Report of the President's Commission on the Assassination of President John F. Kennedy

by United States. Warren Commission

BACKGROUND OF LEE HARVEY OSWALD

Finding no evidence in the circumstances immediately surrounding the assassination that any person other than Lee Harvey Oswald was involved in the killing of the President, the Commission directed an intensive investigation into his life for the purpose, among others, of detecting any possible traces that at some point he became involved in a conspiracy culminating in the deed of November 22, 1963. As a product of this investigation, the Commission has compiled a detailed chronological biography of Oswald which is set forth as appendix XIII. Study of the period from Oswald’s birth in 1939 to his military service from 1956 to 1959 has revealed no evidence that he was associated with any type of sinister or subversive organization during that period. Though his personality and political views took shape during these early years, the events of that period are significant primarily to an understanding of the personality of Lee Harvey Oswald and are discussed in that connection in chapter VII. Beginning with his preparation for defection to the Soviet Union in 1959, however, Oswald engaged in several activities which required close scrutiny by the Commission. In an appraisal of Oswald’s actions since 1959 for the purpose of determining whether he was part of a conspiracy, several aspects of his background and character must be borne in mind. He was young, inexperienced, and had only a limited education. As will be more fully discussed in chapter VII, he was unable to establish relationships with others and had a resentment for authority and any discipline flowing from it. While he demonstrated the ability to act secretively and alone, without regard to the consequences to himself, as in his defection to the Soviet Union, he does not appear to have been the kind of person whom one would normally expect to be selected as a conspirator.

Residence in the Soviet Union

Lee Harvey Oswald was openly committed to Marxist ideology, he defected to the Soviet Union in 1959, and resided there until June of 1962, eventually returning to the United States with a Russian wife. In order to evaluate rumors and speculations[C6-96] that Oswald may have been an agent of the Soviet Union, the Commission investigated the facts surrounding Oswald’s stay in Russia. The Commission was thus fulfilling its obligation to probe all facts of possible relevance to the assassination, and does not suggest by this investigation that the rulers of the Soviet Union believed that their political interests would be advanced by the assassination of President Kennedy. On this question, the Secretary of State testified before the Commission on June 10, 1964 as follows:

I have seen no evidence that would indicate to me that the Soviet Union considered that it had an interest in the removal of President Kennedy or that it was in any way involved in the removal of President Kennedy.

* * * * *

I have not seen or heard of any scrap of evidence indicating that the Soviet Union had any desire to eliminate President Kennedy nor in any way participated in any such event.

Now, standing back and trying to look at that question objectively despite the ideological differences between our two great systems, I can’t see how it could be to the interest of the Soviet Union to make any such effort.

* * * * *

I do think that the Soviet Union, again objectively considered, has an interest in the correctness of state relations. This would be particularly true among the great powers, with which the major interests of the Soviet Union are directly engaged.

* * * * *

I think that although there are grave differences between the Communist world and the free world, between the Soviet Union and other major powers, that even from their point of view there needs to be some shape and form to international relations, that it is not in their interest to have this world structure dissolve into complete anarchy, that great states and particularly nuclear powers have to be in a position to deal with each other, to transact business with each other, to try to meet problems with each other, and that requires the maintenance of correct relations and access to the leadership on all sides.

I think also that although there had been grave differences between Chairman Khrushchev and President Kennedy, I think there were evidences of a certain mutual respect that had developed over some of the experiences, both good and bad, through which these two men had lived.

I think both of them were aware of the fact that any Chairman of the Soviet Union, and any President of the United States, necessarily bear somewhat special responsibility for the general peace of the world. Indeed without exaggeration, one could almost say the existence of the northern hemisphere in this nuclear age.

* * * * *

So that it would be an act of rashness and madness for Soviet leaders to undertake such an action as an active policy. Because everything would have been put in jeopardy or at stake in connection with such an act.

It has not been our impression that madness has characterized the actions of the Soviet leadership in recent years.[C6-97]

The Commission accepts Secretary Rusk’s estimate as reasonable and objective, but recognizes that a precise assessment of Soviet intentions or interests is most difficult. The Commission has thus examined all the known facts regarding Oswald’s defection, residence in the Soviet Union, and return to the United States. At each step the Commission sought to determine whether there was any evidence which supported a conclusion that Soviet authorities may have directly or indirectly influenced Oswald’s actions in assassinating the President.

Oswald’s entry into the Soviet Union.—Although the evidence is inconclusive as to the factors which motivated Oswald to go to the Soviet Union, there is no indication that he was prompted to do so by agents of that country. He may have begun to study the Russian language when he was stationed in Japan, which was intermittently from August 1957 to November 1958.[C6-98] After he arrived in Moscow in October 1959 he told several persons that he had been planning his defection for 2 years, which suggests that the decision was made while he was in the Far East.[C6-99] George De Mohrenschildt, who met Oswald after his return from the Soviet Union, testified that Oswald once told him much the same thing: “I met some Communists in Japan and they got me excited and interested, and that was one of my inducements in going to Soviet Russia, to see what goes on there.”[C6-100] This evidence, however, is somewhat at variance with Oswald’s statements made to two American newspaper reporters in Moscow shortly after his defection in 1959,[C6-101] and to other people in the United States after his return in 1962.[C6-102] Though his remarks were not inconsistent as to the time he decided to defect, to these people he insisted that before going to the Soviet Union he had “never met a Communist” and that the intent to defect derived entirely from his own reading and thinking. He said much the same to his brother in a letter he wrote to him from Russia explaining why he had defected.[C6-103] Which of Oswald’s statements was the more accurate remains unknown.

There is no evidence that Oswald received outside assistance in financing his trip to the Soviet Union. After he arrived in Moscow, Oswald told a newspaper correspondent, Aline Mosby, that he had saved $1,500 out of his Marine Corps salary to finance his defection,[C6-104] although the news story based upon Oswald’s interview with Aline Mosby unaccountably listed the sum of $1,600 instead of $1,500.[C6-105] After this article had appeared, Marguerite Oswald also related the $1,600 figure to an FBI agent.[C6-106] Either amount could have been accumulated out of Oswald’s earnings in the Marine Corps; during his 2 years and 10 months of service he received $3,452.20, after all taxes, allotments and other deductions.[C6-107] Moreover Oswald could certainly have made the entire trip on less than $1,000. The ticket on the ship he took from New Orleans to Le Havre, France, cost $220.75;[C6-108] it cost him about $20 to reach London from Le Havre; his plane fare from London to Helsinki, where he received his visa, cost him $111.90; he probably purchased Russian “tourist vouchers” normally good for room and board for 10 days for $300; his train fare from Helsinki to Moscow was about $44; in Moscow he paid only $1.50 to $3 a night for his room and very little for his meals after his tourist vouchers ran out;[C6-109] and apparently he did not pay his hotel bill at all after November 30, 1959.[C6-110] Oswald’s known living habits indicate that he could be extraordinarily frugal when he had reason to be, and it seems clear that he did have a strong desire to go to the Soviet Union.

While in Atsugi, Japan, Oswald studied the Russian language, perhaps with some help from an officer in his unit who was interested in Russian and used to “talk about it” with Oswald occasionally.[C6-111] He studied by himself a great deal in late 1958 and early 1959 after he was transferred from Japan to California.[C6-112] He took an Army aptitude test in Russian in February 1959 and rated “Poor.”[C6-113] When he reached the Soviet Union in October of the same year he could barely speak the language.[C6-114] During the period in Moscow while he was awaiting decision on his application for citizenship, his diary records that he practiced Russian 8 hours a day.[C6-115] After he was sent to Minsk in early January 1960 he took lessons from an interpreter assigned to him for that purpose by the Soviet Government.[C6-116] Marina Oswald said that by the time she met him in March 1961 he spoke the language well enough so that at first she thought he was from one of the Baltic areas of her country, because of his accent. She stated that his only defects were that his grammar was sometimes incorrect and that his writing was never good.[C6-117]

Thus, the limited evidence provides no indication that Oswald was recruited by Soviet agents in the Far East with a view toward defection and eventual return to the United States. Moreover, on its face such a possibility is most unlikely. If Soviet agents had communicated with Oswald while he was in the Marine Corps, one of the least probable instructions they would have given him would have been to defect. If Oswald had remained a Marine radar specialist, he might at some point have reached a position of value as a secret agent. However, his defection and the disloyal statements he made publicly in connection with it eliminated the possibility that he would ever gain access to confidential information or programs of the United States. The very fact that he defected, therefore, is itself persuasive evidence that he was not recruited as an agent prior to his defection.

The Commission has investigated the circumstances under which Oswald obtained a visa to enter the Soviet Union for possible evidence that he received preferential treatment in being permitted to enter the country. Oswald left New Orleans, La., for Europe on September 20, 1959,[C6-118] having been released from active duty in the Marine Corps on September 11, 1959.[C6-119] He went directly to Helsinki, Finland, by way of Le Havre, France, and London, England, arriving at Helsinki on Saturday, October 10, 1959.[C6-120] Oswald probably arrived in Helsinki too late in the evening to have applied for a visa at the Soviet Union consulate that night.[C6-121] In light of the rapidity with which he made connections throughout his entire trip,[C6-122] he probably applied for a visa early on Monday, October 12. On October 14, he was issued Soviet Tourist Visa No. 403339, good for one 6-day visit in the U.S.S.R.[C6-123] He left Helsinki on a train destined for Moscow on October 15.[C6-124]

The Department of State has advised the Commission that it has some information that in 1959 it usually took an American tourist in Helsinki 1 to 2 weeks to obtain a visa,[C6-125] and that it has other information that the normal waiting period during the past 5 years has been a week or less.[C6-126] According to the Department’s information, the waiting period has always varied frequently and widely, with one confirmed instance in 1963 of a visa routinely issued in less than 24 hours.[C6-127] The Central Intelligence Agency has indicated that visas during the 1964 tourist season were being granted in about 5 to 7 days.[C6-128]

This information from the Department of State and the Central Intelligence Agency thus suggests that Oswald’s wait for a visa may have been shorter than usual but not beyond the range of possible variation. The prompt issuance of Oswald’s visa may have been merely the result of normal procedures, due in part to the fact that the summer rush had ended. It might also mean that Oswald was unusually urgent in his demands that his visa be issued promptly. Oswald himself told officials at the American Embassy in Moscow on October 31, when he appeared to renounce his citizenship, that he had said nothing to the Soviets about defecting until he arrived in Moscow.[C6-129] In any event, the Commission has found nothing in the circumstances of Oswald’s entry into the Soviet Union which indicates that he was at the time an agent of the U.S.S.R.

Defection and admission to residence.—Two months and 22 days elapsed from Oswald’s arrival in Moscow until he left that city to take up residence in Minsk. The Commission has considered the possibility that Oswald was accepted for residence in the Soviet Union and sent to Minsk unusually soon after he arrived, either because he had been expected or because during his first weeks in Moscow he developed an undercover relationship with the Soviet Government. In doing so, the Commission has attempted to reconstruct the events of those months, though it is, of course, impossible to account for Oswald’s activities on every day of that period.

Oswald’s “Historic Diary,”[C6-130] which commences on October 16, 1959, the date Oswald arrived in Moscow, and other writings he later prepared,[C6-131] have provided the Commission with one source of information about Oswald’s activities throughout his stay in the Soviet Union. Even assuming the diary was intended to be a truthful record, it is not an accurate guide to the details of Oswald’s activities. Oswald seems not to have been concerned about the accuracy of dates and names,[C6-132] and apparently made many of his entries subsequent to the date the events occurred. Marina Oswald testified that she believed that her husband did not begin to keep the diary until he reached Minsk, 3 months after his arrival in Russia,[C6-133] and scraps of paper found in Oswald’s possession, containing much the same information as appears in his diary,[C6-134] suggest that he transcribed the entries into the diary at a later time. The substance of Oswald’s writings has been carefully examined for consistency with all other related information available to the Commission. In addition, the writings have been checked for handwriting,[C6-135] and for consistency of style, grammar, and spelling with earlier and later writings which are known to be his.[C6-136] No indication has been found that entries were written or coached by other persons.[C6-137]

However, the most reliable information concerning the period Oswald spent in Moscow in the latter part of 1962 comes from the records of the American Embassy in Moscow,[C6-138] the testimony of Embassy officials,[C6-139] and the notes of two American newspaper reporters, Aline Mosby [C6-140] and Priscilla Johnson,[C6-141] who interviewed Oswald during this period. Oswald’s correspondence with his brother and mother has also been relied upon for some relatively minor information. The findings upon which the Commission based its conclusion concerning Soviet involvements in the assassination were supported by evidence other than material provided by the Soviet Union[C6-142] or Oswald’s writings. The Central Intelligence Agency has also contributed data on the normal practices and procedures of the Soviet authorities in handling American defectors.

The “Historic Diary” indicates that on October 16, 1959, the day Oswald arrived in Moscow, he told his Intourist guide, Rima Shirokova, that he wished to renounce his American citizenship and become a Soviet citizen. The same day, the guide reportedly helped Oswald prepare a letter to the Soviet authorities requesting citizenship.[C6-143] The diary indicates, however, that on October 21 he was informed that his visa had expired and that he would be required to leave Moscow within 2 hours.[C6-144] During the preceding days, according to the diary, he had been interviewed once and perhaps twice by Soviet officials.[C6-145] During this period the KGB,[B] the agency with primary responsibility for examining defectors arriving in Russia, undoubtedly investigated Oswald as fully as possible. In 1959, virtually all Intourist guides were KGB informants, and there is no reason to believe that this was not true of Oswald’s guide.[C6-146]

[B] The Committee for State Security, best known by its Russian initials, “KGB,” is a lineal descendant of the revolutionary ChEKA and has passed through numerous changes of name since 1917 with little change of function. Presently the KGB handles all Soviet counterintelligence operations and is the instrument for various types of subversive activities. It is responsible for the internal security of the Soviet state and the safety of its leaders. In addition it shares responsibility for foreign espionage activities with the intelligence component of the Ministry of Defense, the “GRU.” The KGB would have the primary responsibility for keeping track of a defector such as Oswald.

The Ministry of Internal Affairs or “MVD” was for many years the designation of the organization responsible for civil law enforcement and administration of prisons and forced labor camps in the Soviet Union. During a part of its history it also directed vast economic combines. In January 1960, the central or all-union MVD was abolished and its powers transferred to the MVD’s of the several Soviet republics. A further change took place in the summer of 1962, when the republic MVD’s were renamed Ministries for the Preservation of Public Order and Safety. In the past few years the republic MVD’s have been gradually divesting themselves of their economic functions. When Lee Harvey Oswald was in the Soviet Union though, the MVD still carried on substantial economic activities. For example, inmates of the MVD-administered “corrective labor colonies” engaged in brickmaking, heavy construction work, and lumbering.

In the Commission’s report, the term KGB will be used, as above, to describe the principal Soviet counterintelligence and espionage service. Oswald often inaccurately referred to the “secret police” as the MVD; and in any quotations from him, the Commission will reproduce his actual words. Whenever the Commission refers to the MVD, it will be referring to it as defined in this footnote.

According to Oswald’s diary he attempted suicide when he learned his application for citizenship had been denied.[C6-147] If true, this would seem to provide strong evidence that, at least prior to October 21, there was no undercover relationship between Oswald and the Soviet Government. Though not necessarily conclusive, there is considerable direct evidence which indicates that Oswald did slash his wrist. Oswald’s autopsy showed that he had a scar on his left wrist and that it was of the kind which could have been caused by a suicide attempt.[C6-148] The medical records from the Botkinskaya Hospital in Moscow, furnished by the Soviet Government, reveal that from October 21 to October 28 he was treated there for a self-inflicted wound on the left wrist.[C6-149] The information contained in these records is consistent with the facts disclosed by the autopsy examination relating to Oswald’s wrist and to other facts known about Oswald. Although no witness recalled Oswald mentioning a suicide attempt,[C6-150] Marina Oswald testified that when she questioned her husband about the scar on his wrist, he became “very angry,” and avoided giving her a reply.[C6-151] Oswald’s character, discussed in the following chapter, does not seem inconsistent with a suicide or feigned suicide attempt, nor with his having failed to disclose the suicide attempt. Many witnesses who testified before the Commission observed that he was not an “open” or trusting person, had a tendency toward arrogance, and was not the kind of man who would readily admit weaknesses.[C6-152]

Oswald appeared at the American Embassy in Moscow on October 31, 1959, 3 days after his release from the Botkinskaya Hospital.[C6-153] He did not give the officials at the Embassy any indication that he had recently received medical treatment.[C6-154] Oswald’s appearance was the first notification to the American Government that he was in Russia, since he had failed to inform the Embassy upon his arrival,[C6-155] as most American tourists did at the time.[C6-156] In appendix XV, Oswald’s dealings with the Embassy in 1959 until his return to the United States in 1962 are described in full, and all action taken by the American officials on his case is evaluated. His conduct at the Embassy has also been considered by the Commission for any indication it may provide as to whether or not Oswald was then acting under directions of the Soviet Government.

Commission Exhibit No. 913

NOTE HANDED BY OSWALD TO THE AMERICAN EMBASSY IN MOSCOW ON OCT. 31, 1959

At the Embassy, Oswald declared that he wished to renounce his U.S. citizenship,[C6-157] but the consul to whom he spoke, Richard E. Snyder, refused to accept his renunciation at that time, telling him that he would have to return to complete the necessary papers.[C6-158] However, Oswald did give the consul his passport[C6-159] and a handwritten statement requesting that his American citizenship be “revoked” and “affirm[ing] [his] * * * allegiance” to the Soviet Union.[C6-160] (See Commission Exhibit No. 913, [p. 261].) The FBI has confirmed that this statement is in Oswald’s handwriting,[C6-161] and Snyder has testified that the letter’s phrases are consistent with the way Oswald talked and conducted himself.[C6-162] During the approximately 40-minute interview, Oswald also informed Snyder that he had been a radar operator in the Marine Corps, intimating that he might know something of special interest, and that he had informed a Soviet official that he would give the Soviets any information concerning the Marine Corps and radar operation which he possessed.[C6-163] Although Oswald never filed a formal renunciation, in a letter to the Embassy dated November 3, 1959, he again requested that his American citizenship be revoked and protested the refusal to accept his renunciation on October 31.[C6-164] (See Commission Exhibit No. 912, [p. 263].)

While at the Embassy,[C6-165] and in a subsequent interview with an American journalist,[C6-166] Oswald displayed familiarity with Communist ideological arguments, which led those with whom he spoke to speculate that he may have received some instruction from Soviet authorities. Oswald’s familiarity with the law regarding renunciation of citizenship, observed by both Embassy officials,[C6-167] could also be construed as a sign of coaching by Soviet authorities. However, Oswald is known to have been an avid reader[C6-168] and there is evidence that he had read Communist literature without guidance while in the Marine Corps and before that time.[C6-169] After his arrival in Moscow, Oswald most probably had discussions with his Intourist guide and others,[C6-170] but none of the Americans with whom he talked in Moscow felt that his conversations necessarily revealed any type of formal training.[C6-171] The “Historic Diary” indicates that Oswald did not tell his guide that he intended to visit the Embassy because he feared she would disapprove.[C6-172] (See Commission Exhibit No. 24, [p. 264].) Though Oswald gave Snyder the impression “of an intelligent person who spoke in a manner and on a level, which seemed to befit his apparent level of intelligence,”[C6-173] correspondent Priscilla Johnson, who spent about 5 hours talking with him,[C6-174] received a much less favorable impression:

He liked to create the pretense, the impression that he was attracted to abstract discussion and was capable of engaging in it, and was drawn to it. But it was like pricking a balloon. I had the feeling that if you really did engage him on this ground, you very quickly would discover that he didn’t have the capacity for a logical sustained argument about an abstract point on economics or on noneconomic, political matters or any matter, philosophical.[C6-175]

Commission Exhibit No. 912

LETTER MAILED BY OSWALD TO THE AMERICAN EMBASSY IN MOSCOW.

---

Commission Exhibit No. 24

OSWALD’S OWN ACCOUNT OF HIS MEETING AT THE AMERICAN EMBASSY IN MOSCOW OCT. 31, 1959

Excerpts from his “Historic Diary” A comparison of the formal note Oswald handed Snyder[C6-176] and his letter of November 3[C6-177] with the provisions of section 349(a) of the Immigration and Nationality Act[C6-178] suggests that Oswald had read the statute but understood it imperfectly; he apparently was trying to use three out of the four ways set out in the statute to surrender his citizenship, but he succeeded in none.

Moreover, persuasive evidence that Oswald’s conduct was not carefully coached by Soviet agents is provided by some of his actions at the Embassy. The single statement which probably caused Oswald the most future trouble was his declaration that he had already volunteered to a Soviet official that he would, if asked, tell the Soviet Government all that he knew about his job in radar as a Marine. Certainly a statement of this type would prejudice any possibility of his being an effective pro-Communist agent.

Further, though unquestionably evidencing anti-American sentiments, Oswald’s behavior at the Embassy, which brought him exceedingly close to expatriation, was unlikely to have increased his value in any capacity to the Soviet Union. Richard E. Snyder, the official who interviewed Oswald on October 31, testified that he “had every reason to believe” that Oswald would have carried through a formal—and therefore effective—renunciation of his American citizenship immediately if he had let him.[C6-179] However, as a defector, Oswald could have had considerable propaganda value without expatriating himself; and if he had expatriated himself his eventual return to the United States would have been much more difficult and perhaps impossible. If Snyder’s assessment of Oswald’s intentions is accurate, it thus tends to refute the suggestion that Oswald was being coached by the Soviets. In addition, reporters noticed Oswald’s apparent ambivalence in regard to renouncing his citizenship—stormily demanding that he be permitted to renounce while failing to follow through by completing the necessary papers[C6-180]—behavior which might have detracted from his propaganda value.

According to Oswald’s “Historic Diary”[C6-181] and the documents furnished to the Commission by the Soviet Government,[C6-182] Oswald was not told that he had been accepted as a resident of the Soviet Union until about January 4, 1960. Although on November 13 and 16 Oswald informed Aline Mosby[C6-183] and Priscilla Johnson[C6-184] that he had been granted permission to remain in the country indefinitely, the diary indicates that at that time he had been told only that he could remain “until some solution is found with what to do with me.”[C6-185] The diary is more consistent with the letter Oswald wrote to his brother Robert on December 17, saying that he was then, more than a month after he saw Johnson and Mosby, about to leave his hotel,[C6-186] and with some later correspondence with his mother. Oswald mailed a short note to his mother which she received in Texas on January 5; that same day she mailed a money order to him in Moscow, but it apparently got there too late, because she received it back, unopened, on February 25.[C6-187] Oswald’s conflicting statement to the correspondents also seems reconcilable with his very apparent desire to appear important to others. Moreover, so long as Oswald continued to stay in a hotel in Moscow, the inference is that the Soviet authorities had not yet decided to accept him.[C6-188] This inference is supported by information supplied by the CIA on the handling of other defectors in the Soviet Union.[C6-189]

Thus, the evidence is strong that Oswald waited at least until November 16, when he saw Miss Johnson, and it is probable that he was required to wait until January 4, a little over 2½ months from October 16, before his application to remain in Russia was granted. In mid-November Miss Johnson asked Oswald whether the Russians were encouraging his defection, to which Oswald responded: “The Russians are treating it like a legal formality. They don’t encourage you and they don’t discourage you.”[C6-190] And, when the Soviet Government finally acted, Oswald did not receive Soviet citizenship, as he had requested, but merely permission to reside in Russia on a year-to-year basis.[C6-191]

Asked to comment upon the length of time, 2 months and 22 days, that probably passed before Oswald was granted the right to remain in the Soviet Union, the CIA has advised that “when compared to five other defector cases, this procedure seems unexceptional.”[C6-192] Similarly, the Department of State reports that its information “indicated that a 2-month waiting period is not unusual.”[C6-193] The full response of the CIA is as follows:

Oswald said that he asked for Soviet citizenship on 16 October 1959. According to his diary, he received word a month later that he could stay in the USSR pending disposition of his request, but it was another month and a half before he was given his stateless passport.

When compared to five other defector cases, this procedure seems unexceptional. Two defectors from US Army intelligence units in West Germany appear to have been given citizenship immediately, but both had prior KGB connections and fled as a result of Army security checks. Of the other three cases, one was accepted after not more than five weeks and given a stateless passport apparently at about the same time. The second was immediately given permission to stay for a while, and his subsequent request for citizenship was granted three months later. The third was allowed to stay after he made his citizenship request, but almost two months passed before he was told that he had been accepted. Although the Soviet Ministry of Foreign Affairs soon after told the US Embassy that he was a Soviet citizen, he did not receive his document until five or six months after initial application. We know of only one case in which an American asked for Soviet citizenship but did not take up residence in the USSR. In that instance, the American changed his mind and voluntarily returned to the United States less than three weeks after he had requested Soviet citizenship.[C6-194]

The Department of State has commented as follows:

The files of the Department of State reflect the fact that Oswald first applied for permission to remain in Russia permanently, or at least for a long period, when he arrived in Moscow, and that he obtained permission to remain within one or two months.

A. Is the fact that he obtained permission to stay within this period of time usual?

Answer—Our information indicates that a two months waiting period is not unusual. In the case of [name withheld] the Supreme Soviet decided within two months to give Soviet citizenship and he was thereafter, of course, permitted to stay.

B. Can you tell us what the normal procedures are under similar circumstances?

Answer—It is impossible for us to state any “normal” procedures. The Soviet Government never publicizes the proceedings in these cases or the reasons for its action. Furthermore, it is, of course, extremely unusual for an American citizen to defect.[C6-195]

The information relating to Oswald’s suicide attempt indicates that his application to remain in the Soviet Union was probably rejected about 6 days after his arrival in Moscow. Since the KGB is the Soviet agency responsible for the initial handling of all defectors,[C6-196] it seems likely that the original decision not to accept Oswald was made by the KGB. That Oswald was permitted to remain in Moscow after his release from the hospital suggests that another ministry of the Soviet Government may have intervened on his behalf. This hypothesis is consistent with entries in the “Historic Diary” commenting that the officials Oswald met after his hospital treatment were different from those with whom he had dealt before.[C6-197] The most plausible reason for any such intervention may well have been apprehension over the publicity that would follow the rejection of a devout convert to the Communist cause.

Oswald’s Life in Minsk.—According to the “Historic Diary”[C6-198] and documents received from the Soviet Government,[C6-199] Oswald resided in the city of Minsk from January 1960 until June 1962. Oswald’s life in Minsk is the portion of his life concerning which the least is known. The primary sources of information are Oswald’s own writings and the testimony of Marina Oswald. Other evidence, however, establishes beyond doubt that Oswald was in fact located in Minsk on at least two occasions. The Commission has obtained two photographs which were taken by American tourists in Minsk in August 1961 in which Oswald appears.[C6-200] The tourists did not know Oswald, nor did they speak with him; they remembered only that several men gathered near their car.[C6-201] (See Kramer Exhibit 1, [p. 268].) In addition, Oswald was noticed in Minsk by a student who was traveling with the University of Michigan band on a tour of Russia in the spring of 1961.[C6-202] Oswald corresponded with the American Embassy in Moscow from Minsk,[C6-203] and wrote letters from Minsk to his family in the United States.[C6-204] Oswald and his wife have many photographs taken of themselves which show Minsk backgrounds and persons who are identifiable as residents of Minsk.[C6-205] After he returned to the United States, Oswald conversed about the city with Russian-born American citizens who were familiar with it.[C6-206] Marina Oswald is also familiar with the city.[C6-207] The Commission has also been able independently to verify the existence in Minsk of many of the acquaintances of Oswald and his wife whom they said they knew there.[C6-208] (See Commission Exhibits Nos. 1392, 1395, 2606, 2609, 2612 and 2623, [pp. 270-271].)

OSWALD, MAN STANDING ON RIGHT IN FIGURED SHIRT.

PHOTOGRAPH TAKEN IN MINSK, U.S.S.R. BY AN AMERICAN TOURIST IN AUGUST, 1961.

(KRAMER DEPOSITION 1)

Once he was accepted as a resident alien in the Soviet Union, Oswald was given considerable benefits which ordinary Soviet citizens in his position in society did not have. The “Historic Diary” recites that after Oswald was informed that he could remain in the Soviet Union and was being sent to Minsk he was given 5,000 rubles[C] ($500) by the “Red Cross, * * * for expenses.” He used 2,200 rubles to pay his hotel bill, and another 150 rubles to purchase a train ticket. With the balance of slightly over 2,500 rubles, Oswald felt, according to the diary, like a rich man.[C6-209] Oswald did not receive free living quarters, as the diary indicates the “Mayor” of Minsk promised him,[C6-210] but about 6 weeks after his arrival he did receive an apartment, very pleasant by Soviet standards, for which he was required to pay only 60 rubles ($6.00) a month. Oswald considered the apartment “almost rent free.”[C6-211] Oswald was given a job in the “Byelorussian Radio and Television Factory,” where his pay on a per piece basis ranged from 700 to 900 rubles ($70-$90) a month.[C6-212] According to his wife, this rate of pay was average for people in his occupation but good by Soviet standards generally.[C6-213] She explained that piecework rates throughout the Soviet Union have generally grown out of line with compensation for other jobs.[C6-214] The CIA has confirmed that this condition exists in many areas and occupations in the Soviet Union.[C6-215] In addition to his salary, Oswald regularly received 700 rubles ($70) per month from the Soviet “Red Cross.”[C6-216] The well-paying job, the monthly subsidy, and the “almost rent-free” apartment combined to give Oswald more money than he needed. The only complaint recorded in the “Historic Diary” is that there was “no place to spend the money.”[C6-217]

[C] About a year after Oswald received this money, the ruble was revalued to about 10 times its earlier value.

The Commission has found no basis for associating Oswald’s preferred income with Soviet undercover activity. Marina Oswald testified that foreign nationals are commonly given special treatment in the Soviet Union,[C6-218] and the Central Intelligence Agency has confirmed that it is standard practice in the Soviet Union for Americans and other foreign defectors from countries with high standards of living to be “subsidized.”[C6-219] Apparently it is Soviet practice to attempt to make life sufficiently pleasant for a foreign defector so that he will not become disillusioned and return to his native country. The Commission has also assumed that it is customary for Soviet intelligence agencies to keep defectors under surveillance during their residence in the Soviet Union, through periodic interviews of neighbors and associates of the defector.[C6-220] Oswald once mentioned that the Soviet police questioned his neighbors occasionally.[C6-221]

PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE OSWALDS IN MINSK, U.S.S.R.

(COMMISSION EXHIBIT 1392)
OSWALD AND MARINA ON A BRIDGE IN MINSK

(COMMISSION EXHIBIT 2623)
UNCLE VASILY AKSIONOV AND AUNT LUBOVA AKSIONOVA, WITH THE OSWALDS

(COMMISSION EXHIBIT 1395)
MARINA WAITING FOR BUS

---

PHOTOGRAPHS OF OSWALDS IN U. S. S. R.

(COMMISSION EXHIBIT NO. 2609)
ROSA KUZNETSOVA, ELLA GERMAN, LEE HARVEY OSWALD, AND PAVEL GOLOVACHEV

(COMMISSION EXHIBIT NO. 2612)
OSWALD AND ALFRED (LAST NAME UNKNOWN), A HUNGARIAN FRIEND OF ANITA ZIGER

(COMMISSION EXHIBIT NO. 2606)
VIEW OVERLOOKING THE SYISLOCH RIVER FROM THE BALCONY OF THE OSWALDS’ APARTMENT IN MINSK

Moreover, it is from Oswald’s personal writings alone that the Commission has learned that he received supplementary funds from the Soviet “Red Cross.” In the notes he made during the return trip to the United States Oswald recognized that the “Red Cross” subsidy had nothing to do with the well-known International Red Cross. He frankly stated that the money was paid to him for having “denounced” the United States and that it had come from the “MVD.”[C6-222] Oswald’s papers reveal that the “Red Cross” subsidy was terminated as soon as he wrote the American Embassy in Moscow in February 1961 asking that he be permitted to return.[C6-223] (See Commission Exhibit No. 25, [p. 273].) Marina Oswald’s testimony confirmed this; she said that when she knew Oswald he no longer was receiving the monthly grant but still retained some of the savings accumulated in the months when he had been receiving it.[C6-224] Since she met Oswald in March and married him in April of 1961, her testimony was consistent with his records.

The nature of Oswald’s employment while in Minsk has been examined by the Commission. The factory in which he worked was a large plant manufacturing electronic parts and radio and television sets. Marina Oswald has testified that he was an “apprentice machinist” and “ground small metallic parts for radio receivers, on a lathe.”[C6-225] So far as can be determined, Oswald never straightforwardly described to anyone else in the United States exactly what his job was in the Soviet Union.[C6-226] Some of his acquaintances in Dallas and Fort Worth had the impression that he was disappointed in having been given a menial job and not assigned to an institution of higher learning in the Soviet Union.[C6-227] Marina Oswald confirmed this and also testified that her husband was not interested in his work and not regarded at the factory as a very good worker.[C6-228] The documents furnished to the Commission by the Soviet government were consistent with her testimony on this point, since they included a report from Oswald’s superior at the factory which is critical of his performance on the job.[C6-229] Oswald’s employment and his job performance are thus consistent with his known occupational habits in this country and otherwise afford no ground for suspicion.

Oswald’s membership in a hunting club while he was in the Soviet Union has been a matter of special interest to the Commission. One Russian emigre testified that this was a suspicious circumstance because no one in the Soviet Union is permitted to own a gun for pleasure.[C6-230] The Commission’s investigation, however, has established that this is not so. The Central Intelligence Agency has advised the Commission that hunting societies such as the one to which Oswald belonged are very popular in the Soviet Union.[C6-231] They are frequently sponsored by factories for their employees, as was Oswald’s.[C6-232] Moreover, Soviet citizens (or foreigners residing in the Soviet Union) are permitted to own shotguns, but not rifles, without joining a society; all that is necessary is that the gun be registered at the local militia office immediately after it has been purchased.[C6-233] Experts from the Central Intelligence Agency have examined Oswald’s club membership certificate and gun permit and expressed the opinion that its terms and numbers are consistent with other information the CIA has about the Soviet Union.[C6-234]

(COMMISSION EXHIBIT NO. 25)

EXCERPTS FROM A SPEECH OSWALD NEVER DELIVERED, WHICH HE PROBABLY WROTE ABOARD THE SHIP WHILE RETURNING FROM THE U. S. S. R. WITH HIS FAMILY

Marina Oswald testified that her husband went hunting only on one occasion during the time of their marriage.[C6-235] However, Oswald apparently joined the Byelorussian Society of Hunters and Fishermen in the summer of 1960[C6-236] and did not marry until April 30, 1961,[C6-237] so he could have been more active while he was still a bachelor. Oswald made no secret of his membership in the hunting club. He mentioned it on occasion to friends after he returned to the United States;[C6-238] discussed it at some length in a speech at a Jesuit Seminary in Mobile, Ala., in the summer of 1962;[C6-239] included it in his correspondence with his brother Robert;[C6-240] and kept his membership certificate[C6-241] and gun permit[C6-242] until the day he was killed. In view of these facts, it is unlikely that Oswald’s membership in a hunting club was contrived to conceal some sort of secret training. Moreover, the CIA has informed the Commission that it is in possession of considerable information on the location of secret Soviet training institutions and that it knows of no such institution in or near Minsk during the time Oswald was there.[C6-243]

Oswald’s marriage to Marina Prusakova on April 30, 1961,[C6-244] is itself a fact meriting consideration. A foreigner living in Russia cannot marry without the permission of the Soviet Government.[C6-245] It seems unlikely that the Soviet authorities would have permitted Oswald to marry and to take his wife with him to the United States if they were contemplating using him alone as an agent. The fact that he had a Russian wife would be likely, in their view, to increase any surveillance under which he would be kept by American security agencies, would make him even more conspicuous to his neighbors as “an ex-Russian,” and would decrease his mobility. A wife’s presence in the United States would also constitute a continuing risk of disclosure. On the other hand, Marina Oswald’s lack of English training and her complete ignorance of the United States and its customs[C6-246] would scarcely recommend her to the Soviet authorities as one member of an “agent team” to be sent to the United States on a difficult and dangerous foreign enterprise.

Oswald’s departure from the Soviet Union.—On February 13, 1961, the American Embassy in Moscow received a letter from Oswald postmarked Minsk, February 5, asking that he be readmitted to the United States.[C6-247] This was the first time that the Embassy had heard from or about Oswald since November 16, 1959.[C6-248] The end of the 15-month silence came only a few days after the Department of State in Washington had forwarded a request to the Moscow Embassy on February 1, 1961, informing the Embassy that Oswald’s mother was worried about him, and asking that he get in touch with her if possible.[C6-249] The simultaneity of the two events was apparently coincidental. The request from Marguerite Oswald went from Washington to Moscow by sealed diplomatic pouch and there was no evidence that the seal had been tampered with.[C6-250] The officer of the Department of State who carried the responsibility for such matters has testified that the message was not forwarded to the Russians after it arrived in Moscow.[C6-251]

Oswald’s letter does not seem to have been designed to ingratiate him with the Embassy officials. It starts by incorrectly implying that he had written an earlier letter that was not answered, states that he will return to the United States only if he can first “come to some agreement” on there being no legal charges brought against him, and ends with a reminder to the officials at the Embassy that they have a responsibility to do everything they can to help him, since he is an American citizen.[C6-252]

The Embassy’s response to this letter was to invite Oswald to come personally to Moscow to discuss the matter.[C6-253] Oswald at first protested because of the difficulty of obtaining Soviet permission.[C6-254] He wrote two more protesting letters during the following 4 months,[C6-255] but received no indication that the Embassy would allow him to handle the matter by mail.[C6-256] While the Department of State was clarifying its position on this matter,[C6-257] Oswald unexpectedly appeared in Moscow on Saturday, July 8, 1961.[C6-258] On Sunday, Marina Oswald flew to Moscow,[C6-259] and was interviewed by officials in the American Embassy on Tuesday.[C6-260]

The Commission asked the Department of State and the Central Intelligence Agency to comment on whether the Oswalds’ travel to Moscow without permission signified special treatment by the Soviet Union. From their responses, it appears that since Marina Oswald possessed a Soviet citizen’s internal passport, she did not require prior approval to make the trip.[C6-261] Although Soviet law did require her husband, as the holder of a “stateless passport,” to obtain advance permission for the trip, his failure to do so would not normally have been considered a serious violation. In this respect, the CIA has advised the Commission as follows:

OSWALD’S travel from Minsk to Moscow and return in July 1961 would normally have required prior authorization. Bearers of a Soviet “passport for foreigners” (vid na zhitelstov v. SSSR dlya innostrantsa) are required to obtain travel authorization from the Visa and Registration Department (OVIR) (or Passport Registration Department (PRO) in smaller towns) if they desire to leave the city (or oblast) where they are domiciled. This same requirement is believed to apply to persons, such as OSWALD, holding Soviet “stateless passports” (vid na zhitelstvo v. SSSR dlya lits bez grazhdanstva).

The practicality of even “unauthorized” travel was demonstrated by events related by a United States citizen who defected in 1960, and subsequently was sent to Kiev to study. After repatriating this defector told U.S. authorities he had made a total of seven unauthorized trips from Kiev during his stay in the USSR. He was apprehended on two of his flights and was returned to Kiev each time, the second time under escort. On both occasions he was merely reprimanded by the deputy chief of the institute at which he was studying. Since Marina had a Soviet citizen’s internal passport there would have been no restrictions against her making the trip to Moscow.[C6-262]

The answers of the Department of State, together with the Commission’s specific questions, are as follows:

B. Could resident foreigners normally travel in this manner without first obtaining such permission?

Answer—There are only a few U.S. nationals now living in the Soviet Union. They include an American Roman Catholic priest, an American Protestant minister, a number of correspondents, some students and technical advisers to Soviet businesses. We know that the priest, the minister, the correspondents and the students must obtain permission from Soviet authorities before taking any trips. The technical advisers notify officials of their project before they travel and these officials personally inform the militia.

C. If travel of this type was not freely permitted, do you believe that Oswald normally would have been apprehended during the attempt or punished after the fact for traveling without permission?

Answer—Based on the information we have, we believe that if Oswald went to Moscow without permission, and this was known to the Soviet authorities, he would have been fined or reprimanded. Oswald was not, of course, an average foreign resident. He was a defector from a foreign country and the bearer of a Soviet internal “stateless” passport * * * during the time when he was contemplating the visit to Moscow to come to the Embassy * * *

The Soviet authorities probably knew about Oswald’s trip even if he did not obtain advance permission, since in most instances the Soviet militia guards at the Embassy ask for the documents of unidentified persons entering the Embassy grounds * * *

An American citizen who, with her American citizen husband, went to the Soviet Union to live permanently and is now trying to obtain permission to leave, informed the Embassy that she had been fined for not getting permission to go from Odessa to Moscow on a recent trip to visit the Embassy.

D. Even if such travel did not have to be authorized, do you have any information or observations regarding the practicality of such travel by Soviet citizens or persons in Oswald’s status?

Answer—It is impossible to generalize in this area. We understand from interrogations of former residents in the Soviet Union who were considered “stateless” by Soviet authorities that they were not permitted to leave the town where they resided without permission of the police. In requesting such permission they were required to fill out a questionnaire giving the reason for travel, length of stay, addresses of individuals to be visited, etc.

Notwithstanding these requirements, we know that at least one “stateless” person often traveled without permission of the authorities and stated that police stationed at railroad stations usually spotchecked the identification papers of every tenth traveler, but that it was an easy matter to avoid such checks. Finally, she stated that persons who were caught evading the registration requirements were returned to their home towns by the police and sentenced to short jail terms and fined. These sentences were more severe for repeated violations.[C6-263]

When Oswald arrived at the Embassy in Moscow, he met Richard E. Snyder, the same person with whom he had dealt in October of 1959.[C6-264] Primarily on the basis of Oswald’s interview with Snyder on Monday, July 10, 1961, the American Embassy concluded that Oswald had not expatriated himself.[C6-265] (See app. XV, [pp. 752-760].) On the basis of this tentative decision, Oswald was given back his American passport, which he had surrendered in 1959.[C6-266] The document was due to expire in September 1961,[C6-267] however, and Oswald was informed that its renewal would depend upon the ultimate decision by the Department of State on his expatriation.[C6-268] On July 11, Marina Oswald was interviewed at the Embassy and the steps necessary for her to obtain an American visa were begun.[C6-269] In May 1962, after 15 months of dealings with the Embassy, Oswald’s passport was ultimately renewed and permission for his wife to enter the United States was granted.[C6-270]

The files on Oswald and his wife compiled by the Department of State and the Immigration and Naturalization Service contain no indication of any expert guidance by Soviet authorities in Oswald’s dealings with the Department or the Service. For example, the letters from Minsk to the Embassy in Moscow,[C6-271] which are in his handwriting,[C6-272] display the arrogant attitude which was characteristic of him both before and after he lived in Russia, and, when compared with other letters that were without doubt composed and written by him,[C6-273] show about the same low level of sophistication, fluency, and spelling. The Department officer who most frequently dealt with Oswald when he began negotiations to return to the United States, Richard E. Snyder, testified that he can recall nothing that indicated Oswald was being guided or assisted by a third party when he appeared at the Embassy in July 1961.[C6-274] On the contrary, the arrogant and presumptuous attitude which Oswald displayed in his correspondence with the Embassy from early 1961 until June 1962,[C6-275] when he finally departed from Russia, undoubtedly hindered his attempts to return to the United States. Snyder has testified that although he made a sincere effort to treat Oswald’s application objectively, Oswald’s attitude made this very difficult.[C6-276]

In order to leave Russia, it was also necessary for the Oswalds to obtain permission from the Soviet Government. The timing and circumstances under which the Oswalds obtained this permission have also been considered by the Commission. Marina Oswald, although her memory is not clear on the point, said that she and Oswald first made their intentions to go to the United States known to Soviet officials in Minsk in May, even before coming to Moscow in July for the conference at the American Embassy.[C6-277] The Oswalds’ correspondence with the Embassy and the documents furnished the Commission by the Soviet Government show that the Oswalds made a series of formal applications to the Soviets from July 15 to August 21.[C6-278] Presumably the most difficult question for the Soviet authorities was whether to allow Marina Oswald to accompany her husband. She was called to the local passport office in Minsk on December 25, 1961, and told that authority had been received to issue exit visas to her and Oswald.[C6-279] Obtaining the permission of the Soviet Government to leave may have been aided by a conference which Marina Oswald had, at her own request, with a local MVD official, Colonel Aksenov, sometime in late 1961. She testified that she applied for the conference at her husband’s urging, after he had tried unsuccessfully to arrange such a conference for himself.[C6-280] She believed that it may have been granted her because her uncle with whom she had lived in Minsk before her marriage was also an MVD official.[C6-281]

The correspondence with the American Embassy at this time reflected that the Oswalds did not pick up their exit visas immediately.[C6-282] On January 11, 1962, Marina Oswald was issued her Soviet exit visa. It was marked valid until December 1, 1962.[C6-283] The Oswalds did not leave Russia until June 1962, but the additional delay was caused by problems with the U.S. Government and by the birth of a child in February.[C6-284] Permission of the Soviet authorities to leave, once given, was never revoked. Oswald told the FBI in July 1962, shortly after he returned to the United States, that he had been interviewed by the MVD twice, once when he first came to the Soviet Union and once just before he departed.[C6-285] His wife testified that the second interview did not occur in Moscow but that she and her husband dealt with the MVD visa officials frequently in Minsk.[C6-286]

Investigation of the circumstances, including the timing, under which the Oswalds obtained permission from the Soviet Government to leave Russia for the United States show that they differed in no discernible manner from the normal. The Central Intelligence Agency has informed the Commission that normally a Soviet national would not be permitted to emigrate if he might endanger Soviet national security once he went abroad.[C6-287] Those persons in possession of confidential information, for example, would constitute an important category of such “security risks.” Apparently Oswald’s predeparture interview by the MVD was part of an attempt to ascertain whether he or his wife had access to any confidential information. Marina Oswald’s reported interview with the MVD in late 1961, which was arranged at her request, may have served the same purpose. The Commission’s awareness of both interviews derives entirely from Oswald’s and his wife’s statements and letters to the American Embassy, which afford additional evidence that the conferences carried no subversive significance.

It took the Soviet authorities at least 5½ months, from about July 15, 1961, until late December, to grant permission for the Oswalds to leave the country. When asked to comment upon the alleged rapidity of the Oswalds’ departure, the Department of State advised the Commission:

* * * In the immediate post-war period there were about fifteen marriages in which the wife had been waiting for many years for a Soviet exit permit. After the death of Stalin the Soviet Government showed a disposition to settle these cases. In the summer of 1953 permission was given for all of this group of Soviet citizen wives to accompany their American citizen husbands to the United States.

Since this group was given permission to leave the Soviet Union, there have been from time to time marriages in the Soviet Union of American citizens and Soviet citizens. With one exception, it is our understanding that all of the Soviet citizens involved have been given permission to emigrate to the United States after waiting periods which were, in some cases from three to six months and in others much longer.[C6-288]

Both the Department of State and the Central Intelligence Agency compiled data for the Commission on Soviet wives of American citizens who received exit visas to leave the Soviet Union, where the relevant information was available. In both cases the data were consistent with the above conclusion of the State Department. The Department of State had sufficient information to measure the timespan in 14 cases. The Department points out that it has information on the dates of application for and receipt of Soviet exit visas only on those cases that have been brought to its attention. A common reason for bringing a case to the attention of the Department is that the granting of the exit visa by the Soviet Union has been delayed, so that the American spouse seeks the assistance of his own government. It therefore appears that the sampling data carry a distinct bias toward lengthy waiting periods. Of the 14 cases tested, 6 involve women who applied for visas after 1953, when the liberalized post-Stalin policy was in effect. The approximate waiting periods for these wives were, in decreasing order, 13 months, 6 months, 3 months, 1 month, and 10 days.[C6-289] Of the 11 cases examined by the Central Intelligence Agency in which the time period is known or can be inferred, the Soviet wives had to wait from 5 months to a year to obtain exit visas.[C6-290]

In his correspondence with the American Embassy and his brother while he was in Russia,[C6-291] in his diary,[C6-292] and in his conversations with people in the United States after he returned,[C6-293] Oswald claimed that his wife had been subjected to pressure by the Soviet Government in an effort to induce her not to emigrate to the United States. In the Embassy correspondence, Oswald claimed that the pressure had been so intense that she had to be hospitalized for 5 days for “nervous exhaustion.”[C6-294] Marina Oswald testified that her husband exaggerated and that no such hospitalization or “nervous exhaustion” ever occurred.[C6-295] However, she did testify that she was questioned on the matter occasionally and given the impression that her government was not pleased with her decision.[C6-296] Her aunt and uncle in Minsk did not speak to her “for a long time”; she also stated that she was dropped from membership in the Communist Youth Organization (Komsomol) when the news of her visit to the American Embassy in Moscow reached that organization.[C6-297] A student who took Russian lessons from her in Texas testified that she once referred to the days when the pressure was applied as “a very horrible time.”[C6-298] Despite all this Marina Oswald testified that she was surprised that their visas were granted as soon as they were—and that hers was granted at all.[C6-299] This evidence thus indicates that the Soviet authorities, rather than facilitating the departure of the Oswalds, first tried to dissuade Marina Oswald from going to the United States and then, when she failed to respond to the pressure, permitted her to leave without undue delay. There are indications that the Soviet treatment of another recent defector who left the Soviet Union to return to the United States resembled that accorded to the Oswalds.[C6-300]

On the basis of all the foregoing evidence, the Commission concluded that there was no reason to believe that the Oswalds received unusually favorable treatment in being permitted to leave the Soviet Union.

Associations in the Dallas-Fort Worth Community

The Russian-speaking community.—Shortly after his return from Russia in June 1962, Oswald and his family settled in Fort Worth, Tex., where they met a group of Russian-born or Russian-speaking persons in the Dallas-Fort Worth area.[C6-301] The members of this community were attracted to each other by common background, language, and culture. Many of them were well-educated, accomplished, and industrious people, several being connected with the oil exploration, production, and processing industry that flourishes in the Dallas-Fort Worth area.[C6-302] As described more fully in chapter VII and in appendix XIII, many of these persons assisted the Oswalds in various ways. Some provided the Oswalds with gifts of such things as food, clothing, and baby furniture.[C6-303] Some arranged appointments and transportation for medical and dental treatment, and assumed the cost in some instances.[C6-304] When Oswald undertook to look for employment in Dallas in early October of 1962 and again when marital difficulties arose between the Oswalds in November of the same year, Marina Oswald and their child were housed at times in the homes of various members of the group.[C6-305] The Commission has examined the background of many of these individuals and has thoroughly investigated Oswald’s relationship with them.

There is no basis to suppose that Oswald came to Fort Worth upon his return from Russia for the purpose of establishing contacts with the Russian-speaking community located in that area. Oswald had spent several of his grammar-school years in Fort Worth.[C6-306] In 1962, his brother Robert lived in Fort Worth and his mother resided in nearby Vernon, Tex. In January of that year, Oswald indicated to American officials in Russia that he intended to stay with his mother upon his return to the United States; however, sometime after mid-February, he received an invitation to stay with Robert and his family until he became settled, and he did spend the first several weeks after his return at Robert’s home.[C6-307] In July, Oswald’s mother moved to Fort Worth and Oswald and his wife and child moved into an apartment with her.[C6-308] While in that apartment, Oswald located a job in Fort Worth and then rented and moved with his family into an apartment on Mercedes Street.[C6-309]

Upon his arrival in 1962, Oswald did not know any members of the relatively small and loosely knit Russian-speaking community.[C6-310] Shortly after his arrival Oswald obtained the name of two Russian-speaking persons in Fort Worth from the office of the Texas Employment Commission in that city.[C6-311] Attempts to arrange a prompt visit with one of them failed.[C6-312] The second person, Peter Paul Gregory, was a consulting petroleum engineer and part-time Russian-language instructor at the Fort Worth Public Library. Oswald contacted him in order to obtain a letter certifying to his proficiency in Russian and Marina Oswald later tutored his son in the Russian language.[C6-313] Gregory introduced the Oswalds to George Bouhe and Anna Meller, both of whom lived in Dallas and became interested in the welfare of Marina Oswald and her child.[C6-314] Through them, other members of the Russian community became acquainted with the Oswalds.[C6-315]

The Oswalds met some 30 persons in the Russian-speaking community, of whom 25 testified before the Commission or its staff; others were interviewed on behalf of the Commission.[C6-316] This range of testimony has disclosed that the relationship between Lee Harvey Oswald and the Russian-speaking community was short lived and generally quite strained.[C6-317] During October and November of 1962 Marina Oswald lived at the homes of some of the members of the Russian-speaking community.[C6-318] She stayed first with Elena Hall while Oswald was looking for work in Dallas.[C6-319] In early November, Marina Oswald and the baby joined Oswald in Dallas, but soon thereafter, she spent approximately 2 weeks with different Russian-speaking friends during another separation.[C6-320] Oswald openly resented the help Marina’s “Russian friends” gave to him and his wife and the efforts of some of them to induce Marina to leave him.[C6-321] George Bouhe attempted to dissuade Marina from returning to her husband in November 1962, and when she rejoined him, Bouhe became displeased with her as well.[C6-322] Relations between the Oswalds and the members of the Russian community had practically ceased by the end of 1962. Katherine Ford, one of the members of the group, summed up the situation as it existed at the end of January 1963: “So it was rather, sort of, Marina and her husband were dropped at that time, nobody actually wanted to help. * * *”[C6-323]

In April of 1963, Oswald left Fort Worth for New Orleans, where he was later joined by his wife and daughter, and remained until his trip to Mexico City in late September and his subsequent return to the Dallas-Fort Worth area in early October of 1963.[C6-324] With only minor exceptions,[C6-325] there is no evidence that any member of the Russian-speaking community had further contact with Oswald or his family after April.[C6-326] In New Orleans, Oswald made no attempt to make new Russian-speaking acquaintances for his wife and there is no evidence that he developed any friendships in that city.[C6-327] Similarly, after the return from New Orleans, there seems to have been no communication between the Oswalds and this group until the evening of November 22, 1963, when the Dallas Police enlisted Ilya Mamantov to serve as an interpreter for them in their questioning of Marina Oswald.[C6-328]

George De Mohrenschildt and his wife, both of whom speak Russian as well as several other languages, however, did continue to see the Oswalds on occasion up to about the time Oswald went to New Orleans on April 24, 1963. De Mohrenschildt was apparently the only Russian-speaking person living in Dallas for whom Oswald had appreciable respect, and this seems to have been true even though De Mohrenschildt helped Marina Oswald leave her husband for a period in November of 1962.[C6-329]

In connection with the relations between Oswald and De Mohrenschildt, the Commission has considered testimony concerning an event which occurred shortly after Oswald shot at General Walker. The De Mohrenschildts came to Oswald’s apartment on Neely Street for the first time on the evening of April 13, 1963, apparently to bring an Easter gift for the Oswald child.[C6-330] Mrs. De Mohrenschildt testified that while Marina Oswald was showing her the apartment, she saw a rifle with a scope in a closet. Mrs. De Mohrenschildt then told her husband, in the presence of the Oswalds, that there was a rifle in the closet.[C6-331] Mrs. De Mohrenschildt testified that “George, of course, with his sense of humor—Walker was shot at a few days ago, within that time. He said, ‘Did you take a pot shot at Walker by any chance?’”[C6-332] At that point, Mr. De Mohrenschildt testified, Oswald “sort of shriveled, you see, when I asked this question. * * * made a peculiar face * * * [and] changed the expression on his face” and remarked that he did targetshooting.[C6-333] Marina Oswald testified that the De Mohrenschildts came to visit a few days after the Walker incident and that when De Mohrenschildt made his reference to Oswald’s possibly shooting at Walker, Oswald’s “face changed, * * * he almost became speechless.”[C6-334] According to the De Mohrenschildts, Mr. De Mohrenschildt’s remark was intended as a joke, and he had no knowledge of Oswald’s involvement in the attack on Walker.[C6-335] Nonetheless, the remark appears to have created an uncomfortable silence, and the De Mohrenschildts left “very soon afterwards.” They never saw either of the Oswalds again.[C6-336] They left in a few days on a trip to New York City and did not return until after Oswald had gone to New Orleans.[C6-337] A postcard from Oswald to De Mohrenschildt was apparently the only contact they had thereafter.[C6-338] The De Mohrenschildts left in early June for Haiti on a business venture, and they were still residing there at the time they testified on April 23, 1964.[C6-339]

Extensive investigation has been conducted into the background of both De Mohrenschildts.[C6-340] The investigation has revealed that George De Mohrenschildt is a highly individualistic person of varied interests. He was born in the Russian Ukraine in 1911 and fled Russia with his parents in 1921 during the civil disorder following the revolution. He was in a Polish cavalry military academy for 1½ years. Later he studied in Antwerp and attended the University of Liege from which he received a doctor’s degree in international commerce in 1928. Soon thereafter, he emigrated to the United States; he became a U.S. citizen in 1949.[C6-341] De Mohrenschildt eventually became interested in oil exploration and production; he entered the University of Texas in 1944 and received a master’s degree in petroleum geology and petroleum engineering in 1945.[C6-342] He has since become active as a petroleum engineer throughout the world.[C6-343] In 1960, after the death of his son, he and his wife made an 8-month hike from the United States-Mexican border to Panama over primitive jungle trails. By happenstance they were in Guatemala City at the time of the Bay of Pigs invasion.[C6-344] A lengthy film and complete written log was prepared by De Mohrenschildt and a report of the trip was made to the U.S. Government.[C6-345] Upon arriving in Panama they journeyed to Haiti where De Mohrenschildt eventually became involved in a Government-oriented business venture in which he has been engaged continuously since June 1963 until the time of this report.[C6-346]

The members of the Dallas-Fort Worth Russian community and others have variously described De Mohrenschildt as eccentric, outspoken, and a strong believer in individual liberties and in the U.S. form of government, but also of the belief that some form of undemocratic government might be best for other peoples.[C6-347] De Mohrenschildt frankly admits his provocative personality.[C6-348]

Jeanne De Mohrenschildt was born in Harbin, China, of White Russian parents. She left during the war with Japan, coming to New York in 1938 where she became a successful ladies dress and sportswear apparel designer. She married her present husband in 1959.[C6-349]

The Commission’s investigation has developed no signs of subversive or disloyal conduct on the part of either of the De Mohrenschildts. Neither the FBI, CIA, nor any witness contacted by the Commission has provided any information linking the De Mohrenschildts to subversive or extremist organizations.[C6-350] Nor has there been any evidence linking them in any way with the assassination of President Kennedy.

The Commission has also considered closely the relations between the Oswalds and Michael and Ruth Paine of Irving, Tex. The Paines were not part of the Russian community which has been discussed above. Ruth Paine speaks Russian, however, and for this reason was invited to a party in February of 1963 at which she became acquainted with the Oswalds.[C6-351] The host had met the Oswalds through the De Mohrenschildts.[C6-352] Marina Oswald and Ruth Paine subsequently became quite friendly, and Mrs. Paine provided considerable assistance to the Oswalds.[C6-353] Marina Oswald and her child resided with Ruth Paine for a little over 2 weeks while Oswald sought a job in New Orleans in late April and early May 1963.[C6-354] In May, she transported Marina Oswald to New Orleans, paying all of the traveling and other expenses.[C6-355] While the Oswalds were in New Orleans, the two women corresponded.[C6-356] Mrs. Paine came to New Orleans in late September and took Marina Oswald and her child to her home in Irving.[C6-357]

Since Oswald left for Mexico City promptly after Mrs. Paine and his family departed New Orleans,[C6-358] the Commission has considered whether Ruth Paine’s trip to New Orleans was undertaken to assist Oswald in this venture, but the evidence is clear that it was not. In her letters to Ruth Paine during the summer of 1963, Marina Oswald confided that she was having continuing difficulties with her husband, and Mrs. Paine urged Marina Oswald to live with her in Irving; the letters of the two women prior to Mrs. Paine’s arrival in New Orleans on September 20, 1963, however, contain no mention that Oswald was planning a trip to Mexico City or elsewhere.[C6-359] In New Orleans, Mrs. Paine was told by Oswald that he planned to seek employment in Houston, or perhaps Philadelphia. Though Marina Oswald knew this to be false, she testified that she joined in this deception.[C6-360] At no time during the entire weekend was Mexico City mentioned.[C6-361] Corroboration for this testimony is found in a letter Mrs. Paine wrote her mother shortly after she and Marina Oswald had returned to Irving on September 24, in which she stated that Marina Oswald was again living with her temporarily and that Oswald was job-hunting.[C6-362] When Oswald arrived at the Paine home on October 4, he continued his deception by telling Mrs. Paine, in his wife’s presence, that he had been unsuccessful in finding employment.[C6-363] At Oswald’s request, Marina Oswald remained silent.[C6-364]

Marina Oswald lived with Ruth Paine through the birth of her second daughter on October 20, 1963, and until the assassination of President Kennedy.[C6-365] During this period, Oswald obtained a room in Dallas and found employment in Dallas, but spent weekends with his family at the Paine home.[C6-366] On November 1 and 5, Ruth Paine was interviewed by agents of the FBI who were investigating Oswald’s activities since his return from the Soviet Union, as set forth in greater detail in chapter VIII. She did not then know Oswald’s address in Dallas.[C6-367] She was not asked for, nor did she volunteer, Oswald’s telephone number in Dallas, which she did know.[C6-368] She advised the Bureau agent to whom she spoke of Oswald’s periodic weekend visits, and she informed him that Oswald was employed at the Texas School Book Depository Building.[C6-369]

On November 10, Ruth Paine discovered a draft of Oswald’s letter written the day before to the Soviet Embassy in Washington, in which he indicated that he had journeyed to Mexico City and conferred with a “comrade Kostine in the Embassy of the Soviet Union, Mexico City, Mexico.”[C6-370] (This letter is discussed later in this chapter.) Mr. and Mrs. Paine testified that although they initially assumed the letter was a figment of Oswald’s imagination, the letter gave Mrs. Paine considerable misgivings.[C6-371] She determined that if the FBI agents returned she would deliver to them the copy of a draft of the letter which, unknown to Oswald, she had made.[C6-372] However, the agents did not return before the assassination.[C6-373] On November 19, Mrs. Paine learned that Oswald was living in his Dallas rooming-house under an assumed name.[C6-374] She did not report this to the FBI because, as she testified, she “had no occasion to see them, and * * * did not think it important enough to call them after that until the 23d of November.”[C6-375]

The Commission has thoroughly investigated the background of both Paines. Mrs. Paine was born Ruth Hyde in New York City on September 3, 1932. Her parents moved to Columbus, Ohio, in the late 1930’s.[C6-376] They were divorced in 1961.[C6-377] Ruth Paine graduated from Antioch College in 1955.[C6-378] While in high school she first became interested in Quaker activities; she and her brother became Quakers in 1951.[C6-379] In 1952, following completion of her sophomore year at Antioch College, she was a delegate to two Friends conferences in England.[C6-380]

At the time the Paines met in 1955, Mrs. Paine was active in the work of the Young Friends Committee of North America, which, with the cooperation of the Department of State, was making an effort to lessen the tensions between Soviet Russia and the United States by means of the stimulation of contacts and exchange of cultures between citizens of the two nations through “pen-pal” correspondence and exchanges of young Russians and Americans.[C6-381] It was during this period that Mrs. Paine became interested in the Russian language.[C6-382] Mrs. Paine participated in a Russian-American student exchange program sponsored by the Young Friends Committee of North America, and has participated in the “pen-pal” phase of the activities of the Young Friends Committee.[C6-383] She has corresponded until recently with a schoolteacher in Russia.[C6-384] Although her active interest in the Friends’ program for the lessening of East-West tensions ceased upon her marriage in December 1957, she has continued to hold to the tenets of the Quaker faith.[C6-385]

Michael Paine is the son of George Lyman Paine and Ruth Forbes Paine, now Ruth Forbes Young, wife of Arthur Young of Philadelphia, Pa.[C6-386] His parents were divorced when he was 4 years of age. His father, George Lyman Paine, is an architect and resides in California.[C6-387] Michael Paine testified that during his late grammar and early high school days his father participated actively in the Trotskyite faction of the Communist movement in the United States and that he attended some of those meetings.[C6-388] He stated that his father, with whom he has had little contact throughout most of his life, has not influenced his political thinking. He said that he has visited his father four or five times in California since 1959, but their discussions did not include the subject of communism.[C6-389] Since moving to Irving, Tex., in 1959, he has been a research engineer for Bell Helicopter Co. in Fort Worth.[C6-390] Mr. Paine has security clearance for his work.[C6-391] He has been a long-time member of the American Civil Liberties Union.[C6-392] Though not in sympathy with rightist political aims, he has attended a few meetings of far-right organizations in Dallas for the purpose, he testified, of learning something about those organizations and because he “was interested in seeing more communication between the right and the left.”[C6-393]

The Commission has conducted a thorough investigation of the Paines’ finances and is satisfied that their income has been from legitimate and traceable sources, and that their expenditures were consistent with their income and for normal purposes. Although in the course of their relationship with the Oswalds, the Paines assumed expenses for such matters as food and transportation, with a value of approximately $500, they made no direct payments to, and received no moneys or valuables from, the Oswalds.[C6-394]

Although prior to November 22, Mrs. Paine had information relating to Oswald’s use of an alias in Dallas, his telephone number, and his correspondence with the Soviet Embassy, which she did not pass on to the FBI,[C6-395] her failure to have come forward with this information must be viewed within the context of the information available to her at that time. There is no evidence to contradict her testimony that she did not then know about Oswald’s attack on General Walker, the presence of the rifle on the floor of her garage, Oswald’s ownership of a pistol, or the photographs of Oswald displaying the firearms.[C6-396] She thus assumed that Oswald, though a difficult and disturbing personality, was not potentially violent, and that the FBI was cognizant of his past history and current activities.[C6-397]

Moreover, it is from Mrs. Paine herself that the Commission has learned that she possessed the information which she did have. Mrs. Paine was forthright with the agent of the FBI with whom she spoke in early November 1963, providing him with sufficient information to have located Oswald at his job if he had deemed it necessary to do so,[C6-398] and her failure to have taken immediate steps to notify the Bureau of the additional information does not under the circumstances appear unusual. Throughout the Commission’s investigation, Ruth Paine has been completely cooperative, voluntarily producing all correspondence, memoranda, and other written communications in her possession that had passed between her and Marina Oswald both before and after November 22, 1963.[C6-399] The Commission has had the benefit of Mrs. Paine’s 1963 date book and calendar and her address book and telephone notation book, in both of which appear many entries relating to her activities with the Oswalds.[C6-400] Other material of a purely personal nature was also voluntarily made available.[C6-401] The Commission has found nothing in the Paines’ background, activities, or finances which suggests disloyalty to the United States,[C6-402] and it has concluded that Ruth and Michael Paine were not involved in any way with the assassination of President Kennedy.

A fuller narrative of the social contacts between the Oswalds and the various persons of the Dallas-Fort Worth community is incorporated in chapter VII and appendix XIII, and the testimony of all members of the group who testified before the Commission is included in the printed record which accompanies the report. The evidence establishes that the Oswalds’ contacts with these people were originated and maintained under normal and understandable circumstances. The files maintained by the FBI contain no information indicating that any of the persons in the Dallas-Fort Worth community with whom Oswald associated were affiliated with any Communist, Fascist, or other subversive organization.[C6-403] During the course of this investigation, the Commission has found nothing which suggests the involvement of any member of the Russian-speaking community in Oswald’s preparations to assassinate President Kennedy.

Political Activities Upon Return to the United States

Upon his return from the Soviet Union, Oswald had dealings with the Communist Party, U.S.A., the Socialist Workers Party, and the Fair Play for Cuba Committee, and he also had minor contacts with at least two other organizations with political interests. For the purpose of determining whether Oswald received any advice, encouragement, or assistance from these organizations in planning or executing the assassination of President Kennedy, the Commission has conducted a full investigation of the nature and extent of Oswald’s relations with them. The Commission has also conducted an investigation to determine whether certain persons and organizations expressing hostility to President Kennedy prior to the assassination had any connection with Lee Harvey Oswald or with the shooting of the President.

Communist Party, U.S.A.; Socialist Workers Party.—In August of 1962, Oswald subscribed to the Worker, a publication of the Communist Party, U.S.A.[C6-404] He also wrote the Communist Party to obtain pamphlets and other literature which, the evidence indicates, were sent to him as a matter of course.[C6-405]

Oswald also attempted to initiate other dealings with the Communist Party, U.S.A., but the organization was not especially responsive. From New Orleans, he informed the party of his activities in connection with the Fair Play for Cuba Committee, discussed below, submitting membership cards in his fictitious chapter to several party officials.[C6-406] In a letter from Arnold S. Johnson, director of the information and lecture bureau of the party, Oswald was informed that although the Communist Party had no “organizational ties” with the committee, the party issued much literature which was “important for anybody who is concerned about developments in Cuba.”[C6-407] In September 1963 Oswald inquired how he might contact the party when he relocated in the Baltimore-Washington area, as he said he planned to do in October, and Johnson suggested in a letter of September 19 that he “get in touch with us here [New York] and we will find some way of getting in touch with you in that city [Baltimore].”[C6-408] However, Oswald had also written asking whether, “handicapped as it were, by * * * [his] past record,” he could “still * * * compete with antiprogressive forces, above ground or whether in your opinion * * * [he] should always remain in the background, i.e., underground,” and in the September 19 letter received the reply that “often it is advisable for some people to remain in the background, not underground.”[C6-409]

In a letter postmarked November 1, Oswald informed the party that he had moved to Dallas, and reported his attendance at a meeting at which General Walker had spoken, and at a meeting of the American Civil Liberties Union; he asked Johnson for the party’s “general view” of the latter organization and “to what degree, if any, [he] should attempt to highten its progressive tendencies.” According to Johnson, this letter was not received by the Communist Party until after the assassination.[C6-410] At different times, Oswald also wrote the Worker and the Hall-Davis Defense Committee, enclosing samples of his photographic work and offering to assist in preparing posters; he was told that “his kind offer [was] most welcomed and from time to time we shall call on you,” but he was never asked for assistance.[C6-411] The correspondence between Oswald and the Communist Party, and with all other organizations, is printed in the record accompanying this report.

When Oswald applied for a visa to enter Cuba during his trip to Mexico City, discussed below,[C6-412] Senora Silvia Duran, the Cuban consular employee who dealt with Oswald, wrote on the application that Oswald said he was a member of the Communist Party and that he had “displayed documents in proof of his membership.”[C6-413] When Oswald went to Mexico, he is believed to have carried his letters from the Soviet Embassy in Washington and from the Communist Party in the United States, his 1959 passport, which contained stamps showing that he had lived in Russia for 2½ years, his Russian work permit, his Russian marriage certificate, membership cards and newspaper clippings purporting to show his role in the Fair Play for Cuba Committee, and a prepared statement of his qualifications as a “Marxist.”[C6-414] Because of the mass of papers Oswald did present showing his affinity for communism, some in the Russian language, which was foreign to Senora Duran, and because further investigation, discussed below, indicated that Oswald was not a member of the party, Senora Duran’s notation was probably inaccurate.

Upon his arrest after the assassination, Oswald attempted to contact John J. Abt, a New York attorney, to request Abt to represent him. Abt was not in New York at the time, and he was never reached in connection with representing Oswald. Abt has testified that he at no time had any dealings with Oswald and that prior to the assassination he had never heard of Lee Harvey Oswald.[C6-415]

After his return from the Soviet Union, Oswald also carried on a limited correspondence with the Socialist Workers Party. In October of 1962 he attempted to join the party, but his application was not accepted since there was then no chapter in the Dallas area.[C6-416] Oswald also wrote the Socialist Workers Party offering his assistance in preparing posters. From this organization too he received the response that he might be called upon if needed. He was asked for further information about his photographic skills, which he does not appear to have ever provided.[C6-417] Oswald did obtain literature from the Socialist Workers Party, however, and in December 1962 he entered a subscription to the affiliated publication, the Militant.[C6-418] Apparently in March of 1963 Oswald wrote the party of his activities and submitted a clipping with his letter. In response, he was told that his name was being sent to the Young Socialist Alliance for further correspondence, but the files of the alliance apparently contain no reference to Oswald. Neither the letter nor the clipping which Oswald sent has been located.[C6-419]

Investigation by the Commission has produced no plausible evidence that Lee Harvey Oswald had any other significant contacts with the Communist Party, U.S.A., the Socialist Workers Party, or with any other extreme leftist political organization. The FBI and other Federal security agencies have made a study of their records and files and contacted numerous confidential informants of the agencies and have produced no such evidence.[C6-420] The Commission has questioned persons who, as a group, knew Oswald during virtually every phase of his adult life, and from none of these came any indication that Oswald maintained a surreptitious relationship with any organization. Arnold S. Johnson, of the American Communist Party; James T. Tormey, executive secretary of the Hall-Davis Defense Committee; and Farrell Dobbs, secretary of the Socialist Workers Party, voluntarily appeared before the Commission and testified under oath that Oswald was not a member of these organizations and that a thorough search of their files had disclosed no records relating to Oswald other than those which they produced for the Commission.[C6-421] The material that has been disclosed is in all cases consistent with other data in the possession of the Commission.

Socialist Labor Party.—Oswald also wrote to the Socialist Labor Party in New York in November 1962 requesting literature. Horace Twiford, a national committeeman at large for the party in the State of Texas, was informed by the New York headquarters in July 1963 of Oswald’s request, and on September 11, 1963, he did mail literature to Oswald at his old post office box in Dallas.[C6-422] On his way to Mexico City in September 1963, Oswald attempted to contact Twiford at his home in Houston; Oswald spoke briefly with Twiford’s wife, identifying himself as a member of the Fair Play for Cuba Committee, but since Twiford was out of town at the time, Oswald was unable to speak with him.[C6-423] Arnold Peterson, national secretary and treasurer of the Socialist Labor Party, has stated that a search of the records of the national headquarters reveals no record pertaining to Oswald; he explained that letters requesting literature are routinely destroyed.[C6-424] The Socialist Party-Social Democratic Federation has also advised that a review of its records fails to reflect any information or correspondence pertaining to Oswald.[C6-425]

Fair Play for Cuba Committee.—During the period Oswald was in New Orleans, from the end of April to late September 1963, he was engaged in activity purportedly on behalf of the now defunct Fair Play for Cuba Committee (FPCC), an organization centered in New York which was highly critical of U.S. policy toward the Cuban Government under Fidel Castro. In May 1963, after having obtained literature from the FPCC,[C6-426] Oswald applied for and was granted membership in the organization.[C6-427] When applying for membership, Oswald wrote national headquarters that he had

* * * been thinking about renting a small office at my own expense for the purpose of forming a F.P.C.C. branch here in New Orleans.

Could you give me a charter?[C6-428]

With his membership card, Oswald apparently received a copy of the constitution and bylaws for FPCC chapters, and a letter, dated May 29, which read in part as follows (with spelling as in original):

It would be hard to concieve of a chapter with as few members as seem to exist in the New Orleans area. I have just gone through our files and find that Louisiana seams somewhat restricted for Fair Play activities. However, with what is there perhaps you could build a larger group if a few people would undertake the disciplined responsibility of concrete organizational work.

We certainly are not at all adverse to a very small Chapter but certainly would expect that there would be at least twice the amount needed to conduct a legal executive board for the Chapter. Should this be reasonable we could readily issue a charter for a New Orleans Chapter of FPCC. In fact, we would be very, very pleased to see this take place and would like to do everything possible to assist in bringing it about.

* * * * *

You must realize that you will come under tremendous pressures with any attempt to do FPCC work in that area and that you will not be able to operate in the manner which is conventional here in the north-east. Even most of our big city Chapters have been forced to Abandon the idea of operating an office in public. * * * Most Chapters have discovered that it is easier to operate semi-privately out of a home and maintain a P.O. Box for all mailings and public notices. (A P.O. Box is a must for any Chapter in the organization to guarnatee the continued contact with the national even if an individual should move or drop out.) We do have a serious and often violent opposition and this proceedure helps prevent many unnecessary incidents which frighten away prospective supporters. I definitely would not recommend an office, at least not one that will be easily identifyable to the lunatic fringe in your community. Certainly, I would not recommend that you engage in one at the very beginning but wait and see how you can operate in the community through several public experiences.[C6-429]

Thereafter Oswald informed national headquarters that he had opened post office box No. 30061, and that against its advice he had decided “to take an office from the very beginning”; he also submitted copies of a membership application form and a circular headed “Hands Off Cuba!” which he had had printed, and informed the headquarters that he intended to have membership cards for his chapter printed, which he subsequently did.[C6-430] He wrote three further letters to the New York office to inform it of his continued activities.[C6-431] In one he reported that he had been evicted from the office he claimed to have opened, so that he “worked out of a post office box and by useing street demonstrations and some circular work * * * sustained a great deal of interest but no new members.”[C6-432]

Oswald did distribute the handbills he had printed on at least three occasions.[C6-433] Once, while doing so, he was arrested and fined for being involved in a disturbance with anti-Castro Cuban refugees,[C6-434] one of whom he had previously met by presenting himself as hostile to Premier Castro in an apparent effort to gain information about anti-Castro organizations operating in New Orleans.[C6-435] When arrested, he informed the police that his chapter had 35 members.[C6-436] His activities received some attention in the New Orleans press, and he twice appeared on a local radio program representing himself as a spokesman for the Fair Play for Cuba Committee.[C6-437] After his return to Dallas, he listed the FPCC as an organization authorized to receive mail at his post office box.[C6-438]

Despite these activities, the FPCC chapter which Oswald purportedly formed in New Orleans was entirely fictitious. Vincent T. Lee, formerly national director of the Fair Play for Cuba Committee, has testified that the New York office did not authorize the creation of a New Orleans chapter, nor did it provide Oswald with funds to support his activities there.[C6-439] The national office did not write Oswald again after its letter of May 29. As discussed more fully in chapter VII, Oswald’s later letters to the national office purporting to inform it of his progress in New Orleans contained numerous exaggerations about the scope of his activities and the public reaction to them.[C6-440] There is no evidence that Oswald ever opened an office as he claimed to have done. Although a pamphlet taken from him at the time of his arrest in New Orleans contains the rubber stamp imprint “FPCC, 544 CAMP ST., NEW ORLEANS, LA.,” investigation has indicated that neither the Fair Play for Cuba Committee nor Lee Harvey Oswald ever maintained an office at that address.[C6-441] The handbills and other materials bearing the name of the Fair Play for Cuba Committee were printed commercially by Oswald without the approval of the national headquarters.[C6-442] Oswald’s membership card in the “New Orleans chapter” of the committee carried the signature of “A. J. Hidell,” purportedly the president of the chapter, but there is no evidence that an “A. J. Hidell” existed and, as pointed out in chapter IV, there is conclusive evidence that the name was an alias which Oswald used on various occasions. Marina Oswald herself wrote the name “Hidell” on the membership card at her husband’s insistence.[C6-443]

No other member of the so-called New Orleans chapter of the committee has ever been found. The only occasion on which anyone other than Oswald was observed taking part in these activities was on August 9, 1963, when Oswald and two young men passed out leaflets urging “Hands Off Cuba!” on the streets of New Orleans. One of the two men, who was 16 years old at the time, has testified that Oswald approached him at the Louisiana State Employment Commission and offered him $2 for about an hour’s work. He accepted the offer but later, when he noticed that television cameras were being focused on him, he obtained his money and left. He testified that he had never seen Oswald before and never saw him again. The second individual has never been located; but according to the testimony of the youth who was found, he too seemed to be someone not previously connected with Oswald.[C6-444] Finally, the FBI has advised the Commission that its information on undercover Cuban activities in the New Orleans area reveals no knowledge of Oswald before the assassination.[C6-445]

Right-wing groups hostile to President Kennedy.—The Commission also considered the possibility that there may have been a link between Oswald and certain groups which had bitterly denounced President Kennedy and his policies prior to the time of the President’s trip to Dallas. As discussed in chapter II, two provocative incidents took place concurrently with President Kennedy’s visit and a third but a month prior thereto. The incidents were (1) the demonstration against the Honorable Adlai E. Stevenson, U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, in late October 1963, when he came to Dallas on United Nations Day; (2) the publication in the Dallas Morning News on November 22 of the full page, black-bordered paid advertisement entitled, “Welcome Mr. Kennedy”; and (3) the distribution of a throwaway handbill entitled “Wanted for Treason” throughout Dallas on November 20 and 21. Oswald was aware of the Stevenson incident; there is no evidence that he became aware of either the “Welcome Mr. Kennedy” advertisement or the “Wanted for Treason” handbill, though neither possibility can be precluded.

The only evidence of interest on Oswald’s part in rightist groups in Dallas was his alleged attendance at a rally at the Dallas Auditorium the evening preceding Ambassador Stevenson’s address on United Nations Day, October 24, 1963. On the evening of October 25, 1963, at the invitation of Michael Paine, Oswald attended a monthly meeting of the Dallas chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union in which he was later to seek membership.[C6-446] During the course of the discussion at this meeting, a speaker mentioned Maj. Gen. Edwin A. Walker (Resigned, U.S. Army). Oswald arose in the midst of the meeting to remark that a “night or two nights before” he had attended a meeting at which General Walker had spoken in terms that led Oswald to assert that General Walker was both anti-Catholic and anti-Semitic.[C6-447] General Walker testified that he had been the speaker at a rally the night before Ambassador Stevenson’s appearance, but that he did not know and had never heard of Oswald prior to the announcement of his name on radio and television on the afternoon of November 22.[C6-448] Oswald confirmed his attendance at the U.S. Day rally in an undated letter he wrote to Arnold Johnson, director of the information and lecture bureau of the Communist Party, mailed November 1, 1963, in which he reported:

On October 23rd, I had attended a ultra-right meeting headed by General Edwin a. Walker, who lives in Dallas.

This meeting preceded by one day the attack on a. e. Stevenson at the United Nations Day meeting at which he spoke.

As you can see, political friction between ‘left’ and ‘right’ is very great here.[C6-449]

In the light of Oswald’s attack upon General Walker on the evening of April 10, 1963, discussed in chapter IV,[C6-450] as well as Oswald’s known political views,[C6-451] his asserted attendance at the political rally at which General Walker spoke may have been induced by many possible motives. However, there is no evidence that Oswald attended any other rightist meetings or was associated with any politically conservative organizations.

While the black-bordered “Welcome Mr. Kennedy” advertisement in the November 22 Dallas Morning News, which addressed a series of critical questions to the President, probably did not come to Oswald’s attention, it was of interest to the Commission because of its appearance on the day of the assassination and because of an allegation made before the Commission concerning the person whose name appeared as the chairman of the committee sponsoring the advertisement. The black-bordered advertisement was purported to be sponsored by “The American Fact-Finding Committee,” which was described as “An unaffiliated and nonpartisan group of citizens who wish truth.” Bernard Weissman was listed as “Chairman” and a post office box in Dallas was the only address. (See Commission Exhibit No. 1031, [p. 294].)

Commission Exhibit No. 1031

The Commission has conducted a full investigation into the genesis of this advertisement and the background of those responsible for it. Three of the four men chiefly responsible, Bernard W. Weissman, William B. Burley III, and Larrie H. Schmidt, had served together in the U.S. Army in Munich, Germany, in 1962. During that time they had with others devised plans to develop two conservative organizations, one political and the other business. The political entity was to be named Conservatism—USA, or CUSA, and the business entity was to be named American Business, or AMBUS.[C6-452] While in Munich, according to Weissman, they attempted to develop in their “own minds * * * ways to build up various businesses that would support us and at the same time support our political activities.”[C6-453] According to a subsequent letter from Schmidt to Weissman, “Cusa was founded for patriotic reasons rather than for personal gain—even though, as a side effect, Ambus was to have brought great return, as any business endeavor should.”[C6-454] To establish their organizations, Weissman testified that they:

* * * had planned while in Munich that in order to accomplish our goals, to try to do it from scratch would be almost impossible, because it would be years before we could even get the funds to develop a powerful organization. So we had planned to infiltrate various rightwing organizations and by our own efforts become involved in the hierarchy of these various organizations and eventually get ourselves elected or appointed to various higher offices in these organizations, and by doing this bring in some of our own people, and eventually take over the leadership of these organizations, and at that time having our people in these various organizations, we would then, you might say, call a conference and have them unite, and while no one knew of the existence of CUSA aside from us, we would then bring them all together, unite them, and arrange to have it called CUSA.[C6-455]

Schmidt was the first to leave the service; settling in Dallas in October 1962, he became a life insurance salesman and quickly engaged in numerous political activities in pursuit of the objectives devised in Munich.[C6-456] He became affiliated with several organizations and prepared various political writings.[C6-457]

Upon their release from the military, Weissman and Burley did not immediately move to Dallas, though repeatedly urged to do so by Schmidt.[C6-458] On October 1, 1963, Schmidt wrote Weissman: “Adlai Stevenson is scheduled here on the 24th on UN Day. Kennedy is scheduled in Dallas on Nov. 24th. There are to be protests. All the big things are happening now—if we don’t get in right now we may as well forget it.”[C6-459] The day of the Stevenson demonstration, Schmidt telephoned Weissman, again urging him to move to Dallas. Recalling that conversation with Schmidt, Weissman testified:

And he said, “If we are going to take advantage of the situation * * * you better hurry down here and take advantage of the publicity, and at least become known among these various right-wingers, because this is the chance we have been looking for to infiltrate some of these organizations and become known,” in other words, go along with the philosophy we had developed in Munich.[C6-460]

Five days later he wrote to Weissman and Burley to report that as the “only organizer of the demonstration to have publicly identified himself,” he had “become, overnight, a ‘fearless spokesman’ and ‘leader’ of the rightwing in Dallas. What I worked so hard for in one year—and nearly failed—finally came through one incident in one night!” He ended, “Politically, CUSA is set. It is now up to you to get Ambus going.”[C6-461]

Weissman and Burley accepted Schmidt’s prompting and traveled to Dallas, arriving on November 4, 1963.[C6-462] Both obtained employment as carpet salesmen. At Schmidt’s solicitation they took steps to join the John Birch Society, and through Schmidt they met the fourth person involved in placing the November 22 advertisement, Joseph P. Grinnan, Dallas independent oil operator and a John Birch Society coordinator in the Dallas area.[C6-463]

Within a week to 10 days after Weissman and Burley had arrived in Dallas, the four men began to consider plans regarding President Kennedy’s planned visit to Dallas.[C6-464] Weissman explained the reason for which it was decided that the ad should be placed:

* * * after the Stevenson incident, it was felt that a demonstration would be entirely out of order, because we didn’t want anything to happen in the way of physical violence to President Kennedy when he came to Dallas. But we thought that the conservatives in Dallas—I was told—were a pretty downtrodden lot after that, because they were being oppressed by the local liberals, because of the Stevenson incident. We felt we had to do something to build up the morale of the conservative element, in Dallas. So we hit upon the idea of the ad.[C6-465]

Weissman, Schmidt, and Grinnan worked on the text for the advertisement.[C6-466] A pamphlet containing 50 questions critical of American policy was employed for this purpose, and was the source of the militant questions contained in the ad attacking President Kennedy’s administration.[C6-467] Grinnan undertook to raise the $1,465 needed to pay for the ad.[C6-468] He employed a typed draft of the advertisement to support his funds solicitation.[C6-469] Grinnan raised the needed money from three wealthy Dallas businessmen: Edgar R. Crissey, Nelson Bunker Hunt, and H. R. Bright, some of whom in turn collected contributions from others.[C6-470] At least one of the contributors would not make a contribution unless a question he suggested was inserted.[C6-471] Weissman, believing that Schmidt, Grinnan, and the contributors were active members of the John Birch Society, and that Grinnan eventually took charge of the project, expressed the opinion that the advertisement was the creation of the John Birch Society,[C6-472] though Schmidt and Grinnan have maintained that they were acting “solely as individuals.”[C6-473]

A fictitious sponsoring organization was invented out of whole cloth.[C6-474] The name chosen for the supposed organization was The American Fact-Finding Committee.[C6-475] This was “Solely a name,” Weissman testified; “* * * As a matter of fact, when I went to place the ad, I could not remember the name * * * I had to refer to a piece of paper for the name.”[C6-476] Weissman’s own name was used on the ad in part to counter charges of anti-Semitism which had been leveled against conservative groups in Dallas.[C6-477] Weissman conceived the idea of using a black border,[C6-478] and testified he intended it to serve the function of stimulating reader attention.[C6-479] Before accepting the advertisement, the Dallas Morning News apparently submitted it to its attorneys for their opinion as to whether its publication might subject them to liability.[C6-480]

Weissman testified that the advertisement drew 50 or 60 mailed responses.[C6-481] He took them from the post office box early on Sunday morning, November 24.[C6-482] He said that those postmarked before the attack on President Kennedy were “favorable” in tone;[C6-483] those of later postmark were violently unfavorable, nasty, and threatening;[C6-484] and, according to a report from Schmidt, those postmarked some weeks later were again of favorable tone.[C6-485]

The four promoters of the ad deny that they had any knowledge of or familiarity with Lee Harvey Oswald prior to November 22, or Jack Ruby prior to November 24.[C6-486] Each has provided a statement of his role in connection with the placement of the November 22 advertisement and other matters, and investigation has revealed no deception. The Commission has found no evidence that any of these persons was connected with Oswald or Ruby, or was linked to a conspiracy to assassinate President Kennedy.

The advertisement, however, did give rise to one allegation concerning Bernard Weissman which required additional investigation. On March 4, 1964, Mark Lane, a New York attorney, testified before the Commission that an undisclosed informant had told him that Weissman had met with Jack Ruby and Patrolman J. D. Tippit at Ruby’s Carousel Club on November 14, 1963. Lane declined to state the name of his informant but said that he would attempt to obtain his informant’s permission to reveal his name.[C6-487] On July 2, 1964, after repeated requests by the Commission that he disclose the name of his informant, Lane testified a second time concerning this matter, but declined to reveal the information, stating as his reason that he had promised the individual that his name would not be revealed without his permission.[C6-488] Lane also made this allegation during a radio appearance, whereupon Weissman twice demanded that Lane reveal the name of the informant.[C6-489] As of the date of this report Lane has failed to reveal the name of his informant and has offered no evidence to support his allegation. The Commission has investigated the allegation of a Weissman-Ruby-Tippit meeting and has found no evidence that such a meeting took place anywhere at any time. The investigation into this matter is discussed in a later section of this chapter dealing with possible conspiracies involving Jack Ruby.

A comparable incident was the appearance of the “Wanted for Treason” handbill on the streets of Dallas 1 to 2 days before President Kennedy’s arrival. These handbills bore a reproduction of a front and profile photograph of the President and set forth a series of inflammatory charges against him.[C6-490] Efforts to locate the author and the lithography printer of the handbill at first met with evasive responses[C6-491] and refusals to furnish information.[C6-492] Robert A. Surrey was eventually identified as the author of the handbill.[C6-493] Surrey, a 38-year-old printing salesman employed by Johnson Printing Co. of Dallas, Tex., has been closely associated with General Walker for several years in his political and business activities.[C6-494] He is president of American Eagle Publishing Co. of Dallas, in which he is a partner with General Walker.[C6-495] Its office and address is the post office box of Johnson Printing Co. Its assets consist of cash and various printed materials composed chiefly of General Walker’s political and promotional literature,[C6-496] all of which is stored at General Walker’s headquarters.[C6-497]

Surrey prepared the text for the handbill and apparently used Johnson Printing Co. facilities to set the type and print a proof.[C6-498] Surrey induced Klause, a salesman employed by Lettercraft Printing Co. of Dallas,[C6-499] whom Surrey had met when both were employed at Johnson Printing Co.,[C6-500] to print the handbill “on the side.”[C6-501] According to Klause, Surrey contacted him initially approximately 2 or 2½ weeks prior to November 22.[C6-502] About a week prior to November 22, Surrey delivered to Klause two slick paper magazine prints of photographs of a front view and profile of President Kennedy,[C6-503] together with the textual page proof.[C6-504] Klause was unable to make the photographic negative of the prints needed to prepare the photographic printing plate,[C6-505] so that he had this feature of the job done at a local shop.[C6-506] Klause then arranged the halftone front and profile representations of President Kennedy at the top of the textual material he had received from Surrey so as to simulate a “man wanted” police placard. He then made a photographic printing plate of the picture.[C6-507] During the night, he and his wife surreptitiously printed approximately 5,000 copies on Lettercraft Printing Co. offset printing equipment without the knowledge of his employers.[C6-508] The next day he arranged with Surrey a meeting place, and delivered the handbills.[C6-509] Klause’s charge for the printing of the handbills was, including expenses, $60.[C6-510]

At the outset of the investigation Klause stated to Federal agents that he did not know the name of his customer, whom he incorrectly described;[C6-511] he did say, however, that the customer did not resemble either Oswald or Ruby.[C6-512] Shortly before he appeared before the Commission, Klause disclosed Surrey’s identity.[C6-513] He explained that no record of the transaction had been made because “he saw a chance to make a few dollars on the side.”[C6-514]

Klause’s testimony receives some corroboration from Bernard Weissman’s testimony that he saw a copy of one of the “Wanted for Treason” handbills on the floor of General Walker’s station wagon shortly after November 22.[C6-515] Other details of the manner in which the handbills were printed have also been verified.[C6-516] Moreover, Weissman testified that neither he nor any of his associates had anything to do with the handbill or were acquainted with Surrey, Klause, Lettercraft Printing Co., or Johnson Printing Co.[C6-517] Klause and Surrey, as well as General Walker, testified that they were unacquainted with Lee Harvey Oswald and had not heard of him prior to the afternoon of November 22.[C6-518] The Commission has found no evidence of any connection between those responsible for the handbill and Lee Harvey Oswald or the assassination.

Contacts With the Cuban and Soviet Embassies in Mexico City and the Soviet Embassy in Washington, D.C.

Eight weeks before the assassination, Oswald traveled to Mexico City where he visited both the Cuban and Soviet Embassies.[D] Oswald’s wife knew of this trip before he went,[C6-519] but she denied such knowledge until she testified before the Commission.[C6-520] The Commission undertook an intensive investigation to determine Oswald’s purpose and activities on this journey, with specific reference to reports that Oswald was an agent of the Cuban or Soviet Governments. As a result of its investigation, the Commission believes that it has been able to reconstruct and explain most of Oswald’s actions during this time. A detailed chronological account of this trip appears in appendix XIII.

[D] The Soviet Embassy in Mexico City includes consular as well as diplomatic personnel in a single building. The Cuban Embassy and Cuban Consulate in Mexico City, though in separate buildings, are in the same compound. Both the Soviet and the Cuban establishments will be referred to throughout the report simply as Embassies.

Trip to Mexico.—Oswald was in Mexico from September 26, 1963, until October 3, 1963.[C6-521] (See Commission Exhibits Nos. 2478, 2481, [p. 300].) Marina Oswald testified that Oswald had told her that the purpose of the trip was to evade the American prohibition on travel to Cuba and to reach that country.[C6-522] He cautioned her that the trip and its purpose were to be kept strictly secret.[C6-523] She testified that he had earlier laid plans to reach Cuba by hijacking an airliner flying out of New Orleans, but she refused to cooperate and urged him to give it up, which he finally did.[C6-524] Witnesses who spoke with Oswald while he was on a bus going to Mexico City also testified that Oswald told them he intended to reach Cuba by way of Mexico, and that he hoped to meet Fidel Castro after he arrived.[C6-525] When Oswald spoke to the Cuban and Soviet consular officials in Mexico City, he represented that he intended to travel to the Soviet Union and requested an “in-transit” Cuban visa to permit him to enter Cuba on September 30 on the way to the Soviet Union. Marina Oswald has testified that these statements were deceptions designed to get him to Cuba.[C6-526] Thus, although it is possible that Oswald intended to continue on to Russia from Cuba, the evidence makes it more likely that he intended to remain in Cuba.[C6-527]

OSWALD’S MEXICAN TOURIST CARD AND APPLICATION

(COMMISSION EXHIBIT 2481)
APPLICATION FOR TOURIST CARD

(COMMISSION EXHIBIT 2478)
TOURIST CARD

Oswald departed from New Orleans probably about noon on September 25 and arrived in Mexico City at about 10 a.m. on September 27.[C6-528] In Mexico City he embarked on a series of visits to the Soviet and Cuban Embassies, which occupied most of his time during the first 2 days of his visit. At the Cuban Embassy, he requested an “in-transit” visa to permit him to visit Cuba on his way to the Soviet Union.[C6-529] Oswald was informed that he could not obtain a visa for entry into Cuba unless he first obtained a visa to enter the U.S.S.R.,[C6-530] and the Soviet Embassy told him that he could not expect an answer on his application for a visa for the Soviet Union for about 4 months.[C6-531] Oswald carried with him newspaper clippings, letters and various documents, some of them forged or containing false information, purporting to show that he was a “friend” of Cuba.[C6-532] With these papers and his record of previous residence in the Soviet Union and marriage to a Soviet national, he tried to curry favor with both Embassies.[C6-533] Indeed, his wife testified that in her opinion Oswald’s primary purpose in having engaged in Fair Play for Cuba Committee activities was to create a public record that he was a “friend” of Cuba.[C6-534] He made himself especially unpopular at the Cuban Embassy by persisting in his demands that as a sympathizer in Cuban objectives he ought to be given a visa. This resulted in a sharp argument with the consul, Eusebio Azque.[C6-535]

By Saturday, September 28, 1963, Oswald had failed to obtain visas at both Embassies.[C6-536] From Sunday, September 29, through Wednesday morning, October 2, when he left Mexico City on a bus bound for the United States, Oswald spent considerable time making his travel arrangements, sightseeing and checking again with the Soviet Embassy to learn whether anything had happened on his visa application.[C6-537] Marina Oswald testified that when she first saw him after his return to the United States he was disappointed and discouraged at his failure to reach Cuba.[C6-538]

The general outlines of Oswald’s activities in Mexico, particularly the nature and extent of his contacts at the Cuban Embassy, were learned very early in the investigation. An important source of information relating to his business at the Cuban Embassy was Senora Silvia Tirado de Duran, a Mexican national employed in the visa section of the Cuban Embassy, who was questioned intensively by Mexican authorities soon after the assassination.[C6-539] An excerpt from the report of the Mexican Government summarized the crucial portion of Senora Duran’s recollection of Oswald. In translation it reads as follows:

* * * she remembered * * * [that Lee Harvey Oswald] was the name of an American who had come to the Cuban Consulate to obtain a visa to travel to Cuba in transit to Russia, the latter part of September or the early part of October of this year, and in support of his application had shown his passport, in which it was noted that he had lived in that country for a period of three years; his labor card from the same country written in the Russian language; and letters in that same language. He had presented evidence that he was married to a Russian woman, and also that he was apparently the leader of an organization in the city of New Orleans called “Fair * * * [Play] for Cuba,” claiming that he should be accepted as a “friend” of the Cuban Revolution. Accordingly, the declarant, complying with her duties, took down all of the information and completed the appropriate application form; and the declarant, admittedly exceeding her responsibilities, informally telephoned the Russian consulate, with the intention of doing what she could to facilitate issuance of the Russian visa to Lee Harvey Oswald. However, they told her that there would be a delay of about four months in processing the case, which annoyed the applicant since, according to his statement, he was in a great hurry to obtain visas that would enable him to travel to Russia, insisting on his right to do so in view of his background and his loyalty and his activities in behalf of the Cuban movement. The declarant was unable to recall accurately whether or not the applicant told her he was a member of the Communist Party, but he did say that his wife * * * was then in New York City, and would follow him, * * * [Senora Duran stated] that when Oswald understood that it was not possible to give him a Cuban visa without his first having obtained the Russian visa, * * * he became very excited or angry, and accordingly, the affiant called Consul Ascue [sic], * * * [who] came out and began a heated discussion in English with Oswald, that concluded by Ascue telling him that “if it were up to him, he would not give him the visa,” and “a person of his type was harming the Cuban Revolution rather than helping it,” it being understood that in their conversation they were talking about the Russian Socialist Revolution and not the Cuban. Oswald maintained that he had two reasons for requesting that his visa be issued promptly, and they were: one, that his tourist permit in Mexico was about to expire; and the other, that he had to get to Russia as quickly as possible. Despite her annoyance, the declarant gave Oswald a paper * * * in which she put down her name, “Silvia Durán,” and the number of the telephone at the consulate, which is “11-28-47” and the visa application was processed anyway. It was sent to the Ministry of [Foreign] Relations of Cuba, from which a routine reply was received some fifteen to thirty days later, approving the visa, but on the condition that the Russian visa be obtained first, although she does not recall whether or not Oswald later telephoned her at the Consulate number that she gave him.[C6-540]

OSWALD’S APPLICATION FOR A VISA FOR TRAVEL TO CUBA AND THE REPLY OF THE CUBAN GOVERNMENT

(COMMISSION EXHIBIT 2564)

OSWALD’S APPLICATION ——> TRANSLATION

CUBAN REPLY ——> TRANSLATION

BOTH DOCUMENTS FURNISHED BY THE GOVERNMENT OF CUBA.

With the dates of Oswald’s entry into and departure from Mexico, which had been obtained from the records of the Mexican Immigration Service very shortly after the assassination, the Government of Mexico initiated a thorough investigation to uncover as much information as possible on Oswald’s trip.[C6-541] Representatives of U.S. agencies worked in close liaison with the Mexican law enforcement authorities. The result of this investigative effort was to corroborate the statements of Senora Duran and to verify the essentials of Oswald’s activities in Mexico as outlined above.

Senora Duran is a well-educated native of Mexico, who was 26 years old at the time of her interrogation. She is married to Senor Horacio Duran Navarro, a 40-year-old industrial designer, and has a young child. Although Senora Duran denies being a member of the Communist Party or otherwise connected with it, both Durans have been active in far left political affairs in Mexico, believe in Marxist ideology, and sympathize with the government of Fidel Castro,[C6-542] and Senor Duran has written articles for El Dia, a pro-Communist newspaper in Mexico City.[C6-543] The Commission has reliable evidence from a confidential source that Senora Duran as well as other personnel at the Cuban Embassy were genuinely upset upon receiving news of President Kennedy’s death. Senora Duran’s statements were made to Mexican officials soon after the assassination,[C6-544] and no significant inaccuracies in them have been detected. Documents fitting the description given by Senora Duran of the documents Oswald had shown her, plus a notation which she said she had given him, were found among his possessions after his arrest.[C6-545]

The Cuban Government was asked to document and confirm the essentials of Senora Duran’s testimony. Its response, which has been included in its entirety in this Report, included a summary statement of Oswald’s activities at the Cuban Embassy;[C6-546] a photograph of the application for a visa he completed there,[C6-547] and a photograph of the communication from Havana rejecting the application unless he could first present a Soviet visa.[C6-548] (See Commission Exhibit No. 2564, [p. 306].) The information on these documents concerning Oswald’s date of birth, American passport number and activities and statements at the Embassy is consistent with other information available to the Commission.[C6-549] CIA experts have given their opinion that the handwriting on the visa application which purports to be Oswald’s is in fact his and that, although the handwritten notations on the bottom of the document are too brief and faint to permit a conclusive determination, they are probably Senora Duran’s.[C6-550] The clothes which Oswald was wearing in the photograph which appears on the application appear to be the same as some of those found among his effects after the assassination, and the photograph itself appears to be from the same negative as a photograph found among his effects.[C6-551] Nothing on any of the documents raises a suspicion that they might not be authentic.

By far the most important confirmation of Senora Duran’s testimony, however, has been supplied by confidential sources of extremely high reliability available to the United States in Mexico. The information from these sources establishes that her testimony was truthful and accurate in all material respects. The identities of these sources cannot be disclosed without destroying their future usefulness to the United States.

The investigation of the Commission has produced considerable testimonial and documentary evidence establishing the precise time of Oswald’s journey, his means of transportation, the hotel at which he stayed in Mexico City, and a restaurant at which he often ate. All known persons whom Oswald may have met while in Mexico, including passengers on the buses he rode,[C6-552] and the employees and guests of the hotel where he stayed,[C6-553] were interviewed. No credible witness has been located who saw Oswald with any unidentified person while in Mexico City; to the contrary, he was observed traveling alone to and from Mexico City,[C6-554] at his hotel,[C6-555] and at the nearby restaurant where he frequently ate.[C6-556] A hotel guest stated that on one occasion he sat down at a table with Oswald at the restaurant because no empty table was available, but that neither spoke to the other because of the language barrier.[C6-557] Two Australian girls who saw Oswald on the bus to Mexico City relate that he occupied a seat next to a man who has been identified as Albert Osborne, an elderly itinerant preacher.[C6-558] Osborne denies that Oswald was beside him on the bus.[C6-559] To the other passengers on the bus it appeared that Osborne and Oswald had not previously met,[C6-560] and extensive investigation of Osborne has revealed no further contact between him and Oswald. Osborne’s responses to Federal investigators on matters unrelated to Oswald have proved inconsistent and unreliable, and, therefore, based on the contrary evidence and Osborne’s lack of reliability, the Commission has attached no credence to his denial that Oswald was beside him on the bus. Investigation of his background and activities, however, disclose no basis for suspecting him of any involvement in the assassination.[C6-561]

Investigation of the hotel at which Oswald stayed has failed to uncover any evidence that the hotel is unusual in any way that could relate to Oswald’s visit. It is not especially popular among Cubans, and there is no indication that it is used as a meeting place for extremist or revolutionary organizations.[C6-562] Investigation of other guests of the hotel who were there when Oswald was has failed to uncover anything creating suspicion.[C6-563] Oswald’s notebook which he carried with him to Mexico City contained the telephone number of the Cuban Airlines Office in Mexico City;[C6-564] however, a Cuban visa is required by Mexican authorities before an individual may enplane for Cuba,[C6-565] and a confidential check of the Cuban Airlines Office uncovered no evidence that Oswald visited their offices while in the city.[C6-566]

Allegations of conspiracy.—Literally dozens of allegations of a conspiratorial contact between Oswald and agents of the Cuban Government have been investigated by the Commission. Among the claims made were allegations that Oswald had made a previous trip to Mexico City in early September to receive money and orders for the assassination,[C6-567] that he had been flown to a secret airfield somewhere in or near the Yucatan Peninsula,[C6-568] that he might have made contacts in Mexico City with a Communist from the United States shortly before the assassination,[C6-569] and that Oswald assassinated the President at the direction of a particular Cuban agent who met with him in the United States and paid him $7,000.[C6-570] A letter was received from someone in Cuba alleging the writer had attended a meeting where the assassination had been discussed as part of a plan which would soon include the death of other non-Communist leaders in the Americas.[C6-571] The charge was made in a Cuban expatriate publication that in a speech he delivered 5 days after the assassination, while he was under the influence of liquor, Fidel Castro made a slip of the tongue and said, “The first time Oswald was in Cuba,” thereby giving away the fact that Oswald had made one or more surreptitious trips to that country.[C6-572]

Commission Exhibit No. 1400

LEE HARVEY OSWALD’S MOVEMENTS IN MEXICO CITY

Some stories linked the assassination to anti-Castro groups who allegedly were engaged in obtaining illicit firearms in the United States, one such claim being that these groups killed the President as part of a bargain with some illicit organizations who would then supply them with firearms as payment.[C6-573] Other rumors placed Oswald in Miami, Fla., at various times, allegedly in pro-Cuban activities there.[C6-574] The assassination was claimed to have been carried out by Chinese Communists operating jointly with the Cubans.[C6-575] Oswald was also alleged to have met with the Cuban Ambassador in a Mexico City restaurant and to have driven off in the Ambassador’s car for a private talk.[C6-576] Castro himself, it was alleged, 2 days after the assassination called for the files relating to Oswald’s dealings with two members of the Cuban diplomatic mission in the Soviet Union; the inference drawn was that the “dealings” had occurred and had established a secret subversive relationship which continued through Oswald’s life.[C6-577] Without exception, the rumors and allegations of a conspiratorial contact were shown to be without any factual basis, in some cases the product of mistaken identification.

Illustrative of the attention given to the most serious allegations is the case of “D,” a young Latin American secret agent who approached U.S. authorities in Mexico shortly after the assassination and declared that he saw Lee Harvey Oswald receiving $6,500 to kill the President. Among other details, “D” said that at about noon on September 18, waiting to conduct some business at the Cuban consulate, he saw a group of three persons conversing in a patio a few feet away. One was a tall, thin Negro with reddish hair, obviously dyed, who spoke rapidly in both Spanish and English, and another was a man he said was Lee Harvey Oswald. A tall Cuban joined the group momentarily and passed some currency to the Negro. The Negro then allegedly said to Oswald in English, “I want to kill the man.” Oswald replied, “You’re not man enough, I can do it.” The Negro then said in Spanish, “I can’t go with you, I have a lot to do.” Oswald replied, “The people are waiting for me back there.” The Negro then gave Oswald $6,500 in large-denomination American bills, saying, “This isn’t much.” After hearing this conversation, “D” said that he telephoned the American Embassy in Mexico City several times prior to the assassination in an attempt to report his belief that someone important in the United States was to be killed, but was finally told by someone at the Embassy to stop wasting his time.

“D” and his allegations were immediately subjected to intensive investigation. His former employment as an agent for a Latin American country was confirmed, although his superiors had no knowledge of his presence in Mexico or the assignment described by “D.” Four days after “D” first appeared the U.S. Government was informed by the Mexican authorities that “D” had admitted in writing that his whole narrative about Oswald was false. He said that he had never seen Oswald anyplace, and that he had not seen anybody paid money in the Cuban Embassy. He also admitted that he never tried to telephone the American Embassy in September and that his first call to the Embassy was after the assassination. “D” said that his motive in fabricating the story was to help get himself admitted into the United States so that he could there participate in action against Fidel Castro. He said that he hated Castro and hoped that the story he made up would be believed and would cause the United States to “take action” against him.

Still later, when questioned by American authorities, “D” claimed that he had been pressured into retracting his statement by the Mexican police and that the retraction, rather than his first statement, was false. A portion of the American questioning was carried on with the use of a polygraph machine, with the consent of “D.” When told that the machine indicated that he was probably lying, “D” said words to the effect that he “must be mistaken.” Investigation in the meantime had disclosed that the Embassy extension number “D” said he had called would not have given him the person he said he spoke to, and that no one at the Embassy—clerks, secretaries, or officers—had any recollection of his calls. In addition, Oswald spoke little, if any, Spanish. That he could have carried on the alleged conversation with the red-headed Negro in the Cuban Embassy, part of which was supposed to have been in Spanish, was therefore doubtful. “D” now said that he was uncertain as to the date when he saw “someone who looked like Oswald” at the Cuban Embassy, and upon reconsideration, he now thought it was on a Tuesday, September 17, rather than September 18. On September 17, however, Oswald visited the Louisiana State Unemployment Commission in New Orleans and also cashed a check from the Texas Employment Commission at the Winn-Dixie Store No. 1425 in New Orleans. On the basis of the retractions made by “D” when he heard the results of the polygraph examination, and on the basis of discrepancies which appeared in his story, it was concluded that “D” was lying.[C6-578]

The investigation of the Commission has thus produced no evidence that Oswald’s trip to Mexico was in any way connected with the assassination of President Kennedy, nor has it uncovered evidence that the Cuban Government had any involvement in the assassination. To the contrary, the Commission has been advised by the CIA and FBI that secret and reliable sources corroborate the statements of Senora Duran in all material respects, and that the Cuban Government had no relationship with Lee Harvey Oswald other than that described by Senora Duran. Secretary of State Rusk also testified that after the assassination “there was very considerable concern in Cuba as to whether they would be held responsible and what the effect of that might be on their own position and their own safety.”[C6-579]

Contacts with the Soviet Embassy in the United States.—Soon after the Oswalds reached the United States in June 1962 they wrote to the Soviet Embassy in Washington, D.C. Oswald requested information about subscriptions to Russian newspapers and magazines and ultimately did subscribe to several Russian journals. Soviet law required Marina Oswald, as a Soviet citizen living abroad, to remain in contact with her nation’s Embassy and to file various papers occasionally.[C6-580] In 1963, after Oswald had experienced repeated employment difficulties, there were further letters when the Oswalds sought permission to return to the Soviet Union. The first such request was a letter written by Marina Oswald on February 17, 1963. She wrote that she wished to return to Russia but that her husband would stay in the United States because “he is an American by nationality.”[C6-581] She was informed on March 8, 1963, that it would take from 5 to 6 months to process the application.[C6-582] The Soviet Union made available to the Commission what purports to be the entire correspondence between the Oswalds and the Russian Embassy in the United States.[C6-583] This material has been checked for codes and none has been detected.[C6-584] With the possible exception of a letter which Oswald wrote to the Soviet Embassy after his return from Mexico City, discussed below, there is no material which gives any reason for suspicion. The implications of all of this correspondence for an understanding of Lee Harvey Oswald’s personality and motivation is discussed in the following chapter.

Oswald’s last letter to the Soviet Embassy in Washington, D.C., dated November 9, 1963, began by stating that it was written “to inform you of recent events since my meetings with Comrade Kostin in the Embassy of the Soviet Union, Mexico City, Mexico.”[C6-585] The envelope bears a postmark which appears to be November 12, 1963.[C6-586] Ruth Paine has testified that Oswald spent the weekend at her home working on the letter and that she observed one preliminary draft.[C6-587] A piece of paper which was identified as one of these drafts was found among Oswald’s effects after the assassination. (See Commission Exhibits Nos. 15, 103, [p. 311].) According to Marina Oswald, her husband retyped the envelope 10 times.[C6-588]

Information produced for the Commission by the CIA is to the effect that the person referred to in the letter as “comrade Kostin” was probably Valeriy Vladimirovich Kostikov, a member of the consular staff of the Soviet Union in Mexico City. He is also one of the KGB officers stationed at the Embassy.[C6-589] It is standard Soviet procedure for KGB officers stationed in embassies and in consulates to carry on the normal duties of such a position in addition to the undercover activities.[C6-590] The Commission has identified the Cuban consul referred to in Oswald’s letter as Senor Eusebio Azque (also “Ascue”), the man with whom Oswald argued at the Cuban Embassy, who was in fact replaced. The CIA advised the Commission:

We surmise that the references in Oswald’s 9 November letter to a man who had since been replaced must refer to Cuban Consul Eusebio Azque, who left Mexico for Cuba on permanent transfer on 18 November 1963, four days before the assassination. Azque had been in Mexico for 18 years and it was known as early as September 1963 that Azque was to be replaced. His replacement did arrive in September. Azque was scheduled to leave in October but did not leave until 18 November.

We do not know who might have told Oswald that Azque or any other Cuban had been or was to be replaced, but we speculate that Silvia Duran or some Soviet official might have mentioned it if Oswald complained about Azque’s altercation with him.[C6-591]

When asked to explain the letter, Marina Oswald was unable to add anything to an understanding of its contents.[C6-592] Some light on its possible meaning can be shed by comparing it with the early draft. When the differences between the draft and the final document are studied, and especially when crossed-out words are taken into account, it becomes apparent that Oswald was intentionally beclouding the true state of affairs in order to make his trip to Mexico sound as mysterious and important as possible.

For example, the first sentence in the second paragraph of the letter reads, “I was unable to remain in Mexico indefinily because of my mexican visa restrictions which was for 15 days only.” The same sentence in the draft begins, before the words are crossed out, “I was unable to remain in Mexico City because I considered useless * * *” As already mentioned, the Commission has good evidence that Oswald’s trip to Mexico was indeed “useless” and that he returned to Texas with that conviction. The first draft, therefore, spoke the truth; but Oswald rewrote the sentence to imply that he had to leave because his visa was about to expire. This is false; Oswald’s tourist card still had a full week to run when he departed from Mexico on October 3.[C6-593]

The next sentence in the letter reads, “I could not take a chance on reqesting a new visa unless I used my real name, so I returned to the United States.” The fact is that he did use his real name for his tourist card, and in all dealings with the Cuban Embassy, the Russian Embassy and elsewhere. Oswald did use the name of “Lee” on the trip, but as indicated below, he did so only sporadically and probably as the result of a clerical error. In the opinion of the Commission, based upon its knowledge of Oswald, the letter constitutes no more than a clumsy effort to ingratiate himself with the Soviet Embassy.

COMMISSION EXHIBIT 15
OSWALD’S LETTER TO THE EMBASSY U. S. S. R., WASHINGTON, D. C.

(COMMISSION EXHIBIT 103)
PRELIMINARY DRAFT

Investigation of Other Activities

Oswald’s use of post office boxes and false names.—After his return from the Soviet Union, Lee Harvey Oswald is known to have received his mail at post office boxes and to have used different aliases on numerous occasions. Since either practice is susceptible of use for clandestine purposes, the Commission has directed attention to both for signs that Oswald at some point made undercover contact with other persons who might have been connected with the assassination.

Oswald is known to have opened three post office boxes during 1962 and 1963. On October 9, 1962, the same day that he arrived in Dallas from Fort Worth, and before establishing a residence there, he opened box No. 2915 at the Dallas General Post Office. This box was closed on May 14, 1963, shortly after Oswald had moved to New Orleans.[C6-594] That portion of the post office box application listing the names of those persons other than the applicant entitled to receive mail at the box was discarded in accordance with postal regulations after the box was closed; hence, it is not known what names other than Oswald’s were listed on that form.[C6-595] However, as discussed in chapter IV, Oswald is known to have received the assassination rifle under the name of A. Hidell and his Smith & Wesson revolver under the name of A. J. Hidell at that box.[C6-596] On June 3, 1963, Oswald opened box No. 30061 at the Lafayette Square Substation in New Orleans. Marina Oswald and A. J. Hidell were listed as additional persons entitled to receive mail at this box.[C6-597] Immediately before leaving for Mexico City in late September, Oswald submitted a request to forward his mail to the Paines’ address in Irving, and the box was closed on September 26.[C6-598] On November 1, 1963, he opened box No. 6225 at the Dallas Post Office Terminal Annex. The Fair Play for Cuba Committee and the American Civil Liberties Union were listed as also being entitled to receive mail at this box.[C6-599]

Oswald’s use of post office boxes is consistent with other information known about him. His frequent changes of address and receipt of Communist and other political literature would appear to have provided Oswald reason to have rented postal boxes. These were the explanations for his use of the boxes which he provided Postal Inspector H. D. Holmes on November 24.[C6-600] Moreover, on October 14, 1963, he had moved into a room on Beckley Avenue under the name of O. H. Lee[C6-601] and it would have been extremely difficult for Oswald to have received his mail at that address without having disclosed his true name. The boxes cost Oswald only $1.50 or less per month.[C6-602]

Although the possibilities of investigation in this area are limited, there is no evidence that any of the three boxes was ever used for the surreptitious receipt of messages or was used by persons other than Oswald or his family. No unexplainable notes were found among Oswald’s possessions after his arrest. Oswald’s box on the day of the assassination, No. 6225, was kept under constant personal surveillance by postal inspectors from about 5 p.m. November 22 until midnight November 24. A modified surveillance was maintained thereafter. No one called for mail out of this box; indeed the only mail in the box was a Russian magazine addressed to Oswald. The single outstanding key was recovered from Oswald immediately after he was taken in custody.[C6-603]

In appraising the import of Oswald’s rental of post office boxes, it is significant that he was not secretive about their use. All three boxes were rented by Oswald using his true name.[C6-604] His application for box No. 2915 showed his home address as that of Alexandra De Mohrenschildt (Taylor), whose husband had agreed to allow Oswald to use his address.[C6-605] His application for the New Orleans box listed his address as 657 French Street; his aunt, Lillian Murret, lived at 757 French Street.[C6-606] On the application for box No. 6225, Oswald gave an incorrect street number, though he did show Beckley Avenue, where he was then living.[C6-607] He furnished the box numbers to his brother, to an employer, to Texas and New Orleans unemployment commissions, and to others.[C6-608] Based on all the facts disclosed by its investigation, the Commission has attached no conspiratorial significance to Oswald’s rental of post office boxes.

Oswald’s use of aliases is also well established. In chapter IV, the evidence relating to his repeated use of the name “A. J. Hidell,” and close variants thereof, is set forth.[C6-609] Because Oswald’s use of this pseudonym became known quickly after the assassination, investigations were conducted with regard to persons using the name Hidell or names similar to it. Subversive files, public carrier records, telegraph company records, banking and other commercial records, and other matters investigated and persons interviewed have been examined with regard to Oswald’s true name and his known alias.[C6-610] No evidence has been produced that Oswald ever used the name Hidell as a means of making undercover contact with any person. Indeed, though Oswald did prepare a counterfeit selective service card and other identification using this name, he commonly used “Hidell” to represent persons other than himself, such as the president of his nonexistent Fair Play for Cuba Committee chapter, the doctor whose name appeared on his counterfeit international certificate of vaccination, and as references on his job applications.[C6-611]

Alwyn Cole, questioned document expert for the Treasury Department, testified that the false identification found on Oswald upon his arrest could have been produced by employing elementary techniques used in a photographic printing plant.[C6-612] (See app. X, [pp. 571-578].) Though to perform the necessary procedures would have been difficult without the use of expensive photographic equipment, such equipment and the needed film and photographic paper were available to Oswald when he was employed from October 1962 through early April 1963 at Jaggars-Chiles-Stovall, a commercial advertising photography firm in Dallas.[C6-613] While so employed, Oswald is known to have become familiar with the mechanics of photographic enlargements, contraction, and image distortion that would have been necessary to produce his false identification, and to have used the facilities of his employer for some personal work.[C6-614] Cole testified that the cards in Oswald’s wallet did not exhibit a great deal of skill, pointing out various errors that had been committed.[C6-615] Oswald’s supervisor at Jaggars-Chiles-Stovall has stated that Oswald seemed unable to perform photographic work with precision, which was one of the main reasons for which he was ultimately discharged.[C6-616] The retouched negatives used to make Oswald’s counterfeit certificate of service identification were found among Oswald’s personal effects after his arrest, as was a rubber stamping kit apparently employed to produce his spurious international certificate of vaccination.[C6-617] There is strong evidence, therefore, that Oswald himself made the various pieces of counterfeit identification which he carried, and there is no reason to believe that he received assistance from any person in establishing his alias.

Oswald also used incorrect names other than Hidell, but these too appear unconnected with any form of conspiracy. Oswald’s last name appears as “Lee” in three places in connection with his trip to Mexico City, discussed above. His tourist card was typed by the Mexican consulate in New Orleans, “Lee, Harvey Oswald.”[C6-618] However, the comma seems to have been a clerical error, since Oswald signed both the application and the card itself, “Lee H. Oswald.” Moreover, Oswald seems originally to have also printed his name, evenly spaced, as “Lee H Oswald,” but, noting that the form instructed him to “Print full name. No initials,” printed the remainder of his middle name after the “H.” The clerk who typed the card thus saw a space after “Lee,” followed by “Harvey Oswald” crowded together, and probably assumed that “Lee” was the applicant’s last name. (See Commission Exhibit 2481, [p. 300].) The clerk who prepared Oswald’s bus reservation for his return trip wrote “H. O. Lee.” He stated that he did not remember the occasion, although he was sure from the handwriting and from other facts that he had dealt with Oswald. He surmised that he probably made out the reservation directly from the tourist card, since Oswald spoke no Spanish, and, seeing the comma, wrote the name “H. O. Lee.”[C6-619] Oswald himself signed the register at the hotel in Mexico City as “Lee, Harvey Oswald,”[C6-620] but since the error is identical to that on the tourist card and since he revealed the remainder of his name, “Harvey Oswald,” it is possible that Oswald inserted the comma to conform to the tourist card, or that the earlier mistake suggested a new pseudonym to Oswald which he decided to continue.

In any event, Oswald used his correct name in making reservations for the trip to Mexico City, in introducing himself to passengers on the bus, and in his dealings with the Cuban and Soviet Embassies.[C6-621] When registering at the Beckley Avenue house in mid-October, Oswald perpetuated the pseudonym by giving his name as “O. H. Lee,”[C6-622] though he had given his correct name to the owner of the previous roominghouse where he had rented a room after his return from Mexico City.[C6-623] Investigations of the Commission have been conducted with regard to persons using the name “Lee,” and no evidence has been found that Oswald used this alias for the purpose of making any type of secret contacts.

Oswald is also known to have used the surname “Osborne” in ordering Fair Play for Cuba Committee handbills in May 1963.[C6-624] He also used the false name D. F. Drittal as a certifying witness on the mail-order coupon with which he purchased his Smith & Wesson revolver.[C6-625] He used the name Lt. J. Evans as a reference on an employment application in New Orleans.[C6-626]

Oswald’s repeated use of false names is probably not to be disassociated from his antisocial and criminal inclinations. No doubt he purchased his weapons under the name of Hidell in attempt to prevent their ownership from being traced. Oswald’s creation of false names and ficititious personalities is treated in the discussion of possible motives set forth in chapter VII. Whatever its significance in that respect may be, the Commission has found no indication that Oswald’s use of aliases was linked with any conspiracy with others.

Ownership of a second rifle.—The Commission has investigated a report that, during the first 2 weeks of November 1963, Oswald had a telescopic sight mounted and sighted on a rifle at a sporting goods store in Irving, Tex. The main evidence that Oswald had such work performed for him is an undated repair tag bearing the name “Oswald” from the Irving Sports Shop in Irving, Tex. On November 25, 1963, Dial D. Ryder, an employee of the Irving Sports Shop, presented this tag to agents of the FBI, claiming that the tag was in his handwriting. The undated tag indicated that three holes had been drilled in an unspecified type of rifle and a telescopic sight had been mounted on the rifle and boresighted.[C6-627]

As discussed in chapter IV, the telescopic sight on the C2766 Mannlicher-Carcano rifle was already mounted when shipped to Oswald, and both Ryder and his employer, Charles W. Greener, feel certain that they never did any work on this rifle.[C6-628] If the repair tag actually represented a transaction involving Lee Harvey Oswald, therefore, it would mean that Oswald owned another rifle. Although this would not alter the evidence which establishes Oswald’s ownership of the rifle used to assassinate President Kennedy, the possession of a second rifle warranted investigation because it would indicate that a possibly important part of Oswald’s life had not been uncovered.

Since all of Oswald’s known transactions in connection with firearms after his return to the United States were undertaken under an assumed name,[C6-629] it seems unlikely that if he did have repairs made at the sports shop he would have used his real name. Investigation has revealed that the authenticity of the repair tag bearing Oswald’s name is indeed subject to grave doubts. Ryder testified that he found the repair tag while cleaning his workbench on November 23, 1963.[C6-630] However, Ryder spoke with Greener repeatedly during the period between November 22-28 and, sometime prior to November 25, he discussed with him the possibility that Oswald had been in the store. Neither he nor Greener could remember that he had been. But despite these conversations with Greener, it is significant that Ryder never called the repair tag to his employer’s attention. Greener did not learn about the tag until November 28, when he was called by TV reporters after the story had appeared in the Dallas Times-Herald.[C6-631] The peculiarity of Ryder’s silence is compounded by the fact that, when speaking to the FBI on November 25, Ryder fixed the period during which the tag had been issued as November 1-14, 1963, yet, from his later testimony, it appears that he did so on the basis that it must have occurred when Greener was on vacation since Greener did not remember the transaction.[C6-632] Moreover, the FBI had been directed to the Irving Sports Shop by anonymous telephone calls received by its Dallas office and by a local television station. The anonymous male who telephoned the Bureau attributed his information to an unidentified sack boy at a specified supermarket in Irving, but investigation has failed to verify this source.[C6-633]

Neither Ryder nor Greener claimed that Lee Harvey Oswald had ever been a customer in the Irving Sports Shop. Neither has any recollection of either Oswald or his Mannlicher-Carcano rifle, nor does either recall the transaction allegedly represented by the repair tag or the person for whom the repair was supposedly made.[C6-634] Although Ryder stated to the FBI that he was “quite sure” that he had seen Oswald and that Oswald may have been in the store at one time, when shown a photograph of Oswald during his deposition, Ryder testified he knew the picture to be of Oswald, “as the pictures in the paper, but as far as seeing the guy personally, I don’t think I ever have.”[C6-635]

Subsequent events also reflect on Ryder’s credibility. In his deposition, Ryder emphatically denied that he talked to any reporters about this matter prior to the time a story about it appeared in the November 28, 1963, edition of the Dallas Times-Herald.[C6-636] Earlier, however, he told an agent of the U.S. Secret Service that the newspaper had misquoted him.[C6-637] Moreover, a reporter for the Dallas Times-Herald has testified that on November 28, 1963, he called Ryder at his home and obtained from him all of the details of the alleged transaction, and his story is supported by the testimony of a second reporter who overheard one end of the telephone conversation.[C6-638] No other person by the name of Oswald in the Dallas-Fort Worth area has been found who had a rifle repaired at the Irving Sports Shop.[C6-639]

Possible corroboration for Ryder’s story is provided by two women, Mrs. Edith Whitworth, who operates the Furniture Mart, a furniture store located about 1½ blocks from the Irving Sports Shop, and Mrs. Gertrude Hunter, a friend of Mrs. Whitworth. They testified that in early November of 1963, a man who they later came to believe was Oswald drove up to the Furniture Mart in a two-tone blue and white 1957 Ford automobile, entered the store and asked about a part for a gun, presumably because of a sign that appeared in the building advertising a gunsmith shop that had formerly occupied part of the premises. When he found that he could not obtain the part, the man allegedly returned to his car and then came back into the store with a woman and two young children to look at furniture, remaining in the store for about 30 to 40 minutes.[C6-640]

Upon confronting Marina Oswald, both women identified her as the woman whom they had seen in the store on the occasion in question, although Mrs. Hunter could not identify a picture of Lee Harvey Oswald and Mrs. Whitworth identified some pictures of Oswald but not others. Mrs. Hunter purported to identify Marina Oswald by her eyes, and did not observe the fact that Marina Oswald had a front tooth missing at the time she supposedly saw her.[C6-641] After a thorough inspection of the Furniture Mart, Marina Oswald testified that she had never been on the premises before.[C6-642]

The circumstances surrounding the testimony of the two women are helpful in evaluating the weight to be given to their testimony, and the extent to which they lend support to Ryder’s evidence. The women previously told newspaper reporters that the part for which the man was looking was a “plunger,” which the Commission has been advised is a colloquial term used to describe a firing pin.[C6-643] This work was completely different from the work covered by Ryder’s repair tag, and the firing pin of the assassination weapon does not appear to have been recently replaced.[C6-644] At the time of their depositions, neither woman was able to recall the type of work which the man wanted done.[C6-645]

Mrs. Whitworth related to the FBI that the man told her that the younger child with him was born on October 20, 1963, which was in fact Rachel Oswald’s birthday.[C6-646] In her testimony before the Commission, however, Mrs. Whitworth could not state that the man had told her the child’s birthdate was October 20, 1963, and in fact expressed uncertainty about the birthday of her own grandchild, which she had previously used as a guide to remembering the birthdate of the younger child in the shop.[C6-647] Mrs. Hunter thought that the man she and Mrs. Whitworth believed was Oswald drove the car to and from the store;[C6-648] however, Lee Harvey Oswald apparently was not able to drive an automobile by himself and does not appear to have had access to a car.[C6-649]

The two women claimed that Oswald was in the Furniture Mart on a weekday, and in midafternoon. However, Oswald had reported to work at the Texas School Book Depository on the dates referred to by the women and there is no evidence that he left his job during business hours.[C6-650] In addition, Ruth Paine has stated that she always accompanied Marina Oswald whenever Marina left the house with her children and that they never went to the Furniture Mart, either with or without Lee Harvey Oswald, at any time during October or November of 1963.[C6-651] There is nothing to indicate that in November the Oswalds were interested in buying furniture.[C6-652]

Finally, investigation has produced reason to question the credibility of Mrs. Hunter as a witness. Mrs. Hunter stated that one of the reasons she remembers the description of the car in which Oswald supposedly drove to the furniture store was that she was awaiting the arrival of a friend from Houston, who drove a similar automobile.[C6-653] However, the friend in Houston has advised that in November 1963, she never visited or planned to visit Dallas, and that she told no one that she intended to make such a trip. Moreover the friend added, according to the FBI interview report, that Mrs. Hunter has “a strange obsession for attempting to inject herself into any big event which comes to her attention” and that she “is likely to claim some personal knowledge of any major crime which receives much publicity.”[C6-654] She concluded that “the entire family is aware of these ‘tall tales’ Mrs. Hunter tells and they normally pay no attention to her.”[C6-655]

Another allegation relating to the possible ownership of a second rifle by Oswald comes from Robert Adrian Taylor, a mechanic at a service station in Irving. Some 3 weeks after the assassination, Taylor reported to the FBI that he thought that, in March or April of 1963, a man he believed to be Oswald had been a passenger in an automobile that stopped at his station for repairs; since neither the driver nor the passenger had sufficient funds for the repair work, the person believed to be Oswald sold a U.S. Army rifle to Mr. Taylor, using the proceeds to pay for the repairs.[C6-656] However, a second employee at the service station, who recalled the incident, believed that, despite a slight resemblance, the passenger was not Oswald.[C6-657] Upon reflection, Taylor himself stated that he is very doubtful that the man was Oswald.[C6-658]

Rifle practice.—Several witnesses believed that in the weeks preceding the assassination, they observed a man resembling Oswald practicing with a rifle in the fields and wooded areas surrounding Dallas, and at rifle ranges in that area. Some witnesses claimed Oswald was alone, while others said he was accompanied by one or more other persons. In most instances, investigation has disclosed that there is no substantial basis for believing that the person reported by the various witnesses was Oswald.[C6-659]

One group of witnesses, however, believed that they observed Lee Harvey Oswald at the Sports Drome Rifle Range in Dallas at various times from September through November of 1963. In light of the number of witnesses, the similarity of the descriptions of the man they saw, and the type of weapon they thought the individual was shooting, there is reason to believe that these witnesses did see the same person at the firing range, although the testimony of none of these witnesses is fully consistent with the reported observations of the other witnesses.

The witnesses who claimed to have seen Oswald at the firing range had more than a passing notice of the person they observed. Malcolm H. Price, Jr., adjusted the scope on the individual’s rifle on one occasion;[C6-660] Garland G. Slack had an altercation with the individual on another occasion because he was shooting at Slack’s target;[C6-661] and Sterling C. Wood, who on a third date was present at the range with his father, Dr. Homer Wood, spoke with his father and very briefly with the man himself about the individual’s rifle.[C6-662] All three of these persons, as well as Dr. Wood, expressed confidence that the man they saw was Oswald.[C6-663] Two other persons believed they saw a person resembling Oswald firing a similar rifle at another range near Irving 2 days before the assassination.[C6-664]

Although the testimony of these witnesses was partially corroborated by other witnesses,[C6-665] there was other evidence which prevented the Commission from reaching the conclusion that Lee Harvey Oswald was the person these witnesses saw. Others who were at the firing range remembered the same individual but, though noting a similarity to Oswald, did not believe that the man was Oswald;[C6-666] others either were unable to state whether the man was Oswald or did not recall seeing anybody who they feel may have been Oswald.[C6-667] Moreover, when interviewed on December 2, 1963, Slack recalled that the individual whom he saw had blond hair,[C6-668] and on December 3, 1963, Price stated that on several occasions when he saw the individual, he was wearing a “Bulldogger Texas style” hat and had bubble gum or chewing tobacco in his cheek.[C6-669] None of these characteristics match those known about Lee Harvey Oswald.

Moreover, the date on which Price adjusted the scope for the unknown person was September 28, 1963, but Oswald is known to have been in Mexico City at that time;[C6-670] since a comparison of the events testified to by Price and Slack strongly suggests that they were describing the same man,[C6-671] there is reason to believe that Slack was also describing a man other than Oswald. In addition, Slack believed he saw the same person at the rifle range on November 10[C6-672] and there is persuasive evidence that on November 10, Oswald was at the Paine’s home in Irving and did not leave to go to the rifle range.[C6-673] Finally, the man whom Price assisted on September 28 drove an old car, possibly a 1940 or 1941 Ford.[C6-674] However, there is evidence that Oswald could not drive at that time, and there is no indication that Oswald ever had access to such a car.[C6-675] Neither Oswald’s name nor any of his known aliases was found in the sign-in register maintained at the Sports Drome Rifle Range, though many customers did not sign this register.[C6-676] The allegations pertaining to the companions who reportedly accompanied the man believed to be Oswald are also inconsistent among themselves[C6-677] and conform to no other credible information ascertained by the Commission. Several witnesses noticed a bearded man at the club when the person believed to be Oswald was there, although only one witness thought the two men were together;[C6-678] the bearded gentleman was located, and he was not found to have any connection with Oswald.[C6-679]

It seems likely that the identification of Price, Slack, and the Woods was reinforced in their own minds by the belief that the man whom they saw was firing a rifle perhaps identical to Oswald’s Mannlicher-Carcano. The witnesses agreed that the man they observed was firing a Mauser-type bolt-action rifle with the ammunition clip immediately in front of the trigger action, and that a scope was mounted on the rifle.[C6-680] These features are consistent with the rifle Oswald used for the assassination.[C6-681] The witnesses agreed that the man had accurate aim with the rifle.[C6-682]

However, the evidence demonstrated that the weapon fired by the man they observed was different from the assassination rifle. The witnesses agreed that the barrel of the gun which the individual was firing had been shortened in the process of “sporterizing” the weapon.[C6-683] In addition, Price and Slack recalled that certain pieces were missing from the top of the weapon,[C6-684] and Dr. Wood and his son, and others, remembered that the weapon spouted flames when fired.[C6-685] None of these characteristics correspond with Oswald’s Mannlicher-Carcano.[C6-686] Price and Slack believed that the gun did not have a sling, but the assassination weapon did have one. Sterling Wood, on the other hand, recalled that the rifle which he saw had a sling.[C6-687] Price also recalled that he examined the rifle briefly for some indication as to where it had been manufactured, but saw nothing, whereas the words “MADE ITALY” are marked on the top of Oswald’s Mannlicher-Carcano.[C6-688]

The scope on the rifle observed at the firing range does not appear to be the same as the one on the assassination weapon. Price remembered that the individual told him that his scope was Japanese, that he had paid $18 for it, and that he had it mounted in a gunshop in Cedar Hills, though apparently no such shop exists in that area.[C6-689] The scope on the Mannlicher-Carcano was of Japanese origin but it was worth a little more than $7 and was already mounted when he received the rifle from a mail-order firm in Chicago.[C6-690] Sterling Wood and Slack agreed that the scope had a somewhat different appearance from the scope on the assassination rifle.[C6-691]

Though the person believed to be Oswald retained his shell casings, presumably for reuse,[C6-692] all casings recovered from areas where it is believed that Oswald may have practiced have been examined by the FBI Laboratory, and none has been found which was fired from Oswald’s rifle.[C6-693] Finally, evidence discussed in chapter IV tends to prove that Oswald brought his rifle to Dallas from the home of the Paines in Irving on November 22, and there is no other evidence which indicates that he took the rifle or a package which might have contained the rifle out of the Paine’s garage, where it was stored, prior to that date.[C6-694]

Automobile demonstration.—The testimony of Albert Guy Bogard has been carefully evaluated because it suggests the possibility that Oswald might have been a proficient automobile driver and, during November 1963, might have been expecting funds with which to purchase a car. Bogard, formerly an automobile salesman with a Lincoln-Mercury firm in Dallas, testified that in the early afternoon of November 9, 1963, he attended a prospective customer who he believes was Lee Harvey Oswald. According to Bogard, the customer, after test driving an automobile over the Stemmons Freeway at 60 to 70 miles per hour, told Bogard that in several weeks he would have the money to make a purchase. Bogard asserted that the customer gave his name as “Lee Oswald,” which Bogard wrote on a business card. After Oswald’s name was mentioned on the radio on November 22, Bogard assertedly threw the card in a trash can, making the comment to coemployees that he supposed Oswald would no longer wish to buy a car.[C6-695]

Bogard’s testimony has received corroboration.[C6-696] The assistant sales manager at the time, Frank Pizzo, and a second salesman, Eugene M. Wilson, stated that they recall an instance when the customer described by Bogard was in the showroom.[C6-697] Another salesman, Oran Brown, recalled that Bogard asked him to assist the customer if he appeared during certain evenings when Bogard was away from the showroom. Brown stated that he too wrote down the customer’s name and both he and his wife remember the name “Oswald” as being on a paper in his possession before the assassination.[C6-698]

However, doubts exist about the accuracy of Bogard’s testimony. He, Pizzo, and Wilson differed on important details of what is supposed to have occurred when the customer was in the showroom. Whereas Bogard stated that the customer said he did not wish credit and wanted to purchase a car for cash,[C6-699] Pizzo and Wilson both indicated that the man did attempt to purchase on credit.[C6-700] According to Wilson, when the customer was told that he would be unable to purchase a car without a credit rating, substantial cash or a lengthy employment record, he stated sarcastically, “Maybe I’m going to have to go back to Russia to buy a car.”[C6-701] While it is possible that Oswald would have made such a remark, the statement is not consistent with Bogard’s story. Indeed, Bogard has made no mention that the customer ever spoke with Wilson while he was in the showroom.[C6-702] More important, on November 23, a search through the showroom’s refuse was made, but no paper bearing Oswald’s name was found.[C6-703] The paper on which Brown reportedly wrote Oswald’s name also has never been located.[C6-704]

The assistant sales manager, Mr. Pizzo, who saw Bogard’s prospect on November 9 and shortly after the assassination felt that Oswald may have been this man, later examined pictures of Oswald and expressed serious doubts that the person with Bogard was in fact Oswald. While noting a resemblance, he did not believe that Oswald’s hairline matched that of the person who had been in the showroom on November 9.[C6-705] Wilson has stated that Bogard’s customer was only about 5 feet tall.[C6-706] Several persons who knew Oswald have testified that he was unable to drive,[C6-707] although Mrs. Paine, who was giving Oswald driving lessons, stated that Oswald was showing some improvement by November.[C6-708] Moreover, Oswald’s whereabouts on November 9, as testified to by Marina Oswald and Ruth Paine, would have made it impossible for him to have visited the automobile showroom as Mr. Bogard claims.[C6-709]

Alleged association with various Mexican or Cuban individuals.—The Commission has examined Oswald’s known or alleged contacts and activities in an effort to ascertain whether or not he was involved in any conspiracy may be seen in the investigation it conducted as a result of the testimony given by Mrs. Sylvia Odio. The Commission investigated her statements in connection with its consideration of the testimony of several witnesses suggesting that Oswald may have been seen in the company of unidentified persons of Cuban or Mexican background. Mrs. Odio was born in Havana in 1937 and remained in Cuba until 1960; it appears that both of her parents are political prisoners of the Castro regime. Mrs. Odio is a member of the Cuban Revolutionary Junta (JURE), an anti-Castro organization.[C6-710] She testified that late in September 1963, three men came to her apartment in Dallas and asked her to help them prepare a letter soliciting funds for JURE activities. She claimed that the men, who exhibited personal familiarity with her imprisoned father, asked her if she were “working in the underground,” and she replied that she was not.[C6-711] She testified that two of the men appeared to be Cubans, although they also had some characteristics that she associated with Mexicans. Those two men did not state their full names, but identified themselves only by their fictitious underground “war names.” Mrs. Odio remembered the name of one of the Cubans as “Leopoldo.”[C6-712] The third man, an American, allegedly was introduced to Mrs. Odio as “Leon Oswald,” and she was told that he was very much interested in the Cuban cause.[C6-713] Mrs. Odio said that the men told her that they had just come from New Orleans and that they were then about to leave on a trip.[C6-714] Mrs. Odio testified that the next day Leopoldo called her on the telephone and told her that it was his idea to introduce the American into the underground “because he is great, he is kind of nuts.”[C6-715] Leopoldo also said that the American had been in the Marine Corps and was an excellent shot, and that the American said the Cubans “don’t have any guts * * * because President Kennedy should have been assassinated after the Bay of Pigs, and some Cubans should have done that, because he was the one that was holding the freedom of Cuba actually.”[C6-716]

Although Mrs. Odio suggested doubts that the men were in fact members of JURE,[C6-717] she was certain that the American who was introduced to her as Leon Oswald was Lee Harvey Oswald.[C6-718] Her sister, who was in the apartment at the time of the visit by the three men, and who stated that she saw them briefly in the hallway when answering the door, also believed that the American was Lee Harvey Oswald.[C6-719] By referring to the date on which she moved from her former apartment, October 1, 1963, Mrs. Odio fixed the date of the alleged visit on the Thursday or Friday immediately preceding that date, i.e., September 26 or 27. She was positive that the visit occurred prior to October 1.[C6-720]

During the course of its investigation, however, the Commission concluded that Oswald could not have been in Dallas on the evening of either September 26 or 27, 1963. It also developed considerable evidence that he was not in Dallas at any time between the beginning of September and October 3, 1963. On April 24, Oswald left Dallas for New Orleans, where he lived until his trip to Mexico City in late September and his subsequent return to Dallas. Oswald is known to have been in New Orleans as late as September 23, 1963, the date on which Mrs. Paine and Marina Oswald left New Orleans for Dallas.[C6-721] Sometime between 4 p.m. on September 24 and 1 p.m. on September 25, Oswald cashed an unemployment compensation check at a store in New Orleans;[C6-722] under normal procedures this check would not have reached Oswald’s postal box in New Orleans until at least 5 a.m. on September 25.[C6-723] The store at which he cashed the check did not open until 8 a.m.[C6-724] Therefore, it appeared that Oswald’s presence in New Orleans until sometime between 8 a.m. and 1 p.m. on September 25 was quite firmly established.

Although there is no firm evidence of the means by which Oswald traveled from New Orleans to Houston, on the first leg of his Mexico City trip, the Commission noted that a Continental Trailways bus leaving New Orleans at 12:30 p.m. on September 25 would have brought Oswald to Houston at 10:50 p.m. that evening.[C6-725] His presence on this bus would be consistent with other evidence before the Commission.[C6-726] There is strong evidence that on September 26, 1963, Oswald traveled on Continental Trailways bus No. 5133 which left Houston at 2:35 a.m. for Laredo, Tex. Bus company records disclose that one ticket from Houston to Laredo was sold during the night shift on September 25-26, and that such ticket was the only one of its kind sold in the period of September 24 through September 26. The agent who sold this ticket has stated that Oswald could have been the purchaser.[C6-727] Two English passengers, Dr. and Mrs. John B. McFarland, testified that they saw Oswald riding alone on this bus shortly after they awoke at 6 a.m.[C6-728] The bus was scheduled to arrive in Laredo at 1:20 p.m. on September 26, and Mexican immigration records show that Oswald in fact crossed the border at Laredo to Nuevo Laredo, Mexico, between 6 a.m. and 2 p.m. on that day.[C6-729] Evidence set out in appendix XIII establishes that Oswald did not leave Mexico until October 3, and that he arrived in Dallas the same day.

The Commission noted that the only time not strictly accounted for during the period that Mrs. Odio thought Oswald might have visited her is the span between the morning of September 25 and 2:35 a.m. on September 26. The only public means of transportation by which Oswald could have traveled from New Orleans to Dallas in time to catch his bus from Houston to Laredo, would have been the airlines. Investigation disclosed no indication that he flew between these points.[C6-730] Moreover, it did not seem probable that Oswald would speed from New Orleans, spend a short time talking to Sylvia Odio, and then travel from Dallas to Mexico City and back on the bus. Automobile travel in the time available, though perhaps possible, would have been difficult.[C6-731] The Commission noted, however, that if Oswald had reached Dallas on the evening of September 25, he could have traveled by bus to Alice, Tex., and there caught the bus which had left Houston for Laredo at 2:35 a.m. on September 26, 1963.[C6-732] Further investigation in that regard indicated, however, that no tickets were sold, during the period September 23-26, 1963 for travel from Dallas to Laredo or points beyond by the Dallas office of Continental Trailways, the only bus line on which Oswald could have made connections with the bus on which he was later seen. Furthermore, if Oswald had traveled from Dallas to Alice, he would not have reached the Houston to Laredo bus until after he was first reportedly observed on it by the McFarlands.[C6-733] Oswald had also told passengers on the bus to Laredo that he had traveled from New Orleans by bus, and made no mention of an intervening trip to Dallas.[C6-734] In addition, the Commission noted evidence that on the evening of September 25, 1963, Oswald made a telephone call to a party in Houston proposing to visit a resident of Houston that evening[C6-735] and the fact that such a call would appear to be inconsistent with Oswald’s having been in Dallas at the time. It thus appeared that the evidence was persuasive that Oswald was not in Dallas on September 25, and, therefore, that he was not in that city at the time Mrs. Odio said she saw him.

In spite of the fact that it appeared almost certain that Oswald could not have been in Dallas at the time Mrs. Odio thought he was, the Commission requested the FBI to conduct further investigation to determine the validity of Mrs. Odio’s testimony.[C6-736] The Commission considered the problems raised by that testimony as important in view of the possibility it raised that Oswald may have had companions on his trip to Mexico.[C6-737] The Commission specifically requested the FBI to attempt to locate and identify the two men who Mrs. Odio stated were with the man she thought was Oswald.[C6-738] In an effort to do that the FBI located and interviewed Manuel Ray, a leader of JURE who confirmed that Mrs. Odio’s parents were political prisoners in Cuba, but stated that he did not know anything about the alleged Oswald visit.[C6-739] The same was true of Rogelio Cisneros,[C6-740] a former anti-Castro leader from Miami who had visited Mrs. Odio in June of 1962 in connection with certain anti-Castro activities.[C6-741] Additional investigation was conducted in Dallas and in other cities in search of the visitors to Mrs. Odio’s apartment.[C6-742] Mrs. Odio herself was reinterviewed.[C6-743]

On September 16, 1964, the FBI located Loran Eugene Hall in Johnsandale, Calif.[C6-744] Hall has been identified as a participant in numerous anti-Castro activities.[C6-745] He told the FBI that in September of 1963 he was in Dallas, soliciting aid in connection with anti-Castro activities. He said he had visited Mrs. Odio. He was accompanied by Lawrence Howard, a Mexican-American from East Los Angeles and one William Seymour from Arizona. He stated that Seymour is similar in appearance to Lee Harvey Oswald; he speaks only a few words of Spanish,[C6-746] as Mrs. Odio had testified one of the men who visited her did.[C6-747] While the FBI had not yet completed its investigation into this matter at the time the report went to press, the Commission has concluded that Lee Harvey Oswald was not at Mrs. Odio’s apartment in September of 1963.

The Commission has also noted the testimony of Evaristo Rodriguez, a bartender in the Habana Bar in New Orleans, to the effect that he saw Oswald in that bar in August of 1963 in the company of a Latin-appearing man.[C6-748] Rodriguez’ description of the man accompanying the person he thought to be Oswald was similar in respects to the description given by Sylvia Odio since both testified that the man may have been of either Cuban or Mexican extraction, and had a slight bald spot on the forepart of his hairline.[C6-749] Rodriguez’ identification of Oswald was uncorroborated except for the testimony of the owner of the bar, Orest Pena; according to Rodriguez, Pena was not in a position to observe the man he thought later to have been Oswald.[C6-750] Although Pena has testified that he did observe the same person as did Rodriguez, and that this person was Oswald,[C6-751] an FBI interview report indicated that a month earlier Pena had stated that he “could not at this time or at any time say whether or not the person was identical with Lee Harvey Oswald.”[C6-752] Though when testifying, Pena identified photographs of Oswald, the FBI report also recorded that Pena “stated the only reason he was able to recognize Oswald was because he had seen Oswald’s picture in the news media so often after the assassination of President John F. Kennedy.”[C6-753] When present at Pena’s bar, Oswald was supposed to have been intoxicated to the extent that he became ill,[C6-754] which is inconsistent with other evidence that Oswald did not drink alcoholic beverages to excess.[C6-755]

The Commission has also noted the testimony of Dean Andrews, an attorney in New Orleans. Andrews stated that Oswald came to his office several times in the summer of 1963 to seek advice on a less than honorable discharge from the Armed Forces, the citizenship status of his wife and his own citizenship status. Andrews, who believed that he was contacted on November 23 to represent Oswald, testified that Oswald was always accompanied by a Mexican and was at times accompanied by apparent homosexuals.[C6-756] Andrews was able to locate no records of any of Oswald’s alleged visits, and investigation has failed to locate the person who supposedly called Andrews on November 23, at a time when Andrews was under heavy sedation.[C6-757] While one of Andrews’ employees felt that Oswald might have been at his office, his secretary has no recollection of Oswald being there.[C6-758]

Oswald Was Not an Agent for the U.S. Government

From the time of his release from the Marine Corps until the assassination, Lee Harvey Oswald dealt in various transactions with several agencies of the U.S. Government. Before departing the United States for the Soviet Union in 1959, he obtained an American passport, which he returned to the Embassy in Moscow in October 1959 when he attempted to renounce his U.S. citizenship. Thereafter, while in the Soviet Union, Oswald had numerous contacts with the American Embassy, both in person and through correspondence. Two years later, he applied for the return and renewal of his passport, which was granted him. His application concerning the admittance of his wife to this country was passed upon by the Immigration and Naturalization Service of the Department of Justice in addition to the State Department. And before returning to this country, he secured a loan from the State Department to help cover his transportation costs from Moscow to New York. These dealings with the Department of State and the Immigration and Naturalization Service have been reviewed earlier in this chapter and are considered in detail in appendix XV. After his return, Oswald was interviewed on three occasions by agents of the FBI, and Mrs. Paine was also questioned by the FBI about Oswald’s activities. Oswald obtained a second passport in June of 1963. And both the FBI and the CIA took note of his Fair Play for Cuba Committee activities in New Orleans and his appearance at the Soviet consulate in Mexico City. For reasons which will be discussed fully in chapter VIII, Oswald’s name was never given to the U.S. Secret Service.

These dealings have given rise to numerous rumors and allegations that Oswald may have been a paid informant or some type of undercover agent for a Federal agency, usually the FBI or the CIA. The Commission has fully explored whether Oswald had any official or unofficial relationship with any Federal agency beyond that already described.

Oswald’s mother, Mrs. Marguerite Oswald, testified before the Commission that she believes her son went to Russia and returned as an undercover agent for the U.S. Government.[C6-759] Mrs. Oswald mentioned the belief that her son was an agent to a State Department representative whom she visited in January 1961, when she was trying to locate her son.[C6-760] She had been interviewed earlier by FBI Agent John W. Fain, within some 6 months of Oswald’s departure for Russia, and did not at that time suggest such an explanation for Oswald’s departure.[C6-761] Though provided the opportunity to present any material she considered pertinent, Mrs. Oswald was not able to give the Commission any reasonable basis for her speculation.[C6-762] As discussed later in this chapter, the Commission has investigated Marguerite Oswald’s claim that an FBI agent showed her a picture of Jack Ruby after the assassination but before Lee Harvey Oswald had been killed; this allegation was inaccurate, since the picture was not of Ruby.

After the assassination it was reported that in 1962 Oswald had told Pauline Bates, a public stenographer in Fort Worth, Tex., that he had become a “secret agent” of the U.S. Government and that he was soon going back to Russia “for Washington.”[C6-763] Mrs. Bates in her sworn testimony denied that Oswald ever told her anything to that effect.[C6-764] She testified that she had stated “that when he first said that he went to Russia and had gotten a visa that I thought—it was just a thought—that maybe he was going over under the auspices of the State Department—as a student or something.”[C6-765]

In order to evaluate the nature of Oswald’s dealings with the Department of State and the Immigration and Naturalization Service, the Commission has obtained the complete files of both the Department and the Service pertaining to Lee Harvey Oswald. Officials who were directly involved in dealing with the Oswald case on these matters have testified before the Commission. A critical evaluation of the manner in which they were handled by these organizations is set forth in appendix XV. The record establishes that Oswald received no preferential treatment and that his case involved no impropriety on the part of any Government official.

Director John A. McCone and Deputy Director Richard Helms of the Central Intelligence Agency testified before the Commission that no one connected with the CIA had ever interviewed Oswald or communicated with him in any way.[C6-766] In his supplementing affidavit, Director McCone stated unequivocally that Oswald was not an agent, employee, or informant of the CIA, that the Agency never communicated with him in any manner or furnished him any compensation, and that Oswald was never directly or indirectly associated with the CIA.[C6-767] The Commission has had access to the full CIA file on Oswald which is entirely consistent with Director McCone’s statements.

The Director of the FBI, J. Edgar Hoover, Assistant to the Director Alan H. Belmont, FBI Agents John W. Fain and John L. Quigley, who interviewed Oswald, and FBI Agent James P. Hosty, Jr., who was in charge of his case at the time of the assassination, have also testified before the Commission. All declared, in substance, that Oswald was not an informant or agent of the FBI, that he did not act in any other capacity for the FBI, and that no attempt was made to recruit him in any capacity.[C6-768] Director Hoover and each Bureau agent, who according to the FBI would have been responsible for or aware of any attempt to recruit Oswald as an informant, have also provided the Commission with sworn affidavits to this effect.[C6-769] Director Hoover has sworn that he caused a search to be made of the records of the Bureau, and that the search discloses that Oswald “was never an informant of the FBI, and never assigned a symbol number in that capacity, and was never paid any amount of money by the FBI in any regard.”[C6-770] This testimony is corroborated by the Commission’s independent review of the Bureau files dealing with the Oswald investigation.

The Commission also investigated the circumstances which led to the presence in Oswald’s address book of the name of Agent Hosty together with his office address, telephone number, and license number.[C6-771] Hosty and Mrs. Paine testified that on November 1, 1963, Hosty left his name and phone number with Mrs. Paine so that she could advise Hosty when she learned where Oswald was living in Dallas.[C6-772] Mrs. Paine and Marina Oswald have testified that Mrs. Paine handed Oswald the slip of paper on which Hosty had written this information.[C6-773] In accordance with prior instructions from Oswald,[C6-774] Marina Oswald noted Hosty’s license number which she gave to her husband.[C6-775] The address of the Dallas office of the FBI could have been obtained from many public sources.

Thus, close scrutiny of the records of the Federal agencies involved and the testimony of the responsible officials of the U.S. Government establish that there was absolutely no type of informant or undercover relationship between an agency of the U.S. Government and Lee Harvey Oswald at any time.

Oswald’s Finances

In search of activities or payments demonstrating the receipt of unexplained funds, the Commission undertook a detailed study of Oswald’s receipts and expenditures starting with the date of his return from the Soviet Union on June 13, 1962, and continuing to the date of his arrest on November 22, 1963. In appendix XIV there appears a table listing Oswald’s estimated receipts and expenditures on a monthly basis during this period.

The Commission was assisted in this phase of the investigation by able investigators of the Internal Revenue Service of the Department of the Treasury and by agents of the FBI. The investigation extended far beyond interrogation of witnesses who appeared before the Commission. At banks in New Orleans, La.; Fort Worth, Dallas, Houston, and Laredo, Tex., inquiries were made for any record of a checking, savings, or loan accounts or a safe deposit box rented in the names of Lee Harvey Oswald, his known aliases, or members of his immediate family. In many cases a photograph of Oswald was exhibited to bank officials who were in a position to see a person in the safe deposit box area of their banks. No bank account or safe deposit boxes were located which could be identified with Oswald during this period of his life, although evidence was developed of a bank account which he had used prior to his trip to the Soviet Union in 1959. Telegraph companies were checked for the possibility of money orders that may have been sent to Oswald. All known locations where Oswald cashed checks which he received were queried as to the possibility of his having cashed other checks there. Further inquiries were made at Oswald’s places of employment, his residences and with local credit associations, hospitals, utility companies, State and local government offices, post offices, periodicals, newspapers, and employment agencies.[C6-776]

Marina Oswald testified that she knew of no sources of income Oswald other than his wages and his unemployment compensation.[C6-777] No evidence of other cash income has been discovered. The Commission has found that the funds known to have been available to Oswald during the period June 13, 1962, through November 22, 1963, were sufficient to cover all of his known expenditures during this period. Including cash on hand of $63 when he arrived from the Soviet Union, the Oswalds received a total of $3,665.89 in cash from wages, unemployment compensation benefits, loans, and gifts from acquaintances. His cash disbursements during this period were estimated at $3,501.79, leaving a balance of $164.10. (See [app. XIV].) This estimated balance is within $19 of the $183.87 in cash which was actually in Oswald’s possession at the time of his arrest, consisting of $13.87 on his person and $170 in his wallet left at the Paine house.[C6-778]

In computing Oswald’s expenditures, estimates were made for food, clothing, and incidental expenses. The incidental expenses included telephone calls, the cost of local newspapers, money order and check-cashing fees, postage, local transportation costs, personal care goods and services, and other such small items. All of these expenses, including food and clothing, were estimated at a slightly higher figure than would be normal for a family with the income of the Oswalds, and probably higher than the Oswalds actually spent on such items.[C6-779] This was done in order to be certain that even if some of Oswald’s minor expenditures are not known, he had adequate funds to cover his known expenditures.

During the 17-month period preceding his death, Oswald’s pattern of living was consistent with his limited income. He lived with his family in furnished apartments whose cost, including utilities, ranged from about $60 to $75 per month.[C6-780] Witnesses testified to his wife’s disappointment and complaints and to their own shock and misgivings about several of the apartments in which the Oswalds lived during the period.[C6-781] Moreover, the Oswalds, particularly Marina, frequently lived with relatives and acquaintances at no cost. Oswald and his family lived with his brother Robert and then with Marguerite Oswald from June until sometime in August 1962.[C6-782] As discussed previously, Marina Oswald lived with Elena Hall and spent a few nights at the Taylors’ house during October of 1962;[C6-783] in November of that same year, Marina Oswald lived with two families.[C6-784] When living away from his family Oswald rented rooms for $7 and $8 per week or stayed at the YMCA in Dallas where he paid $2.25 per day.[C6-785] During late April and early May 1963, Oswald lived with relatives in New Orleans, while his wife lived with Ruth Paine in Irving, Tex.[C6-786] From September 24, 1963, until November 22, Marina Oswald stayed with Ruth Paine, while Oswald lived in roominghouses in Dallas.[C6-787] During the period Marina Oswald resided with others, neither she nor her husband made any contribution to her support.[C6-788]

The Oswalds owned no major household appliances, had no automobile, and resorted to dental and hospital clinics for medical care.[C6-789] Acquaintances purchased baby furniture for them, and paid dental bills in one instance.[C6-790] After his return to the United States, Oswald did not smoke or drink, and he discouraged his wife from doing so.[C6-791] Oswald spent much of his time reading books which he obtained from the public library, and periodicals to which he subscribed.[C6-792] He resided near his place of employment and used buses to travel to and from work.[C6-793] When he visited his wife and the children on weekends in October and November 1963, he rode in a neighbor’s car, making no contribution for gasoline or other expenses.[C6-794] Oswald’s personal wardrobe was also very modest. He customarily wore T-shirts, cheap slacks, well-worn sweaters, and well-used zipper jackets. Oswald owned one suit, of Russian make and purchase, poor fitting and of heavy fabric which, despite its unsuitability to the climates of Texas and Louisiana and his obvious discomfort, he wore on the few occasions that required dress.[C6-795]

Food for his family was extremely meager. Paul Gregory testified that during the 6 weeks that Marina Oswald tutored him he took the Oswalds shopping for food and groceries on a number of occasions and that he was “amazed at how little they bought.”[C6-796] Their friends in the Dallas-Fort Worth area frequently brought them food and groceries.[C6-797] Marina testified that her husband ate “very little.” He “never had breakfast. He just drank coffee and that is all. Not because he was trying to economize. Simply he never liked to eat.” She estimated that when he was living by himself in a roominghouse, he would spend “about a dollar, $1.30” for dinner and have a sandwich and soft drink for lunch.[C6-798]

The thrift which Oswald exercised in meeting his living expenses allowed him to accumulate sufficient funds to meet other expenses which he incurred after his return from the Soviet Union. From his return until January of 1963, Oswald repaid the $435.71 he had borrowed from the State Department for travel expenses from Moscow, and the $200 loan he had obtained from his brother Robert to fly from New York to Dallas upon his return to this country. He completed the retirement of the debt to his brother in October 1962.[C6-799] His cash receipts from all sources from the day of his arrival in Fort Worth through October 1962 aggregated $719.94; it is estimated that he could have made the repayments to Robert and met his other known expenses and still have been left with savings of $122.06 at the end of the month. After making initial $10 monthly payments to the State Department, Oswald paid the Government $190 in December and $206 in January, thus liquidating that debt.[C6-800] From his net earning of $805.96 from November through January plus his prior savings, Oswald could have made these payments to the State Department, met his other known expenses, and still have had a balance of $8.59 at the end of January 1963. In discussing the repayment of these debts, Marina Oswald testified: “Of course we did not live in luxury. We did not buy anything that was not absolutely needed, because Lee had to pay his debt to Robert and to the Government. But it was not particularly difficult.”[C6-801]

Included in the total figure for Oswald’s disbursements were $21.45 for the rifle used in the assassination and $31.22 for the revolver with which Oswald shot Officer Tippit. The major portion of the purchase price for these weapons was paid in March 1963, when Oswald had finished paying his debts, and the purchases were compatible with the total funds then available to him.[C6-802] During May, June, and July of 1963, Oswald spent approximately $23 for circulars, application blanks, and membership cards for his one-man New Orleans chapter of the Fair Play for Cuba Committee.[C6-803] In August he paid $2 to one and possibly two young men to assist in passing out circulars and then paid a $10 court fine after pleading guilty to a charge of disturbing the peace.[C6-804] Although some of these expenses were incurred after Oswald lost his job on July 19, 1963, his wages during June and July, and his unemployment compensation thereafter, provided sufficient funds to enable him to finance these activities out of his own resources.[C6-805]

Although Oswald paid his own busfare to New Orleans on April 24, 1963, his wife and the baby were taken there, at no cost to Oswald, by Ruth Paine.[C6-806] Similarly, Ruth Paine drove to New Orleans in September and brought Marina Oswald and the baby back to Irving, Tex.[C6-807] Oswald’s uncle, Charles Murret, also paid for the short trip taken by Oswald and his family from New Orleans to Mobile, Ala., on July 27, 1963.[C6-808] It is estimated that when Oswald left for Mexico City in September 1963, he had accumulated slightly over $200. Marina Oswald testified that when he left for Mexico City he had “a little over $100,” though she may not have taken into account the $33 unemployment compensation check which Oswald collected after her departure from New Orleans.[C6-809] In any event, expenses in Mexico have been estimated as approximately $85, based on transportation costs of $50 and a hotel expense of about $1.28 per day. Oswald ate inexpensively and, allowing $15 for entertainment and miscellaneous items, it would appear that he had the funds available to finance the trip.[C6-810]

The Commission has considered the testimony of Leonard E. Hutchison, proprietor of Hutch’s Market in Irving, in connection with Oswald’s finances. Hutchison has testified that on a Friday during the first week in November, a man he believes to have been Lee Harvey Oswald attempted to cash a “two-party,” or personal check for $189, but that he refused to cash the check since his policy is to cash personal checks for no more than $25.[C6-811] Oswald is not known to have received a check for this amount from any source.

On Friday, November 1, Oswald did cash a Texas Unemployment Commission check for $33 at another supermarket in Irving,[C6-812] so that a possible explanation of Hutchison’s testimony is that he refused to cash this $33 check for Oswald and is simply in error as to the amount of the instrument. However, since the check cashed at the supermarket was issued by the State comptroller of Texas, it is not likely that Hutchison could have confused it with a personal check.

Examination of Hutchison’s testimony indicates that a more likely explanation is that Oswald was not in his store at all. Hutchison testified that the man who attempted to cash the check was a customer in his store on previous occasions; in particular, Hutchison recalled that the man, accompanied by a woman he believes was Marina Oswald and an elderly woman, were shopping in his store in October or November of 1963 on a night he feels certain was a Wednesday evening.[C6-813] Oswald, however, is not known to have been in Irving on any Wednesday evening during this period.[C6-814] Neither of the two checkers at the market recall such a visit by a person matching the description provided by Hutchison, and both Marina Oswald and Marguerite Oswald deny that they were ever in Hutchison’s store.[C6-815] Hutchison further stated that the man made irregular calls at his grocery between 7:20 a.m. and 7:45 a.m. on weekday mornings, and always purchased cinnamon rolls and a full gallon of milk.[C6-816] However, the evidence indicates that except for rare occasions Oswald was in Irving only on weekends; moreover, Buell Wesley Frazier, who drove Oswald to and from Irving on these occasions, testified that on Monday mornings he picked Oswald up at a point which is many blocks from Hutchison’s store and ordinarily by 7:20 a.m.[C6-817] Hutchison also testified that Ruth Paine was an occasional customer in his store;[C6-818] however, Mrs. Paine indicated that she was not in the store as often as Hutchison testified;[C6-819] and her appearance is dissimilar to the description of the woman Hutchison stated was Mrs. Paine.[C6-820] In light of the strong reasons for doubting the correctness of Hutchison’s testimony and the absence of any other sign that Oswald ever possessed a personal check for $189, the Commission was unable to conclude that he ever received such a check.

The Commission has also examined a report that, not long before the assassination, Oswald may have received unaccounted funds through money orders sent to him in Dallas. Five days after the assassination, C.A. Hamblen, early night manager for the Western Union Telegraph Co. in Dallas, told his superior that about 2 weeks earlier he remembered Oswald sending a telegram from the office to Washington, D.C., possibly to the Secretary of the Navy, and that the application was completed in an unusual form of hand printing.[C6-821] The next day Hamblen told a magazine correspondent who was in the Western Union office on other business that he remembered seeing Oswald in the office on prior occasions collecting money orders for small amounts of money.[C6-822] Soon thereafter Hamblen signed a statement relating to both the telegram and the money orders, and specifying two instances in which he had seen the person he believed to be Oswald in the office; in each instance the man had behaved disagreeably and one other Western Union employee had become involved in assisting him.[C6-823]

During his testimony, Hamblen did not recall with clarity the statements he had previously made, and was unable to state whether the person he reportedly had seen in the Western Union office was or was not Lee Harvey Oswald.[C6-824] Investigation has disclosed that a second employee does recall one of the occurrences described by Hamblen, and believes that the money order in question was delivered “to someone at the YMCA”; however, he is unable to state whether or not the man involved was Oswald.[C6-825] The employee referred to by Hamblen in connection with the second incident feels certain that the unusual episode described by Hamblen did not occur, and that she at no time observed Oswald in the Western Union office.[C6-826]

At the request of Federal investigators, officers of Western Union conducted a complete search of their records in Dallas and in other cities, for the period from June through November 1963, for money orders payable to Lee Harvey Oswald or his known aliases and for telegrams sent by Oswald or his known aliases. In addition, all money orders addressed to persons at the YMCA in Dallas during October and November 1963 were inspected, and all telegrams handled from November 1 through November 22 by the employee who Hamblen assertedly saw service Oswald were examined, as were all telegrams sent from Dallas to Washington during November. No indication of any such money order or telegram was found in any of these records.[C6-827] Hamblen himself participated in this search, and was “unable * * * to pin down any of these telegrams or money orders that would indicate it was Oswald.”[C6-828] Hamblen’s superiors have concluded “that this whole thing was a figment of Mr. Hamblen’s imagination,”[C6-829] and the Commission accepts this assessment.