New York to talk to a guy by the name of Glazer, but he is considered the wealthiest booking agent, and from what I heard years ago, this guy probably could have been in rackets—I don’t know, but he is with the AGVA. I can’t explain this—some of these boys have worked themselves up to——

Mr. BURLESON. So that the only contacts that you do know about were through AGVA, or what you have already told us?

Mrs. GRANT. There was nothing—I know when Lenny—he said something about “Maybe he knows somebody in the AGVA.”

Mr. BURLESON. Who could help them in the trouble he was having?

Mrs. GRANT. That’s right. He also called—there was a fellow in Chicago by the name of—I have noticed all their names.

Mr. BURLESON. But this is all you can think about?

Mrs. GRANT. But if they have got names, I will answer it.

Mr. BURLESON. All right, we will get to that.

Mrs. GRANT. I am not trying to get out of it.

Mr. BURLESON. This is all you can think of now?

Mrs. GRANT. Let me explain something before you even—and since this is going in this record—I knew more racketeers than he did. My girl friends lived in classy buildings and there were fellows that worked, they were gambling men. The ran districts in Chicago and when I was 16 or 18, this was the prohibition. We hear all of this stuff and we were intrigued by it, but we didn’t know who these people were, but I knew they existed, and truthfully, all in 1 year—in the early forties they were, as you say, bumped off, but he didn’t know them, and please believe me I am very truthful and very honest.

Mr. HUBERT. Let’s go off the record now and recess until this evening.

(Discussion between counsel off the record.)

Mr. HUBERT. We will recess until 7:30 this evening.

(Whereupon, the proceeding was recessed.)

TESTIMONY OF MRS. EVA GRANT RESUMED

The proceeding was reconvened at 7:30 p.m.

Mr. HUBERT. Now, I understand that you returned to Chicago to live some time prior to the war, is that correct?

Mrs. GRANT. Let’s see—every year I went home—I may have stayed a month, 3 months or 4 months.

Mr. HUBERT. No; I mean on a permanent basis.

Mrs. GRANT. I was never there permanent after I married Frank Grant. I mean, if I was there—the longest time I was there is the year my father was sick before he died.

Mr. HUBERT. All right; let me put it this way—I am going to ask you if you know some names of people and if you don’t know them, all right, but if you do know them, tell us what you know about them. For instance, Frank Howard and Jack Howard—do you know those people?

Mrs. GRANT. No; I don’t, sir.

Mr. HUBERT. And a man by the name of Erwin Berke [spelling] B-e-r-k-e. Do you know him?

Mrs. GRANT. Never—just doesn’t ring a bell, I never have heard the name.

Mr. HUBERT. Do you know a man by the name of Sam Jaffe [spelling] J-a-f-f-e?

Mrs. GRANT. No, sir.

Mr. HUBERT. Do you know a man by the name of Sam Chavin [spelling] C-h-a-v-i-n?

Mrs. GRANT. No, sir.

Mr. HUBERT. Perhaps you knew his wife, Charlotte Chavin, who is the daughter of Sam Jaffe, did you ever see her?

Mrs. GRANT. Where are they from; do you have an idea?

Mr. HUBERT. They were from Chicago, ma’am, and they subsequently moved to Muncie, Ind.

Mrs. GRANT. I never heard of them—I never heard of them.

Mr. HUBERT. You never heard of them?

Mrs. GRANT. No, sir.

Mr. HUBERT. Did you ever know of any connection that Jack might have had with those people?

Mrs. GRANT. It wasn’t a close connection. We knew some Jaffes—I mean, as kids—they were in the undertaking business, but I haven’t heard of them in years.

Mr. HUBERT. Did you know a daughter of Sam Jaffe whose name was Charlotte and she married Sam Chavin?

Mrs. GRANT. No, sir; I can’t recall.

Mr. HUBERT. Then there was another daughter who married Erwin Berke.

Mrs. GRANT. What was her first name? Can I ask you a question—how far back does the names go?

Mr. HUBERT. This would have been around the period of the war—1942 to 1946.

Mrs. GRANT. I wasn’t around Chicago that much in those years—you see—I was here and on the west coast.

Mr. HUBERT. In any case, these names don’t ring a bell?

Mrs. GRANT. No, sir; I can’t place them at all unless they are mispronounced or misspelled, but Jaffes—I did know.

Mr. HUBERT. Did you know any Jaffes who moved from Chicago to Muncie, Ind.?

Mrs. GRANT. No; no.

Mr. HUBERT. The Jaffes you did know were in an earlier period; is that right?

Mrs. GRANT. That’s right.

Mr. HUBERT. And as far as you know, they didn’t move to Muncie, Ind.?

Mrs. GRANT. In the last 25 years—I can’t place the name close to Jack or me.

Mr. HUBERT. What about Paul Labriola [spelling] L-a-b-r-i-o-l-a?

Mrs. GRANT. No.

Mr. HUBERT. What about Hershey Colvin?

Mrs. GRANT. I never heard those names.

Mr. HUBERT. Jimmy Weinberg?

Mrs. GRANT. We are—my mother had a niece that was married to a Weinberg, but there is not one name like that in the family—no Jimmies.

Mr. HUBERT. Now, you did, of course, move ultimately to Dallas, which has been your home, I take it, for some period?

Mrs. GRANT. On and off for over 20 years—22 years.

Mr. HUBERT. When did you first come to Dallas?

Mrs. GRANT. I think it was in 1942 or 1943, I was here for a little while.

Mr. HUBERT. For how long?

Mrs. GRANT. For a few months at least it seems.

Mr. HUBERT. What was the purpose of coming here to Dallas; do you remember?

Mrs. GRANT. Oh, I came to look—Al Kamin owned the Marlene Sales and he had costume jewelry and he wanted me to sell it, you know, in little stores and I took a sample and I didn’t sell it. I had several samples and I went to work selling magazines for a company, it seems, out of Los Angeles—I don’t know what year it was.

Mr. HUBERT. This was in Dallas?

Mr. GRANT. Oh, yes; but I mean this particular agency handles all magazines.

Mr. HUBERT. How long did you stay in Dallas during that period?

Mrs. GRANT. It seems a couple of months—I don’t know—then, I went home. You see, I think it was during the summer—I left my son there in the summer—I just can’t remember—honest to God.

Mr. HUBERT. Weren’t you in some sort of an export-import business?

Mrs. GRANT. Oh, yes; but that was later—I think it was in 1944, 1945, 1946, and 1947.

Mr. HUBERT. Now, you were living in Dallas on a rather permanent basis during those years?

Mrs. GRANT. After that—yes.

Mr. HUBERT. So, I gather from your testimony you would fix a time of your permanent domicile or residence in Dallas as about 1944?

Mrs. GRANT. It seems to me I stayed more here—then. I was here—I would think 3 or 4 years. Even if I went to Chicago I didn’t stay long.

Mr. HUBERT. I understand, but your home in the normal sense of the word would have been Dallas after 1944?

Mrs. GRANT. I would say from that time on I was just here until 1948, constantly, well, I mean outside of every year—leaving for a few weeks.

Mr. HUBERT. Well, now—what was the export-import business?

Mrs. GRANT. We really didn’t do any exporting. That was the name of the Berger-Grant Sales Co. Milton Berger was with me—he has since died. We bought and sold caustic soda, soda ash, and my brother Jack made a connection for me to sell irons—regular household irons and lamps and merchandise, but he knew a factory in Chicago and they sent me merchandise and Milton went on the road and through seven or eight States in the South and I handled the business end of it—that was caustic soda, soda ash, and we had a few accounts—the best account I remember is the Rivera people—the Rivera family. They bought soda ash and caustic soda from us.

Mr. HUBERT. Who were they?

Mrs. GRANT. Well, Jerry Rivera, his home is in Piedras Negras—they are still there.

Mr. HUBERT. In what State—in what country?

Mrs. GRANT. Isn’t that right over the border in Mexico?

Mr. HUBERT. I don’t know—Piedras Negras—is that it?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes.

Mr. HUBERT. It’s in Mexico?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes; but he lived in San Antonio a great deal and in Houston he had an office.

Mr. HUBERT. Is he alive?

Mrs. GRANT. Oh, yes.

Mr. HUBERT. When was the last contact with him?

Mrs. GRANT. I think I saw him about 4 years ago—maybe 5.

Mr. HUBERT. And what connection, do you recall?

Mrs. GRANT. Oh, he came through—he was at one of the motels and he called my brother and I went out and had dinner with him.

Mr. HUBERT. He called Jack, you mean?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes—now, there are several brothers in the family, and I even met his parents the previous year.

Mr. HUBERT. Do you recall any connection with that Rivera family or any member of it in the last 4 or 5 years?

Mrs. GRANT. No; but I do know I met his mother and father. They came to Chicago in one of the summers—like in the middle fifties when I was up there. They had called our home in Chicago and his parents were staying at the Palmer House.

Mr. HUBERT. Do you know of any connection whatsoever between your brother, Jack Ruby, and any member of the Rivera family in the last 4 or 5 years?

Mrs. GRANT. I don’t think he had any business with them.

Mr. HUBERT. Or any connection otherwise?

Mrs. GRANT. He only knew them through me.

Mr. HUBERT. Do you know of any connection in any way—business, social, or otherwise, in the last 5 years?

Mrs. GRANT. Nothing—nothing. I am here now exactly a little over 4 years and I have not left this city for 4 years, outside of going to Hot Springs once for 3 days.

Mr. HUBERT. Do you know a man by the name of Paul Roland Jones?

Mrs. GRANT. Oh, yes.

Mr. HUBERT. Would you tell us what you know about him?

Mrs. GRANT. I was going with a fellow by the name of Dr. Weldon Duncan. This fellow was here in town, at least he was 2 weeks ago—now—he is a chiropractor and he knew this Roland Jones and Roland told me—that’s it. He told me he was in the export business, not in the export business exactly, wait a minute—brokerage business—of eggs.

Mr. HUBERT. When did you meet Paul Roland Jones first?

Mrs. GRANT. When I knew him well was before you see, we didn’t have enough money to open the club. Jack was still in the service and Jack says he will sell his interest in the Earl Products—he was in business with the other brothers, do you have it there?

Mr. HUBERT. Yes.

Mrs. GRANT. OK—well, Jack says when he gets out of this he will send me some money and that could have been the fall or summer of 1947. That seems to be it.

Mr. HUBERT. Tell me how you got to meet him?

Mrs. GRANT. Well, Dr. Duncan brought him over.

Mr. HUBERT. As a friend or in what way?

Mrs. GRANT. They came to the club—I mean—just came to that club.

Mr. HUBERT. Which club was that?

Mrs. GRANT. It was called the Singapore Supper Club at 1717 South Ervay.

Mr. HUBERT. You were running that club?

Mrs. GRANT. No; the club was not open—we didn’t have chairs or tables.

Mr. HUBERT. All right, they came to this place then that was called the Singapore Club that was not yet open?

Mrs. GRANT. And I used the office of the club for my other merchandise business. In fact, the club was full with lamps and all other kinds of things.

Mr. HUBERT. And this doctor introduced you to Roland Paul Jones?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes.

Mr. HUBERT. Did you ever have any further connections with Roland Paul Jones?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes.

Mr. HUBERT. Tell us about that, please?

Mrs. GRANT. We were buying metals, at least we were trying to buy metals and materials to sell to—in fact, gas companies—one is—I have the files, believe me, and I think it’s at Jonesboro—is it in Arkansas or Oklahoma? Well, we got the specifications and Paul Roland Jones brought me a piece of metal, maybe 6 inches long—it’s a certain type of pipe, rather, he brought me, and this man didn’t want it, so I sent it on to Chicago to my brother.

Mr. HUBERT. Which brother?

Mrs. GRANT. It seems to me I sent it to my older brother, Hyman, and he says he knew somebody that might be able to use the amount of footage we had at this place, and we were going to make what you call a finder’s fee or broker’s fee, but little did we know of Paul Roland Jones’ connection, because I’m going to tell you. This man told me several things—“I’m not fit to be in the night club business, I’m not the caliber of a person.”

Mr. HUBERT. Who was that—Jones told you that?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes; and he seemed to be a very nice fellow and he used my phone for a long distance call to Ardmore, Okla., and I know he paid me $2 or $3 in change when he did it, and I didn’t know a thing about this.

Mr. HUBERT. About what, ma’am?

Mrs. GRANT. Well, wait a minute, I pick up the headlines and they got Paul Roland Jones in jail somewhere—in Fort Worth. I no sooner picked this up—this paper, the paper of this city, my brother is calling me from Chicago that the FBI or some organization, one of your organizations went to the Congress Hotel where Jack was staying and they are questioning him about whether—about what he knew about Paul Roland Jones. I don’t think Jack ever heard me mention the name.

Mr. HUBERT. How long had you known Paul Roland Jones when this occurred?

Mrs. GRANT. Not too many months—if it was 6 months or 8 months—it was the longest.

Mr. HUBERT. Had you done any business with him?

Mrs Grant. No—never.

Mr. HUBERT. It was simply through meeting at the club?

Mrs. GRANT. Well, this doctor brought him in one afternoon. He knew him because he went to him for treatment.

Mr. HUBERT. Well, that’s the first meeting, but thereafter, what was the basis of the meeting?

Mrs. GRANT. Nothing. I mean, he came in, and I went to dinner with him and the doctor once, and we went for a ride, but I’ll tell you, the doctor and I didn’t know anything about his background.

Mr. HUBERT. He was ultimately charged, was he not, with the possession of narcotics?

Mrs. GRANT. Oh, yes; in fact, we read the story that night. We were shocked. We knew he took trips, we knew he was married to a dancer in New York, but this all came out—wait a minute, his wife came from New York that summer.

Mr. HUBERT. Now, we’ll get into that later. Did Jack know Paul Roland Jones at that time?

Mrs. GRANT. If he did—no; I doubt if he ever even heard of him.

Mr. HUBERT. Jack had not come down here yet?

Mrs. GRANT. If he was, he didn’t stay long.

Mr. HUBERT. But to your recollection he didn’t know Jones at all?

Mrs. GRANT. I don’t think he has ever seen him—well, wait a minute, he may have seen the man or heard about him.

Mr. HUBERT. I understand that, but at the time of this episode that you are telling us about?

Mrs. GRANT. I don’t think he ever saw him as far as I know, but I want to tell you that Roland Jones went to Chicago during the period of those 6 months and he did meet my brother Hyman. I don’t know what conversation my brother had—my brother thought he was a nice guy—we didn’t know anything about his background.

Mr. HUBERT. Do you know what happened to him?

Mrs. GRANT. Oh, yes; he went to jail for something about narcotics from Turkey or something like that.

Mr. HUBERT. Did he have any other charges later against him? Do you know?

Mrs. GRANT. Do you want to know something—I went into a hotel here, and let me think, either the Whitmore or the Southland since he has been out, or when he got out, and this friend of mine said, “Guess who got out of jail?” He said “Paul Roland Jones,” and I said, “That’s nice.”

Mr. HUBERT. How long ago was that?

Mrs. GRANT. This must be 7 years or 8 years—it seems like a long time ago.

Mr. HUBERT. Have you seen him since?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes; he was here 2 years ago, I think. He came through and he stopped by the Vegas Club one night. Oh, he says, he got in a cab and he was coming through—he probably was here other times but he didn’t want anybody to know—he said he was coming through changing planes and he says he’s sure going to be picked up and he says to say hello to Jack.

Mr. HUBERT. When was that?

Mrs. GRANT. Maybe a year and a half or 2 years ago.

Mr. HUBERT. Did you see him in November 1963?

Mrs. GRANT. Oh, no.

Mr. HUBERT. Did you talk to him on the phone?

Mrs. GRANT. No.

Mr. HUBERT. Did you know he was in Dallas?

Mrs Grant. No.

Mr. HUBERT. Is there anything you know that would indicate that your brother, Jack, knew he was in Dallas?

Mrs. GRANT. I don’t know.

Mr. HUBERT. In November 1963?

Mrs. GRANT. I don’t know. I’ll tell you how I figure this out, if I can go see my contract—you see, my band leader was making a record, you know, a record of music.

Mr. HUBERT. But so far as your recollection is concerned, it would be over a year from today?

Mrs. GRANT. Easy—easy.

Mr. HUBERT. And by “contact with him,” of course, I mean—you know—telephone, letters, messages?

Mrs. GRANT. No; he came in—he told me that he knows people at Mercury Records and that if I send in the song he was going to make it, and truthfully, I was glad when he came in, when he left, for more reasons than one. We don’t discuss his background or anything.

Mr. HUBERT. Now, that’s over a year ago—certainly.

Mrs. GRANT. It has been so long—I say a year and a half—the airlines would know quicker than I know because he said he just flew in and he was just there for the evening and going back out, at least that’s what he told me. I don’t discuss his background or anything like that—at least, that’s what he told me.

Mr. HUBERT. Do you know a man by the name of Taylor Crossley?

Mrs. GRANT. What is the first name?

Mr. HUBERT. Taylor [spelling] T-a-y-l-o-r.

Mrs. GRANT. I know a lot of Taylors here but that is the last name.

Mr. HUBERT. No; Crossley. John Melton, and Morris Melton [spelling] M-e-l-t-o-n?

Mrs. GRANT. No, sir.

Mr. HUBERT. Now, do you know a person by the name of Elsie Johnson?

Mrs. GRANT. Oh, yes.

Mr. HUBERT. How do you know her?

Mrs. GRANT. Well, 8 or 9 years ago she was in the building business with my brother, Sam. Before that—she was a commercial artist.

Mr. HUBERT. How did you meet her—when did you meet her?

Mrs. GRANT. When I first came here, and honest to God, this is one person I can’t tell you even how I met her.

Mr. HUBERT. When you first came here—when do you mean?

Mrs. GRANT. I would say 20 years ago.

Mr. HUBERT. 1944—probably?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes; and let me tell you, she knew a girl, Bobby, whether I met Bobby first—she’s a little girl that worked as a cashier at one of the theatres and was it that she introduced me to Bobby—I knew her very well and her sister and her mother and her brothers, and she became a preacher. She ordained herself.

Mr. HUBERT. Is she a friend of yours?

Mrs. GRANT. Well, I don’t know if she is an enemy—I just don’t know—it has been years since I have seen her. I spoke to her on the phone. It seemed to me she called me November 24, that afternoon, or her sister did.

Mr. HUBERT. Who is her sister?

Mrs. GRANT. Mary Sue Brown, and I think she worked at Green’s Department Store.

Mr. HUBERT. And you knew Mary Sue Brown also?

Mrs. GRANT. Oh, yes; I knew the family. I used to go out there like maybe once a year—Elsie had a car and she would drive me to her mother’s home, which is Mrs. Barnes.

Mr. HUBERT. Do they still live in the Dallas area?

Mrs. GRANT. I’m sure they do—I probably have their phone number.

Mr. HUBERT. And your thought is that the last time you heard from them was that there was a call from Elsie?

Mrs. GRANT. How sorry she was about my brother—it was on November the 24th.

Mr. HUBERT. That was the last contact you had with her?

Mrs. GRANT. No; I saw Mary, let’s see, I saw Mary Sue—I went to one of the stores—I think it was H. L. Green’s and she was waiting on the people, I mean, she was a saleswoman in the store.

Mr. HUBERT. And that’s since?

Mrs. GRANT. I haven’t seen Mary Sue for maybe a year and a half previously or Elsie, maybe, I don’t think I have seen Elsie since I am back this time—3 or 4 years—I can’t remember.

Mr. HUBERT. Was there any difficulty between you and Elsie concerning some ring?

Mrs. GRANT. No; the other sister.

Mr. HUBERT. Mary Sue Brown?

Mrs. GRANT. Mary Sue Brown.

Mr. HUBERT. What about that?

Mrs. GRANT. Well, she used to come over and stay overnight and I have this diamond ring yet, and it had a little stone in there my mother had given me. There were many stones—from two marriage rings, and a fellow gave me a little stone and my mother’s little—you know, a little diamond—little diamonds. I went to take a bath and I had my money in this purse and it’s a terrible thing—very terrible—it kills me to this day even thinking about it—she was going to stay another day, and I knew how much money I had on me the day before and I bought a little dress and some things I bought. I took her to dinner and stuff like that. She managed to wiggle out of not staying any more. She was very nervous, and that night I get to the club and I put my ring out and you could see the prongs were bent back—the stone was missing, the center stone, which was about, a third of a carat. I called some friends of mine——

Mr. HUBERT. How long ago was that?

Mrs. GRANT. I think it’s a year and a half—maybe 2 years.

Mr. HUBERT. All right, go on.

Mrs. GRANT. I just don’t remember. Anyway, I called—the vice squad came in very often to the club and I was really very friendly with a fellow by the name of Mike, and I don’t remember who he had with him, and they took the ring to the laboratory—they proved that someone had—I can’t explain it—they said——

Mr. HUBERT. They said that they had taken the stone out by force?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes; something like that. Anyway, the thing is, any other thing I wouldn’t have cared about, but that stone, my mother gave me and she swore she didn’t do anything about it, but I’ll tell you, there was some money missing out of my purse and I never felt right about it, and her nervousness in getting out of the apartment and all.

Mr. HUBERT. You made no charges?

Mrs. GRANT. No; I just wished the whole thing hadn’t happened, but I told her I wanted the stone back. I didn’t care about the money—I just was sick.

Mr. HUBERT. Had you during the war done any kind of trading in sugar stamps?

Mrs. GRANT. No; no.

Mr. HUBERT. That’s not true?

Mrs. GRANT. No; I never had any extra stamps outside of what my family had.

Mr. HUBERT. Did you ever boast to anyone or say to anyone in any way that you had connections with the Capone gang?

Mrs. GRANT. Aw—let me tell you, when I came to Dallas——

Mr. HUBERT. Just answer the question.

Mrs. GRANT. No, sir. And it just kills me—connections—I had no connections.

Mr. HUBERT. Do you know of a Lois, or perhaps it’s Louis Green?

Mrs. GRANT. Now, I didn’t know him. He was in this town. The conversation was great about him. He did not know me—he wouldn’t know me if he saw me and I understand he’s dead. There was absolutely—the man never even talked to me. I wouldn’t know him—short, tall, or anything.

Mr. HUBERT. You never met him?

Mrs. GRANT. No; not to my knowledge—no, sir.

Mr. HUBERT. Do you know the circumstances of his death?

Mrs. GRANT. I don’t think I was here.

Mr. HUBERT. Did he die—how long ago, do you know?

Mrs. GRANT. I really don’t know, but I was hurt—you know what I mean—there were certain individuals I read about in the papers. I know he was considered a character.

Mr. HUBERT. What do you mean by that?

Mrs. GRANT. Well, he was with the rough element—he never worked.

Mr. HUBERT. In Dallas, you mean?

Mrs. GRANT. In Dallas—he was a Dallas man, as much as—-you know, when you are in the night club business, you see a lot of undesirable people, but you are not sure.

Mr. HUBERT. Tell us how you got into the night club business yourself.

Mrs. GRANT. Well, when I was on the west coast I ran a restaurant in back of a bar and it seemed to be quite a lucrative business. That was Frankie Nolan’s place on Sunset Boulevard. Now, whether that was the second place or the first place—I don’t know, but then I once went with a fellow, Harvey Brooker, and his mother had a restaurant and I learned to manage that.

Mr. HUBERT. That was in San Francisco?

Mrs. GRANT. No; it was in Los Angeles—both these places were in Los Angeles.

Mr. HUBERT. I was thinking particularly about the Dallas area.

Mrs. GRANT. Then, when I came here and I worked for Harvey Phillips, the Southwest Tool & Die Co., some real estate man who he was acquainted with, Fred Shinskey, said, “You know, I know a good spot where the landlord wants to build a restaurant and night club,” and Jack got money from the Earl Products—and sent me $1,100 and I think that was the amount, to put the money down on the lease—the first and the last months of a 10-year lease. Mr. Waddlington, who owned the ground, had built the inside of the building—no; the outside of the building, and part of the inside to my specifications and the idea was that Jack—Jack was in the service but he was very unhappy in being in business with my two brothers, and they sent me some money. I think they sent me—one brother sent me $1,500 and my older brother—with the things he bought and paid for ran about $2,500—like dishes and intercom system and a grand piano—ran to about $2,500—and this is Hyman——

Mr. HUBERT. And so——

Mrs. GRANT. Wait a minute, and I went into business then.

Mr. HUBERT. That became known as what?

Mrs. GRANT. That became known as the Singapore Supper Club for a little over a year, and it was a very sad—it was too nice a club for that part of town there.

Mr. HUBERT. Now, did Jack join you in that venture?

Mrs. GRANT. Oh, yes; he was a partner in it.

Mr. HUBERT. And he actually helped operate it?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes; listen, I want to tell you, he did all the operating, and the truth of the matter is, had he not known how bad that neighborhood was—you see, I didn’t know, because I didn’t mingle with anybody and I didn’t understand about certain—what they call the tenderloin district, I never heard the word. He was mad that I got involved in that with so much money and then all this work—this struggle for 2 years—It took 2 and 2½ years or 3 years until they built the building.

Mr. HUBERT. He came in what year—Jack did?

Mrs. GRANT. He came right after he got out of service and it seems to me it was in 1948.

Mr. HUBERT. And he stayed with you running this club for some time?

Mrs. GRANT. I left shortly. I went on the road—I went on the west coast and I was selling fishing tackle for Harvey Phillips, and then I got another line—of radios.

Mr. HUBERT. Well, is it fair to say then that when Jack came, you left—just about?

Mrs. GRANT. Well, shortly after that.

Mr. HUBERT. You sold out to him?

Mrs. GRANT. No; I just gave him power of attorney. It’s my brother.

Mr. HUBERT. And he invested $1,100?

Mrs. GRANT. Oh, he invested a lot more—he got more money out of what he sold out of his business in Chicago and I don’t know how much his end of the Earl Products came to.

Mr. HUBERT. He sold or closed the Singapore Supper Club?

Mrs. GRANT. He changed the name to the Silver Spur because that name would fit better in that area.

Mr. HUBERT. And did you have an interest in the Silver Spur?

Mrs. GRANT. He sent me some money when I was broke or sick or I didn’t work or the weather was too hot.

Mr. HUBERT. But you didn’t have any financial interest in the Singapore Club?

Mrs. GRANT. Oh, I put in money because I made money in the brokerage business. Every time I made money, I would throw it back in—I put it back in.

Mr. HUBERT. Well, what was the arrangement between you and Jack as to the ownership of the Silver Spur?

Mrs. GRANT. We were partners.

Mr. HUBERT. Half and half?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes; but there was never any half and half. I can’t explain it. He was there and things were so bad, we were lucky we were eating. That’s one of the reasons I left and went out to the west coast on the road with the fishing tackle.

Mr. HUBERT. And you stayed away from Dallas as I understand it, until approximately 1959, wasn’t it?

Mrs. GRANT. Oh, no; I was here lots of times.

Mr. HUBERT. Well, I understand that, but I mean—you didn’t come back here to live on a permanent basis?

Mrs. GRANT. I was here—I was here the next year—the year after that, and I stayed 2 years and he got involved with another club that a fellow was wanting to sell it and it was called Hernando’s Hideaway and I think that was in 1952 or 1953, and by then—Jack always had his hands in two or three places—whether they are making money or not, and I ran this other club, if I remember, and then I ran the Vegas Club for a while.

Mr. HUBERT. But you came back to Dallas, so that it was on a permanent basis, in what year?

Mrs. GRANT. I don’t know how long I was here then.

Mr. HUBERT. But I think you mentioned a little while ago that you haven’t been out of town—out of this town for 4 or 5 years?

Mrs. GRANT. Now, I am here 4 years constantly.

Mr. HUBERT. That’s what I am talking about.

Mrs. GRANT. But this time I was gone about a year and a half or 2, but I have been back here, but I didn’t come to stay.

Mr. HUBERT. That’s what I understand, so that during the period from 1948 to roughly 1958, a period of 10 years, you were in and out of Dallas, of course?

Mrs. GRANT. Oh, yes.

Mr. HUBERT. But, you didn’t have any connection with any of Jack’s operations here?

Mrs. GRANT. Well, in the early fifties when I came, I worked at the Vegas Club and as I said, I ran this Hernando’s Hideaway.

Mr. HUBERT. Do you know the circumstances of Jack’s acquisition of the Vegas Club?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes.

Mr. HUBERT. Could you tell us briefly how that came about?

Mrs. GRANT. I know this, that he sold the other club—I may be wrong—for $4,500. I don’t know the exact amount—but I have an idea it was around $4,500 and he bought this club with a couple other fellows.

Mr. HUBERT. Did you know them?

Mrs. GRANT. I never met them—I know I heard the name Joe Bonds—I never saw him in my life. Maybe if I saw him I didn’t know it was him. When I came he was in jail.

Mr. HUBERT. What about Martin Gimpel or Marty Gimpel?

Mrs. GRANT. Oh, Marty, may he rest in peace, is a real nice guy.

Mr. HUBERT. He’s dead now, isn’t he?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes—he worked for the Post Office.

Mr. HUBERT. He has been dead some time?

Mrs. GRANT. Not over 2½ years.

Mr. HUBERT. Was he in the Vegas Club?

Mrs. GRANT. It seems to me he may have been in with Jack and maybe even—you see, there was a time he may have even taken over—Jack let him take over the Silver Spur and Jack went into a business called—the club—does it say Bob Wills’ Ranch House there, something like that, anything about Bob Wills’ Ranch House?

Mr. HUBERT. No, ma’am. Did he have some interest in that?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes, and it’s here in town—it’s not that name any more. Jack, I think, leased or sold the Silver Spur to Marty and it was Marty that was running the club and Jack was running the Bob Wills’ Ranch House with somebody else—oh, yes, I know the guy—Hyman Fader, or something like that.

Mr. HUBERT. Isn’t it a fact that for the last 2 or 3 years you have operated the Vegas Club for Jack?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes, three and a half years.

Mr. HUBERT. And you have been I take it, on a salaried basis?

Mrs. GRANT. That’s right.

Mr. HUBERT. You have no ownership in the club, though, I take it?

Mrs. GRANT. No.

Mr. HUBERT. But did you have complete management and control?

Mrs. GRANT. Well, let me put it this way—every week I would give him—like if I would have $800 and he said he needed $600 to pay bills or $400, he would take it. I make the payroll, I pay the bills and I didn’t go to the Federal to pay the taxes.

Mr. HUBERT. Well, let me put it this way—you used your gross receipts, I suppose, to pay the running expenses?

Mrs. GRANT. That’s right, and when he would take any money, he would take a lump; you know what I mean, 400 or 500, not if he made 2¼, did he take 2¼.

Mr. HUBERT. Did you keep any books on the transactions?

Mrs. GRANT. Oh, yes—what is his name—Abe Kleinman—of course, I don’t have them—I have some of the things, but Abe Kleinman was the accountant.

Mr. HUBERT. You didn’t own the land or the building of the Vegas Club?

Mrs. GRANT. Oh, no—no.

Mr. HUBERT. How much rent was paid; do you know?

Mrs. GRANT. 500—since I’m there.

Mr. HUBERT. $500 a month?

Mrs. GRANT. $500 a month, but I think the first year that I was there, I think it was only 400 and something.

Mr. HUBERT. All of the help, I take it, was paid in cash?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes, but everyone who signed checks. You know—I would make out a check—I would take out their withholding and social security and put it right on it.

Mr. HUBERT. You used a bank then for the operation of the Vegas Club?

Mrs. GRANT. We had a bank account.

Mr. HUBERT. But did you pay salaries and other expenses?

Mrs. GRANT. I paid the band and I paid the bartender and I paid a floorman.

Mr. HUBERT. What bank was that with?

Mrs. GRANT. The Merchants’ State Bank.

Mr. HUBERT. You had a checking account there?

Mrs. GRANT. No, I didn’t. He did. But what I mean is, the checks didn’t go through the bank. We just let them sign a check like a receipt, but everything was on it—their names, their withholding and their social security.

Mr. HUBERT. That’s what I was trying to get at—the Vegas Club or Jack Ruby or you, yourself, for the operation of the Vegas Club, did not have an active checking account in which money received was deposited and expenses paid out?

Mrs. GRANT. He deposited the money every week, but it was like a round figure, like 200. I paid for the gas, I paid the telephone and lights and water bill on checks. I bought all the merchandise on cash and we have receipts. He paid the rent.

Mr. HUBERT. And you paid the employees by cash, too?

Mrs. GRANT. The bartender, and the band and the floorman. The waitresses worked on tips.

Mr. HUBERT. All the employees were paid by cash?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes, but they signed receipts for it.

Mr. HUBERT. I understand. Who was Pauline Hall in that operation, what did she have to do?

Mrs. GRANT. Well, sometimes she helped on the floor as a hostess and, of course, while I was ill, she took over the management for 2 weeks in 1963 in November. She has been a waitress in our club on and off. She has known us about 8 years. She has been a bartender when we needed one—she is a very nice person.

Mr. HUBERT. I understand you had some trouble with your band at the Vegas in the fall—did they quit or something of that sort?

Mrs. GRANT. Well, we had the same band leader—yes—almost 8 years.

Mr. HUBERT. Who was he?

Mrs. GRANT. Joe Johnson.

Mr HUBERT. And what happened?

Mrs. GRANT. Well, he was unhappy because someone offered him more money. We weren’t getting along, he and I, and there was always a dissension. First of all, he wouldn’t stay on the bandstand—I had to humor him.

Mr. HUBERT. Well, did he quit or did you fire him?

Mrs. GRANT. No, we didn’t fire him. He made arrangements with another night club.

Mr. HUBERT. And that was when?

Mrs. GRANT. He made arrangements unbeknownst to us, but he gave us notice and he left, I think, the first week of November, 1963.

Mr. HUBERT. What about Raymond Jones, do you know him?

Mrs. GRANT. Oh, yes.

Mr. HUBERT. He worked at the Vegas, didn’t he?

Mrs GRANT. He worked on and off—he was a porter.

Mr. HUBERT. He was a handyman?

Mrs. GRANT. I beg your pardon?

Mr. HUBERT. He was a handyman or a porter?

Mrs. GRANT. He was a porter.

Mr. HUBERT. He quit the Vegas, didn’t he?

Mrs. GRANT. No; he has always had another job and he worked for me and he came back—he wasn’t a very good porter. Truthfully, where he worked the last job for 19 years, he didn’t do actually any porter work—he was like the foreman over porters.

Mr. HUBERT. Well, did he stop working for the Vegas at any particular date so that you didn’t see him thereafter?

Mrs. GRANT. Well, he came back a couple of times—Jack knew him from the Dallas Athletic Club. That’s how I got him in the first place.

Mr. HUBERT. Well, did he quit working for you back last fall sometime?

Mrs. GRANT. Well, call it quits—he quit a few times, I called him and he came; he is not the most intellectual man; he can’t read or write; he can’t sign his own name.

Mr. HUBERT. But, in any case, he stopped working for you?

Mrs. GRANT. Well, I fired him a couple of times and he came back. I don’t know how you would—it isn’t any quitting—he never showed up. In fact, he worked for me right around New Year’s again.

Mr. HUBERT. You had nothing to do, as I understand, with the operation of the Sovereign Club or the Carousel, but perhaps you can tell us something about how those two clubs came into existence and what you know about them?

Mrs. GRANT. Well, first, I wasn’t in town to begin with, and when I did arrive here, that club was in existence.

Mr. HUBERT. Which one was that?

Mrs. GRANT. That was the Sovereign Club.

Mr. HUBERT. That’s on Commerce Street, isn’t it?

Mrs. GRANT. 1312½ Commerce.

Mr. HUBERT. It’s an upstairs location?

Mrs. GRANT. And I understand Jack has taken money from Earl and probably from my sister Mary and God knows who else in the family—there was none of his money in there—if he had a thousand dollars of his money, it was a lot of money.

Mr. HUBERT. Was that a corporation, to your knowledge?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes.

Mr. HUBERT. Who are the owners of the stock?

Mrs. GRANT. Well, from what I knew—Ralph Paul put in some money and that was another thing. He is quite a well-to-do man and I think he wanted Jack to be a success, whether he loaned or gave him money—I don’t know, but I know he was connected with the club, and Leo Torti, I think Jack owed him a little. Jack promised or owed him some money, made him part of the corporation and the first that started out it was with Earl being in it, but the State doesn’t allow an outsider to be in a corporation of that type when you carry a liquor license and I think they rehashed it later on and it went over a few times—it started out with the people I didn’t know, but ones I got to know later on was Joe Slayton and another fellow who I still don’t know who he is. There was three partners—Jack represented Earl, Earl gave him the money. Jack encouraged Earl to give him the money to go into this thing and to this day, and this is truthfully, I think he owes Earl $8,500 on that deal alone, and I’m making it low. I don’t know all the money Earl had given him from time to time.

Mr. HUBERT. Did you know of the existence of a corporation called Sovereign, Incorporated?

Mrs. GRANT. No; it’s called S & R Corp. or R & S. Yes; I know it now and I knew it when I came to town. He told me about it.

Mr. HUBERT. But did you ever hear of a corporation called Sovereign Club, Incorporated, or Inc.?

Mrs. GRANT. It could be the same club if it is. Now, since then Ralph was so disgusted when Jack got in all this trouble, he gave me the stock—his stock.

Mr. HUBERT. Did he own that stock that you’ve got—do you know?

Mrs. GRANT. I guess so.

Mr. HUBERT. He gave you the certificates, you mean?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes; there’s no name on them—I have it at home—I think it says 500 shares.

Mr. HUBERT. The name was just in blank?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes.

Mr. HUBERT. So, he didn’t have to endorse it over to you?

Mrs. GRANT. I told him we were going to sell it and he said, “You endorse it over to the other person.”

Mr. HUBERT. But he did not endorse it over, he just gave you the certificates?

Mrs. GRANT. Well, he had a letter with the attorney—they went up to an attorney called Graham Koch [spelling] K-o-c-h. Anyway, he would know more about it than I do.

Mr. HUBERT. Do you know whether Ralph Paul was holding that stock as owner or as security for money owed?

Mrs. GRANT. Who knows?

Mr. HUBERT. But do you know that?

Mrs. GRANT. I know Ralph must have given Jack a lot of money that he never got back; believe me, let me tell you.

Mr. HUBERT. Had Jack talked to you at all about any nightclubs that he proposed to open?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes.

Mr. HUBERT. When did he first talk to you about that?

Mrs. GRANT. Listen, now, he didn’t say he was going to open it, he says, “This would be a good private club,” and I think he took me then on a street here to Maple or Cedar Springs, and I guess he was going to ask Ralph Paul for money, to be honest, they were very close.

Mr. HUBERT. Were you to be a part of it?

Mrs. GRANT. Well, he didn’t tell me.

Mr. HUBERT. How far had those plans gone, do you know?

Mrs. GRANT. I looked at the outside of the building with him late at night—3 o’clock in the morning. Now, wait a minute, he had seen it—he had been in it—whatever this building is, and to this day I’d like to find it because someone else told me that.

Mr. HUBERT. Do you know when that was that he showed that building to you?

Mrs. GRANT. It seemed to me that it was in the summer and once early in the fall, or it could have been in October.

Mr. HUBERT. Did he say what he was going to do with the Vegas and the Carousel?

Mrs. GRANT. He didn’t say anything about the Vegas or the Carousel, but I’ll tell you, the Carousel in my estimation wasn’t making any money and it made him sick, and one of the reasons was he said that all the other clubs that sell liquor over the bar—you see, this State has very peculiar liquor laws and he said with a downtown club he could get a lot of members to go into this private club, but he did look at this building a few times because he talked about it and he is the biggest planner you’ve ever seen about something that don’t develop in his mind.

Mr. HUBERT. Now, does the name Gene Schriver [spelling] S-c-h-r-i-v-e-r, mean anything to you?

Mrs. GRANT. Is that a girl or a fellow; do you know?

Mr. HUBERT. I don’t know.

Mrs. GRANT. Well, we knew a Jean that worked for him as a waitress.

Mr. HUBERT. Is the last name Schriver?

Mrs. GRANT. Not that I know of. I knew a lot of girls that worked for them but I didn’t know their last names.

Mr. HUBERT. What kind of work did she do?

Mrs. GRANT. She was a waitress up there—a couple of years ago.

Mr. HUBERT. How long did she stay?

Mrs. GRANT. Well, she was there two or three times. She got mad at Jack and went over and worked for the Colony Club, if it’s the same little girl.

Mr. HUBERT. Was she working with Jack at the time of the death of the President?

Mrs. GRANT. Gee, I don’t know; I don’t remember who was working there. I know one cute little girl and I couldn’t think of her name unless it came up.

Mr. HUBERT. What about Frank Goldstein?

Mrs. GRANT. Well, he used to work with him selling subscriptions in San Francisco and when Jack was having trouble with the union—he hasn’t spoken to that fellow in 26 years and I believe it, because I’ve been on the west coast off and on, and Frank often asks, “Why don’t you write to me or call?” Last fall, in fact, in November—as late as November, I think Jack made the first call to Frank Goldstein because things were getting very bad.

Mr. HUBERT. In your opinion, that phone call made to Goldstein was the first connection between Jack and Goldstein——

Mrs. GRANT. That’s right.

Mr. HUBERT. Wait a minute, let me finish my question—in some considerable number of years?

Mrs. GRANT. I know that for a fact because I used to go to the west coast and see Frank every 5 years—5 or 7 years and we talked about him and I don’t remember Jack or him ever saying they talked or wrote and Frank, I don’t think, could write.

Mr. HUBERT. But as far as you know, he had no connection with him; is that right?

Mrs. GRANT. No; but I do know he is a gambler and it is very well emphasized in San Francisco that he is a gambler.

Mr. HUBERT. What about Benny Barrish?

Mrs. GRANT. Benny—I heard he is a liquor salesman. I knew him when we were on the west coast. He’s a Chicagoan. He came out there in 1935 and as far as I know he’s a liquor salesman.

Mr. HUBERT. When was the last connection you had with him?

Mrs. GRANT. I saw him about 8 or 9 or 10 years ago when I went to San Francisco.

Mr. HUBERT. You haven’t seen him or corresponded with him in any way by telephone?

Mrs. GRANT. No, no.

Mr. HUBERT. Do you know if Jack ever knew him?

Mrs. GRANT. Oh, sure. We knew him from Chicago as kids, but I’m sure Jack hasn’t—now, I won’t say positive I know Jack hasn’t for any reason, unless during this month—this particular month where he was having trouble early in the fall of 1963 with regard to amateur auditions at his club. He had contacted people all over the country trying to find out who knew the bigwigs in the union where the AGVA, you know, the big shots—who they were that run the union.

Mr. HUBERT. Would Benny Barrish be the sort of person who might know something or be able to do something about that?

Mrs. GRANT. Well, he gets around—he knew and knows people in the liquor business that have entertainments in San Francisco—it might be.

Mr. HUBERT. As far as you know, Jack has made no connections out there in anyway for some time?

Mrs. GRANT. In over 12 years—I would swear to this that he has had no connection out there since before the war and he has never been west of 100 miles of this area in that time. I have many, many times heard where people said he went to Las Vegas. He hasn’t been there only once with me and I think that was when we went to—from Los Angeles back and, of course, that must have been in 1937 or 1938, and he has not been back.

Mr. HUBERT. Did you see Jack Ruby, your brother, or communicate with him every day, would you say, for a period of 60 to 90 days prior to November 24?

Mrs. GRANT. Every day? I don’t say I saw him every day, but I would say I heard him on the phone three to five times.

Mr. HUBERT. Would you be willing to say then that to the best of your knowledge he was not out of the city of Dallas during that period, that is to say——

Mrs. GRANT. Well, wait a minute, didn’t he go to New York in August?

Mr. HUBERT. Well, I was going to except August at that point—that’s why I put it at 90 days.

Mrs. GRANT. Didn’t he go to see a fellow, Joe Glazer, who was the head of a certain union?

Mr. HUBERT. We have evidence that he did go to New York in August, but after that trip—let’s put it this way, from September 25 until November 25 just a period of 2 months, can you state to us now that to the best of your knowledge, Jack was not out of the Dallas area?

Mrs. GRANT. I don’t remember him going out.

Mr. HUBERT. Specifically, do you have any indication whatsoever of any kind that he might have gone to Las Vegas during this period?

Mrs. GRANT. That—I swear.

Mr. HUBERT. Well, you certainly would have known it if he had been gone, say 3 or 4 days, wouldn’t you?

Mrs. GRANT. Well, for one more reason, he would advise me to keep it quiet and to collect the money to see that Andy does this or that.

Mr. HUBERT. And there is nothing to indicate to you whatsoever that he was in Las Vegas during September or October or November of 1963?

Mrs. GRANT. But I know he has made many calls to the same fellow, McWillie. I would say he made at least 10 calls in those 3 months.

Mr. HUBERT. And what would be the reason for those calls?

Mrs. GRANT. The same thing—Willie might know somebody in Las Vegas, since there is that type of entertainment, with these amateurs.

Mr. HUBERT. Did Jack tell you he was calling these various people because of this trouble with the union?

Mrs. GRANT. It seemed to me—well, he was so bitter against Barney—I shouldn’t say this because—it’s just sickening—because they didn’t mean to hurt him—Barney and Abe Weinstein and he felt—the union sent him a telegram to quit these amateur auditions and they sent it to Abe and Barney, but they wouldn’t quit, but Jack figured they had an “in” with the big guys, you know, and Jack couldn’t get to this fellow, and he told me that he called McWillie. In fact, he may have called him even 3 days before that—he was just sick about this.

Mr. HUBERT. Now, was McWillie, and I think you mentioned another person earlier, Lenny Patrick he called?

Mrs. GRANT. Well, Lenny Patrick he called in Chicago—one time, and he was not there, and until he got his number—he called 15 different people from what I understand.

Mr. HUBERT. What I was getting at is this—your explanation that if he called Goldstein and Barrish and McWillie and so forth, your explanation that those calls were made in connection with this difficulty about the amateur night thing—was that information obtained by you from Ruby, or are you just giving us your opinion of what those calls were about?

Mrs. GRANT. Well, he has discussed this with me many times and I didn’t go to the downtown club too often, but when I did go there, it so happened either September or October on a particular Sunday night, whichever Sunday night it was—there are five Sundays and whichever Sunday it would be, and the Vegas Club would be closed on Sunday, he told me he had just gotten through talking to somebody and I’ll be honest about it, it just went in one ear and out the other, because I figured that——

Mr. HUBERT. Well, you see what I am trying to get at and that is whether or not your statements that those calls were made in connection with this AGVA business derives from him directly or whether it is merely your opinion that those calls were about that?

Mrs. GRANT. It is not only my opinion, we talked about it. We had discussed it and he had told me.

Mr. HUBERT. So that that does come—that information, then does come directly from Jack?

Mrs. GRANT. Well, and one other thing, when I called home, I spoke to my older brother and he knows Jack Yanover. My brother Jack did not know Jack Yanover like my older brother.

Mr. HUBERT. That’s who?

Mrs. GRANT. Hyman; he’s a friend of his and my older brother in this conversation said to me, “I told him to call Jack Yanover. Maybe he knows somebody because Yanover has some kind of saloon in Chicago,” that’s in my estimation because of the way it looks, and this all went on and Jack used to rehash it with me until it—well, I know that’s what that call was for.

Mr. HUBERT. And that was all during the period then of September and October?

Mrs. GRANT. In the summer—last summer and he also told me, you know, he told me during one of those months he said, “I tried to call Lenny Patrick,” and he said, “I got his number,” he got it from somebody and I don’t know who, what and I didn’t give a darn.

Mr. HUBERT. Did Jack tell you all of this prior to November 24?

Mrs. GRANT. Oh, sure. To tell you the truth, the way I see Jack through this little glass, he has very little to say.

Mr. HUBERT. Do you know a man by the name of Robert McKeown [spelling] M-c-K-e-o-w-n, or have you ever heard of him?

Mrs. GRANT. Is it a Dallas man?

Mr. HUBERT. I believe not.

Mrs. GRANT. Would it be my friend or Jack’s friend?

Mr. HUBERT. Well, it would probably be Jack’s friend. Did Jack ever tell you of contacting him by telephone and going to see him in the Galveston area concerning the selling of jeeps to Castro?

Mrs. GRANT. Now, I know Jack was in Cuba 6 or 7 years ago or one of those years.

Mr. HUBERT. Oh, yes; you told us about that—that was when he went to join McWillie for a little while?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes; and I also know that I did hear the story about jeeps.

Mr. HUBERT. When did you hear that?

Mrs. GRANT. Well, let me say this—I don’t know whether I heard it last year or the year before, but I do remember something in a conversation—some guy told him he knew where there were 400 or 800 jeeps or 80 jeeps and whether Jack went down—Jack went to Houston first of all—he did go to Houston last year to see a man from a night club. They were going to exchange acts or work in a deal, but I don’t remember who the man was, and this all came about, but Jack, I’ll tell you, he isn’t that kind of a promoter.

Mr. HUBERT. What did Jack tell you about the jeeps?

Mrs. GRANT. This was the deal with McWillie at the time and we were on friendly terms, as much as I remember about it, and I think he shoved it off.

Mr. HUBERT. Was it the jeep proposition that had something to do with Jack’s visit to McWillie in Havana in 1959?

Mrs. GRANT. Jack was very depressed, he was having a lot of trouble, that McWillie sent him as much as I know, a ticket to come to Havana to have a week or 10 days vacation. That’s as much as I know of the whole darn thing and deal outside of the talking about jeeps at that time.

Mr. HUBERT. Did that visit have anything to do with the jeeps in addition to the rest and vacation that you know of? Now, don’t guess about it.

Mrs. GRANT. Yes; but I heard “Jeeps” but I didn’t pay too much attention to it.

Mr. HUBERT. Well, then, the real fact is you don’t know much about it?

Mrs. GRANT. I really don’t.

Mr. HUBERT. You heard something about jeeps about that time, but you are not in a position really to say that you know yea or nay—yes or no—whether Jack’s visit to Havana with McWillie had to do with jeeps or not; isn’t that right?

Mrs. GRANT. Do you know that I didn’t know at the time he was in Havana. I knew this a few years later.

Mr. HUBERT. What I mean is—the real fact is you don’t have any knowledge of it—of the real facts?

Mrs. GRANT. I have no specific knowledge of it, but I do know that my sister told me he was down in Havana. He called Chicago from there and he said he’s in Havana and I think he spoke to Marion Carroll—that sister.

Mr. HUBERT. Did you know a man by the name of Lawrence Meyers?

Mrs. GRANT. I knew a Meyers but I can’t think of his first name.

Mr. HUBERT. Did you see him or meet him during the first 3 weeks of November 1963?

Mrs. GRANT. Not that I know—I can’t think of it—no; this fellow I knew years ago, but I can’t think of his first name—gee, that isn’t his first name. He used to live here in town on Lemmon Avenue.

Mr. HUBERT. Did you know a man by the name of Alex Gruber?

Mrs. GRANT. You mean Al Gruber on the West Coast?

Mr. HUBERT. Yes.

Mrs. GRANT. Yes.

Mr. HUBERT. How long have you known him?

Mrs. GRANT. I heard his name around the house 30 years—Jack knew him when they were young.

Mr. HUBERT. Did you know that Jack had called him on the night of the President’s death?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes; I do.

Mr. HUBERT. Can you tell us how you knew it?

Mrs. GRANT. Either late that evening or the next day he talked to Al and there was something in the conversation—Al was here early in the fall and in fact coming through—I was in the hospital and he promised Al a dog and it seems to me I called him—I must have called him later on; anyway, when I did call him a week or so later or whenever I did, I don’t know, but it was after this incident, Al said, “You know, Jack was crying when he called me on the day of the assassination?”

Mr. HUBERT. Did Jack himself tell you he had called?

Mrs. GRANT. No; Al told me. I had called Al myself. I had called Al within 10 days of the President’s assassination, something regarding to the dog.

Mr. HUBERT. Yes, ma’am; I understand that—you mean before the President’s assassination?

Mrs. GRANT. No.

Mr. HUBERT. After?

Mrs. GRANT. But Jack has talked to him before too—some weeks.

Mr. HUBERT. But did Jack tell you that or did Gruber tell you that?

Mrs. GRANT. No; Al told me this.

Mr. HUBERT. You did not know that Jack had called Gruber on the night of the President’s assassination until Gruber himself told you?

Mrs. GRANT. No; it seems to me that Jack even may have mentioned it, but still I made a call myself to Al in regards to the dog. Jack said he promised him a certain dog.

Mr. HUBERT. And you say Gruber had been through Dallas?

Mrs. GRANT. While I was in the hospital in November—in Dallas.

Mr. HUBERT. Did you see him then?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes; I did. He visited me at the Gaston Hospital.

Mr. HUBERT. You were hospitalized for how long?

Mrs. GRANT. For about a week.

Mr. HUBERT. What was the nature of your illness; do you recall?

Mrs. GRANT. Tumor and hysterectomy.

Mr. HUBERT. And you were in there about a week?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes.

Mr. HUBERT. What was your relationship with Jack from the standpoint of, say, personal relationship as brother and sister and, of course, as comanager—were you on a friendly basis?

Mrs. GRANT. Most of the time.

Mr. HUBERT. Any difficulties between you sometimes?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes; lots of times. We got along a lot of times like a disagreeable man and wife. If my band leader complained it was no good. If I complained it was no good.

Mr. HUBERT. What was Jack’s attitude generally toward politics; do you know?

Mrs. GRANT. He didn’t have any.

Mr. HUBERT. To your knowledge did he belong to any kind of organizations whatsoever?

Mrs. GRANT. Not one that I could put my—outside of the YW—YMCA or something to that effect or the union connected with the musicians’ union or AGVA, and maybe three or four private clubs around—entertainment clubs.

Mr. HUBERT. Did he have any sort of attitudes toward conservatism or liberalism or any kind of “ism”?

Mrs. GRANT. All I know—he’s a good American and he is far better than a lot of people are.

Mr. HUBERT. But, did you ever notice any interest that he had in pro-Cuban affairs or anti-Cuban affairs or pro-Castro or anti-Castro or anything of that sort?

Mrs. GRANT. This is the exact words when they spit on Stevenson last fall—Jack and I were going to dinner or coming to dinner and someway or somehow we were sitting in the car—his car—and he looked at me and he says, “Isn’t that awful?” He says, “They ought to knock their heads together.” Now, we were told two young fellows out of college or in college did that and he says, “To think—a man devotes his time” and he went on for a couple of minutes, and that was it, and I remember the incident of—I’ll tell you—he respects high people and he admires highly educated, cultured people—good family men.

Mr. HUBERT. Well the answer to my question, I gather, from what you have said, then, is that Jack did not have any ideas that were pro-Cuba or anti-Cuba or pro-Castro or anti-Castro?

Mrs. GRANT. He was against communism from the beginning of when it even entered his mind. I don’t know what year—maybe 35 years ago.

Mr. HUBERT. How did he express himself on that?

Mrs. GRANT. He didn’t have to—from the things he done—was too American—too much American.

Mr. HUBERT. But my point is—I gather from that that he never discussed with you his feelings about communism or anything—it’s just that you observed that?

Mrs. GRANT. Well, I’m not an intellectual on those subjects, to be honest about it.

Mr. HUBERT. Was he the type of man that would be interested in these subjects himself?

Mrs. GRANT. No; not to express it openly or fight with it—in this manner, if you said anything against anybody or anything big of our country that is Americanism—you might as well—he would knock the hell out of you.

Mr. HUBERT. In other words, what you are saying to me is that if he has any kind of “ism” at all, it would be Americanism?

Mrs. GRANT. That’s right—he has that—he does have that—that’s his greatest.

Mr. HUBERT. Jack never married, did he?

Mrs. GRANT. No; he was engaged to a young lady here.

Mr. HUBERT. What generally was his attitude toward women; do you know?

Mrs. GRANT. Well, in his late life I think he was sort of a playboy myself, but in his early life he wanted to get married. There were several individuals he had a great love for and the trouble is, he picked on women who were of means and he couldn’t give them what they wanted. He could tell from the way they were reared or their attitude, and how they expressed themselves when they get married—what they wanted, and I think it sort of cooled him toward making it. He liked women. He was a real man.

Mr. HUBERT. I understood he took good care of himself physically?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes.

Mr. HUBERT. In the sense that he took physical exercise regularly?

Mrs. GRANT. And the truth is, he has a great sympathy for women who are left with hardships and maybe it started with me or my mother—if they have to work and do a lot of things—it was in the back of his mind.

Mr. HUBERT. Jack didn’t drink very much, did he?

Mrs. GRANT. He didn’t drink a fifth of liquor a year. When we went out, we ordered two drinks, I would drink mine and have to drink two-thirds of his. Then, we were ashamed to sit there and he would order it again—not that I’m such a big drinker, but that’s what he did.

Mr. HUBERT. What about smoking—he didn’t smoke either, did he?

Mrs. GRANT. I don’t remember but once he had a cigar in his mouth, a couple of years ago at a party and maybe he had three or four cigarettes in his life, that I know of.

Mr. HUBERT. Did you and he have any difficulties about the girl that he was going out with one time and I think Rabbi Silverman had to kind of intervene?

Mrs. GRANT. That he was going with? That wasn’t it—it wasn’t about a girl.

Mr. HUBERT. Well, you did have a disagreement?

Mrs. GRANT. A very big disagreement—early this summer of 1963—it was in the early part of the summer. It was over money. He had $800 or $900 and he wanted to pay bills and somebody encountered him who needed their car fixed or something and I think he paid for the car and he didn’t pay the electric bills, and when he went to jail in November—3 months of the Carousel’s bill on the electric company wasn’t paid and it ran almost $800 or $900 for 3 months.

Mr. HUBERT. What was the particular argument about then—that he had loaned some money to someone?

Mrs. GRANT. No; it was not the first occasion only—this one—that’s the time that I blew my top and I had been sick—I have been in very bad physical condition and he wanted me to get out of the club, and Leo Torti who worked for us on weekends told him that I was having a difficult time and I should be in the hospital and he said, “I gave you money to go to the hospital,” and he gave me a push and I had just got some new high heeled shoes and I went back about 8 feet and I hurt my arm and my shoulder and he wanted me out of the Vegas Club.

Mr. HUBERT. Whose car did he have repaired with the money you thought he should have used for the lights?

Mrs. GRANT. Some family man—he does that—I haven’t the least idea and I don’t think he did either.

Mr. HUBERT. How did you find out it was used to repair someone’s car?

Mrs. GRANT. Some man come in my club weeks later and says, “Your brother was in,” and I didn’t even know this man’s business, and he said he works there as a car mechanic and he says, “He got someone’s car out of hock,” so I figured maybe it was his car—I didn’t think of it.

Mr. HUBERT. Who was that man, do you know?

Mrs. GRANT. Some customer at the Vegas Club—if I saw him, I would know him.

Mr. HUBERT. You don’t remember his name?

Mrs. GRANT. No; but I knew his appearances. He was one like the regulars who come about every month one time.

Mr. HUBERT. Do you know what kind of car he drove?

Mrs. GRANT. No; I was in the club—I wouldn’t know what the patrons were driving, but he did repair someone’s car and it was a family man that was supposed to go on the road or some darn thing and if I’m not mistaken, as far as I know, my brother never got the money back. It wasn’t $800 worth of repairs, but these are the things that he did.

Mr. HUBERT. What was the twistboard deal, can you tell us about that?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes; he met a man—I think this man lives in Fort Worth and I think his name is out there somewhere and it says a plastic company on that thing—I’m almost sure it is the same man, and this man was manufacturing them and Jack had a deal with him to cover Texas, and if it went good, Jack would get the whole United States. In fact, I think somewhere in my apartment there might be a twistboard. I don’t know if I ever saw the man or not, but I believe he is in either Arlington or Fort Worth, lived there, and there is a twistboard that Jack—he sold quite a number—he sent some out to different people.

Mr. HUBERT. Was Earl interested in that?

Mrs. GRANT. I don’t know. Earl’s partner, I think, is a friend that he knows—we call him George—in a laundry in Detroit. Whether he was or has been—I don’t think Earl wanted—in Earl’s business with this man, I think the contract reads he cannot go into another business. I may be wrong, but I’m almost sure that’s what I remember Earl saying at one time.

Mr. HUBERT. Do you know whether Earl had any interest in the twistboard operations at all?

Mrs. GRANT. I doubt it, unless he advanced Jack some money, but I don’t think there was that much money put into it. The man let Jack have, say, a hundred twistboards and he paid for them and I don’t know too much about it, but I did have them in the club and we gave them away as prizes and I know Jack contacted weight salons where women go to reduce about them.

Mr. HUBERT. Do you remember having any contact whatsoever with Ralph Paul?

Mrs. GRANT. Oh, yes.

Mr. HUBERT. During the period from November 22 through November 24, up until the time Oswald was shot?

Mrs. GRANT. Me?

Mr. HUBERT. Yes.

Mrs. GRANT. I don’t think I even talked to him during those days.

Mr. HUBERT. That’s what I mean.

Mrs. GRANT. You know, I assume him and Jack were very good friends.

Mr. HUBERT. I’m not suggesting to the contrary.

Mrs. GRANT. He never did call me and I never called him—I don’t remember calling him. I have called him many times since then.

Mr. HUBERT. Yes; I know, but I’m talking about during this particular period of 3 days.

Mrs. GRANT. I don’t think he has ever called me—I have called him.

Mr. HUBERT. No; I mean—let’s restrict ourselves for the moment to the three days of November 22, 23, and 24.

Mrs. GRANT. He may have called me on the 24th of November.

Mr. HUBERT. After Oswald was shot?

Mrs. GRANT. Well, there was at least 20 calls when I did not pick up the phone—people in my home did.

Mr. HUBERT. No, ma’am; that’s not what I’m talking about but let me get at it this way—was there any contact between you and Ralph Paul from the time the President was shot until the time Oswald was shot?

Mrs. GRANT. No; definitely not. Can I go back with something?

Mr. HUBERT. Yes, ma’am.

Mrs. GRANT. Let me explain about this Raymond Jones. He worked for 19 years at the Dallas Athletic Club and when Jack got in trouble, the very next week he had made a remark to his boss, whoever he is, “I’m going to see my friend,” they said, “Where are you going?” And he said, “I’m going to see my friend,” and they said, “Who is your friend?” And he said, “Jack Ruby.” They told him that if he went to see Jack that he didn’t have a job. He says, “Well,”—he came back and he went to see Jack and he couldn’t get in and he came to see me at the Club and he says he just quit. I said, “After 19 years?”

Mr. HUBERT. The Vegas was closed too, was it not?

Mrs. GRANT. It was closed on and off a few times after that.

Mr. HUBERT. No; I mean, the Vegas was closed on November 22, November 23, and November 24?

Mrs. GRANT. Well, 2 days after that—it was closed for 5 days.

Mr. HUBERT. And then ultimately it was sold?

Mrs. GRANT. Then, I opened it again and I closed it and I opened it for New Year’s and I closed it permanently January 4.

Mr. HUBERT. Until when?

Mrs. GRANT. Until someone else bought it—it wasn’t in operation until this woman got her license, which was about the 1st of March.

Mr. HUBERT. And of course the Carousel closed too because of the license lapsing—the liquor license?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes; they closed February the 12th, from what I understand— their liquor license was revoked.

Mr. HUBERT. Well, let’s take a break for a few minutes.

Mrs. GRANT. You mentioned a man’s name McKeown or something like that; may I ask you what he does?

Mr. BURLESON. Let’s take a break now, Eva.

(The deposition proceedings were recessed as heretofore stated and continued as hereinafter shown.)

Mr. HUBERT. Let the record show that the deposition is continuing after the recess at 9:10 p.m. and that Mr. Burleson will ask some questions with respect to the block of questions and the areas covered by those questions before I go on.

Mr. BURLESON. Mrs. Grant, you were saying out at the Vegas Club that the employees were paid in cash, and you mentioned something about giving them some type of check with their name on it. Would the transaction be such that you would give them a check and then cash the check for them in effect?

Mrs. GRANT. That’s exactly it, but the check never went through the bank procedure. It was like a voucher that they had received that money on.

Mr. BURLESON. Was it on a regular bank draft that it was made out on?

Mrs. GRANT. Most of the time.

Mr. BURLESON. And the net effect would be that you would give them a check and then cash it for them and take the check back and give them cash?

Mrs. GRANT. Well, I put the check in an envelope and I would have—like your salary is $65, withholding and social security, and write on the back of the envelope that, and a lot of them kept their envelopes and a lot of them threw it out and they had signed the check and returned it and the balance of what money they should receive was in there.

Mr. BURLESON. Now, you were in the hospital the first part of November 1963?

Mrs. GRANT. I was sick for a solid week.

Mr. BURLESON. Now, you had been having some trouble for quite some time?

Mrs. GRANT. That’s right.

Mr. BURLESON. And as a matter of fact, Jack had been trying to get you to go into the hospital because the doctors had advised him and you that you needed this operation immediately? And you had been prepared on at least one, or maybe more than one occasion, to go to the hospital and everything had been arranged for the operation and you backed out at the last moment?

Mrs. GRANT. That’s right.

Mr. BURLESON. And Jack knew that you were having this trouble and knew that the doctors recommended that, and you talked with your doctors about this?

Mrs. GRANT. All through the whole week.

Mr. BURLESON. And finally he was able to get you in the hospital there the first part of November 1963; is that correct?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes.

Mr. BURLESON. And you then had what—a partial or complete hysterectomy, or do you know?

Mrs. GRANT. I know they took out a tremendous tumor and a lot of things—I didn’t ask because I don’t know what parts it was.

Mr. BURLESON. Who was the doctor?

Mrs. GRANT. Bill Aranov.

Mr. BURLESON. Then you got out of the hospital 7 days after the 6th, which would have been about the 13th?

Mrs. GRANT. That’s right.

Mr. BURLESON. And that was in the middle of a week—about a Wednesday, wasn’t it?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes; Wednesday—that’s right.

Mr. HUBERT. Now, were you given some medication after you left the hospital?

Mrs. GRANT. Well, not for a few days, I would say, but about the third or fourth day I got pretty bad.

Mr. BURLESON. You started what—hurting and being in pain?

Mrs. GRANT. Tremendous pain.

Mr. BURLESON. And did this doctor that had operated on you prescribe some pills?

Mrs. GRANT. His coworker or assistant—I think his name is Dr. Bookatz.

Mr. BURLESON. But, at any rate, a doctor did prescribe some pills. What type of pills were they, do you know?

Mrs. GRANT. I believe that they have codeine in it.

Mr. BURLESON. What would be the effect on you that these pills would have?

Mrs. GRANT. Well, they put me into a trance and made my body stiff and I didn’t have any more pain but I wasn’t as alert as I usually was.

Mr. BURLESON. Did it affect your thinking?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes.

Mr. BURLESON. Did Jack visit you in the hospital?

Mrs. GRANT. Oh, yes; two or three times a day—mostly two times anyway.

Mr. BURLESON. And called on the phone sometimes?

Mrs. GRANT. Oh, yes; and sent me three bouquets of flowers and everything.

Mr. BURLESON. And how long did you take this medicine after you started taking it—2 or 3 days after you got out of the hospital?

Mrs. GRANT. Well, I really didn’t start to take it until the weekend after I was home.

Mr. BURLESON. That would have been the weekend about the 16th?

Mrs. GRANT. That’s right.

Mr. BURLESON. And how long did you take it?

Mrs. GRANT. Well, there was 1 or 2 days I cut down and then I—about the 21st, which was a Thursday, I had an unusual severe pain and I started all over again.

Mr. BURLESON. Taking heavy doses of it?

Mrs. GRANT. Well, they are tablets and I called his nurse and she suggested to take them but not as often as I did when I complained it threw me into a trance but it still did, because I am not a pill taker and I guess pills work a little better on me.

Mr. BURLESON. Were you taking pills on the day of the 22d of November?

Mrs. GRANT. I already had two pills by the time the President was assassinated—these pills are prescribed one every 4 hours.

Mr. BURLESON. Do you subscribe to the Dallas Morning News or did you back on November 22?

Mrs. GRANT. No, no; but my manager was very sympathetic.

Mr. BURLESON. Your manager?

Mrs. GRANT. My manager brought it up every day she came to the apartment.

Mr. BURLESON. That’s your manager at the apartment house?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes.

Mr. BURLESON. And she brought it up—the paper?

Mrs. GRANT. Every day.

Mr. BURLESON. About what time of the morning on November 22 did she bring it up?

Mrs. GRANT. It may have been around 11 o’clock.

Mr. BURLESON. Had you heard from Jack before that concerning the ad?

Mrs. GRANT. No; shortly—it seemed within the next 20 minutes I would think that he may have called.

Mr. BURLESON. Had you seen the ads by Bernard Weissman by the time Jack called?

Mrs. GRANT. Well, I had seen it, but I’ll be honest—I didn’t——

Mr. BURLESON. Did you see it after you got the paper on the morning of the 22d before Jack called on the 22d?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes, I did.

Mr. BURLESON. And Jack was talking about it at that time?

Mrs. GRANT. He was.

Mr. BURLESON. And would you relate at this time some of the things you recall he said at that time about the Bernard Weissman ad.

Mrs. GRANT. Well, the first thing he asked was if Pauline is going to take over—she was the manager, and do this and do that and get the napkins and all of this stuff connected with the club and then he said, “Did you see the ad?”

Mr. BURLESON. This was before the President was shot?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes. It so happened that that whole page was like on the back of a section—it seemed to me anyway that it was that way and it was open right on my bed—that section, anyway, was opened at that time for some reason or other.

Mr. BURLESON. What did Jack say when he called you about the ad?

Mrs. GRANT. At that time he said, “Did you see the ad?” And I said, “What ad?” He said, “About the President?” And I said, “Yes.” It said, “Welcome, Mr. Kennedy,” and he didn’t say too much then. He said some words in regard—like what do you think of it, so I said, “Oh”——He said, “Did you read it?” And I says, “Yes, yes.” You know, I wanted to get away.

Mr. BURLESON. Had you really read it?

Mrs. GRANT. Even if I did, I’ll be honest about it, it didn’t appear to me to be bad or good because I didn’t read all the way down and think about it and I didn’t study it like maybe I did later.

Mr. BURLESON. Anyway, go back to what he said then.

Mrs. GRANT. Well, he said, “Read it.” He says, “I’ll call you later.” And he was in the Dallas Morning News, I think, at that time.

Mr. BURLESON. He said something to lead you to believe that?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes; well, he said—it seems to me, “I’m in the News, and I’m going to Toni Zoppi’s office,” which was somewhere in the building, and “I’ve got to pick up a pamphlet.”

Mr. BURLESON. Toni Zoppi being the entertainment editor or amusement editor of the Dallas Morning News?

Mrs. GRANT. That’s right; and Jack had given him an ad a week before on a certain entertainer and that’s the fellow that made the remark, but that was Del Mar—Bill DelMar or DeMar or something like that, and Jack wanted it because, I guess, the entertainer wanted all this stuff back—that’s what we call writeups.

Mr. BURLESON. When was the next time, then, that you heard from Jack; was that after the assassination?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes.

Mr. BURLESON. And at that time what was Jack’s state as you recall it?

Mrs. GRANT. Well, I was hysterical myself. He must have been crying, from his voice.

Mr. BURLESON. At the time that he called, did you know that President Kennedy had been assassinated?

Mrs. GRANT. Oh, yes; because Pauline had called me and on my clock it was about 25 to 1.

Mr. BURLESON. What was Jack doing—saying—or was he crying?

Mrs. GRANT. Well, when Jack called it was after 1 again.

Mr. BURLESON. How was he—was he upset or normal?

Mrs. GRANT. Oh, he was upset.

Mr. BURLESON. What did he say?

Mrs. GRANT. He says, “I’m in the Dallas Morning News,” and I could hear—it wasn’t distinct, but he says, “The people are all around here, the phones are ringing like hell and everyone is canceling their subscriptions and their ads—big ads from all over the State,” and he said, “Did you read it?” And so I read it again.

Mr. BURLESON. While he was waiting?

Mrs. GRANT. No; but I mean since then—I looked at it—I’ll be honest about it, I didn’t comprehend it.

Mr. BURLESON. Okay.

Mrs. GRANT. You see, I didn’t comprehend it.

Mr. BURLESON. Tell us what else he said.

Mrs. GRANT. Well, Jack said something about John Newman, the fellow that takes the ads there and he says, “You know, Jack, I have to take orders from my superiors,” and Jack, whether he told me that night or later on in the afternoon— he said, “What are you—so money hungry? That you have to take $1,500 for an ad?” Jack knew a full page cost approximately that—I mean, he is well aware of that.

Mr. BURLESON. Let me bring you forward a little bit on these occasions that you told the FBI about in these statements where Jack spent this time with you at your house—would you watch television during this period of time or some of the time?

Mrs. GRANT. Well, he didn’t. I had watched it a great deal that afternoon on a Friday, and he came over—it seems to me when he left the News he came over and came back later on with a lot of groceries and by that time either I saw Curry or somebody else on the television and he was saying, “We got the right man.”

Mr. BURLESON. Did Jack see that?

Mrs. GRANT. I don’t know—I really don’t know. I tell you—usually under those pills, I thought I heard it plenty that day, and we got sick when we were talking about that.

Mr. BURLESON. Did you and Jack talk about Lee Harvey Oswald?

Mrs. GRANT. He had made very few remarks— he says, “He’s a creep.” You see, “a creep” is a real low life to Jack and “what a creep he is,” he says, and he was sick—he went in the bathroom.

Mr. BURLESON. Did he actually vomit?

Mrs. GRANT. He did not—he was sick to his stomach and he cried, he looked terrible—he just wasn’t himself, and truthfully, so help me, I remember even my mother’s funeral—it just killed him. He said this, “Someone tore my heart out,” and he says, “I didn’t even feel so bad when pops died because pappa was an old man. He was close to 90.”

Mr. BURLESON. What did Jack have to say about President Kennedy?

Mrs. GRANT. Oh, all I know is that it just killed him. I’ll tell you the truth—he sat there like it wasn’t worth life—like he thought they were out to get the world, the whole world, and this was part of it.

Mr. BURLESON. All right. He was very respectful of President Kennedy as a man and as a President?

Mrs. GRANT. Oh, he admired him—he thought this man was a great man of courage. If I said anything like I said there—something about his brother and integration, he said, “This man is greater, than Lincoln”—the same night.

Mr. BURLESON. Did Jack ever have an occasion to say anything to you about a letter that was in the newspaper that was written by some man, purportedly to President Kennedy’s daughter, Caroline?

Mrs. GRANT. I don’t know about that, but the week—the same week of the assassination—I think it was Monday or Tuesday—it was that week, there was a picture of the President sitting behind the desk just like you are and John-John was sitting at the front and you could see him playing around, I think it was his father’s feet, and he called it his house—I think, let me put it this way: My brother says, “This kid don’t know his father is the President and the father don’t act like a President.” He meant that he was just like a good guy—like acting ordinarily, like he wasn’t of wealth or power—he was just like the average young man and Jack looked at him as even being much younger than he was.

Mr. BURLESON. But you don’t know anything about such a letter being in the paper that Jack saw?

Mrs. GRANT. I don’t know—if he did, I don’t know it. I’ll tell you, I don’t know about that picture—it was the first week that I was home.

Mr. BURLESON. On Saturday, the times that Jack was in your house, do you recall if he watched any television?

Mrs. GRANT. No—very little. Saturday he came in with three pictures, and at the left hand corner, they were postal card pictures and he told me what he did. He went home and he couldn’t sleep—he got Larry out of bed and George Senator, and I thought he was nuts, I’ll be honest with you about it, so help me.

Mr. HUBERT. Who?

Mrs. GRANT. I thought my brother Jack was plain nuts.

Mr. BURLESON. Is that when he went out in the middle of the morning and took the pictures?

Mrs. GRANT. That’s right; and he didn’t know exactly where he saw it—that was the worst part of it and Larry told me that later on when they found him, he came back to it and they drove around and waited for daylight and he showed Larry how to take the pictures.

Mr. BURLESON. You are talking about the “Impeach Earl Warren” sign?

Mrs. GRANT. That’s right—all of this got in Jack’s mind that some Communist—no, no—he didn’t use the word “Communist”. I think he said “Some outfit or some lousy guy,” or something was putting up signs like that.

Mr. BURLESON. Did Jack tell you what he was going to do with this picture?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes.

Mr. BURLESON. What?

Mrs. GRANT. First, he showed it to me—three little pictures.

Mr. BURLESON. You actually saw the pictures?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes—I saw them—they are postal cards—laying out on my white table. They were this big (indicating).

Mr. BURLESON. These are pictures of “Impeach Earl Warren” signs?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes; and they looked like the American flag.

Mr. BURLESON. And it was on this Polaroid film?

Mrs. GRANT. The camera is still at my house, so that’s the same camera, I’m sure.

Mr. BURLESON. All right.

Mrs. GRANT. It was like a postal card picture. It seems to me in the left hand corner was that, and at the bottom it said, “Belmont—Impeach Earl Warren,” and a box number and it said, “Belmont, Massachusetts.”

Mr. BURLESON. What did Jack tell you as he showed you those pictures?

Mrs. GRANT. He called Stanley because he had a lot of faith in him.

Mr. BURLESON. Stanley who?

Mrs. GRANT. Stanley Kaufman; an attorney. This is another wonderful American, and he said, “Stanley,” and he told him about the pictures and then he talked to me, he says, “You know what, I went down to the post office and the newspaper box—the post office box——”

Mr. BURLESON. The newspaper box of Bernard Weissman’s ad?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes—“It’s so stuffed with mail,” he said to the clerk, and you can find out now which clerk this is, and on the 23d he was there at 6 or 7 o’clock in the morning and Larry and Senator should know the time—I really don’t know that—but it seems to me that’s what he said.

First of all, he figured that a gentile is using that name to blame all this on a Jew—about that ad, and then he analyzed the ad on Saturday and he saw the black border.

Mr. BURLESON. Will you tell me what Jack said he was going to do with these pictures?

Mrs. GRANT. He talked to Stanley and he was going to take them to the FBI—Monday, the first thing.

Mr. BURLESON. Was he also going to take them to Mr. Gordon McLendon who was the operator of KLIF?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes; he said he was going up there that night. Whether he did or was there or not, I don’t know.

Mr. BURLESON. Did he mention at that time—did he mention Mr. McLendon’s name, that Mr. McLendon does these editorials on radio station KLIF?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes—he was very close to Gordon.

Mr. BURLESON. All right.

Mrs. GRANT. In fact, I think he called Gordon from my house. He was there—and on Saturday he spent a long time with me and he called many people.

Mr. BURLESON. And he was quite upset over these pictures and signs?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes.

Mr. BURLESON. Now, let’s come forward to where we were talking about this Al Gruber.

Mrs. GRANT. Yes—Al.

Mr. BURLESON. Or it’s possibly Alex Gruber.

Mrs. GRANT. Yes; it’s Al Gruber—his nickname is Musty.

Mr. BURLESON. And there was something about a dog?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes.

Mr. BURLESON. Now, is this the dog that Jack was having someone build a crate for?

Mrs. GRANT. That’s right; or buy a crate or something.

Mr. BURLESON. And that he could ship this dog to Al Gruber in a crate?

Mrs. GRANT. It seems to me when Al was here when I was in the hospital, Jack had promised him a certain dog, I don’t know which one it is, and not a dog, but a certain dog, because Jack had a lot of dogs. His dogs just had puppies, I think, in the last month and Al had talked to—Jack had talked to Andy Armstrong—Andrew—and said something about getting a crate and Al wanted this dog.

Mr. BURLESON. Now bringing you forward a little bit to this episode that you and Jack had the trouble over that ended up in going to Rabbi Silverman and that you touched upon?

Mrs. GRANT. Well, he went to Rabbi Silverman because we weren’t talking for about 2 weeks. This was previous to the operation.

Mr. BURLESON. All right; and did Rabbi Silverman talk to you?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes.

Mr. BURLESON. Had Jack complained to him that he couldn’t get along with you or something?

Mrs. GRANT. Well. I don’t know exactly what Jack said—the rabbi, you see, didn’t tell me, but I told the rabbi about this money deal. Of course, I didn’t tell him that I didn’t go to the hospital on all these times that I had made arrangements with the doctors and backed out.

Mr. BURLESON. Now, you were asked some questions concerning Jack’s political beliefs or political leanings or political philosophies or political—anything that had to do with politics, did you ever hear Jack saying anything about being a Democrat or a Republican or being a right wing or left wing—he didn’t get involved in politics?

Mrs. GRANT. Now, this is it—my older brother knew a lot of Democrats and it seemed that we followed in their footsteps, because this is what I heard as a child—that the Democrats are for the poor people, so we as poor people went along with them, but we were never the kind that I was to go out and get votes or boast about a fellow—me and Jack—never.

Mr. BURLESON. You don’t know if Jack worked in any type of political movement?

Mrs. GRANT. Not to my knowledge. My older brother did—he was a Democrat and he worked for Governor Horner.

Mr. HUBERT. Who is the older brother?

Mrs. GRANT. Hyman.

Mr. BURLESON. Now, I think you also told me that Earl Ruby’s wife had a great admiration for President Kennedy also?

Mrs. GRANT. Truthfully, Earl couldn’t get out of her sight unless she OK’d it, but she was such a great admirer, and you know how much time he spent down here and money and Earl said she never said a word—she just loved him.

Mr. BURLESON. You mean loved the President?

Mrs. GRANT. The President—the late President. They’ve got pictures—little pictures before the assassination—they had all of those.

Mr. BURLESON. That’s enough on that. Now, one last area—

Since, and limit this to strictly since the conviction, you have visited Jack nearly daily in the jail?

Mrs. GRANT. Well, I would say at least six times out of the week.

Mr. BURLESON. What is, in your opinion, Jack’s present condition?

Mrs. GRANT. I believe he is mentally deranged, inasmuch as I’m not a doctor, but from what he says to me.

Mr. BURLESON. You have now, as of this moment, been informed by a newspaper and also by me about what Jack attempted to do today?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes; I have.

Mr. BURLESON. And you were informed and knew of what Jack had attempted to do about a month ago when he rammed his head up against the wall, were you not?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes.

Mr. BURLESON. What has Jack told you as to what you should do with and to yourself?

Mrs. GRANT. He wants me to do away with myself.

Mr. BURLESON. Does he give you a reason why?

Mrs. GRANT. He thinks they are going to kill out all the Jews and he has made remarks that 25 million Jews have been slaughtered.

Mr. BURLESON. Already?

Mrs. GRANT. On the floor below.

Mr. BURLESON. And they are being slaughtered where?

Mrs. GRANT. In the jail and sometimes it’s planes going over and they are dropping bombs on the Jews.

Mr. BURLESON. Has he told you about hearing or seeing Jews boiled in oil?

Mrs. GRANT. Oh, yes.

Mr. BURLESON. And has he told you about seeing or hearing his brother, Earl, being dismembered?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes; and his children.

Mr. BURLESON. And Earl’s children, and by dismembered, he has seen them cut off?

Mrs. GRANT. Arms and legs—they are cut off.

Mr. BURLESON. Does he, nearly every time you talk to him, ask you to check on them, when is the last time?

Mrs. GRANT. I have to sort of tell real lies, that I just got through talking with Sam and Earl and with Eileen and with Sam and everything is OK.

Mr. BURLESON. Because he says that they have been doing this to them?

Mrs. GRANT. He says many times he has seen Sam on the second floor and the rabbi was going—yesterday, they took the rabbi, sometimes they take Stanley.

Mr. BURLESON. That’s Stanley Kaufman you are talking about?

Mrs. GRANT. Stanley Kaufman.

Mr. BURLESON. In other words. Jack just doesn’t make sense when you talk to him?

Mrs. GRANT. Oh, no; then sometimes he will say one thing that will be all right and then he goes off into this stuff.

Mr. BURLESON. Has Jack told you that he was actually tried for the killing of President Kennedy?

Mrs. GRANT. No; but he thinks that they think that he killed the President.

Mr. BURLESON. Did he tell you that what he went through with was not really a trial, but a farce?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes.

Mr. BURLESON. And part of a play?

Mrs. GRANT. In fact; his verdict is on the 14th and the next day he says to me in front of Eileen, “When will the trial be?”

Mr. BURLESON. Did he say it wasn’t really Judge Brown that was up there but somebody else?

Mrs. GRANT. That’s exactly what he said.

Mr. BURLESON. Did he tell you anything about their introducing evidence in his absence?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes.

Mr. BURLESON. And that evidence that they were supposed to have introduced is the fact that he killed President Kennedy?

Mrs. GRANT. Well, he just thinks they are blaming him for it and they think he did it and they are going to take it out on all the Jews.

Mr. BURLESON. Does he tell you many times that you will never see him again because he will be killed?

Mrs. GRANT. Every time he kisses me goodby that day, he says, “You will never see me again. Do away with yourself.”

Mr. BURLESON. To save yourself this punishment?

Mrs. GRANT. That’s right.

Mr. BURLESON. What is your opinion as to his present condition mentally?

Mrs. GRANT. I have seen him just 24 hours ago and he was in a very bad state of mind.

Mr. BURLESON. He was in a very bad state of mind?

Mrs. GRANT. That’s right.

Mr. BURLESON. How about physically?

Mrs. GRANT. He has lost between 35 and 40 pounds to my knowledge. He looks like he has been in a concentration camp.

Mr. BURLESON. What is his greatest desire as you know it right now?

Mrs. GRANT. He wants to tell the Warren Commission the truth—he wants truth serum and a lie detector test.

Mr. BURLESON. The truth being not going into the psychomotor variant epilepsy.

Mrs. GRANT. He don’t know much about that—he doesn’t even know what they are talking about.

Mr. BURLESON. He just wants to tell how he felt and how these things affected him?

Mrs. GRANT. That’s right.

Mr. BURLESON. I believe that’s all on those.

Mrs. GRANT. All right.

Mr. HUBERT. When he tells you these various things, do you try to straighten him out and say to him that it is not so?

Mrs. GRANT. When it first started—I didn’t realize this—I hadn’t said things—I said, “Don’t be crazy,” just words like that—“what are you talking crazy,” and then when we got to—this Dr. Beavers into the case and I talked to him and he read something of his report and, of course, my sister was here at that time. Every day he would say to her, “You’ll never see me again. Kiss me goodby through the glass.” You know, if it wasn’t so serious it would be funny in a way, because it don’t seem like him. It seems that if I agree with him it’s no good and I have tried—I realize Dr. Beavers said if you’d try agreeing with him then he says, “You don’t believe me, do you?” He says, “They are playing a game with you, don’t believe Phil, don’t believe him.” And I said, “What about the rabbi?” And he says, “The rabbi don’t listen to me.” And truthfully, every time the rabbi went up there he came down sick and disgusted with himself—he’s trying to knock some sense into Jack and it don’t work—it doesn’t register with the rabbi, you see.

Mr. HUBERT. What I wanted to get at—you all are trying to discourage him from having these views?

Mrs. GRANT. Well, after talking to the psychiatrist, I said I don’t know what to do. If I tell you, you will agree with him it is no good, and if I don’t—I stay there and listen through this glass.

Mr. BURLESON. I might be able to help with that—help clarify that—when he says that they have just killed Earl or Sam or their children, you say, “No, that’s not true because I just talked to them?”

Mrs. GRANT. I say, “I just talked to them,” and then we’ll get onto something and I will try to talk about a friend who wrote a letter or someone came to see him and he goes right back, he says, “There’s no more Earl. They have dismantled him.” That’s the words he uses.

Mr. BURLESON. And do you come back and say, “Well, it’s not true because I just talked to him 30 minutes ago or 2 hours ago?”

Mrs. GRANT. Or, he makes me promise, “Will you call them tonight to be sure it’s not so—to be sure it wasn’t him,” and I’ll be sure that it is somebody else on the phone. They can check with the calls last Saturday—he made seven calls to Chicago.

Mr. HUBERT. Who did?

Mrs. GRANT. Jack; he don’t know that he made them, he don’t know that he made that many. I got the letter that he made them from Eileen at home.

Mr. HUBERT. He is allowed to make phone calls though?

Mrs. GRANT. Well, sometimes—I think he annoys them a little bit—those who sympathize with him and they figure he’s pretty screwy, you know he is really gone—he makes these collect calls to Chicago and they let him and there are one or two guards that aren’t as nice—I think they are not as tolerant.

Mr. BURLESON. Let’s go off the record just a second, so that I can give Mr. Hubert some information.

(Discussion between counsel and the witness off the record.)

Mr. BURLESON. They have a pay phone out there in the jail, do they not?

Let’s go off the record just a second to give Mr. Hubert some information.

(Discussion between counsel off the record.)

Mr. HUBERT. I have to explain what went on while we were off the record.

Let the record show that while we were off the record Mr. Burleson was explaining to me the circumstances used in the jail for allowing prisoners, especially those who are under a death sentence to use the pay phone in the jail, and that was the substance of the conversation off the record.

Now, do you have any more questions, Mr. Burleson? Are you through?

Mr. BURLESON. Yes.

Mr. HUBERT. I wanted to get into the matter of the financing of the defense of your brother, Jack—I suppose we should start with the selection of the attorneys originally in this case. Now, we know that Mr. Tom Howard apparently took the first affirmative action on behalf of Jack Ruby in the afternoon of November 24.

Mrs. GRANT. On the 24th.

Mr. HUBERT. And I want to ask you if you know by whose authority he took this action?

Mrs. GRANT. Ralph Paul, who knows nothing about lawyers—only knew Howard and they called them thinking they could get back on bond. Now, I didn’t know Oswald died until later in the afternoon. I was hysterical over this shooting and being sick and the President’s assassination—in fact, my television was on but it was turned down.

Mr. HUBERT. In other words, it was Ralph Paul that called Mr. Howard for the initial step?

When it came to the charge of the matter which ultimately followed, did you have anything to do with the selection of the attorneys who would defend your brother Jack?

Mrs. GRANT. Let me put it this way—there was Daugherty and Sullivan and Jim Martin, and one guy was threatened and one fellow’s wife didn’t want him in. Tom Howard pushed Jim Martin out of the case. I was panicky here. I had asked Tom to call Fred Brunner, Charles Tessmer—what is the name of this Erisman?

Mr. BURLESON. Fred Erisman.

Mrs. GRANT. Erisman or something like that and also Percy Foreman to get another lawyer—you know, a super lawyer that I felt—I didn’t know too much about Tom, but talking to Chicago and people telling me here and everything, anyway, Tom remained in the case and I understand he didn’t contact these people as quickly as he should and Earl was panicky up in Detroit.

Mr. HUBERT. Didn’t Earl come down here as a result of that?

Mrs. GRANT. Not that day.

Mr. HUBERT. Not that day?

Mrs. GRANT. I don’t know how many days later he did come, but we were on the phone constantly. He went to the west coast and he went to see one of the names there, Mike Shore who knows Frank Sinatra there and we figured that they would know somebody and that’s how Belli came into the picture. Now, that is that part of the picture. Now, we didn’t have any money.

Mr. HUBERT. What about Tonahill, how did he get in?

Mrs. GRANT. Oh: he was a friend of Belli’s—Belli invited him in—as much as I know.

Mr. HUBERT. In other words, Tonahill came in after Belli did; is that correct?

Mrs. GRANT. Or maybe together—they were together I think on insurance cases previously—I assume this.

Mr. HUBERT. So, Belli chose a local lawyer, as it were, to go along with him; is that the idea?

Mrs. GRANT. Well, Tom was still in the case. Tom called him right away.

Mr. HUBERT. Called who?

Mrs. GRANT. You know more about that—Tom got us an investigator, Bob Dennison.

Mr. BURLESON. You made the statement that Tom called you?

Mrs. GRANT. Tom called you.

Mr. HUBERT. You mean Phil Burleson?

Mrs. GRANT. Phil Burleson.

Mr. HUBERT. And ultimately, in any case, Mr. Belli was retained to handle the defense?

Mrs. GRANT. That’s right.

Mr. HUBERT. Was a fee arrangement made with him?

Mrs. GRANT. Let me explain that part—this is what I know. I was not in San Francisco or Los Angeles. Earl told me this—he says, “You’re looking at Belli—$75,000,” and Earl thought you might as well have said $75 million, but he says, “I will want about $25,000 to pay my expenses and I think I could write a book and make $50,000.”

Mr. HUBERT. Earl was telling you that?

Mrs. GRANT. Earl told me words that——

Mr. HUBERT. That Belli had told him?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes; and this is what took place in their conversation.

Mr. HUBERT. When you were quoting some sentences there a moment ago, I understood you to mean, and see if I am correct, that Earl was telling you what Belli had told him?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes, and I don’t know if there was a contract—I assumed it was agreeable with Earl. Earl already had talked to a fellow by the name of Billy Woodfield, the writer. Billy Woodfield, and don’t ask me how they got connected—I know little about these things—he’s going to write a short story for Europe, and he probably could help us raise this initial $25,000 cash. Well, no; he didn’t say that—that was for his expenses—he didn’t get any money down that day as far as I know.

Mr. HUBERT. Then, the fee was $75,000, of which he thought——

Mrs. GRANT. He could write a book and retain $50,000 out of the book, but he would like $25,000.

Mr. HUBERT. As soon as possible?

Mrs. GRANT. That I don’t know—he says for expenses on the case.

Mr. HUBERT. How much was actually paid to him; do you know?

Mrs. GRANT. Let me tell you this—the short stories were sold in Europe and some in America through newspapers. Each paper paid separately—$400, $300, $600, and the story said, “My story—Jack Ruby.” I gave most of the story, Jack gave some of it, but I knew this story—what would you call it—little incidents that happened in his life, some of it, and some part of the story was right on Friday and Saturday the 22d. I gave the whole story, you know, I have newspaper stories of it, and I gave it to Belli, and all these little stories, we were supposed to get $50,000 from all the different agencies that bought this to put it in their papers—that’s how it’s done, but we received, I would say to my knowledge, $23,000.

Mr. HUBERT. How was it handled?

Mrs. GRANT. Earl.

Mr. HUBERT. Earl controlled the funds at that time?

Mrs. GRANT. At that time, yes. It came to the writer and the agent, Larry Schiller and Billy Woodfield. Larry sells the story, Billy wrote the story. You know, you need a writer even though you write.

Mr. HUBERT. I’m talking about the money that came to you?

Mrs. GRANT. Well, they received some money on the west coast but they deposited it in a bank with an escrow deal.

Mr. HUBERT. In what bank and under what name was it?

Mrs. GRANT. Earl will tell you—Earl has papers from the bank.

Mr. HUBERT. You don’t know that?

Mrs. GRANT. I know it’s in Hollywood and I know Earl says he received about $23,000.

Mr. HUBERT. It was not handled in Dallas.

Mrs. GRANT. Not to my knowledge—1 cent of that.

Mr. HUBERT. But you say that Earl is the one who is handling the money?

Mrs. GRANT. At that time, Earl had power of attorney.

Mr. HUBERT. He had a power of attorney from Jack?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes.

Mr. HUBERT. In other words, this contract was made for the benefit of Jack, as it were, and the money that came in was put into some escrow agreement and then Earl was able to withdraw from that and sign checks against it by virtue of the power of attorney; is that right?

Mrs. GRANT. That’s right, that’s right; these people received, I would say, 35 percent.

Mr. HUBERT. Is that correct—the way I put it?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes; but we received ourselves, I think, $23,000—there may have been $30,000.

Mr. HUBERT. What happened to the money you did receive?

Mrs. GRANT. Earl has checks that were made out directly to Belli, which I think he himself cashed about $13,200.

Mr. HUBERT. Who is “he”?

Mrs. GRANT. Mr. Melvin Belli. I do know that the doctors were paid and that may have run to $3,500, and we do know that Bob Dennison received $4,000. I cannot give you step by step because I do not have it, but Earl has an accounting of all the money received through the efforts of that story; however, Earl has spent—I don’t know how many thousands. In the first place, I think Earl put in $7,000 right away for things, but he took it out later.

Mr. HUBERT. Do you know how much has been received all told—you say about $23,000 as a result of the story?

Mrs. GRANT. That’s as much as I know. This is what I know. There may have been some money—we were supposed to get money in later, but I don’t know if we got it.

Mr. HUBERT. Were there any other people or organizations that contributed any money?

Mrs. GRANT. No; well——

Mr. HUBERT. Or, do you know?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes; I know. But I’m trying to think how to tell it to you. Recently we received $100 from Walter Winchell in the last 10 days. We received $250 a month ago from friends back in Chicago. Then there is a lot of 5’s and 10’s—I guess I, myself, could not go into that account, by the way. In the city of Dallas, I received $245 that I had given to Eileen to reimburse Earl. We put that in a Jack’s defense fund. I received that amount, then that was December and January—those months, and then in March or April, I think I also took $110—let me tell you, the money comes into the county building, you know, the checks, and when I say I received it, it doesn’t come directly to me.

I typed up all the money on a list and I sent it on to Eileen with a check for deposit of $110. That’s the money that I know, but if we will stop for a minute, I know the hundred, the 250, the 245 and the hundred—those were plus that $23,000. Now, if there is any other money—did I tell you any other money? I told you everything there was.

Mr. HUBERT. There are no substantial amounts?

Mrs. GRANT. Oh, no; listen, don’t listen to those reports.

Mr. HUBERT. Except from the result of the selling?

Mrs. GRANT. The big fee was $250 and the story was sold, and we received—I would say Larry Schiller and Billy Woodfield took 35 percent of the money—the writer and the agent that sells it of the story. I know there was $23,000 came in and there may have been more since then.

Mr. HUBERT. In any case, Earl would have more accurate figures?

Mrs. GRANT. Oh, yes.

Mr. HUBERT. As far as you know, in the handling of the money, it is less than a thousand dollars that came through you?

Mrs. GRANT. I think there is a thousand in all of this money and a few hopes. The New York Times was very sympathetic and they put an ad in their paper. Most papers will not take an ad for what you call “Jack Ruby’s Defense Fund.” The ad cost $150—I think they took it less than the ad.

Mr. HUBERT. You paid $150?

Mrs. GRANT. I didn’t—someone in Chicago or Earl must have paid it, but I do know that, that ad went in. Now, if any other little moneys come in, I don’t have any accounting of it. I know it came in here—this is the money that I know.

Mr. HUBERT. And to your knowledge, then, what has come through your hands is less than a thousand dollars?

Mrs. GRANT. Well, let’s see—$245, $110, $250, and $100—I think that’s about it, unless I have forgotten some, but that’s all I know myself.

Mr. HUBERT. All the rest has been handled by Earl?

Mrs. GRANT. That was for the sale of the short story.

Mr. HUBERT. Now, at the present time who are the attorneys for Jack Ruby? That he still has? Mr. Tonahill is apparently still in the case?

Mrs. GRANT. Well, we retained Mr. Tonahill and Burleson from the very first minute and they are still in. Shall I tell him about Belli?

Mr. BURLESON. Go ahead.

Mrs. GRANT. The day of the verdict I got a telephone call that if Belli don’t get out of town they are going to kill him.

Mr. HUBERT. Do you know who the phone call was from?

Mrs. GRANT. No; but on the other hand, I think——

Mr. HUBERT. Did you convey that information to Mr. Belli?

Mrs. GRANT. No; but unfortunately, I didn’t hear from him Saturday. He had a heart attack while he was here, I think, during the trial—he was deathly sick.

Mr. HUBERT. Belli was?

Mrs. GRANT. There were a few days he went to get a cardiograph and all that. One of the days, 1 of the 2 days—well, it wasn’t 1 day, it was 3 days, really, but he went to court anyway, and I remember on the Saturday he went to some clinic here and got all kinds of tests, but the day before he was almost a goner.

After I heard the news of the verdict and what came over radio or television, I thought he would die. He couldn’t talk on the phone—he mumbled Saturday to some member of my family who called him. I didn’t hear anything until later on—late Sunday afternoon, and Monday I went to visit him at his suite.

Mr. HUBERT. That was here in Dallas?

Mrs. GRANT. That’s right; at the Statler-Hilton. He answered the phone and, of course, I heard mumbling and there were newspapermen and Life magazine men—I don’t remember everyone that was there, but there were 10 or 12, maybe about 10 people, my sister and myself. His wife was leaving one direction and he was leaving the other. She was white as a ghost and he was white as a ghost and I just didn’t say anything because they were packed up to leave and I didn’t want it to get out because he said he was going to San Antonio, but I don’t think he went there at all. I think he went another direction because he just wanted to sort of fool who was after him, but it was a very bad day for him and myself and my sister. I didn’t even tell her that. You see, they were downtown and I was home in my apartment the day of the verdict. I was glad when he left. That, and adding up a few other things—people said, “You are lucky to get him out because you didn’t know the things.” They said, “They were trying Melvin Belli and they weren’t trying Jack Ruby.”

Of course, between that telephone call and everything——

Mr. HUBERT. Was that a local call?

Mrs. GRANT. Oh, no.

Mr. HUBERT. Or, was it a long distance call?

Mrs. GRANT. No; it was a local call.

Mr. HUBERT. Was it a man or a woman?

Mrs. GRANT. A man, and another thing, I know my phone was tapped and I know—it’s a terrible thing to say, but I have all reasons to believe that the district attorney has been on it and is still on it. The only time they got off is when I went to the FBI and complained about it; that I thought my brother wasn’t protected in the city jail, and somebody knows every move I was making. It seems my phone was clearer after that, and truthfully, if the district attorney has any tapes on me, it should be in on the tape of the day of the verdict, and I was so sick over the verdict and having this.

Mr. HUBERT. You did not recognize the voice that made the threat against Belli?

Mrs. GRANT. No.

Mr. HUBERT. Were you asked to convey that information to Belli?

Mrs. GRANT. No; no.

Mr. HUBERT. How long did that conversation last; do you know?

Mrs. GRANT. Not over 3 or 4 minutes. It was the other party speaking. This happened the afternoon—the day my brother got his horrible verdict.

Mr. HUBERT. That was Saturday afternoon, March 14?

Mrs. GRANT. That’s right; March 14.

Mr. HUBERT. About what time of the afternoon was it?

Mrs. GRANT. I would say after 2:30—sometime between 2:30 and 4, it seems.

Mr. HUBERT. It was a one-sided conversation, I take it?

Mrs. GRANT. Practically.

Mr. HUBERT. And the essence and the gist of the conversation was that if Mr. Belli did not leave town he would be injured?

Mrs. GRANT. The voice said something like this, “Mrs. Grant?” I says, “Yes.” He said, “If Melvin Belli knows what’s good for him, he had better leave town. They are going to kill him.” Now, I don’t know—this man didn’t sound like a child and he didn’t sound like an imbecile.

Mr. HUBERT. Did you ask him who he meant by “they”?

Mrs. GRANT. I’ll tell you the truth, I was so shocked at the verdict, and before I knew it he was off—I was hanging on the phone there by myself.

Mr. HUBERT. Did he indicate to you in any way who “they” were?

Mrs. GRANT. No.

Mr. HUBERT. Or who was going to kill him?

Mrs. GRANT. No. Oh, now I want to tell you about—going back to Monday, which would be the 16th, there was conversation and, of course, I think I heard this Sunday too.

Mr. HUBERT. That’s March 16?

Mrs. GRANT. I think March 16 was on a Monday.

Mr. HUBERT. That’s correct.

Mrs. GRANT. But I may have heard this Sunday, that the sheriff—and there has been threats against Belli—and this is another thing I know, whether someone is on my phone and leaked it out—it wasn’t me, that the sheriff is going to give Belli a guard out of town, that he has been threatened, but I already knew that. Then, I got to thinking about all of this and I says, “I hope he leaves, I don’t want to have this on my mind,” but, I knew when I was in his suite of rooms—somebody called there Monday afternoon sometime and he went to the phone for a minute; as a rule someone else was answering the phone, and then he went in the bedroom there and he answered the phone. He had quite a suite of rooms—three rooms, I think, and the remark among the people there—they said the sheriff is going to give him a guard, you know, escort him out of town.

Mr. HUBERT. You mean you heard that that afternoon.

Mrs. GRANT. Too, but it wasn’t—I already had known that from the conversation Saturday afternoon, it didn’t look good.

Mr. HUBERT. Did he comment upon this telephone call that he answered himself?

Mrs. GRANT. No; he hardly did any talking that afternoon.

Mr. HUBERT. Well, you mentioned the telephone call, I wonder why you did so, that is to say, what import you had put on it?

Mrs. GRANT. You want to know the truth?

Mr. HUBERT. Yes; I want to know the truth.

Mrs. GRANT. I was not thinking anything about it but he is coming back for a trial and I told Phil recently, I thought he was going to get his trial transferred from the Texas Bar Association and I guess he can’t. I wasn’t going to say anything about it—I figured—he’s never coming back, but now I am a little scared. I wouldn’t like anything—look, you don’t want a lawyer in a case?

Mr. HUBERT. Let me finish about this phone call—is there any other significance to that phone call that you heard him answer? You mentioned it in connection with this.

Mrs. GRANT. It didn’t look right when he left—left the phone.

Mr. HUBERT. That’s just an impression, though, he didn’t say anything to indicate the nature of it?

Mrs. GRANT. No; no.

Mr. HUBERT. You indicated that perhaps, I say—you indicated—the way you brought it up—it could be inferred perhaps that it was also a threatening phone call?

Mrs. GRANT. No, no; I didn’t mean that at all.

Mr. HUBERT. But, do you know that to be a fact?

Mrs. GRANT. No, no; this was merely that the sheriff said he was going to escort him out of town.

Mr. HUBERT. Do you think it was the sheriff on the phone?

Mrs. GRANT. It could be—that’s what I felt, and shortly after this there was another phone call came in and he went in and he took the call.

Mr. HUBERT. When you said the rumor or talk was that the sheriff was going to escort him out of town, I assumed you meant he was going to give him protection, is that what you meant?

Mrs. GRANT. That’s what I mean, so he doesn’t get hurt. Maybe the sheriff knows something about this, although he does know—I don’t know. I only know I was too sick after the verdict to even think about anything, but now that I know he’s coming back, I asked Phil, I said, “Do you think he’s coming back?” And he says, “Yes; he’s coming back.”

Mr. HUBERT. Mrs. Grant or Mr. Burleson, do you have any other matter I have touched upon that you would like to bring up at this time?

Mr. BURLESON. I would like to go into some of these things you have just questioned her about.

Mr. HUBERT. All right.

Mr. BURLESON. Right at first, Mr. Tom Howard did go down and talk to Jack on Sunday the 24th?

Mrs. GRANT. Oh, yes.

Mr. BURLESON. And did get a writ of habeas corpus, I believe?

Mrs. GRANT. I know nothing of the court procedures of that date.

Mr. BURLESON. You don’t know that Judge Brown did set a bond on assault with intent to commit murder upon Lee Harvey Oswald before this hearing?

Mrs. GRANT. I understand it was filed in Richardson. I may be wrong. Someone told me that, that they did file a murder charge against Oswald.

Mr. BURLESON. Before Oswald was pronounced dead, did you know anything about Judge Joe B. Brown setting bond and granting a writ to let Jack out on assault with intent to commit murder?

Mrs. GRANT. I honestly——

Mr. BURLESON. Do you or not?

Mrs. GRANT. I don’t.

Mr. BURLESON. Then, subsequently, Mr. Howard had myself go up and talk to Jack—you learned that, did you not?

Mrs. GRANT. I learned there were about three or four or five attorneys that went up and talked to Jack.

Mr. BURLESON. Then, Mr. Belli came in town and at the time, did you hear from Mr. Tonahill?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes.

Mr. BURLESON. He called you in the middle of the night, I believe?

Mrs. GRANT. That’s right.

Mr. BURLESON. And did he tell you that he and Mr. Belli were together?

Mrs. GRANT. No.

Mr. BURLESON. Did he just mention himself?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes.

Mr. BURLESON. What did he say?

Mrs. GRANT. He asked me if I had hired an attorney and I said, “I think Earl got somebody.” And they were discussing it with Percy Foreman, but I was wrong. They never got to Percy Foreman because Tom Howard never called him.

Mr. BURLESON. Then Melvin Belli did come in town and met with Mr. Tom Howard and Mr. Tonahill?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes.

Mr. BURLESON. And stayed out at the Cabana Hotel, I believe, the motel out on Stemmons Freeway?

Mrs. GRANT. Well, I was never at that hotel to visit them—I can’t remember.

Mr. BURLESON. Earl was in town at the same time Mr. Belli was in town?

Mrs. GRANT. I think you are right there—that they were all over there—Earl was there for a couple of days but I didn’t go there.

Mr. BURLESON. Then Mr. Belli went down and talked with Jack prior to the time and he said that he would accept the case, do you remember that?

Mrs. GRANT. I’m sure he did.

Mr. BURLESON. And after talking to Jack, do you remember he said he would accept the case at that time?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes.

Mr. HUBERT. Mr. Burleson, may I make this suggestion—of course, this is not a court hearing, on the other hand, for the sake of the value of the testimony, I think if you wouldn’t lead her so much that the testimony might have more weight.

Mrs. GRANT. Well, I’ll tell you, my mind—I’m just about out of my mind.

Mr. BURLESON. Yes. Do you know if that is when I became active in the case—at that time?

Mrs. GRANT. I think you came in about—it seems to me—about a week after this incident—it seems to me that’s when I first met you.

Mr. BURLESON. And do you know if Mr. Belli brought any attorneys with him from California?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes.

Mr. BURLESON. Do you know who that was?

Mrs. GRANT. I know he brought Samuel Brody.

Mr. BURLESON. Now, after this, there was a bond hearing, I believe; is that correct?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes.

Mr. BURLESON. And who sat at the counsel table with Mr. Ruby, your brother?

Mrs. GRANT. I know you were there and I know Mr. Brody and Tonahill, Mr. Belli—I think Tom Howard was there right along then.

Mr. BURLESON. And then, that actually was on one occasion or on two occasions that that bond hearing was held; or do you recall?

Mrs. GRANT. It seems to me a couple of times—maybe more than that.

Mr. BURLESON. Then bond was denied?

Mrs. GRANT. That’s right.

Mr. BURLESON. Then, at the time of the change of venue, do you know who the attorneys were at that time?

Mrs. GRANT. It seems to me the same group were still there.

Mr. BURLESON. Do you recall about that time if anything occurred in connection with Tom Howard and his connection with the case?

Mrs. GRANT. About the picture?

Mr. BURLESON. No; just about whether or not he continued in the case or did he?

Mrs. GRANT. It seems to me at that time—he was leaking information to the district attorney’s office, he was in the way of Mr. Belli and Mr. Tonahill—at least they felt that or they told me that. We had found a mistrust in him, which is close to that time as I can remember, where information has come to us that Tom Howard is trying to sell a picture of the late President Kennedy being shot and half of his skull is in the air, to Life magazine, and I think Billy Woodfield had told that to Earl and Earl told me to get ahold of the Secret Service, they came out to see me and Elmer Moore, and another gentleman—I cannot think of the other gentleman’s name—he probably could recall—and we went in the alley because I don’t know if my place is bugged or not, and the Secret Service stepped in to either squash the sale of this particular picture or got ahold of it—the films and everything, and, of course, when Belli found out, he was sick because he said it don’t look right for an attorney representing a person to do something like this.

Mr. BURLESON. All right. Anyway—somewhere around there——

Mr. HUBERT. May I examine her just a little on that point?

Mr. BURLESON. Yes; go ahead.

Mr. HUBERT. Did you ever find out whether it was true that Mr. Howard was doing this?

Mrs. GRANT. Well, since then I heard it was true, but doubly true there’s some girl that works for one of your departments who heard and who told another person that there is evidence there is a picture of that kind in existence.

Mr. HUBERT. You have never seen the picture?

Mrs. GRANT. No; I haven’t. I also heard several days before the assassination there was a pamphlet put in all the drugstores where you sell magazines and was distributed all through the city of Dallas with the late President’s picture, and the top of its says, “Wanted” and the bottom had a number like a jailman, you know, a convict, and the day of the assassination, early that afternoon these distributors had a devil of a time trying to remember all the places they placed that particular pamphlet, that was for sale for 10 cents or 15 cents.

Mr. BURLESON. Come back up to his question.

Mr. HUBERT. I just wanted to explore whether or not it had come to your knowledge whether the story was the truth or not?

Mrs. GRANT. This all came to me—call me back on the word “communism” that I said later on, if you want?

Mr. BURLESON. Do you know anything else about this alleged sale of the picture?

Mrs. GRANT. Nothing, but Earl told me to get ahold of the men here and I did and I called the office and Elmer Moore came out and I told him.

Mr. BURLESON. All right. Coming back—along about this time—did you, Earl, and Stanley Kaufman and so forth enter into some kind of a contract with Mr. Howard where he would withdraw from the case?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes.

Mr. BURLESON. Did you pay him some money?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes; the first week he was in, I had a little money and I think it was when I sold the Vegas Club and I think I had $1,600 and I had bills to pay but I didn’t pay them and I gave him $200.

Mr. BURLESON. At the time that you terminated his services in the case, did you pay him some money then?

Mrs. GRANT. We gave him a check for $2,000—we gave him $2,700 altogether, but I gave him $2,000 when he signed the contract to step out of the case.

Mr. BURLESON. Now, when the change of venue hearing started——

Mrs. GRANT. By the way, when I say “I gave him”—that money came also out of the $23,000.

Mr. BURLESON. Now, when the change of venue started and the picking of the jury followed, who were the attorneys then that were sitting there at the counsel table?

Mrs. GRANT. Well, Belli, Tonahill and yourself—I don’t remember—I think Sam Brody was sick and went home. However, Mr. Belli brought in a young gentleman who came and sat for a while.

Mr. BURLESON. Could that have been Mr. Bill Choulous?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes.

Mr. BURLESON. And that was out of Mr. Belli’s office?

Mrs. GRANT. That’s right.

Mr. BURLESON. Then, when it got into the actual trial of the case after the change of venue lasted about a week, who were the attorneys then during the picking of the jury?

Mrs. GRANT. Well, Mr. Burleson, Mr. Joe Tonahill, and Mr. Belli did all the work from picking the jury and through the trial.

Mr. BURLESON. The three of them?

Mrs. GRANT. The three of them.

Mr. BURLESON. And they continued on through the trial?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes.

Mr. BURLESON. And they were the only ones sitting with Jack Ruby at the time of the verdict?

Mrs. GRANT. You know, I was not in the courtroom all during the trial. They kept me out in the lobby, but I do know—that is what I heard or saw.

Mr. BURLESON. Now, within a week after the verdict came in, did you write a letter to Mr. Belli dismissing him from the case or asking him to withdraw, one or the other?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes.

Mr. BURLESON. You told him in the letter—what?

Mrs. GRANT. Well, I couldn’t reach him by telephone and since he’s traveling around, and I’m——

Mr. BURLESON. What did you tell him in the letter?

Mrs. GRANT. Say it again?

Mr. BURLESON. Did you tell him in effect if he didn’t resign you would fire him?

Mrs. GRANT. Well, yes; words to that effect.

Mr. BURLESON. In other words, he did resign?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes.

Mr. HUBERT. I think that letter was published in the press, was it not?

Mrs. GRANT. No—I never gave it to them. If it was, it shouldn’t be, because we only made three copies, the original went to him and one to Mr. Burleson and one to Tonahill. I didn’t want any more copies around—I didn’t want that—that was one of the things that bothered me.

Mr. HUBERT. I don’t know, ma’am, I had the impression that I had seen that letter through seeing a copy of it in the press.

Mrs. GRANT. If you did—I didn’t see it here, or we didn’t, and we would have known it.

Mr. HUBERT. I don’t know—I may be mistaken.

Mrs. GRANT. That is one thing—that’s the whole thing—the whole case was tried in the papers.

Mr. BURLESON. Now, after that you were feeling pretty low and sick at that time, weren’t you?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes.

Mr. BURLESON. Did your family—Earl and Sam and sisters go down to Houston and talk to Mr. Percy Foreman?

Mrs. GRANT. They did.

Mr. BURLESON. Was a contract drawn up at that time?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes; there was.

Mr. BURLESON. Did Mr. Foreman know you had Jack Ruby’s power of attorney?

Mrs. GRANT. I don’t know what they told him but it was well indicated that I was now controlling. I took over Earl Ruby’s power.

Mr. BURLESON. What did Mr. Foreman do as to whether or not he made any announcements as to whether he was the attorney?

Mrs. GRANT. Well, he immediately called in the press. He immediately stated what he wanted, he took pictures of my family and he said he wanted $5,000 within 10 days and another $5,000 30 days following the 10 days.

Mr. BURLESON. Did he come to Dallas shortly thereafter?

Mrs. GRANT. The following week, I think, he came to Dallas—it wasn’t that weekend, it was the following weekend—am I right—or was it that week?

Mr. BURLESON. That week—I think they went down there, if I might help you a little bit, about Monday.

Mrs. GRANT. He came down on a Saturday—I did not see him, but I spoke with him over the phone. I thought he asked too much money. He wanted power of attorney and I wasn’t happy about the contract, because these contracts have a——

Mr. BURLESON. You had not signed a contract?

Mrs. GRANT. No.

Mr. BURLESON. Anyway, he went and visited Jack?

Mrs. GRANT. And he wanted Jack to come downstairs to take pictures with him and our civil attorney, Stanley Marcus——

Mr. BURLESON. Do you mean Stanley Kaufman?

Mrs. GRANT. Stanley Kaufman, pardon me, wouldn’t permit it. He said “This is one of the reasons Mrs. Grant and her family didn’t want Belli in the picture. There has been too much newspaper publicity, radio, and television. He couldn’t be hurt any worse and there is no sense of you getting into this widespread publicity,” and Mr. Foreman and Mr. Kaufman got into some squabble there and Mr. Kaufman left heated, I understand, and Mr. Percy Foreman called me later that afternoon that he was coming out to see me in the evening. He heard I had a doctor and I was sick. He didn’t show up.

Mr. BURLESON. Did he make arrangements to meet you the next morning?

Mrs. GRANT. He did.

Mr. BURLESON. Monday morning?

Mrs. GRANT. At 9:30.

Mr. BURLESON. Where?

Mrs. GRANT. In the lobby of his hotel—the Statler.

Mr. BURLESON. Did you come down?

Mrs. GRANT. I came down.

Mr. BURLESON. With whom?

Mrs. GRANT. With my sister Eileen.

Mr. BURLESON. Did you meet him?

Mrs. GRANT. I met Mr. Burleson and Mr. Tonahill and we waited, and we went upstairs and waited—we ordered some coffee and a roll and we waited there about an hour and 40 minutes. The telephone rang and a news commentator was on the phone and Mr. Burleson answered it and Mr. Burleson was shocked from what he heard on the phone, that Mr. Percy Foreman, instead of coming down to his own room to see us, he went to the newspaper office somewhere or television or radio—I have no idea, and made a public display of himself, that he is withdrawing from the case. He indicated that he didn’t get along with the family and he didn’t like our attorney—our civil attorney.

Mr. BURLESON. Did you at any time see him personally?

Mrs. GRANT. I never met him personally.

Mr. BURLESON. He then got out of the case and hasn’t had anything to do with it since?

Mrs. GRANT. No.

Mr. BURLESON. Then, shortly thereafter, did you have an opportunity to have a conference with Dr. Hubert Winston Smith?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes; I did.

Mr. BURLESON. And did you, Jack, and everybody sign a contract with Dr. Hubert Smith?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes.

Mr. BURLESON. Employing him as chief counsel?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes—as chief counsel.

Mr. BURLESON. And keeping Mr. Tonahill and myself on?

Mrs. GRANT. Oh, yes.

Mr. BURLESON. Subsequent to that time, did your brother up in Chicago talk to a Mr. Charles Bellows?

Mrs. GRANT. Well, Mr. Bellows knew about this case right along because members of the family have known him for 20 or 30 years. I have never known him—I have heard of him—they went to him, and it’s got so sick and sickening here that Earl decided, as a friend, he could help us and he is in the background.

Mr. BURLESON. Would you say he is in more an advisory capacity?

Mrs. GRANT. Just as a good family friend, and he is, I understand, a very fine great criminal lawyer and he wants to help.

Mr. HUBERT. And you are speaking of the present as well as the past?

Mrs. GRANT. In the past he didn’t intercede because he figured Belli would be capable. Not that—now, wait a minute—I don’t mean to say that they are not—it’s just after there is so much to it and he has heard how the case was handled, and since Earl went to him.

Mr. BURLESON. And Mr. Bellows did make one trip down to Dallas?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes; he did.

Mr. BURLESON. And stayed a matter of hours and then flew on back?

Mrs. GRANT. That’s right.

Mr. BURLESON. So that to get back to what we wanted to answer the question he asked you earlier—who are the present attorneys now?

Mrs. GRANT. Phil Burleson, who is doing most of the work, Mr. Joe Tonahill, Mr. Hubert Winston Smith, and Mr. Charles Bellows.

Mr. BURLESON. And Bellows is in an advisory capacity to help any way he can?

Mrs. GRANT. That’s right. I’m sorry I forgot about some of them.

Mr. BURLESON. Now, going to this money situation—as far as you know, recognizing that you are under oath—as far as you know, there were no contributions of any large sum other than the one $250 that you have talked about.

Mrs. GRANT. That was the largest and the one and only of that kind.

Mr. BURLESON. Have you heard rumors that the Ruby defense fund received large sums?

Mrs. GRANT. I have heard they got—I think they’ve got close to a thousand dollars—I may be wrong.

Mr. BURLESON. I mean, have you heard rumors for instance, not too long ago I heard a rumor that Stanley Marcus gave $25,000; have you heard rumors similar to that?

Mrs. GRANT. I have heard many of those kind by different people but we haven’t received it.

Mr. BURLESON. You know nothing about any such large sum?

Mrs. GRANT. (Shaking head so as to indicate a negative reply.)

Mr. HUBERT. She is shaking her head—the answer is “no”.

Mrs. GRANT. Oh. I’m sorry; no.

Mr. BURLESON. Mainly, the only things you know about personally or have heard about from other members of the family are the sale to the magazine of the story, which you have told us about, and the small amount you have told us about?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes.

Mr. BURLESON. And you know of no organization that has given any sum?

Mrs. GRANT. Not that I know—they may be now—Earl is trying to talk to some organizations that he belongs to like B’nai B’rith, that he used to belong to—I don’t know. This is what I know—what I told you.

Mr. BURLESON. All right, but you don’t know of any—say—labor unions or civic clubs or anything like that that have given any money?

Mrs. GRANT. I’m sure—I’m sure they haven’t. In fact, wait a minute—Michael Levin, another good friend of the family—we know him only for 45 years and he’s my older brother’s friend since they were 14 years old and he has compiled a letter and is asking certain individuals that he knows—doctors, lawyers, big business people—to contribute, and when I talked to Eileen last, which was Saturday, she said, “We didn’t receive one—” some of them don’t even answer the letters and some say they haven’t got it or something else.

Mr. BURLESON. Now, there were some reports in the newspapers concerning the fact that Dr. Hubert Winston Smith was going to raise a lot of money.

Mrs. GRANT. Well, we hope he’s going to raise a lot of money—we hope he can raise sufficient money to cover legal fees. He’s interested in an academy institute of law and science.

Mr. BURLESON. Have you received any money from Dr. Winston Smith?

Mrs. GRANT. No; and I don’t think he’s gotten anything or even worked on it yet.

Mr. BURLESON. Now, to clarify my position in the thing—you have paid me, the family has paid me a total for everything, somewhere in the neighborhood of $700 or $800 or $900?

Mrs. GRANT. At the most—that’s right.

Mr. BURLESON. You are trying to get more together, though, aren’t you?

Mrs. GRANT. Well, now, wait a minute—Belli was supposed to pay out of that $13,000—$2,000—I asked him what he was going to pay you. He didn’t pay you?

Mr. BURLESON. Right.

Mrs. GRANT. As he told me.

Mr. BURLESON. Right.

Mrs. GRANT. And I know he didn’t pay you—that was up until the time he didn’t pay you at that time.

Mr. BURLESON. But I have entered into a verbal contract with you and the other members of the family for you to compensate me on the appeal and things of that nature—right?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes.

Mr. BURLESON. I’m through, as far as I am concerned, on that point. Now, is there anything other than what we have talked about here that you want to clarify further——

Mrs. GRANT. Yes; I want to clarify——

Mr. BURLESON. Wait, let me finish—or do you think that we haven’t talked about anything that you feel like is important that you would like to state at this time?

Mrs. GRANT. We have never received money from any unethical organization, labor work, gratis, friends, or relatives such as gangsters or unions or Jack has gotten one dime out of anybody of that kind, or racketeer money, bookies or any type of, you know, discriminating businesses of any kind. I know his finances, I know where he has gotten 99 percent of his money and that is from members of the family. In fact, they can ask Marian and Earl a good deal about that.

I also know the night of November 22 when Jack was with me the evening before—7:15—during that short time he was with me and they were talking about Oswald, I had made the statement and this is what I said. “Don’t worry,” and I told it to the FBI and I didn’t see it in the report.

Mr. BURLESON. “Don’t worry”—what?

Mrs. GRANT. “That lousy Communist”—I’m referring to, and I mean, I assumed this myself.

Mr. BURLESON. And you said it in Jack’s presence?

Mrs. GRANT. That’s right. “Don’t worry, that some lousy Communist will get him before anybody else does.”

Mr. BURLESON. The Communist will get him before anybody else?

Mrs. GRANT. That’s just what I said and I did not see it in this report—I don’t think I saw it. I did say it because I already talked to four or five people on the phone and I’m going to tell you why I said that—everyone on television and it seems it was Curry, which is our chief of police—says he’s someone that’s come out with three draft cards, he has been in Cuba and he defected to Russia and I think my mind is like 40 million other grownups, decided that he was a Communist sent here for this kind of a thing and the people that I knew that I speak to on the phone at that time or had been friends with all felt the same way or talked about it in that way. He couldn’t help but think that. It’s because what television has presented to the public, and then this thing in the paper and this was only Friday evening, and I have made that remark—I made it not only to him, to Pauline Hall, and to Madeline Blainey and to Emma and to Leo and whoever called I kept talking about that and made that remark, and I made it not only to him but to these others, and I kept talking about it because I was imbedded with that in my mind from television. They kept talking about it—they indicated he had three draft cards, he went to Russia and they threw him out and they planted him here and he went to Cuba and he had money and he was going to hire a plane.

Mr. BURLESON. Okay—anything else you want to go into this to clarify this?

Mrs. GRANT. Jack has always been a fighter for the Jews. Any—in the Army, if they look back, he didn’t mind—if you fought and if you cussed and they said words like sheeny or kike or Jew—he belted it out to them. I know my brother Jack. He told me of different incidents. One of the things that he loved about this President—he didn’t care what you were, you were a human being and Jack felt that this was one time in history that Jews are getting the break. He put in great Jewish men in office, they were fit to hold the office, and, of course, we are not Catholics and we never discuss religion in that effect, but my brother had such a great admiration for this man. It’s unbelievable.

Mr. HUBERT. Did Jack ever tell you why he shot Oswald?

Mrs. GRANT. The truth is this—here recently with his head out—he said he did it for Jackie and the kids, but I think he’s just looking for a reason.

Mr. HUBERT. No; I’m talking about the first few days?

Mrs. GRANT. He didn’t talk—for 10 days he never mentioned it and I never mentioned it, but in this white overall he had a little picture and on one side is the late President’s picture in color. It is the most beautiful picture of him that I have seen. On the other side is a prayer of the Catholics. I have never seen my brother carry anything like that. He is definitely a good Jew no matter what people think. He had kissed the President’s picture in front of me—right in front of me like a baby, and he held that card prayer and his lawyers have seen him, and I don’t know what denomination they all are—we don’t go that way. He just held that card there, there’s a little pocket in there—all he knows—let me put it this way—it maybe was in back of his mind something that I don’t know or nobody knows, but he loved the President, but he had no idea of doing this. In the first place——

Mr. HUBERT. It wouldn’t do any good, I don’t believe, for you to give your opinions.

Mrs. GRANT. All right.

Mr. HUBERT. If you know from what he told you, that’s another matter, but you say he has not told you that?

Mrs. GRANT. This was a shock out of my wits.

Mr. BURLESON. Let me ask you this—he didn’t tell you that, then?

Mrs. GRANT. No.

Mr. BURLESON. Now, something we haven’t gone into and might be relevant to this—Jack had a great acquaintance with the police, didn’t he?

Mrs. GRANT. Far greater than the average citizen of this city, unless they were a wife of a man.

Mr. BURLESON. Could you tell us what Jack’s attitude was toward the police?

Mrs. GRANT. They were very friendly, he admired them, he thought they were good people. On many occasions some policeman would have a night off and he would want to take his wife out on his anniversary and it’s in between paydays, Jack would let him have $10 and he would say, “I’ll write a check” and so Jack didn’t want to take the check and sometimes he would hold it 6 years and this check was still in there which they can see among his possessions. He admired the police department. He was very close. In fact, he entertained them in the club on their nights off and I’m positive some have been out to his apartment.

Mr. BURLESON. Do you know whether or not Jack knew Officer J. D. Tippit?

Mrs. GRANT. He said he knew a Tippit but it’s like me—there was a Tipton, a Tippit, and a Tipin (spelling) p-i-n, and a Tipton, and as far as I was concerned, even when Payton was talking to me, they were all the same man, until much later I found out there are three Tippits, there is a Tipton and a Tipin.

Mr. BURLESON. Did Jack, during the period November 22 through the last time you talked to him on the 23d or the 24th of November, say anything to you about the fact that Officer Tippit was killed?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes; on Saturday evening, during this 4-hour period I was very sick and I, of course—I was physically sick besides mentally sick now over the assassination of the President, and we talked about the Governor being shot and different things and he says, “You think you will be all right to go to the funeral,” but I was so sick.

Mr. BURLESON. Did he say what funeral?

Mrs. GRANT. Oh, yes; he meant the policeman’s funeral—Tippit’s. Of course, a lot of people don’t know—he went to all of the policemen’s funerals and, of course, there has been a few funerals—if it was a member of their families and if he knew the fellows he would go. He was that kind. He tried to pay his respects to people.

Mr. BURLESON. But he did have a conversation about Tippit?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes.

Mr. BURLESON. What did he say about Tippit being killed?

Mrs. GRANT. He said, “You think you will be all right”—and this was Saturday, and I said, “Yes,” and he said, “Well, do you think you will be all right?” And I hollered back like—I said, “Yes—yes,” and not to bother me. I was too sick—I didn’t even want to think of it, but I’ll be honest, all the time he’s talking to me I had it in my mind—“I’m not going, I’m too sick and I know I ain’t going to feel good Monday,” see.

Mr. BURLESON. In other words, he told you he had planned to go to Tippit’s funeral on Monday?

Mrs. GRANT. That’s right—no; he didn’t say “Monday”, he did not say Monday—he didn’t say the date.

Mr. BURLESON. Whenever it was?

Mrs. GRANT. He said to the funeral.

Mr. BURLESON. Tippit’s funeral?

Mrs. GRANT. Yes; but he says—he saw I was sick and he figured maybe I don’t want to get out and he says, “Do you think you can go to dinner tomorrow?” And he does take me to dinner.

Mr. BURLESON. But anyway, he had made arrangements or was telling you that he and you were going to the funeral of Tippit, is that right?

Mrs. GRANT. That’s correct—that’s what he thought.

Mr. BURLESON. But you didn’t feel up to it physically?

Mrs. GRANT. That Saturday I couldn’t see myself going, I’ll tell you, I just wanted to quiet him down.

Mr. BURLESON. And as far as you know. Jack did not know Tippit?

Mrs. GRANT. I don’t—I don’t know, all I could tell you is that Jack lived in Oak Cliff for a couple of years or maybe a year and a half and Tippit, being of that area, he could have run into him and known of him slightly. He didn’t know him as well as other policemen that I know he knows. I know of policemen much closer than him, but since this all happened, one of my coworkers, Leo Torti, showed me a magazine and Tippit was in our club sometime—a month previous to this—previous to his killing.

Mr. HUBERT. Was it a picture of Tippit?

Mrs. GRANT. It was a picture of Tippit, and he said, “Do you remember he talked to you up at the front, he was in in September or October or November sometime.”

Mr. BURLESON. Was that the Carousel or the Vegas?

Mrs. GRANT. The Vegas, and while I looked at him then I remembered that he looked familiar, but truthfully, you know, after the President’s assassination and this incident of my brother I didn’t see any newspaper. I didn’t look for anything to read. I had no television or radio on—I couldn’t take it.

Mr. BURLESON. Mr. Hubert, I think that is all I have along that line.

Mr. HUBERT. Mrs. Grant, earlier today, as a matter of fact, at the very beginning or prior to the beginning of the deposition, I showed you a list of names and telephone numbers and addresses on a document consisting of 37 pages, marked with a large “E”, and asked you to go through that list and make a check mark as to every name and number that had any significance to you at all.

Now, you have done so and I am going to ask, if I may, with the consent of your attorney, that I now read off that list of names as to those names that you have checked off, and I am going to request the reporter to make a special list of those that you have checked off and hand it to you so that you may make comments of your own, and then after consultation with your attorney, draft up an affidavit as to what comments you have to make with respect to each one of these people. In other words, you have indicated that the names that have been checked off have a significance to you.

Mrs. GRANT. That’s right.

Mr. HUBERT. I would like you to prepare notes and with the assistance of your attorney, draft an affidavit as to what significance each one of these names has. I understand that it will be perhaps a matter of 2 weeks or so before you can get that because there are quite a number of names.

Now, I will read those names so that the record will show which of the names you have marked off. I understand that as to those you have not marked off, those names have no significance to you; is that correct?

Mrs. GRANT. That’s right—I can’t relate them to anything.

Mr. BURLESON. May I make a suggestion—it may be a little time consuming, but if she could look back through that now that she has had an opportunity to testify and recall many, many things that she probably hasn’t thought of in some time—she could very quickly look at the ones she didn’t check?

Mrs. GRANT. Is it possible that some of those are license plate numbers—could you tell?

Mr. HUBERT. They seem to be mostly telephone numbers.

Mr. BURLESON. Yes; ma’am—that’s right.

Mrs. GRANT. May I explain something to you?

Mr. HUBERT. Yes; please.

Mrs. GRANT. All right. Jack would be driving along in his car and there would be a young lady drive up to the right of him. If she didn’t have a marriage ring and she looked cute and he thought she might like to see a little night life he would let her pass—he would look at her license number and copy the number and find out in the city hall where to send her—her name and address and the telephone—a complimentary card to come to the Vegas Club—he as a host.

Now, I told this to Payton and the other people and he would send these people cards because girls would come to the club and ask me, “Where is Mr. Ruby?” And I would say, “He’s not here.” And they said, “Well, he sent me this complimentary card.” Once I said something to him about it and he said “Oh, I sent this to a girl,” and I never thought anything about it. Finally, when he was arrested and I knew they found a lot of numbers, I said to him, “What are these numbers for?” And he said, “You know they are license plate numbers.”

Mr. HUBERT. I see your point—it might be better if we gave her the whole list.

Mrs. GRANT. I’m not going to steal it.

Mr. HUBERT. I can’t give you this list but I can get these names run off.

Mr. BURLESON. Suppose we do it that way and it may be that in time she can reflect better.

Mr. HUBERT. Suppose we do it that way, then, and instead of doing it the way we have agreed, I will supply you with a list of all of these names and ask that you look at all of them and possibly you will see some that you have overlooked?

Mrs. GRANT. That’s right—there may be one or two that I have overlooked.

Mr. HUBERT. And I will ask you, then, to give us an affidavit as to the significance of any of these.

Mrs. GRANT. I will be happy to.

Mr. HUBERT. I would ask that you give us the affidavit only upon your own knowledge.

Mr. BURLESON. Not as to what she has heard?

Mr. HUBERT. Well, if she indicates it is what she knows from her own knowledge as apart from what she has heard.

Mrs. GRANT. These are mostly strippers and waitresses that I know or have known, or comedians. Listen, what happened to the two boxes of names and addresses that they took out?

Mr. HUBERT. I don’t know, ma’am. It may well be that these are they.

Mrs. GRANT. That isn’t enough.

Mr. HUBERT. Off the record.

(Discussion between counsel and the witness as to the names shown on the list heretofore referred to.)

Mr. BURLESON. May I ask you—do you want this in one single affidavit, paragraph by paragraph?

Mr. HUBERT. I don’t think so. I think that the affidavit could be in the usual form.

Mr. BURLESON. What I am asking is, do you want a single affidavit as to each one of the names here?

Mr. HUBERT. I think not, I think the usual affidavit form—one that says that—having been handed a list and so forth, that she has the following comment to make on each and then in numerical sequence, and as to the rest of them there is no significance.

Mr. BURLESON. And one notary signature will be sufficient?

Mr. HUBERT. Yes.

Mr. BURLESON. And then there will be just one instrument?

Mr. HUBERT. Yes.

Mrs. GRANT. I do want to say this: Do you know Jack in his early teens and in the early thirties—he and these bad boys he later on disassociated himself with, they were people in the neighborhood—broke up Bund meetings in Chicago—do you know Chicago at all?

Mr. HUBERT. No.

Mr. BURLESON. For the record, I have no other questions to ask.

Mr. HUBERT. I haven’t either. Thank you very much.

Mrs. GRANT. All right.

TESTIMONY OF SAM RUBY

The testimony of Sam Ruby was taken at 10:55 a.m., on May 29, 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. Sam Ruby was accompanied by his attorney, Phil Burleson.

Mr. HUBERT. This is the deposition of Sam Ruby.

Mr. Ruby, my name is Leon D. Hubert. I am a member of the advisory staff of the General Counsel of 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, Mr. Ruby, the nature of the inquiry today is to determine what facts you know about the death of Oswald and of the life of your brother, Jack Ruby, and any other pertinent facts you may know about the general inquiry.

Mr. Ruby, I believe that you appear here today by virtue of a letter addressed to you by Mr. J. Lee Rankin, general counsel of the staff of the President’s Commission. Did you receive that letter?

Mr. RUBY. Yes, sir.

Mr. HUBERT. Do you remember the day that you did receive it.

Mr. RUBY. I believe it was Tuesday.

Mr. HUBERT. Under the rules of the Commission you are entitled to a 3-day written notice prior to the taking of your deposition, but the rules also provide that you may waive that notice if you wish and testify right now. Do you wish to do so?

Mr. RUBY. Yes; I do—I wish to testify.

Mr. HUBERT. I would like the record to show also that Mr. Phil Burleson, attorney at law, is present and representing Mr. Sam Ruby; is that correct?

Mr. BURLESON. Yes.

Mr. HUBERT. Now, will you stand and take the oath, please? And raise your right hand.

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

Mr. RUBY. Yes, sir.

Mr. HUBERT. All right. Will you state your full name, please?

Mr. RUBY. Samuel David Ruby.

Mr. HUBERT. How old are you. Mr. Ruby?

Mr. RUBY. 51.

Mr. HUBERT. Where do you reside?

Mr. RUBY. At 11616 Jamestown Road, Dallas, Tex.

Mr. HUBERT. What is your occupation?

Mr. RUBY. I am a washing machine repairman at washaterias.

Mr. HUBERT. Mr. Ruby, you have heretofore been interviewed by the FBI on four different occasions and I would like you to tell me about those. In order that we may proceed in that way, I wish to identify an interview of you on November 24, 1963, by FBI Agents Sayres [spelling] S-a-y-r-e-s, and Eckenrode. That interview consists of six pages—on the first page I have marked on the right margin the following: “Dallas, Texas, May 29, 1964, Exhibit No. 1, deposition of Sam Ruby,” and I have placed my name beneath that and on the right-hand lower corner of each of the succeeding five pages I have placed my initials for the purpose of identification.

Now, I ask you if you have had occasion to read this document which I have identified as Exhibit No. 1?

Mr. RUBY. Yes; I have.

Mr. HUBERT. I would like you to express your opinion as to the correctness of that report of the interview?

Mr. RUBY. They are correct as far as that is concerned.

Mr. HUBERT. Have you any changes or any suggestions or modifications in any way that you wish to make with respect to that statement?

Mr. RUBY. Well, I think he has them.

Mr. BURLESON. On page 6; in previously going over this, Mr. Hubert, I think there are some things he would like to comment on and I will ask him about it.

Mr. HUBERT. All right, sir.

Mr. BURLESON. On page 6, the first paragraph—there is a statement that “This man’s name was Leo, last name unknown. Jack fired this man because he said he was stealing from him.”

I’ll ask you whether or not you now have found out or since that time, have found out Leo’s last name?

Mr. RUBY. Yes; I found out his name.

Mr. BURLESON. What is that?

Mr. RUBY. Torti [spelling] T-o-r-t-i; I believe is the way he spells it.

Mr. BURLESON. And as to the second statement there about Jack firing this man, do you now know that that was not the situation?

Mr. RUBY. Yes: I found out that he was not quite competent as Jack would have him and there were a few things that he didn’t take care of, in other words, when my brother told him to do it and he neglected to do a few things.

Mr. BURLESON. And that was the reason for the firing of Torti rather than stealing?

Mr. RUBY. Right.

Mr. BURLESON. And subject to that correction you told Mr. Hubert, everything else appeared to be correct, as I understand it now?

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. HUBERT. Is it correct to state that when you made the statement that you have just modified on page 6 of Exhibit No. 1 that you had the impression that the man had been fired because he had been stealing from Jack and that impression has been clarified since that; is that correct?

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. HUBERT. How was it clarified?

Mr. RUBY. Well, since talking to Jack and at the time—Jack mentioned a few things that—when I come to the club, which I did a few times to visit him and see the show and to watch the admission being taken and put in the register properly, and that gave me the impression that maybe he just wanted to see that maybe Leo didn’t forget to do those things.

Mr. HUBERT. You have since talked to your brother Jack and he has clarified this matter, so that you are now able to state that your present understanding is that it was not because of an allegation of stealing, but rather because he was incompetent; is that correct?

Mr. RUBY. Right; and Jack’s idea about managing the club.

Mr. HUBERT. Now, I show you another report of an interview of you by FBI Agent Alfred Sayres on November 27, 1963, which I have marked for identification as follows: “Dallas, Texas, May 29, 1963, Exhibit No. 2, deposition of Sam Ruby,” and I have signed my name and all of which appears in the right margin of this one page document and I ask you the same question with respect to that, that is, if it is correct?

Mr. RUBY. Which paragraph is that?

Mr. HUBERT. The entire document—I am speaking of the entire document—I think you have just read it.

Mr. BURLESON. That’s the one you said was all right.

Mr. RUBY (reading instrument referred to). I think I recall when Jack was hospitalized, I think it was in Chicago.

Mr. BURLESON. All right, let me ask you a question—in regard to the second paragraph which says—“He said he knows of no time when Jack Ruby has ever been hospitalized for any reason.” Does something come to your mind in reference to the hospitalization of Jack?

Mr. RUBY. Yes; he was struck in back of the head, I think he was scalping tickets at one of the sporting events—at football or one of those events in Chicago—and the police officer told him not to scalp, told him to leave the premises where the sporting event was being held, and Jack refused to do so, and anyway—I don’t know what the deal was, but Jack was hit on the back of the head with a club or something like that, and he had a big bandage on the back of his head, and he was hospitalized then, but I don’t remember what year it was—I don’t remember.

Mr. HUBERT. All right, with that amplification or correction of Exhibit No. 2, is the exhibit otherwise correct?

Mr. RUBY. Well, they tell me—I talked to the family and they say that my mother was hospitalized in Elgin.

Mr. BURLESON. All right; let me ask you—you are now referring to the third paragraph and a sentence in there that says, “This was the Dunning Hospital on Irving Boulevard in Chicago?”

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. BURLESON. You have subsequently found out that it may have been a different hospital?

Mr. RUBY. Right; after I talked to some members of the family and they say it was in Elgin, Ill., which is a mental hospital.

Mr. BURLESON. And are there any other corrections or additions you want to make to that statement?

Mr. RUBY. Well, I found out since, that my sister, Eileen, had somewhat of a nervous breakdown since she came here to visit during the trial.

Mr. BURLESON. Let me ask you—you are now referring to the last paragraph that says, “He knows of no other indications of any mental illnesses in his family.” What have you found out since you made that statement?

Mr. RUBY. My sister Eileen was treated by a doctor during—following a nervous breakdown some years ago—we found out during the course of the trial when she was here.

Mr. BURLESON. Did you find out anything about Earl having any type of mental disorder, either in the service or subsequent thereto?

Mr. RUBY. Well, here it is.

Mr. BURLESON. You have that in there?

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. HUBERT. Do you know where your sister was hospitalized or treated?

Mr. RUBY. My sister Eileen Kaminsky—no; I don’t, but she did mention she was having some difficulty.

Mr. HUBERT. But you got that information from her?

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. HUBERT. And you didn’t know it at the time of the interview covered by Exhibit No. 2, to wit: November 27, 1963?

Mr. RUBY. No.

Mr. HUBERT. Other than that, this document is correct, that is Exhibit No. 2, is that right?

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. HUBERT. Now, I show you Exhibit No. 3, which you have already read, and that Exhibit No. 3 is an interview of you by Alfred Sayres, having been dated November 29. I have marked it for identification as follows: “Dallas, Tex., May 29, 1964, as Exhibit No. 3 to the deposition of Sam Ruby,” and I have signed my name below it and I ask you if that document is correct?

Mr. RUBY (reading instrument referred to). Well, the first paragraph there?

Mr. BURLESON. Let me ask you—in reference to the first paragraph starting with “Samuel David Ruby, 11616 Jamestown Road, Dallas, Tex., advised that he has no interest financial or administrative in the S & R Corp. He further advised that he has no interest financial or administrative in the Carousel Club or in the Club Vegas in Dallas, Tex., which clubs are operated by his brother, Jack Ruby. He further advised that he is not aware that his name has ever appeared on any document as an officer in the S & R Corp., or in any way in the operation of the Carousel Club or the Club Vegas.”

Have you, since you made that statement back on the 29th of November 1963, been informed of some facts that are contrary to what you stated at that time, and do you wish to explain to Mr. Hubert what that is?

Mr. RUBY. Yes; I found out from Ralph Paul, who was also a stockholder, that I was a member of the corporation and that I was issued shares of stock in the S & R Corp., but I have never seen them, I have never received them or have never seen any of the corporation papers, so I am just taking his word for it, and I still don’t know, but they say it and also in the Vegas Club, I hold a chattel mortgage on that, which has not fully been paid off. I don’t know whether you would consider that a financial interest in that or not. Jack never paid me off the full amount.

Mr. HUBERT. Does that have to do with reference to a loan that had been made by you to him?

Mr. RUBY. Yes, sir.

Mr. HUBERT. And at an earlier date upon which you got a judgment in your favor?

Mr. RUBY. That’s right, sir.

Mr. HUBERT. Well, we will touch upon that a little later, and I think that will be clarified. It is a fact, I take it, until you were advised by Mr. Paul that your name appeared on the corporate papers, you didn’t know anything about it until then?

Mr. RUBY. No; this last, this third paragraph, I think I found out from my brother Earl.

Mr. BURLESON. All right, let me make reference to a particular sentence in there. In the third paragraph of the statement, “He further advised that sometime during the fall or early winter of 1960, his sister, Marion Caroll, visited in Dallas and while here loaned Jack Ruby a fairly large sum of money. He said she later regretted making this loan and his brother Earl came to Dallas sometime in the spring of 1961 for the purpose of recovering the amount of this loan for Marion. He said he does not know if Earl was successful in this attempt or if Earl paid Marion the amount of the loan and thereby became a creditor of Jack Ruby.”

What have you found out since making that statement that might make some difference?

Mr. RUBY. Well, part of that I believe is true—Earl did come down here to try to get some of that money back, but I also found out that he let Jack have some money of his own because Jack was having some financial difficulties with the Carousel Club. It was changed then and I think it was the Sovereign Club or the Carousel.

Mr. HUBERT. Who did you find that out from?

Mr. RUBY. From Earl.

Mr. HUBERT. Did he say how much?

Mr. RUBY. No; he didn’t say—he may have said, but I don’t recall, but I know he says he let him have some money.

Mr. HUBERT. All right, are there any other changes or corrections to Exhibit No. 3?

Mr. RUBY. No; if he has an interest—I don’t know whether he has an interest—if it’s in writing—he may have.

Mr. BURLESON. Let me ask you—are you referring to the fourth paragraph that says, “He says he does not know whether or not Earl Ruby has a financial interest in the Carousel Club or the Club Vegas at Dallas, but if he does have, this interest may have arisen out of the above-mentioned loan.”

Mr. RUBY. Yes; that’s right—that is correct.

Mr. HUBERT. That is correct?

Mr. RUBY. Yes; that is correct, but I don’t know about it.

Mr. BURLESON. That’s what you have heard?

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. HUBERT. Is that all as to Exhibit No. 3, then?

Mr. RUBY. That’s right—well, now——

Mr. BURLESON. Let me ask you this—you are now referring to the last paragraph. “He concluded by stating that he has no knowledge of the financial or corporate structures of the S & R Corporation or of the Carousel Club or Club Vegas in Dallas, Tex.” Do you want to change that in the light of what you have heard since that?

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. HUBERT. Let’s put it this way—when that statement was given, that was true, you did not have that knowledge?

Mr. RUBY. That’s right.

Mr. HUBERT. What you want to say now is that you have found out something since?

Mr. RUBY. That’s right.

Mr. HUBERT. Will you tell us what it is?

Mr. RUBY. I found out that a certain amount of shares were issued to me in the S & R Corp. and that I was a vice president in the corporation.

Mr. HUBERT. And you did not know that at the time you made this statement?

Mr. RUBY. No, sir.

Mr. HUBERT. Whom did you find out those facts from?

Mr. RUBY. From Ralph Paul.

Mr. HUBERT. And that is the only source of your information, is that correct?

Mr. RUBY. Right.

Mr. HUBERT. Have you ever seen the shares?

Mr. RUBY. No; I never have seen them.

Mr. HUBERT. Have you ever seen any of the books or papers of the corporation that would indicate it?

Mr. RUBY. No, sir.

Mr. HUBERT. But your sole source of information as to your present statement is the information obtained from Ralph Paul?

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. HUBERT. Have you made any other inquiry about the matter?

Mr. RUBY. Well, we tried looking through the Carousel Club files up there—they had these metal files. We went through those and we couldn’t find any papers, any corporation papers and no one of the attorneys seemed to have them at the time and Stanley Kaufman, who was a personal friend of his, and he is an attorney here in town, he didn’t have them and he didn’t know where they were, and we couldn’t locate them.

Mr. HUBERT. Did you invest any money for the purchase of the shares of stock which apparently might have been issued to you?

Mr. RUBY. No; I didn’t invest any. Jack may have transferred some of the money that he owed me as a financial transaction.

Mr. HUBERT. What you mean is that he owed you some money and he may have issued the stock to you?

Mr. RUBY. To cover that.

Mr. HUBERT. As a way of paying the loan?

Mr. RUBY. Right.

Mr. HUBERT. But in any case he didn’t tell you he was doing so?

Mr. RUBY. No.

Mr. HUBERT. Have you any further comments as to Exhibit No. 3?

Mr. RUBY. No.

Mr. HUBERT. Now, I show you a document which purports to be a report of an interview of you by Alfred Sayres, FBI agent, on December 5, 1963, and for the purpose of identification I have marked that document, “Dallas, Tex., May 29, 1964, Exhibit No. 4 of the deposition of Sam Ruby,” and I have signed my name below that, and it consists of one page, and I ask you the same question with respect to that document?

Mr. RUBY. Well, this first paragraph—I found out that he had—that he did make a trip to Cuba.

Mr. BURLESON. Let me ask you—you are referring to the first paragraph which starts off: “Samuel David Ruby, 11616 Jamestown Road, Dallas, Tex., advised telephonically that he knows of no trip to Cuba made by Jack Ruby at any time. It was explained to Mr. Ruby that if such a trip were made it had been alleged Jack Ruby made the trip with a gambler from Fort Worth, Texas. He suggested that such a person may have been a man by the name of McWillie whom he has heard mentioned as a gambler and a friend of Jack Ruby.” What do you now know in reference to that, that you have found out since that time?

Mr. RUBY. Well, from Jack himself—this was in the Dallas County Courthouse in jail, that Mr. McWillie sent him the airplane tickets for him to go to Cuba and to be his guest while he was there.

Mr. HUBERT. When did you get that information from Jack Ruby?

Mr. RUBY. I don’t know—sometime ago—I believe it was during the trial—during the course of the trial.

Mr. HUBERT. You visited him at the Dallas County Jail, is that correct?

Mr. RUBY. Right.

Mr. HUBERT. And during the course of that conversation he told you that?

Mr. RUBY. Yes, sir.

Mr. HUBERT. Did you ask him about it or did he volunteer the information?

Mr. RUBY. I asked him about it.

Mr. HUBERT. And you think that was during the trial but before the verdict?

Mr. RUBY. Yes, sir.

Mr. HUBERT. About what part of the trial—do you remember?

Mr. RUBY. It was more or less during the beginning of it—most likely.

Mr. HUBERT. In February?

Mr. RUBY. Probably was.

Mr. HUBERT. Have you anything else to say about Exhibit No. 4?

Mr. RUBY. Everything is all right on it.

Mr. HUBERT. Now, I understand that your name and Jack’s—the family name was Rubenstein.

Mr. RUBY. That’s right.

Mr. HUBERT. And that you changed your name to Ruby?

Mr. RUBY. Correct.

Mr. HUBERT. Where was that change made?

Mr. RUBY. In Chicago, Ill.

Mr. HUBERT. And that was by a regular court proceeding in the courts of Illinois?

Mr. RUBY. Right, sir.

Mr. HUBERT. And did you know that Jack had also changed his name?

Mr. RUBY. I didn’t know definitely whether he changed it legally.

Mr. HUBERT. Did you know that your brother Earl had changed his name?

Mr. RUBY. We changed ours at the same time. We were in business together.

Mr. HUBERT. What I wanted to ask you is whether or not the change of name of you and Earl and Jack was by a common understanding, that you all would change your name?

Mr. RUBY. No; just Earl and I had a common understanding. We were in business together at the same time and we used the same attorney.

Mr. HUBERT. What business was that that you were in?

Mr. RUBY. We were in the advertising specialty manufacturing business.

Mr. HUBERT. What was the name of it?

Mr. RUBY. Earl Products Co.

Mr. HUBERT. Was it a corporation?

Mr. RUBY. No; just a company.

Mr. HUBERT. A trade name?

Mr. RUBY. A trade name.

Mr. HUBERT. Was Jack in that company?

Mr. RUBY. He was. He was in the company for about 2 years, I believe.

Mr. HUBERT. And that was during what years?

Mr. RUBY. 1946 and 1947.

Mr. HUBERT. Now, how did he come to leave it?

Mr. RUBY. We had a little difference as to the policies of the company and Earl and I more or less agreed on the way it should be run and Jack had other ideas, and, of course, when we couldn’t agree, we bought him out.

Mr. HUBERT. What did you pay him?

Mr. RUBY. I believe it was about $14,000.

Mr. HUBERT. Now, was that paid in cash?

Mr. RUBY. Yes; it was cash.

Mr. HUBERT. After you bought him out and you paid him in cash, did he come to Dallas?

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. HUBERT. Would you say he came almost immediately?

Mr. RUBY. Yes; in fact I think he may have made some trips here before we sold out, before he sold out to us—I’m not sure about that, but it seems like he had come down here to visit my sister Eva—Eva L. Grant.

Mr. HUBERT. Do you know of your own knowledge whether or not when he got here he had approximately $14,000 in cash, that is to say, when he came to Dallas?

Mr. RUBY. Well——

Mr. HUBERT. Let me put it this way—you knew he had the $14,000—you don’t know whether he had any debts or anything that would have consumed that $14,000, is that what you are saying?

Mr. RUBY. That’s right.

Mr. HUBERT. Now, when did you move to Dallas?

Mr. RUBY. In 1955—I moved here in July 1955.

Mr. HUBERT. And what was the occasion for your coming here?

Mr. RUBY. I sold out to my brother Earl in March of 1955 and at that time my youngest boy, Brion, had a little asthma difficulty and my sister Eva, who was residing in Chicago at the time, suggested that I come to Dallas and look into the building of homes in Dallas. She had some friends who were in the business of building homes, and I did build one residence in Oak Cliff, that is part of Dallas, in association with this lady friend of hers, and subsequently this woman I built the home with, she liked the home so well she bought it from me and I realized at the time that these building tradesmen here were kind of hard to get along with. In other words, they—some of them would drink on the job and material would be missing from the job and I thought I would rather get into something else that I was more familiar with.

Mr. HUBERT. Well, as I understand it, then, after you sold your interest to Earl, you made the decision to move to Dallas on a permanent basis?

Mr. RUBY. I came down here for a visit first.

Mr. HUBERT. When did you decide to make this your home—to make Dallas your home?

Mr. RUBY. After I sold out the company to Earl in March, I came down here in April.

Mr. HUBERT. Is that what you considered to be your permanent move to Dallas—in April?

Mr. RUBY. Well, I came down here for a visit and I decided I liked Dallas very much and I went back up north and, of course, at that time I was in the business of building this home and I told my wife—I called her on the phone and told her that we are going to move to Dallas and I went up there in the latter part of June and helped pack our furnishings and belongings and had them moved down here by truck.

Mr. HUBERT. You had already finished building the home here you were talking about?

Mr. RUBY. No; I was in the process of building it.

Mr. HUBERT. After you moved down here and that was in the summer of 1955, as I understand you, and after you had finished this building venture which you decided you didn’t want to continue in, what business did you go into by way of making a living?

Mr. RUBY. I went into—it was also the advertising specialty business—then with two fellows who were at that time engaged in it. They had a company under the trade name of Atlas American Specialties Co., I believe.

Mr. HUBERT. What was the name of the two men you are speaking of?

Mr. RUBY. One was Sam Lasser (spelling) L-a-s-s-e-r, and the other fellow was named Norman Weisbrod.

Mr. HUBERT. I think you have covered those transactions in your statements.

Mr. RUBY. I believe I have—I don’t think they asked me those questions, although I did mention that they were friends of Jack’s.

Mr. HUBERT. But you actually were business partners with them?

Mr. RUBY. Yes, sir.

Mr. HUBERT. How long did that last?

Mr. RUBY. That lasted until June 1956.

Mr. HUBERT. Well, what was the occasion of breaking that up, or what happened?

Mr. RUBY. We manufactured a product that wasn’t engineered or designed properly and we had a lot of rejects and we were having to pay freight both ways and——

Mr. HUBERT. What was the product?

Mr. RUBY. It was this plastic spinner that you see on these wires in front of service stations and used car lots and the weather—when they are spinning around would force them to crack in half and they would fall on the cars and maybe damage them and they weren’t satisfied with them and we found out later that this man who made our mould for us didn’t design it properly.

Mr. HUBERT. Where are Lasser and Weisbrod now, do you know?

Mr. RUBY. They are partners in the wholesale distributing business of sunglasses.

Mr. HUBERT. In what city?

Mr. RUBY. In Dallas—I believe the name is Mode (spelling) M-o-d-e, Imports.

Mr. HUBERT. Do you have occasion to see those people frequently?

Mr. RUBY. No; I haven’t seen those people in maybe—maybe for about 3 years.

Mr. HUBERT. They were friends of Jack’s?

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. HUBERT. Did Jack get you interested in this venture with these two men?

Mr. RUBY. Well, he introduced me to them and he did say that they had a very good business and that they were hard working fellows.

Mr. HUBERT. Did you invest any money with them?

Mr. RUBY. Yes; I did.

Mr. HUBERT. How much?

Mr. RUBY. $3,500.

Mr. HUBERT. When you dissolved, did they buy you out?

Mr. RUBY. No: the whole company was dissolved. We just liquidated it. We paid all of our debts.

Mr. HUBERT. Did you have any part of the investment returned to you?

Mr. RUBY. No, sir.

Mr. HUBERT. So, you lost the $3,500 in that venture?

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. HUBERT. After that was completed, what did you do?

Mr. RUBY. In the latter part of 1956, I investigated this coin-operated washateria business and I succeeded in purchasing and in installing a new coin-operated washateria at 3608 Oak Lawn in Dallas.

Mr. HUBERT. What was the name of it?

Mr. RUBY. It was Speedy Wash, I believe it was.

Mr. HUBERT. And that was just a trade name?

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. HUBERT. I think you borrowed some money from some banks to do that?

Mr. RUBY. Yes; I borrowed some money from some banks.

Mr. HUBERT. Did you have any other ventures since that, or is that still in existence?

Mr. RUBY. No; I lost my lease—my lease was up and Ward’s Drug Store next door somehow managed to get the lease on the store and, of course, I had to vacate and discontinue that place, but while I had that place of business I purchased the Bonnie Washateria at 2002 East 11th Street in Dallas and I also purchased another washateria at 2524 North Fitzhugh in Dallas.

Mr. HUBERT. Do you still operate those?

Mr. RUBY. No; I sold both of those.

Mr. HUBERT. How long ago?

Mr. RUBY. Well, this one at 2425 North Fitzhugh was the Ruby Washateria and I sold that 2 years ago last March—let me see—that would be 1962, wouldn’t it?

Mr. HUBERT. Yes.

Mr. RUBY. In March 1962.

Mr. HUBERT. That was the last one you sold?

Mr. RUBY. No; that was the Ruby Washateria. Then, the Bonnie Washateria, which was at 2002 East 11th Street, I sold just last December, I believe it was.

Mr. HUBERT. Whom did you sell that to?

Mr. RUBY. To a Mr. George Cernorsky.

Mr. HUBERT. What was the purpose of your selling it?

Mr. RUBY. Well, I had a lot of competition—there was a new washateria opened up there on the street from me about a block away next to a supermarket and I was sort of in an isolated corner myself and also I was at that time engaged in extensive repair work and I tried to go more into the repair of washing machines and I thought it was taking a lot of my time and I wasn’t making any money there and in fact I was losing money, and I thought—why have something like that on your hands and I would rather devote my time to repair work.

Mr. HUBERT. And that’s what you have done?

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. HUBERT. And that’s what you are doing now?

Mr. RUBY. Yes; but I also since that time—I also purchased a little manufacturing business in Coppell, Tex., which of all days, I purchased it on November 20, 1963.

Mr. HUBERT. What kind of business is that?

Mr. RUBY. It was a little stuffed animal business and the name of the company was the Autographic Mascots that they use around these colleges and universities and high schools—all of these schools have little mascots, you know, and the purpose was to have these kids—these various classes—have their classmates autograph them as sort of a remembrance or souvenir of their school days.

Mr. HUBERT. Are you still operating that?

Mr. RUBY. No; we sold that—we just sold that recently—April the 15th this party took over complete possession of it.

Mr. HUBERT. Whom did you sell it to?

Mr. RUBY. To Mrs. M. Frances Cole, I believe her name is.

Mr. HUBERT. C-o-l-e (spelling)?

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. HUBERT. Is she operating it now?

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. HUBERT. Now, I understand that you loaned some money to Jack in 1955; is that correct?

Mr. RUBY. That’s right.

Mr. HUBERT. How much and under what circumstances?

Mr. RUBY. Well, he said he was having difficulty in paying his Federal excise taxes and I let him have $1,000, and then sometime later—that was probably in May or June of 1955 when I let him have the $1,000, and then sometime later—that was probably May or June when I let him have the $1,000 and later that summer, it may have been in July or August, I let him have $4,500, and he had some more difficulty with the Government on his Federal excise tax and he had to pay off these taxes or they would have padlocked his club—it was the Vegas Club.

Mr. HUBERT. When you made these loans to Jack, did you receive any evidence of the loan, such as a note?

Mr. RUBY. Yes, sir; I had him make out a bill of sale to me for the Vegas Club.

Mr. HUBERT. Was that recorded in any way?

Mr. RUBY. Well, I think I still have it at home—I think I still have it at home. I don’t remember whether it was recorded or not—the attorney made it out.

Mr. HUBERT. I understand that you had to file a legal proceeding against Jack in order to recover your money?

Mr. RUBY. That’s right.

Mr. HUBERT. A judgment for it?

Mr. RUBY. That’s right, sir.

Mr. HUBERT. Was that a contested suit—did you file suit against him?

Mr. RUBY. Yes, sir; I did.

Mr. HUBERT. This bill of sale, was that sort of a security device or actual transaction of sale?

Mr. RUBY. It was an actual transaction of sale and also a security.

Mr. HUBERT. What you did—you sued on the note, I assume, that was involved; is that correct?

Mr. RUBY. No; we sued that I was the legal owner of the business and that he told me he would—in December he said he would purchase the club from me. He wasn’t satisfied with me as a partner and he said he was going to buy me out, but he failed to meet his financial promises and so I kept calling him and so I wasn’t getting any satisfaction and I hired an attorney. Mr. Harold I. Berman.

Mr. HUBERT. And then he filed suit on your behalf?

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. HUBERT. And he obtained a judgment?

Mr. RUBY. Right.

Mr. HUBERT. Was that a contested suit or did it go by default?

Mr. RUBY. It was contested—he had his attorney there, Mr. Klepak.

Mr. HUBERT. He actually went to trial?

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. HUBERT. And you won the case?

Mr. RUBY. Yes, sir.

Mr. HUBERT. And the result of the judgment was that you were declared to be the owner of the Vegas; is that it?

Mr. RUBY. Well, that Jack should—he agreed to pay me the amount of money he owed me, which at that time amounted to about $4,500. He had paid me some money.

Mr. HUBERT. Was that after you obtained the judgment that he agreed to pay you?

Mr. RUBY. Well, it was during the judgment—that’s the way we settled it in court.

Mr. HUBERT. In other words, the case was compromised, was it?

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. HUBERT. And the compromise was that he agreed to pay you—what sum of money?

Mr. RUBY. $4,500—that was the balance that he owed me at the time—at that time.

Mr. HUBERT. Then didn’t he then execute a note to you or was that just simply part of the judgment?

Mr. RUBY. That was part of the judgment and we have a legal document showing that the judgment was entered and agreed upon and I think was signed by the judge, and I have that document at home. It’s still on file in the records building—it has never been removed.

Mr. HUBERT. Has the $4,500 been paid off?

Mr. RUBY. No, sir.

Mr. HUBERT. How much is yet due upon it?

Mr. RUBY. Oh, about $1,300 or so.

Mr. HUBERT. Was it to be paid off in installments or any period of time or just what was the arrangement or compromise made?

Mr. RUBY. I believe he gave me a thousand dollars in the Court that day and they had to take a hundred dollars off for his attorney—his attorney wanted a hundred dollars from that thousand dollars, and so I only received $900 and the rest was, I believe, to be paid off in $200 monthly installments.

Mr. HUBERT. So, that in any case there now remains a balance of $1,300 due on that?

Mr. RUBY. Yes, sir.

Mr. HUBERT. Did you ever live in Youngstown, Ohio?

Mr. RUBY. Yes, sir.

Mr. HUBERT. During what period?

Mr. RUBY. From 1939 to 1941. I registered there for the draft.

Mr. HUBERT. What was your occupation there?

Mr. RUBY. I was what they call a siding applicator—you know—these siding manufacturers like Johns-Manville and Ruberoid and these various other siding manufacturers. I worked for a construction company and we secured contracts and I was one of their—what they call—shingle applicator.

Mr. HUBERT. What was the name of the company? Do you recall?

Mr. RUBY. The National Improvement Company.

Mr. HUBERT. Did you work with it only?

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. HUBERT. And that was for a period of 2 years?

Mr. RUBY. I think it was 3 years—1939, inclusive—1939 to 1941.

Mr. HUBERT. And then you went into the draft?

Mr. RUBY. And then I worked in Chicago for a few months and then I went and enlisted in the Navy in February 1942, and they turned me down because of my eyes, and I went to the draft board and tried to find out how soon my number was coming up and they took my name and address and it was within the next few days that they let me know that they wanted me to come down for an examination.

Mr. HUBERT. Do you know Ralph Paul?

Mr. RUBY. Yes; very well.

Mr. HUBERT. How long have you known him?

Mr. RUBY. Well, practically since I have been in Dallas—since 1955, I would say.

Mr. HUBERT. How did you meet him?

Mr. RUBY. Through Jack at the Vegas Club.

Mr. HUBERT. Were you ever in partnerships with him yourself?

Mr. RUBY. Yes, sir—I forgot to mention that. I just recall that now. We were in an ice cream business venture.

Mr. HUBERT. What was the name of that; do you know?

Mr. RUBY. I think it was the Rainbow Ice Cream Palace.

Mr. HUBERT. Where was it located?

Mr. RUBY. In Wynnewood Shopping Center.

Mr. HUBERT. What happened to that venture?

Mr. RUBY. It just wasn’t successful.

Mr. HUBERT. How long did it last?

Mr. RUBY. Well, let’s see—about 4 months I believe—March, April, May, and June—I think it only lasted 4 months.

Mr. HUBERT. Have you had any other business arrangements or enterprises with Paul?

Mr. RUBY. No—but I was in another business with a fellow named Robert Eisman.

Mr. HUBERT. I-s-m-a-n [spelling]?

Mr. RUBY. No—[spelling] E-i-s-m-a-n.

Mr. HUBERT. What was that business?

Mr. RUBY. Washateria—we were partners in a coin-operated business—washateria at the time—two of them.

Mr. HUBERT. What was the name of this?

Mr. RUBY. One was the—what was the name on it—it was on 1713 South Ervay Street.

Mr. HUBERT. That was different from the other two you have mentioned here?

Mr. RUBY. Yes, sir.

Mr. HUBERT. How long did that arrangement last?

Mr. RUBY. Oh, about 3 years.

Mr. HUBERT. When was it dissolved?

Mr. RUBY. This is 1964—that must have been in March 1960, or 1961.

Mr. HUBERT. Is this man Eisman still in Dallas?

Mr. RUBY. No; he’s living in Fort Worth at the present time—he is in the washateria—not washateria, but coin-operated washing machines at the present time.

Mr. HUBERT. What caused you to dissolve that arrangement with Mr. Eisman?

Mr. RUBY. We had an awful lot of vandalism there in that neighborhood. They cut down water hoses and they would break into the machines and there was just too much vandalism to be profitable.

Mr. HUBERT. Have you ever been charged or convicted of any felonies?

Mr. RUBY. No, sir.

Mr. HUBERT. What has been your relationship with Jack since you came to live in Dallas?

Mr. RUBY. How do you mean that?

Mr. HUBERT. Well, as brothers—do you visit socially often—you have told us about some of the financial matters between you and I was wondering what was the personal relationship between you?

Mr. RUBY. Well, outside of that difference we had about the club, he used to come over and visit us for the Jewish holidays and sometimes we would invite him over for an evening to dinner.

Mr. HUBERT. On the average, how often did you see him a year, for instance?

Mr. RUBY. Well, I would see him, oh, maybe anywhere from three to six times a year.

Mr. HUBERT. Did you have other contacts with him by phone or otherwise?

Mr. RUBY. Yes; we talked to him on the phone on different occasions. There was nothing important—I mean—just about maybe something about his family or how he was doing or inquire about the children.

Mr. HUBERT. What about your relationship with his sister, Mrs. Eva Grant?

Mr. RUBY. Well, I have seen her more often and we are off and on like brothers and sisters and we argue at different times and maybe in a week or so we’ll forget about it and make up. She has her own views on things.

Mr. HUBERT. Did you have occasion to see Jack during the period September 25 through November 24, 1963?

Mr. RUBY. September—you say?

Mr. HUBERT. Yes.

Mr. RUBY. Yes—September 25, yes, I believe I did. I may have seen him at the club one night and then on one occasion, I remember it was the week of Halloween, because the man I was working for went out of town and Jack called me—he called me—I don’t know whether he called me or my wife called me, and wanted me to go to Fort Worth with him to look at this twistboard factory which he was handling as a distributor at that time and I wasn’t too anxious to go, but he insisted and he said maybe if that distributing business went all right, he would like me to become interested in that.

Mr. HUBERT. Did you go with him then?

Mr. RUBY. Yes; I did. I had some work but I thought I could make it up either later in the day or the following day—just repairing washing machines. I was working for a man that had three washaterias at the time and I took a ride with him to Fort Worth to see this manufacturing plant.

Mr. HUBERT. Did you enter into the venture with Jack?

Mr. RUBY. No, sir.

Mr. HUBERT. Do you know to what extent he did?

Mr. RUBY. No; he told me that he was a distributor for these boards and he was thinking maybe of going into the manufacture of them.

Mr. HUBERT. When did he tell you that?

Mr. RUBY. At that time.

Mr. HUBERT. Do you know whether your brother Earl had any interest in it?

Mr. RUBY. No, sir; I don’t.

Mr. HUBERT. You don’t know to this moment whether he does?

Mr. RUBY. No, sir.

Mr. HUBERT. Jack never mentioned that Earl might be interested?

Mr. RUBY. No—no; he never mentioned one way or the other whether Earl would be interested.

Mr. HUBERT. Do you recall whether you had any contact whatsoever with Jack during the periods, say, from the 16th of November through the 24th of November—that would be about the week before the President died until Oswald was shot?

Mr. RUBY. Yes; I think he called me on the phone a few times and wanted me to go visit my sister Eva in the hospital.

Mr. HUBERT. Did you go?

Mr. RUBY. No, sir; I didn’t.

Mr. HUBERT. Now, do you remember any other contacts between you and Jack other than the one you just mentioned concerning visiting your sister in the hospital?

Mr. RUBY. Well, he may have called me twice on the phone—I didn’t see him during that period. The last time I saw him was the week of Halloween—it was on a Wednesday, I believe.

Mr. HUBERT. In other words, then, the last time you saw him was before Oswald was shot?

Mr. RUBY. That’s right, sir.

Mr. HUBERT. That was approximately a month or 4 weeks before Oswald was shot?

Mr. RUBY. That’s right; before.

Mr. HUBERT. And you recall at least one telephone conversation which you have just made reference to about visiting your sister in the hospital?

Mr. RUBY. Yes—he was very upset about me not going. I promised him I would go and then I happened to be very busy working for this washateria owner and I thought it was more important I stay at my job and maybe go at night, but he became very upset about me not going and sort of became abusive.

Mr. HUBERT. That was all over the phone?

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. HUBERT. Did he contact you after the President was shot?

Mr. RUBY. No, sir—no, he didn’t contact me.

Mr. HUBERT. Did your sister do so?

Mr. RUBY. No, sir.

Mr. HUBERT. In other words, between November 22d and the time Oswald was shot, you had no communication of any sort whatsoever with either your sister, Eva Grant, or your brother, Jack Ruby; is that right?

Mr. RUBY. That’s right, sir.

Mr. HUBERT. Were you aware of his reaction to the President’s death during the period November 22 through November 24?

Mr. RUBY. No, sir; I had no idea. I was busy at the time—I was working for this man, Mr. Dean, and I also was doing repair work at night and I was working pretty late at night and I would get home late and get up early in the morning and had to be at the job at 8 and so my days and nights were fully occupied at that time and previous to that, too.

Mr. HUBERT. I think you have stated in one of these statements that Mr. Paul said he was going to give you 50 percent of the stock of the S & R Corp.; did he say why he was going to do that?

Mr. RUBY. Yes, sir; that was after Judge Sterrett denied an application for a new license and he wanted to turn his 50 percent over to me so that I should have the obligations of the club, which I wasn’t in favor of because I didn’t have the financial backing to take it over. I have never received that 50 percent.

Mr. HUBERT. Why did he want to give it to you?

Mr. RUBY. So that he wouldn’t have to assume any financial responsibilities incurred by the corporation.

Mr. HUBERT. And you refused it?

Mr. RUBY. I didn’t refuse him at the time, but I didn’t agree one way or the other, but I suggested my sister Eva take over the 50 percent of the corporation.

Mr. HUBERT. Were any shares of stock ever delivered to you?

Mr. RUBY. No, sir; not any shares.

Mr. HUBERT. Mr. Burleson, do you have any questions you would like to ask of Mr. Ruby?

Mr. BURLESON. Yes. First, Sam, have you, since this incident occurred back on November 24, 1963, had an occasion to have any threats on your life, your well-being, your future or that of your children, or your family?

Mr. RUBY. Well, there was one man that called and said he was a friend of Jack’s and he wanted to come over and he said that he was from up North—I believe he was from Minnesota and he had come down here to look for a job—he wanted to get a job and he was a friend of Jack’s and it didn’t sound sensible or logical and he had talked to my wife, and we didn’t give him our address or any other information and he said he wanted to talk to Jack.

Mr. BURLESON. But you have had no direct threats?

Mr. RUBY. No, sir.

Mr. HUBERT. When was this occurrence?

Mr. RUBY. The conversation—well, my wife would know more about that, I believe, since she talked to him—I believe it was in December.

Mr. HUBERT. You have never heard any more from this individual?

Mr. RUBY. No, sir.

Mr. BURLESON. Now, you have been visiting Jack recently, have you not, in jail?

Mr. RUBY. Yes, sir.

Mr. HUBERT. Can you tell us what you found Jack’s condition to be since the verdict and at the present time?

Mr. RUBY. Well, to be frank with you, I always thought there was something odd about Jack, but I thought he was just the type of a person that’s hard to get along with and that was before—years ago—but since I have been visiting him lately, his mental condition has deteriorated very rapidly. He keeps saying that people are being killed in the streets and he hears screams in the building of people being slaughtered.

Mr. BURLESON. Are these just people or are these Jewish people?

Mr. RUBY. Well, he says, “People,” and then he says “Jewish people” and he always imagines that Earl is killed and his children’s bodies are being dismembered.

Mr. HUBERT. Does he say anything about Eva?

Mr. RUBY. No; he tells me to leave and sell my home and get out of Dallas. He says that the police hate him here.

Mr. HUBERT. Does he tell you to do anything as far as self-destruction is concerned?

Mr. RUBY. Yes; he has done that quite a few times. He says he is going to take his life and I’ve tried to talk him out of it, and tell him everything will be all right.

Mr. HUBERT. He said he was going to take his own life?

Mr. RUBY. Yes; and I have never heard him talk like that before.

Mr. BURLESON. Does he appear to be normal to you?

Mr. RUBY. No; he has that—I don’t know how to describe his look, but he has sort of a look of a person that is being tortured or tormented by something and I don’t know what you would call it, but it is sort of a—he has that look in his face of not seeing you, like he is looking—staring at you but not seeing you.

Mr. HUBERT. Does he recognize you?

Mr. RUBY. Yes; he does.

Mr. HUBERT. When did you last see him?

Mr. RUBY. Last Sunday.

Mr. HUBERT. How many times since his conviction have you seen him prior to last Sunday?

Mr. RUBY. Well, I have seen him at least once a week.

Mr. HUBERT. And this condition that you have described that he has, did it exist right after the conviction or was it a progressive matter?

Mr. RUBY. Well, it has been progressive and during the course of the bond hearing and the change of venue and the jurors and the trial itself—he didn’t seem to communicate with me very much. He didn’t have anything to say to me, so to speak, like he didn’t have all of his faculties, you might say.

Mr. BURLESON. Now, let me ask you—do you know anything about the financial situation of the so-called defense fund—the money that has come in for the defense of Jack Ruby, have you had anything to do with it yourself?

Mr. RUBY. No; I had nothing to do with it, but I understand they sold a story. Do you want to know about that?

Mr. BURLESON. Well, we know about that. That’s the newspaper story that this Woodfield fellow bought?

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. BURLESON. Have you personally received any money from any source from persons who have contributed it to you to use in the defense fund?

Mr. RUBY. No, sir.

Mr. HUBERT. You have not received even any money in the mail; is that right?

Mr. RUBY. Not one penny.

Mr. BURLESON. And no one has given you any to be utilized for the defense?

Mr. RUBY. No, sir.

Mr. BURLESON. Have you contributed any of your own, other than the expense that you have been out personally during the trial and things of that nature, have you contributed any?

Mr. RUBY. No, sir.

Mr. BURLESON. And have you heard from any members of the family who are maybe more aware of it than you are that many large sums have come in, other than this one for the sale of the news story?

Mr. RUBY. Yes: I heard that one come in from one of Jack’s friends in Chicago.

Mr. BURLESON. Is that the $250?

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. HUBERT. Who was the friend, do you know?

Mr. RUBY. Kelman, I think his name is Joe Kelman.

Mr. HUBERT. Do you know that man?

Mr. RUBY. Not personally; I met his brother years ago. His brother was a personal friend of Jack’s, Morris Kelman, and they are, I believe, in the auto windshield glass manufacturing business in Chicago.

Mr. HUBERT. Then, I believe there was another check of some sum from Walter Winchell?

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. HUBERT. Do you know how much that was?

Mr. RUBY. My sister Eva said it was for $100.

Mr. BURLESON. You were reported as saying to some news media that there was several thousand dollars?

Mr. RUBY. I didn’t say that. I said it was very generous—I didn’t give any amount. I didn’t even say whether it was a dollar or what amount it was.

Mr. BURLESON. Do you know of any other sums of money that may have come in, of any substantial sum?

Mr. RUBY. No; I don’t.

Mr. BURLESON. That’s all I have. I need to go off the record for a moment. I need to talk to Mr. Ruby on a matter that we had not completely discussed.

Mr. HUBERT. All right. Would you like to leave the room for your conference?

Mr. BURLESON. Yes; please.

(At this point counsel Burleson and the witness, Sam Ruby, left the conference room for approximately 10 minutes, returned thereto, and the proceedings of Mr. Ruby’s deposition continued as follows.)

Mr. BURLESON. I would like to go back on the record and ask you, Mr. Ruby, is there anything you would like to bring out—anything that you would like to tell Mr. Hubert here on any version of the case, either something we have already talked about, to amplify, explain that, or either something new—some new area that you feel like that he would be interested in?

Mr. RUBY. Well, I don’t know, except that I talked to some of the people from the Liquor Commission, the Texas State Liquor Commission, and they think that he may have felt sorry for the Tippit family as well as the Kennedy family, and he always took it personally when a police officer was killed. I mean, he made it his business to contribute something financially when an officer was killed.

Mr. HUBERT. Who told you that?

Mr. RUBY. Well, they are up at the Liquor Commission in Oak Cliff—I don’t think I know that just now.

Mr. BURLESON. That would be the Liquor Control Board—some of the personnel there?

Mr. RUBY. I believe that’s it.

Mr. BURLESON. Do you know their names?

Mr. RUBY. I believe one was Johnny Cranks.

Mr. HUBERT. When was this told to you?

Mr. RUBY. Well, they called me up there to inquire whether I was a member of the corporation.

Mr. HUBERT. And then they volunteered their opinion as to what his motivation was?

Mr. RUBY. Yes; that was what they thought and I talked to Jack a few times at the county jail and he says he felt very sorry for the Kennedy family.

Mr. BURLESON. Did Jack ever tell you why he shot Oswald?

Mr. RUBY. No; he never mentioned his name to me. He never mentioned his name.

Mr. BURLESON. You were in the service?

Mr. RUBY. Yes, sir.

Mr. BURLESON. I know one of Jack’s brothers was in the intelligence?

Mr. RUBY. I was in the Army intelligence.

Mr. BURLESON. You were in the Army intelligence—for how long?

Mr. RUBY. Well, we were stationed at Langley Field in 1942 and 1943 and a Captain Southern swore me in as an agent, to keep an eye on Communists and Nazi saboteurs and to see whether anybody was leaving subversive literature around for the boys to read, and if I did see anybody acting suspicious to write a letter into a certain box number in Newport News, Va., which was about 20 miles away from Langley Field, and have a general theme, in fact, he says he checked up on my family history and all of the members of the family, and to write just like I am writing to my family, in fact he mentioned my brother Jack and write a letter like you are writing, “Dear Brother Jack: Last night we went to town and we had a few beers and we went to a movie and had a few dances and Pvt. John Smith has been acting kind of queer lately,” and he said somewhere in the letter mention that and they would take care of it from then on, and I had to sign my name Johnny Newman.

Mr. HUBERT. What was the captain’s first name; do you recall?

Mr. RUBY. I don’t recall his first name, but his name was Southern.

Mr. HUBERT. How do you spell it?

Mr. RUBY. S-o-u-t-h-e-r-n [spelling].

Mr. HUBERT. And he was part of what organization?

Mr. RUBY. The Army Air Force—it was the Third Army Air Force based at Langley Field, Va.

Mr. HUBERT. But what was the specific organization in which he was in?

Mr. RUBY. Well, our outfit was called the Tenth Tow Target. They used to tow targets and train pilots at the same time for these anti-aircraft guns, to fire these guns behind the planes.

Mr. HUBERT. All right.

Mr. BURLESON. Do you have anything else you want to bring out on any subject or matter of any nature that you think either the Commission or Mr. Hubert would be interested in?

Mr. RUBY. Well, all I know is that Jack had a very deep feeling about this anti-Semitism in this country and, of course, with the massacre of the 6 million Jews in Germany, and he had that on his mind quite a bit, and he was the most religious of the boys in the family. The brothers went to say prayers for my dad after he passed away for a full year, which is customary, of course, we went for a few months—the other brothers, but Jack is the one that went for a full year, and he observed going to the synagogue more regularly than the other brothers did.

Mr. HUBERT. Did he, in fact, go to the synagogue regularly, do you know?

Mr. RUBY. Well, all I can say is that he went more regularly than the other brothers.

Mr. HUBERT. How do you know that?

Mr. RUBY. Well, he used to call from there or when he would be talking, he would say he was going to the synagogue and he was coming from there, and in the conversation he would say he talked to the rabbi and he would call and say he was going there and we would invite him over for dinner or he would go early in the morning and we would invite him over for a late breakfast.

Mr. BURLESON. Do you think of anything else you want to develop or bring out?

Mr. RUBY. No.

Mr. HUBERT. All right, sir. Now, there has never been, Mr. Ruby, any interview between you and me other than what took place in this room since this deposition began, is that correct?

Mr. RUBY. That’s right, sir.

Mr. HUBERT. So that all that has ever passed between you and me has been recorded in this room—right?

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. HUBERT. Thank you very much. I’m glad to see you, Mr. Ruby, and I’m glad you came down.

Mr. RUBY. Thank you.

Mr. BURLESON. Thank you, Mr. Ruby, and I will see you outside in just a second.

TESTIMONY OF JACK L. RUBY

The testimony of Jack L. Ruby was taken at 11 a.m., on July 18, 1964, at the Dallas County Jail, Dallas, Tex., by Mr. Arlen Specter, assistant counsel of the President’s Commission. Present were: Bell P. Herndon and W. James Wood, special agents of the FBI; Clayton Fowler and Joe H. Tonahill, counsel for Jack Ruby; William F. Alexander, assistant district attorney for Dallas County, Tex.; Allan L. Sweatt, chief criminal deputy for Dallas County, Tex.; E. L. Holman, chief jailer; and Dr. William Robert Beavers, observer.

Mr. SPECTER. May the record show that present at this time are Mr. Clayton Fowler, chief counsel for Jack Ruby; Mr. Joe H. Tonahill, cocounsel for Jack Ruby; Mr. William F. Alexander, assistant district attorney for Dallas County, Tex.; Mr. Allan L. Sweatt, chief criminal deputy and polygraph operator for Dallas County, Tex.; Mr. Bell P. Herndon, the polygraph operator and special agent of the Federal Bureau of Investigation; Mr. W. James Wood, special agent of the Federal Bureau of Investigation; Odell Oliver, court reporter; and Arlen Specter, assistant counsel of the President’s Commission.

We have discussed preliminarily the procedure to be followed on the polygraph examination, where those currently present may remain while the polygraph operators, Mr. Herndon and Mr. Wood, explain the questions to Mr. Ruby, and then everyone would leave except the operators, Messrs. Herndon and Wood, the court reporter and I, and the question now subject to being resolved is the issue of whether anyone will be present from the sheriff’s office.

As you know, the President’s Commission is trying to bring its work to a close and the Chief Justice promised a polygraph test and that was 6 weeks ago tomorrow. There have been a lot of things we have had to work out, and I think it all ought to be on the record. I would want to give everyone an opportunity to put any request right on the record in any way you want; and, of course, I think that all your objections and comments about this proceeding should go on the record. After you have so stated, I will state responsively the Commission’s position on these proceedings.

I will say further that there is no closed mind on these issues and that they will have to be weighed and evaluated by the members of the Commission themselves.

Mr. FOWLER. Let me first suggest then—why don’t I discuss this with Jack?

Mr. SPECTER. That’s fine.

Mr. FOWLER. And then Jack may say whether he wants to go ahead with this and how I have advised him, and that he has on numerous occasions requested it, and I will tell him that the Chief Justice promised to give it to him and they are here ready to do it, which I am going to tell him, and if he insists on it, I can’t and won’t try to hold him back.

Mr. TONAHILL. That’s a good suggestion.

Mr. SPECTER. Fine; and if he has changed his mind for any reason, I will just want to have it on the record, and that will conclude the issue, so far as the Commission is concerned.

Mr. FOWLER. Let’s see—he’s on what floor?

Mr. TONAHILL. 6-M.

Mr. FOWLER. Let me step down and chat with him for just a few minutes.

Mr. TONAHILL. Do you want me to go with you?

Mr. FOWLER. I may need you later.

Mr. SPECTER. Let the record show that Mr. Fowler left the room, and in approximately 5 minutes thereafter, returned to the room from his conference with Mr. Ruby.

Mr. FOWLER. He says he’s going to take this test regardless of his lawyers, and he says, “By God, I’m going to take the test.”

Mr. TONAHILL. Well, you know the law is in his favor and that he is presumed to be sane, and there can’t be anybody speak for him but himself.

Mr. FOWLER. I have advised him, and I have read this letter to him, and I have explained all of this to him when I talked to him.

Mr. TONAHILL. If he wouldn’t take it now——

Mr. FOWLER. Well, I won’t want to go back there then.

Mr. TONAHILL. If he ever gets his hands on you, they’ll let him have it.

Mr. SPECTER (addressing the court reporter). I hope you have had a chance to put these observations on the record.

Mr. FOWLER. I also want this further put into the record as to how many requests, in addition to this one, that were made for this test.

Mr. SPECTER. We would be willing to accede to that request, and as you know, we have been trying to set this up for a long while. The circumstances of the Commission’s timetable require us to proceed today; that is, either proceed or find out from Mr. Ruby that we would not ever proceed along this line. I have requested Sheriff Decker to have a physician standing by so that he may protect, to the fullest extent possible, Mr. Ruby’s physical condition if he needs medical attention. As to your first request for Dr. Tanay of Detroit to be present, the Commission would permit that. But since Dr. Tanay is not now present, there is no way to implement that. We have no objection to having any other doctor here who can be present here today.

With respect to request No. 2 made during our preliminary discussion, that the results of the tests be held confidential, the Commission has heretofore on other questions refused to make any advance commitment because of the nature of its responsibility to make the final decision on disclosing or not disclosing what it concludes is in the public interest. Or stated differently, the Commission just won’t be committed. The results of this examination will not be disclosed to anyone until the Commission itself has reviewed the results and makes a decision, bearing many factors in mind, including your request, to have the information remain confidential.

Mr. FOWLER. All right; now in the past, of course we feel this—that as to the other information that we assumed would be confidential and would not be released to the press, this of course has been done, and we strenuously request that this matter not be released to the press.

(At this point Sheriff Decker entered the room.)

Mr. DECKER (addressing Mr. Fowler). Jim Kerr caught you making a 50-yard dash and they are circling around downstairs and Jim Kerr is just going in circles wanting to know what Clayton Fowler is doing up in the jail.

(At this point Sheriff Decker left the room.)

Mr. SPECTER. Mr. Fowler, as to your last statement, I don’t know what you are referring to specifically, and without taking it up in terms of specific items, I couldn’t comment about it, and I don’t know that it would be really useful to go into it at this time. The material given to the Commission, where the Commission says it will be kept confidential, to the best of my knowledge, has always been honored. There are in these proceedings many chains and it is not possible in some cases to pinpoint responsibility, but the Chief Justice and the Commission have honored every commitment they have made heretofore. If they feel in their judgment—of course they have the paramount responsibility for the entire investigation—that the results of this proceeding ought to be kept secret, you may be assured that it will be implemented to the fullest extent possible.

Mr. FOWLER. Well, of course, our request is that this matter be held strictly confidential because it is being given at the request of the Commission and for the benefit of the Commission, and we feel that the Commission and only the Commission should have this information, and before any of it is released for public consumption or private consumption, No. 1, the sheriff’s office, the district attorney’s office, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, or any other agency of the Government outside the Warren Commission—that we be told that this is going to be done.

Mr. SPECTER. That request, I think, can be honored in that you will be notified in advance of any publication, that the Commission will make a publication if in fact it ultimately decides to make such a publication. Now, there is one facet of this matter which is difficult to control and that is the fact itself that a polygraph examination is being administered. I do not know at this time what circulation has been given to this fact, if any, by any of the people who are involved, since it has touched many bases among many parties in this proceeding. That fact itself may have already been disclosed, but with respect to the results of this examination, I propose to keep those within the custody of the Commission through the Federal Bureau of Investigation and its operators, who are conducting this test, and their report will be made available only to the Commission until the Commission decides whether it should be made public.

Mr. FOWLER. All right. Now then, I would like for this record to also show that this letter from Mr. Gordon Shanklin has been handed to you and that you are fully appraised of what this letter contains, and I want the record to further show that on this date (1:05 p.m.), not later than 10 minutes ago, I talked with Jack Ruby. I read the letter to him. I explained it to him to the best of my ability. I also advised him that the family legal advisor, Mr. Sol Dann, an attorney of Detroit, had made these requests, and that following these requests that I as Jack Ruby’s attorney advised him not to take the test, and that if he did so he would be doing it against the advice of his attorney, against the advice of his family advisor’s attorney, and against the advice of the family, and that notwithstanding this, Jack said that he had requested this before either Mr. Sol Dann or myself came into this case as attorneys, and that Chief Justice Warren had promised that he would give him this test, and that regardless of what Mr. Dann’s wishes would be, together with his entire family and together with his attorneys of record, that he insisted on this test, but that a further proceeding of it would be against the advice of his lawyers, and at this time we do respectfully request that the Commission not disclose any of the questions that will be submitted to Jack Ruby to any other person other than the operators, the investigator for the Warren Commission, and his attorneys present, Mr. Joe Tonahill and Clayton Fowler; and that more specifically that these questions not be given to anyone connected with the Dallas Sheriff’s Office, the Dallas Agency of the Bureau of Investigation, the Dallas District Attorney’s Office, and more specifically, Mr. Bill Alexander, who is present in the room at this time and representing the district attorney’s office, and Mr. Allan Sweatt, who is present in the room and representing the Dallas Sheriff’s Office. Anything else, Joe?

Mr. TONAHILL. I might go back on a little background whenever you finish.

Mr. FOWLER. I wish you would.

Mr. SPECTER. With respect to the notation for the record concerning the contents of the letter from Mr. Gordon Shanklin, special agent in charge of the FBI office here in Dallas, that identical information has been conveyed through the Federal Bureau of Investigation to Mr. J. Lee Rankin, general counsel of the Commission. Having considered those requests and those factors, the general counsel has instructed me to proceed to have this polygraph taken today if Mr. Jack Ruby wants to have this polygraph taken in accordance with his prior request to the Commission on June 7, 1964, and the commitment given by the Commission through the Chief Justice that such a polygraph examination would be given. With respect to the request that none of the questions be made available to anybody from the Dallas Police Department or the Dallas District Attorney’s Office or the Dallas Sheriff’s Office, the Commission’s position on that is that if the questions are to be submitted in advance to the counsel for the defendant, that there is equal standing on the part of the State to have similar treatment.

Previously, I outlined for you the procedure that we proposed to adopt during the course of this polygraph examination, to wit; having the people present in the room who are here at the present time, which includes Mr. Clayton Fowler and Mr. Joe Tonahill, representing Mr. Ruby; Mr. William F. Alexander, representing the Dallas District Attorney’s office; Mr. Allan L. Sweatt, chief criminal deputy of the Dallas Sheriff’s office; Mr. Bell P. Herndon, special agent of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and Mr. W. James Wood, special agent of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, who are going to administer the polygraph examination.

The questions to be asked of Mr. Ruby at the time of administration of the examination would be set forth to Mr. Ruby so that he would understand them fully; and with the other people present, it would be known what questions were going to be asked of Mr. Ruby in advance of the actual asking.

Then, it was the Commission’s view that everybody should leave the room except for the two special agents of the FBI who would be administering the test, the court reporter and me, so that the minimum number of people would be present.

I have conveyed that request to Sheriff Decker and he has insisted that a member of his staff be present as custodian of the body of Jack Ruby, since he has that responsibility. It is not yet determined who that will be, but the Commission proposes to proceed on the administration of the polygraph test under those circumstances, with the only open question being the identity, if anyone, of the representative of the sheriff who has charge of the custody of the body of the defendant here or Jack Ruby, since he is not a defendant in this proceeding, actually.

Mr. TONAHILL. I should like to say as one of Jack Ruby’s defense counsel along with Chief Defense Counsel Clayton Fowler, that when I entered the defense of Jack Ruby back in December of 1963, with Mr. Belli, at that time we insisted before undertaking his defense that he agree to a polygraph test and truth serum test or any other scientific test that would reflect whether or not there was a connection between him and Lee Harvey Oswald or in any respect a conspiracy. He agreed and insisted at that time that there was no such conspiracy. He did not know Lee Harvey Oswald and there was no connection between them and that he would undertake any type of a scientific test that we could have made available for him. Jack Ruby has insisted on those tests ever since.

We have from time to time proposed to the FBI through Mr. Gordon Shanklin and others, that a lie detector test be given Mr. Ruby. We have filed motions to obtain scientific tests. Mr. Ruby has insisted on these tests very strenuously and has felt that I have stood in the way of him obtaining them.

I was present during the Warren Commission deposition of Jack Ruby along with Mr. Jim Bowie of the district attorney’s office some 6 weeks ago when Chief Justice Earl Warren on numerous occasions responded to Jack Ruby that he had it in his power to make available to him some day in the future a polygraph test and would do so at Mr. Ruby’s request.

Now it has come down that Chief Justice Earl Warren and the Warren Commission are now in the process of keeping faith with their promise to Mr. Ruby.

Mr. Fowler and I have talked with the various psychiatrists, Drs. Tanay, West, and Beavers, each of whom feels that because Jack Ruby is of unsound mind and mentally ill, this polygraph test is a mistake and would produce nothing by way of an accurate result of deception, truth, or conclusiveness in any regard and feel that it should not be made.

As cocounsel with Mr. Fowler. I yield to his position here and concur with him, but as a personal individual, very close and very knowledgeable of the entire history of this polygraph demand on the part of Ruby, it is my personal view that even though he is of unsound mind, does not know right from wrong, is mentally ill, and his psychiatrists are opposed to it, unless he is given the polygraph test there will never be any satisfaction in any respect. His condition might even grow worse without it, and in the interest of satisfying everyone concerned, the State, the Nation, and the world—that in all probability if this polygraph test is not given, there will be left hanging in the clouds certain doubts as to whether there was a conspiracy between Ruby and others or Oswald, or whether they knew each other, despite the fact that his mental condition may be such that it will not demonstrate any effective results.

Nevertheless my personal view is that it might be well to go forward with it, and certainly if all appellate efforts are exhausted on behalf of Jack Ruby and his case is affirmed all the way up, which I feel that it won’t be; if his family and Jack Ruby should refuse to undergo a polygraph test, certainly the Board of Pardons and Parole may look with disfavor upon that fact and infer possible premeditation on his part in the shooting of Oswald or a possible conspiracy and might rule against him in granting clemency, in the event it ever reached that stage. And, irrespective of whether an effective polygraph test can be run of this man at this time in his present mental state or not, I personally feel that an effort should be made to do it.

Mr. SPECTER. For the record I want to add that requests have been received by the Commission, requests made on behalf of Mr. Ruby, to have a polygraph test, prior to the time the Commission heard his testimony on June 7 of this year, and that the Commission has not initiated any effort whatsoever to have a polygraph test taken but is only conducting these proceedings today to make available to Mr. Ruby this examination if he wishes to have it at this time, in accordance with the promise made by the Commission through the Chief Justice on June 7.

I want to be emphatic and clear on this question that we do not now and have never asked for or insisted on a polygraph examination. If Mr. Ruby does not want to have such an examination taken, that is acceptable to the President’s Commission on the Assassination. As we discussed informally before we started a record proceeding, in this event we are willing to have anything put on the record that Mr. Fowler or Mr. Tonahill wish to place on the record as his attorneys; and of course, we do not wish to, have not, and will not interfere in any way with your representation of Mr. Ruby, as his counsel, so that he may take your advice and proceed in accordance with your advice.

If you wish to put on the record any medical evidence, I am authorized to have that done here today or at a later date. Mr. Tonahill and I discussed this matter by telephone last Wednesday and I indicated to him at that time that the Commission was willing to have such evidence placed on the record as an aid to their evaluation of whether to place any credence in the tests which are going to be administered.

It has been somewhat uncertain as to whether this proceeding would go forward today, so that counsel for Mr. Ruby may wish to provide supplemental data by way of testimony, letter, affidavit or in whatever form you choose. The Commission will be glad to receive it and to weigh it in evaluating whatever these tests may disclose.

May the record further show that arrangements have been made to have Dr. Norman Beavers available, adjacent to the room where these proceedings will take place, in the event that there is any medical attention required for Mr. Ruby.

Mr. TONAHILL. Sheriff Decker gave me this phone number and said he would be standing by.

I would like to add to Mr. Specter’s comments that it is correct that numerous letters have been written by me to the Warren Commission requesting the polygraph test prior to the intervention of the psychiatrist, who felt that it would be a mistake.

At no time has the Warren Commission agreed and stated that they desired the polygraph test. The test, as I understand, has grown out of the agreement between Mr. Ruby and Mr. Chief Justice Earl Warren at the hearing that occurred here about 6 weeks ago.

I should like to say that I asked Sheriff Bill Decker to get in touch with Dr. William Beavers, and this was as a result of the conversation with Mr. Specter, and have Dr. William Beavers available so that he could be interrogated subsequent to the running of the polygraph test. Is that agreeable?

Mr. SPECTER. Yes; that is agreeable, if you desire to do just that.

Mr. FOWLER. Further, let’s add this, Joe, that in whatever capacity or degree it would help to substantiate that in our opinion we believe that Jack Ruby is of unsound mind.

We would like to submit at a later date a report by Dr. Emanuel Tanay, a practicing psychiatrist in Detroit, Mich., a report by him based upon the examination of Jack Ruby, together with the report of Dr. West, and we would respectfully request that this matter be furnished to you at a later date. We have it available but not for today, and we would like to make it a part of this record, as suggested by counsel.

Mr. SPECTER. Mr. Fowler, the Commission will be glad to receive any evidence that you may wish to submit on all the questions which you have raised during the course of this proceeding.

Mr. TONAHILL. Whoever is in charge of his body ought not to be an expert on this thing [referring and indicating the polygraph machine].

Mr. FOWLER. You and I have done all we can do on it. I am not going to physically manhandle Jack Ruby.

Mr. TONAHILL. No; Jack Ruby is going to insist on doing it, and until he is declared a ward through an insanity proceedings, he is presumed to be able to exercise his own consent.

Mr. FOWLER. That’s right.

Mr. SPECTER. Let us discuss this off the record a moment.

(Discussion between Mr. Specter and Messrs. Tonahill and Fowler off the record regarding presence in the room of anyone able to operate a polygraph machine other than the FBI operator, Mr. Herndon.)

Mr. FOWLER. Let us put this into the record, that we would further object to anyone in the sheriff’s office being present. If the only valid reason is one of security, and I would like the record to reflect that we are within the confines of the Dallas County Jail, namely, on 7-M, which is a part of the Dallas County Jail, and that it would appear to me to be virtually escape proof, and as I understand previously when Mr. Warren was here, that he was allowed to talk with Jack Ruby by himself and without the presence of anyone from the sheriff’s department, which further leads me to believe that this is not for security purposes only, and we will object to the presence of anyone from the Dallas County Sheriff’s office.

Mr. SPECTER. In response to your objection. Mr. Fowler, for the record I will state that the Commission has requested that its preference be honored to have no one other than the FBI personnel administering the test, the court reporter, and me present, but that Sheriff Decker has taken the position that the prisoner, Jack Ruby, is his responsibility and that he must have someone on his staff present. Sheriff Decker did agree to substitute as that person the chief jailer, who has no knowledge of or experience with polygraph operation, so that the confidentiality of these proceedings is secure in my view.

Sheriff Decker’s position is not that Mr. Ruby may escape, but there may be an incident which would require having someone present, and the sheriff feels that someone from his staff ought to be present. In view of his position on that, it is my conclusion that such a proviso is justifiable under all the circumstances.

With respect to the conversations between the Chief Justice and Mr. Ruby, I was present at the time those conversations were held and they were held in the corner of the room in which we are now sitting, following the formal testimony of Mr. Ruby at a time when there were numerous people in another portion of this room in which we now sit, so that at no time was the Chief Justice alone with Mr. Ruby in any separate room. Mr. Tonahill was present at that time and I think can confirm my version.

Mr. TONAHILL. We were all present and the sheriff’s department men did leave, the personnel there—the sheriff and his deputies. He left him in the custody—we left Ruby’s body in charge of a Secret Service man.

Mr. SPECTER. Elmer Moore.

Mr. TONAHILL. Yes, sir.

Mr. SPECTER. And at that time there were also present Mr. Tonahill, Mr. Rankin, Congressman Ford, Mr. Ball of the Commission’s staff, and I was present. At no time did the Chief Justice have any conversations privately with Mr. Ruby except that, at the very end, Mr. Ruby, the Chief Justice, and I were in a corner of the room conversing, and there were many others present at that time, and I think Mr. Tonahill can verify that.

Mr. TONAHILL. I was present.

Mr. SPECTER. Now, for the record, I want to state that Mr. Fowler has previously gone to discuss the matter with Mr. Ruby to determine what are Mr. Ruby’s desires in terms of having a polygraph examination, in view of the stated position of the Commission that it does not request such an examination, but has made such an examination available to Mr. Ruby if he wants one, pursuant to his request to have such an examination, made during the course of Commission proceedings on June 7, 1964, and the response by Chief Justice Warren that the Commission would offer him such a polygraph examination in response to his repeated requests.

Mr. FOWLER. Now, I would like to answer regarding the presence of a deputy sheriff here. I believe you advanced the theory that it was thought by Mr. Decker that there might be something that might occur during the giving of the polygraph tests that perhaps might disrupt things.

We further feel and respectfully request that if there is this feeling by the polygraph operator himself, that he will be conducting this test some 10 or 12 feet from a door, and if the sheriff is allowed at all, that he be allowed to stand at the door and any other exit that might be in the building, to not be able to view the chart or any part of it. This would be our request to that.

Mr. SPECTER. The conditions set forth in your request will be granted and the sheriff’s custodian will be present at the door so that he may not have access to the chart, to insure the confidential nature of these proceedings.

I think we are now ready to have Mr. Ruby come in, but before he comes in, let’s take a 5-minute recess.

Let the record show we are taking a 5-minute recess.

(Proceedings recessed and resumed as stated.)

Mr. ALEXANDER. I assume that once Jack is brought in, there will be complete silence.

Mr. SPECTER. Yes. Mr. Alexander, do you want to make your request for the record?

Mr ALEXANDER. Yes; please. At this time for and on behalf of the Dallas County, Tex., district attorney’s office, a request is made that the Warren Commission furnish the district attorney’s office a list of the questions asked Jack Ruby in this polygraph examination, and that a copy of the recording made by the polygraph machine be furnished the Dallas County district attorney’s office. We would also like a copy of the interpretation of the test, but whether or not we are given an interpretation of the test, we do want the aforementioned questions and actual tape of the polygraph machine.

Mr. SPECTER. Mr. Fowler, you may want to make a similar request as to the results.

Mr. FOWLER. In behalf of Jack Ruby and as attorney for Jack Ruby, I respectfully request that the Warren Commission deny the request of the Dallas district attorney’s office for the following reasons: Number One—that this is a matter of request that has been made by Mr. Ruby to the Warren Commission only, that if the district attorney’s office were furnished with these questions and answers and any other matters pertaining to the giving of this polygraph test, it might and could and very well effect the outcome of his case that is now on appeal before the court of criminal appeals here in the State of Texas, and we respectfully request that the request by the district attorney’s office be denied by the Warren Commission in all of their requests for this information.

On the other hand, we who represent Jack Ruby, respectfully request that we be furnished a copy of the questions that will be asked and that if some determination is made as to the answers and the outcome is ever made public, that we be furnished the information of the outcome of the tests.

Now, this is off the record.

(Statement by Mr. Fowler to Mr. Specter, off the record, requesting that Mr. Ruby be advised again when brought into the room for the test, the requests of his attorneys and family with respect to taking the test.)

Mr. SPECTER. In response to those two statements, no commitment can be made on behalf of the Commission anticipating the action of the Commission in advance of knowledge by the Commission of the results of the tests, and any additional evidence which may be submitted on the competency of Mr. Ruby which may aid the Commission in the evaluation of the results of the polygraph examination. The requests of Mr. Alexander and Mr. Fowler will be transmitted to the Commission and will be carefully studied by the Commission before any final decision is reached.

With respect to a list of questions, the procedure as previously outlined will permit all parties to be present when the questions are enumerated, so that the questions asked of Mr. Ruby will be a surprise to no one, but will be discussed in his presence and in the presence of representatives of both the district attorney’s office and Mr. Ruby’s defense counsel, so that there is no limitation to the taking of notes on the questions that may be asked.

With respect to the results, including a copy of the results themselves and a copy of the interpretation, no commitment can be made until the Commission has examined the results in this matter fully.

With respect to affecting the outcome of any subsequent proceedings, the Commission has exercised the greatest possible care in avoiding the influencing of the State court proceedings.

The action taken by the Commission has been designed to fulfill its function, while at the same time not interfering, or interfering to the minimal possible extent, with the State court proceedings. Now, before we get Mr. Ruby in, do you want to make a request for his doctor; and when we get Mr. Ruby in, we will make the other statement and then we will be able to go ahead, but I don’t think we want to go through any more with him present than we have to.

Mr. TONAHILL. Yes; it is requested that Dr. William Beavers, who has been retained by Jack Ruby’s family to observe and treat Jack Ruby, be present during the examination in order that he may observe and render any expression that he may have to offer that will be of benefit to the Commission as well as to Jack Ruby’s mental health condition, with special reference to interpreting the results of the polygraph tests, and as an aid and guide to the Commission in its interpretation of it as to what weight and value to give to it.

Mr. SPECTER. Does that request, Mr. Tonahill, go only for the time that everyone is present, or do you want him present, while the examination itself is going on?

Mr. TONAHILL. While the examination itself is going on—before and during the examinations—before the examination and during the actual examination, so that he can actually observe the actual examination.

Mr. SPECTER. In view of the expression of concern that has been made by Dr. Tanay, that request will be granted, since it is made by counsel for Mr. Ruby at this time.

The JAILER (on entering the room). He will be right up.

(Mr. Ruby entered the hearing room at 2:23 p.m.)

Mr. SPECTER. May the record now show that Mr. Ruby is present. Mr. Ruby, I am Arlen Specter. How are you today?

Mr. RUBY. Fine; how are you?

Mr. TONAHILL. Jack, that’s Mr. Specter of the Warren Commission.

Mr. SPECTER. Mr. Ruby, why don’t you have a chair over here—we’ve been getting things set up, and let me introduce you to everybody so you will know who everybody is.

This is Miss Odell Oliver, who is the court reporter, and she will take your testimony just like we did before.

Miss OLIVER. How do you do, Mr. Ruby?

Mr. SPECTER. And I guess you know Dr. Beavers, and this is Mr. Wood. He is one of the polygraph operators with the FBI, and this is Mr. Herndon, one of the operators and with the FBI also. This is Mr. Alexander, and your name, sir?

The JAILER. Mr. Holman, E. L.

Mr. SPECTER. This is Mr. Holman.

Mr. RUBY. Can Fowler remain here after I start with the interrogation?

Mr. SPECTER. Yes; Mr. Ruby. The procedure which we’ve discussed is this and this is subject to agreement of all sides, and we’ve been through it, but let me go through it with you. We are going to conduct the polygraph examination in a standard way, which involves a series of questions, about eight or nine in duration. Before we start with the series, the questions will be explained to you in advance so that you will know exactly what the questions are to be and you will know what the operator means by the questions. He will explain them so that there is no possibility of any confusion in terms of what the questions mean so they won’t surprise you. You will have full awareness of what is going to be asked.

At that time, everybody who is present in this room will be present when the questions are discussed in a general way. So that the record may be complete, let it show that Mr. Fowler is here and Mr. Tonahill is here, and Mr. Alexander is here, and Mr. Herndon and Mr. Wood are here. Dr. Beavers is here, and Chief Jailer E. L. Holman is here, Odell Oliver is here, and of course, I am here. Those are the only people who are here now and they are the only people who will be present when we explain each series of questions to you, so that you understand what is happening and what questions are going to be asked.

Now, scientifically, it’s preferable to have as few people possible at the time the examination is administered as we can, so for that purpose, we are trying to cut down the number as much as we can. We had originally thought that the only people present would be the two operators, the court reporter and I. Now we have Mr. Holman here on the custody question, and then your counsel requested especially that Dr. Beavers be present at the time of the administration of the tests. It is our desire to have only those people present, which would mean Mr. Alexander wouldn’t be here and Mr. Tonahill wouldn’t be here and Mr. Fowler wouldn’t be here at the time the test is administered.

Mr. RUBY. I would like to have Mr. Fowler here in preference of Dr. Beavers. May I request that?

Mr. SPECTER. Yes; you may request that.

Mr. RUBY. And how soon will the answers be released, as soon as possible?

Mr. SPECTER. Well, the answers are going to be compiled by the FBI and then they’re going to go to the Commission, to Chief Justice Warren of the Commission, and I am not in a position to say to you when the answers will be released. That will be up to the Commission. They will have to study the results of the tests and make a decision on the time of release of the tests. Everything is up to them as to whether they will be released, what the release will be, and when it will be made.

I want to say preliminarily before we start, that the Commission has not requested the test, but it is responding to the request which was made on your behalf by letter, before the Chief Justice questioned you on June 7.

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. SPECTER. You requested then that a test be given.

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. SPECTER. We want it to be perfectly plain for the record that the Commission isn’t pushing this matter, but it’s only in response to your request, and that you have learned counsel here who are representing you, and you are aware of that. We want to make it pointed and clear that anything you say could be used against you, and it is possible for adverse or unfavorable inferences to be drawn. Whenever a defendant who is involved in a criminal proceeding says anything, anything he says could be held against him.

I know Mr. Fowler and Mr. Tonahill have advised you of that and that has been brought to your attention, but this record should show that we called it to your attention as forcefully and as clearly as we could, so that you would understand what we are doing here.

Mr. ALEXANDER. Mr. Specter; let me explain one thing. Under Texas law, nothing that Jack says here could be used against him in Texas.

Mr. RUBY. Bill, I’m not quarreling with that, and I know you certainly are not going to help me, I know that, but I want to get a copy to the chief as soon as I can, Chief Holman over there.

Mr. SPECTER. You would like to do what, Mr. Ruby?

Mr. RUBY. To have the report as soon as the results are analyzed.

Mr. SPECTER. That, as I say, is up to the Commission, but you understand what I have said to you here?

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. SPECTER. And under those circumstances do you continue to request that such an examination be given you?

Mr. RUBY. Yes: any questions you want to ask, anything pertaining to this—I will answer anything without reluctance. There’s no punches to be pulled. I want to answer anything and everything.

Mr. SPECTER. Mr. Fowler, I think, wants to make a statement for the record too.

Mr. RUBY. In fact, Bill, you can stay here If you want to.

Mr. FOWLER. Jack: let me ask you this: A little while ago I came up into the jail cell and talked with you, is that correct?

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. FOWLER. And at that time I advised you that the Warren Commission people were here at your request to give you a polygraph test?

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. FOWLER. I also showed you a letter from Mr. Gordon Shanklin of the FBI here in Dallas, that he had received requests that were submitted to him by Mr. Sol Dann, who is the legal advisor to your family?

Mr. RUBY. Right.

Mr. FOWLER. And that certain requests were made there, No. 1, that the tests would be given in the presence of Dr. Tanay, with no outsiders present, with particular reference to anyone from the district attorney’s office or the sheriff’s office, and further, that it would have to be assured that the results of the tests would be held confidential by the Commission, and that under no circumstances made available to the district attorney or the press. Further, that written authority for such examination be obtained from Mr. Earl Ruby. Now, I have explained this to you, have I not?

Mr. RUBY. Yes; can I change that now?

Mr. FOWLER. Well, let me go on further, Jack, and as your attorney of record, at that time I advised that you not take nor submit to this polygraph test.

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. FOWLER. And at this time, as your attorney of record, I advise you in the presence of these gentlemen and Commission, these people representing the Commission, that you will be doing so against the advice of your counsel.

Mr. RUBY. Right.

Mr. FOWLER. And against the advice and wishes of your family.

Mr. RUBY. Right.

Mr. FOWLER. Now, do you still at this time wish to take the tests?

Mr. RUBY. Yes; and I would also like to add that, if I have a right to say this—I want it be made immediately that the district attorney’s office should receive whatever is necessary in regard to the answers to the district attorney, and as I once wrote to District Attorney Henry Wade, that I didn’t want to publicize it, but if possible they may—I would prefer that naturally, but at that time it was so easy to get a lie detector test, I wrote to Henry Wade; that it is not for publicity purposes but only for authenticity and the truth. So, I agree with everything except that if I may supersede the attorney and say I’m not concerned about withholding anything. I want it to be released immediately to all parties concerned.

Mr. SPECTER. Well, your request on that, Mr. Ruby, will be transmitted to the Commission and they will consider that very carefully in reaching whatever conclusion they do about releasing it.

Mr. RUBY. I want to supersede the attorney, Mr. Dann, in stating that I want everything to come out immediately, as soon as possible, and whoever wants to know the results—what the results are—I want it to be known, regardless of which way it turns.

Mr. SPECTER. Mr. Ruby, you want Mr. Fowler to remain with you during the course of the examination?

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. SPECTER. In view of Mr. Ruby’s request, it is my view that it ought to be honored and that the group is of such a size now that it ought to remain as it is constituted at the present time for both sessions.

We have done our best to limit it, but since it is a legitimate request here to include Mr. Fowler, we will sit in this group during all portions of the test.

Mr. Ruby has indicated that he has no objection to having Mr. Alexander here, and if one side is here, the other may be.

Mr. ALEXANDER. Mr. Specter, if it will help the ultimate in the tests, I have no objection to leaving the room, and perhaps Mr. Tonahill, I think, could very well leave, or if Jack has no objections and perhaps wants us here, we will stay.

Mr. SPECTER. I am advised by Mr. Herndon that the technical considerations are not persuasive as to one or two more people, with this many present, so that if it’s acceptable to all parties, specifically Mr. Ruby, we will just proceed with the group that’s presently here during all portions, the explanatory portion to Mr. Ruby and the actual testing itself.

Is that agreeable, gentlemen? Is that agreeable with you, Mr. Ruby?

Mr. RUBY. Well——

Mr. FOWLER. Jack, let me make this request. I don’t think Bill can read a polygraph test, but I would feel better as your attorney if Mr. Alexander were not present.

Mr. RUBY. I don’t mind everyone remaining here.

Mr. FOWLER. Well, of course, again—let me advise you that if Mr. Alexander remains—let me advise you of your rights—that if Mr. Alexander remains, he is a member of the district attorney’s staff, the answers to these questions could be used against you at some later date, if they are adverse to your rights, and as your attorney, I advise you that it would be my suggestion to you and request to you that Mr. Alexander not be allowed to remain.

Mr. RUBY (addressing Mr. Alexander). Will you object?

Mr. ALEXANDER. Not at all, Jack.

Mr. RUBY. All right.

Mr. SPECTER. If Mr. Alexander is willing to abide by your request, Mr. Ruby, then your request will govern as far as the proceeding is concerned.

Mr. FOWLER. Now, Mr. Alexander and I—when it comes to me representing you or any other client—I represent one client and he represents the other. He, in my opinion, is a perfect gentleman, but in the courtroom he is a perfect prosecutor, and I like to be as near a perfect defense lawyer as I can, and I believe that by allowing him to stay here——

Mr. RUBY. No, Fowler——

Mr. FOWLER. Well, I’m thinking of you now. I’m asking you to do this, and again, this is entirely up to you, so it’s your decision. I think I have fully explained to you the reason why we would not want him here.

Mr. RUBY. Now, I’ve got the monkey on my back now.

Mr. FOWLER. Well, you’ve got more than a monkey on your back, Jack. This is your decision.

(Conference between Mr. Fowler and Mr. Ruby out of the hearing of this reporter and others in the room.)

Mr. RUBY. Well, whatever my attorney suggests, I guess I will have to follow through.

Mr. SPECTER. Your request then is that Mr. Alexander not be present?

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. ALEXANDER. That will be fine.

Mr. SPECTER. If it is all right with you, we will proceed on that basis, but of course, that will go only for the time the test is actually being administered to you.

Mr. FOWLER. That’s right.

Mr. SPECTER. Mr. Bell Herndon will now start to explain the proceedings to you. He is the operator of the polygraph, the principal operator here, Mr. Ruby. As I explained to you, Mr. Herndon and Mr. Wood, are joint operators for the FBI on the polygraph or lie detector test and Mr. Herndon will take over now to explain just how it’s going to work.

Mr. HERNDON. Thank you. Mr. Ruby, first of all, I want to show you my credentials so you will know that I am a special agent and I am from the FBI laboratory in Washington, D.C. (Exhibited instruments to Mr. Ruby.)

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. HERNDON. Perhaps to set the record straight, Mr. Specter, I might mention that my colleague, Special Agent Wood, is not actually a polygraph examiner, but he is here to assist me in this examination. Is that all right?

Mr. SPECTER. Yes, that’s fine to specify that exact status.

Mr. HERNDON. He is here to assist me and to help me in the interrogation of this gentleman.

Mr. SPECTER. Mr. Herndon, before you start on the questioning, we will want to put Mr. Ruby under oath, so pause at that point, but proceed now to explain what is going to happen.

Mr. HERNDON. Mr. Ruby, actually prior to any polygraph examination which the Federal Bureau of Investigation gives to anyone, we have a consent form that I want to read to you, and as I want to remind you, of course, you have been advised of your rights, and there is no sense of my going over it again, but I want to remind you that your counsel and your attorneys are here.

I will now read to you this consent form that we use as a standard procedure on this type of examination.

“Consent to Interview with Polygraph. I, Jack L. Ruby”—I believe that’s the way you sign your name?

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. HERNDON. “I, Jack L. Ruby, consent freely and voluntarily to be interviewed by special agents of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, which I also know as the FBI, in connection with the President’s Commission on the Assassination of President Kennedy investigation. I agree to the use of the polygraph or so-called lie detector during this interview or any part of it, and I am willing to be present at the time and place of interview for such time as is necessary to complete the interview.

“No threats or promises of any kind have been made to me to obtain my consent to this interview.”

Now, I can let you read that if you would like or your attorney might like to read it.

Mr. RUBY. That’s perfectly all right.

Mr. HERNDON. If it’s agreeable with you, I would appreciate it if you would sign it, Mr. Ruby, if that’s agreeable with your counsel?

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. HERNDON. And Mr. Wood and I will witness that.

Mr. RUBY. Do you want it “Jack Ruby” or “Jack L. Ruby”?

Mr. HERNDON. You sign it as you usually sign, but do you want to read it any further, sir?

Mr. RUBY. I’ll just sign it.

(Mr. Ruby at this time signed the instrument referred to, which was thereafter signed by witnesses Special Agents Herndon and Wood.)

Mr. RUBY. Did you get your pants sewed up, Joe?

Mr. TONAHILL. It went through to my leg.

Mr. RUBY. That was a pretty rough brawl we had, wasn’t it, Joe?

Mr. TONAHILL. Yes.

Mr. RUBY. Joe, I’d appreciate it if you weren’t in the room. Can I ask you to leave, Joe?

Mr. TONAHILL. I’ll be glad to leave, if you want me to, Jack.

Mr. RUBY. As a matter of fact, I prefer Bill Alexander to you, you’re supposed to be my friend.

Mr. TONAHILL. Let the record show that Mr. Ruby says he prefers Bill Alexander being here during this investigation, who is the assistant district attorney who asked that a jury give him the death sentence, to myself, who asked the jury to acquit him, his attorney.

Mr. HERNDON. May we proceed?

Mr. SPECTER. Please do, Mr. Herndon.

Mr. HERNDON. Mr. Ruby, as you know, we have a doctor here, and before we begin anything, I want you to try to relax. I realize that there is some tension here, and before we proceed any further, I want to ask you very generally, how do you feel today, right now, specifically speaking?

Mr. RUBY. Very good, except—may I be very honest?

Mr. HERNDON. Of course.

Mr. RUBY. What is the preference of the doctor being here? Is he supposed to be my doctor, I mean Dr. Beavers?

Mr. HERNDON. Mr. Specter, do you want to answer that?

Mr. SPECTER. Yes; Mr. Ruby, he is here at the request of Mr. Tonahill, and I believe concurred in, by your chief counsel, Mr. Fowler.

Mr. HERNDON. The reason I asked you about your health, Mr. Ruby, obviously I don’t want to proceed with this interrogation of the polygraph type when you obviously may not feel well physically today. I wouldn’t want to subject you to the examination unless you felt well enough to take it, and I will ask you some very general questions about your health in regard to your history in that regard.

Have you every had any respiratory diseases or illnesses such as asthma or trouble with breathing, Mr. Ruby?

Mr. RUBY. None whatever.

Mr. HERNDON. Any sinus condition or trouble?

Mr. RUBY. No.

Mr. HERNDON. Have you ever had any heart ailments?

Mr. RUBY. No, sir.

Mr. HERNDON. No heart trouble to your knowledge.

Mr. RUBY. [No response.]

Mr. HERNDON. Mr. Ruby, have you had any medication of any type whatsoever today, such as tranquilizers, aspirin, any drugs at all today?

Mr. RUBY. None whatsoever.

Mr. HERNDON. While you’ve been here in custody, have you been under any medication?

Mr. RUBY. None whatever.

Mr. SPECTER. Mr. Herndon, at this time I shall administer the oath to Mr. Ruby.

Mr. RUBY. You want me to stand up?

Mr. SPECTER. Yes, sir; if you would please. As assistant counsel, I have the authority under the law to administer an oath to you for proceedings in the nature of depositions.

Do you solemnly swear that the answers and information you shall give in this proceeding before the President’s Commission on the Assassination of President Kennedy will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?

Mr. RUBY. I do.

Mr. SPECTER. Have the answers you have heretofore given in response to the informal questions already asked of you been the truth, sir?

Mr. RUBY. Repeat that again?

Mr. SPECTER. Have the answers which you have already given in response to the informal questions put to you by Mr. Herndon and others here, are they all true?

Mr. RUBY. Yes, about my health—are all true—yes.

Mr. SPECTER. All right, Mr. Herndon, will you proceed.

Mr. HERNDON. Yes. Thank you.

I understand, Mr. Ruby, that you have had your lunch today, is that correct? I want to make sure you have had a chance to eat.

Mr. RUBY. Yes, I did.

Mr. HERNDON. When did you eat, how long ago?

Mr. RUBY. I would guess approximately 12:30.

Mr. HERNDON. You’ve had no digestive problems while you’ve been here?

Mr. RUBY. No.

Mr. HERNDON. Have you had any coffee today—these are questions that will help us later on?

Mr. RUBY. One early in the morning.

Mr. HERNDON. Early in the morning?

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. HERNDON. Did you have more than one cup?

Mr. RUBY. One and a half cups.

Mr. HERNDON. That’s your usual amount of coffee you have?

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. HERNDON. Did you have any coffee at lunch, Mr. Ruby?

Mr. RUBY. No, I did not.

Mr. HERNDON. Now, Mr. Ruby, have you ever had a——

Mr. RUBY. The reason why I say this, there was some newspaper items recently that brought up the fact that I was of unsound mind. Do I sound that way to you at the present time?

Mr. HERNDON. I don’t feel that I am qualified at this time to make any statement in that regard. I’m sure you would understand that that is something you can’t give in a moment’s notice.

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. HERNDON. Would you care to sit over here, Mr. Ruby, and I will further explain the test to you.

Mr. RUBY. Surely.

(At this time Mr. Ruby conferred with Mr. Fowler out of the hearing of this reporter and others in the room.)

Mr. RUBY. All right.

(At this time Mr. Ruby seated himself in the polygraph test chair.)

Mr. HERNDON. This is a polygraph chair. The reason it is so constructed, we want to take advantage of these high arms [indicating arms on the polygraph chair] so that we can get a better tracing, and very frankly, Mr. Ruby, I want to give you as best an examination as I can. So, it’s going to take a little time and I want you to relax as best you can. I realize you might be a little nervous, and I will certainly take that into consideration. Let me just briefly, Mr. Ruby, tell you about the polygraph examination and what we’re going to do today. I want to proceed by hooking up some of these pieces of equipment and briefly tell you what it is. Now, may I ask you to remove the material you have in your pocket, sir, and you might want to give it to your counsel.

Mr. SPECTER. Let the record show that Mr. Ruby has removed all the objects from his upper left-hand pocket.

(After removing objects mentioned, Mr. Ruby handed the same to Mr. Fowler.)

Mr. HERNDON. I gather from looking at your overalls that you don’t have any restrictive garments or belts or anything underneath on you which would hinder you or your relaxation?

Mr. RUBY. No, sir.

Mr. HERNDON. You are very comfortable?

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. HERNDON. Very fine, Mr. Ruby. Now, Mr. Ruby, there are two ways I can do this. I can do two things—I can either go ahead and put this equipment on you right now and describe briefly how it’s going to work, or if you want, I can go over these first series of questions and give you some instructions, and then put the equipment on. Which do you prefer?

Mr. RUBY. Which is the most effective way to get what you want?

Mr. HERNDON. Well, I think in view of the fact that we will have some discussion here, I want to make sure that you perfectly understand these questions, I will go ahead and give you some basic instructions about how these questions are going to be asked and how I want you to answer them.

Mr. RUBY. All right.

Mr. HERNDON. And then later on, as I hook you up, I will briefly describe what this equipment is going to do.

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. HERNDON. The polygraph examination will entail, as Mr. Specter indicated, just approximately 8 to 9 questions, Mr. Ruby, in what we call a series. Now, I’m going to go over these questions with you right now very carefully. I want to make sure that the way I have them phrased is in such a way that you understand perfectly what I mean by them. We will discuss the question and you may if you want to, even answer the question at this time.

Mr. RUBY. I would appreciate it myself.

Mr. HERNDON. In other words, I’m going to tell you what the question is going to be and you shall feel free to answer it “Yes” or “No.”

Mr. FOWLER. Excuse me, sir.

Mr. HERNDON. Certainly.

Mr. FOWLER. At this time, Jack, I request that in view of the fact that you’re not hooked up, that you do not answer the question and reserve those until such time as you will be on the machine.

Mr. RUBY. That’s fine.

Mr. HERNDON. Then, we will just discuss the questions.

Mr. RUBY. Do it to your advantage, may I add.

Mr. HERNDON. I generally prefer in my practice with the polygraph to have the gentleman answer the question so that he knows he has already answered it, and as a matter of record, he knows that that question is coming along.

Mr. RUBY. Please let me do it, will you? [Addressing Mr. Fowler.]

Mr. FOWLER (no response).

Mr. HERNDON. I will bow to whatever Mr. Specter or counsel wants to do in this regard.

Mr. RUBY. Fowler, I hate to dispute with you, but let me do it this way?

Mr. FOWLER. Well, Jack, again, Mr. Alexander is here and again I tell you this—that the answers to some of these questions could be absolutely very detrimental to you.

Mr. RUBY. They can’t be.

Mr. FOWLER. I’m talking about from a legal standpoint. Now, morally, I know how you feel and you want to do the best you can for the Commission.

Mr. RUBY. I will.

Mr. FOWLER. But by the same token, this gentleman over here [referring to Mr. Alexander] represents the State, who at this time is not representing you. Now, if we could allow Mr. Alexander to have the benefit of the nature of the questions, with the exception of the answers—if this is what Jack wants—but I do not want Mr. Alexander to have the benefit of the answers.

Mr. SPECTER. The test may be conducted either way. As Mr. Herndon has explained, he has a slight preference to have the answers, but the ultimate decision on that is up to Mr. Ruby and his counsel. The Commission will proceed in either manner.

Mr. RUBY. It’s unfortunate that my attorney, Mr. Fowler, don’t see as I do. I would like to give every cooperation without the slightest fraction of interference. That’s why I requested that. You won’t let me do it that way, huh, Fowler?

Mr. FOWLER. I’m requesting that you do not, Jack.

Mr. HERNDON. It will be no problem.

(Addressing the court reporter.) Do you have any problem hearing?

COURT REPORTER. If Mr. Ruby would talk just a little bit louder it would be fine.

Mr. HERNDON. Mr. Ruby, I have placed all these questions in a form so that they are very short and concise and can be answered only by “Yes” or “No,” and that’s the way we have to ask a question during a polygraph examination, but I’ll go over them with you and give you an idea of what they’re going to be. During the normal series, I’m going to ask several questions, of course, which are pertinent to the Commission’s investigation, but I will also ask you several questions which more or less just deal with your identity, your background and your name, so you will have two types of questions that I will ask. Now, the first question I’m going to ask you under series 1, which is rather pertinent, and I want you to know that I’m going to ask it, and I’m going to phrase it as simply as I can.

“Did you know Oswald before November 22, 1963?”

Now, what I mean by “know” is did you have any personal acquaintance of this individual, any personal acquaintance? Have you ever seen him, did you have any conversation with him? In other words, as you would say, “Well, I know that person.”

Mr. RUBY. Should I answer that?

Mr. FOWLER. Not now, Jack.

Mr. HERNDON. That question will be asked or repeated, and so you and I will understand what we want, I’ll repeat it. “Did you know Oswald before November 22, 1963?”

Mr. RUBY. Right.

Mr. HERNDON. Another question that I will ask in series 1, after I get the instrument adjusted, and it will be short and simple and answerable only by “Yes” or “No.”

“Did you assist Oswald in the assassination?”

Do you understand that question?

Mr. RUBY. Yes; it is very clear.

Mr. HERNDON. I tried to make them as short as possible and as clear as possible. Again, I’m going to ask you just as a matter of format here, “Did you take any medication this morning?” You have already answered that question, but that will be one of the questions I will ask you. I’m also going to ask on series 1, just to give you a little time to relax here, some of these rather simple questions such as: “Did you voluntarily request this test?”

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. HERNDON. You have already indicated your answer to that. And, I will ask a rather obvious question as a matter of identity, “Is your first name Jack? Is your last name Ruby?” These types of questions will be asked and I want to make sure I cover each and every one. I’m going to ask you, “Do you use the middle name ‘Leon’?” I understand you do; is that correct?

Mr. RUBY. No; very rarely, very rarely.

Mr. HERNDON. All right, you can answer that as you see fit, when I ask it on the test. I will ask you this question, and I want to ask this as a matter of record for me because I interview a lot of people: “Have you ever been arrested?” Now, what I mean in this regard, and I’ll probably change that phraseology to “Have you ever been arrested before? Prior to the shooting, have you ever been arrested?” Now, what I mean by “arrested,” Mr. Ruby, is were you ever actually placed under arrest and brought before some type of magistrate and charged with any crime. That question will also be on the first examination. Those are the questions I’m going to ask you. Do you have any questions about them, sir? Are they clear and concise to you?

Mr. RUBY. When you speak of the last question about a crime, I’ve never been involved in a crime, so if you’ve been arrested for selling beer after hours, does that qualify as an answer too?

Mr. HERNDON. Well, what I mean by “arrested” is if you were formally charged with something?

Mr. RUBY. Like a felony?

Mr. HERNDON. Well, any type of a formal arrest, wherein you actually were arrested and charged before a magistrate, of offending a law that’s on the record, either of a community, a city, or the State.

Mr. RUBY. You don’t necessarily have to have been found guilty or anything, just the point of being arrested, is that right?

Mr. HERNDON. Now, let me inject this, Mr. Ruby. If these questions when I ask them, if you have something in doubt in your mind of how to answer it “Yes” or “No,” just refrain from answering it, and we’ll go back after the test and discuss it.

Mr. RUBY. Very well.

Mr. HERNDON. In other words, I want you to be able to freely and truthfully say “Yes” or “No” to these questions. If one of them leaves any area of doubt in your mind and you are hesitant to answer it, feel free not to say anything, and we will just proceed, and after I stop the instrument, I will then go over that question with you. All right, sir?

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. HERNDON. All right, Mr. Ruby, I’ll just briefly hook up the instrument and I’ll probably run it for a little while just to get it adjusted to you, and inasmuch as you’ve never had a polygraph before, I will explain the instrument’s parts to you. You can see here, Mr. Ruby, I have a rubber tube and I’m going to place that around your chest, sir. This is what we call the pneumograph and that will accurately record you respiratory pattern as you inhale and exhale. Would you be kind enough to raise your arms, sir?

Mr. RUBY (complied with request of Mr. Herndon).

(Reporter’s note: 2:58 p.m.)

Mr. HERNDON. Now, as you can see, as you inhale the tube stretches, and as you exhale it decreases in size and I will have a tracing of it on the polygraph.

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. HERNDON. During the examination and as we run the test, I would appreciate it if you would sit perfectly relaxed, rather straight in the chair, with both of your feet flat on the floor. Now, that will record, during the interview, the tracing of your breathing, and I want you for this reason to breathe perfectly normal and perfectly relaxed. Now, the next thing I want to put on will be on your hand and I’ll put it on your right hand here. I notice you have one finger cut off on that hand. What happened there, Mr. Ruby?

Mr. RUBY. Oh, running a nightclub you get involved in various altercations.

Mr. HERNDON. Now, this next component that I want you to see will be what we call the Galvanic Skin Response, GSR. I’m going to place these on your fingers, and actually all this simply does, through these instruments and the electronic processes, is to record any variance in the electrical conductivity or the resistance of your skin. It’s helpful to me in this examination. Your hands are very good. They are not sweating a bit. Is that too tight?

Mr. RUBY. No.

Mr. HERNDON. Is it uncomfortable?

Mr. RUBY. No.

Mr. HERNDON. All right, Mr. Ruby. Now, neither one of these two components will you feel at all. That will be no problem at all.

Mr. RUBY. All right.

Mr. HERNDON. Now, the next component that I will put on your left arm, because it’s closer to your heart, and this is the cardiograph cuff, and this is going to give me an accurate tracing of any relative changes in your blood pressure. These will just be relative changes. I won’t be able to necessarily know what your blood pressure is. I will have relative blood pressure changes, and I will also have on a chart a change in any heartbeat or heart rate you might have.

Now, I am going to record all these physiological responses as we discuss the questions, and as you answer them I will have an indication of what is taking place physiologically, what is going on in your physical system, and which will assist me in interpreting whether or not you may be deceiving with regard to the question.

Mr. RUBY. What is your name, please, sir?

Mr. WOOD. Wood. I’m with the FBI.

Mr. RUBY. Where is Shanklin, I thought he was supposed to be here?

Mr. WOOD. He is in town but he is not here.

Mr. RUBY. Isn’t Mr. Shanklin the chief?

Mr. HERNDON. Do you want to relax your arm, Mr. Ruby? Now, do you have any questions about what I’ve done so far, Mr. Ruby?

Mr. RUBY. No. Do you want me to relate my story to you now?

Mr. HERNDON. No; I want you to sit perfectly still. There will be no conversation, and I’m going to get the instrument adjusted to you. That will take only a few minutes, so just sit and try not to move. I’m not going to ask you any questions at this time. I just want to adjust the machine to you.

Mr. SPECTER. Mr. Herndon, have you now covered all the preliminaries up to the point of asking the questions?

Mr. HERNDON. Just about. I will probably repeat some basic instructions for Mr. Ruby just before we start asking him the questions.

Mr. SPECTER. All right, then I think those who are going to leave should leave now so that we are ready to go as soon as your instrument is in tune.

May the record show that Mr. Alexander has left the room.

Mr. FOWLER. Jack, do you have any objections to Mr. Tonahill being here?

Mr. RUBY. If Tonahill is going to be here—I don’t believe he’s—I know Bill Alexander is my friend, so he can stay, but Joe is supposed to be my friend.

Mr. FOWLER. Well, we’re not putting it on that basis, Jack. This is just purely personal.

Mr. RUBY. Just let me tell you this, Fowler. I have nothing to gain by Joe being here, because—I have nothing to gain.

Mr. FOWLER. All right, all right. Then, we will ask Joe and Mr. Alexander to step out.

Mr. RUBY. You still want Alexander to step out?

Mr. FOWLER. I certainly think so, Jack.

Mr. RUBY (addressing Mr. Alexander who was standing in the doorway to the examining room). Now, Bill, don’t say I didn’t request you, now?

Mr. ALEXANDER. I know it, Jack.

Mr. SPECTER. May the record show that Mr. Alexander and Mr. Tonahill have just gone out of the room.

Mr. HERNDON. Mr. Ruby, it will take me a few moments to get this adjusted. If you desire to talk to Mr. Fowler, if you can sit still and talk it will be all right.

(Conference at this time between Mr. Fowler and Mr. Ruby out of the hearing of the court reporter and others in the room.)

Mr. HERNDON. Do you want to sit still now, Mr. Ruby. I’m not going to ask you any questions. I just want to get everything adjusted at this time. You will hear a few scratching noises on the paper.

Now, will you take a deep breath, Mr. Ruby, and then relax, sir?

Mr. RUBY (complied with request of Mr. Herndon).

Mr. HERNDON. Now, just breathe normally.

Now, if everyone will just be quiet for a few moments. There will be no questions asked. I just want to get the instrument adjusted.

(Reporter’s note: 3:05 p.m.)

Mr. HERNDON (snapped his fingers twice). I made that noise purposely, Mr. Ruby. Now, I’m going to let you get the feel of that cuff as I inflate it, and there will be a little bit of pressure put against your arm. You’ve had your blood pressure taken by a doctor, I’m sure?

Mr. RUBY. Oh, yes.

Mr. HERNDON. You recall that. It will be the same feeling and I will have to leave it on just for a matter of a few moments, and if you will sit perfectly still and put your feet flat on the floor and look straight ahead.

I will now apply a little bit of pressure on that arm. You probably feel a little pressure. All right, sir?

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. HERNDON. From time to time I may come over and raise and lower your arm to make sure it’s perfectly relaxed.

Mr. RUBY. That’s all right.

Mr. HERNDON. Do you feel your pulse beat?

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. HERNDON. You can see and feel your pulse beat and in a moment you can see how it records. Very fine, Mr. Ruby. You have been very cooperative. I don’t think we will have any problem.

Mr. RUBY. You can see the differences of nature—if certain things are wrong or right, can’t you?

Mr. HERNDON. Well, I have to very carefully interpret what I see. I’m going to take all these things together at a later date into consideration, and I don’t see any difficulty.

Mr. RUBY. Because—I want my chief to understand this here and see that.

Mr. HERNDON. Are you a little more relaxed now?

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. HERNDON. You seem to be. I don’t want to begin until you feel you are perfectly relaxed.

Mr. RUBY. Yes; I’m very much relaxed because I have nothing—I’m not sparring with it, so I must be relaxed.

Mr. HERNDON. Very fine. I appreciate your cooperation very much and you are cooperating with me very well.

In a moment, you can move your hand a little bit to get a little circulation. You probably felt just a little tingling sensation?

Mr. RUBY. Yes; I felt a little bit of throbbing in these two fingers.

Mr. HERNDON. Are they too tight?

Mr. RUBY. No; that’s fine.

Mr. HERNDON. I can relax this a little bit on your arm. I just want it close enough so that they won’t slip, just about like that. I don’t want this to cause you any discomfort to you. Now, if you are about ready?

Mr. RUBY. I am ready.

Mr. HERNDON. You remember, I’m going to ask you just the questions that we discussed before and that’s all.

Mr. RUBY. You mean that’s all?

Mr. HERNDON. Oh, no; this is just series 1, Mr. Ruby. We’re going to cover many questions.

Mr. RUBY. All right.

Mr. HERNDON. I’m going to go rather deliberately slow on this first one until you become acquainted with the procedure.

Mr. RUBY. Believe me, I know the answers, so you can ask me as fast as you like.

Mr. HERNDON. During the test, again, if you will keep your feet on the floor at all times, flat on the floor at all times, and try not to move. I know it’s hard to sit perfectly still for the 3 to 4 minutes, but it is to your advantage to try to keep from moving. If you have to cough or move, I’ll probably observe it and take it into consideration.

During the examination, Mr. Ruby, I know we have other people in the room, but I would appreciate it if you would just try to concentrate as if there were just you and me in here and these questions are coming out and if you know the answer in your own mind, I want you to truthfully answer them “Yes” or “No.” Do not give any qualifying statement or additional comments.

Mr. RUBY. All right.

Mr. HERNDON. On the other hand, if I come to one of these questions that you’re not sure whether you want to say “Yes” or “No,” there is some area in doubt, just don’t say anything and we’ll go back and discuss it later.

Mr. RUBY. Okay.

Mr. HERNDON. If you will, look right over here, look straight ahead at the wall and relax, and hear my question and give your answer to it, “Yes” or “No.”

Mr. RUBY. Yes, sir.

Mr. HERNDON. I will tell you when I am going to begin. I will tell you when this particular test is over, but do not relax or move until I give you the word.

Mr. RUBY. Very well.

Mr. HERNDON. As I say, you will hear a little scratching noise and I will be marking the paper as we proceed.

Mr. RUBY. Can I speak?

Mr. HERNDON. Right now if you want to; yes, sir.

Mr. RUBY. Fowler, I beg you to get Bill Alexander and Joe Tonahill back in here. I tell you. Will you do it, please.

Mr. FOWLER. Jack, let’s go on just like it is now. I don’t want you to have any apprehensions that we’re trying to keep anybody out.

Mr. RUBY. All right.

Mr. HERNDON. It’s taking me about a minute to get the instrument warmed up again here.

All right, I will now put a little pressure on that arm, Mr. Ruby, and I will let you know when I’m going to begin. Once again, just answer the questions truthfully, “Yes” or “No.”

(Reporter’s note: 3:10 p.m.)

Mr. HERNDON. The test will now begin.

“Is your first name Jack?”

Mr. RUBY. “Yes.”

Mr. HERNDON. “Is your last name Ruby?”

Mr. RUBY. “Yes.”

Mr. HERNDON. “Did you voluntarily request this test?”

Mr. RUBY. “Yes.”

Mr. HERNDON. “Did you know Oswald before November 22, 1963?”

Mr. RUBY. “No.”

Mr. HERNDON. “Do you use the middle name ‘Leon’?”

Mr. RUBY (no immediate response). How can I answer that? I don’t have my driver’s license, but I don’t use it.

Mr. HERNDON. All right, just sit still and we will discuss it. “Did you assist Oswald in the assassination?”

Mr. RUBY. “No.”

Mr. HERNDON. “Have you ever been arrested?”

Mr. RUBY. “Yes.”

Mr. HERNDON. “Did you take any medication this morning?”

Mr. RUBY. “No.”

Mr. HERNDON. “Have you answered all my questions truthfully?”

Mr. RUBY. “Yes.”

Mr. HERNDON. This first series is over. If you will just sit still for a moment, I will release the pressure on your arm, and you may now move your arm and relax and get the circulation moving.

Mr. RUBY. I’m all right.

Mr. HERNDON. That wasn’t too bad, sir; was it?

Mr. RUBY (no response).

(Reporter’s note: 3:12 p.m.)

Mr. HERNDON. Mr. Ruby, there are two questions I want to ask you about on our first series.

I know you couldn’t refrain from laughing and talking about that middle name of “Leon.” Do you want to further explain that?

Mr. RUBY. Yes; I don’t use it, so hence it’s sort of a remembrance of a very good friend of mine. I used it on my driver’s license, but since then it has become a habit of keeping it on my driver’s license, but I’ve never been called with it and very rarely do I sign papers that way, but once I stated it on my driver’s license, I had to follow through with it that way, and that’s the answer to it. Once you have it on your driver’s license, you have to have it the same way.

Mr. HERNDON. Do you like the name “Leon”?

Mr. RUBY. Well, I did more for sentimental reasons, but as I went along later I sort of dropped it.

Mr. HERNDON. Is it actually on your driver’s license, though?

Mr. RUBY. I think it’s Jack L. Ruby. No—Jack Leon Ruby. It’s Jack Leon Ruby on my driver’s license and that’s something that once you start with it, and its been years ago, when you renew your license, it remains the same, but outside of signing papers or contracts or anything of vital importance, you only find out it’s much simpler to sign “Jack Ruby.”

Mr. HERNDON. All right, Mr. Ruby, and one other question. I would just like to ask you what went on in your mind when you did answer the question “Yes” to “Have you ever been arrested?”

Mr. RUBY. Well, the police had taken me—I had been arrested, because when the police officer said, “Jack, come on, we’re taking you down,” you’re arrested.

Mr. HERNDON. When was this? Are you referring to this current or some previous time?

Mr. RUBY. Previous to that.

Mr. HERNDON. What situation was that?

Mr. RUBY. Well, it was—I was arrested for dancing after curfew. Some fellows smuggled in intoxicants after hours.

Mr. HERNDON. Was this here in your own place or some other place?

Mr. RUBY. At my own place. No felony crime, nothing serious—only misdemeanors.

Mr. HERNDON. You consider that was a misdemeanor?

Mr. RUBY. Oh, yes; in other words—a $25 fine. I never have been in any criminal activity.

Mr. HERNDON. Very fine. Does your arm feel all right now?

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. HERNDON. Very good. We have finished with the first series.

Mr. SPECTER. I am now going to ask Mr. Alexander and Mr. Tonahill to return between now and the time we start on the next test.

May the record show that Mr. Alexander and Mr. Tonahill are back in the room.

Mr. HERNDON. Did the cardiounit disturb you at all other than just a slight tingling sensation?

Mr. RUBY. In this arm here [indicating left arm]?

Mr. HERNDON. Did that bother you before the series No. 1 group?

Mr. RUBY. No; that’s fine.

Mr. HERNDON. Mr. Ruby, you are now a veteran of the first series. You did real well. You cooperated very fine.

Now, we will proceed with series No. 2. I want to go over these questions with you so that you and I understand precisely and perfectly what they mean.

Mr. RUBY. All right.

Mr. HERNDON. Now, in this series of questions, I am going to ask as one of the ones which is pertinent in this investigation, “Are you now a member of the Communist Party?”

Mr. RUBY. No.

Mr. HERNDON. You don’t have to answer that if you don’t want to now, but I’m going to ask you that question, sir.

Mr. RUBY. OK.

Mr. HERNDON. You understand what I mean by that—that’s about as short and sweet as we can get it.

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. HERNDON. I’m going to ask you, “Have you ever been a member of the Communist Party?”

Mr. RUBY. No.

Mr. HERNDON. You understand the difference—one is now and one is—have been perhaps sometimes in your youth or life—if you were affiliated with the Communist Party.

Mr. RUBY. Yes; I understand.

Mr. HERNDON. I’m going to ask you this question, Mr. Ruby: “Are you now a member of any group that advocates the violent overthrow of the United States Government?”

Mr. RUBY. No.

Mr. HERNDON. Do you understand that question?

Mr. RUBY. Yes, sir.

Mr. HERNDON. I’m going to ask: “Have you ever been a member of any group that advocates the violent overthrow of the United States Government?”

Mr. RUBY. No.

Mr. HERNDON. It’s very similar, only it’s in the past tense.

Mr. SPECTER. Mr. Ruby, on those two questions—we can’t go through all of those groups which advocate the overthrow of the United States Government, so we are generalizing with respect to them.

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. SPECTER. You have indicated you understand them?

Mr. RUBY. Yes; and my answer is “No—no collaborating.”

Mr. SPECTER. I don’t think it is necessary to elaborate on that.

Mr. RUBY. No.

Mr. HERNDON. All right, in addition to those questions, I’m going to ask you a relatively simple question as this, that you should be able to answer “Yes” or “No.” “Were you born in the United States?”

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. HERNDON. “Were you born in Chicago?”

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. HERNDON. Now, this next question I’m going to ask you, you don’t have to answer it now. You can discuss it with me later or you can wait and decide what you want to answer to it. “Did you ever make a false official statement?”

Now, that’s a general question and I realize that, Mr. Ruby, and when I ask that question, obviously your mind probably went back to many things. We make a lot of official statements. Now, I’m asking that question in its broadest terms. In other words, to your recollection, have you ever made a false official statement?

Mr. RUBY. When you say “official”—for instance, in order to have a job years ago—I want to explain this to you. In order to work in a department store, I had to use another name because this other person would be the right age that I could work, but outside of that, officials—to any authorities—I haven’t.

Mr. HERNDON. Obviously, this department store thing came to your mind when I asked that question?

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. HERNDON. Well, sir, I’m glad you brought that out so I will have an understanding that that was in your mind. What I mean here, however, is something more in the nature of an application for a license, an application for a permit, an application for insurance—anything that would come within the jurisdiction of being somewhat a legal or semilegal form or application?

Mr. RUBY. No.

Mr. HERNDON. I want to make sure you understand what I mean by that question.

Then, I’ll probably ask, I understand you were born in 1911, is that correct?

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. HERNDON. These are questions of identity—“Were you born in 1911?”

Now, let me see, gentlemen, if we have gone over all the questions. I have gone over all the questions with Mr. Ruby that I’m going to ask for this next series.

Mr. SPECTER. All right, prior to the administration of the second series, Mr. Alexander and Mr. Tonahill are now leaving the room again.

May the record show that Mr. Alexander and Mr. Tonahill have now departed from the room.

(Reporter’s note: 3:20 p.m.)

Mr. HERNDON. All right, now just relax. Can I get you a drink of water or anything, Mr. Ruby?

Mr. RUBY. No; I’m perfectly all right.

Mr. HERNDON. All right, very fine. Once again, if you will try to refrain from moving, simply look straight again, and sit perfectly still and answer the questions “Yes” or “No.” I again will tell you when I am going to begin, Mr. Ruby.

Now, are you relaxed? Are you OK?

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. HERNDON. How does your arm feel? I noticed you had a little bit of pressure there around the cuff. Is the circulation all right?

Mr. RUBY. Fine.

Mr. HERNDON. You feel fine?

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. HERNDON. It will take me a moment again here to get the instrument adjusted. Before I put any pressure on the cuff, Mr. Ruby, I’m going to just tighten this up just slightly, do you want to move up just a moment? Does that bind you in any way or is it too tight [checking tube around Mr. Ruby’s chest]?

Mr. RUBY. No.

Mr. HERNDON. All right, now just lean back relax. All right, sir. Now, we’re getting a better tracing. All right, I am going to now put a little pressure on and I will tell you when I am going to begin.

(Reporter’s note: 3:23 p.m.)

Mr. HERNDON. Now, I’m checking this just so you can raise and lower your arm and keep relaxed. Look straight ahead, Mr. Ruby.

(Reporter’s note: 3:25 p.m.)

Mr. HERNDON. I will now begin.

“Were you born in the United States?”

Mr. RUBY. “Yes.”

Mr. HERNDON. “Were you born in Chicago?”

Mr. RUBY. “Yes.”

Mr. HERNDON. “Are you now a member of the Communist Party?”

Mr. RUBY. “No.”

Mr. HERNDON. “Have you ever been known by another name?”

Don’t answer that question. I didn’t review it before. Skip it. Just sit and relax.

“Have you ever been a member of the Communist Party?”

Mr. RUBY. “No.”

Mr. HERNDON. “Did you ever make a false official statement?”

Mr. RUBY. “No.”

Mr. HERNDON. “Are you now a member of any group that advocates the violent overthrow of the United States Government?”

Mr. RUBY. “No.”

Mr. HERNDON. “Have you ever been a member of any group that advocates violent overthrow of the United States Government?”

Mr. RUBY. “No.”

Mr. HERNDON. “Were you born in 1911?”

Mr. RUBY. “Yes.”

Mr. HERNDON. That concludes that series. Just sit still for a moment, sir.

All right, you may now move your arm and relax, Mr. Ruby.

Mr. RUBY. All right.

(Reporter’s note: 3:27 p.m.)

Mr. HERNDON. There was one irrelevant question that I failed to mention here. We will discuss that in a moment, and that is, “Have you ever been known by another name?”

You might want to mention that to the gentlemen, as a matter of record. I told him to refrain from answering it. It’s really not that pertinent.

Mr. SPECTER. Fine, we will bring it to their attention.

Mr. HERNDON. But, as long as I did ask it, if you want, I’d like him to answer it before the other gentlemen come in.

Mr. SPECTER. I think that’s all right.

Mr. RUBY. Have I ever had it changed legally, is that what you meant?

Mr. HERNDON. In other words, when I asked you that question, I realized I hadn’t gone over it.

Mr. RUBY. That’s all right.

Mr. HERNDON. Therefore—I know you hesitated to answer it.

Mr. RUBY. Well, I have two names—my name was Rubenstein and was changed to Ruby.

Mr. HERNDON. That’s what came to your mind, the fact that you actually had your name changed?

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. SPECTER. We are now between series Nos. 2 and 3?

Mr. HERNDON. Yes.

Mr. RUBY. How many series do I have now?

Mr. HERNDON. I don’t know quite yet, Mr. Ruby.

Mr. SPECTER. Let the record show that Mr. Alexander and Mr. Tonahill are back in the room.

Gentlemen, there was one question which Mr. Herndon did not go over in advance and that was, “Was Mr. Ruby ever known by any other name?” Since he did ask it, but since it was obvious as soon as he had asked it that he had not gone over it, he asked Mr. Ruby not to answer it, and when the series was over, he asked Mr. Ruby the question again and Mr. Ruby said that he had been known previously as “Jack Rubenstein” and had legally changed his name. With that one variation, all the questions asked during that series were identical with those discussed before you left the room.

Mr. HERNDON. My apologies, gentlemen, but it was an irrelevant question.

Mr. Ruby, we shall now proceed to what we call series No. 3. Here again these questions are going to be intermixed, some rather pertinent to what we’re interested in here, others general questions. Let me go over the relevant questions, first, Mr. Ruby.

“Between the assassination and the shooting, did anybody you know tell you they knew Oswald?”

Mr. RUBY. No.

Mr. SPECTER. Now, you understand, Mr. Ruby, when he says “the shooting,” that means the shooting of Oswald?

Mr. RUBY. Repeat that over again—let me hear it again.

Mr. HERNDON. I think you realized that, but I want to make certain that you understand, and I want to go back and break down that question—between the assassination of President Kennedy and the shooting—now, the shooting I mean is the shooting of Oswald?

Mr. RUBY. Oh, yes—yes—the answer is “No.”

Mr. HERNDON. I realize you understood the question, but the shooting in some other person’s mind could be many things. I want to keep these sentences as concise and short as possible.

“Did anybody you know tell you they knew Oswald?”

Mr. RUBY. No.

Mr. HERNDON. Do you understand the question, Mr. Ruby?

Mr. RUBY. Right.

Mr. HERNDON. “Did you tell anyone that you were thinking of shooting Oswald before you did it?”

Mr. RUBY. No.

Mr. HERNDON. Is that question all right, do you understand it?

Mr. RUBY. Yes—I take that back. Sunday morning—I want to elaborate on that—before I left my apartment—it evidently didn’t register with the person because of the way I said it. In other words, the whole basis of this whole thing was that Mrs. Kennedy would have to come back for trial.

Mr. FOWLER. Jack, let me ask you at this time—excuse my interruption, but why don’t you just address yourself to the general questions that are asked you. I think it’s all right.

Mr. RUBY. All right.

Mr. FOWLER. I don’t think it will help the Commission, and this may be in the form of a question later on, but just confine your answer to “Yes” or “No.”

Mr. RUBY. Well, the thing is this—I have to answer—ask me the question again.

Mr. HERNDON. Let’s go over it once more, Mr. Ruby, and I want you to be able to be in a position that you can freely, honestly, and truthfully answer it simply “Yes” or “No.”

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. HERNDON. Now, if there’s something in here in this area that troubles you, we can rephrase the question.

Mr. RUBY. Will you specify the time—the time element is very important.

Mr. HERNDON. The only time element is before—before you did it. Now, “before” is a very broad coverage?

Mr. RUBY. That’s it. That’s a difficult question to answer.

Mr. HERNDON. That’s the way the question is worded. Let me ask it again and see if you want to discuss it. “Did you tell anyone that you were thinking of shooting Oswald before you did it?”

Mr. RUBY [no response].

Mr. HERNDON. If you want me to reword that question, I’ll take it up with Mr. Specter.

Mr. RUBY. Why don’t you say this—“that Sunday morning, specifically?” That would be easier for me to answer.

Mr. HERNDON. In other words, “Did you tell anyone you were thinking of shooting Oswald on Sunday morning?”

Mr. FOWLER. Jack, again, excuse me, sir.

Mr. RUBY. Fowler, it puts me in a tough spot when he asks me that question and I evade it.

Mr. FOWLER. I understand this, but I’m talking now specifically about in the presence of Mr. Alexander. Now, later on, if you want to answer it “Yes” or “No” to that question, it’s perfectly all right. I want you to fully understand the question.

Mr. HERNDON. I want to bow, of course, to Mr. Specter, of course, for the way the Commission desires it.

Mr. SPECTER. If you would like us to break it down, we could do it in two questions. “Did you tell anybody on Sunday morning that you were going to shoot Oswald before you did it?”

Mr. RUBY. Yes, that’s easier to answer.

Mr. SPECTER. Then, we can ask you this: “Before Sunday morning did you tell anybody you intended to shoot Oswald?”

Mr. RUBY. Now, that’s a better way to ask it—the last question.

Mr. SPECTER. Then, we’ve covered all the time in two parts.

Mr. RUBY. The last question you asked me is a better way to ask me. The last question you asked, my answer is “No.”

Mr. SPECTER. Then, we’ll want to ask you a followup question.

Mr. RUBY. Do you understand what I’m saying—did you understand what I said?

Mr. SPECTER. Yes, I understand what you’re saying, but we will want to ask you for the purpose of the test, “On Sunday morning did you tell anybody that you intended to shoot Oswald?”

Mr. RUBY. All right. I’ll answer it.

Mr. HERNDON. If I could get the court reporter to read back how you phrased that question, so that we could both agree on it.

COURT REPORTER. “On Sunday morning did you tell anybody that you intended to shoot Oswald?”

Mr. SPECTER. There are two questions. “Before Sunday morning, did you tell anyone you intended to shoot Oswald?” That’s all right for one question. Now, write this one down, Mr. Herndon. The question is “Before Sunday morning did you tell anyone that you intended to shoot Oswald?”

Mr. RUBY. Now, before Sunday morning means any time element beyond the time I left my apartment. Is that what you’re referring to when you say Sunday morning?

Mr. SPECTER. Well, I’ll even change that and I’ll say “Before you left your apartment on Sunday morning, did you tell anyone you intended to shoot Oswald?”

Now, the following question will be: “From the time you left your apartment on Sunday morning, did you tell anyone you intended to shoot Oswald?”

Mr. RUBY. Now, you better rephrase that. I hadn’t already left the apartment. Do you follow me?

Mr. SPECTER. Right. Well, I see what you’re driving at—you’re driving at the time.

Mr. RUBY. The time element is very important.

Mr. SPECTER. All right, we can make it in three parts: “While you were at your apartment on Sunday morning, did you tell anyone you intended to shoot Oswald?”

Now, we’ve broken it up three ways. That would really be covered, Mr. Ruby, in the first part: “Before you left your apartment on Sunday morning, did you tell anyone you intended to shoot Oswald?”

Mr. RUBY. Now, you’ve got to get another question in there: “Previous to your arising that morning, have you told anyone you’re going to shoot Oswald?” You see my point?

Mr. SPECTER. Yes; before you awakened, in other words?

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. SPECTER. “Before you awakened on Sunday morning, had you told anyone you intended to shoot Oswald?”

Mr. RUBY. Before I awakened.

Mr. SPECTER. Mr. Ruby, I don’t want to leave any area of questionableness here or ambiguity—of course, you didn’t say in your sleep this, so perhaps we ought to phrase it “Before you went to bed on Saturday night or early Sunday morning did you tell anyone you intended to shoot Oswald?”

Mr. RUBY. That’s right.

Mr. HERNDON. Would you repeat that, Mr. Specter?

Mr. SPECTER. Yes. “Before you went to bed——”

What time did you go to bed that night?

Mr. RUBY. At 1:15 or 1:30, but you must put it specifically—also, whether I received any phone calls from the time I went to bed and the time I arose. Do you follow me? In other words, I could clear myself by answering that question truthfully, but I could have received a phone call in between the time I went to bed and the time I awakened.

Mr. HERNDON. So, the area we’re trying to cover here, Mr. Ruby, as I see it is—if you did tell anyone you were thinking of doing this—the approximate time.

Is that what we’re getting at, Mr. Specter?

Mr. SPECTER. Yes.

Mr. HERNDON. Now, we can phrase that in several different ways. If your recollection is that good that you specifically recall an incident, you can tell me how you want me to ask it.

Mr. ALEXANDER. May I make a suggestion?

Mr. HERNDON. Yes.

Mr. ALEXANDER. Ask it, “Did you tell someone by telephone you intended to shoot Oswald?”

Mr. RUBY. Plus the fact that I think it should be included, “Did I talk to anyone before going to bed?”

Mr. HERNDON. Mr. Specter?

Mr. FOWLER. Now, we will certainly object to a question being framed by this attorney.

Mr. SPECTER. Mr. Fowler, do I understand your position correctly, that you are concerned about the disclosure of this information in the presence of Mr. Alexander?

Mr. FOWLER. I am.

Mr. SPECTER. But, do you have any concern about disclosing the answer to this question to the Commission?

Mr. FOWLER. None whatsoever.

Mr. SPECTER. Well, would it be agreeable with you if Mr. Alexander leaves while this question is being formulated so we can understand it, and then that he comes back when we have formulated it?

Mr. ALEXANDER. Jack knows that I know the answer to it, so there’s no use in anybody getting upset about it.

Mr. RUBY. Are you sure you know the answer to it?

Mr. ALEXANDER. I think so, Jack.

Mr. FOWLER. It would be preferable if he would leave.

Mr. SPECTER. Mr. Alexander, do you have any objection to stepping out just while we formulate this question?

Mr. ALEXANDER. Not at all, not at all. Come on Joe.

Mr. TONAHILL. I don’t have to go.

Mr. SPECTER. Mr. Alexander has now departed, may the record show.

All right, Mr. Ruby, we want to phrase the question in accordance with polygraph procedure in a way that gets to the point, as you see the point. So, tell us exactly what you have in mind here.

Mr. RUBY. Well, you had better remind me again.

Mr. HERNDON. Here’s the area we’re trying to cover. Here’s the question I originally asked you which created all this problem. “Between the assassination and the shooting”—now, let me start that again—“Did you tell anyone that you were thinking of shooting Oswald before you did?”

Now, I tried to put that as plainly as I could. I’m not interested here in the area of when——

Mr. RUBY. Yes, but if you’re speaking in the area of when, it’s pretty incriminating. It’s a long premeditation, then, of time element.

Mr. HERNDON. I think the Commission here has its question of whether or not you did tell anybody?

Mr. SPECTER. Mr. Ruby, if you have no objection to answering that question, we would like you to do so now for purposes of giving us information, and then we will test you in just a minute as we go through with the polygraph, if you’re willing to answer that question?

Mr. RUBY. Clayton?

Mr. FOWLER. Jack, let me say this—now, this is the very crux of your case. In other words, if there is premeditation on your part to murder or to kill, this can and will be used against you, and this information—let’s project it a little bit and say that you do get a new trial, and that between now and that the Warren Commission releases their information for public consumption or to the district attorney’s office or to anybody else, then, if your answer to these questions might be “Yes,” then it would be most difficult to appear and defend you.

Mr. RUBY. Clayton, I’m here to tell the truth. I don’t know how the heck to answer it. I appreciate you’re in a tough spot.

Mr. FOWLER. Well, of course, as you can readily see, this is why we advised you not to take this.

Mr. RUBY. That’s why I want it, because I know what’s best for me.

Mr. FOWLER. Well, I don’t think you do, Jack.

Mr. RUBY. Can I overrule you, Clayton, where you won’t be too angry if I overrule you?

Mr. FOWLER. Well, I have no—I’m not going to put a cob in your mouth, Jack.

Mr. RUBY. Can I ask one more favor of you?

Mr. FOWLER. Sure.

Mr. RUBY. Will you let those two gentlemen back in the room, at your request?

Mr. FOWLER. Not at my request; no, sir.

Mr. RUBY. Please, Clayton?

Mr. FOWLER. If you leave that up to me, I say, “No.”

Mr. RUBY. All right, I’m going to answer your question.

Mr. HERNDON. Mr. Ruby, why don’t I just go over with you once again all of them, for this series of questions.

Mr. SPECTER. At this time, I would like to ask Mr. Ruby if he is willing to answer the question about the conversations. I would like to develop the information about the conversations so that we will know it is factual. This would be an extended question of the nature that the Chief Justice asked you on June 7—if you’re willing to answer my question to you at this time, which is: “Did you tell anybody that you intended to shoot Oswald at any time before you did it?” And, I would follow that up, if you answer that question, with, “Whom did you tell and when?” With that information, we can then formulate these questions for the lie detector test to see if you’re telling the truth.

Mr. RUBY. Clayton, please? I’ve got to do this? I’ve got to, because I told it to the Warren Commission.

Mr. FOWLER. In other words, these questions have already been talked about?

Mr. RUBY. Yes; and will you ask them to come in?

Mr. SPECTER. Mr. Fowler, I don’t know that they have. I have reviewed the transcript, but I don’t know that we’ve asked these before, but he answered everything that was asked of him in the last session.

Mr. RUBY. Yes, I was very voluntary.

Mr. SPECTER. We deliberately didn’t go into some areas, suffice it to say, for certain purposes. But this is the question we’re concerned with at the moment, and we would like an answer substantively, in addition to testing his truthfulness. It comes to a head when we try to formulate the questions for the polygraph, because we really have to get the underlying facts, and then we can point our efforts to see whether he’s telling the truth according to the indicators from the examination.

Mr. FOWLER. Again, I don’t believe certainly he understands the full complicity of this thing. If there are any questions that are asked that show premeditation on his part, I would respectfully ask that he decline to answer and that you decline to ask it.

Mr. RUBY. But it’s already in there. I’ve already told it to the Warren Commission.

Mr. FOWLER. Now, if there is an area that has been covered already and you still wish to go into it—I don’t want this man——

Mr. RUBY. So, would you mind calling Alexander in?

Mr. FOWLER. Listen, Jack, will you please listen to me? This man got up down there and asked the jury to send you to the electric chair.

Mr. RUBY. I know it.

Mr. FOWLER. He has not changed his opinion yet, and he will again ask it at some later date. Now, is this the kind of man you want to pussyfoot around in here with and let listen to these questions? Just “Yes” or “No”—if it is—we’ll bring him back in.

Mr. RUBY. Yes: I want him in here, and I want you to ask him to come in, please.

Mr. FOWLER. I won’t ask him to come in.

Mr. RUBY. Joe, ask him to come in.

Mr. TONAHILL. No; Clayton is your chief counsel and I’m going to respect his desires.

Mr. RUBY. Chief—I know.

Mr. SPECTER. Well, I will ask him to come in, Mr. Ruby. I’m willing to bring him back, if that’s your request.

Mr. FOWLER. I would like this record to reflect that this is against the advice of his attorneys present, and that it will be very detrimental to, No. 1, his appeal, and No. 2, perhaps to any clemency that might be asked for in the future, and No. 3, for the actual trial of the case on the merits, if such ever occurs.

Mr. SPECTER. Mr. Ruby, the Commission can proceed and conduct this test and not bring him back. I want you to be clear on that point, that these men do not have to be here for the purposes of getting this information for the Commission, so we will know all the facts, or for the purposes of conducting this test. So, it’s really extraneous. It doesn’t really matter for them to be in here for the tests.

Mr. FOWLER. Jack, why do you want them back?

Mr. RUBY. Because I happen to know what I’m talking about.

Mr. TONAHILL. Now, Jack——

Mr. RUBY. Joe, you’re not my attorney any more. We know it. We understand one another, please. You’re not helping me.

Mr. FOWLER. Let’s just direct our attention right now, Jack, to the things that are near to you. Why do you want Mr. Alexander here?

Mr. RUBY. I feel I don’t want him to think I’m holding out on anything. I don’t want him to have any idea that I’m reluctant to answer things in front of him, believe me.

Mr. FOWLER. Listen, at some future date—yes. Perhaps in a trial, another trial, yes. When you are on the witness stand, if you are able to go to the witness stand, perhaps these questions will be directed to you at that time, and you can make a full disclosure before a jury, but I respectfully request that you do not do it in the presence of a district attorney.

Mr. RUBY. But Clayton, they know all these questions already. Henry Wade, I spoke to, and I told him all this.

Mr. FOWLER. Well, if he knows them already, then why not just let him stay out? You’re not trying to impress him, are you? Do you think that he can do anything to help you right now?

Mr. RUBY. No, no; but the thing is that I have a few other thoughts in mind, as you well know about.

Mr. FOWLER. What are they, Jack?

Mr. RUBY. That I spoke to you about for your consideration.

Mr. FOWLER. Jack, I’m not worried, I’m not concerned about anybody trying to do away with me. This is the least of my worries. Nobody has threatened me about this thing. Nobody has coerced me in any way.

Mr. RUBY. I want harmony, that’s what I want. I want harmony with you and the district attorney’s office.

Mr. FOWLER. Well, we can’t harmonize over your situation, I’m sorry.

Mr. SPECTER. Well, the point we got to was the question of getting the substantive information out before going on with the test. Did you tell anyone that you intended to shoot Oswald?

Mr. HERNDON. You mean—before?

Mr. SPECTER. Well, I don’t know if we’re going to get an answer to it or not.

Mr. FOWLER. Jack, now the question that is being directed to you at this time—well, go right ahead.

Mr. RUBY. Yes: Sunday morning.

Mr. SPECTER. And whom did you tell?

Mr. RUBY. George Senator.

Mr. SPECTER. And where were you at the time you discussed it with him?

Mr. RUBY. In my apartment.

Mr. SPECTER. And state in as precise words as you can remember, just what you said to him and he said to you at that time?

Mr. RUBY. Well, he didn’t say anything—the funny part—he was reading the paper and I doubt if he even recalled me saying it. I have to elaborate on it, but I was so carried away emotionally that I said—I don’t know how I said it—I didn’t say it in any vulgar manner—I said, “If something happened to this person, that then Mrs. Kennedy won’t have to come back for the trial.” That’s all I said. Now, would you mind asking me on that particular point? That happened Sunday morning. That’s the only time any thought ever came to my mind, because that morning I read some articles in the newspaper that she would have to come back to trial.

Mr. SPECTER. Did you ever say to anybody, “I am going to shoot Oswald,” or anything to the effect that, “I am going to shoot or kill him”?

Mr. RUBY. No; I just made the statement—that’s the only thing I said.

Mr. SPECTER. That statement you made to George Senator, that’s the only thing, that’s the closest you came to saying it?

Mr. RUBY. That Sunday morning before I left my apartment.

Mr. SPECTER. Did you ever tell Randolph Paul you were going to shoot him?

Mr. RUBY. I don’t even know a Randolph Paul.

Mr. SPECTER. How about Breck Wall?

Mr. RUBY. I know I never said that to Breck Wall.

Mr. SPECTER. Perhaps the name was Ralph Paul. Did you ever say it to Ralph Paul?

Mr. RUBY. No, sir.

Mr. SPECTER. Now, let’s prepare the question this way, if we may, Mr. Herndon: “Aside from anything you said to George Senator, did you ever tell anyone you intended to shoot Oswald?”

Mr. RUBY. No.

Mr. SPECTER. Now, is that formulation acceptable for purposes of the test, Mr. Herndon?

Mr. HERNDON. I want to make sure I get it correct.

Mr. SPECTER. “Aside from anything you said to George Senator, did you ever tell anyone else you intended to shoot Oswald?”

Mr. RUBY. In the flippant way I said it, I doubt if he’d even—you know—the poor guy may not even have remembered it. We never discussed it after that.

Mr. SPECTER. What was the exact time you recollect you said that to him?

Mr. RUBY. I don’t know—it was about 10:15 Sunday morning.

Mr. SPECTER. Approximately?

Mr. RUBY. Well, you know—10 minutes either way.

Mr. SPECTER. All right, Mr. Fowler, we will phrase the question in that way, but that phraseology of the question carries certain implications which you understand.

Mr. RUBY. May I repeat that question once more to make sure it’s accurate?

Mr. SPECTER. Mr. Alexander can come back in.

(Mr. Alexander at this time entered the room.)

Mr. SPECTER. We have now formulated the question, Mr. Alexander, and Mr. Herndon will now read it, together with the other questions he intends to ask in this series.

Mr. HERNDON. The question is, “Aside from anything you said to George Senator, did you ever tell anyone else that you intended to shoot Oswald?”

Mr. RUBY. No.

Mr. HERNDON. That will be one of the questions on the next series.

Mr. Specter, do you want that to be in lieu of this one or in addition to this question?

Mr. SPECTER. Let’s ask it in lieu of that question. Strike the other question, the original question.

Mr. HERNDON. Strike the original question that commences, “Did you tell anyone you were thinking about”?

Mr. SPECTER. Yes; that’s the one we’ve been talking about.

Mr. ALEXANDER. Is this still series 3?

Mr. HERNDON. We’re still on series 3. Mr. Alexander. As a matter of fact, if it’s all right with you gentleman, I’d like to start right over again on series 3.

Mr. SPECTER. Mr. Ruby, I think we have that one area resolved.

Mr. HERNDON. I’m going to ask you as we said originally—before—back in the testimony. “Between the assassination and the shooting, did anybody you know tell you they knew Oswald?”

Then, the other relative or pertinent question here will be, “Aside from anything you said to George Senator, did you ever tell anyone else that you intended to shoot Oswald?”

And, in addition to those questions, I will ask on this series the following questions——

Mr. RUBY. Why don’t you add—in—let’s get the time element in there, too, because that was Sunday morning.

Mr. HERNDON. Well, I don’t want to make these questions too long.

Mr. RUBY. I know, but I want this because somebody might think that I mentioned it 2 days prior to that.

Mr. SPECTER. We can add if you want to. “Aside from anything you said to George Senator on Sunday morning, did you ever tell anyone else that you intended to shoot Oswald?”

Mr. RUBY. OK.

Mr. HERNDON. All right, we’re going to insert after “George Senator”—“on Sunday morning.” Here again, the Sunday morning being that time after you woke up and prior to noon.

Mr. RUBY. Remember, it was the flippant way I said it that I doubt if the poor soul remembered it.

Mr. HERNDON. The other questions in this series will be as follows, Mr. Ruby. Here again are some of the irrelevant questions. “Is your last name Ruby? Do you live in Dallas?” I’m going to ask you “Are you married?” Just for the record, I understand you’re single, so you could answer that “No.” “Were you in the military service?”

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. HERNDON. I’m going to ask you this question: “While in service,” and I mean the military service, “did you receive any disciplinary action?” Do you understand that question?

Mr. RUBY. In other words, “While you were in the military, were you hurt?”

Mr. HERNDON. No; Mr. Ruby, disciplinary action. Were you court-martialed, captains’ mast, or any disciplinary action?

Mr. RUBY. None whatsoever.

Mr. HERNDON. There’s one other relevant question I want to ask on this series and I put it as simply as I can. “Did you shoot Oswald in order to silence him?”

Mr. RUBY. No.

Mr. HERNDON. One other question: “Have you ever served time in jail?” Now, what I mean by that question, Mr. Ruby, is not this present custody but any other time. “Did you ever actually serve time in jail?”

Mr. RUBY. I have served 30 days—I mean—that would answer it.

Mr. HERNDON. Then, you can answer that?

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. HERNDON. If that comes to mind, you could say, “Yes.”

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. HERNDON. Now, let me make sure we’ve gone over these questions. Do you feel all right, Mr. Ruby?

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. HERNDON. All right, we will proceed.

Mr. RUBY. That 30 days embarrasses me, because it was with reference to selling some song sheets back in the old depression days, and it wasn’t for anything criminal. It was something that I didn’t realize at the time there were copyrights on those songs. So, I don’t want to become a felon just because—outside of what I am now.

Mr. HERNDON. Well, these questions, I don’t mean to embarrass you, Mr. Ruby. I want to ask these questions because they’re going to help me later on, and I want to get some of these other questions on your background. Was that in Chicago?

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. HERNDON. When you explained about the song sheets?

Mr. RUBY. Yes; I made a pretty good living at that time.

Mr. HERNDON. You still recall that and it embarrasses you?

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. HERNDON. I will be ready to start series 3 in a moment.

Mr. SPECTER. All right, if Mr. Alexander and Mr. Tonahill will leave the room, we will proceed with series 3.

May the record show that Mr. Alexander and Mr. Tonahill are now absent.

(Reporter’s note: 3:58 p.m.)

Mr. HERNDON. Of course, we have been moving around and talking, Mr. Ruby, I’m going to make a few minor adjustments here. Are you comfortable, sir?

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. HERNDON. Now, I’m going to put this up a little higher on your chest, and I want you to lean back and relax. Do you want to put your feet flat on the floor during the test, if you will.

All right. I again will tell you when we actually start the test. I’m going to put a little pressure on the arm, and once again, on these questions, if you will answer them simply “Yes” or “No” truthfully. Will you look straight ahead, please, sir.

(Reporter’s note: 3:59 p.m.)

Mr. HERNDON. The test will now begin. Look straight ahead, Mr. Ruby.

“Is your last name Ruby?”

Mr. RUBY. “Yes.”

Mr. HERNDON. “Do you live in Dallas?”

Mr. RUBY. “Yes.”

Mr. HERNDON. “Between the assassination and the shooting, did anybody you know tell you they knew Oswald?”

Mr. RUBY. “No.”

Mr. HERNDON. “Are you married?”

Mr. RUBY. “No.”

Mr. HERNDON. “Aside from anything you said to George Senator on Sunday morning, did you ever tell anyone else that you intended to shoot Oswald?”

Mr. RUBY. “No.”

Mr. HERNDON. “Were you in the military service?”

Mr. RUBY. “Yes.”

Mr. HERNDON. “While in service did you receive any disciplinary action?”

Mr. RUBY. “No.”

Mr. HERNDON. “Did you shoot Oswald in order to silence him?”

Mr. RUBY. “No.”

Mr. HERNDON. “Have you ever served time in jail?”

Mr. RUBY (no response).

Mr. HERNDON. The test is over. Sit still for a moment and we will release the pressure on your arm.

Do you feel a little better when I release that pressure?

Mr. RUBY. When you elaborate on “serving time”, 30 days isn’t serving time.

Mr. HERNDON. I was going to ask you to explain that, and you followed instructions explicitly there.

Then, actually in explanation to that, this 30 days to you were insignificant?

Mr. RUBY. Well, yes, but I explained that.

Mr. HERNDON. That’s all right. I have to ask these questions.

Mr. RUBY. To serve time is when you refer to a man being in the penitentiary.

Mr. HERNDON. Now, there are a few questions I want to ask him with regard to that series.

Mr. SPECTER. Go ahead.

Mr. HERNDON. Just two points I want to clarify for my own use here.

Mr. Ruby, I asked you. “Are you married?” and you replied “No.” Could you tell me if anything went on in your mind at the time you responded “No”?

Mr. RUBY. Yes; I was thinking of the young girl, that had I been married I wouldn’t have been in this trouble. I guess that’s what flashed back in my mind.

Mr. HERNDON. Is this a former sweetheart?

Mr. RUBY. Yes. What else?

Mr. HERNDON. I just wanted to get your explanation at that particular point?

Mr. RUBY. You noticed something there?

Mr. HERNDON. Did you feel anything?

Mr. RUBY. Yes; I knew I wasn’t—something was working on me when you asked me that. I would probably have been living in another part of the city, and I wouldn’t have been involved in this.

Mr. HERNDON. Do you recall the girl’s name?

Mr. RUBY. Yes—Alice Nichols.

Mr. HERNDON. And how long ago was this that you were acquainted with her?

Mr. RUBY. Oh, for many years, and I guess we severed relations in 1959—“relations”—I meant our company.

Mr. HERNDON. That’s the last time you were dating?

Mr. RUBY. Yes; we were engaged and so on.

Mr. HERNDON. You never actually married this young lady?

Mr. RUBY. No, sir. That’s why you see me in a moment of despair—like I am.

Mr. HERNDON. Did you ever consider marrying her?

Mr. RUBY. Yes; yes.

Mr. HERNDON. All right, that clarifies that question for me. One other area I’d like you to speak frankly and freely on, and here again it gets back to this military service. I asked you, “While in the military service, did you ever receive any disciplinary action?”

Mr. RUBY. No.

Mr. HERNDON. Did you ever get in any trouble at all while you were in the service that came to your mind during that question?

Mr. RUBY. When you say “trouble”?

Mr. HERNDON. Disciplinary action for trouble?

Mr. RUBY. No; I have never been called down for anything. I may have had a brawl with another soldier.

Mr. HERNDON. Did you while you were in the service ever have a fight?

Mr. RUBY. Yes; but when you speak of “disciplinary” is when you go before a court-martial or the colonel calls you in or something happens.

Mr. HERNDON. Were you called in before the commanding officer?

Mr. RUBY. Sure; but it’s not important enough to answer. Evidently, you’re getting a pretty good reading?

Mr. HERNDON. I’m having no technical difficulty with regard to giving the test.

Mr. RUBY. I wish you would prove to my chief here, over there, how I stand with you (referring to Mr. Holman).

Mr. HERNDON. I want to study these very carefully, of course, but you have been very cooperative, as far as running the actual examination. That will complete series 3.

Mr. SPECTER. Fine, I will call the gentlemen in.

Let the record show that Mr. Tonahill and Mr. Alexander have returned.

Mr. HERNDON. We will go on to another series now. I am going to run a little different type of examination, Mr. Ruby, if you still feel like you want to continue. Do you want to take a break?

Mr. RUBY. Oh, I want to go on completely.

Mr. HERNDON. You are not tired?

Mr. RUBY. No.

Mr. HERNDON. This next one will be relatively short, and it won’t take too long.

I’m going to ask you these questions somewhat in sequence and in consecutive order. There are five of them. They can be answered simply by “yes” or “no.”

“Did you first decide to shoot Oswald on Friday night?”

Mr. RUBY. No.

Mr. HERNDON. “Did you first decide to shoot Oswald on Saturday morning?”

Mr. RUBY. No.

Mr. HERNDON. “Did you first decide to shoot Oswald Sunday morning?”

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. HERNDON. And last, I’ll ask you, “Have you answered all questions truthfully?”

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. HERNDON. In addition to those questions I’ve just asked, I’m going to ask, again to establish identity, “Is your first name Jack?”

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. HERNDON. “Is your last name Ruby?”

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. HERNDON. I will ask you of those questions that I have just related to you, those pertinent five questions in consecutive order, with considerable spacing and time between—I believe you understand what I mean by Friday night?

Mr. RUBY. Definitely—the period of meditation.

Mr. HERNDON. That’s right—in the evening after 6 o’clock, and Saturday morning we consider as being that time from when you wake up until you have lunch, and I think you understand these questions.

Mr. RUBY. Also, is there any way you can ask me if my family had known of my doing anything like that?

Mr. HERNDON. We may possibly get into that area or perhaps take that up with Mr. Specter.

Mr. SPECTER. Well, actually, Mr. Ruby, we have a great many questions to ask you and there are certain limitations on the test.

Mr. HERNDON. I am going to proceed on this particular series now.

Mr. SPECTER. All right. Mr. Alexander and Mr. Tonahill are leaving the room, and may the record show both have now departed.

(Reporter’s note: 4.08 p.m.)

Mr. HERNDON. Did you want to tell me something before, Mr. Ruby, before I start?

Mr. RUBY. No.

Mr. HERNDON. Again, I will tell you when the test begins.

Will you let the record show that I have these designated as series 3a.

All right, do you feel all right now, Mr. Ruby?

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. HERNDON. Sit perfectly still and try to concentrate and look straight ahead and answer the questions truthfully “Yes” or “No.”

I now put some pressure on that arm cuff.

The test will now begin.

(Reporter’s note: 4:10 p.m.)

Mr. HERNDON. “Is your first name Jack?”

Mr. RUBY. “Yes”.

Mr. HERNDON. “Is your last name Ruby?”

Mr. RUBY. “Yes”.

Mr. HERNDON. “Did you first decide to shoot Oswald on Friday night?”

Mr. RUBY. “No”.

Mr. HERNDON. “Did you first decide to shoot Oswald on Saturday morning?”

Mr. RUBY. “No”.

Mr. HERNDON. “Did you first decide to shoot Oswald on Saturday night?”

Mr. Ruby. “No”.

Mr. HERNDON. “Did you first decide to shoot Oswald on Sunday morning?”

Mr. RUBY. “Yes”.

Mr. HERNDON. “Have you answered all questions truthfully?”

Mr. RUBY. “Yes”.

Mr. HERNDON. The test is over. Will you sit still a moment. I will release the pressure on your arms. You may now move your hands and get the circulation back.

(Reporter’s note: 4:12 p.m.)

Mr. HERNDON. I have no questions on that.

Mr. Ruby came in here what time—originally?

COURT REPORTER. My notes indicate around 2 p.m.

Mr. HERNDON. How do you feel, Mr. Ruby?

Mr. RUBY. Fine.

Mr. HERNDON. You’re not tired?

Mr. RUBY. No.

Mr. HERNDON. Mr. Ruby, you are perfectly relaxed?

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. HERNDON. As long as Mr. Ruby feels fine, I think we can continue and we can prepare the exact wording for the next series.

You may wish to bring the other gentlemen in.

Mr. SPECTER. All right, thank you.

Let the record show that Mr. Alexander and Mr. Tonahill have returned to the room.

(Conference off the record between Messrs. Specter and Herndon regarding formulation of questions.)

Mr. RUBY. Joe?

Mr. TONAHILL. Yes, Jack.

(Conference between Mr. Tonahill and Mr. Ruby from 4:13 to 4:15 p.m., out of the hearing of this reporter and others in the room.)

Mr. ALEXANDER. Jack, you are a good man.

Mr. RUBY. Who, Bill?

(Conference between Mr. Alexander and Mr. Ruby from 4:15 to 4:18 p.m., out of the hearing of this reporter and others in the room.)

Mr. SPECTER. Mr. Holman, what time do you feed Mr. Ruby? What time do you start the evening meal?

The JAILER. Well, we begin about 4:30 p.m.

Mr. HERNDON. Are you hungry. Mr. Ruby?

Mr. RUBY. No, I’m feeling fine.

Mr. SPECTER. Well, let’s go ahead with this series of questions and then we will take about a 20-minute break.

(Conference between Mr. Alexander and Mr. Ruby from 4:22 to 4:25 p.m., out of the hearing of this reporter and others in the room.)

Mr. SPECTER. All right, we are ready to go on to the next series of questions.

Mr. HERNDON. Do you feel all right, Mr. Ruby, at this time?

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. HERNDON. We will now go to the first question of this next series, Mr. Ruby, and I will ask you these questions. I want to make sure you have a clear understanding of what they mean.

“Were you in the Dallas Police Department jail basement at the time Lieutenant Pierce’s car drove out of the basement?”

Now, I see you are hesitating on that—I can rephrase it if you so like?

Mr. RUBY. Oh, no.

Mr. HERNDON. Let me go over it again, to make sure the question will be clear to you.

“Were you in the Dallas Police Department jail at the time Lieutenant Pierce’s car drove out of the basement?”

Mr. RUBY. If I can explain it—if I can elaborate on it, it will be easy to answer.

Mr. SPECTER. Go ahead now, if it’s all right with your counsel, so we can focus in on what concerns you.

Mr. HERNDON. Perhaps I might want to ask that other question first and he would find he might not have as much of a problem if I asked it first.

Mr. SPECTER. Well, I prefer to stay with what we have now. I think we can. If it’s all right to have him explain it, if it’s all right with his attorney, I’d rather stay with that.

Mr. RUBY. I’ve already told it to the Warren Commission?

Mr. TONAHILL. Well, go ahead.

Mr. RUBY. As I left the Western Union, I walked toward the ramp, and as I walked down, Lieutenant Pierce’s car was parked already on the curb, partly on the curb and partly some of it was on the ramp, and some officer was talking to him, so consequently—I don’t know how to answer that—whether I was in the basement—when his car had driven out?

Mr. SPECTER. Did you walk by his car?

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. SPECTER. At the same time it was parked there?

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. SPECTER. So that the officer did not see you——

Mr. RUBY. That’s correct.

Mr. SPECTER (continuing). Because the car was parked there?

Mr. RUBY. Yes; and his back was turned to me.

Mr. SPECTER. To state it differently, did the presence of the automobile and the fact that he was talking to Lieutenant Pierce obscure the vision of the officer who was on duty guarding that entrance or exit?

Mr. RUBY. Yes; and I walked down because I didn’t know they were guarding it—that there was anything going on there, you know?

Mr. HERNDON. Well, with that question, I can see his area of conflict here.

Mr. TONAHILL. What you want to know is was he in the basement, but he was out on the sidewalk. I think that’s a straight question.

Mr. ALEXANDER. “Were you in the basement or were you on the sidewalk when Lieutenant Pierce’s car came out?” How about that?

Mr. HERNDON. Yes, I will revise that one question and break it down.

Mr. TONAHILL. Yes, that’s a very good question.

Mr. HERNDON. All right, Mr. Ruby, will this question create any problem for you? “Were you on the sidewalk at the time Lieutenant Pierce’s car”—I had “drove out,” but was he driving out or was he parked there?

Mr. RUBY. When I noticed him he was already—he was stationary. He was parked. He had stalled there or something.

Mr. SPECTER. “Were you on the sidewalk at the time Lieutenant Pierce’s car stopped in front of the guard at the exit?”

Mr. RUBY. Yes, yes. Why do you say “stopped at the exit?”

Mr. TONAHILL. At the ramp exit.

Mr. HERNDON. “The ramp exit”—that makes it specific.

Mr. Ruby, your question will then be, “Were you on the sidewalk at the time Lieutenant Pierce’s car stopped on the ramp exit?”

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. HERNDON. Or, would you prefer “at the ramp exit?”

Mr. RUBY. That’s okay.

Mr. HERNDON. Let’s leave it “on the ramp exit.”

Another question I will ask, “Did you enter the jail by walking through an alleyway?”

Mr. RUBY. What do you call an alleyway—a ramp?

Mr. TONAHILL. It’s a ramp, it isn’t an alley. It goes under the building and comes out.

Mr. SPECTER. That’s all right, we’ll stand on that.

Mr. HERNDON. You will stand on that question, Mr. Specter?

Mr. SPECTER. Yes.

Mr. HERNDON. In other words, you can answer that as you want to?

Mr. TONAHILL. Now, if he says “No”——

Mr. ALEXANDER. It isn’t an alley, now, it’s a ramp.

Mr. SPECTER. Let me specify here—is there another entrance to the jail that you have to go through an alleyway?

Mr. RUBY. There’s another—the Commerce Street entrance, and there’s two entrances, and there’s ways of coming through, I imagine, from the——

Mr. TONAHILL. But it’s a driveway, is what it is, going down.

Mr. ALEXANDER. There’s nothing in the sense that you’re thinking of—you could come from the building out where you could go down the ramp on either side.

Mr. TONAHILL. It’s all under the building, not the ramp.

Mr. FOWLER. Actually, I think what he is thinking of is that there is an alley too.

Mr. ALEXANDER. It wouldn’t be accessible.

Mr. FOWLER. It would make it very difficult to get down into the basement from the alley.

Mr. ALEXANDER. All right, if Jack knows we’re talking about “alley,” as long as you distinguish between the alley and the ramp, so he can answer your question.

Mr. TONAHILL. He has always referred to it as a ramp.

Mr. RUBY. That’s a ramp.

Mr. SPECTER. By “alley,” we do not mean the ramp. We mean the entrance into the building.

Mr. TONAHILL. Now, you’ve got him squared away.

Mr. SPECTER. Fine. We want you to understand the question exactly.

Mr. HERNDON. The question will stand as is.

Mr. TONAHILL. Why don’t you read the question?

Mr. HERNDON. Just leave the question as it is?

Mr. SPECTER. Leave it as it is.

Mr. HERNDON. The next question I’m going to ask, or one of the questions I will ask will be, “Did you walk past the guard at the time Lieutenant Pierce’s car was parked on the exit?”

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. HERNDON. You said it was parked?

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. HERNDON. I think I’ll put it “on the ramp exit” so it’s perfectly clear, and I will repeat the question.

The question again, “Did you walk past the guard at the time Lieutenant Pierce’s car was parked on the ramp exit?”

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. HERNDON. Now, the other questions here, “Did you talk with any Dallas police officers on Sunday, November 24, prior to shooting Oswald?”

Mr. RUBY. No.

Mr. HERNDON. Other questions I intend to ask on this next series, Mr. Ruby are: “Did you previously live in Chicago?”

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. HERNDON. “Are your parents alive?”

Mr. RUBY. No.

Mr. HERNDON. This next question, and you don’t have to answer it now. You can answer it on the test. “Did you ever make a false insurance claim?”

Mr. RUBY. No.

Mr. HERNDON. You are a man in business and you would probably have insurance on perhaps your car, your personal life and your business?

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. HERNDON. I just wondered if you ever made a false insurance claim?

Mr. RUBY. No—I see what you mean—No, I have it on an automobile.

Mr. HERNDON. I put this question in here—I’m not sure, actually, but “Do you still operate the Carousel Club?”

Mr. RUBY. No.

Mr. HERNDON. You don’t?

Mr. RUBY. No.

Mr. HERNDON. All right. The questions will be: “Do you still operate the Carousel Club? Were you on the sidewalk at the time Lieutenant Pierce’s car stopped on the ramp exit? Did you previously live in Chicago? Did you enter the jail by walking through an alleyway? Are your parents alive? Did you walk past the guard at the time Lieutenant Pierce’s car was parked on the ramp exit? Did you ever make a false insurance claim? Did you talk with any Dallas police officers on Sunday, November 24, prior to the shooting of Oswald?”

Do you understand all those questions and can you answer them clearly and simply “Yes” or “No”?

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. ALEXANDER. Apparently this is series 5?

Mr. SPECTER. We called the last series, series 3a.

Mr. HERNDON. We will call this series 4, according to my records. Is that in sequence, Mr. Specter?

Mr. SPECTER. Yes; I believe it is.

Mr. HERNDON. I will proceed shortly then, gentlemen.

Mr. SPECTER. Mr. Tonahill and Mr. Alexander have now left the room.

Mr. HERNDON. Mr. Ruby, do you want to put both of your feet on the floor for me, sir, and look straight ahead at the wall, and relax until I get the instrument adjusted.

(Reporter’s note: 4:35 p.m.)

Mr. HERNDON. All right, I will now put some pressure on the arm cuff, and I will tell you when I am going to start asking you questions, Mr. Ruby.

We will now begin.

(Reporter’s note: 4:36 p.m.)

Mr. HERNDON. “Do you still operate the Carousel Club?”

Mr. RUBY. “No.”

Mr. HERNDON. “Were you on the sidewalk at the time Lieutenant Pierce’s car stopped on the ramp exit?”

Mr. RUBY. “Yes.”

Mr. HERNDON. “Did you previously live in Chicago?”

Mr. RUBY. “Yes.”

Mr. HERNDON. Try to sit still, if you can.

Mr. RUBY. All right.

Mr. HERNDON. “Did you enter the jail by walking through an alleyway?”

Mr. RUBY. “No.”

Mr. HERNDON. “Are your parents alive?”

Mr. RUBY. “No.”

Mr. HERNDON. “Did you walk past the guard at the time Lieutenant Pierce’s car was parked on the ramp exit?”

Mr. RUBY. “Yes.”

Mr. HERNDON. “Did you ever make a false insurance claim?”

Mr. RUBY. “No.”

Mr. HERNDON. “Did you talk with any Dallas police officers on Sunday, November 24, prior to the shooting of Oswald?”

Mr. RUBY. “No.”

Mr. HERNDON. That series is over. If you will sit still for a moment, Mr. Ruby. I will now release the pressure from your arms.

Mr. RUBY. Am I acting a little nervous?

Mr. HERNDON. A little, but I think you’re getting a little bit tired. That’s quite all right. I notice a little motion, but I will certainly take that into consideration when I evaluate and interpret these charts.

(Reporter’s note: 4:40 p.m.)

Mr. HERNDON. Is there any area of doubt at all in your mind about that question where you were on the sidewalk at the time Lieutenant Pierce’s car stopped at the ramp exit?

Mr. RUBY. I said I was on the sidewalk—I walked past.

Mr. HERNDON. Yes; did that question trouble you then?

Mr. RUBY. No.

Mr. HERNDON. You were on the sidewalk?

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. HERNDON. I just wanted to clarify that. When I asked you, “Are your parents alive?”, Mr. Ruby, have they been deceased for some time?

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. HERNDON. Did that question bother you or trouble you at all?

Mr. RUBY. No; I don’t know—I guess I’m nervous now—I don’t know just why I said that.

Mr. HERNDON. I have no further questions in that series.

Mr. RUBY. Aren’t you going to ask me whether I knew anything as to whether or not he was going to come down, or anything like that?

Mr. HERNDON. We will have to prepare some more questions.

Mr. SPECTER. May the record show that Mr. Alexander and Mr. Tonahill are now back in the room, and we are going to take a brief recess.

Mr. HERNDON. You’ve done very well thus far, Mr. Ruby, as far as cooperating on the examination.

Mr. RUBY. OK. What happens now?

Mr. HERNDON. We’re going to take a break and give you a little rest. Now, if you will just lean forward and raise your arms, I will take this equipment off of you.

Mr. RUBY. I’m not hungry, jailer.

Mr. HOLMAN. Do you want to go lie down?

Mr. RUBY. We only have a 20-minute break. That’s all.

Mr. HERNDON. Might I suggest to the jailer that you might like to sit at another chair and change your position?

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

(Reporter’s note: 4:45 p.m.)

(The proceedings were in recess at this time from 4:45 p.m. to 6:25 p.m.)

Mr. SPECTER. May the record now show that it is 6:25 p.m. and that we have adjourned for a period of 1 hour and 40 minutes, during which time Mr. Ruby has had an opportunity to rest. Is that correct, Mr. Ruby?

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. SPECTER. Mr. Ruby has just asked me about the presence of reporters downstairs, and would you get this in the record. Miss Oliver. Would you repeat what you just said to me, Mr. Ruby?

Mr. RUBY. Are you going to make any announcement to them?

Mr. SPECTER. Yes; and you asked me to speak freely about this matter?

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. SPECTER. My view is that we should, in view of the circumstances, as I have been told—there are a large number of reporters downstairs, and I’ve discussed this with Mr. Fowler and Mr. Tonahill, and it’s our joint view that there should be an announcement made that you have requested a polygraph examination and that we have conducted one under the auspices of the President’s Commission through the cooperation of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, that there has been extensive examination and the results, of course, cannot yet be known at this date, but they are to be taken to Washington and studied for future action by the Commission.

Mr. RUBY. Let’s make it clear that Mr. Tonahill don’t represent me. Joe, let’s have that understanding?

Mr. TONAHILL. Clayton is going to make whatever announcement is made for you, Jack.

Mr. RUBY. Joe, let’s have that understanding, will you please, Joe?

Mr. FOWLER. Jack, we’ll have no difficulty with that, don’t worry about that.

Mr. SPECTER. The substance of what I just said was discussed by me with Mr. Fowler and it is our thought that that would be an appropriate statement to make at this particular time. That’s about as far as we can go. Do you concur in the advisability of that?

Mr. RUBY. Now, with reference to hedging on questions and so on, don’t you think some comment should be made that I wasn’t reluctant in answering any of the questions that were put to me?

Mr. SPECTER. I think that would be a fair comment to make, if you want that statement made?

Mr. RUBY. Yes; I think so.

Mr. ALEXANDER. That there was cooperation. That he was cooperative.

Mr. SPECTER. Yes; that he was cooperative.

Mr. RUBY. On all questions on anything and everything pertaining to anything.

Mr. SPECTER. Mr. Ruby, in view of your interest in that disclosure, I think that would be appropriate to be made.

Mr. ALEXANDER. That without reservation, he cooperated fully.

Mr. RUBY. I wanted to be more specific, that I wanted to be asked.

Mr. SPECTER. Well, I said that initially. In other words, that it is at your request that we had conducted this, so that it would be clear that you took the lead in initiating this examination, which is the fact, and we will state the fact or give you the credit in that direction, just as it is the fact.

Mr. RUBY. But the point I wanted to bring out was that I wanted to specify that I also wanted to be asked any and all questions, regardless of what might be subversive or whatever thoughts might be in your mind.

Bill, I think you can give these people certain questions and more potent ones than they know, because you probably know a lot of things that you have in your own mind that you’d like to have answered too?

Mr. FOWLER. Well, Jack, let me say this for your purpose and for the purpose of the Warren Commission. This is not a trial and really, Mr. Alexander is here as an attorney just like I am. He’s representing the State just as Mr. Tonahill and I are representing you.

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. ALEXANDER. Jack, I can’t really think of anything that I’d like to ask.

Mr. RUBY. Well, let me get this clear. I notice that the pictures brought out the fact that there are two sets of private boxes, close together in the post office. Did you gentlemen know this? Which is quite an insinuation.

Mr. ALEXANDER. Jack, let’s ask the question, “Did you meet Oswald at the post office at any time, as far as you know, until the next day?”

Mr. RUBY. Yes—and also they had a statement in there that I used the box for purpose of mail orders and to do business with Mexico and Cuba. That’s incorrect because I never did business with Mexico and Cuba.

Now, these are things that you gentlemen don’t want to ask me, but Mr. Alexander would know what to tell you about that.

Mr. ALEXANDER. There is one question that ought to be asked.

Mr. SPECTER. I want that, Bill.

Mr. ALEXANDER. “Did any Cuban or foreign influence cause you to do any act?”

Mr. RUBY. Very good—very good.

Mr. ALEXANDER. Because there has been some question about maybe Jack was motivated from Cuba and we ought to eliminate that and ask him a question to give him a chance to eliminate it.

Mr. RUBY. Also, I want to get the gun situation straightened out. You know what I’m talking about—the Ray Brantley call.

Mr. ALEXANDER. Yes.

Mr. RUBY. And the trip down to Cuba—I’m getting things confused now.

Mr. ALEXANDER. Let’s let him write that.

Mr. SPECTER. Mr. Ruby, we have conferred with all parties here on the substance of the questions to be asked. Naturally, we have limitations in time and we can only ask them in a short series. We have conferred with Mr. Fowler, we have conferred with Mr. Wade and with Mr. Alexander here, and naturally also, the interest of the Commission is paramount, and we are doing our very best not to interfere with the State criminal proceedings. We do not wish to take sides at all nor to influence it in any way. We want to accomplish the purpose of the Commission. Those interests overlap to some extent because whenever we ask a Commission question, it has collateral bearings on a great many things, but to the extent that we can, we have conferred, as I say, with the defense counsel and the representatives of the district attorney’s office in arriving at the questions which have been asked, and I think we will cover before this examination is concluded the important areas. Now, at the end of it, if you feel that there is some other area that you would like to have covered, we would be very willing to hear your request and to accommodate you to the maximum extent possible consistent with the policy of the Commission.

Mr. RUBY. Mr. Alexander knows certain questions that he has in his mind that haven’t come out and I think I know what he’s thinking about.

Mr. SPECTER. Well, Mr. Alexander has talked to me about some questions that I’m sure he would prefer on the record and we have taken those into account in formulating our questions. Isn’t that so, Mr. Alexander?

Mr. ALEXANDER. Yes, sir. I think what Jack has in mind is that he wants an opportunity to answer a question regarding any possible connection with anything in Cuba. Also, he wants a question asked that will give him an opportunity to explain that the gun which he asked Ray Brantley to mail to McWillie in Las Vegas——

Mr. RUBY. Not to Vegas, to Cuba, and all I did was to receive a phone call, and this was—I told this to the Warren Commission—and this was during the time when we were very friendly together.

Mr. ALEXANDER. That was in 1958.

Mr. RUBY. All I did was relay the phone message to Ray Brantley, and he said, “Oh, I know Mr. McWillie very well,” and following that I never followed up or seen him. Now, this is incriminating for me because all I did—like a tool—got myself involved by relating a message that somebody else wanted. Now, this was during peacetime because he wanted protection from the foreign element coming in.

Mr. ALEXANDER. Jack relayed the message that McWillie wanted a Smith & Wesson or some kind of a .38.

Mr. RUBY. Yes. There wasn’t no money or anything in the deal. Ray Brantley said, “Oh, I know McWillie. I’ve done business with him constantly.” Following that—I never followed up on it a time, and what he did—and this is incriminating against me very bad, but he had the irony to do this—when I mentioned the fact that I did call Ray Brantley, this man denied that I called him. That makes me a liar to that extent, so I want that question put to me in reference to Ray Brantley and all that and I want about my trip to Cuba and my association with the underworld.

Mr. SPECTER. Well, the question of the gun with Ray Brantley was covered in detail when the Chief Justice was here and we shall cover that in the balance of the polygraph examination.

Mr. RUBY. I also had numerous phone calls, long-distance calls, all over the country and that was with relationship only to my nightclub that I had trouble with the union. There was no conspiracy, but you’ll go into that.

Mr. SPECTER. You covered that also in your testimony before the Commission.

Mr. RUBY. Yes; but that doesn’t prove anything.

Mr. ALEXANDER. Let me suggest one question there to ask him?

Mr. SPECTER. Yes, sir.

Mr. ALEXANDER. “Did any telephone call you made have any connection, however remote, with your shooting of Oswald?”

Mr. RUBY. No.

Mr. ALEXANDER. That will cover it.

Mr. TONAHILL. How about asking him if he didn’t tell the Warren Commission the truth several weeks ago in answering every question they asked him?

Mr. RUBY. I didn’t elaborate enough with them and we didn’t go into it enough, because I was telling a complete story. Yes; I’ll answer that—certainly I will.

Mr. SPECTER. Fine; that will be asked of you.

Mr. HERNDON. That will be somewhat all inclusive.

Mr. SPECTER. We’ll have that for the very next series.

Mr. ALEXANDER. “Did you have any telephone conversation which related in any way with the shooting of Oswald?”

Mr. RUBY. Also, ask me whether the phone calls were in reference to the union trying to get somebody to help me with my club.

Mr. ALEXANDER. Let’s make another question about that. “Did any union or underworld connection have anything to do with the shooting of Oswald?”

Mr. RUBY. Very good.

Mr. SPECTER. Yes; I will add those in and cover them to the maximum extent possible, and I add that reservation because there are a great many additional questions to be asked which we have already mapped out.

Mr. HERNDON. Do you want me to proceed with the usual preliminaries?

Mr. RUBY. You don’t have to proceed with that. Why don’t you just call them to me and I’ll answer them. You want to go through a formality—a previous thing.

Mr. ALEXANDER. Jack, he’s got to have a record.

Mr. HERNDON. I want to make sure you understand the question involved.

Mr. RUBY. I’m sure I do.

Mr. HERNDON. I feel in fairness to both of us, we have to do this.

Mr. RUBY. Believe me—believe me, you don’t have to go through that formality, if you want to save yourself a lot of time, and I think you’ll like that better.

Mr. ALEXANDER. Jack, he has to have a written question that’s keyed to this tape.

Mr. RUBY. Yes; I follow that, but he doesn’t have to go through the preliminary explaining to me this because I’ll answer anything you want “off the hook.”

Mr. SPECTER. Mr. Ruby, we appreciate your willingness to do that and we’ll take you up on that to the fullest extent possible, but Mr. Herndon has to do some preliminary questioning which is indispensable to his evaluation.

Mr. RUBY. All right, get him to minimize it if he can.

Mr. SPECTER. He will bear that in mind and minimize it to the fullest extent.

Mr. HERNDON. Are you ready?

Mr. SPECTER. Yes.

Mr. HERNDON. Then, these gentlemen actually will not be aware of the questions, is that all right with you, I mean—prior to the time they leave? I believe we discussed that previously and I did want to mention it, that it would be so important when the questions would be asked.

Mr. ALEXANDER. Not to me, Jack.

Mr. RUBY. I see—about your being aware of the question.

Mr. HERNDON. Mr. Specter, you recall, previously—one of the reasons I was going over all the questions before actually conducting the examination was in order for these gentlemen that are in attendance to be aware of what questions are going to be asked Mr. Ruby during the actual polygraph examination. Now, if we dispense with that before we go over these questions, if they leave the room, they do not know the questions I’m going to ask him.

Mr. ALEXANDER. I don’t think Jack has any objection to us staying here at this time, do you, Jack?

Mr. RUBY. No; I certainly don’t.

Mr. FOWLER. Well, of course, I still have the same objection, and respectfully request again, Jack, that we’re not trying to hide anything—don’t misunderstand me.

Mr. RUBY. Just a minute—let me tell you something. I want to straighten up some things. Whether he leaves the room or not, Mr. Alexander is going to know everything that went on here, so please concede to it.

Mr. FOWLER. Well, I’ll concede to this, that at sometime he will know, but I’m saying this—that perhaps there might be something, Jack, that might in some way be to your detriment if Mr. Alexander knew the answer to the question at this time. Now, he may say “No,” but I still, as your attorney and in trying to protect your rights, insist that it be handled in this way, and I would certainly appreciate your cooperation with me to that extent.

Mr. RUBY. The only reason I want Mr. Alexander here, I want him to know my effectiveness when I answer the questions.

Mr. FOWLER. Jack, that’s very well, and I don’t think he has any doubt that you’re trying to hide it and all of that.

Mr. SPECTER. Then, let us proceed as we have before, with Mr. Herndon announcing the questions in advance but going through a minimum amount of preliminaries so that he is satisfied that he can evaluate the results.

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. SPECTER. And we will proceed on that basis.

Mr. RUBY. You can run through them a lot faster and I’ll grasp them.

Mr. HERNDON. All right; I will proceed in that manner and also with the questions we have already set forth.

Mr. SPECTER. Yes; and then we’ll supplement them to cover the additional topics which have not yet been included.

Mr. HERNDON. All right, Mr. Ruby, do you feel all right to continue with this?

Mr. RUBY. Yes; I am ready.

Mr. HERNDON. Very fine. I will hook this up and go over these questions and I’ll just read them out to you and you just speak up if there is one you want to rephrase.

Mr. RUBY. Go ahead.

Mr. HERNDON. “Did you see the armored truck before you went to the basement?”

Mr. RUBY. No.

Mr. HERNDON. “Did you enter the police department through a door at the rear on the east side of the jail?”

Mr. RUBY. No.

Mr. HERNDON. “After talking to Little Lynn, did you hear any announcement that Oswald was about to be moved?”

Mr. RUBY. No.

Mr. HERNDON. “Before you left your apartment Sunday morning, did anyone tell you the armored car was on the way to the police department?”

Mr. RUBY. No.

Mr. HERNDON. Those are your main questions, and I will ask you some of these other routine questions.

Mr. RUBY. All right; go ahead.

Mr. HERNDON. “Do you have any brothers?”

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. HERNDON. “Do you have any sisters?”

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. HERNDON. “Have you answered all questions truthfully?”

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. HERNDON. Now, here’s a question I want to go over with you very carefully. “Did you ever hit anyone with any kind of weapon?”

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. HERNDON. All right; I’ll give you an opportunity now to explain that to me. This is for my purposes of the examination.

Mr. RUBY. Well, in running a—in my business, when you get somebody with a—it’s a very exciting business. One particular night a man pulled a knife on me and I took a pistol and hit him on the head in that altercation, and sometimes you get fellows with real bad rough reputations. They’re real toughs. There’s no question about it, and being in my type of business for a livelihood, the only way you can—of course, I do call the law enforcement officers. At that particular moment, it’s my life or theirs, and some of these men are pretty powerful physically, and I fought in every way possible, with my fists and everything else—but to minimize the various troubles I had, where there would be an altercation or something come up, I’d tell them to leave, and of course, something would happen and they would go from here—whatever it is. It happened a few times where I would pummel a few of these men.

Mr. HERNDON. I understand, Mr. Ruby, but all of these incidents that you recall are in connection with your operating this club?

Mr. RUBY. Yes; they are at the club. These boys are real bad boys and they all have records, and they’re pretty tough guys. Will you agree with something on that?

Mr. ALEXANDER. That’s right.

Mr. HERNDON. Then, on the actual test. I’m going to ask you this question: “Other than what you’ve told me, did you ever hit anyone with any kind of weapon?”

Mr. RUBY. I don’t follow—“Other than what you’ve told me?”

Mr. HERNDON. In other words, other than your being the owner of a nightclub, which because of the type of customers you occasionally have, you would have to use some force, perhaps hit a customer or hit someone in your club?

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. HERNDON. Have you ever been involved in any other situation where you actually struck at somebody with a weapon? “Weapon” here I’m referring to as a gun, club, or knife or anything that would be other than just a normal fist-fight.

Mr. RUBY. Yes; that happened, but that was before I got in this trouble. This man threatened to kill me and was going to go for his gun, and I was nice enough to have him stay at my place and he was causing a nuisance in the vicinity of the club, causing brawls and all that and I tried to reprimand him, and a little boy of Italian descent and very gracious, somehow he got very belligerent with me, and I knew he had a car and he said, “I’m going to get my pistol,” and there’s a funny reaction about that. Once they get you cowered to that extent, then you’re doomed, and there’s a funny feeling, when I was with him, that you have with them. So, I got my pistol and I cornered him and I called him by his name and I called him a name, and I said, “You’re going to kill me, you so-and-so?” Finally he said, “I was only kidding, I was only kidding,” and there’s a certain reaction you have and I can’t explain it. That’s the only time any crime of that sort has ever happened outside of my business.

Mr. HERNDON. Outside of your business?

Mr. RUBY. Yes, sir.

Mr. HERNDON. Then, if I asked you whether or not you told me you ever hit anyone with any kind of weapon, unless something else comes up to your mind, you would answer that “Yes”?

Mr. RUBY. Yes, like if I was a goon or something.

Mr. HERNDON. Yes, a union goon.

Mr. RUBY. A union goon. Right. I haven’t been a slugger or anything like that.

Mr. HERNDON. All right, we can go along here Mr. Ruby, and I will hook up the instrument.

(Reporter’s note: 6:43 p.m.)

Mr. HERNDON. Will you raise your arms, Mr. Ruby, please? Do you feel comfortable?

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. HERNDON. Now, lean back. [Attached instruments to Mr. Ruby.]

Mr. RUBY. Have I been evading any of your questions?

Mr. HERNDON. You have been most cooperative—thus far no problems.

Mr. RUBY. But you can’t tell how I stand, can you?

Mr. HERNDON. Mr. Ruby, I will want to take a considerable amount of time to review these charts very thoroughly before I come to any conclusion.

Mr. RUBY. How long would it take—how long will it take?

Mr. HERNDON. Well, I can’t answer that question with a definite answer. It depends on what I may run into when I study these very carefully back in Washington.

Mr. RUBY. Bill, will I still be around when the answers come back?

Mr. ALEXANDER. Yes.

Mr. RUBY. Raise your right hand and give him your word.

Mr. ALEXANDER. That’s right.

Mr. RUBY. Chief, you heard him, did you not, Chief? [Addressing the Chief Jailer Holman.] You and I should live so long.

Mr. HERNDON. Is that comfortable, Mr. Ruby?

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. HERNDON. Now, I’m not going to ask the questions at this time, I’m just going to readjust the instruments.

Mr. TONAHILL. Let’s go, Bill.

Mr. SPECTER. Let the record show that Mr. Alexander and Mr. Tonahill have left the room.

Mr. HERNDON. Do you want to cough, Mr. Ruby?

Mr. RUBY. You want me to?

Mr. HERNDON. Yes.

(Mr. Ruby coughed at this time.)

Mr. HERNDON. All right, are you about ready to begin with this one?

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. HERNDON. Once again, just repeating instructions, if you will uncross your legs, sir, and put your feet flat on the floor and look straight ahead and answer the questions truthfully “Yes” or “No.”

This will be series No. 5. I will let you know when the test will begin. Is there a little pressure on the arm cuff?

Mr. RUBY. Yes.

Mr. HERNDON. Now, Mr. Ruby, look straight ahead. That’s fine. Now, just look straight ahead and try not to move, and the test will begin.

(Reporter’s note: 6:45 p.m.)

Mr. HERNDON. “Is your last name Ruby?”

Mr. RUBY. “Yes.”

Mr. HERNDON. “Did you see the armored car before it entered the basement?”

Mr. RUBY. “No.”

Mr. HERNDON. “Do you have any brothers?”

Mr. RUBY. “Yes.”

Mr. HERNDON. “Did you enter the police department through a door at the rear on the east side of the jail?”

Mr. RUBY. “No.”

Mr. HERNDON. “Do you have any sisters?”

Mr. RUBY. “Yes.”

Mr. HERNDON. “After talking to Little Lynn did you hear any announcement that Oswald was about to be moved?”

Mr. RUBY. “No.”

Mr. HERNDON. “Other than what you’ve told me, did you ever hit anyone with any kind of weapon?”

Mr. RUBY. I don’t know how to answer that.

Mr. HERNDON. All right, just sit still and relax, sir.

Mr. RUBY. Ask me that again—I got the answer.

Mr. HERNDON. “Other than what you’ve told me, did you ever hit anyone with any kind of weapon?”

Mr. RUBY. “No.”

Mr. HERNDON. “Before you left your apartment Sunday morning, did anyone tell you the armored car was on the way to the police department?”

Mr. RUBY. “No.”

Mr. HERNDON. “Have you answered all questions truthfully?”

Mr. RUBY. “Yes.”

Mr. HERNDON. All right, that test is over. Just sit still for a moment, and I will now release the pressure on your arm. You can move you left arm and relax.

(Reporter’s note: 6:50 p.m.)

Mr. HERNDON. I’m sorry if I gave you any problem on that question.

Mr. RUBY. Yes, because it threw me off again.

Spotted a typo or a problem in this chapter? Tell us