Mrs. Rich. At this time I would also, pertaining to my statement concerning working for various police organizations, introduce into this informal hearing, so to speak, another piece of material given to me by the Oakland Police Department while working on a case for them, under the name of Julie Anne Cody. Also under this name is a police record purposely devised by the Oakland Police Department for obvious purposes, to coincide with this card that I am about to hand to Mr. Hubert—also, how shall we say it—falsified, made up by the Oakland Police Department, for obvious purposes. This was to get me into a particular place—I had to have a police record—all done with the sanction of the Oakland Police Department. May I also note that on that card the dates and the names are fictitious, intentionally so. The card was in reality printed in, I believe, November of 1963.
Mr. Hubert. You say you want to introduce this card into this proceeding?
Mrs. Rich. Yes. And I will tell you why. If you note the date on that, some of my statements—Let’s say that this came into light, and I didn’t give the explanation of why and what this meant—the dates would conflict with some of my testimony. And I want this understood that this was purely done to, shall we say, consummate a case for the Oakland Police Department. I was not actually in California the dates on that card.
Mr. Hubert. When was this card issued to you?
Mrs. Rich. In reality, this card was issued in November of 1963. I was working on a grand larceny case.
Mr. Hubert. You want this card back, the original?
Mrs. Rich. Yes.
Mr. Hubert. All right. Now, as soon as we have a Xerox copy made of the card, we will identify it and sign the copies as we have done the other.
Meanwhile, let us pass on to another point. I think you have mentioned that you saw Ruby at a certain meeting at which your husband was present and there was a general discussion of guns or Cuban refugees.
Mrs. Rich. Your statement is partially correct.