TESTIMONY OF WILLIAM J. NEWMAN RESUMED
The testimony of William J. Newman was taken at 4:08 p.m., on March 26, 1964, in the office of the U.S. attorney, 301 Post Office Building, Bryan and Ervay Streets, Dallas, Tex., by Mr. Burt W. Griffin, assistant counsel of the President's Commission.
Mr. Hubert. Let the record show that at 4:08, March 26, 1964, the deposition of Mr. W. J. Newman, which was commenced last night with Mr. Burt W. Griffin conducting the investigation, but which was not completed last night, is now being resumed by Leon D. Hubert, Jr., staff member, conducting the deposition.
Mr. Newman, are you willing to continue the deposition at this time?
Mr. Newman. Yes, sir.
Mr. Hubert. Will you understand that you are under the same oath that you were yesterday when the deposition began, and all through the deposition?
Mr. Newman. Yes, sir.
Mr. Hubert. And that you regard yourself as being under the same oath?
Mr. Newman. Yes.
Mr. Hubert. Let the record show, also, that I have been designated by Mr. J. Lee Rankin, General Counsel of the Commission, to take the sworn deposition of Mr. William J. Newman.
Mr. Newman, I simply want to mark for identification so that we will all know what we are talking about certain papers and letters and reports so that we can refer to them by the designation marked on them.
Now, I notice that last night, apparently, the last exhibit number that was used by Mr. Griffin was No. 5038, in connection with a letter dated November 26, or rather it is a copy of a letter dated November 26 addressed to J. E. Curry, Chief of Police, the original of which, apparently, signed W. J. Newman.
Since I do not know what sequence of the letters Mr. Griffin has used since he started your deposition, I am going to number the documents that we will be talking about now by using the same basic number 5038, adding the letters "A", "B", "C", etc., as far as we need to go. Now, in that connection, I am marking an undated statement—an undated document, I beg your pardon, undated document entitled "Statement of Police Reserve Officer William J. Newman." It is also unsigned. And it is to be found in the Commission Document 81-A point 79. For the purpose of identification, I am marking it "Dallas, Tex., March 26, 1964. Exhibits 5038-A. Deposition of W. J. Newman." Sign my name below it. Then for the purposes of identification, also, I am marking a verifax or photostatic copy of "Officer's Memorandum dated December 6, 1963, to Lieutenant Revill, from Detective R. W. Westphal," which document is to be found in Commission Document 81-A point 79. And, I am marking that "Dallas, Tex., March 26, 1964. That's Exhibit 5038-B. Deposition of W. J. Newman," and signing my name below on that document. Then the next document is a letter, or verifax or photostatic copy of a letter, dated December 31, 1963, to J. E. Curry, signed by Jack Revill, and C. C. Wallace, purporting to be a report on an interview by Reserve Officer W. J.—William J. Newman, No. 317, and for the purposes of identification I am marking that document "Dallas, Tex., March 26, 1964. Exhibit No. 5038-C." Continuing your identification, "Dallas, Tex., March 26, 1964, Exhibit 5038-C. Deposition of W. J. Newman." I am signing my name on that document, which is also to be found in Commission Report—Commission Document No. 81-A point 79. Finally, I am marking what purports to be a copy of the report by FBI Agents James C. Kennedy and Leo L. Robertson, concerning an interview with William J. Newman on December 24, 1963, and for identification I am marking that document, "Dallas, Tex., March 26, 1964. Exhibit 5038-D. The deposition of W. J. Newman." And signing my name on that document.
Now, Mr. Newman, you have had an opportunity, I think, to read these various documents there, 5038, then 5038-A, B, C and D.
Mr. Newman. Yes, sir.
Mr. Hubert. The only purpose of asking you to read them and to compare them is to ask you if you can assist us at getting at the facts, and that is all we want to know.
There seems to be some contradiction between them. Maybe there is not. If there isn't and you can show us that there isn't, that is all we want to know. If there is a contradiction, we would like to have your explanation, if we can, as to what is the truth, because that is all we want to know anyhow. If there is a contradiction, it is obvious that one of the statements must be wrong, and all we want to do is tell us which is wrong and which is right. That is the sole purpose of this inquiry.
Mr. Newman. Be happy to; if I can.
Mr. Hubert. Perhaps I can get at it this way: These reports seem to indicate that you saw a man coming down the ramp. These records also seem to indicate that you saw a man climbing over a rail in the basement. Now, I think we can clarify this situation immediately by asking you, do those reports relate to two different instances?
Mr. Newman. That's correct.
Mr. Hubert. In other words, there was a man climbing over the rail, and there was a man coming down the Main Street ramp, and as far as you know they are two different episodes?
Mr. Newman. Two different things.
Mr. Hubert. Two different things. All right. We got a lot clarified there. Now, I think the other point is when did each of these happen, and let's take, first of all, the man coming down the ramp.
Mr. Newman. This, as I stated there, was, as near as I can estimate, approximately 1 minute or less prior to the shooting.
Mr. Hubert. I think you said in your statement that because of the various conditions existing you could not identify the man by name or sight or anything of that sort?
Mr. Newman. No.
Mr. Hubert. That is to say when he was coming down the ramp?
Mr. Newman. That's correct. I have also—I have never made any estimate.
Mr. Hubert. No; that's correct. I didn't mean to intimate that you had. It is a fact that a man coming down—that you did see a man coming down, but you really don't know who he is, and that never have known?
Mr. Newman. That's correct.
Mr. Hubert. You have, of course, seen pictures and so forth of Jack Ruby since?
Mr. Newman. That's right.
Mr. Hubert. Would you say that the man coming down the ramp was Jack Ruby?
Mr. Newman. No; I wouldn't. By the same token, I wouldn't say that he wasn't.
Mr. Hubert. In other words, you can't say whether he was or wasn't?
Mr. Newman. That's right. I just didn't pay that much attention to it at the time.
Mr. Hubert. And that was definitely about a minute before the shooting?
Mr. Newman. That's correct.
Mr. Hubert. So, I think we have that one clarified, so far as that is concerned.
Now, about the man jumping over the rail, what is your best thought about the timing on that?
Mr. Newman. I have none. When I talked to Lieutenant Revill, I think this was Sunday the 1st of December, I guess it would be, and he asked me two or three times whether I had seen a man go over the rail. I couldn't recall anyone. Later, I think it was, oh, two days later, I am not sure, I did remember seeing someone go over that rail, but as I stated in that statement, I cannot, for the life of me, set the time in any figures. Just something that registered, and that was the end of it.
Mr. Hubert. So, that when you say "it", you couldn't tell whether it was before the shooting or after, you can't tell whether it was a minute before or a minute after, 5 minutes before or 5 minutes after, or for that matter more time before or more time after?
Mr. Newman. Well, I know not longer than 5 or 10 minutes after, because I wasn't there. I couldn't establish it at any time.
Mr. Hubert. So, that your best recollection right now, today, is simply that you have a recollection of a man going over the rail from the parking area into the ramp.
Mr. Newman. That's right.
Mr. Hubert. About what part of the ramp was it; do you remember?
Mr. Newman. About midway.
Mr. Hubert. About midway? But, you don't know?
Mr. Newman. Just——
Mr. Hubert. The relation of it as to time of the shooting, except that it couldn't have been when you weren't there, obviously.
Mr. Newman. That's right.
Mr. Hubert. You remember how the man was dressed?
Mr. Newman. No.
Mr. Hubert. I'll ask you this, too: Do you know whether it was, or was not, or do you have any opinion on whether it was or was not Jack Ruby, or do you have any opinion as to who it was at all?
Mr. Newman. I have no opinion whatsoever. I would like to say in that, since we are talking about this incident, that when I talked to Detective Westphal—was it?
Mr. Hubert. Yes, sir.
Mr. Newman. Lieutenant Revill was out of town. He didn't indicate to me that he placed any importance on it whatsoever. I was not aware of the fact that he had even written a memo on it. Mr. Griffin, last night, did not bring it up, and I, after talking to him, dropped the subject. Didn't see fit to bring it up, or didn't even remember it.
Mr. Hubert. What is this undated statement which we have identified as 5038-A, the one that is also unsigned? Do you know anything about that at all?
Mr. Newman. I don't know. I would guess probably that information was taken down at the time I talked to him on the telephone. That is, by and large, the statement I made to him.
Mr. Hubert. You had called him on the telephone as indicated, in fact, by Exhibit 5038-B, when Westphal reports on it, says, "Subject." That means you, "called this date." Did he ask you when—in other words, he left a call for you, is that correct?
Mr. Newman. Now, I called him.
Mr. Hubert. You called him to tell him what?
Mr. Newman. Just to give him that information that I had remembered since I talked to him the previous time, because at the time he seemed to think it was fairly important.
Mr. Hubert. Now, did you go out to Parkland Hospital?
Mr. Newman. Yes.
Mr. Hubert. Did you speak to a man, reserve officer by the name of Holly?
Mr. Newman. I don't recall. I spoke to several reserve officers. I can't recall any of them as to who they were.
Mr. Hubert. Do you remember telling anyone of them about having seen either of these two men that we just talked about, that is to say, the man coming down the rail, or coming down the ramp, or the man coming over the rail?
Mr. Newman. No, at the time I didn't even recall placing any significance on the fact, because at the time I didn't even know what had happened.
Mr. Hubert. You don't recall talking to anybody about either of these two episodes, the man going down the ramp and the man jumping over the rail while you were at Parkland that day?
Mr. Newman. No, I didn't.
Mr. Hubert. I gather from your statement, but I think I had better get it exactly straight, that you did not do anything with respect to either of the two men?
Mr. Newman. No, I had no contact with them.
Mr. Hubert. I didn't mean that contact, so much as I meant taking some police action.
Mr. Newman. No, that is what I meant too.
Mr. Hubert. All right. Do you know an officer by the name of Brock? Reserve officer, I believe.
Mr. Newman. No, I don't. I don't recognize the name.
Mr. Hubert. And one by the name of Worley?
Mr. Newman. No, I don't recognize that name either. I might know him on sight if I see him.
Mr. Hubert. Well, have you any other comments to make? I think the thing is clarified.
Mr. Newman. No, we had our misunderstanding last night. I didn't know what needed to be clarified. I know I was thoroughly shaky and possibly not too accurate as to the details of what happened in that basement prior to the shooting in the hour or hour and a half, but that wasn't my concern, and I didn't pay too much attention. I just gave it as best I remembered.
Mr. Hubert. Well, I wasn't at the deposition last night, so I don't know what went on, and I, therefore, will not ask you any further questions.
Have you had any interview with me prior to taking of this deposition today?
Mr. Newman. No.
Mr. Hubert. All right. I think that is all. Thank you for coming very much.
Mr. Newman. I do have one other thing here that Mr. Griffin seemed to be concerned about last night, in that I couldn't identify a man, a reserve officer I had met in the basement of the garage, or immediately after I got there by name. That that you are holding is a class picture that was made. I can now identify—I have a list of names in my pocket if you want them.
Mr. Hubert. The only way for it to be of the use would be if you would let me mark the picture and put it in the record.
Mr. Newman. You may have it if you like. I don't know whether it is of any importance or not.
Mr. Hubert. I don't either, but—do you want it to go in?
Mr. Newman. Not necessarily. I am leaving it up to you.
Mr. Hubert. As I say, I don't know what the question was last night about identification, and you have brought this matter up; I am perfectly willing to hear what you have to say about it. I think it would be better, if you comment about it, to put it in the record, but on the other hand maybe it wouldn't be necessary. Why don't you say what you have to say about it and then we can judge better?
Mr. Newman. As near as I can recall, when he was questioning me about what officers I had seen in the basement that morning whom I knew, and the subject came up that I had seen one man but I could not remember his name. He asked me at that time for a description of him and I gave it to him. After looking at that picture last night when I got home, and with the list of names I had for the picture, I can now give the man's name, if you would like it.
Mr. Hubert. Yes; go ahead.
Mr. Newman. Third from the left—second from the left on the back row. Casten, Jerome Casten.
Mr. Hubert. Jerome Casten. Now, that was the reserve officer that Mr. Griffin was questioning you about last night, and, as I understand it, you testified that you did remember seeing a man, and you gave his description, but at that time you did not know his name?
Mr. Newman. That's correct.
Mr. Hubert. With the aid of this picture, which as I understand, is a class picture—I see Captain Solomon there, by the way—you identified him as the second man in the top row from the left, and you stated his name to be——
Mr. Newman. Jerome Casten.
Mr. Hubert. Jerome Casten. I think it would be better if you would allow this to go in. I am, therefore, marking the picture on the reverse side thereof by placing the following on it, to wit: "Dallas, Texas, March 26, 1964. Exhibit 5038-E, deposition of W. J. Newman." Then I am signing my name below that, I am placing an "X" over the man you have identified, and placing my initials next to the "X"; is that correct, sir?
Mr. Newman. That's right. I don't remember seeing that man throughout the rest of the day, and to the best of my knowledge he was assigned somewhere other than the basement quite sometime prior to the shooting.
Mr. Hubert. Now, in order that the record may show that we were both talking about the same document all the time, I wonder if you would mind placing your name below mine on each one of these?
Mr. Newman. All right, sir.
Mr. Hubert. Thank you very much.