Warren Commission (02 of 26): Hearings Vol. II (of 15)

by United States. Warren Commission

COMMISSION EXHIBITS INTRODUCED

Exhibit No.:	Page
328	[1]
329	[2]
330	[2]
331	[15]
332	[22]
333	[29]
334	[38]
335	[38]
336	[38]
337	[38]
338	[38]
339	[38]
340	[38]
341	[38]
342	[38]
343	[54]
344	[64]
345	[64]
346	[65]
347	[72]
348	[72]
349	[85]
350	[86]
351	[92]
352	[95]
353	[95]
354	[155]
355	[155]
356	[189]
357	[189]
358	[189]
359	[198]
360	[198]
361	[198]
362	[198]
365	[210]
366	[210]
367	[210]
368	[257]
369	[257]
370	[261]
371	[257]
372	[268]
373	[273]
374	[274]
375	[274]
376	[275]
377	[279]
378	[282]
379	[286]
380	[286]
381-A	[287]
382	[292]
383-A	[292]
384	[340]
385	[353]
386	[353]
387	[353]
388	[353]
389	[353]
390	[353]
391	[359]
392	[362]
393	[365]
394	[365]
395	[365]
396	[367]
397	[374]
398	[374]
399	[374]
400	[380]
401	[445]
402	[455]
403	[477]
404	[479]
404-A	[479]
405	[480]
406	[480]
407	[483]
408	[483]
408-A	[483]
409	[490]
409-A	[490]
409-B	[490]
410	[494]
411	[496]
412	[496]
413	[496]
414	[496]
415	[498]
416	[498]
417	[498]
418	[498]
419	[500]
420	[501]
421	[501]
422	[502]
423	[502]
424	[502]

---

Hearings Before the President's Commission
on the
Assassination of President Kennedy

[Thursday, February 27, 1964—Afternoon Session]
TESTIMONY OF JAMES HERBERT MARTIN RESUMED

The President's Commission reconvened at 3 p.m.

Mr. Dulles. Gentlemen, the Commission will come to order.

Are you ready to continue the testimony, Mr. Martin?

Mr. Martin. Yes, sir.

Mr. Dulles. Will you carry forward, Mr. Redlich?

Mr. Redlich. Mr. Martin, I would like to hand you a group of newspaper clippings which have not as yet been introduced in evidence and I would ask you to look through them and to pick out any which you feel create an image of Mrs. Marina Oswald which you feel does not conform to the reality of her personality, as you know it, and ask you in regard to each one to tell us in what respect the facts as reported in each of these clippings do not conform to the real person as you know her.

Mr. Dulles. I assume we can avoid repetition, can't we?

Mr. Redlich. Yes.

Mr. Dulles. Incidents here have been touched on in other papers and we don't need to touch them again.

Mr. Redlich. Yes, Mr. Chairman.

During the intermission we have gone through all of the newspaper clippings and eliminated the duplicate stories and hope to eliminate duplicate facts as we go along.

Mr. Martin. Well, this one is inaccurate that it doesn't have anything to do with her image, so to speak. It says she spent Christmas——

Mr. Redlich. For the sake of the record if we are going to have comment on them I would like to have them introduced as evidence because the record wouldn't state what they are about.

Are you going to make comment?

Mr. Martin. Do you want me to?

Mr. Redlich. If you are going to make comment about it, if you feel there is some inaccuracy here then I would like to introduce that in evidence, since apparently you are.

Mr. Martin. It is inaccurate as far as the date in the article is concerned.

Mr. Redlich. The witness has handed to us a newspaper story which we have marked as Commission Exhibit No. 328.

Mr. Dulles. Could we have the inaccuracy mentioned here?

Mr. Redlich. Yes, the headline of which is "Mrs. Oswald Will Bare Life of Mate" and I request it be admitted in evidence.

Mr. Dulles. Any objection?

Mr. Leech. No.

Mr. Dulles. It will be admitted.

(The document referred to was marked Commission's Exhibit No. 328 for identification and received in evidence.)

Mr. Redlich. I show you Commission Exhibit No. 328 and ask you if there are any inaccuracies in that statement.

Mr. Martin. "Mrs. Oswald and Her Children Now Make Their Home at an Undisclosed Hotel" which is inaccurate—"and it was in that motel room, somewhere in the Dallas-Fort Worth area that the youngest Oswald child spent her first Christmas. There was a tree, toys and even a visit from Mrs. Oswald's brother who lives 30 miles to the north in Denton, Tex."

That was the inaccuracy that she spent Christmas not in a motel but in our home.

Mr. Dulles. That is about from 3 o'clock in the afternoon as I recall until 7:30 in the evening.

Mr. Martin. No, sir; that was Thanksgiving.

Mr. Dulles. That was Thanksgiving. Spent the whole day of Christmas in your home?

Mr. Martin. Well, she lived there. She was at our home 24 hours a day.

This one—

Mr. Redlich. The witness has produced before the Commission a newspaper story which we have labeled as Commission Exhibit No. 329, the headline of which reads, "Money Gifts to Tippit's Near $200,000 Mark."

Mr. Chairman, I request that Commission Exhibit No. 329 be admitted in evidence.

Mr. Dulles. Any objection?

Mr. Leech. No.

Mr. Dulles. It shall be admitted.

(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 329 for identification and received in evidence.)

Mr. Redlich. Mr. Martin, I hand you Exhibit No. 329 and ask you if it is inaccurate in any respect.

Mr. Martin. The article states that Mrs. Shirley Williamson, a Fort Worth housewife, who felt compassion for the widow, Mrs. Oswald, and the two babies said the fund for the Russian-born widow had reached $76,000."

The fund that Mrs. Williamson collected amounted to some $2,600. That was her total. That is the inaccuracy there.

Mr. Dulles. Is she referring to the funds she collected or the whole collections?

Mr. Martin. Her funds. This has come up numerous times. We even called her about it one time. She had given out press releases that she had collected personally, I think, in excess of $8,000, whereas what she was doing was adding what she had collected to what had already been sent to Marina, and saying that she was holding that money.

Mr. Dulles. But even that total is exaggerated, is it not?

Mr. Martin. At that time, yes.

Mr. Dulles. The total collections?

Mr. Martin. At that time, yes.

Mr. Redlich. Mr. Martin, this article also makes reference to the fund on behalf of the wife of Officer Tippit with which, of course, you have no connection.

I would like to ask you, however, whether at the time you extended the offer to Marina Oswald to live in your home you were aware of the fact that there were funds being raised for Officer Tippit's wife.

Mr. Martin. I was undoubtedly aware of it but I don't recall any conscious knowledge of it or thinking of it.

Mr. Redlich. Do you recall whether you were aware at the time that there were any funds coming in on behalf of Mrs. Oswald?

Mr. Martin. No.

Mr. Redlich. You were not aware?

Mr. Martin. Not aware, no.

Mr. Redlich. The witness has offered to, has presented to, the Commission a newspaper story appearing in the Buffalo Evening News, December 7, 1963, headline of which reads, "Oswald's Widow Reported Hoping to be U.S. Citizen."

This story has been identified as Commission Exhibit No. 330 and I ask that it be introduced in evidence.

Mr. Dulles. Any objection?

Mr. Leech. None.

Mr. Dulles. Accepted.

(The newspaper article referred to was marked Commission's Exhibit No. 330 for identification and received in evidence.)

Mr. Redlich. Mr. Martin, I show you Commission's Exhibit No. 330 and ask you if it is inaccurate in any respect to the best of your knowledge?

Mr. Martin. In the second paragraph it says, "Mrs. Oswald, 23," which is inaccurate—"Russian-born Mother of Three—"

Mr. Redlich. Will you state the inaccuracy?

Mr. Martin. The age is inaccurate. She is 22, "Russian-born Mother of Three" that is inaccurate. She is the mother of two, "burst into tears when she learned at least $7,700 had been sent to her by sympathetic Americans."

There was no burst of tears.

Mr. Redlich. Will you tell the Commission what the reaction was?

Mr. Martin. I would say of happiness rather than—she was glad that that was there, which is normal.

Mr. Redlich. Do you recall anything she told you?

Mr. Martin. No. This was December 7. No, I have no recollection of anything that she said?

Mr. Dulles. Didn't you testify before, maybe it is with regard to another or similar clipping, that she had some reference to the silly Americans who were giving this money?

Mr. Martin. Well, it was a comment she had made at sometime or another. I don't know whether it was during this particular thing or not. I think it was further on.

Mr. Dulles. On a similar occasion?

Mr. Martin. A little later date, yes.

Mr. Redlich. Mr. Martin, you have commented on the respects in which the newspaper clippings were at variance with the facts about Marina Oswald as you knew them.

Are there any other facts which perhaps were not reflected in these clippings but which you might be aware of in respect to which the public image of Marina Oswald differed from the true person that you knew on the basis of your contact with her?

Mr. Martin. No. Of course, she is not the least bit frugal. She spends money quite freely, which it is her money to spend, but it won't last very long at the rate it is going.

Mr. Redlich. In connection with that did Marina Oswald ever discuss with you the financial difficulties she may have encountered while she was married to Lee Oswald?

Mr. Martin. Yes. She remarked one time that she had always wished for $500 just to do with as she wanted. She also mentioned that the small amount of money that it took them to live upon. She said it ran between $130 and $135 a month.

Representative Ford. Did she complain about this limited amount?

Mr. Martin. No. I asked her how she could live on that little and she said well, all they had was rent and food, and occasionally she would get a dress or get a pair of shoes. She said that she didn't object to it.

Representative Ford. But when more money became available she found ways and means of spending it?

Mr. Martin. Yes. Well, she mentioned one time to me that—I told her she was spending too much money, and she said, "Well, when it is all gone I will go to work." That is——

Mr. Dulles. That is a little Russian, may I say for the record.

Mr. Redlich. Mr. Martin, this Commission has recovered information to the effect that the public announcements which you made concerning the amount of funds which had been collected on Marina Oswald's behalf actually reflected figures that were less than the amount which had actually been collected on her behalf.

Without getting into specific figures at this time, are these reports correct in your opinion?

Mr. Martin. Which report?

Mr. Redlich. The report——

Mr. Martin. Oh, yes, we were obtaining a smaller figure, that is true.

Mr. Redlich. That is true. Did you consult with Marina Oswald on this policy on reporting to the press a lesser figure than had actually been collected?

Mr. Martin. Yes.

Mr. Redlich. What was your reason for doing it?

Mr. Martin. To—well, the money she had collected was considerable, and most people in their life don't accumulate that much money in their entire lifetime.

What we were trying to do for her was to build enough of a—enough capital to furnish her from the interest a steady income. And by keeping the figure down figured it would increase.

Mr. Redlich. I don't want to put words in your mouth. Could you be a little more specific about your reason?

Mr. Martin. Well, so people would keep contributing to her cause.

Mr. Redlich. And she was in accord with this policy of keeping the public amount at a low figure so that people would contribute to her cause?

Mr. Martin. Yes.

Mr. Redlich. I would like to revert to a point that you made this morning to clear up the record. You said that you left your job at the Six Flags Inn Motel because of your obligations to Marina Oswald. Did you leave the job voluntarily or were you fired?

Mr. Martin. I left voluntarily. I actually left on the 15th of December, and I had a week's vacation coming, they gave me that which paid me to the 1st of January.

Mr. Redlich. When you met Mrs. Oswald in late November and in your conversations with her at that time, did she discuss with you the fact of her husband's trip to Mexico?

Mr. Martin. No.

Mr. Redlich. Are you now——

Mr. Martin. She did at a later date, sometime in January before she went to the Commission.

Mr. Redlich. When did you first learn of Lee Oswald's trip to Mexico?

Mr. Martin. I guess it was from newspaper accounts.

Mr. Redlich. When you read it in the newspapers did you ask Marina about it?

Mr. Martin. No.

Mr. Redlich. What prompted you to discuss with Marina in January the question of her knowledge about it?

Mr. Martin. Let's see—she told me when the FBI was questioning her one day, she told me that they had information that he had attempted suicide, and that particular day she didn't want to see the FBI at all, and she was a little bit unhappy with them and I just asked her what else did she learn.

Mr. Redlich. Who else was present at this conversation?

Mr. Martin. I don't think anybody.

Mr. Redlich. Just you and Mrs. Oswald?

Mr. Dulles. Who was this who had attempted suicide, I didn't catch that?

Mr. Martin. Lee Harvey Oswald.

Mr. Dulles. At what time?

Mr. Martin. That was in Russia sometime before, I think before he met her.

Mr. Dulles. And she said she had heard this from the FBI or the FBI had asked her about it?

Mr. Martin. The FBI had read, I think, in his manuscript that he had attempted suicide.

Mr. Dulles. And they asked her about it?

Mr. Martin. She didn't know that. Yes. And at that time I asked her if she learned anything else, and she said no, but that they still didn't know that she knew that he had gone to Mexico, and at that time we were talking about the Commission, that general area of time, and I mentioned to be sure to tell the truth to the Commission.

Mr. Redlich. Did you ask her why she had not revealed knowledge of her trip—of her knowledge of Lee Oswald's trip to Mexico?

Mr. Martin. I can't recall exactly whether I did or not.

Mr. Redlich. Did you ask her?

Mr. Martin. I have a recollection but I have no idea what was said.

Mr. Redlich. Did you and she discuss the purpose of Lee Oswald's trip to Mexico?

Mr. Martin. No.

Mr. Redlich. Do you say you advised her to tell this Commission about that trip to Mexico?

Mr. Martin. Yes.

Mr. Redlich. When you were here and she testified did you inquire of her as to whether in fact she did tell this Commission about the trip to Mexico?

Mr. Martin. I inquired of John Thorne and he said that she had.

Mr. Redlich. But in connection with the Nixon incident, you indicated earlier in your testimony that you had not inquired of her as to whether she had told this Commission about the Nixon incident.

Mr. Martin. Right.

Mr. Redlich. Did you think that the Nixon incident was of less importance than the Mexican trip?

Mr. Martin. No, I didn't quite believe the Nixon incident.

Mr. Redlich. Do you believe it now?

Mr. Martin. I don't know. I don't know if there is any corroboration other than her say so.

Mr. Redlich. It was because you had doubts about the actual existence of the incident that you didn't pursue with her the question as to whether she should tell this Commission about it?

Mr. Martin. Yes. I didn't tell her not to say anything about it. I didn't mention it specifically at all. The only thing I told her to do was to tell the Commission the truth in all cases.

Mr. Redlich. At the conclusion of each day's testimony while she was here before this Commission did you discuss the nature of her testimony with her?

Mr. Martin. No. I asked her how the day went. And she would tell me, "fine," and that was the end of it.

Mr. Redlich. But you did inquire specifically about the Mexico trip?

Mr. Martin. Yes. Because I knew she lied about that to the FBI.

Mr. Redlich. Are there any other incidents you knew she had lied about to the FBI?

Mr. Martin. No.

Mr. Redlich. That is the only one?

Mr. Martin. Yes.

Mr. Redlich. Did you and Marina Oswald ever discuss the question of her husband's rifle practice?

Mr. Martin. No. The only time I recall that ever being asked of her was at the press conference here in Washington, and I never specifically asked her at all, whether he practiced.

Mr. Redlich. Did you ever discuss with her the question of Lee Oswald's ownership of a rifle?

Mr. Martin. No.

Mr. Redlich. When you discussed the General Walker incident with her, did you discuss his ownership of a rifle?

Mr. Martin. No. The only thing, I think about the only thing I asked her about that was how he got there and how he got back.

Mr. Redlich. What did she say?

Mr. Martin. She said he walked and took the bus.

Mr. Redlich. And you didn't ask her what weapon he had shot at General Walker with?

Mr. Martin. No. That was in the newspaper, it was a rifle. And there were many things I didn't ask about because I was previously informed through the news or I thought I was anyway.

Mr. Redlich. You specifically, with regard to the rifle, you are telling this Commission that you had no conversations with Marina Oswald concerning her husband's practice with the rifle either in Dallas or in New Orleans.

Mr. Martin. Let's see—I think I did discuss with her one time at the rifle range out in Grand Prairie was it, wherever it was, that the owner had seen Lee Harvey Oswald out there with a rifle, and he drove up in a car.

Mr. Redlich. Who is "they"?

Mr. Martin. The owner of the rifle range.

Mr. Redlich. You say they drove up in a car?

Mr. Martin. He drove up in a car.

Mr. Redlich. The owner of the rifle range?

Mr. Martin. No; Lee Harvey Oswald.

Mr. Redlich. Drove to the rifle range in a car?

Mr. Martin. Yes. And——

Mr. Dulles. Did he drive himself?

Mr. Martin. Well, this is a report from the rifle range owner who said he had seen Lee Harvey Oswald there on numerous occasions practicing, and that he drove up in a car by himself. He always came by himself, and I did ask her if he could drive and she said no, definitely.

Mr. Redlich. Where did you read this report or where did you hear about it?

Mr. Martin. It was right after the start there, in the Dallas papers.

Mr. Redlich. This was something you read. This was not a personal conversation you had with the owner of the rifle range?

Mr. Martin. No, it was a newspaper account.

Mr. Redlich. Were there any other conversations you had with Mrs. Oswald concerning rifle practice?

Mr. Martin. No.

Mr. Redlich. Did you have any conversations with her concerning Lee Oswald's ability as a rifleman?

Mr. Martin. No.

Mr. Redlich. Did Mrs. Oswald ever discuss with you the fears that she claims to have had that Lee Oswald would attempt to kill a public figure as a result specifically of the Walker incident?

Mr. Martin. No, other than when she told me that she told him that if he tried anything similar to the Walker incident she would have him arrested. And she never mentioned to me a particular figure that he would do anything like that. She evidently had it though or she wouldn't have made the threat to him.

Mr. Redlich. Other than the Nixon incident, and the Walker incident, Mrs. Oswald never related to you any other specific incident with regard to the attempt to take the life of anyone?

Mr. Martin. No.

Representative Ford. Did Mrs. Oswald, Marina, ever indicate to you her feeling toward guns; did she ever indicate any apprehension about having one in the house?

Mr. Martin. No.

Representative Ford. Related to rifles, pistols?

Mr. Martin. I have a 22 rifle in the house, for instance. Of course, she may never have seen it. But I don't believe the question ever came up at all.

Representative Ford. She never indicated to you that she had told Lee Harvey Oswald that she was apprehensive about his use of a gun or his having a gun in the household?

Mr. Martin. No.

Mr. Redlich. Mr. Martin, I would like to ask you whether Mrs. Oswald ever discussed with you any aspects of the life of Marina Oswald and Lee Harvey Oswald while they were in Russia.

Mr. Martin. Let's see now—she mentioned one time to both my wife and I that Lee had gone to Moscow, I believe, and an old boy friend called her up and she went out with him while Lee was gone.

Mr. Redlich. Did she indicate to you at that time the purpose of Lee's trip to Moscow?

Mr. Martin. No.

Mr. Redlich. Did she indicate to you whether she had told Lee about her going out with this old boy friend?

Mr. Martin. She said she did tell him.

Mr. Redlich. By the way, would you recall when Lee made this trip to Moscow?

Mr. Martin. No, I don't think she mentioned the date at all. She may have but I don't recall.

Mr. Redlich. Did she indicate in connection with this trip of Lee Oswald to Moscow that she herself subsequently went to Moscow while he was there?

Mr. Martin. No. I think she said he was gone one day or one night and came back the next day.

Mr. Redlich. So that on the basis of your recollection, if there was a trip in which Lee Oswald went to Moscow and she joined him there this was a different trip from the one you are talking about?

Mr. Martin. Yes.

Mr. Redlich. Is that right?

Mr. Martin. Yes.

Mr. Redlich. Just to make sure of this you say to the best of your recollection she said he went there for one day and returned?

Mr. Martin. Yes.

Mr. Redlich. Can you think of any other aspects of their life in the Soviet Union that Marina discussed with you.

Mr. Martin. He used to like her aunt. Now, which aunt I don't know. Yes, I do. It is the aunt that is working as a secretary and her husband is on a pension. She has an aunt and an uncle by blood.

Now, the aunt's husband is on a pension, and the uncle's—The uncle is a lieutenant colonel in the Soviet Army.

Mr. Redlich. Now, the aunt and uncle that you say she liked very much, is this the aunt and uncle with whom she was living at the time she met Lee Oswald or is this a different aunt and uncle?

Mr. Martin. That was all very—always confusing to me because she wouldn't call the spouse of the aunt, for instance, her uncle, and I couldn't tell all the time which party she was talking about.

Mr. Dulles. These were both relatives to Marina, therefore, they were not married.

Mr. Martin. Well, no; they were not married to each other.

Mr. Dulles. That is what I mean, yes.

Mr. Martin. There were two couples, and the aunt in one couple and the uncle in the other couple. But she didn't refer to the opposite spouse as an aunt and uncle.

Mr. Redlich. Does the name Berlov refresh your recollection any?

Mr. Martin. Berlov?

Representative Ford. Did Marina ever indicate to you anything about her education, what school she attended?

Mr. Martin. No, just the school of pharmacy, and she compared her grade school or our grade school, which is, I guess similar to our grade school in high school or junior high, anyway.

Representative Ford. She only referred to the pharmacy training?

Mr. Martin. Yes.

Representative Ford. As any special training she received?

Mr. Martin. Yes.

Representative Ford. But she did discuss that with you?

Mr. Martin. Not at length. Just stated the fact that she had finished pharmacy school.

Representative Ford. But she didn't discuss any other training or schooling of a special nature.

Mr. Martin. No.

Representative Ford. Did she ever discuss any special training that Lee might have had while he was in Russia?

Mr. Martin. No.

Representative Ford. Did she ever discuss Lee's employment while he was in Russia?

Mr. Martin. Only that he was unhappy where he was working.

Representative Ford. Did she tell you where he worked, the kind of work he was doing?

Mr. Martin. I don't know, I have an idea it was in a factory of some kind, whether she told me that or whether it was an assumption, I don't know.

Mr. Redlich. Did she ever discuss their apartment, their living quarters in Minsk?

Mr. Martin. Yes, she said she had a one-room apartment, and had a balcony on it, and that as soon as the baby was born they were going to move to a larger one. I questioned her about that because I understand it is quite difficult to get more than a one-room apartment in Russia and she said, well, Lee was an American and he could get things the Russians couldn't get.

Mr. Redlich. Did Mrs. Oswald give you the impression that in general she and Lee Oswald had better treatment than other Russians?

Mr. Martin. Yes, and actually her past life even before she met Lee seemed a little bit strange to me, going to the opera, taking vacations and holidays as she says. I understand it is quite expensive to go to the opera, and she was making, what did she say, 45 rubles a month, and she would take a girl friend with her when she went to the opera.

Now, how much that cost, I don't know.

Mr. Redlich. Did you ever question her about her financial situation in Russia?

Mr. Martin. I asked her how she could afford it and she said she got by. She was living at home or with her aunt and uncle. So I imagine their expenses there weren't high.

Mr. Redlich. Did she mention any extra income which Lee Harvey Oswald may have had apart from his job?

Mr. Martin. No; I asked her about that specifically because I had heard an account that he was supposed to be getting Western Union money orders, and asked her about that. She didn't know what a Western Union money order was, for one thing, so I reworded the question and asked if he was getting money from anyone else other than where he was working, and she said no.

Mr. Redlich. This was true of this life in the Soviet Union?

Mr. Martin. Yes, apparently.

Mr. Redlich. Did Marina ever discuss with you the uncle with whom she lived who was apparently a lieutenant colonel in the Soviet army?

Mr. Martin. No; except she didn't like him.

Mr. Redlich. Did she say why?

Mr. Martin. No. She preferred her aunt, who has the husband on the pension.

Mr. Redlich. Can you search your memory at this point and tell this Commission anything that you have not yet told us about Marina's conversations with you concerning her life in the Soviet Union?

Mr. Martin. Her aunt used to bring food and liquor home after parties had at the government building where she was working. Other than talking about—she pulled one tooth out before she came to the United States. A tooth was either crooked or broken and she pulled the tooth out. That caused the other one to twist. I don't know what that was.

Representative Ford. Did Marina ever indicate to you while she was in the Soviet Union that she drank beer, wine, liquor?

Mr. Martin. Vodka.

Representative Ford. When she came to the United States, you could observe it, did she drink beer, wine, liquor of any kind?

Mr. Martin. She drank, I guess she drank a bottle of beer every day, and occasionally she would drink some vodka.

Representative Ford. But not a heavy drinker?

Mr. Martin. No.

(Discussion off the record.)

Mr. Redlich. Mr. Martin, have you ever been curious about how Mrs. Oswald was ever able to leave the Soviet Union?

Mr. Martin. Well, I wasn't, until Don Levine brought up the subject. Of course, I have no idea what it entails to get into Russia or out of it as far as that is concerned.

But according to Mr. Levine, it is extremely difficult for people to get out of Russia, especially when they have had the training that Marina has had.

Mr. Redlich. By training you mean what?

Mr. Martin. Pharmacy. He said they spent quite a bit of money on her training, and he doesn't understand how she got out of Russia on such short notice.

Mr. Redlich. Did you ever ask this question of Marina Oswald?

Mr. Martin. She said that Lee arranged it, and that is all she would say.

Mr. Redlich. She never discussed any other aspect of her departure from the Soviet Union?

Mr. Martin. No. Let's see, they were in Moscow, she waited a couple of days while he was, how did she put it, collecting money or getting money together to come over to the States. I have forgotten the name of the hotel they stayed in. She even remarked they had pancakes every morning and she didn't like pancakes.

Mr. Redlich. In terms of her official negotiations to leave the Soviet Union, you asked her nothing other than the question that I have already discussed with you?

Mr. Martin. No, she said that Lee arranged everything.

Mr. Redlich. I would like to ask you a few questions now about some of the individuals that Marina and Lee Harvey Oswald knew in Fort Worth and Dallas, and ask you in each case whether Marina Oswald discussed any of these individuals with you.

The first is George Bouhe.

Mr. Martin. I know the name but I don't think Marina has ever mentioned him; Katya Ford has though.

Mr. Redlich. Are you personally acquainted with George Bouhe?

Mr. Martin. No.

Mr. Redlich. Could you tell us what Katya Ford has told you about Mr. Bouhe?

Mr. Martin. It was relating to Marina—I think Katya Ford and Bouhe are friends, and they had been discussing Marina all the time she was in seclusion, and wondering what had happened to her, where she was. Now this was after the news was out where she was.

Mr. Redlich. Are you acquainted with——

Mr. Dulles. Excuse me, by "in seclusion", you mean at the time she was with you in your house?

Mr. Martin. Yes, and the press didn't know where she was.

Mr. Dulles. I see.

Mr. Redlich. Are you acquainted with George De Mohrenschildt or his wife Jean De Mohrenschildt?

Mr. Martin. No.

Mr. Redlich. Have you ever discussed either George or Jean De Mohrenschildt with Marina Oswald?

Mr. Martin. No.

Mr. Redlich. Have you ever discussed George and Jean De Mohrenschildt with anyone else?

Mr. Martin. No.

Mr. Dulles. Did you ever hear the name mentioned before?

Mr. Martin. No. I think I would remember that name.

Mr. Redlich. Are you personally acquainted with Peter Gregory?

Mr. Martin. I met him once, maybe twice, at the Inn. He was interpreting for Marina, for the Secret Service, I believe, before Lee Gopadze got there.

Mr. Redlich. Do you know who he is?

Mr. Martin. I understand he is a geologist, and he also teaches Russian.

Mr. Redlich. Did Marina ever discuss either Peter Gregory or Paul Gregory with you?

Mr. Martin. She mentioned—I don't know which one.

Mr. Redlich. One is the father and one is a son.

Mr. Martin. I think it is the older gentleman that I met. She mentioned that she liked him.

Mr. Redlich. The older gentleman?

Mr. Martin. Yes. And I think she corresponded with him. I know she corresponded with him.

Mr. Redlich. Do you have any knowledge of Mr. Gregory's son?

Mr. Martin. No.

Mr. Redlich. Have you ever met him?

Mr. Martin. Not to my knowledge.

Mr. Redlich. You have had no conversations with anyone else about him?

Mr. Martin. No. We were—I think John Thorne and I were talking about at sometime we may need an interpreter, and I mentioned his name in that instance.

Mr. Redlich. That would be the elder Mr. Gregory?

Mr. Martin. Yes. But nothing on Paul Gregory.

Mr. Redlich. Nothing on Paul Gregory?

Mr. Martin. No.

Mr. Redlich. Are you aware of the fact that Paul Gregory is a student at the University of Oklahoma?

Mr. Martin. No.

Mr. Redlich. Did Marina ever discuss with you the fact that she had helped tutor the son of Peter Gregory?

Mr. Martin. No.

Mr. Redlich. Are you familiar with—strike that. Do you have any personal acquaintanceship with Gary Taylor?

Mr. Martin. No.

Mr. Redlich. Have you ever heard the name of Gary Taylor?

Mr. Martin. No.

Mr. Redlich. Marina Oswald has never discussed that name with you?

Mr. Martin. No.

Mr. Redlich. Do you know Mrs. Elena Hall?

Mr. Martin. Elena Hall? No.

Mr. Redlich. Has Marina ever discussed her with you?

Mr. Martin. No.

Mr. Redlich. The name John R. Hall, who is the husband of Mrs. Elena Hall?

Mr. Martin. No, it sounded a little familiar but I can't place anything on it.

Mr. Redlich. Do you know Mrs. Katherine Ford?

Mr. Martin. Yes.

Mr. Redlich. Could you tell us how you came to know her?

Mr. Martin. Let's see, she had contacted Marina a couple of times by letter, and——

Representative Ford. While she was staying at your home?

Mr. Martin. Yes—well, she sent the letter to Grand Prairie, the letters, Christmas cards, and I think two letters after that. So I called her and Marina wanted to, expressed a desire to, talk to her. So I called her and Marina talked to her on the phone. I think every time she talked to her she talked nearly an hour.

Representative Ford. In Russian or in English?

Mr. Martin. In Russian.

Mr. Dulles. Was it on the telephone?

Mr. Martin. Yes.

Mr. Redlich. Did Marina ever tell you the gist of these conversations?

Mr. Martin. No.

Mr. Redlich. Did Marina ever relate to you whether she had ever lived in Mrs. Ford's home?

Mr. Martin. I believe she had for a very short time.

Mr. Redlich. You mean Marina related this to you?

Mr. Martin. I think Mrs. Ford told me that.

Mr. Redlich. How did you get this knowledge, from Marina or from Mrs. Ford? Did you ever discuss this with Marina?

Mr. Martin. No. I know Marina likes her home, I mean likes the house that they live in.

Mr. Redlich. Did you ever ask Marina how it came about that she was separated from her husband and living at the home of Mrs. Ford?

Mr. Martin. No.

Mr. Redlich. Did any of Marina's other Russian-speaking friends in the Dallas-Fort Worth area write letters to her while she was at your home?

Mr. Martin. Mrs. Paine wrote at least once a week and——

Mr. Dulles. Once a week?

Mr. Martin. Yes. Marina did not answer, didn't answer any of the letters and didn't call her.

Mr. Redlich. Did Mrs. Paine attempt to reach Marina by phone?

Mr. Martin. Yes, until I had my telephone number changed and then she couldn't find the phone number so she came over to the house.

Mr. Redlich. What happened when she came to the house?

Mr. Martin. Nothing, I let her in the house and Marina and the children were back in the den and the Secret Service men went back into the den, and I don't believe she knew that she was there.

Mr. Dulles. Was the change in number, did it have anything to do with Marina as objecting to receiving the calls?

Mr. Martin. No. That was strictly because the press pressure.

Mr. Dulles. The presence of the press?

Mr. Redlich. I would like to go back to this incident when Mrs. Paine came to see Marina. You say Marina did not know that Mrs. Paine was there?

Mr. Martin. Yes, she knew it.

Mr. Redlich. She knew that Mrs. Paine was there?

Mr. Martin. Mrs. Paine didn't know that Marina was there.

Mr. Redlich. But Marina knew that Mrs. Paine was there?

Mr. Martin. Yes.

Mr. Redlich. Did Marina see Mrs. Paine at that time?

Mr. Martin. No.

Mr. Redlich. Did you talk to Marina at that time?

Mr. Martin. Well, before and after.

Mr. Redlich. At the time Mrs. Paine was there did you personally tell Marina that Mrs. Paine wanted to see her?

Mr. Martin. I told her before Mrs. Paine came in the door that Mrs. Paine was here, and she said she didn't want to see her. She stayed in the den, and Mrs. Paine was in the living room.

Mr. Redlich. Then did you convey this message to Mrs. Paine yourself?

Mr. Martin. No.

Mr. Redlich. Who did?

Mr. Martin. Well, she came with the intention or for the purpose of bringing a package to Marina that she had received in the mail, and I don't believe she knew that Marina was living there. I told her at that time that because of security that Marina wasn't seeing anyone but I don't believe she knew that Marina was at that address until later.

Mr. Redlich. When Mrs. Paine called your home prior to the change of phone, did you speak to Mrs. Paine?

Mr. Martin. No, my wife did.

Mr. Redlich. Do you recall the nature of the conversations between your wife and Mrs. Paine as reported to you?

Mr. Martin. Well, let's see, she called and asked for Marina or asked to get in touch with Marina. My wife gave me the number and I guess I called her back.

Mr. Redlich. You called Mrs. Paine back?

Mr. Martin. A day or two later, yes.

Mr. Redlich. What did you say to her?

Mr. Martin. I told her that under the present circumstances she just didn't want to see anybody, and also the security on her didn't permit her to go out too far. That we could possibly arrange a meeting at some middle point later on.

Mr. Redlich. Was Marina free to see anyone she wanted to see?

Mr. Martin. Yes.

Mr. Redlich. And the reason she didn't see Mrs. Paine was because she didn't want to see Mrs. Paine?

Mr. Martin. Yes. I asked her several times to call her, at least call Mrs. Paine and tell her she didn't want to see her, and she just shrugged her shoulders and said she didn't want to talk to her.

Mr. Redlich. Did Marina ever tell you why she didn't want to talk to her?

Mr. Martin. She said something about Mrs. Paine talking too much, and she didn't like Mrs. Paine's children.

Mr. Redlich. Were you aware at the time that Marina had lived with Mrs. Paine?

Mr. Martin. Yes.

Mr. Redlich. Were you aware at the time that Mrs. Paine had taken the Oswald family to New Orleans and had——

Mr. Martin. Yes.

Mr. Redlich. Gone to New Orleans and brought them back to Irving, Tex.?

Mr. Martin. Yes, that is why I felt she owed Mrs. Paine something.

Mr. Redlich. What was Marina's attitude toward your comments?

Mr. Martin. She just didn't want to talk to her.

Mr. Redlich. Did you yourself ever meet Mrs. Paine?

Mr. Martin. Yes.

Mr. Redlich. Would you describe that meeting?

Mr. Martin. Well, the first time I met her was we went over to the Paine's house to pick up some of Marina's belongings.

Mr. Redlich. Who is "we"?

Mr. Martin. John Thorne and I.

Mr. Redlich. Do you recall about when this was?

Mr. Martin. I guess it was about a week after she had moved in, maybe shorter, maybe sooner than that. There was not much said at all at that meeting. Then when she came out to the house she talked at length, but it was——

Mr. Redlich. There is another occasion when you say she came?

Mr. Martin. When she came to my house.

Mr. Redlich. That was the same occasion that you referred to earlier when she came to pick up a package?

Mr. Martin. To deliver a package.

Mr. Redlich. To deliver a package, I am sorry. Could you relate what happened at that time?

Mr. Martin. I was quite distracted by the children. It was rather a stiff meeting or conversation.

Representative Ford. This was the meeting at Mrs. Paine's house?

Mr. Martin. No, my house.

Representative Ford. Your house?

Mr. Martin. Mrs. Paine brought, I think, a package and some food, cookies, things like that, for Marina, and——

Mr. Dulles. Those are from Mrs. Paine to Marina, but the package was a third——

Mr. Martin. The package came through the mail.

Mr. Dulles. That you understand, but the cookies came from Mrs. Paine.

Mr. Martin. Yes.

I believe she brought some toys for the children. What the toys were, I don't recall. Her children were running back and forth through the living room making quite a bit of noise.

Mr. Dulles. Mrs. Paine's children?

Mr. Martin. Yes. And I wasn't really paying too much attention to what she was saying. I was wanting her to leave. I didn't ask her to leave but I wasn't saying much to foster the conversation. Then she left in, I guess, 15 minutes.

Mr. Redlich. What did Mrs. Paine say to you?

Mr. Martin. Oh, boy——

Mr. Dulles. Was she disturbed, I mean was she annoyed, visibly annoyed, that Marina wouldn't see her. She didn't know Marina was in the house, I realize that.

Mr. Martin. She didn't know Marina was in the house. I am certain she didn't.

Mr. Redlich. You mean her children were running around the house though, weren't they?

Mr. Martin. Her children were running in the living room and dining room.

Mr. Dulles. But not into the den?

Mr. Martin. But not into the den and kitchen.

Representative Ford. Do you have a door on the den so you can close the den off?

Mr. Martin. Yes. She talked mostly about generalities and she would like to see Marina to make sure she is well taken care of, and so on. She was concerned about her. And she came back after that time, she came back once more. I wasn't there. My wife answered the door and didn't invite her in.

Mr. Dulles. How long a trip is it from your house to Mrs. Paine's, roughly, a few miles?

Mr. Martin. No, a good 20 miles.

Mr. Dulles. A good 20 miles?

Mr. Martin. Because it is 30 miles out to the Inn, and she lives about 8 or 10 miles toward me from the Inn, so it is about 20 miles.

Mr. Redlich. Your wife did not invite Mrs. Paine into the house at that time?

Mr. Martin. No.

Mr. Redlich. Was this at Marina's urging?

Mr. Martin. Yes. Mrs. Paine was quite upset at that—that is what Wanda said, she looked upset at that time.

Representative Ford. On this occasion, did Mrs. Paine know Marina was in the house?

Mr. Martin. No, I don't believe so.

Mr. Dulles. Did she ask where she was, specifically?

Mr. Martin. No.

Mr. Dulles. She didn't ask?

Mr. Redlich. What was the purpose of her visit?

Mr. Martin. I don't believe—let's see, she may have brought something that day, too. I don't recall whether she did or not. I know right after that, the Civil Liberties Union got into it. Well, Mark Lane, was first.

Mr. Redlich. You say right after that Mark Lane got into it?

Mr. Martin. Yes.

Mr. Redlich. Would you elaborate on that?

Mr. Martin. Mark Lane came to Dallas, and contacted John Thorne and I. We met him at the Statler and talked to him at lunch, and he expressed a desire to talk to Marina Oswald so that he could represent her husband, defend her husband in a hearing, and we told him that we would relay that information to her.

So we did, and she said that she didn't want to have any representation. She didn't want any more——

Mr. Redlich. You mean she didn't want any representation for Lee Oswald?

Mr. Martin. Yes, she didn't want any more to do about it.

Representative Ford. Can you recall the date of this visit by Mr. Lane?

Mr. Martin. No.

Representative Ford. Was it in December or January?

Mr. Martin. It was in January, I believe.

Mr. Redlich. And you transmitted Mr. Lane's message to Marina?

Mr. Martin. Yes, and she said that she didn't want any representation for Lee.

Mr. Redlich. Did you tell her this in English?

Mr. Martin. Yes, and explained it to her, and at that time she could understand.

Mr. Dulles. To your knowledge, did Marina ever meet Mr. Lane?

Mr. Martin. Not to my knowledge, no.

Mr. Redlich. And you also related the Ruth Paine, second Ruth Paine, visit to your home to something which you referred to as the American Civil Liberties Union business.

Mr. Martin. It was right after—these incidents happened rather closely. The letter from the Civil Liberties Union—well, first we received a telephone call from the Civil Liberties Union wanting to see Marina Oswald.

Representative Ford. Telephone call from Dallas or New York, or what?

Mr. Martin. From Richardson, the same person who wrote the letter which you have there. Do you have that?

Mr. Redlich. We do have. We are inventorying many of these documents of which the American Civil Liberties letter is one and we will introduce it at an appropriate time.

Mr. Martin. Richardson is a suburb of Dallas. This gentleman called, what was his name?

Mr. Leech. I can't remember it.

Mr. Redlich. Would it refresh your recollection if I mentioned the name Olds?

Mr. Martin. Yes, Greg Olds. He called on the phone and wanted to see Marina Oswald, wanted to make sure she was being properly represented, that she knew her rights, and so on and so forth.

John Thorne talked to him, and told him that he represented Marina Oswald, and that he was definitely sure that all her rights were being observed.

Then I think there was another phone call from them still wanting to see Marina Oswald, and I talked to Marina and she said well, she would talk to him. So they arranged a meeting with a third party, I can't remember his name, who was a minister of some kind, and then Marina changed her mind and said no, she didn't want to go at all, she didn't want to talk to any of them. So then they wrote the letter. They wrote a letter to her in Russian and sent one to me in English, one to John Thorne in English, and I believe one to the Secret Service and one to the FBI.

Mr. Leech. Do you want to mention about their press releases at this time?

Mr. Martin. There were a number of press releases at that time also that she was being held incognito and not able to——

Mr. Redlich. You mean incognito or incommunicado?

Mr. Martin. Incommunicado.

Representative Ford. Press releases by whom?

Mr. Martin. The Civil Liberties Union, and so they sent this letter to her and she answered it with a two-page letter in Russian.

Representative Ford. In Russian?

Mr. Martin. Yes.

Mr. Redlich. Do you have a copy of that two-page letter?

Mr. Martin. No. She wrote it, put it in an envelope, put a stamp on it and I mailed it. I didn't open it or look in it in any way. And that seemed to be the end of it, but they still persisted they wanted to see her.

Mr. Redlich. And the reason Marina did not see them was entirely her own volition?

Mr. Martin. Her own.

Mr. Dulles. She never talked to you about what was in the letter?

Mr. Martin. No, she said she just told them she didn't want to see them.

Mr. Dulles. In two pages?

Mr. Martin. Yes, sir; This was quoted, a portion of the letter was quoted, in the Worker.

Representative Ford. I suggest, Mr. Chairman, that we get, if possible, a copy of the original of that letter.

Mr. Martin. You probably can get it from Greg Olds.

Mr. Dulles. Would you make a note of that. I think we should do that.

That was dated sometime in the middle of January?

Mr. Martin. I believe so. The letter you have—she wadded the letter up that was written to her in Russian and threw it away, and I got it back out, and asked her to go ahead and write them a letter so it would quiet them. So she said she would and she wrote a letter, I think, that night, so it would be within a couple of days of the date of that letter, the English copy of which you have.

Mr. Redlich. Mr. Chairman, if you would like, we could take a 3- or 4-minute recess and I could get the American Civil Liberties Union letter to Marina Oswald and introduce it at this time for the sake of clarity in the record.

Mr. Dulles. Good. It is a good time for a breather.

(Short recess.)

The Chairman. All right, gentlemen, the Commission will be in order.

You are familiar with, Mr. Dulles, you are familiar with, the hearing up to date. You go right ahead and preside, if you will.

Mr. Dulles. Mr. Redlich will you go right ahead with your questions?

Mr. Redlich. I believe Congressman Ford, you said you wanted to ask your questions prior to your leaving.

Representative Ford. Do you wish to have that letter entered as an exhibit at this point before I ask several questions?

Mr. Redlich. The witness has produced before this Commission a letter which I now mark Commission Exhibit No. 331 on the Dallas Civil Liberties Union stationery, addressed to Mr. John Thorne, James Martin, Mr. Sorrels, Secret Service, Mrs. Lee H. Oswald, and the Federal Bureau of Investigation.

I ask that it be introduced in evidence.

Mr. Dulles. Any objection?

Mr. Leech. No.

Mr. Dulles. It will be introduced.

(The letter referred to was marked for identification as Commission Exhibit No. 331 and received in evidence.)

The Chairman. Have you seen it?

Mr. Martin. Yes.

Mr. Redlich. Mr. Chief Justice, we have introduced that because just prior to the recess we were discussing it and Congressman Ford indicated he had to leave I believe and I wanted to ask some questions.

The Chairman. Go ahead.

Mr. Dulles. Could I ask one question on this letter for clarification? It is my understanding it is your belief that Mrs. Oswald received a copy of this letter in Russian?

Mr. Martin. Well, she received a letter on this letterhead written in Russian. Now whether it was an exact copy, I don't know.

Mr. Dulles. About the length of this letter as far as you could tell?

Mr. Martin. Yes.

Mr. Dulles. At about the same time?

Mr. Martin. Yes, it was the same day.

Mr. Dulles. That was the letter she crumpled up and put in the wastepaper basket?

Mr. Martin. Yes.

Mr. Dulles. But you retrieved it from the wastepaper basket, did you not say?

Mr. Martin. Yes, sir, and asked her to answer it.

Mr. Dulles. Where is that copy that you retrieved from the wastepaper basket?

Mr. Martin. I don't know.

Mr. Dulles. Maybe reassigned to the wastepaper basket?

Mr. Martin. It may have been, yes.

Representative Ford. I believe that was the letter that Mr. Redlich indicated he would get a copy from the Dallas Chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union.

Mr. Martin. Her answer is what he wanted to get.

Mr. Redlich. I think Congressman Ford is right. We might be able to get both a copy of the letter and their answer.

Mr. Dulles. Their statement in this letter is the English of the Russian translation which they sent to her. I think it would be adequate, wouldn't it?

Mr. Redlich. Yes.

Mr. Dulles. It seems to me it would be adequate for our purposes.

Mr. Redlich. We will contact the Dallas Division on that.

Representative Ford. Marina testified here, and she has said elsewhere, that based on the facts as she now knows them, she believes that Lee was guilty of the assassination of President Kennedy.

Mr. Martin. Yes.

Representative Ford. Was that her attitude when you first met her?

Mr. Martin. Well, when I first met her, we didn't converse very well at all. There was lack of communication because of the language barrier, and I didn't discuss it with her probably until the latter part of December, although she was speaking fairly good English by the 15th of December.

Representative Ford. When you first discussed it with her, what was her attitude?

Mr. Martin. Well, she said she thought he was crazy.

Representative Ford. But did she indicate when you first discussed the question of guilt or not being guilty, what was her attitude?

Mr. Martin. She thought he was guilty.

Representative Ford. The first time you discussed the matter?

Mr. Martin. Yes.

Representative Ford. Did she indicate why?

Mr. Martin. No. I asked her why, and she said it was just a feeling.

Representative Ford. At that point had she——

Mr. Martin. A woman's feeling.

Representative Ford. At that point had she been given or shown the evidence that had been accumulated by various agencies of the Federal Government?

Mr. Martin. I don't know. I assume she had through the FBI. The FBI were showing her pictures and numerous things. I was not in on any of the questioning at all.

Mr. Dulles. Had she read the papers or had them read to her as far as you know at that period?

Mr. Martin. Some of them, yes.

Mr. Dulles. Newspapers, I mean.

Mr. Martin. Yes.

Representative Ford. From that first conversation you had with her about this matter, the guilt of Lee Harvey Oswald, she has never changed her mind?

Mr. Martin. No, and I have never heard her say anything other than he was guilty.

Representative Ford. Did you ever discuss with Marina the conversation she had with Lee Harvey Oswald at the Dallas police station the day he was apprehended or the day following. Or at any time prior to his death?

Mr. Martin. The only time she said anything about it was that he told her not to worry and to make sure and get the—get June a pair of shoes.

Representative Ford. She told you that is what he said to her?

Mr. Martin. That is what he said, yes.

Representative Ford. There was nothing extraordinary that she told you about the conversation?

Mr. Martin. No, sir.

Representative Ford. Other than what you have indicated?

Mr. Martin. Yes. He said not to worry. Everything would be all right.

Representative Ford. Did you ever ask her about this conversation that she had with Lee Harvey Oswald while he was at the Dallas police station?

Mr. Martin. No.

Representative Ford. As her manager, as the manager of Marina, did you have anything to do with the change of her appearance? Many people have said to me the first picture they saw of her and the subsequent pictures they saw of her she was wearing different kind of clothes. She had a different hair-do, and so forth. Did you have anything to do with that?

Mr. Martin. Yes.

Representative Ford. What was the purpose of that?

Mr. Martin. Just to change her general appearance so she wouldn't be recognized when she went out.

Representative Ford. Did she agree to this, was she willing to do it?

Mr. Martin. Yes. She didn't like her haircut particularly.

Representative Ford. She liked the previous way it was?

Mr. Martin. Yes.

Representative Ford. How about the change in clothes, the type that she wore?

Mr. Martin. Well, of course, that was for the better.

Representative Ford. Did she like it?

Mr. Martin. She liked the clothes, yes.

Representative Ford. That is all.

Mr. Martin. She tried makeup but that didn't work, because she couldn't stand makeup.

Mr. Redlich. We previously asked you, Mr. Martin, about various people that Marina Oswald knew in the Dallas-Fort Worth area and you have indicated the extent to which you knew them personally and the extent to which they had contacted Marina Oswald during the time she was in your home.

Are there any other friends of Marina Oswald's rather than those I have asked you about that you—who attempted to contact her while she was living at your home?

Mr. Martin. Ilya, I believe it is Mamatav or Mamantov—he is of the Dallas Police Department and he has asked of her how she is.

Mr. Redlich. Has he ever seen her, to the best of your knowledge other than in an official capacity?

(At this point, Congressman Ford left the hearing room.)

Mr. Martin. Well, one time when we went to Sears, Sears Roebuck in Dallas, and walked into the store he was walking and practically ran into her, and they said hello and passed the time of day and he left.

Mr. Redlich. There were no other friends of hers that you know about who attempted to see her or call her while she was living at your home?

Other than those we have already discussed on the record? If I mentioned the name of Mr. or Mrs. Teofil Meller—the first name is Teofil, the last name is Meller.

Mr. Martin. Well, there was someone that called the office one day and had a rather odd name, was that Meller, and said that Marina wanted to talk to her, and we took it just for a crank call. She wouldn't leave the number or anything like that. I am not sure whether that was Meller.

(Discussion off the record.)

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

Mr. Martin. There was no telephone number involved.

Mr. Redlich. You have discussed at length the attempt of Ruth Paine to see Mrs. Oswald. Did Mike Paine ever attempt to see Mrs. Oswald while she was living at your home?

Mr. Martin. No.

Mr. Redlich. Have you ever talked to Michael Paine?

Mr. Martin. No. When we went over to get the clothes, for instance, he stood back—I don't believe he said anything at all. It was a very odd situation. He was helping us move things but he didn't say anything.

Mr. Redlich. Did Marina ever discuss Michael Paine with you?

Mr. Martin. No.

Mr. Redlich. Only Ruth Paine but not Michael Paine?

Mr. Martin. Yes. She said they were separated.

Mr. Redlich. Mr. Martin, did Marina ever discuss with you her husband's desire to go to Cuba?

Mr. Martin. She said that he had wanted to go to Cuba because he wanted—because he wasn't happy in Russia and he wasn't happy in the United States and then she said he wouldn't be happy in Cuba either.

Mr. Redlich. Did she ever discuss with you a plan to hi-jack a plane?

Mr. Martin. No.

Mr. Redlich. Did she ever indicate what steps he was taking to get to Cuba?

Mr. Martin. No. Not at all.

Mr. Redlich. Do you have any knowledge at all of any plans he was making to get to and live in Cuba?

Mr. Martin. No.

Mr. Redlich. Mr. Ford has asked you about the conversations which Marina had with Lee Oswald at the Dallas Police Station on November 23 and you have replied. I would like to ask you about any—your knowledge about any conversation which Robert Oswald had with Lee Oswald while he was in the custody of the Dallas Police prior to his death?

Mr. Martin. I have no knowledge at all of that.

Mr. Redlich. You have never had any conversations with Robert Oswald concerning his conversations with Lee Oswald.

Mr. Martin. No.

Mr. Redlich. Have you ever talked to Mrs. Marguerite Oswald concerning any conversations which she had with her son while he was in the custody of the Dallas police?

Mr. Martin. No.

Mr. Redlich. Have you had any conversations at all with Mrs. Marguerite Oswald concerning the facts surrounding the assassination of President Kennedy?

Mr. Martin. No, I don't think any direct conversation, I mean between she and I. I was present at times out there at the Inn when she was talking to this person or that person. But I don't believe I have had any direct conversation with her at all.

Mr. Redlich. Did Mrs. Marguerite Oswald ever discuss with you an incident concerning a photograph which was supposed to have been shown to her by agents of the FBI on November 23, 1963.

Mr. Martin. No, I have heard that through news media but that is the only place I heard it.

Mr. Redlich. You have no direct knowledge of that incident yourself. Did Marina Oswald ever discuss that incident with you?

Mr. Martin. No.

Mr. Redlich. Did Marina Oswald ever discuss with you her mother-in-law's allegations that Lee Oswald was acting as an agent of the United States Government?

Mr. Martin. No. She mentioned only one incident where the FBI came to their house when they were in Oak Cliff, and they took him down to the car, I believe he was about ready to sit down to dinner when they arrived, and they took him down to the car and talked to him, and Marina was upset because dinner was spoiling, and I think that is the only reference she has made to anything like that.

Mr. Redlich. She has never discussed with you the specific claims of Marguerite Oswald in that respect?

Mr. Martin. No.

Mr. Redlich. In the course of your conversations with Marina Oswald or in the course of the preparation of any stories or releases on Mrs. Oswald's behalf have you ever discussed with Mrs. Oswald the events of November 21 and the morning of November 22?

Mr. Martin. Yes.

Mr. Redlich. Could you relate those conversations to us?

Mr. Martin. He came home Thursday night, which was unusual.

Mr. Redlich. Just so the record is clear, I hope you are relating to us now what Marina Oswald has related to you and not what you have read in any publication.

Mr. Martin. Yes.

Mr. Redlich. All right.

Mr. Martin. And, let's see, this was sometime in December that she was telling me this—no, I remember when it was, when she was moving from the Inn to my home.

Mr. Redlich. By the Inn you mean——

Mr. Martin. The Inn of the Six Flags. She was in the back seat and Leon Gopadze was in the front seat talking with her, and she told him that he had come home Thursday night and that——

Mr. Dulles. In Russian?

Mr. Martin. Yes.

Mr. Dulles. This was a conversation in Russian?

Mr. Martin. Yes. Lee translated it for me, Gopadze translated it.

Mr. Dulles. Afterwards or as it took place.

Mr. Martin. As it took place, well, it was immediately afterwards, and she made a comment that he had left his wedding band on the dresser, I think, and she got up the next morning she found his wedding band on the dresser, which was strange.

Now, that is the only thing that relates to that period that I have heard her say. Now, I didn't actually hear her say that.

Mr. Redlich. You have had no other conversations with her with regard to the period of November 21 and the morning of November 22?

Mr. Martin. No.

Mr. Redlich. Do you have any knowledge of the story which Marina Oswald prepared in Russian and which she has sent to this Commission?

Mr. Martin. Yes.

Mr. Redlich. Could you state the extent of your knowledge?

Mr. Martin. I knew it was written, and written by her, and that is about the extent of it.

Mr. Redlich. Was it ever translated for you?

Mr. Martin. Well, we have part of it translated, a portion of it.

Mr. Redlich. Are there any parts of that story which you now believe to be inaccurate?

Mr. Martin. No, I don't have the whole thing translated, but I think everything that is translated, I have no reason to doubt.

Mr. Redlich. Did you assist Marina Oswald in the preparation for her television appearance in January on CBS television?

Mr. Martin. Yes.

Mr. Redlich. Are there any portions of that interview which you now believe to be inaccurate in any respect?

Mr. Martin. No. We set a format for CBS to use, specific questions, and Marina was not prompted as to the answers to give. Those were impromptu. But we went over the ones with her off the camera, and asked her the questions so that she would understand them, and then she answered them, and the second time she did it on camera.

Mr. Redlich. To the best of your knowledge and recollection those answers were accurate?

Mr. Martin. Yes. I can't remember them. But none of them struck me as being——

Mr. Redlich. Apart from the newspaper clippings which we went through this morning and afternoon, are you familiar with any other narrative prepared by or for Marina Oswald?

Mr. Martin. Prepared by or for?

Mr. Redlich. Yes.

Mr. Martin. You mean other than newspaper articles?

Mr. Redlich. Other than the newspaper articles which we discussed this morning and this afternoon.

Mr. Martin. Life magazine.

Mr. Redlich. Did you have anything to do with the recent story in Life magazine?

Mr. Martin. No, we had nothing on that other than the picture. Time magazine, she was interviewed for Time magazine.

Mr. Redlich. When was that?

Mr. Martin. Saturday—Friday—she was here in Washington.

Mr. Redlich. If I may refresh your recollection, she completed her testimony before this Commission at approximately 5:30 on Thursday, February 6.

Mr. Martin. Well, I believe it was Friday. We held a press conference on Friday afternoon, and I think it was Friday night then.

Mr. Redlich. It would be sometime after the completion of her testimony is that correct?

Mr. Martin. Yes.

Mr. Redlich. Were you with her during the course of that interview?

Mr. Martin. It must have been Thursday night. It was Thursday night because Secret Service was still with her.

Mr. Redlich. You believe this interview took place on Thursday night?

Mr. Martin. Yes.

Mr. Redlich. That would be February 6?

Mr. Martin. Yes.

Mr. Redlich. Were you with her during the course of this interview?

Mr. Martin. Part of the time. I left John Thorne and Marina and the Time reporter at the table. June was restless, and I was walking her around the restaurant.

Mr. Redlich. Have you read the interview?

Mr. Martin. Yes.

Mr. Redlich. Are there any portions of it which you now believe to be inaccurate, to the best of your recollection?

Mr. Martin. I don't think so. I would have to re-read it to make it definite, make a definite statement on it.

Mr. Redlich. On the basis of conversations which you had during the course of the testimony of Marina Oswald before this Commission and on the basis of conversations which you have had subsequent to that time, do you have any opinion concerning the truthfulness of the testimony which she presented before this Commission?

Mr. Martin. No. I think primarily she is truthful, and I think that under oath she would tell the truth.

Mr. Redlich. Are you still Mrs. Oswald's business representative?

Mr. Martin. According to the contract, yes. According to my contract with her.

Mr. Redlich. Have you received any communication from her which raises questions as to whether you are still her business representative?

Mr. Martin. Yes.

The Chairman. Are we really concerned with that?

Mr. Redlich. Mr. Chairman, I intend to ask the witness why he was discharged in terms of whether it had anything to do with any business negotiations or anything to do with the testimony of Mrs. Oswald before this Commission.

The Chairman. You can ask him if it has anything to do with her testimony. We are not interested in her business affairs.

Mr. Redlich. I merely wanted to establish the fact of——

The Chairman. This thing can go on interminably with all this minutia and things that don't bear on what we are here to find out, whatever his business relations are with Mrs. Oswald, it seems to me is his business and not ours.

Mr. Redlich. Did Mrs. Oswald's attempt to terminate the relationship with you relate in any way to her testimony before this Commission?

Mr. Martin. No. There was no reason given.

Mr. Redlich. Did it relate in any way, in your opinion, to any information which you may have given to anyone else with regard to your knowledge of the facts concerning the assassination of President Kennedy.

Mr. Martin. No.

Mr. Redlich. Do you know Jack Ruby?

Mr. Martin. Yes.

Mr. Redlich. Would you tell us about your association with him?

Mr. Martin. Well, it is a very minor association. I had been working in the Statler Hotel in Dallas as assistant manager for maybe six months before I met him, and met him through some of the other people in the hotel.

Mr. Dulles. What year was this?

Mr. Martin. About 1955.

Mr. Dulles. I just want to get the general area.

Mr. Martin. 1955 or 1956. And as a club manager, I was club manager in Dallas also, and didn't associate with him at all, even on a bilateral communication through the clubs. But it was just a nodding acquaintance, you might say. I knew him by his first name. He knew me by my first name and we spoke when we saw each other and I think I have been in his place twice.

Mr. Redlich. Do you recall the approximate dates of those visits?

Mr. Martin. Let's see, once in 1962. I had some gentlemen from New Orleans with me. They were visiting Dallas on business at the Inn of the Six Flags, and they wanted to see the Carousel.

Mr. Dulles. That is what you mean by his place?

Mr. Martin. Yes. So I called Jack Ruby and asked if it would be all right if I brought them down. We stayed approximately an hour and a half.

The other time was during the daytime, let's see, as it was then, I had—I was walking in that area and just stopped in to say hello. The club was closed at that time, not closed for business but it was before opening hours.

Mr. Redlich. Those are the only times you have been in Jack Ruby's business establishment?

Mr. Martin. Yes.

Mr. Redlich. Do you consider yourself a friend of his?

Mr. Martin. No. An acquaintance.

Mr. Redlich. Have you gone out socially?

Mr. Martin. No. He came out to the Inn one time with some little gimmick. It is called a Detwist Board. It is quite a piece of plywood about like this with a round plate on the bottom of it, seated in ball bearings and you are supposed to stand on this thing to twist, and came out to ask me to see who to ask at the park to merchandise it, the Six Flags over Texas Amusement Park, and I told him. Now, whether he went over there or not, I don't know.

Mr. Redlich. I understand that you have had a conversation with an aid of General Walker concerning the General Walker incident.

Would you tell the Commission about that?

Mr. Martin. They contacted us——

Mr. Redlich. Who is "they"?

Mr. Martin. General Walker's aide, Mr. Moore or Morse, a tall thin gentleman, about 55 or 60, and wanted actually an interview with Marina which we didn't think was necessary.

They came out to John Thorne's office and we sat and talked. They were of the opinion—what they were trying to do was find out who else was involved—this was right after the announcement was made in the paper about Lee Oswald shooting at Walker. They were trying to find out who else was involved because General Walker is still in fear of his life.

Mr. Dulles. This was some time before the 22d.

Mr. Martin. No, it was after.

Mr. Dulles. After November 22?

Mr. Martin. Yes, sir. This was after the announcement was made in the paper that——

Mr. Dulles. Oh, yes.

Mr. Martin. That Lee Oswald had attacked him.

Mr. Dulles. The actual attack was in April. This was after the newspaper announcement.

Mr. Martin. Yes.

The Chairman. After the newspaper announcements that Lee had tried to kill him which was after the assassination?

Mr. Martin. That is correct.

Mr. Dulles. Yes.

Mr. Martin. And they just wanted verification actually that or to try to get verification as to how many people were involved, and we told them that there was just one person involved.

Mr. Redlich. At the time did you ask Marina about this?

Mr. Martin. Yes.

Mr. Redlich. And this is what she told you?

Mr. Martin. Yes.

Mr. Dulles. The persons involved in the Walker incident?

Mr. Martin. Yes. She said that Lee did it alone without any help. There was no one with him.

Mr. Redlich. Mr. Martin, I have at this time no further questions other than those which may be suggested by a perusal of the records which you have forwarded to this Commission.

As we indicated in the brief recess earlier, Mr. Dulles is able to be here at 9 o'clock this evening, and I would envisage then a very brief session at which time your testimony would be completed.

Mr. Martin. All right.

Mr. Redlich. Are there any questions that anyone would like to ask of Mr. Martin at this time?

The Chairman. Would you like to ask your client any questions?

Mr. Leech. No. I am not going to make that mistake.

(Laughter.)

The Chairman. All right.

Mr. Dulles. I have no questions. I will reserve them for tonight. I don't think I have any further questions.

The Chairman. Mr. Rhyne, do you have any questions you would like to ask. Mr. Rankin, are you through for the day?

Mr. Rankin. Until 9 o'clock.

The Chairman. Well then, gentlemen, we will adjourn until 9 o'clock.

(Whereupon, at 5:15 p.m., the President's Commission recessed.)

---

[Evening Session]
TESTIMONY OF JAMES HERBERT MARTIN RESUMED

The President's Commission reconvened at 9:20 p.m.

Mr. Dulles. The Committee will come to order.

Will you continue with the testimony?

Mr. Redlich. Thank you, Mr. Dulles.

Mr. Martin, at our last session I asked you whether you knew Jack Ruby, and you replied that you did. You indicated the brief contact that you have had with him and the two times, I believe, that you have been to his business establishment?

Mr. Martin. Yes.

Mr. Redlich. Apart from your own personal contact with Jack Ruby, do you have any other information about him and his activities which you would like to present before this Commission?

Mr. Martin. No, nothing that I definitely know about him. It is just he is a city character. He is very friendly to everyone.

Mr. Redlich. Please understand I am not asking you for rumors or that type of thing.

Mr. Martin. No, I know. Well, just what I know of him, he seems very friendly to everyone, and he is always around. You are liable to see him anywhere.

Mr. Redlich. Has he ever been to the motel that you have?

Mr. Martin. Yes, I mentioned that.

Mr. Redlich. Oh, yes.

Mr. Martin. He brought that twist board out there one time.

Mr. Redlich. Never been there as a guest?

Mr. Martin. No.

Mr. Redlich. I hand you a copy of an invoice for a Revere recorder and a 1,200-foot reel of recording tape, and ask you if you have ever seen this?

Mr. Martin. Yes. That is a tape recorder that I rented and recorded the——

Mr. Redlich. I will ask you about it shortly. I would just like to know if you are familiar with it.

Mr. Martin. Yes.

Mr. Redlich. Mr. Chairman, I am marking this as Commission Exhibit No. 332, and ask that it be admitted in evidence.

Mr. Dulles. Any objection?

Mr. Leech. No, sir.

Mr. Dulles. It may be admitted.

(The tape recorder and tape invoice referred to were marked Commission's Exhibit No. 332 for identification and received in evidence.)

Mr. Redlich. Mr. Martin, I hand you Commission Exhibit No. 332, and ask you to tell the Commission the conditions under which this invoice arose?

Mr. Martin. We had Marina's manuscript interpreted by Ilya Mamantov, and this was part of it. He was only able to interpret about half of it.

Mr. Redlich. He interpreted it and put it on tape?

Mr. Martin. And we recorded that on tape as he interpreted it.

Mr. Dulles. How do you mean interpreted?

Mr. Martin. He read it in English?

Mr. Dulles. Oh, I see, translated it.

Mr. Martin. Yes.

Mr. Dulles. From Russian into English?

Mr. Martin. Yes.

Mr. Redlich. When I asked you this afternoon about your knowledge as to the accuracy of that story, I take it your reply was based upon this translation?

Mr. Martin. Yes.

Mr. Redlich. And this only encompasses about half of the entire story, is that right?

Mr. Martin. It is more than half, it is about 15 pages, I guess.

Mr. Redlich. Did she consult with you at all in the preparation of that story?

Mr. Martin. No.

Mr. Redlich. And there is nothing on this tape other than the English translation of that Russian story?

Mr. Martin. That is true.

Mr. Dulles. Do we have that translation as well as the copy of the original?

Mr. Redlich. Yes, Mr. Chairman, we have the original in Russian and then it was translated by Mr. Gopadze, of the Secret Service.

Mr. Martin. Actually our translation is very poor. He was not able to translate properly into English a lot of the phrases.

Mr. Dulles. Who is "he," Illa? Isn't that Ilya, by the way?

Mr. Martin. I am not sure.

Mr. Dulles. That is generally the Russian, I don't know.

Mr. Rankin. That is right.

Mr. Martin. It might be.

Mr. Dulles. Yes.

Mr. Martin. But he is professor at SMU. He has a list of titles that long. He is very well thought of. I think he works for Sun Oil Company, and is a well-respected individual. His wife and his mother, I believe, teach Russian also. I think his mother taught Mrs. Paine a good deal of her Russian.

Mr. Redlich. Mr. Martin, I would like to show you Commission Exhibit No. 325 which was introduced earlier today. Mr. Leech, I believe you have a photostat of this. If you could hand it to me during the course of this questioning. I would appreciate it.

Mr. Leech. Yes.

Mr. Redlich. Thank you.

Could you tell the Commission what this document purports to state, and then I will ask you about individual items.

Mr. Martin. These are contracts that we have made both in writing and verbally for Marina Oswald's right, her story rights.

Mr. Redlich. And the first item appearing on Commission Exhibit No. 325 is a contract with Texitalia Films.

Mr. Martin. Yes.

Mr. Redlich. Would you describe the terms and conditions of that contract?

Mr. Martin. Texitalia Films is planning a 60-minute technicolor documentary to start. They will pay $75,000 for World-Wide movie and the TV rights.

Mr. Dulles. Excuse me, is this a documentary of Marina's life?

Mr. Martin. Yes. Any movie or television appearances Marina would be paid $7,500 plus expenses for each appearance. Then for each personal appearance, for instance, the film opens in St. Louis on such and such a date and they would like for her to be there to make a personal appearance for the showing, the opening of the film, she would receive $1,500 plus expenses for each public appearance of that nature.

Mr. Redlich. And this contract according to this exhibit was signed on February 11, 1964?

Mr. Martin. Yes.

Mr. Leech. By her?

Mr. Martin. No, by me acting for her.

Mr. Redlich. By you acting on behalf of Mrs. Oswald?

Mr. Martin. Yes, in accordance with my contract with her.

Mr. Redlich. The second item appearing here is a contract with Life magazine. Would you tell the Commission about that?

Mr. Martin. Life magazine purchased the rights, North American rights on a photograph of Lee Harvey Oswald with a rifle and pistol, primarily for their use on a cover issue.

Mr. Dulles. That is what appeared on the recent cover issue, I guess, it was 2 weeks ago.

Mr. Martin. Yes, sir.

Now, that $5,000 has been paid. We have the $5,000 in an escrow account.

Mr. Redlich. Did you actually have in your possession the photograph, a copy of which appeared on the cover of Life magazine?

Mr. Martin. No.

Mr. Redlich. Could you tell us how this contract was consummated, in view of the fact that Life magazine apparently printed on its cover a photograph which you never possessed?

Mr. Martin. They knew the photographs belonged to Marina. They have a common law copyright, and the only way they could legally use the film is to purchase the rights from Marina.

Mr. Redlich. Did Life magazine indicate to you where they obtained the photograph?

Mr. Martin. No.

Mr. Redlich. Have you had conversations with other publications concerning that photograph?

Mr. Martin. Yes. I made the contact with the London Daily Mirror for the purchase of the British Commonwealth rights on that same photograph, and they guaranteed $2,200 plus 50–50 split on what they sold in the Commonwealth. It was restricted to the Commonwealth only.

However, the London Daily Mail came out with the photograph prior to the Mirror, and I was informed by Mr. Weggand of the London Daily Express that the Detroit Free Press had sold this photograph to the London Daily Mail for $500.

Mr. Redlich. Do you have any idea how the Detroit Free Press obtained this photograph?

Mr. Martin. No. I talked to Ken Murray, who I was informed was the attorney for the Detroit Free Press.

Mr. Redlich. Where did you talk to him?

Mr. Martin. At his home in Detroit.

Mr. Redlich. By phone?

Mr. Martin. By telephone. And he stated that the photograph was public property, and not covered under common law copyright. I asked him where he got the photo, and he said he got it at the same place as Life did, through a leak in the Commission. I talked to Life magazine attorney—I can't remember his name. It is a very odd name. It begins with an "S". Now, Murray said that Life had informed him that they had gotten it from a leak through the Commission, and I contacted Life and he denied saying anything of the sort to Murray.

However, Murray insisted that that is where he got that and he figured it was public domain.

Mr. Redlich. At the start of today's testimony when you mentioned the possibility of a leak with regard to this photograph, something that you said prior to the actual start of hearings, Mr. Rankin and I commented on that assertion.

Would you tell the Commission what we said?

Mr. Martin. That there was definitely not a leak in the Commission, and that you would certainly find out what Murray was talking about.

Mr. Redlich. Did you talk to an editor of the Detroit Free Press with regard to this photograph?

Mr. Martin. I called at night. It was at night, and I asked for the news editor. He was not in, so I talked to a reporter, and he couldn't say anything about it. He referred me to Ken Murray and gave me his home telephone number.

Mr. Redlich. The next item on Commission Exhibit No. 325 has reference to Stern Magazine.

Would you tell the Commission about that, please?

Mr. Martin. Stern Magazine we have been working with since the middle of December. They have been quite patient actually. For $12,500 they wanted Marina's memoirs and photographs, available photographs for use in Germany and Italy only. They wanted exclusive use in those two countries. Then they would endeavor to sell these same memoirs and pictures to other European countries, limiting it only to European countries, and take a 30 percent commission on any sales that they made, the remaining 70 percent going to Marina.

Mr. Redlich. Has this contract been signed?

Mr. Martin. Yes.

Mr. Redlich. Do you know when it was signed? Can you approximate the date?

Mr. Martin. I confirmed it by wire to them. It is in the exhibits.

Mr. Redlich. We have not introduced——

Mr. Martin. You haven't come to that yet.

Mr. Redlich. We do not intend to introduce the specific documents into the record, just this summary.

Mr. Leech. Give him an approximate date.

Mr. Redlich. You say it was confirmed by telegram.

Mr. Martin. Yes, it was confirmed by telegram to Spiegelberg.

Mr. Leech. When?

Mr. Martin. In New York. December 16 at 2:45 p.m.

Mr. Redlich. The next item on Commission Exhibit No. 325 also refers to Stern Magazine, an item of $2,650.

Could you comment on that?

Mr. Martin. This was a recent development wherein since they could not send an author in to talk to Marina, they purchased seven photographs for a total of $2,650, to take the memoirs later.

However, they will not hold off the memoirs forever.

Mr. Redlich. These seven photographs are photographs of what?

Mr. Martin. Of Marina and Lee Harvey Oswald together and separate.

Mr. Redlich. These were photographs which were not turned over to the Dallas police?

Mr. Martin. No. They were photographs that we were given prints of by the FBI. The FBI sent prints of these photographs to us.

Mr. Redlich. Am I correct in assuming that all of the photographs which were in the possession of Marina Oswald and Lee Harvey Oswald, either in his apartment or in the Paine's apartment, were turned over to the Dallas police?

Is that right?

Mr. Martin. As far as I know.

Mr. Redlich. To the best of your knowledge?

Mr. Martin. Yes.

Mr. Redlich. And that any photographs which you have and which have been the basis of any contract are copies which were made available to you by some law enforcement authority?

Mr. Martin. Yes. Now, there was a check, there was a $250 cash down payment made on this $2,650. Then a check for $2,400; the check was stopped, payment on the check was stopped because of a letter written by William McKenzie saying that I had no authority to sign any contracts whatsoever for Marina, and that if they did use anything that I had sold them, litigation would follow immediately. So consequently they stopped payment on the check. I still have the check. It is still attached to the letter that was sent with it.

Mr. Dulles. Could I ask who is that check made out to?

Mr. Martin. Made out to me.

Mr. Dulles. To you as agent?

Mr. Martin. Yes.

Mr. Dulles. Or to you just in your name?

Mr. Martin. I think it is just made out to me.

Mr. Dulles. I don't know if it is important.

Mr. Leech. You go ahead and I'll find it.

Mr. Martin. Under the contract all checks were supposed to be made payable to me. Then I would deduct my fee and forward the balance to Marina.

Mr. Redlich. The next item on Commission Exhibit No. 325 refers to Meredith Press.

Mr. Martin. The Meredith Press is a book publisher with their main office in Des Moines, Iowa. I had talked with Mr. Ted Purdy at great length and on numerous occasions by phone. We had negotiated world book rights for Marina Oswald's story. For this Meredith Press would pay a $25,000 advance to her. Then on the first printing would be a 10 percent commission of the retail price of the book.

On the second printing would be 12½ percent commission, and on the third and succeeding printings it would be 15 percent commission.

Now, of course, the commissions were to be deducted from the advance.

Mr. Redlich. And this was to be her life story?

Mr. Martin. Yes.

Mr. Redlich. Had you discussed with Marina at all the contents of this book? Had you started making any preparations for writing?

Mr. Martin. No. I am not a writer, and wouldn't know the first thing to do about a book. But we had negotiated with one writer, Isaac Don Levine, who Meredith Press felt would be the best writer available for this type of book because of the Russian attachment.

Mr. Redlich. When you told us this morning of your initial concern over the Nixon shooting incident, did it relate to these various agreements that you have been working on concerning the sale of Marina Oswald's story?

Mr. Martin. Did it relate to them?

Mr. Redlich. Yes.

Mr. Martin. How do you mean?

Mr. Redlich. Were you concerned about the publicity, the effect of the publicity of the Nixon incident on these various agreements which you were negotiating at the time?

Mr. Martin. No. As a matter of fact, it would enhance the price of it.

For instance, the Post magazine, the Saturday Evening Post, said that they would like to buy American serial rights if there was something in Marina's story that the Commission did not know.

Mr. Redlich. When did they tell you this?

Mr. Martin. Around the first of the year I guess.

Mr. Redlich. Around the first of the year. Did Marina know about this?

Mr. Martin. No.

Mr. Redlich. This is the Saturday Evening Post you are talking about?

Mr. Martin. Yes. I talked to a Mr. Black.

Mr. Redlich. And the Saturday Evening Post said to you that they would buy the serial rights provided there was some information which would not be known to the Commission?

Mr. Martin. Yes. I told them there was no realm that would apply, and we closed negotiations.

Mr. Redlich. And you say you didn't relate this fact at all to Marina Oswald?

Mr. Martin. No.

Mr. Redlich. These negotiations with the Post.

Mr. Martin. No.

Mr. Redlich. Was there in fact to the best of your knowledge material which she did not in fact relate to this Commission?

Mr. Martin. Not to my knowledge other than the Nixon affair.

Mr. Redlich. And were you aware at the time she completed her testimony here that she had not related this information to the Commission?

Mr. Martin. Yes.

Mr. Redlich. Was there any connection between her failure to tell the Commission of the Nixon incident and the negotiations, the temporary negotiations that you had had with the Saturday Evening Post?

Mr. Martin. No, none whatsoever. That was closed off at least 30 days before she testified.

Mr. Redlich. Was there any attempt on your part or anyone acting on Marina Oswald's part that you know of to negotiate the sale of the information concerning the Nixon shooting incident?

Mr. Martin. No, not to my knowledge.

Mr. Redlich. When Marina—did Marina ever give you an explanation for why she did not tell the Commission about the Nixon incident?

Mr. Martin. No. I have never talked to her about that other than the first time that she told me about it. I asked John Thorne if she had mentioned it. I didn't discuss it with her.

Mr. Redlich. And since Marina Oswald's return from Washington after having testified here, you say you have never discussed the Nixon incident with Marina Oswald in any way?

Mr. Martin. No. I probably would have had there been sufficient time. Of course, she left my home the following day after she got back from Washington.

Mr. Redlich. When you say you probably would have, in what way?

Mr. Martin. Well, since she didn't mention it to the Commission, I feel the Commission should know about it.

Mr. Dulles. Did you know at this time she had not mentioned it to the Commission?

Mr. Martin. I asked John Thorne.

Mr. Dulles. Oh, you asked John Thorne?

Mr. Martin. Yes.

Mr. Redlich. What did John Thorne say?

Mr. Martin. Said she had not mentioned it.

Mr. Redlich. Did you ask John Thorne why she had not mentioned it?

Mr. Martin. No.

Mr. Redlich. Did John Thorne offer any information as to why she had not mentioned it?

Mr. Martin. No.

Mr. Redlich. Do you know whether John Thorne had urged her to mention it?

Mr. Martin. No.

Mr. Redlich. John Thorne was aware of the Nixon incident prior to Marina Oswald's appearance before this Commission, was he not?

Mr. Martin. Yes.

Mr. Redlich. Because you had apparently told him about that shortly after you learned about it in January.

Mr. Martin. Yes.

Mr. Redlich. Did you discuss the Nixon incident with Robert Oswald after Marina Oswald's appearance before this Commission in February?

Mr. Martin. No.

Mr. Redlich. You had not?

Mr. Martin. I don't know if I discussed it with him prior to the Commission's testimony or not. I may or I may not have. I don't know. I don't know whether I mentioned it to him or not.

Mr. Redlich. Coming back to Commission Exhibit No. 325, the next item under London Daily Mirror, am I correct in assuming that this is, that this item refers to the rifle photo which you discussed earlier in your testimony tonight?

Mr. Martin. Yes, that is right.

Mr. Redlich. Do you have anything to add with regard to that rifle photo that you have not already told us?

Mr. Martin. No.

Mr. Redlich. Did you discuss with Marina Oswald at any time this rifle photo and the circumstances under which it was taken.

Mr. Martin. I asked her at one time why he wanted a photograph taken of that type, and she said she didn't know. He just wanted pictures taken that way.

Mr. Redlich. Did she tell you when this photograph was taken in relationship to any other incidents such as the General Walker incident or the Richard Nixon incident?

Mr. Martin. No.

Mr. Redlich. Did you know where the photograph was taken?

Mr. Martin. I don't know, I don't even know if it was in Oak Cliff or not. I have an idea that it was in Oak Cliff but I don't know whether I know that or whether I have read it.

Mr. Redlich. When you say Oak Cliff, some of us don't live in Dallas.

Mr. Martin. It is a suburb of Dallas, a section of Dallas.

Mr. Redlich. Are you referring to the area where the Neely Street house was located?

To refresh your recollection, Mr. Martin, the Oswalds lived in two places in Dallas. One was on Elsbeth Street and the other on Neely. Are they both in Oak Cliff?

Mr. Martin. Yes, Elsbeth Street is right around the corner from Neely Street, I believe they lived in an apartment on Elsbeth.

It was a group of apartments in one building, and on Neely Street, I think, that was similar to a duplex.

Mr. Redlich. And you are not certain as to where this photograph which was the subject of these negotiations was taken?

Mr. Martin. No, except that the Elsbeth address, I believe, was a brick residence, I mean a brick apartment, it is a dark building, and the Neely Street address is a white building.

I believe the photo shows a white building.

Mr. Redlich. On the basis of that you would conclude the photograph was taken at which address?

Mr. Martin. At the Neely Street address.

Mr. Redlich. At the Neely Street address. When you were negotiating with various publications for this photograph, didn't anyone ask you when and where it was taken?

Mr. Martin. Yes, I told them that it was while they were living in Oak Cliff. I didn't say where or when.

Mr. Redlich. No one asked you.

Mr. Martin. And they apparently weren't concerned with the where or when.

Mr. Redlich. Did they ask you anything about the publication which Lee Oswald had in his hand?

Mr. Martin. Yes, and I told them that it was either the Militant or the Worker. I was not sure which one. I am not even sure whether either one.

Mr. Redlich. Your copy of the photograph did not indicate clearly which one it was?

Mr. Martin. Correct.

Mr. Redlich. Do you now know which one it was?

Mr. Martin. No.

Mr. Dulles. Are you sure it is one of the two?

Mr. Martin. No, I am not. I assume that it would be one of the two.

Mr. Redlich. For the record it is the Militant.

Mr. Dulles. It is?

Mr. Redlich. Is there anything about the circumstances of this photograph, including the rifle, the pistol, the time, the place, anything concerning this photograph that you have not told this Commission about which you have knowledge?

Mr. Martin. No.

Mr. Redlich. The last item on Commission Exhibit No. 325 is This Week magazine, $1,000. Could you tell us about that. At the conclusion of this list I will ask if there is anything else. We are now at This Week magazine.

Mr. Martin. When Marina was here in Washington, she had the press conference, and at the end of the press conference she mentioned, she made a statement "Now I go to church." On the way to the CBS studios we passed a Russian Orthodox Church, and she remarked about it, that she would like to come back and go inside, see what it looked like. Someone in This Week magazine caught that statement, and wanted to write a short article on Marina going to church, and that is what that is.

Mr. Redlich. What happened? Could you tell us how this article got written?

Mr. Martin. It hasn't been written.

Mr. Redlich. Did the reporter accompany Mrs. Oswald to church?

Mr. Martin. Oh, no. Actually when the television interview was over, we came back and went to the church, but the church was locked and we didn't get in at all. Now this contact was made after we left Washington. This Week magazine contacted us after, not while we were still here.

Mr. Redlich. And what was the subject matter of this article specifically supposed to be?

Mr. Martin. The title of it was supposed to be "I go to church," and it would be an article written on Marina going to church.

Mr. Redlich. Mr. Martin, the total figure on the bottom of Commission Exhibit No. 325 is $132,350. This presumably does not include any future royalties, is that correct?

Mr. Martin. That is correct.

Mr. Redlich. Have you made an estimate as to the total earnings which would accrue as a result of these contractual arrangements?

Mr. Martin. It should be approximately $300,000 at a maximum, depending on what American serial rights and British Commonwealth serial rights, Asiatic serial rights would bring.

Mr. Redlich. You say the maximum of $300,000?

Mr. Martin. I think so.

Mr. Leech. Of those contracts?

Mr. Redlich. That is what I am asking about are these.

Mr. Martin. Of these contracts, yes.

Mr. Redlich. Could you tell us about any other contractual arrangements that you have made or are negotiating on behalf of Marina Oswald?

Mr. Martin. There are no others. I will have to refer to things. We had an offer from Australia and also from New Zealand as far as this photograph is concerned. However, it was thrown to the wind by the Detroit Free Press, so they got it from Detroit Free Press, we have been offered—we have not received an offer. The Australian newspaper——

Mr. Dulles. Do you need these details do you think?

Mr. Redlich. I want to get the total figure, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Martin. Associated Newspapers Limited of Australia would like to have Australian rights to a book that Marina would write, and also the London Evening Standard would like to have the British rights, of course, to the picture of Lee Harvey Oswald.

Mr. Redlich. Mr. Martin, Mr. Thorne has indicated to this Commission that he estimated that Marina's earnings would approach approximately $500,000. Would you comment on that estimate?

Mr. Martin. I think it might be a little high. Of course, if you take into consideration she has $68,000, close to $70,000 in contributions alone, then the advances on this Exhibit No. 325, that is $200,000 right there. I think $500,000 might be just a little bit high.

Mr. Redlich. The final document I would like to show you is a photostat of a letter which you presented to the Commission today, purporting to be a letter written in Russian together with an English translation. It starts, the English translation starts with the words "As the widow of Lee Oswald." I show you Commission Exhibit No. 333 and ask you if this is a photostat of the letter which you submitted to the Commission this morning.

Mr. Martin. Yes, apparently so.

Mr. Dulles. Who is that letter to?

Mr. Redlich. We don't know yet.

Mr. Dulles. You don't know yet?

Mr. Redlich. I will develop that in the questioning. I mark this Commission Exhibit No. 333, being a Russian letter and what purports to be its English translation and ask that it be admitted in evidence.

Mr. Dulles. Can you identify that any further than just a Russian letter?

Mr. Redlich. On the top appears a date, and the day of the month is the 20th. I am unable to tell what month it is.

Mr. Martin. But the year is 1964, and the words "Dallas, Texas" then appear under the date.

Mr. Dulles. That helps identify it.

Mr. Redlich. I ask that it be admitted in evidence.

Mr. Dulles. Any objection?

Mr. Leech. No objection.

Mr. Dulles. It is admitted.

(The photostats of a Russian letter with an English translation were marked Commission Exhibit No. 333 for identification and received in evidence.)

Mr. Redlich. Mr. Martin, with your permission I would just summarize the contents of this letter, and if I have summarized it inaccurately, just say so. This letter requests that the death penalty not be applied to Jack Ruby, the person who has been charged with the murder of Lee Harvey Oswald. Is that inaccurate?

Mr. Martin. No; that is correct.

Mr. Redlich. That is a correct summary of the contents of the letter?

Mr. Martin. Yes.

Mr. Redlich. Do you recall to whom that letter was written?

Mr. Martin. She originally wrote the letter to Melvin Belli.

Mr. Redlich. By "she" you mean Marina Oswald?

Mr. Martin. Marina. I advised her against——

Mr. Redlich. Melvin Belli?

Mr. Martin. Is the attorney for Jack Ruby. I advised her against such an action, because of the possibility of the letter itself in translating from Russian to English being misinterpreted and used in a manner that might be derogatory to Marina Oswald. I suggested that she send this letter to Henry Wade who would be the prosecutor in the case. Now whether she changed the salutation on the letter I don't know. I can't read Russian. And the salutation was not translated in the translation. The translation was made by Katya Ford.

Mr. Redlich. To the best of your knowledge has this letter ever been sent to anyone?

Mr. Martin. No sir, it hasn't.

Mr. Dulles. You say it has not been?

Mr. Martin. It has not been.

Mr. Dulles. That is your belief or you have knowledge that it has not been?

Mr. Martin. I have the original. Now if a letter has been sent, it would be a different letter.

Mr. Redlich. On the basis of your knowledge of Marina Oswald's handwriting, would you tell the Commission whether you believe that this letter is in her handwriting?

Mr. Martin. Yes, it is. I also observed her writing the letter.

Mr. Redlich. Are you aware of the fact that Marina Oswald discussed this letter when she appeared before this Commission?

Mr. Martin. I believe you mentioned it sometime today.

Mr. Redlich. Were you aware of it prior to your coming here?

Mr. Martin. No.

Mr. Redlich. Do you know why it has not been sent?

Mr. Martin. She decided that it was best not to be sent unless she actually thought that Ruby was going to get the death penalty. Actually a letter like that should go to the Governor of the State.

Mr. Redlich. Mr. Martin, do you have any additional information concerning the assassination of President Kennedy, Marina Oswald, or the assassination of her husband Lee Harvey Oswald which you would like to present before this Commission at this time?

Mr. Martin. No, I don't think so. Nothing.

Mr. Redlich. If it would be helpful for the work of this Commission for you to return to Washington and appear again before this Commission, would you be willing to do so?

Mr. Martin. Yes, sir.

Mr. Redlich. Mr. Chairman, I have no further questions of this witness, unless Mr. Rankin does or you do.

Mr. Dulles. I would just like to ask a question about this letter I am just glancing over. Where did this letter paper come from? Is that some personal paper with a tree on it?

Mr. Martin. Yes. I bought that.

Mr. Dulles. You bought it for her?

Mr. Martin. At a drug store, yes, sir, at a drug store in Arlington.

Mr. Dulles. Is this another draft or is this just a copy?

Mr. Martin. This is the original of the copy.

Mr. Redlich. We have photographed what is now Commission Exhibit No. 333 and we are keeping the photostat. Mr. Martin, you will recall that at the start of today's proceedings Chief Justice Warren read into the record a copy of the letter which you received requesting certain notes, records, documents in connection with today's hearing. Have you made available to the Commission all of the material which was requested in that letter?

Mr. Martin. Yes, sir; I went through everything I had at home, and could find nothing else.

Mr. Redlich. If you should find anything else which you inadvertently failed to bring before this Commission, will you mail it to us for examination and we will return it to you.

Mr. Martin. Yes, sir; there is a Worker that I have.

Mr. Redlich. You mean by Worker the Daily Worker?

Mr. Martin. Yes. I think they dropped the "Daily."

Mr. Dulles. They are no longer daily.

Mr. Martin. It is called the Worker now. It has quite a lengthy article about Marina in it, and I will send that to you.

Mr. Redlich. And you will send anything that you may come across which you may have inadvertently failed to produce before this Commission?

Mr. Martin. Yes, sir.

Mr. Redlich. I have no further questions, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Dulles. There were some questions that Senator Cooper had suggested. I don't know, have you looked those over? Have they been covered?

Mr. Rankin. Yes.

Mr. Redlich. Those have been covered.

Mr. Dulles. All been covered?

Mr. Redlich. Yes.

Mr. Dulles. Did Marina ever express to you her opinion as to the guilt or innocence of her husband in connection with the assassination of the President?

Mr. Martin. Yes.

Mr. Dulles. What did she say?

Mr. Martin. She believes he was guilty. She believes he did it, and the first time she said it I questioned her as to why she thought he did it, and she said she just felt it. It was a woman's intuition. She didn't know the word intuition at that time. I had to look it up in the Russian-English Dictionary.

Mr. Dulles. Did she indicate any view as to whether he did it alone or had an accomplice or accomplices?

Mr. Martin. She remarked about the Walker incident, that that was definitely done alone, and that he always was alone. He never did anything with anyone else. I don't recall that she mentioned that specifically in the case of the assassination of the President. But she had made that remark before or during the interim about Walker.

Mr. Dulles. Did she ever at any time express to you any interest in returning to the Soviet Union or her desire to stay in the United States?

Mr. Martin. Well, she has always said that she wanted to stay in the United States. One time she said that she thought she would go back to Russia, and I asked her why and she said, well, she was just joking.

Mr. Dulles. Did she ever refer to you any letters she wrote to the Soviet Embassy with regard to a desire to return?

Mr. Martin. No. There was only one incident that she told me about was a letter to a friend in Russia.

Mr. Dulles. You mentioned that I think.

Mr. Martin. Yes.

Mr. Dulles. The one that she didn't put enough stamps on, enough postage on.

Mr. Martin. Yes, it came back "insufficient postage."

Mr. Dulles. Did she ever mention to you any names of any friends or associates of her husband that had not been discussed here at one time or another in this testimony, including the list of names that was read out to you?

Mr. Martin. No.

Mr. Dulles. Do you know any other friends that Marina has other than those that have been discussed in this testimony?

Mr. Martin. No. I was trying to think a while ago about that, and I can't think of anyone else.

Mr. Dulles. That is all I have.

Mr. Redlich. Mr. Leech, would you like to ask Mr. Martin any questions at this time?

Mr. Leech. Not a word.

Mr. Dulles. Mr. Rhyne? Mr. Rankin, have you any further questions?

Mr. Rankin. Mr. Chairman, I merely wish to thank him for appearing voluntarily.

Mr. Dulles. I do thank you for coming and responding so fully to our questions.

Mr. Martin. Anything I can do.

Mr. Dulles. And if anything occurs to you or to your counsel as sometimes happens later, we will be very glad if you or your counsel will bring it to our attention.

Mr. Martin. Yes, sir; I certainly will.

Mr. Redlich. May I before we adjourn ask another question?

Mr. Dulles. Certainly.

Mr. Redlich. Have you ever discussed with Mrs. Marguerite Oswald the question of the guilt or innocence of Lee Harvey Oswald?

Mr. Martin. No. The only time I was in contact with Marguerite Oswald was at the Inn of the Six Flags in Arlington, Tex., and I don't believe I really discussed anything with her. I was more on the sidelines and didn't enter into any discussions with her at all.

Mr. Redlich. And have you discussed with Robert Oswald the question of the guilt or innocence of Lee Harvey Oswald?

Mr. Martin. Yes. Let's see, on one occasion the article by Mark Lane, I think it was in the National Observer, was printed in the National Observer, and I called Robert's attention to that. I believe he cited 15 points where he believed that Lee Oswald was innocent, and I remarked to Robert that in nearly 100 percent of those points they were just completely out of line. The brief I believe was taken from newspaper accounts, from various newspaper accounts of the assassination, and a number of them contradicted each other.

Mr. Redlich. Did Robert Oswald comment on this?

Mr. Martin. No.

Mr. Redlich. For the record I believe the publication you are referring to is the National Guardian.

Mr. Martin. The National Guardian, yes.

Mr. Redlich. Is that your recollection now?

Mr. Martin. Yes, National Guardian.

Mr. Redlich. And Robert Oswald had no comment on this?

Mr. Martin. No.

Mr. Redlich. We have no further questions.

Mr. Dulles. The Commission will stand adjourned, subject to call.

(Whereupon, at 10:20 p.m., the President's Commission recessed.)

---

[Wednesday, March 4, 1964]
TESTIMONY OF MARK LANE

The President's Commission met at 2:30 p.m., on March 4, 1964, at 200 Maryland Avenue NE., Washington, D.C.

Present were Chief Justice Earl Warren, Chairman; Senator John Sherman Cooper and Representative Gerald R. Ford, members.

Also present were J. Lee Rankin, general counsel; Norman Redlich, assistant counsel; Charles Murray and Charles Rhyne, assistants to Walter E. Craig.

The Chairman. The Commission will be in order.

The Commission has been informed that Mr. Lane has collected numerous materials relevant to the Commission's work.

The Commission proposes to question Mr. Lane on all matters of which he has knowledge concerning the assassination of President Kennedy and the subsequent killing of Lee Harvey Oswald, and to request of Mr. Lane that he make available to the Commission any documentary material in his possession which can assist the Commission in its work.

In accordance with the rules of this Commission, Mr. Lane has been furnished with a copy of this statement.

Mr. Lane, would please rise and be sworn? Do you solemnly swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?

Mr. Lane. I do.

The Chairman. Will you be seated, please.

Mr. Rankin, would you proceed with the examination, please?

Mr. Rankin. Mr. Lane, will you state your name?

Mr. Lane. My name is Mark Lane.

Mr. Rankin. Where do you live?

Mr. Lane. 164 West 79th Street, New York City, New York State.

Mr. Rankin. Are you a practicing lawyer?

Mr. Lane. Yes; I am.

Mr. Rankin. Will you state your age, please?

Mr. Lane. I am 37 years old.

Mr. Rankin. How long have you been practicing law?

Mr. Lane. Thirteen years.

Mr. Rankin. You have qualified in the State of New York?

Mr. Lane. Yes.

Mr. Rankin. Are you qualified in any other Jurisdiction?

Mr. Lane. Just in the Federal court.

Mr. Rankin. Do you have some information concerning the matters being investigated by the Commission that you would like to present to the Commission?

Mr. Lane. Yes; I do.

Mr. Rankin. Will you proceed to do so?

Mr. Lane. Yes.

I wonder if I might ask at the outset if I will be able to secure a copy of the transcript of my testimony tomorrow, or is that going to be rushing things?

The Chairman. You will be able to obtain it. I don't know whether we can promise it to you tomorrow morning or not. But we will do it just as quickly as it can be transcribed by the reporter.

Mr. Lane. Thank you, sir.

At the outset, I would like to request that this portion of the hearing, in any event, be opened to the public. I think that there are matters here of grave concern to all the people of our country, and that it would, therefore, be fruitful and constructive for the sessions to be conducted in a public fashion, open to the public and to the press.

Accordingly, I request that this session at least involving my testimony be so opened to the public.

The Chairman. You would have a right, as any witness would have, to request that, Mr. Lane. We will conduct this in an open hearing. We will adjourn at this time to the auditorium downstairs, and we will conduct the hearing there. It will be open to the public. I saw a good many members of the press around, so it will really be a public affair.

(Whereupon, at 2:45 p.m., the Commission recessed and then reconvened in the auditorium in open session.)

---

[TESTIMONY OF MARK LANE RESUMED IN OPEN SESSION]

The Chairman. The Commission will be in order.

The Commission convened in our committee room on the fourth floor.

A reporter has been appointed.

Mr. Lane has been sworn.

Mr. Lane has stated that he would like to give his testimony at a public hearing. I explained to him that that was thoroughly agreeable to the Commission. The Commission does not operate in a secret way. Any witness who desires to have his—give his testimony in public may do so.

We have done it in the quiet of our rooms for the convenience of witnesses, and in order to accelerate the program. But any witness who desires to have his testimony recorded at a public hearing may do so.

The purpose of this Commission is, of course, eventually to make known to the President, and to the American public everything that has transpired before this Commission. All of it will be made available at the appropriate time. The records of the work of the Commission will be preserved for the public. So, Mr. Lane, we will be happy to accommodate you, and to proceed with our hearing.

Now, Mr. Rankin will conduct the examination.

(Having been previously duly sworn.)

Mr. Rankin. Mr. Lane, will you proceed to tell the Commission whatever you have that would bear upon this investigation? Start item by item, and give us whatever you have in support.

Mr. Lane. Yes, sir.

At the outset, I would like to call to the Commission's attention a matter which is somewhat peripheral, perhaps, and should the Commission determine it does not wish to hear my testimony in that regard, I will understand that. But I would like to call it to your attention, because although it is peripheral I think it is related to both the assassination and the investigation into the assassination of the President.

That is in relationship to a picture which has been widely publicized, probably in every single community of our country, allegedly showing Lee Harvey Oswald holding in his hand a rifle which has been described in at least one publication, Life magazine, as the weapon with which he assassinated President Kennedy.

I would like to indicate to the Commission at this time that the pictures which have been distributed throughout the country included doctored and forged photographs. I would like to present evidence to the Commission at this time in that regard.

I ask the Commission if it does conclude that the photographs have been doctored, whether it will consider determining whether or not a crime has been committed, or an effort has been made to submit evidence to the Commission members, though not directly through the press, from magazines, which evidence——

The Chairman. I didn't get that last sentence—something about the Commission?

Mr. Lane. I am asking the Commission if it does conclude that the pictures have been doctored, to consider investigating the method by which the doctoring took place, who was responsible, and whether or not an effort has been made to influence the members of the Commission, while not directly, through the publication of this picture, which certainly has been circulated very widely throughout our country.

The Chairman. You may be sure, Mr. Lane, that anything you present in that regard will be thoroughly considered by the Commission.

Mr. Lane. Thank you, sir.

I would like to offer the February 21, 1964 issue of Life magazine.

Mr. Rankin. Will you mark that, Mr. Reporter, please, the next number.

Mr. Lane. A picture appears on the entire cover of Life magazine, and an identical picture appears in the interior pages, at page 80. The caption on the cover reads, "Lee Oswald with the weapons he used to kill President Kennedy and Officer Tippit."

I think it is quite plain from looking at both of the pictures that there appears on the rifle, what appears to be a rifle in the left hand of Lee Harvey Oswald, a telescopic sight.

Mr. Rankin. Mr. Lane, we will mark that Exhibit No. 334.

(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 334, for identification.)

Mr. Lane. Next I would like to offer a picture which is a glossy 8½-by-11 picture, of a photograph published in the New York Times, secured by the New York Times from the Associated Press.

Representative Ford. Is there any verification of the fact that that is as you have identified it?

Mr. Lane. That is what—a picture secured——

Representative Ford. From the New York Times, which in turn had acquired it from the Associated Press?

Mr. Lane. Well, that is a statement which I have made under oath, and it can be verified with the New York Times.

Mr. Rankin. That is Exhibit 335 that you are just referring to, Mr. Lane.

(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 335, for identification.)

Mr. Lane. I suggest that is the identical picture with the one published on the cover of Life magazine, Exhibit 334, in every respect, including the creases in the trousers, the background, with the exception of the rifle in the hands of Oswald, which appears to have no telescopic scope in Exhibit 335.

In addition, there clearly has been some other doctoring of the photograph around the head of Lee Harvey Oswald, and the trees and other background material over his left shoulder have been removed from the Associated Press picture, but are present in the Life magazine picture.

Shadows and fenceposts which can be observed between the legs of Lee Harvey Oswald in Exhibit 335 have been removed in the Life magazine picture. I would like to offer this picture as the next exhibit.

Mr. Rankin. That will be marked Exhibit 336.

(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 336 for identification.)

Mr. Rankin. Will you tell us what that is, Mr. Lane?

Mr. Lane. Yes; 336 is an 8½-by-11 glossy photograph of a picture appearing in Newsweek magazine, March 2, 1964, credited by Newsweek magazine to the Detroit Free Press. I would suggest that that is an identical picture with the other two pictures in every respect, except that it has no telescopic sight on the rifle, and there is a great deal of metallic materials present on that rifle clearly not present in the other two pictures.

The Chairman. Did you say metallics?

Mr. Lane. Metallics.

Mr. Rankin. Will you tell us what you mean by that, Mr. Lane?

Mr. Lane. Yes. Just below the hand, the left hand of Lee Harvey Oswald, there is clearly visible a series of pieces of metal, allegedly part of the rifle, which are in no way clear—which are in no way present in the other pictures.

The Chairman. I see.

Mr. Lane. To make that clearer, I would like to offer Exhibit 337, which is an enlargement of the picture 335, the New York Times picture.

(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 337, for identification.)

Mr. Lane. This enlarges the area on the rifle just below what is allegedly Oswald's left hand. It clearly shows an absolute absence of all of the metallic material present in the Newsweek photo, 336.

This is a front page of the New York Journal American dated February 18, 1964, which is an identical picture with the one published in Life magazine, Exhibit 334, and the credit lines appearing on that publication indicate that the picture has been secured from the Associated Press through the Detroit Free Press.

(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 338, for identification.)

Mr. Lane. That picture has a telescopic sight, and is not the picture in terms of the metal material on the rifle which Newsweek stated they secured through the Detroit Free Press, and is not the picture without the telescopic sight which the New York Times states that it secured through the Associated Press. In any event, I would like to submit a picture procured from Worldwide Photos.

Mr. Rankin. 339.

(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 339, for identification.)

Mr. Lane. This is allegedly a picture taken in the Dallas Police Station, showing the alleged murder weapon.

The Chairman. That is No. 339, Mr. Lane?

Mr. Lane. Yes, sir, and I would call the Commission's attention to the curved line of the stock present in Exhibit 339, and obviously absent from every other picture, indicating that in no event is the rifle allegedly in the hands of Lee Oswald, in Exhibits 334 through 338 comparable to the alleged murder weapon as shown in the Dallas police station.

And should the Commission decide to investigate the obviously doctored pictures that have been circulated so widely in our country, I would refer the Commission investigators to the Times Picayune of New Orleans, published on November 24, 1963, in which an Associated Press story indicated that the Dallas police chief, Jesse Curry, stated that he had in his possession photographs found in the home of Lee Harvey Oswald's Russian-born wife which linked Oswald with the rifle used in the assassination of President Kennedy. Curry said in the article attributed to Curry——

Mr. Rankin. Do you wish to make that a part of the record?

Mr. Lane. Yes.

Mr. Rankin. That will be Exhibit 340.

(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 340 for identification.)

Mr. Lane. The article attributes a statement to Curry indicating that he, the Dallas Police Chief, found the pictures in the suburban Irving, Tex., home in which Marina Oswald lived, and stated that Mr. Curry had said that the pictures will be used in evidence in Oswald's murder trial. This was published, I assume, prior to the time that Oswald was himself killed on that day.

Representative Ford. Would the date of the paper be on the back side?

The Chairman. It is on the front. November 24th.

Mr. Lane. I would like to offer this as an exhibit.

Mr. Rankin. This is marked Commission Exhibit 341.

(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 341, for identification.)

Mr. Lane. Exhibit 341 is a page or portion of a page of the New York Times, on Sunday, December 8, with a picture of the alleged murder weapon, secured, according to the credit line under the picture, from the United Press International, indicating clearly that that rifle is not the rifle allegedly being held by Mr. Oswald in any of the pictures so widely circulated throughout our country.

Mr. Rankin. On what do you base that last conclusion, Mr. Lane? Would you point out to the Commission the differences as you see them?

Mr. Lane. Yes; the reference of the stock. The stock has a clearly curved and bent line in this picture.

Mr. Rankin. That is in Exhibit 341?

Mr. Lane. Yes, and it is present in none of the pictures of Oswald holding the rifle; 336, for example, in Newsweek magazine shows almost a straight stock. Some of them show even an absolutely straight stock.

Exhibit 335 from the New York Times shows a perfectly straight stock—which is not only a stock unlike this particular Italian 6.5 millimeter carbine, but is a stock I believe unlike any rifle stock produced during the 20th century, and possibly the 19th century, anywhere. Rifle experts seem to agree that every stock must have in it some break, so that it is possible to place your hand around the rifle while your finger holds the trigger. And there is no break in the doctored photographs, in the stock portrayed on the doctored photographs.

I have checked many rifle catalogs. This is not my field, and I don't qualify as an expert. But I have checked many rifle catalogs, and have only seen rifles with a break where the stock becomes narrow enough for one's hand to grasp it while pulling the trigger.

Mr. Rankin. Is that the basis of your opinion that you have just given, that it doesn't have a break in it, and that other rifles for any period later than you have described do?

Mr. Lane. Well, several persons who have described themselves as rifle experts have made that statement to me.

Mr. Rankin. Who are those?

Mr. Lane. I believe I have some of their names here. I don't have the names of those who have called, but I can secure that at our first break by a telephone call to my office.

Mr. Rankin. Would you furnish that then?

Mr. Lane. Surely. In any event, whether there was another rifle or not, the rifle portrayed in the picture is clearly—in the picture in which Oswald is allegedly holding the rifle—clearly is not the rifle allegedly claimed to be the murder weapon. I wonder if I might ask the Commission if it might produce the rifle now, so that we might compare the actual rifle with the pictures.

The Chairman. We will do that in due course. But we don't have the rifle here now, Mr. Lane. We will make the proper comparisons, you may be sure, with experts.

Mr. Lane. Now, on another peripheral matter—unless there are any further questions in relation to this matter——

Mr. Rankin. No, you may proceed. Do you have negatives of these pictures you have produced?

Mr. Lane. No. I am glad you asked that question, because I can now relate to you about a conversation that I had 2 or 3 days ago with a Mr. Dirksen, who is on the photo desk of the Associated Press. I called Mr. Dirksen and asked him for a glossy of the picture which the Associated Press sent out over the wire service.

Mr. Rankin. Could you identify Mr. Dirksen a little more clearly?

Mr. Lane. He just told me he was employed. I called the Associated Press in New York City and asked for the photo desk, Mr. Dirksen answered and said he was employed there. I asked him what his specific position was there, and he declined to give me that information. He said he didn't think it was relevant.

In any event, I asked him if he could secure for me a glossy, a glossy copy of the picture sent by the Associated Press over the wires. And I described the picture as the one of Oswald allegedly holding the murder weapon in his left hand, and having on his right hip a pistol, allegedly the pistol with which he slew Officer Tippit.

Mr. Dirksen stated to me that he could not make a glossy of that picture available to me and I pointed out to him that in the past the Associated Press had been most cooperative when I asked for pictures, and he said, "Yes, we sent a whole batch up to you last week, didn't we?" I said, "Yes, you did, I appreciated that. I wonder why this picture is being treated differently from other pictures." He said, "This is not a normal picture and this is not the normal situation."

I asked him what he meant by that. He explained that there was a special contract—he did not have all the details, he said, because he is not one of the persons who was involved in drafting the contract—but there was a special contract between the Associated Press and the source of this picture, and they agreed, the Associated Press agreed in this contract that they would not make a glossy available to anyone, that they would send the pictures out only to their subscribers, and that no one else would be allowed to see the picture.

I said if that was the understanding, I certainly would not wish to have them breach their agreement, and asked if instead he would make the name of the source known to me, so that I might go directly to the source and see if I might secure the picture in that fashion. He stated he could not do that, because one of the other stipulations in the contract would be that they could not reveal the name of the source of the picture.

I discussed this with an employee of the New York Times thereafter, since I knew that the New York Times was a subscriber to the services made available by the Associated Press.

Mr. Rankin. Could you identify that employee, please?

Mr. Lane. No, I am not going to be able to discuss sources, obviously, here, I am sorry.

But this employee indicated to me thereafter that an inquiry had been made by the New York Times to the Associated Press along the same lines as the inquiry which I had made, in terms of trying to determine the source of the Associated Press picture. And I was informed by this employee of the New York Times that the Associated Press declined to name the source of the picture, even when the New York Times made a request. Therefore, I do not have the negative, and I do not know the source of the picture.

Mr. Rankin. Is that true with regard to all of the pictures that you produced?

Mr. Lane. My office called Life magazine, and asked someone at Life magazine on the photo desk, the editorial department, if a picture could be made available and they stated that they would not make a glossy available—it was their policy in reference to all pictures in their possession.

Those are the only inquiries I made with reference to the source of the pictures.

Mr. Rankin. Now you may proceed.

Mr. Lane. Yes. I would like to raise one other peripheral matter before going into the evidence, if I might. That is, I would like to call to the attention of the Commission this article, and ask that it be marked as an exhibit.

Mr. Rankin. That has been marked Commission Exhibit 342.

(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 342, for identification.)

Mr. Lane. Thank you.

This is an article appearing in the New York Journal American Sunday, February 23.

Mr. Rankin. This consists of two separate pages, does it not?

Mr. Lane. It does—the first page being a masthead and front page, headline from the Journal American, dated Sunday, February 23, 1964, and the second page containing a portion of the front page of the Journal American on that date, and a portion of page 15, the continued story of the Journal American on the same date.

This is an article written by Bob Considine, who enjoys a reputation for being an excellent reporter. Mr. Considine states in his article that an eyewitness to the shooting of Officer Tippit by the name of Warren Reynolds was himself recently shot through the head by a man with a rifle.

Now, I don't believe that it is alleged that Reynolds actually saw the person pull the trigger which sent the bullets at Officer Tippit. As I understand it, Mr. Reynolds has stated that he, Reynolds, heard the shot, the shooting, left his office and saw a man running away, placing new shells into a pistol as he ran away. And Mr. Considine indicates that Reynolds thereafter identified Oswald as the person who was running from the scene.

This article indicated that during January, Mr. Reynolds was himself shot through the head with a rifle, and that he is in the hospital—I believe he was in the hospital at that time. I don't know what the state of his health is at the present time.

Mr. Considine indicates that a person was picked up in the Dallas area and charged with the shooting, but that someone who Mr. Considine refers to as "his girl"—I assume he is making reference to the gentleman who was charged with the attack upon Reynolds—testified in such a fashion, and took a lie detector test, so that the person charged with the crime was released.

This person, Betty Mooney MacDonald, who helped to free her friend, according to Mr. Considine, herself had worked as a stripper in the Carousel Club in Dallas, owned by Jack Ruby.

Two weeks before this article was written, Miss MacDonald was herself arrested for a fight with her roommate, and the week before the article was written, Mr. Considine states she hanged herself in her cell.

I would request the Commission to investigate into these series of most unusual coincidences, to see if they have any bearing upon the basic matter pending before the Commission.

The Chairman. It may be introduced as are all of these pictures, admitted.

(The documents heretofore marked for identification as Commission Exhibits Nos. 334 to 342, were received in evidence.)

Mr. Lane. In the course of my investigation, I have come across some material which would be relevant only if I was first able to examine the rifle, quite frankly. I wonder if that might be able to be accomplished sometime during the day?

The Chairman. During the day?

Mr. Lane. Today, if possible.

The Chairman. Well, I think not, because we don't have it. But we will make it available to you, though, at the very first opportunity, Mr. Lane.

Mr. Lane. Fine. Then I will reserve my comment in reference to the rifle for that occasion.

The Chairman. You may.

Mr. Lane. Thank you. I would like to, on behalf of Lee Harvey Oswald, make this information available to the Commission.

It, of course, has been alleged by the chief of police of Dallas, and by the district attorney of Dallas that Oswald was present on the sixth floor of the Texas Book Depository Building during the very early afternoon of November 22, 1963, and that from that area he fired an Italian carbine, 6.5 millimeters, three times, twice striking the President of the United States, wounding him fatally, and injuring the Governor of Texas by striking him with a bullet, on one occasion.

The physician who signed the death certificate of the President pronouncing him dead was Dr. Kemp Clark, whose name appeared on the official homicide report filed by the Dallas Police Department, and attested to by two police officers.

On the 27th of November, the New York Times reported, "Dr. Kemp Clark, who pronounced Mr. Kennedy dead, said one bullet struck him at about the necktie knot, 'It ranged downward in his chest and did not exit' the surgeon said."

On the same day the New York Herald Tribune stated, "On the basis of accumulated data, investigators have concluded that the first shot fired as the Presidential car was approaching, struck the President in the neck, just above the knot of his necktie, then ranged downward into his body."

According to Richard Dudman—Mr. Dudman is the Washington correspondent, as I am sure you all know better than I, for the St. Louis Post-Dispatch—according to him, the surgeons who attended the President while he was at the Parkland Memorial Hospital, described the wound—were in agreement in describing the wound in the throat as an entrance wound. The St. Louis Post-Dispatch on December 1 carried a rather long and involved story by Mr. Dudman, recounting his conversations with the physicians who were treating the President on the 22d at the Parkland Memorial Hospital.

Dr. Perry explained that he began to open an air passage in the President's throat in an effort to restore his breathing, and he explained that the incision had been made through the bullet wound in the President's throat—since that was in the correct place for the operation, in any event. Dr. Perry, according to Mr. Dudman, described to him the bullet hole as an entrance wound.

Dr. Robert N. McClelland, who was one of the three physicians who participated in that operation, later stated to Mr. Dudman, "It certainly did look like an entrance wound."

He went on to say that he saw bullet wounds every day in Dallas, sometimes several times a day, and that this did appear to be an entrance wound.

One doctor made reference to the frothing of blood in the neck wound. The doctor said, "He is bubbling air." Two of the doctors, Drs. Peters and Baxter, inserted a tube into the right upper part of the President's chest, just below the shoulder, to reexpand the lungs, and to keep them from collapsing.

Dr. Jones and Dr. Perry inserted a similar tube on the left portion of the President's chest.

The activity was necessitated because the bubbling air was the first clue that they had that the President's lung had been punctured.

The prosecuting authorities, confronted with what seemed then to be evidence that the President had been shot from the front, in the throat——

The Chairman. Are you reading now, Mr. Lane?

Mr. Lane. No, I am just making reference to this. That is not a quote.

The Chairman. It is not a quote. You are just paraphrasing what was in this article of Mr. Dudman's?

Mr. Lane. No, I am leaving Mr. Dudman now, and going on to statements made by the prosecuting authorities. I will submit quotations—I will try to remember to place quotation marks when I have a quotation.

The Chairman. Yes, all right.

Mr. Lane. The authorities who were confronted with what seemed to be irrefutable evidence that the President had been shot in the front of the throat, concluded that the Presidential limousine was approaching the Book Depository Building when the first shot was fired, because it seems at the very outset a theory was developed by the prosecuting authorities that Oswald was on the sixth floor of the Book Depository Building, that he was the assassin, and that he acted alone.

I think that the record and an examination of the activities of the Dallas police, and the Dallas district attorney's office, will show that the only area where they have been consistent from the outset was once this theory was enunciated, they stayed with the theory, and they were devoted to the theory, regardless of the discovery of new evidence and new facts.

For example, the New York Times stated on November 26, 1963, "The known facts about the bullets, and the position of the assassin, suggested that he started shooting as the President's car was coming toward him, swung his rifle in an arc of almost 180°, and fired at least twice more." At that time, the prosecution case had already been developed in terms of the theory that Oswald was the assassin and that Oswald acted alone.

There were newspaper pictures published in many portions of the country showing the Textbook Depository Building on Houston Street where the Presidential limousine approached the Book Depository Building, and Elm Street, where after the limousine made a sharp left turn it continued until it reached the underpass directly ahead.

And in these newspapers, there were superimposed dotted lines showing the trajectory of the three bullets, showing that the first bullet was fired while the Presidential car was still on Houston Street, still approaching the Book Depository Building.

However, it soon became essential for the prosecution to abandon that theory, because the eyewitnesses present, including Governor Connally, and Mrs. Connally, stated that the limousine had already made a left turn, had passed the Book Depository Building at the time that the first shot was fired.

In essence, then, the prosecution remained with the theory that Oswald, while acting alone, shot the President from the front from the back.

However,——

Mr. Rankin. I don't understand that.

Mr. Lane. I don't understand that either, but this was the theory of the prosecution—that the President had—it had been conceded at that time that the President had been shot in the front of the throat. However, the evidence then developed indicated that the Presidential limousine had already passed the Book Depository Building, and the President was not facing the Book Depository Building when the first shot was fired. At that time, Life magazine explains it all in a full page article entitled, "An End to Nagging Rumors, the 6 Crucial Seconds."

And Life conceded that the limousine was some 50 yards past Oswald when the first shot was fired, and that the shot entered the President's throat from the front, but explained that the President had turned completely around and was facing the Book Depository Building when the shot was fired.

But that theory, however, could not——

Mr. Rankin. Do you have the date of that article?

Mr. Lane. That was December 6, Life magazine. The full page article was entitled "End to Nagging Rumors, the Six Critical Seconds."

The problem——

Senator Cooper. May I ask a question there—just to clarify? Did you say that in this article that Life said that the late President had turned around and was facing the Book Depository Building when the shot was fired?

Mr. Lane. Yes, Senator. The trouble with that theory, however, which was enunciated by Life, and from where they secured it I do not know, but they certainly were in Dallas very much in evidence on the scene—was that the week prior to then Life magazine itself printed the stills of the motion pictures, and in those stills, with Life's own captions, it was quite plain that the President was looking almost completely forward, just slightly to the right, but almost forward, and certainly not turned around when the first shot was fired. And so the stills printed in Life's own publication a week before they enunciated this theory proved that the Life theory was false.

In addition to this, persons present on the scene, such witnesses as Mrs. Connally and the Governor of Texas, indicated that the President was looking almost straight ahead. And I believe that Mrs. Connally stated that she had just made a statement to the President, tragically enough, something about, "You cannot say the people of Dallas have not given you a warm welcome today," and he was about to respond when the first bullet struck him.

In order for the prosecution to remain with the theory in the light of the new evidence that Oswald was the assassin and he acted alone, something would have to give, and it became plain that the third try would have to result in a new examination of the medical testimony.

Mr. Dudman stated that the doctors at Parkland Hospital, who had, of course, this vital evidence to offer, were never questioned about the vital evidence by the FBI or by the Secret Service, and that it was not until after an autopsy had been performed at Bethesda, that two Secret Service agents, armed with that report, journeyed down to the Parkland Hospital and talked to the doctors, for the purpose of explaining to them that the new medical testimony and evidence indicated they were all in error at the outset. And, eventually, that was the position agreed to by the physicians, that they all had been in error when they stated that it was an entrance wound in the throat.

Physicians seem to agree that a short period of time after death, as a result of the deterioration of tissue, it is much more difficult to examine wounds to determine if they are entrance wounds or exit wounds.

In addition to this, according to Mr. Dudman in the Post Dispatch there had been an operation performed on what the doctors thought then was an entrance wound; therefore, it would seem altering the wound in the throat so that it would probably be more difficult to determine if it were an entrance or an exit wound, after the operation had been completed.

However, I do not know, of course, what is in the autopsy report—very likely you have seen that report—but portions of it, whether accurately or inaccurately, have been leaked to the public through the press. And the portion which has been leaked to the press, to the public through the press, in reference to the wound in the President's throat, indicated that the bullet struck the back of the President's head, and either a fragment of the bullet or a fragment of bone from the President's head exited at the throat.

If this were so, while it could explain perhaps the wound in the throat, it would be difficult to understand why this was not apparent to the doctors in the Parkland Hospital, particularly in view of the fact that it would indicate that the path of the bullet ran from the top of the head down to the throat, not from the throat down to the back of the chest, a very different path entirely.

And since Dr. Perry indicated that he inserted a tube into the President's throat following the bullet wound, it would be difficult to understand how he was not aware of the path of the bullet, when it was absolutely in the opposite direction from the one he thought it was in when he inserted the tube.

Most remarkable of all, though, is that if the bullet entered the top of the head, and a portion of it or a portion of bone exited from the throat, the collapse of the lungs and the frothing of air at the throat are both indications of a punctured lung—it would be difficult to explain by that particular bullet's path.

I think that an openminded investigating and prosecuting agency would have found, at the outset, in view of the medical evidence available at the outset, that the President was shot from the front while facing slightly to the right, and after passing the book depository building—an openminded investigating body in Dallas, the district attorney's office or the police, or others who were associated in that investigation, might have considered abandoning their theory that Oswald was the assassin and that he acted alone, and might have been led by the factual data to investigate in other areas as well—clearly something that they did not do.

I have been informed by reporters, for example, that—reporters from foreign countries covering the trial, that some of them were very concerned about the fact that they would now not be able to leave Dallas, that clearly the airports would be closed, there would be roadblocks placed on many of the streets, the trains would be stopped or searched, in order that the assassin or those who assisted him, or those who assisted the assassins, might be prevented from readily leaving the entire area.

I am informed by the reporters in the area that there were no such roadblocks, that planes continued to leave, trains continued to leave, and that the prosecution continued with its theory that Oswald was the assassin, that he acted alone, and they had secured his arrest, and there was nothing more to be done other than to prove as conclusively as possible, utilizing the press as we know, and the television, and the radio media for that purpose.

And while I am on this question, I wonder if I might ask the Commission to give consideration to—although I don't believe that it is present in any of the six panels which have been established by the Commission—but to give consideration nevertheless to the 48 hours in which Oswald was in custody, in reference to what happened to his rights as an American citizen, charged with a crime in this country.

The statement by the National Board of the American Civil Liberties Union, that had Oswald lived he could not have secured a fair trial anywhere in this country.

The Chairman. You may be sure, Mr. Lane, that that will be given most serious consideration by the Commission, and the Commission has already appointed as an act in that direction the President of the American Bar Association, with such help as he may wish to have, to make an investigation of that very thing. I assure you it will be done by the Commission.

Mr. Lane. Getting back to the evidence, Mr. Chief Justice, the spectator closest to President Kennedy, a Mrs. Hill, who was a substitute teacher in the Dallas public school system, stated to me that she was in her view the closest spectator to the President, and was standing alongside a Mary Moorman, who resides in Dallas.

Mr. Rankin. Do you have the date of this interview, Mr. Lane?

Mr. Lane. It was within the last week. She stated to me that she was the closest spectator to the President, she and her friend, when the President was struck by a bullet. She said that she heard some four to six shots fired.

Now, she was standing on the grass across the—across Elm Street, across from the Texas Book Depository Building. She said that in her—it is her feeling that all of the shots, the four to six shots, came from the grassy knoll near the triple overpass which was at that time directly in front and slightly to the right of the Presidential limousine, and that in her view none of the shots were fired from the Book Depository Building which was directly across the street from her, and which was to the rear of the Presidential limousine.

She said further that after the last shot was fired, she saw a man run from behind the general area of a concrete facade on that grassy knoll, and that he ran on to the triple overpass.

She told me that standing alongside of her was Mary Moorman, who took a picture of the President just a brief moment before the first shot was fired, and that agents of the Federal Bureau of Investigation took the film from Miss Moorman, and gave her a receipt, which she still has in her possession, but that she has not been able to see the picture, and that it is possible that the picture included the entire Book Depository Building, taken just precisely a second or less before the shots were fired.

Tom Wicker, who is a member of the New York Times White House staff, who was the only New York Times reporter in Dallas when the President was shot, stated in an article which appeared in the Saturday Review, on January 11, 1964, "As we came out of the overpass, I saw a motorcycle policeman drive over the curb, cross an open area, a few feet up a railroad bank, dismount, and start scrambling up the bank." Ronnie Dugger, who is the editor of the Texas Observer, a statewide publication in Texas, stated in his publication on November 29, 1963, and later stated to me in two different interviews material of the same nature.

I am now quoting from the publication:

"On the other side of the overpass a motorcycle policeman was roughriding across some grass to the trestle for the railroad tracks, across the overpass. He brought his cycle to a halt and leapt from it and was running up the base of the trestle when I lost sight of him."

Mr. Rankin. Can you give us the date of the paper that came from?

Mr. Lane. Yes. That was the Texas Observer, November 29, 1963. That statement has been confirmed by Mr. Dugger to me in two interviews in Dallas.

James Vachule, who is a reporter for the Fort Worth Star Telegram, said, "I heard the shots, several, at the triple overpass."

And Jerry Flemmons, reporting also for the Fort Worth Star Telegram, on November 22, 1963, stated, "Kennedy was gunned down by an assassin, apparently standing on the overpass above the freeway."

Now, I spoke to a Mary Woodward, who is an employee of the Dallas Morning News, and she stated that she was present with three coworkers, all employees of the Dallas Morning News, and they were standing near the—the base of the grassy knoll, perhaps 50 feet or so from the overpass, with the overpass to their right, and the book depository building to their left. And on November 23, 1963, the Dallas Morning News ran a story by Miss Woodward, and I have since that time spoken with Miss Woodward by telephone, and she has confirmed portions—the entire portion which I will quote from now—in her conversation with me.

That is, that as she and her three coworkers waited for the President to pass, on the grassy slope just east of the triple overpass, she explained that the President approached and acknowledged their cheers and the cheers of others, "he faced forward again, and suddenly there was an ear-shattering noise coming from behind us and a little to the right."

Here we have a statement, then, by an employee of the Dallas Morning News, evidently speaking—she indicated to me that she was speaking on behalf of all four employees, all of whom stated that the shots came from the direction of the overpass, which was to their right, and not at all from the Book Depository Building, which was to their left.

Miss Woodward continued, "Instead of speeding up the car, the car came to a halt. Things are a little bit hazy from this point, but I don't believe anyone was hit with the first bullet. The President and Mrs. Kennedy turned and looked around as if they, too, didn't believe the noise was really coming from a gun. Then after a moment's pause there was another shot, and I saw the President slumping in the car."

This would seem to be consistent with the statement by Miss Hill that more than three shots were fired.

In addition to these statements, James A. Chaney, who is a Dallas motorcycle policeman, was quoted in the Houston Chronicle on November 24, 1963, as stating that the first shot missed entirely. He said he was 6 feet to the right and front of the President's car, moving about 15 miles an hour, and when the first shot was fired. "I thought it was a backfire", he said.

Now, Miss Hill told me that when she was questioned—put that word unfortunately in quotation marks—by the U.S. Secret Service agents, that they indicated to her what her testimony should be, and that is that she only heard three shots. And she insisted that she heard from four to six shots. And she said that at least one agent of the Secret Service said to her, "There were three wounds and there were three shells, so we are only saying three shots." And they raised with her the possibility that instead of hearing more than three shots, that she might have heard firecrackers exploding, or that she might have heard echoes.

Despite this type of questioning by the Secret Service, Miss Hill continued to maintain, the last I spoke with her, about a week ago, that she heard from four to six shots.

Now, to the best of my knowledge, from my investigation, which has been very severely limited by lack of personnel and almost total lack of funds, and, therefore, is clearly not the kind of investigation which is required here—but from this limited investigation, it seems that only two persons immediately charged into the Texas Book Depository Building after the shots were fired. They were an officer of the Dallas Police Force, Seymour Weitzman, who submitted an affidavit to the Dallas police office, in which he stated that he discovered the rifle on the sixth floor of the Book Depository Building.

There was one other gentleman who ran into the building, and that was Roy S. Truly, who was and is, I believe, the director of the Book Depository Building.

However, Mr. Truly stated that he believed that the shots came from the direction of the overpass and from the grassy knoll. And although he was standing directly in front of the Book Depository Building, he did not believe that the shots came from that building.

Standing with him at the time of the assassination was O. V. Campbell, who was the vice president of the Book Depository Building.

In the Dallas Morning News on November 23, 1963, it was stated that "Campbell says he ran toward a grassy knoll to the west of the building where he thought the sniper had hidden."

So we have two persons that we know of standing in front of the Book Depository Building, and they both thought that the shots came from the grassy knoll near the overpass.

The police officer, Seymour Weitzman, submitted an affidavit to the Dallas district attorney's office, he and Mr. Truly, as I indicated a moment ago were the only two who charged into the Book Depository Building when the shots were fired.

Weitzman indicated in his affidavit—I assume you have the original of that affidavit—that he ran "in a northwest direction, scaled the fence toward where we thought the shots came from."

He indicated "then someone said they thought the shots came from the old Texas Building. I immediately ran to the Texas Building and started looking inside."

So even the two people who ran into the building indicated that they did not believe the shots came from the building.

Mr. Weitzman went into the building because someone whose name he did not give in his affidavit told him to go into the building, and then Truly explained that although he thought the shots came from the general direction of the grassy knoll or the overpass in front of the President's limousine, he saw this officer run into the building, of which he is a director, and he felt that since he knew the building and the officer did not, he should go in the building to assist the officer.

From published accounts, and from my investigation, I can only find one person who thought that the shots came from the building, and that was the Chief of Police in Dallas, Jesse Curry, who said as soon as the shots were fired, he knew they came from the building. From the Book Depository Building.

Now, of course, there were many persons present there whom I have not quoted, to whom I have no access.

Now, I spoke on several occasions with the reporter for the Fort Worth Star Telegram, whose name is Thayer Waldo. Mr. Waldo was standing with a police captain near the Dallas Trade Mart Building, which was the building, public building, where the President was going to have spoken that day. Mr. Waldo was awaiting his arrival, the President's arrival there, when a sergeant who was seated in a police cruiser called the captain over hurriedly to the police car. Mr. Waldo accompanied the captain to the police car. And Mr. Waldo stated to me that he heard the first bulletin which came over the Dallas police radio, and it was "Bulletin. The President has been shot. It is feared that others in his party have been wounded. The shots came from a triple overpass in front of the Presidential automobile."

So even the police, despite the Chief of Police's later assertion that he knew that the shots came from the Book Depository Building, behind the Presidential limousine, the first police radio broadcast indicated that it was the police position at that time that the shots came from the front, not from the rear.

Now, Patrolman Chaney, who I made reference to a little earlier, the motorcycle patrolman, stated that the Presidential car stopped momentarily after the first shot. That statement was consistent with Miss Woodward's statement in the Dallas Morning News, that the automobile came to almost a complete halt after the first shot, and the statement of many other witnesses as well.

Mr. Rankin. When was that statement made?

Mr. Lane. That statement appeared in the newspaper I made reference to before, the Houston Chronicle, on November 24, 1963.

Mr. Rankin. When you made an independent inquiry at any time, would you tell us, Mr. Lane?

Mr. Lane. Yes, I certainly shall do that.

Now, I think one has to conjecture as to why the Secret Service agent who was undoubtedly trained for this assignment, and particularly the agent who was driving the Presidential limousine in Dallas, where we were told that the greatest efforts ever to protect an American President were going to be made that day, because of the previous difficulties in Dallas, the attack upon our Ambassador to the United Nations and the attack upon the then Senator Johnson, when he spoke in Dallas in 1960—one would assume that the most qualified Secret Service driver that could be secured would be driving that automobile. It is difficult to understand why the automobile almost came to a complete stop after the first shot was fired, if the shots were coming from the rear. The natural inclination, it would seem, would be to step on the gas and accelerate as quickly as possible. However, if the driver were under the impression that the shots were from the front, one could understand his hesitation in not wanting to drive closer to the sniper or snipers.

In addition, however, Roy Kellerman, who was in the front right-hand seat of the automobile, who I am told was in charge of the Secret Service operation that day, the director of the Secret Service not being present in Dallas on that occasion—according to the pictures printed in Life magazine, Mr. Kellerman looked forward until the first shot was fired. Then he turned back, and looked at the President. He immediately looked forward again, and was looking in the direction of the overpass while the second shot was fired, and while the third shot was fired.

One would certainly expect that Mr. Kellerman was and is a trained observer, who would not panic in such a circumstance, for which he has received his training.

The pictures I make reference to are those in Life magazine which I referred to a little earlier in the afternoon.

Senator Cooper. May I ask a question there, Mr. Chief Justice?

The Chairman. Yes, go right ahead, Senator.

Senator Cooper. This last statement you made, about the Secret Service agent who turned, so that he was faced to the rear, toward the President, and then turned forward—I didn't quite understand what you deduced from that.

Mr. Lane. I assumed that he was looking toward the sound of the shots.

Senator Cooper. You mean when he turned to the rear, or turned ahead?

Mr. Lane. Well, when the President was shot, and was struck he then turned around, which I would imagine would be an ordinary response when somebody in an automobile with whom you are riding has been shot.

But immediately after that, before the second shot was fired, he turned completely to the front, and was looking at the overpass during the remainder of the time that the shots were fired. It would seem to indicate to me that it is possible that Mr. Kellerman felt that the shots were coming from the general direction in which he was looking.

Mr. Rankin. What do you base your statement on that the car stopped, the President's limousine?

Mr. Lane. The statement made by various witnesses, including Mr. Chaney, a motorcycle policeman, Miss Woodward, who was one of the closest witnesses to the President at the time that he was shot, and others. I think that is the—I haven't documented that beyond that, because that seemed to be so generally conceded by almost everyone, that the automobile came to—almost came to a complete halt after the first shot—did not quite stop, but almost did. And, of course, you have the films, I assume, of the assassination and know more about that than I do, certainly.

Now, in reference to the rifle, there is on file—I assume that you have it or copies of it—in the Dallas district attorney's office or the police office in Dallas, an affidavit sworn to by Officer Weitzman, in which he indicates that he discovered the rifle on the sixth floor of the Book Depository Building at, I believe, 1:22 p.m., on November 22, 1963.

Now, in this affidavit, Officer Weitzman swore that the murder weapon—that the weapon which he found on the sixth floor was a 7.65 Mauser, which he then went on to describe in some detail, with reference to the color of the strap, et cetera.

Now, the prosecuting attorney, of course, took exactly the same position, and for hours insisted that the rifle discovered on the sixth floor was a German Mauser, adding the nationality. A German Mauser is nothing at all like an Italian carbine. I think almost any rifle expert will indicate that that is so.

I have been informed that almost every Mauser—and I am not able to document this, unfortunately, but I am sure that you have easy access to rifle experts—that almost every German Mauser has stamped upon it the caliber, as does almost every Italian carbine.

Mr. Rankin. Do you know the difference between the two?

Mr. Lane. Do I know the difference?

Mr. Rankin. Yes.

Mr. Lane. I know the difference between an Army M-l and an American carbine—those are the only two weapons I fired—during the war. No, I don't know anything about rifles, other than those two rifles, which I used at one time.

I think it is most interesting to note that when Oswald was arrested we were informed immediately that he had an alias—his last name was Lee in that alias—as well as a great deal of material about his political background and activities on behalf of the Fair Play for Cuba Committee, and his defection to the Soviet Union, et cetera. But the alias was raised immediately.

The following day, on the 23d, when it was announced by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, that Oswald had purchased an Italian carbine, 6.5 millimeters, under the assumed name, A. Hidell, then for the first time the district attorney of Dallas indicated that the rifle in his possession, the alleged murder weapon, had changed both nationality and size, and had become from a German 7.65 Mauser, an Italian 6.5 carbine. And, further he indicated then for the first time that they knew of another alias maintained by Lee Oswald. In addition to the name Lee, which they discovered, they said, by going to the home where he lived—the house where he had lived in Dallas, where he rented a room, a rooming house, they discovered there he had secured the room under the name Lee. Mr. Wade stated that on Oswald's person, in his pocketbook, was an identification card made out to A. Hidell, and I have seen pictures of this reproduced in either Time magazine or Newsweek, or one of the weekly news magazines—I believe it was one or the other—with a picture of Oswald appearing on this card, plainly indicating that Oswald had the alias A. Hidell, to Mr. Wade.

I think it is interesting that the name Lee as an alias was released immediately, although some investigation was required to secure that alias. But the name A. Hidell, was not released as an alias, although that was present and obvious by mere search of Oswald's person when he was arrested.

Mr. Rankin. Can you give us the time of the release of the information about the alias, A. Hidell?

Mr. Lane. That was on November 23.

Mr. Rankin. And how about Lee?

Mr. Lane. November 22. The first release of the name A. Hidell came from the district attorney's office after the FBI had indicated that Oswald had purchased an Italian carbine under that name.

If I were permitted to cross-examine Mr. Wade, which evidently you have decided that I shall not be permitted to do, and Officer Weitzman, I would seek to find out how about the most important single element in probably this case or any other murder case, physical evidence, the murder weapon, in a case which I am sure is Mr. Wade's most important case—how he could be so completely in error about this.

Mr. Wade is a very distinguished prosecuting attorney, has been one for some 13 or 14 years, and I believe was an agent of the Federal Bureau of Investigation prior to that time.

I would like to know how he could have been so wrong about something so vital.

Now, assuming that the rifle found on the sixth floor was an Italian rifle, Italian carbine, one must wonder how it was possible for any number of things to happen for it to be fired there three times and strike the President in front of the throat, although he was past that building, and for the noise, according to the witnesses of the shooting, to have come from a different place entirely.

But in addition to that, one must wonder if that rifle is capable of the performance which the prosecuting authorities allege that it gave on that day. An Olympic rifle champion, Hubert Hammerer, said that he doubts that it could be done.

Mr. Rankin. Could you give us his address?

Mr. Lane. He is not in the United States. The story appeared in the New York Times. I don't have the exact date.

Representative Ford. What nationality is he?

Mr. Lane. I don't know.

Representative Ford. Do you know when he was Olympic champion?

Mr. Lane. No, I don't know that. I do know it probably was some time after the Italian carbine was manufactured, since it is an extremely old weapon, manufactured back in 1938, as I recall. There seems to be an agreement that the period of time was between 5 and 6 seconds from the first shot to the last shot.

There is a serious question in the minds, I think, of persons who have fired that pistol—that rifle—first of all, as to its ability to be fired that quickly accurately with a telescopic sight, and secondly, in reference to the ammunition which is available. Various persons have tested various lots of ammunition. Someone from the National Rifle Association told me that he tested more than 30 rounds, a little over 30 rounds of the Italian 6.5——

Mr. Rankin. When you refer to these people, will you tell us the names of any of them that you can? It might be of help to us.

Mr. Lane. I should remember this gentleman, because I just spoke with him. That is another name I am going to have to supply for you.

Mr. Rankin. Thank you.

Mr. Lane. He is a member of the board of directors of the National Rifle Association. He purchased for one of the television networks some 30 rounds, a little over 30 rounds, and told me that 20 of them did not fire at all, and 6 of them were guilty of hanged fire, which is a phrase I don't know anything about, but he tells me that means it did not fire fully, and, therefore, could not be accurate. Therefore, a very small percentage of the ammunition was of any value.

Mr. Ed Wallace talked about making a similar test in the New York World Telegram and Sun, in a feature article, and I think he said that he went with an expert, and they got 20 rounds of this ammunition, and of those 17 did not fire—only 3 fired. It was very old ammunition.

Representative Ford. Who is Ed Wallace, and who is the individual that Ed Wallace referred to? Do you have that information?

Mr. Lane. I believe Mr. Wallace indicated that he was present when the test was made. But it was an article appearing in the New York World Telegram and Sun within a week after the assassination—from the 23d to the 30th of November. And I can secure and mail to you a copy of that article, if you prefer.

While there may be some question as to whether or not a rifle expert could secure such performance from a rifle, or whether or not one could secure enough good ammunition to get such performance, I think there is general agreement that only in the hands of a rifle expert could one attempt to come close to that kind of shooting that it is alleged Oswald did on November 22.

The Times reported on November 23, "As Marines go, Lee Harvey Oswald was not highly regarded as a rifleman." And you have in your files, of course, the scorecard indicating Oswald's marksmanship or lack of marksmanship while in the Marine Corps.

In addition to that, you have the documents given to you by Marguerite Oswald, Lee Oswald's mother, which contained a scorecard maintained by Oswald while in the Marine Corps, showing his score in fast and slow shooting at various different yardages, in reference to both an M-l, as I recall, and an American carbine. Now, of course, it has been alleged on occasion that Mr. Oswald practiced with his rifle, on occasion, on weekends, at rifle ranges.

Mrs. Paine, with whom Lee Oswald's wife lived for the 2 month period preceding the assassination, and where Lee Oswald himself spent weekends for that 2 months period preceding the assassination, told me that Oswald could not have ever gone to a rifle range on a weekend, since she can account for his whereabouts during that entire 2 month period just preceding the assassination.

Mr. Rankin. Can you give us the day of that conversation with Mrs. Paine?

Mr. Lane. I have had about five conversations with her. The first one would be, oh, I believe, New Year's Day. I think that is the first time—this year—I believe that is the first time that she made the statement to me. She said she could account for Oswald's whereabouts during that 2 month period on weekends, from Friday late afternoon, when he left work in Dallas and arrived there in Irving, until early Monday morning.

She said the exception is during that time—she didn't watch him every moment, of course—there might be exceptions when she went shopping for half an hour, and he was left home to take care of the children, her two children, his children. But that unless he ran out quickly into the back yard with the rifle and shot and then quickly put the rifle away while caring for three children, or four children, that it would be impossible for him to practice with the rifle on weekends.

Since it has been alleged that the rifle was in the garage during the entire period of time, of course—that was in Irving, Tex., and he was in Dallas, Tex.—it would have been impossible for him to practice during the week while he was in Dallas, with that particular rifle.

Of course one must zero in a rifle in order to be even fairly accurate with it. One must practice with the specific weapon which one is going to use, in order to have any accuracy, in any event.

Now, I spoke with Dial M. Ryder, who is a gunsmith in Irving, Tex., at the Irving Sport Shop, and he told me that he mounted a telescopic sight on a rifle for a man named Oswald during October 1963.

Now, unfortunately, he does not recall—that is around the deer season, he informed me, and a lot of people are getting rifles fixed or repaired or sights mounted on them during that time in the Dallas-Irving area. And he does not recall, therefore, what this gentleman named Oswald looks like.

But he does know that a rifle was brought to him by someone whose name now appears in this record as Oswald, and that he drilled three holes in the rifle for a mount, telescopic mount. He said he had only seen three rifles which required three holes for telescopic mount—a 303 British Enfield, a 303 American Springfield army surplus rifle, or an Eddystone, which is also an American rifle. He said, therefore, he did not attach a telescopic sight to the Italian carbine, because he would have only drilled two holes.

His employer, I think his name is Greener, he told me, checked with all the Oswalds they could find in the Irving area after this matter came to their attention, and could not find anyone in that area—and they called some people in Dallas also named Oswald—could not find anyone named Oswald who brought the rifle in to him.

I talked to Milton Klein, who is the owner of Klein's sporting goods store in Chicago—Klein's Sporting Goods is the name of the establishment, in Chicago.

Mr. Rankin. When was this?

Mr. Lane. I spoke with him within the last 2 or 3 days. And he told me that—he runs the mail-order house which sent the carbine, Italian carbine, to Dallas, not to Oswald, but to A. Hidell, and that he sent that out with the holes already bored in the Italian carbine, and equipped with a telescopic sight which was already attached to the rifle.

Aguto Marcelli, who is a correspondent for an Italian publication which appears physically very much to be like Life magazine, called Leuropeo, stated to me that he had spoken with Mr. Klein, and Mr. Klein told him that the FBI—"The FBI warned me to keep my trap shut."

Mr. Rankin. When was this?

Mr. Lane. He told me this about 2 weeks ago. When I spoke with Mr. Klein, about 3 days ago, 2 or 3 days ago, he indicated that he did not want to discuss any aspect of this matter with me. And I asked him if that was because he was told not to talk with anyone about this case, and he said yes.

And I said, "Who told you that?"

He said, "The FBI agents told me, ordered me not to discuss this case."

I pointed out to him that if he did not wish to discuss the case with me, I would not force him to. There was no way that he would be compelled to answer any of the questions that I asked him. But, however, in our democratic society, the FBI cannot order anyone not to discuss a case, and that such an order to him was not a valid order, if he wanted to discuss the case with me—he could.

So he did. And he told me what I informed you—that the FBI told him not to discuss the case, and that he mailed this rifle with the holes already bored and with the telescopic sight already mounted to someone named A. Hidell.

He also said that "No ammunition was purchased from me by Hidell at that time or since."

Senator Cooper. Mr. Chairman, may I ask a question?

The Chairman. Yes, sir.

Senator Cooper. Did he name any person with the FBI who told him not to discuss the case?

Mr. Lane. No; he did not.

Senator Cooper. Can you identify—did he identify him in any way?

Mr. Lane. He did not identify him. Earlier, perhaps before you arrived, Senator, I made reference to a statement made by Mrs. Hill, who was told by the Secret Service—I think perhaps you were here—that only three shots were fired. And I asked her specifically if she could identify that Secret Service agent, and she told me that she could not, there was such tremendous confusion at that time, there were so many agents of the FBI and Secret Service that she spoke to, that she did not think she could. But possibly if she saw him, she might be able to recognize him.

I didn't go any further into that question, however, with Mr. Klein. He seemed very reluctant to discuss that entire area—to discuss anything, but particularly that area.

I read in the Dallas Times Herald, on November 25, 1963, the statement made by Mr. Wade, when asked what they had tying Oswald to the "crime of the century" and his response was, according to the Dallas Times Herald, "If I had to single out any one thing, it would be the fingerprints on the rifle, and the book cartons which he used to prop the weapon on."

On the same day the World Telegram and Sun reported "Federal authorities have concluded that no readable print was found on the murder weapon when it was flown to Washington for laboratory studies."

There were certain leaks that a fingerprint or a palm print was discovered on the bolt of the rifle. If that is so, it would be remarkable if it were a print belonging to anyone other than Captain Fritz of the Homicide Squad in Dallas, because according to the affidavit signed by Officer Weitzman, who discovered the weapon, and I am quoting now from the affidavit on file—at that time on file with the district attorney's office, "The time the rifle was found was 1:22 p.m. Captain Fritz took charge of the rifle, and ejected one live round from the Chamber. I then went back to the office after this."

Now, you know if you have worked with that rifle that the—on most Italian carbines that bolt is not worked too easily. One really has to grab a hold of it and pull back. It would be unusual if a fingerprint belonging to someone other than the person who did that survived.

The first statement made by Mr. Wade in reference to the taxi driver who he alleged—he, Wade, alleged took Oswald generally from this scene, indicated that the driver's name was Daryl Click.

Now, that statement was not made in the first hours of the arrest. That statement was not made until after Chief Curry had announced to the press in Dallas, on that day, November 24th that the case was closed, there would be no further investigation—Oswald was the assassin, he had acted alone, he was then dead. And as a result of the change in policy, to reopen the case and have Mr. Wade assume a position in front of the radio and television microphones and cameras of the Nation, on that evening November 24, Mr. Wade then presented what he said was the evidence "for you piece by piece." And part of the evidence which he had secured was the proof that a taxi driver named Daryl Click drove Oswald roughly from the scene to his home, to Oswald's home.

When I was in Dallas—I suppose this was on January 2d, my first trip there in reference to this matter—I spoke with a Mr. Roseboro of the Teamsters Union—they have organized the taxi drivers in Dallas—and asked him if he knew—if he could give me any information about a Daryl Click. He said he did not have the name in his files, but Texas being a right-to-work law State, it is possible, he said, that Mr. Click was a driver but not a member of that union. He referred me to the personnel department of the City Transportation Co., which he told me was the one company monopoly running all the taxis in Dallas.

I spoke with the City Transportation Co. personnel office, Mr. Pott, as I recalled, who checked the records, and indicated to me that there was no Daryl Click who drove a taxi in Dallas.

Some time after Mr. Wade stated that Daryl Click was the taxi driver, he then stated that a person by the name of William Whaley was the taxi driver who took Oswald from the scene after he left the bus to his home.

It is therefore alleged by the prosecution that Oswald, after firing upon the Presidential limousine, walked the entire floor from the front of the Book Depository Building to the rear of the warehouse, almost to the extreme rear, where he hid the rifle, where it was found, and then took the stairs at the rear of the Book Depository Building and walked down four flights, until he arrived at the second floor, and then he walked to the Coca-Cola machine, which was at the front of the building, meaning he crossed the entire warehouse floor again, and he purchased a Coca-Cola, and was sipping it when a police officer arrived with a gun drawn, questioned him briefly. Mr. Truly explained to the officer that Oswald worked there. And eventually Oswald left the building, boarded a bus, then walked, after leaving the bus—walked two blocks and entered Mr. Whaley's taxi, at exactly 12:30, according to Mr. Whaley. The shots that killed the President were fired at 12:31.

Now, there is on file in the district attorney's office—I assume you have the original or copies of it—a report of a paraffin test taken of Oswald, of both his hands and his face. The test proved, according to Mr. Curry, and the statement that he made on Saturday, November 23, to the press that Oswald had fired the murder weapon. However, a reading of the test indicates that one could come to a very different conclusion.

The test in reference to the face proved negative, indicating that Oswald had not fired a rifle on November 22, 1963—although the test on the hands showed positive—indicating, according to the person who did the analysis, the kinds of patterns consistent with one having fired a revolver. That was the statement on the test taken and conducted by a Louis L. Anderson, on November 23, 1963, by the Dallas City County Crime Investigation Laboratory.

Now, it has, of course, been alleged that after Oswald shot the President and took a bus and a taxi, and went home and got a jacket, he then shot and killed Officer Tippit. The affidavit in the district attorney's office indicates that a person saw a stopped police car, walked up to the police car, leaned on it with his arms on the window, or what would be a windowsill or window ledge of the automobile, and then stepped back a step or two, the officer came out, and this person shot Officer Tippit to death.

The affidavit is peculiarly sparse in reference to the description of the assailant, the man who killed Tippit, by an eyewitness who said she was just 50 feet away.

Her description of this person is found in two different portions of the affidavit—he was young, white, male, and that is the entire description present in the affidavit at that time.

I spoke with the deponent, the eyewitness, Helen Louise Markham, and Mrs. Markham told me—Miss or Mrs., I didn't ask her if she was married—told me that she was a hundred feet away from the police car, not the 50 feet which appears in the affidavit. She gave to me a more detailed description of the man who she said shot Officer Tippit. She said he was short, a little on the heavy side, and his hair was somewhat bushy. I think it is fair to state that an accurate description of Oswald would be average height, quite slender, with thin and receding hair.

Helen Markham said to me that she was taken to the police station on that same day, that she was very upset, she of course had never seen anyone killed in front of her eyes before, and that in the police station she identified Oswald as the person who had shot Officer Tippit in the lineup, including three other persons. She said no one pointed Oswald out to her—she was just shown four people, and she picked Oswald.

She said—when I asked her how she could identify him—she indicated she was able to identify him because of his clothing, a gray jacket and dark trousers. And this was the basis for her identification—although Oswald physically does not meet the description which she indicated.

Representative Ford. When did you have this conversation with the deponent?

Mr. Lane. Within the last 5 days.

Representative Ford. Some time in late February 1964?

Mr. Lane. Or perhaps even early March, yes, sir.

Now, I inquired—I told her that I was coming here today, and that I was completing my investigation as Oswald's lawyer, and asked her if she would discuss the matter with me, and she said she would.

I asked her if anyone had asked her not to discuss this matter with me. At first she seemed reluctant, and she said she was reluctant because I called her at her place of employment, the Eat Well Cafe in Dallas. I tried her at home many times before then, but her phone was always busy. I believe it is a phone which is not her personal one, but is a common phone shared by others in the building where she resides.

I apologized for calling her at her place of employment. And she seemed reluctant to talk to me. I asked if anyone had asked her not to talk about this case with anyone. She said yes, she had been told by the FBI, by Secret Service agents, and by Dallas police, all three groups, not to discuss anything in relation to this case, and that by and large she had not.

I told her that somewhere it occurred to me that I had seen an article in a newspaper in which she described the assailant of Oswald as short, stocky, and with bushy hair—I'm sorry, the assailant of Tippit—as being short, stocky, with bushy hair. And she said she did talk to a reporter, she thinks, for one of the Dallas newspapers, the Dallas Times-Herald or the Dallas Morning News—but that is the only time she talked to anybody.

I would like to call to the Commission's attention the entire brief narrative of the entire case, as presented by the district attorney's office at this point, or at least on the 24th, because it seems to me to be so full of incredible happenings, that it would be very difficult to submit such a story to a jury by a prosecution generally.

If everything that the prosecution in this case says is true, one must conclude that Oswald behaved in a very, very unusual manner from the beginning to the end.

He decided on Thursday, November 21, that he was going to assassinate the President, and so he decided to go back to Irving, Tex., to secure a rifle there, in order to carry out that purpose. He had on his person some $13 when arrested, and almost $150 in cash in the top drawer of his dresser—so we can assume that on Thursday, the 21st, he had roughly that amount of money present.

One can purchase a rifle for less than $13 in many stores in Dallas. There is no question about that. By using a small portion of that $150, he could have purchased a rifle absolutely superior to the Italian carbine at home in Irving in many respects. And there are gun magazines which have had editorials dwelling on this question, saying that if Oswald did it with this weapon, and they do not move into the question of whether or not he did, it was an absolute miracle, because no one who knew anything about rifles would have chosen such a decrepit, worthless rifle, as this Italian carbine, manufactured in 1938, for which there is such pure ammunition. There are a series, I believe, of editorials in gun magazines proving that Oswald, I think, as a matter of pride, from a sportsman's viewpoint—that Oswald was in no way associated with weapons and did not belong in that category, because he could not have chosen such a weapon.

Representative Ford. Could you give us the citations of one of these magazines?

Mr. Lane. Yes. One is called Gun Magazine. I do not recall the names. But that is one of them. I am sure there was such an editorial in that one. I will get the other one and mail those to you also.

But I think there would have to be a more compelling reason for Oswald not to go home and get that particular inferior rifle if he decided on Thursday to kill the President. That was the only rifle in the whole world probably that could be traced to him. One can purchase a rifle in almost any community in this country, certainly in Dallas, without any notoriety attaching to it, without giving one's name or address, or having a serial number attached to a receipt kept by a store indicating who owns that particular rifle.

But here we have Oswald going home to get an inferior rifle, which rifle is the only rifle in the whole world which can be traced to him, which rifle he is going to leave behind as a calling card after the assassination is complete.

And so he goes home to Irving, Tex., and he gets this rifle, and he wraps it up in paper, we are told, and brings it in to the Book Depository Building.

Now, the rifle can be broken down, I believe, from examining other Italian carbines. But it would be not much shorter if it was broken down—perhaps 6 or 7 inches shorter. Evidently, though, he did not do that.

So he took this rifle into the book depository building, which I suggest, gentlemen, is a most remarkable thing. This was going to be the greatest series of precautions in the history of the United States to protect an American President. As we know now, and suspected then, with very good reason, because of the nature of what had gone before, with reference to public officials in Dallas—and here we have a man who has defected to the Soviet Union, who has married a Russian national, active on behalf of the Fair Play for Cuba Committee, we see a discharge less than honorable from the U.S. Marine Corps, who was working in the building exactly on the Presidential route. Not only is it on the Presidential route, but it is the building where the automobile is going to have to clearly slow down because of the sharp turn, sharp left turn, made right in front of the building.

And despite all of these precautions—and I have been informed that there were serious precautions taken in Dallas on that day by the Dallas police and by others, and that persons who did no more publicly, who did no more ever politically than to publicly speak in favor of school integration, were followed that day as potential assassins in Dallas.

Nevertheless, Oswald, with that background, is permitted to walk into the Book Depository Building, directly on the Presidential route, carrying with him in his hand a full rifle.

Mr. Rankin. Can you tell us the information on which you base this, about anyone who merely spoke about school integration?

Mr. Lane. Yes. A reporter for the Dallas Morning News told me that, told me he was absolutely certain that was so. But before revealing his name, I am going to have to call him and indicate I am going to do that. I will be happy to do that. I am glad you are interested in that matter, because I think it is a most important one.

I suggest that the Federal Bureau of Investigation knew that Oswald worked at the Texas Book Depository Building, which was on the Presidential route. An FBI agent by the name of Hosty visited the home of the Paines in Irving, Tex., sometime during September and October. He visited that home on more than one occasion. Each of the at least two times that he was there, possibly three but I am not certain—but I was told he was there two times—I know I was told by Mrs. Paine in the presence of her husband, Michael Paine, that Agent Hosty was there at least on two occasions—each time he was there he asked where Oswald was. Mrs. Paine explained to Agent Hosty, she told me, that Oswald lived there only on weekends, and that during the week Agent Hosty could find him at his room in Dallas, where he stayed during the week, or during the daytime could find him at the Texas Book Depository Building, where he was an employee. Nevertheless—and that Oswald would not be found in Irving, Tex. at the Paine's home during the week. Nevertheless, Agent Hosty returned again at least one more time to the Paine home in Irving, during the week, during the day, I believe—certainly during the week—and again asked about Oswald, and again Mrs. Paine told him that he worked at the Book Depository Building, he would not be there, she said, "As we told you last time he won't be here during the week. During the daytime during the week you can find him at his job at the Book Depository Building, and during the nighttime during the week you can find him at his rooming house in Dallas."

Mr. Rankin. Did she tell you whether she told him where the rooming house was?

Mr. Lane. I do not believe I asked her that question, and I don't believe she mentioned that.

Well, to go back to the prosecution narrative, or narrative according to the facts presented by the prosecution, Oswald was on the sixth floor, fired at the Presidential limousine, not as the automobile approached the building, when the automobile came extremely close to the building, so close that possibly even with that weapon one could have shot occupants of the automobile from that window—but it is alleged that Oswald never shot—it is now alleged that Oswald never shot when the automobile was right outside of the building, but fired when the automobile was some 75 yards beyond the building, when the first shot was fired.

Then Oswald walked the entire floor—or ran—the entire floor of the warehouse to the rear of the building, placing the rifle in between some boxes, but visible, so that one can see it when one arrives on the floor; went to the rear stairs, walked down the four flights to the second floor, then to the front of the building again, where he purchased a Coca-Cola—made no effort to leave the building at that time, evidently was going to wait until the building was surrounded by police before leaving.

He stayed at the top of the stairs near the Coke machine long enough so that a police officer could come up and place a pistol near him, and Roy Truly, the director, then intervened indicating that Mr. Oswald was employed at the building at that time, and the officer then went on to do other things in the building, including later on, I believe, to find the rifle, if it was the same officer.

Mr. Truly stated that Oswald was quite calm when the officer approached him on the stairs. He said although he did seem a little concerned about that pistol being stuck at him—but otherwise he seemed quite calm at that time.

Well——

Representative Ford. Where was this statement made, or testimony given?

Mr. Lane. By Truly?

Representative Ford. Yes.

Mr. Lane. This was reported very widely in probably dozens or scores of newspapers. The New York Times carried that, as did many other publications—direct quotations from Truly who was interviewed.

Then the next thing we heard from the prosecution in their opening or closing statement to the television cameras, after Oswald was killed was that—the next we hear of Oswald he was on a bus. Well, if Oswald boarded the bus where the busdriver claims he did, then Oswald walked a distance, in order to secure a bus which is going to take him directly back to the Book Depository Building, which one would think he was trying to flee after assassinating the President.

I would refer you to his story by Hugh Ainsworth in the Dallas Morning News published during the first week after the assassination. Hugh Ainsworth and Larry Grove published on November 28 in the Dallas Morning News—this is headed "Oswald Planned To Ride By Scene"—in which there are statements from the busdriver that—named C. J. McWatters, in which Mr. McWatters indicates that Oswald entered the bus at Elm and Griffin, and further indicates that the bus was going to go seven blocks further west and turn at Houston Street, exactly the scene of the assassination, or at least the scene of the Texas Book Depository. So Oswald traveled somehow some seven blocks in order to secure a bus which is going to take him back to the place that he left.

Now, although I have talked to Mr. Ainsworth, and he tells me that the story is absolutely correct, and he questioned Mr. McWatters quite thoroughly, and he will so testify, I believe, if he is asked—Mr. Ainsworth will—and the affidavit which Mr. McWatters signed, or which the busdriver signed, he does not state that Oswald walked seven blocks and was going to get on a bus which was going to take him back. Indeed, he states that he picked him up about Elm and Houston Street, at the Book Depository Building. But the busdriver indicates that that story in his affidavit is not true. He indicated that after the affidavit was drawn and signed by him.

Mr. Rankin. What did you say was not true, Mr. Lane—which part of it?

Mr. Lane. The affidavit. Mr. McWatters indicates that the affidavit in which—let me start that again.

There is an affidavit from the busdriver, which I am sure you have, which shows that according to his statement Oswald came into the bus at Elm and Houston Street. However, the busdriver since that time has indicated that Oswald came into the bus seven blocks from Elm and Houston Street, and had entered a bus which was going to take him to Elm and Houston Street. Elm and Houston Street of course is the location of the Book Depository Building.

Mr. Rankin. Now, when you say since that time he has indicated that, you mean to you or to someone else?

Mr. Lane. To those two reporters for the Dallas Morning News with whom I discussed—one of them—I discussed this specifically. And he said that every word in that story is absolutely accurate, that he went to see the busdriver, and had a prolonged interview with him, and went over this in great detail with him. I think these two reporters will testify as to what the busdriver told them in their interview with him.

Mr. Rankin. But they have not published this later story that you are telling about.

Mr. Lane. Yes, they have. That is the date that I gave you. The Dallas Morning News, on Thursday, November 28, under the headline "Oswald Planned To Ride By Scene".

Mr. Rankin. Do you want to leave that with us?

Mr. Lane. I wonder if copies can be made of everything.

Mr. Rankin. Yes.

Mr. Lane. Then I will be happy to leave it.

Mr. Rankin. The story you were just referring to in the Dallas Morning News is Commission Exhibit 343.

(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 343 for identification and received in evidence.)

Mr. Lane. That's correct.

Well, now, Oswald allegedly had shot the President and has walked some, talked to an officer, was calm, walked some seven blocks to find a bus which was going to take him back to where he left, and then got off and got—entered into a taxi after he had walked some two blocks from where he left the bus. And this taxi he entered of course a minute before the President was shot, if the taxi driver's log is accurate—after Oswald had done all these things, after allegedly shooting the President and the Governor.

Then the taxi driver drove him directly past his own home, according to the statement and—past Oswald's Dallas rooming house, until he arrived at a scene about a half a mile beyond Oswald's house, where Oswald then left the taxi, and then walked or ran home to secure a jacket—leaving behind, although one would assume he is now giving considering to escaping, the $150 in the dresser drawer, and taking just his jacket with him.

Mr. Rankin. Which dresser drawer?

Mr. Lane. This is in Dallas.

Mr. Rankin. Not at the Paine's?

Mr. Lane. Not at the Paine's. I do not know if there was money at the Paine's, but if he had money there, he left that behind the night before, knowing he was going to——

Mr. Rankin. But the $150 you are speaking of was in his rooming house at Dallas.

Mr. Lane. Yes.

Mr. Rankin. Do you have any affidavit or information in support of that statement about the $150?

Mr. Lane. I do not have an affidavit. I have the statement of a reporter who was told that—he was told this by a police officer who was present when the money was found in the Dallas rooming house. I have his statement. I can again ask for his permission to release that.

Mr. Rankin. Would you do that, please.

Mr. Lane. Yes, sir.

Senator Cooper. Mr. Chairman—perhaps it has been done, but I think it would be proper in all cases in which he has referred to conversations that he has had with individuals who made statements to him about some aspect of this matter, and whose names he has not identified, that if he could give to the Commission in all of those cases the names of the individuals who gave him this information.

Mr. Lane. Yes, sir.

Senator Cooper. I mean at sometime—don't you think?

Mr. Rankin. Yes, sir, it would be very helpful.

Mr. Lane. Yes, sir. I think there are only two occasions where I indicated I had to check the source, and one is the name of the rifle association board member whose name I will be happy to give to you, but I just do not recall it—my office has that.

Senator Cooper. I did not remember that you gave the name of this individual who told you that some policeman had told him that he had been present when the $150 was found.

Mr. Lane. Yes; that is one.

Senator Cooper. Did you give that name?

Mr. Lane. No; I did not give that name.

Mr. Rankin. You said you were going to ask him his permission.

Mr. Lane. Yes; that's correct.

Then Oswald took a taxi, which took him approximately a half mile beyond his own house, his own room in Dallas, and he either walked or ran back to get his jacket—although it was a very warm day in Dallas. That day Mrs. Kennedy said later on that, reviewing the moment before the President was shot—she said she saw this overpass ahead and looked forward to being under it for a moment because there would be some brief shade to protect them from the powerful sun that day.

Well, Oswald ran home to get his jacket. He left the house, saw a police car parked, went up to the police car, according to the affidavit of Mrs. Markham, leaned on the car, and when the officer came out, he shot him to death, and then he went to the movies. And in the movies, and just before he went into the Texas Theatre, he was so extremely agitated that a gentleman on the outside of the theatre—I think his name is John Brewer—I am not certain—you have that affidavit, I am sure—indicated that Oswald was acting very agitated, the cashier made the same statement, and changing from seat to seat. The police were called and he was arrested.

Of course, one would wonder why Oswald, who might have thought that he had made his getaway while in the Texas Theatre unobserved, would become so extremely agitated, when just a moment after he allegedly shot the President and the Governor, with the policeman charging up the stairs, pointing a pistol at him, about to arrest him for these two terrible crimes, he was calm, according to Mr. Truly, but he became agitated only when he thought he had secured his getaway.

I think those of us who saw, as we all did, I guess, Oswald on television in his brief appearance would conclude that he seemed, even while in custody and charged with these two crimes, somewhat calm under the circumstances—calm when charged with the assassination, calm a moment after killing the President, when a policeman pointed a pistol at him, but agitated only in the theatre, and just before going to the theatre when he might have concluded that he was then in the clear.

I would just like to conclude on this note.

I hope the Commission will give consideration to my request, which the Commission has answered, but which again I would like at this time to renew. That is, that I be permitted, at the request of Mrs. Oswald, the mother of the accused defendant, really, before this Commission's hearing, to represent his interests here, to have access to the material which you have access to, and the right to present witnesses.

It is not usual for an attorney representing a party to be given an opportunity to testify, which is quite unusual—but rather to be given the opportunity to present witnesses and to cross-examine them. It has generally been my role in criminal cases. Never before have I testified in behalf of a client.

If it is the Commission's position that this is not a trial in any respect, and therefore Oswald is not entitled to counsel, that is the position with which I would like to respectfully offer a dissent.

The fact that Oswald is not going to have a real trial flows only from his death, and he is not responsible with that having taken place. Every right belonging to an American citizen charged with a crime was taken from him up to and including his life.

I think now that that episode is completed, hopefully never to reappear ever again in our history, or anything close to it—I think it would be proper to permit him to have counsel before the Commission, counsel who can function on his behalf in terms of cross-examining evidence and presenting witnesses. If it is the Commission's position now that he is entitled to counsel, and the Commission will appoint counsel, then I ask the Commission to consider that the Constitutional right to counsel involves the right to counsel of one's choice, or in the event of the death of a party, to counsel of the choice of the surviving members of the family.

If Marina Oswald, the widow, sought to have counsel represent her husband I would think—here—I would think that would cause a conflict and a problem, if the widow and also the mother made the same request. But as I understand it no request has been made by the widow, who has indicated to the press that she believes her husband is guilty, and through her former business agent, Mr. Martin, who I am told was secured for her by the Secret Service as a business agent, she indicated that even a trial which might prove he was innocent, she would still be sure he was guilty, and has indicated since that time no desire to my knowledge to secure counsel for her husband, her late husband, before the Commission.

I think, then, the mother would, in almost any jurisdiction, be the next person to make a decision in this area, and the mother has made a decision, as you know. She has retained me to represent the rights and interests of her son.

I think under those circumstances it would be proper for the Commission to permit me to participate.

This, of course, is not a jury trial. With all due respect to the integrity and background of each of the members of the Commission, I suggest that it is not the function of the trying body to appoint counsel, or the jury to appoint counsel, but in our society it is just the reverse; it is the function of defense counsel to participate in determining who the jury should be.

Many criminal lawyers, very noted counsel, would probably seek to excuse certain—and again no disrespect at all is meant to the background of members of this Commission—but defense counsel generally seeks to excuse as jurors those who are in any way associated with the Government in a criminal case. And here we have the Government appointing the jury, and then the jury picking counsel, who also is Government connected at this time. I in no way wish to raise the question of the integrity of any of the members of the Commission or counsel or anyone else, or their ability. But that truism about equality has some meaning in terms of impartiality—everyone is impartial to some people, and more impartial to other people. And counsel, in order to function, I believe, must be totally independent and totally committed to the responsibility of representing his client.

But above all, he must be secured by someone who has the ability to speak for the deceased, in this case his mother and his wife. And under those circumstances, I renew my request that I be permitted to, at the request of Lee Oswald's mother, who survives him—to function before this Commission as counsel on his behalf.

The Chairman. Mr. Lane, I must advise you that the Commission, as you already know, has considered your request and has denied it. It does not consider you as the attorney for Lee Oswald. Now, this is not for any discussion. We are not going to argue it. You have had your say, and I will just answer.

Lee Oswald left a widow. She is his legal representative. She is represented by counsel. This Commission is cooperating with her in any way she may request. If anyone else wants to present any evidence to this Commission, they may do so. But it is the view and the wish—the will of the Commission—that no one else shall be entitled to participate in the work and the deliberations of the Commission.

We asked you to come here today because we understood that you did have evidence. We are happy to receive it. We want every bit of evidence that you have. You may present anything that you wish to us. But you are not to be a participant in the work of the Commission. I assume you have some questions you would like to ask Mr. Lane, Mr. Rankin?

Mr. Rankin. Yes, sir. Do you have any affidavits that you would like to submit to the Commission? I understood at one time you had some affidavits.

Mr. Lane. Well, I do have some affidavits. They are not originals—they are photostatic copies of affidavits taken by the Dallas police and on file in the Dallas district attorney's office. Now—including the paraffin test which I made reference to.

Now, if the Commission does not have copies of those, I would like to be so informed and I will see what I can do. I assume the Commission has copies of all those documents.

Mr. Rankin. Yes. Do you have anything beyond that that you care to submit?

Mr. Lane. I have the various statements which I have made reference to from Mrs. Hill and Mrs. Markham, Mr. Klein, Mr. Ryder. But I have given you the essence of those statements. If you are interested in pursuing that, I think it might be best to call them.

Mr. Rankin. I am interested if there was anything beyond what you have given us, Mr. Lane. And if you say you have given us the substance, then I take it that is complete as far as it could be of assistance to us, except our going directly to the witness. Is that what you have in mind?

Mr. Lane. Yes.

Mr. Rankin. Now, do you have any witnesses that you would like to present for the Commission?

Mr. Lane. Well, I would like—I do not know that I would be able to do that, frankly.

Mr. Rankin. Well, would you have any that you suggest that we should interview, bring before the Commission, that you have not presented up to this time in your testimony?

Mr. Lane. No; there is no one who I know of other than those names I have given, and two other persons whose permission I am going to have to secure in reference to other matters, and hopefully they will be willing to not only allow their names to be used, but to come forward and testify, if you wish to hear them.

Mr. Rankin. Now, is there any documentary evidence beyond which you have submitted that you would like to submit to the Commission?

Mr. Lane. Not beyond what I have submitted or made reference to.

Mr. Rankin. In regard to the paraffin that you have referred to, do you have any particular materials or anything you want to refer the Commission to?

Mr. Lane. To that particular test taken by Mr. Anderson on November 23d?

Mr. Rankin. Anything beyond that?

Mr. Lane. No; not at this time.

Mr. Rankin. Now, I understand at one time you referred to some meeting in the Carousel Club a week or so before the assassination. Do you have any material on that or any information?

Mr. Lane. Yes.

Mr. Rankin. Is there anything you would care to present to the Commission?

Mr. Lane. Yes. I have been informed—and this is the source I will have to check with again in order to secure his testimony——

Mr. Rankin. You will advise us if you are permitted to.

Mr. Lane. Yes. But I can tell you the substance—that a meeting took place on November 14, 1963, in the Carousel Club between Officer Tippit and Bernard Weissman, Mr. Weissman being the gentleman who placed a full-page advertisement in the Dallas Morning News which was printed on November 22, asking a series of questions of President Kennedy. It was addressed "Welcome to Dallas, President Kennedy. Why have you traded the Monroe Doctrine for spirit of Moscow. Why has Gus Hall and the Communist Party endorsed your 1964 election" and such matter. I think these two give a rather clear indication of the kind of advertisement that it was. And I have been informed that Mr. Weissman and Officer Tippit and a third person were present there. I have been given the name of the third person. But for matters which I will make plain to the Commission, I will be pleased to give you the name of the third person as given to me, but not in the presence of the press. I would rather do that in executive session—that one piece of testimony.

The Chairman. That is satisfactory to do that, if you wish.

Mr. Lane. Thank you, sir.

Mr. Rankin. Is there anything else about that incident that you know and want to tell the Commission at this time?

Mr. Lane. No.

The Chairman. That is the entire story, is it?

Mr. Lane. That they were there for more than 2 hours conferring—these three persons.

The Chairman. Your information does not—is not to the effect as to what they were conferring on.

Mr. Lane. No; they did not hear that.

Mr. Rankin. I am not suggesting, Mr. Lane, that you have been selective about what you have told the Commission and what you have not told, but I do wish to make the inquiry as to whether there is any information you might have that the Commission should be informed of as to other people that you might have interviewed in regard to this matter.

Mr. Lane. I have given the Commission at this time everything that I know.

Mr. Rankin. Is there anything about the palm prints that you can tell us in addition to what you have given us?

Mr. Lane. Not in addition to what I have said.

Mr. Rankin. Well, I will ask you generally—is there anything in addition to what you have said that you would like to tell the Commission at this time that has any bearing upon this investigation?

Mr. Lane. All I can say in reference to that, Mr. Rankin, is that I am practically engaged in this project by myself, which means I am extremely limited. This is not my profession—investigator. I am an attorney. And there are many leads which I have followed, which have led me nowhere at all, obviously. Before finding Mrs. Markham or before finding Mrs. Hill, there were many other persons I talked to who were not even present, who I have heard were present. But there are still large numbers, probably at this point hundreds of leads which I have heard of, and which I have not yet been able to trace or to check through. I do not think it would be constructive just to tell you all of the things I have heard, because most of them are patently untrue, and they just require a great deal of work. But I will continue to do that, and should I come across any material which might in any way interest you, I will certainly either write to you for the purpose of presenting it to you through the mail in affidavit form, if you prefer, or indicate that I will be available to come and testify again if you prefer that.

The Chairman. Mr. Lane, your client, Mrs. Marguerite Oswald, when she was testifying before us, told us that she had sold some pictures to the press and she wanted the originals of all the pictures that she presented to us, because she said they were of great financial value to her. Do you know what sales she has made concerning pictures such as you have shown us?

Mr. Lane. In terms of the picture with the rifle, you mean, for example?

The Chairman. Well, we might start with that.

Mr. Lane. She has never seen such a picture, she has informed me, of Lee Harvey Oswald with the rifle—except after they had been published. She never had any knowledge of such pictures, and had never seen them.

I do not really represent Marguerite Oswald. She has retained me to represent the interests of her son. And so in her business dealings in terms of her sale of pictures and articles, I have not represented her. I believe she has a literary agent or perhaps even another lawyer—I don't know. But she has retained me to represent her son's interests, not to represent her at all.

The Chairman. I see.

Mr. Lane. Of course, we have conferred. But I do not have that information.

The Chairman. Yes.

Mr. Rankin. Mr Lane, I have a further question. Have you ever been prevented by any law enforcement officer from interviewing anyone concerning this matter when you wished to?

Mr. Lane. Well, I would say that I have been prevented by the statements made by the law enforcement persons or agents to the individual, that he should not talk to anyone about this case, that it is a secret matter. As I have indicated, Mr. Klein——

Mr. Rankin. You have described those cases, have you?

Mr. Lane. I have also spoken to a reporter who is employed by a Dallas newspaper, who informed me that he sought to question more than 150 in the area, and that many of those persons informed him that they were ordered by the FBI not to talk to anyone about this case, and that almost none of the witnesses would talk with him about the case, and that some of them, when he asked the reason that they were not talking to him, it was "Was this because you have been told by the FBI?"—and he indicated they were not even allowed to answer that question. But many of them told him that the FBI or the Secret Service ordered them not to talk. In no other respect have I been interfered with to my knowledge.

Mr. Rankin. Do you have the name of that reporter—can you reveal that to us?

Mr. Lane. I cannot reveal it at this time, but I am hopeful you will permit me to. He is one of the reporters I referred to earlier.

Mr. Rankin. Thank you.

The Chairman. Senator, do you have any questions?

Senator Cooper. No; I have no questions.

The Chairman. Mr. Rhyne.

Mr. Rhyne. Mr. Chief Justice—I wanted to ask Mr. Lane, on his inquiry about what happened to Oswald during the 48 hours he was under detention—you suggested that the Commission make an inquiry into whether his civil rights were denied. Do you have any information on that subject?

Mr. Lane. Yes. I saw what happened—I read in the newspapers and heard on the radio.

Mr. Rhyne. It looked to me that most of the material presented here today was really in the newspapers. You are merely repeating what someone else has said.

Mr. Lane. I don't think that is an accurate characterization of my testimony at all, sir. For example, I told you before of conversations that I have had—I know you listened intently—I told you of conversations that I had with Mr. Klein. I told you of conversations I had with Miss Hill, who is probably the closest eyewitness to the assassination, with Miss Woodward, who is perhaps the second or third closest witness to the assassination, with Dial Ryder, with at least two or three other persons.

Mr. Rhyne. But on this one point, with respect to denial of any civil rights or protection of civil rights during this 48-hour period, you say that is all in the newspaper stories?

Mr. Lane. No. What I meant by that response was that the basic denial that I was discussing was the development of the case publicly against him, so that it would be impossible in securing a jury panel to secure 12 jurors probably anywhere in this country who had not reached a conclusion, first of all. And secondly, obviously the death of the accused, which I know is a matter for the Commission's inquiry already.

Mr. Rhyne. I notice that you said your investigation was incomplete. So I just wanted to be sure that I understood what you meant with respect to this 48-hour detention period.

Mr. Lane. No; I have no knowledge over and above that that I could give you in that area.

The Chairman. Mr. Murray, do you have any questions you would like to ask?

Mr. Murray. No; I have none, Mr. Chief Justice, at this time.

The Chairman. Well, Mr. Lane, if any evidence should come to your attention in the future, would you be willing to convey the information to the Commission?

Mr. Lane. Yes; I certainly would, sir.

The Chairman. We will appreciate it if you would. Thank you for your attendance.

We will adjourn at this time.

(Whereupon, at 5:35 p.m., the President's Commission adjourned, and reconvened in executive session.)

---

[TESTIMONY OF MR. LANE RESUMED IN EXECUTIVE SESSION]

The Chairman. The session will be in order.

Mr. Rankin. Will you proceed, Mr. Lane, in executive session now, to describe the names?

Mr. Lane. The third name that I was informed—the person that I was informed was there, the third person, is named Jack Ruby. It was my feeling, of course, while his case was pending it would not be proper to comment on that in the presence of the press.

Mr. Rankin. You mean the third person in the group apparently conferring?

Mr. Lane. Yes. Tippit, Weissman, and Ruby.

The Chairman. Have you made any public statement of this kind before on this subject—about this meeting?

Mr. Lane. Not about Ruby—about a meeting between Weissman and Tippit, yes.

The Chairman. But you never named Ruby publicly?

Mr. Lane. No; I have not. I shall not.

The Chairman. I see. Do you know any way by which we might corroborate that meeting—the fact that it was held?

Mr. Lane. I am going this evening to see, or tomorrow—I will try this evening first—to see if I can secure permission by my informant to reveal his name, and I hope he will be willing to come forward and testify as to what took place.

The Chairman. The Commission would like to know it, if you can do that.

Mr. Lane. Yes; I shall inform you as soon as I discover that. I would like very much for the Commission to have that information. Can I indicate to my informant that the matter can be so raised so that his name will not be known to anyone other than the Commission?

The Chairman. Yes, sir; you may.

Mr. Lane. That will be extremely helpful.

The Chairman. If you can think of any way that can be corroborated, it would be most helpful to us.

Mr. Lane. I understand.

The Chairman. Congressman, you just got in as we are about to adjourn. Mr. Lane was telling us of one piece of information that he had concerning a meeting that was held at the Carousel Nightclub, about a week, did you say——

Mr. Lane. Yes.

The Chairman. About a week before the assassination, at which the man who financed this full-page article in the paper, Dallas paper, this morning, concerning President Kennedy, and Officer Tippit, and he told us in private here—he didn't want to mention it before the press—Jack Ruby. And he tells us that he will try to find out from his informant more about that, and if he possibly can deliver the information to us.

Senator Cooper. May I ask one question?

I assume from what you have said you wouldn't be able to answer it, but was there any reason ascribed for the presence of Tippit?

Mr. Lane. My informant does not know the reason.

Senator Cooper. Or Ruby, with Weissman?

Mr. Lane. My informant does not know that information.

Representative Ford. May I ask a question, Mr. Chief Justice? When did this information come to your attention, Mr. Lane?

Mr. Lane. Some weeks ago.

Representative Ford. Do you consider the informant a reliable, responsible person?

Mr. Lane. Yes. I cannot vouch, of course, for the information personally, but I believe the informant is a reliable and a responsible person.

Representative Ford. Would your informant be willing, as far as you know—be willing to testify and give the Commission this information directly?

Mr. Lane. I am going to try to arrange that this evening. The Chief Justice has indicated that his name would not be known if he did that, and that I did not know that I could make that statement to him before now. I hope that will be decisive.

The Chairman. Is there anything further, gentlemen?

If not——

Representative Ford. May I ask, Mr. Chairman, are we going to have a schedule laid out, are we going to have a meeting of the Commission where maybe we will know what the schedule is in the next week or 10 days or 2 weeks?

Mr. Rankin. We have a draft now.

The Chairman. We have a draft for you to see.

Mr. Lane. Perhaps I should withdraw at this time.

The Chairman. All right.

Mr. Lane, thank you very much, sir.

(Whereupon, at 5:45 p.m., the President's Commission recessed.)

---

[Monday, March 9, 1964]
TESTIMONY OF ROY H. KELLERMAN, WILLIAM ROBERT GREER, CLINTON J. HILL, AND RUFUS WAYNE YOUNGBLOOD

The President's Commission met at 9:10 a.m. on March 9, 1964, at 200 Maryland Avenue NE., Washington, D.C.

Present were Chief Justice Earl Warren, Chairman; Senator John Sherman Cooper, Representative Hale Boggs, and Representative Gerald R. Ford, members.

Also present were Norman Redlich, assistant counsel; Arlen Specter, assistant counsel; Walter Craig and Charles Murray, observers; and Fred Smith, Treasury Department.