Mr. Carro. Pending investigation, and for a sociological study while there.
Mr. Liebeler. Would the probation officer work with the boy while he was in the Youth House or basically after he got out of the Youth House?
Mr. Carro. No, actually the probation officer's job would be then to develop a history of the family which would entail talking to the boy about the nature of the difficulty which brought him before the court, talking to the parent as to what the parent knew and the boy's whole background from early childhood, whether there was trauma, whether he was a nailbiter, you know, the whole family history, brother, sibling relationship, parental history, look into the school record. In this particular instance it was most important because there was a question of truancy. Also find out about the religious affiliation, whether the boy went to church, look into the environmental surroundings, where he lived; visit the home, talk to the boy, himself, about the nature of his act and why he did the things he did, and actually, in essence, get a full report, about as full as possible as to the boy's background, his parents, his whole situation, make a recommendation to the court, get the reports from the school as to what the probation officer deemed should happen in this instance.
Unlike the special sessions and other courts where the probation officers do not make recommendations, in Children's Court the probation officer does make a recommendation which the judge then can go along with or reject or take it under consideration. This was aside from what was going on in Youth House.
In Youth House the boy that is sent there, every worker that has some contact with the boy is required to write something about the contact, and they are in fairly good position because they watch this boy in his off moments for 2 to 3 weeks, in his everyday activities, and he is also seen by a psychiatrist while he is there, and then this report, along with what the probation officer has been able to get from visits to the home, the parents, talking to the boy himself, is collated and put together, and this forms the basis for the material that is given to the judge, so that the judge is in a better position to render a decision of what should happen, whether this boy should be placed, whether he should be returned home, whether he should be given therapy, whether he should be put on probation, strict probation, or whatever the judge would deem in the particular instance.
Mr. Liebeler. In this particular case you recall that Oswald was remanded to Youth House?
Mr. Carro. Yes, he was remanded from the very first day to the Youth House because he had not even bothered to report to school. I forget whether he had just turned 13 or he was still 12, but in New York State we have a law that requires each boy to attend school until at least 16, and this was a young man of tender age who had at this point taken it upon himself to just not bother to go to school any more, and furthermore, this was not the usual hooky-playing type—when I say hooky, the type of boy who does not go to school, to truant with his other friends, to go to the park, fish, play, or whatever it is. This is a boy who would not go to school just to remain home, not do anything.
The judge felt that since there was no father figure at home and it was just a mother who worked, that this was not a salutary situation for a boy this tender age to be in, and he felt he wanted to find out a little more about this boy before he made decision, and consequently he asked for the study at the Youth House.
Mr. Liebeler. Do you know who worked with Lee Oswald at the Youth House?
Mr. Carro. No; I only know that—I did not know the staff by name. I had been there on some occasions, so I do not know specifically who. I know he was seen by the psychiatrist, Dr. Hartogs, because they do send you their report afterwards, and I did receive a Youth House report, but I don't recall who specifically had the daily contacts with Lee Oswald.