ARRB 13th Batch

Part Two

---

Document # 124-10087-10332 Is a one page document from SAC, Chicago to Director dated 11/26/63.

Enclosed herewith are five copies to the Bureau and one copy to New York of a LHM dated as above, captioned “Polish Reaction to The Assassination of President Kennedy.”

Also enclosed are an equal number of copies of an FD-323 evaluating the source. The source referred to in the enclosed LHM is [CS CG [ ]-S who furnished the information to SA William E. Duff on 11/24/63 and 11/25/63.

The enclosed LHM and FD 323 are classified secret since the relationship of [CS CG [ ]-S with his Polish contacts tends to fall within the category of double agent operations.

Document # 124-10100-10040 Is a 5 page document from SAC Miami to Director dated 2/20/64. Only one page is here.

Set out below is a translation of an article which appeared in “Bohemia” on 12/20/63, furnished by MM [ ]-S to SA James D. Hayes on 2/17/64. This article, which criticizes the Director and the Bureau, was translated by Sophie Y. Saliba at Miami.

MM [ ]-S, an individual who is acquainted with both pro and anti-Castro activities in Cuba and the United States, advised “Bohemia” is a weekly magazine published in Havana, Cuba, under the direction and control of the government of Cuba of Fidel Castro Ruz. MM [ ]-S advised the author of the article, Mario Kuchilan, is also known as Mario Ernesto Ku Chilan Sol.

“Ready for Action”

Every Limitation becomes a Point of Departure

by

Mario Kuchilan

“F.B.I. `Striptease’ ”

Jack Rubenstein, alias `Ruby’, the hero of Dallas, is about to be released. His attorney, Melvin Belli, has…

(The rest is missing.)

Document # 124-10100-10306 Is a copy of Cover Page D from Document # 124-10069-10000.

Document # 124-10102-10077 Is a four page document from SAC, Albuquerque to Director dated 11/26/63. Actually, two copies of two pages. It is a copy of Document # 124-10070-10347.

Document # 124-10102-10200 Is missing

Document # 124-10103-10219 Is a three page document from SAC, Miami to Director dated 11/29/63. Only two pages are here.

Re my tel to Bureau 10:38 a.m. 11/26/63 re Jose Antonio Carbarga.

Emilio Nunez Portuondo called FBI, Miami, November 27, `63 to call attention to violence in Venezuela and the reported attempt on the lives of various officials there by means of bombs disguised as gifts. On November 29, `63 he noted these additional acts of violence are apparent proof of the statement of Jose Antonio Carbarga that “Castro’s plan of violence continues in Venezuela, Peru and all the Americas.”

Nunez claimed that Carlos Lechuga, Cuban Ambassador to the United Nations in New York is at the head of all Cuban espionage and subversive activity in the United States. He admitted he had nothing to base this statement, but stated it is common knowledge and the FBI should investigate Lechuga. Nunez noted the Miami Herald for November 29, `63 reports arrest of Jose Antonio Carbarga, Mexico City, for allegedly giving article to Mexico city daily paper, “El Universal” quoting Nunez Portuondo as stating that the assassination of President Kennedy was a Castro plot. Nunez believed arrest of Carbarga due to FBI action. He was assured that FBI had nothing to do with arrest of Carbarga.

In view of violence in Latin America and kidnaping of assistant military attache in Venezuela, it is suggested Bureau may wish to remind State Department, for such instructions and precautions as may be deemed appropriate, of information secured by MM[ ]-S from Raul Roa Kouri in Rio De Janeiro that “there would not be a safe U.S. Ambassador in any foreign post in event of violence”. This information is already reported and disseminated by Bureau by LHM from Miami November 12, `63 captioned “Cuba’s relations with Soviet Bloc countries, is – Cuba Bufile 64-47156.

Document # 124-10105-10245 Is a two page document from SAC, Cleveland to Director dated 11/27/63. It is a copy of Document # 124-10070-10297. Only one page is here.

Document # 124-10108-10046 Is a two page document from SAC Dallas to Director. it is a copy of Document # 124-10070-10297.

Document # 124-10108-10090 Is a copy of Document # 124-10077-10059.

Document # 124-10108-10141 Is a copy of Document # 124-10072-10190.

Document # 124-10110-10420 is a copy of one of the Cover Pages from

Document #124-10065-10076.

Document # 124-10112-10058 Is a copy of Cover Page D from Document # 124-10069-10000. Actually, there are two copies of the same page here.

Document # 124-10119-10129 Is a 6 page document from SAC, Chicago to Director dated 11/25/63. It is a copy of Document # 124-10077-10025.

Document # 124-10119-10134 Is a copy of Document # 124-10068-10034.

Document # 124-10119-10142 Is a copy of Document # 124-10068-10016.

Document # 124-10119-10287 Is missing

Document # 124-10125-10102 Is a four page document from SAC, San Francisco to Director dated 1/30/64. It is about Dr. Walter Bromberg, a defense witness for Jack Ruby for his trial. Dr. Bromberg and his wife, Esther, lived in Sacramento, California since 1948. He moved to New York city in 1963.

Dr. Walter Bromberg, MD

A source advised on January 30, 1952, that Dr. Bromberg was employed by the Department of Public Health, State of California, as an assistant physician and surgeon at the Sacramento Police Emergency Hospital, Sacremento, California, since October, 1951.

Dr. Bromberg was born December 16, 1900, at New York City, New York. He attended elementary and high school in Brooklyn, New York. He received a B. S. degree from the University of Cincinnati in 1924. He received a M. D. degree from Long Island College.

Dr. Bromberg served in the U. S. Navy as a Commander in the Medical corps from May, 1942, to June, 1946, having U. S. Navy Serial Number 216461. From June, 1946, to August, 1950, he conducted a private practice as a medical psychiatrist at Reno, Nevada. From August, 1950, to September, 1951, he was employed with the California State Department of Mental Hygiene at Mendocino State Hospital. The source furnished the following description of Bromberg:

Name: Dr. Walter Bromberg

Race: White

Born: December 16, 1900, at New York City, New York

Height: 5’10”

Weight: 180 lbs.

Marital status: Married

Residence: 1907 21st. Street, Sacramento, Calif. (1952)

In the November 9, 1951, issue of the San Francisco “Examiner”, a newspaper published in San Francisco, California, there appeared an article headlined “Dr. Bromberg Under Fire.” A subheading stated “meddled at Agnews, Director Says.” The article set out as follows:

“Dr. Walter Bromberg, ousted Director of Clinical Surveys at Mendocino State Hospital, was accused today of meddling in Agnews State Hospital affairs.

“The accusation was made by Dr. Walter Rappaport, Director of Agnews, in a State Personnel Board hearing on Bromberg’s appeal from his dismissal.

“Rappaport said Bromberg twice consulted women patients at Agnews while he was employed at Mendocino. Rappaport said this was the first time in the history of California that a state hospital director intervened in the administration of another state hospital.”

In the September 26, 1951, issue of the New York “Daily News”, a newspaper published in New York city, there appeared an article showing a photograph of Belle Bromberg and her two children in connection with the arrest of Walter Bromberg on the grounds that her alimony payments were in jeopardy in that he had threatened to go to California if she did not agree to a Florida divorce. The article reflected that Belle Bromberg alleged that Walter Bromberg had been to California on a trip with a Welfare Department employee by the name of Esther Boyd and that Dr. Bromberg had been living with Boyd since 1939.

A second source advised on October 27, 1952, that she is a very close acquaintance of Hazel Nystron, who admitted to her that she has been a member of the Communist Party of the USA. Nystron encouraged the source to become a member of the Communist party and in this connection arranged an introduction for the source with the Organizational and Membership Director of the Communist Party in the Sacramento area.

Nystron invited her to various social functions in Sacramento. Nystron and some of her associates have, with some frequency, engaged in “sex parties” where base, immoral practices took place. The source attended one such function without prior knowledge of the practices to take place. Present at this “party” was Dr. Walter Bromberg who was then employed as a physician at the Sacramento City Hospital and who formerly was clinical director at the Mendocino State Hospital.

Document # 124-10126-10080 Is a copy of Document # 124-10068-10034.

Document # 124-10126-10124 Is a copy of Document # 124-10068-10034.

Document # 124-10126-20345 Is a copy of Document # 124-10125-10102.

Document # 124-10127-10018 Is a copy of Document # 124-10081-10142.

Document # 124-10133-10055 Is a copy of Document # 124-10003-10038.

Document # 124-10143-10394 Is a copy of Document # 124-10103-10219.

Document # 124-10160-10009 Is a three page document from SAC, NY to Director dated 11/26/63.

NY [ ]-S on 11/26 instant, conferred with Gus Hall, CPUSA General Secretary, in room 707, Chelsea Hotel, NYC. Hall stated he would not visit CPUSA headquarters during the present week for “security reasons”. He stated further that he felt there will be an ultra right attack against the CP in view of the alleged involvement of Lee Oswald with the Fair Play For Cuba Committee.

Shortly after the informant met with Hall, Arnold Johnson and Irving Potash arrived at the room with two copies of the “NY World Telegram and Sun” for this date. Both were in an excited state. The “World Telegram” article, according to the informant, indicated that the Dallas, Texas, PD, had leaked the fact that among Oswald’s personal effects were some letters on CPUSA stationery dealing with how he should proceed in his activities in the FPCC and as the informant stated, “how to handle noisy neighbors”. According to the informant it was apparent that Johnson had not revealed the fact that he had corresponded with Oswald. He then told Hall that there were three letters from Oswald which he had answered. He recalled one dated August 28 last to Elizabeth Gurely Flynn and one to himself on September 1 last. He indicated that there apparently was one sent some time previously and that he added that Oswald probably wrote to Flynn because he obtained Flynn’s name from literature enclosed to Oswald in the earlier reply.

As to the disposition of Oswald’s letters, Johnson could not specifically recall, but it was his belief that he sent them to George Meyers, because Meyers is in charge of the Southern region of the CP and would normally handle matters from the south. From this Johnson recalled that to the best of his knowledge all the Oswald letters came from, and the replies were sent to, an address in New Orleans.

Hall instructed Arnold Johnson to phone George Meyers immediately and instruct him to bring to NYC any and all correspondence concerning Oswald he might have in his possession.

The assembled group then decided upon answering newspaper inquiries concerning the story in the “World Telegram” with a statement to the effect that the CPUSA answers all correspondence received by it as a matter of courtesy even though some of it may be from anti-Communists. In these letters of acknowledgement, they often enclose various pieces of current literature.

From the conversation of the group, the informant learned that general attitude of the CP leaders present was that Oswald was a “nut” used by the FBI to send letters to the CPUSA office in order to get answers. Continuing, they feel that Oswald was prevailed upon to become part of a conspiracy but that he did not shoot President Kennedy. Someone in the group concluded that the rifle was not of the type that could fire with such accuracy, frequency, and impact to do the damage that it had done. They feel that someone else did the shooting, but that all the evidence was stacked against Oswald to point to him as the guilty person. It is their feeling that Jack Ruby was also a member of the ultra – right who was prevailed upon to kill Oswald because indications were that he was about to talk.

After some additional discussion along the same lines, Johnson and Potash left the room and no additional information on this matter was developed.

It was learned that George Meyers is scheduled to be in NYC, 11/27 next.

Document # 124-10163-10133 Is missing

Document # 124-10169-10052 Is a copy of Document # 124-10003-10038.

Document # 124-10178-10493 Is a copy of Document # 124-10103-10219.

Document # 124-10182-10122 Is a copy of Document # 124-10087-10328.

Document # 124-10272-10091 Is a copy of Document # 124-10103-10219.

All the CIA Documents Postponed in Part are missing.

CIA Documents: Postponed in part

1.) Document # 104-10015-10030

2.) Document # 104-10015-10035

3.) Document # 104-10015-10037

4.) Document # 104-10015-10058

5.) Document # 104-10015-10129

6.) Document # 104-10015-10150

7.) Document # 104-10015-10158

8.) Document # 104-10015-10178

9.) Document # 104-10015-10220

10.) Document # 104-10015-10223

11.) Document # 104-10015-10227

12.) Document # 104-10015-10240

13.) Document # 104-10015-10259

14.) Document # 104-10015-10269

15.) Document # 104-10015-10330

16.) Document # 104-10015-10348

17.) Document # 104-10015-10364

18.) Document # 104-10015-10375

19.) Document # 104-10015-10385

20.) Document # 104-10015-10396

21.) Document # 104-10015-10402

22.) Document # 104-10015-10403

23.) Document # 104-10015-10410

24.) Document # 104-10015-10435

25.) Document # 104-10015-10448

26.) Document # 104-10016-10007

27.) Document # 104-10016-10022

28.) Document # 104-10017-10000

29.) Document # 104-10017-10008

30.) Document # 104-10017-10009

31.) Document # 104-10017-10010

32.) Document # 104-10017-10011

33.) Document # 104-10017-10021

34.) Document # 104-10017-10035

35.) Document # 104-10017-10048

36.) Document # 104-10017-10052

37.) Document # 104-10017-10062

38.) Document # 104-10017-10063

39.) Document # 104-10017-10068

40.) Document # 104-10017-10076

41.) Document # 104-10017-10080

42.) Document # 104-10018-10000

43.) Document # 104-10018-10004

44.) Document # 104-10018-10005

45.) Document # 104-10018-10006

46.) Document # 104-10018-10041

47.) Document # 104-10018-10048

48.) Document # 104-10018-10055

49.) Document # 104-10018-10065

50.) Document # 104-10018-10082

51.) Document # 104-10018-10092

52.) Document # 104-10018-10094

53.) Document # 104-10018-10096

54.) Document # 104-10095-10001

HSCA documents postponed in part are also missing.

HSCA Documents: Postponed in Part

1.) Document # 180-10084-10094

2.) Document # 180-10086-10235

3.) Document # 180-10101-10053

4.) Document # 180-10102-10278

5.) Document # 180-10106-10011

6.) Document # 180-10107-10194

7.) Document # 180-10111-10065

8.) Document # 180-10115-10028

9.) Document # 180-10120-10343

Additional Releases – HSCA Documents Open In Full

Document # 180-10110-10034 Is a two page document on the HSCA’s trip to Cuba. It is dated August 11, 1977. Actually it is four pages as the two page letter is copied.

CONFIDENTIAL / LIMDIS

August 11, 1977

Memorandum for the Record

Subj: Select Committee on Assassinations

– Proposed Staff Trip to Cuba

By: H-Alexander Schnee

On Monday, August 8, James Wolf, head of the Legal Section of the Select Committee on Assassinations (House) called to request a meeting to discuss a proposed trip to Cuba by Robert Blakey, the Chief Counsel and three staff assistants. He strongly emphasized the need for secrecy and for limiting this information to people with a need-to-know. I briefly mentioned previous discussions of a Cuban connection with the staff of the Committee and we agreed to meet the next day.

On Monday evening, Ambassador Stedman advised me to point out to Wolf the establishment of “Interests Section” on September 1st and that this would provide a good channel to explore the Cuban reaction and make any arrangements that became necessary. We should offer to get the Committee staff together with the

U. S. head of the Interests Section soon after he is appointed. The Committee, alternatively, could choose to work through the Cubans in their Interest Section in the Czech Embassy.

Mr. Wolf, Tuesday morning, August 9, readily accepted the concept of working through the Interests Section and asked for general guidance as to how they should proceed. With the caveat that I had not cleared my views in the Department,

I suggested they proceed as follows:

–The approach to the Cubans should be based on reports the Committee had received that Castro had informed some American visitors that he is prepared to cooperate in a serious and comprehensive investigation into the assassination of President Kennedy by the USG.

–Our representatives in the Interest Section of the Swiss Embassy in Havana could probably approach the Cubans on this within a month of their opening the Section. The Cubans might reply within two weeks. If the answer is positive, the first contact could be established by October 15. (Wolf thought timing was important because the Committee would have to report to the Congress early in the fall.)

–Rather than arrive with a staff prepared to go to work in Cuba, I suggested that the Chief Counsel, or one other person arrive alone, to ascertain what the Cubans were prepared to do and how they wished to proceed.

–The Embassy would set up the meeting with the appropriate Cuban official and make hotel arrangements. If the hotel presents a problem as regards avoiding publicity, other arrangements might be feasible.

–The best way to travel would be by the Cuban carrier out of Montreal. Air Canada is an alternative, but more people apt to recognize the traveler and be interested fly on Air Canada. Mexican Airlines is another alternative.

–The Department will handle the visas.

Subsequently, Wayne Smith, the Director of Cuban Affairs approved of this approach, stressing the expediency of a one man visit.

Mr. Wolf, in a telephone conversation August 11, said he had discussed the proposed arrangements with Professor Blakey and he is in complete agreement. The projected time frame is more than adequate. If the Department finds that more time is needed, a few more weeks won’t create problems. They understand the advantages of one person making the initial contact, but wonder whether the Chief Counsel and one aid might be acceptable. They will also want advice from our representatives as to whether a hotel registration might not be picked up by a knowledgeable and interested newspaper reporter. The Canadians, for example, are very much interested in the activities of the Committee.

We agreed that they would hear from me when our Interests Section head is available, or that they would contact me if they have additional questions or thoughts about he matter.

Document # 180-10110-10035 Is a one page letter from Alexander Schnee to Lyle F. Lane dated September 2, 1977.

SECRET

TOP SECRET enclosures September 2, 1977

Lyle F. Lane, Esquire

Chief, U. S. Interests Section

Havana

Dear Lyle:

I trust that you are enjoying your arrival in Havana as much as you appear to be on TV morning, noon and night.

Professor Blakey asked me to stop by today to pick up the enclosed two envelopes. You will note one is marked “Background: C”. That translates as a background paper which you are free to turn over to the Cubans, if you so desire. The other enevlope is marked “Lyle Lane: P not C”. That translates as highly classified background material for you, NOT to be shown to the Cubans.

I believe you will find both useful. If you have any questions, please don’t hesitate to communicate with me. Professor Blakey is very anxious to be as helpful as he can be.

Hopefully this letter finds you well and enjoying the challenge.

Sincerely,

Alexander Schnee

Office of Congressional Relations

Enclosures:

As Stated.

cc: Prof. Blakey ( ltr only

Amb. Stedman (Ltr only)

Document # 180-10110-10036 Is a one page letter from L. E. Connell,

U. S. Naval Investigative Service to Mr. Douglas J. Bennet, Assistant Secretary of State for Congressional Relations. It is undated but stamped August 15, 1977.

This Service is processing a request by the U. S. House of Representatives Select Committee on Assassinations for all materials concerning Lee Harvey Oswald and the investigation into the assassination of President John F. Kennedy (enclosure (1)).

All such materials are contained in or cross-referenced to this Service’s file holdings on Lee Harvey Oswald. Among those holdings are seven documents originated within the Department of State (enclosure (20), and a portion of one document originated by this Service (enclosure (3)).

Enclosures (2) and (3) are forwarded for your review and direct transmittal to the Select Committee. This Service interposes no objection to the declassification and transmittal of enclosure (3).

Document # 180-10110-10037 Is a one page letter from Douglas J. Bennet to G. Robert Blakey dated 9/27/63.

September 27, 1977

Professor Robert Blakey

General Counsel

Select Committee on Assassinations

3331 House Office Building, Anex 2

Washington, D.C. 20515

Dear Professor Blakey:

There are transmitted herewith copies of several documents concerning Lee Harvey Oswald and the investigation into the assassination of President John F. Kennedy which originated in the Department of State, and a copy of a portion of one document which originated in the Naval Investigative Service (enclosure).

These documents are forwarded pursuant to a request to this office from Captain L. E. Connell, Director, Naval Investigative Service. A copy of the Captain’s request is attached (enclosure).

Unfortunately, we are not able to obtain a more legible copy of the dispatch from our Embassy in Moscow dated October 26, 1959. You will notice that a clearer copy of the November 2, 1959 dispatch is provided.

The Department would appreciate appropriate security protection of the classified materials, and prior consultation in the event the Committee might wish to publicize or downgrade the classification of these documents.

Sincerely,

Douglas J. Bennet, Jr.

Assistant Secretary for

Congressional Relations

cc: Capt. Connell, Naval Investigative Service

Enclosures as Stated.

Document # 180-10110-10038 This is a three page document. This a letter, dated May 10, 1962 from John Noonan, Chief, Records and Services Branch, for the Director, Office of Security, State Department to the Director of Naval Intelligence, Attn: Assistant Chief of Staff for Intelligence, Department of the Navy.

This is in reply to your cited memorandum and previous, concerning the Subject: April 26, 1962, OP-921E2/cn, SER (I’m guessing the middle letter is an “E” as it’s badly blurred) 8128P92.

The Passport Office, with jurisdiction in this matter, has advised as follows:

“On the basis of the evidence and information of record in this case, it is considered that Mr. Oswald, who was born at New Orleans, Louisiana on October 18, 1939, has not expatriated himself under the pertinent laws of the United States.”

There were two enclosures. One a letter dated May 1, 1962 to PPT (passport Office) from John Noonan.

Supplementary to the reference, there is enclosed a copy of ONI letter of April 26, with copy of its attachment concerning the subject.

As ONI has again requested information on Oswald’s citizenship status, it will be appreciated if you can advise as soon as possible so that an appropriate reply may be prepared.

Then the last enclosure a letter dated April 4 1962 to the Passport Office from Otto F. Otepka, For the Director, Office of Security.

OSWALD, Lee Harvey

Reference Your memorandum dated December 28, 1961

Please advise if there has been a change in the Subject’s citizenship status, and further any other information which might be of assistance to the Navy in considering his case.

Please have the two enclosures returned with your reply.

Enclosures:

The two (2) ONI Memoranda, March 19 and 23, 1962.

There is a notation that the enclosures were not returned with PPT [Stimons?] obtained from PPT / [Johnsons?] office 5/9/62 [?] to file.

Document # 180-10110-10039 Is a one page telegram from Tokyo to the Secretary of State dated November 9, 1959. It is telegram 1448. This is John Pic’s reaction to Lee’s “defection”.

PRIORITY

SENT DEPARTMENT 1448, REPEATED INFORMATION PRIORITY MOSCOW 23, CINCPAC, COMUS / JAPAN UNNUMBERED

USAF Staff Sergeant John E. Pic Tachikawa Air Base, called at Embassy November 6, concerning news reports that his half-brother, Lee Harvey Oswald, 20 years old, intends to renounce US citizenship and become Soviet citizen.

According to Moscow AP dispatch in PACIFIC STARS AND STRIPES November 1, Lee Oswald is at Metropole Hotel, Moscow. UPI story datelined Fort Worth, Texas, reports another brother, Robert L. Oswald, has attempted to reach Lee Oswald by cable to Moscow and has also sent telegram to Secretary Herter pleading for assistance in contacting him.

Pic asked that Embassy inform him of any developments about Lee Oswald and requested that Embassy Moscow if possible transmit to him following message: “Please reconsider your intentions. Contact me if possible. Love. (Signed) John”.

Request any information this matter which Embassy can pass on to Pic.

CA informed

MACARTHUR

Document # 180-10110-10040 Is a three page document from Embassy Moscow to Department of State, Washington dated 11/2/59. This is really a legible copy of the dispatch. The barely readable dispatch is Document # 180-10110-10041.

FOREIGN SERVICE DISPATCH

From Amembassy MOSCOW

To THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE, WASHINGTON November 2, 1959

Ref Our tel 1304, October 31, 1959

SUBJECT CITIZENSHIP: Lee Harvey OSWALD

Mr. Lee Harvey OSWALD, an American citizen, appeared at this Embassy October 31, 1959 and stated to Second Secretary Richard E. Snyder that he wishes to renounce his American citizenship and that he had applied to become a citizen of the Soviet Union. He presented to the interviewing officer his passport and the following signed, undated, handwritten statement, the original of which is retained by the Embassy (misspellings are as in original):

“I Lee Harey (cq) Oswald do hereby request that my present citizenship in the United States of america, be revoked.

“I have entered the Soviet Union for the express purpose of appling for citizenship in the Soviet Union, through the means of naturalization.

“My request for citizenship is now pending before the Supreme Soviet of the U.S.S.R.

“I take these steps for political reasons. My request for the revoking of my American citizenship is made only after the longest and most serious considerations.

I affirm that my allegiance is to the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics.

s/ Lee H. Oswald

Oswald is the bearer of Passport No. 1733242, issued September 10, 1959 (retained by Embassy). The passport shows that he was born in New Orleans, Louisiana, on October 18, 1939, and gives his occupation as “shipping export agent” 4936 Collinwood Street, Fort Worth, Texas. A telegram subsequently received at the Embassy for him indicates that a brother, Robert L. Oswald, resides at 7313 Devenport, Fort Worth, Texas. He stated that he was discharged from the U. S. Marine Corps on September 11, 1959. Highest grade achieved was Corporal. Oswald evidently applied for his passport to the Agency at San Francisco while still in service. He stated that he had contemplated the action which he took for about two years before his discharge. He departed from the United States through New Orleans with the intent of traveling to the Soviet Union through Northern Europe. He states that he first applied for a Soviet tourist visa in Helsinki on October 14, that he applied for Soviet citizenship by letter to the Supreme Soviet on October 16 in Moscow. He stated that he did not mention his intent to remain in the Soviet Union to the Soviet Embassy in Helsinki at the time of his visa application.

Throughout the interview Oswald’s manner was aggressive, arrogant, and uncooperative. He appeared to be competent. He insisted that he did not wish to waste time in discussion or answering questions concerning his “personal” affairs beyond what was directly related to divesting himself of his American citizenship. He was contemptuous of any efforts by the interviewing officer in his interest, made clear that he wanted no advice from the Embassy. He stated that he knew the provisions of U. S. law on loss of citizenship and declined to have them reviewed by the interviewing officer. In short he displayed all the airs of a new sophomore party-liner.

Oswald gave as the “principal reason” for his decision that “I am a Marxist”, but declined any further elaboration of his motives. However, other remarks bearing on his attitude were made during the interview. At one point he alluded to hardships endured by his mother as a “worker” and stated that he did not intend to have this happen to him. He also referred to himself several times as a “worker”, but admitted that he never held a civilian job, having entered the Marine Corps directly from junior year of high school. (He claimed to have completed high school while in service.) He stated that his service in Okinawa and elsewhere “gave me a chance to observe `American imperialism.’ ” At another point he reacted sensitively when asked, in connection with his rank in the Marine Corps, whether he felt he should have had a higher grade.

Oswald categorically refused to discuss his family beyond stating that he was not married and that he has a mother in Texas. He had obliterated the address written on the inside cover of his passport and steadfastly refused to give any last home address until it was elicited by the “threat” that nothing could be done about his request to renounce his citizenship without this information. After giving the address noted above, he then confirmed that it was his mother’s address. He would not say whether he had informed his mother and rebuffed any suggestion of concern for her.

Oswald offered the information that he had been a radar operator in the Marine Corps and that he had voluntarily stated to unnamed Soviet officials that as a Soviet citizen he would make known to them such information concerning the Marine Corps and his speciality as he possessed. He intimated that he might know something of special interest.

Oswald is presently residing in non-tourist status at the Metropole Hotel in Moscow awaiting the Soviet response to his application for citizenship. As his Soviet visa and militia registration expired on October 22, 1959, and have not been renewed, he is patently in a technically illegal residence status with the tacit consent of the Soviet authorities.

For what significance it may have, the foregoing was also the pattern in the Nicholas Petrulli case (our Dispatch 111, September 11, 1959). Having evidently concluded after allowing Petrulli to languish “illegally” in a local hotel for a month, that he was no asset as a Soviet citizen, the Soviets suddenly invited him to depart pointing out that he had “overstayed” his visa.

In view of the Petrulli case and other considerations the Embassy proposes to delay action on Oswald’s request to execute an oath of renunciation to the extent dictated by developments and subject to the Department’s advice.

/s/ Edward L. Freers

Charge d’Affaires, ad interim

Document # 180-10110-10041 Is a copy of Document # 180-10110-10040.

Document # 180-10110-10042 Is a one page State Department telegram dated October 31, 1959 7:59 A.M. From Moscow to the Secretary of State. It is numbered 1304.

Lee Harvey Oswald, unmarried age 20 PP 1733242 issued Sept 10, 1959 appeared at Emb. today to renounce American citizenship, stated applied in Moscow for Soviet citizenship following entry USSR from Helsinki Oct. 15. Mother’s address and his last address US 4936 Collinwood St., Fort worth, Texas. Says action contemplated last two years. Main reason “I am a Marxist”. Attitude arrogant aggressive. Recently discharged Marine Corps. [That was encircled] Says has offered Soviets any information he has acquired as enlisted radar operator.

In view of Petrulli case we propose delay executing renunciation until Soviet Action known or Dept. advises. dispatch follows. Press informed.

Document # 180-10110-10043 Is a four page document dated 10/26/59.

The first three pages are a Foreign Service Dispatch but the subject is Robert Edward Webster, not Oswald. The first three pages are impossible to read clearly.

Oddly, the fourth page is about Oswald in Mexico City and specifically about Silvia Duran’s arrest. This is a weird document. On the top is “ORCES REFERENCE SHEET” and this is dated 8 Jan 1964. Then half the page is blank.

There is only about a paragraph of interest which states:

In one of the bitterest exchanges on record between Cuba and Mexico since Castro came to power, the two Governments clashed last week over the investigation conducted by Mexican police into the activities of President Kennedy’s suspected assassin, Lee Harvey Oswald while he was in Mexico from September 26 to October 3. Mexican Foreign Minister Tello announced on November 28 that the Mexican Ambassador to Cuba had been instructed to return as “unacceptable” the Cuban Government’s note of November 26 which had protested the action of Mexican police in questioning an employee of the Cuban Consulate in Mexico City, Senora Silvia Duran, about Oswald’s application for a Cuban transit visa.

Then there is about a paragraph on nuclear vessels not being allowed to dock in Mexican ports until some agreement on risks is reached.

This document was something akin to a news ticker.

Document # 180-10110-10044 Is a one page letter dated August 2, 1977 from Andy Purdy to Captain Donald Nielsen, Assistant Secretary for International Security Affairs, Department of Defense.

The Select Committee on Assassinations requests access to the material concerning Lee Oswald and the investigation into the assassination of President John F. Kennedy currently in the possession of the Naval Investigative Service of the Office of Naval Intelligence.

Document # 180-10110-10045 Is a one page letter from Alexander Schnee to Lyle F. Lane dated 10/5/77

Yesterday I received from Robert Blakey, Chief Counsel and Director of the Select Committee on Assassinations the attached memorandum. A covering memo to me stated that this memorandum should be made available to you for your information.

If you have any questions concerning the attachment please do not hesitate to get in touch with me and I will take them up with Blakey. He would, of course, be pleased to receive any information you may have concerning his proposed visit or concerning the timing of your presentation of the subject to the appropriate Cuban officials.

Document # 180-10110-10046 Is a two page letter from Lyle F. Lane to Alexander Schnee dated October 17, 1977.

Thank you for your letter of October 5, which followed up an earlier one of September 2 on the same subject.

I have not yet taken any action on this matter, since I am still feeling my way and have not had an opportunity to see anyone absolutely privately with whom I would presently feel comfortable about raising such a sensitive matter. Of course, I can always do it at a working level of the Foreign Ministry, but I prefer not to do it that way unless time runs out. Since my recollection is that Professor Blakey was not thinking of coming much before the end of the year anyway I have felt we have some time. Please let me know if this is not correct.

In the meantime, I am intrigued by the memorandum enclosed with your October 5 letter. Does it mean that Gonzales has had a recent approach on this subject from the Cuban Government–since we met with Professor Blakey in Washington? If so, it would of course be of interest and possibly great significance to me to know who contacted him. I realize that this may be considered sensitive information which cannot be diviluged. But at the same time I am left in the position precisely of trying to gauge the sensitivity and level of the contact I should try to make at this end. It seems to me that we should cooperate on this by pooling our intelligence as much as possible.

One possibility is that Gonzales should simply go back directly to his latest contact–assuming that it is indeed a recent one–and make the pitch for Professor Blakey’s visit directly. That certainly would simplify and expedite the whole business. I would have no trouble with that approach, provided only that Gonzales says at the same time that the Department of State and I have been informed and that I will know about the Professor’s visit when it is undertaken. (I assume you will keep Bill Stedman informed.)

I will take no initiative on this matter until I hear from you again, unless–as is possible at any time in this Byzantine place–I am presented with the clear opportunity of a private meeting at a very high level where I am confident that this subject can be safely raised and treated with the security and sensitivity it deserves.

Document # 180-10110-10047 Is a one page letter from Alexander Schnee to Lyle F. Lane dated November 1, 1977

Thank you for your letter of October 17, received about 10 days later.

In response there is attached a memo to me from Professor Blakey in which I trust you will find the answers to the questions in your memo concerning the Gonzales contact.

Professor Blakey is very keen on visiting in December. Considering the very meticulous cross-checking and analysis which would be required with respect to new information acquired, and the probably need for a second visit, a December start would leave no extra time for proper handling and incorporation in the initial substantive report. We would, obviously, appreciate your views as to possible timing as they develop.

I am also enclosing an excerpt from the Congressional Record dated September 28, 1977 concerning the authority of the Select Committee and other information which I believe you will find of interest, and a related report in the New York times dated October 17, 1977.

Document # 180-10110-10048 Is a one page letter from Alexander Schnee to Blakey dated November 16, 1977. There are two copies of it.

Enclosed are copies of the classified messages we discussed on the phone.

Enclosure:

State # 274299

Havana 0594

Document # 180-10110-10049 Is a one page cable from the Department of State dated November 16, 1977. This is State #274299. There are two copies of the cable.

Prof. Blakey endeavoring contact Acosta but no success to date. Interests Section states Acosta has been in Chicago. We will inform you of developments. Vance.

Document # 180-10110-10170 This is a 36 page document from Douglas J. Bennet Jr. to Blakey dated April 7, 1978.

Enclosed you will find those documents which the Department has located in response to the Committee’s March 15 request for information about Antillo Ramerez Ortiz. At this time, we have also enclosed certain Department of State documents which appeared among the files of the Federal Bureau of Investigation. These documents were originally withheld from the Committee’s review pursuant to the third agency rule.

The Department has provided these documents to the Committee with the understanding that all classified material will receive appropriate protection under the conditions of Executive Order.

The first page is an incoming telegram to the Dept. of State from Habana (Via Pouch) to Secretary of State. Unnumbered, May 10. Control 7969, Rec’d May 13, 1958 8:58 a.m.

SENT SANTIAGO UNNUMBERED, REPEATED INFORMATION DEPARTMENT UNNUMBERED

Antulio Ramirez Ortiz of Puerto Rico sentenced three years Friday for attempting join rebels. Admitted intent and ownership various implicating documents. Sentence considered heavy and lawyer appealing to Second Section of Supreme Court, Habana.

Message Unsigned.

Document # 180-10110-10072 Is a three page memorandum for the record dated April 17, 1978.

Memorandum for the Record

Subject: Select Committee on Assassinations Visit to Cuba, Liaison with GOC on Investigation of President Kennedy’s Assassination.

Background

Several visitors to Cuba last year were personally advised by Castro that he would cooperate with a “serious” investigation by the government of the assassination of President Kennedy. When the House Select Committee on Assassinations was reorganized under Chairman Stokes, a visit to Cuba to explore this potential was given a high priority. The visit was arranged through the Cuban Interests Section in Washington. Neither the Department nor the US Section in Havana were involved in making the arrangements, but we were kept informed by the Committee Chief Counsel. Most of the following information was obtained during a conversation with Chairman Stokes.

Arrangements

The Committee was represented by the Chairman – Representative Louis Stokes, the Chief Counsel – Dr. Robert Blakey and two staff members, one of whom could serve as a translator. They departed Washington by private plane on March 30 and returned to Miami, Florida on April 4. In Havana they were put up in what appeared to be private homes. They were very well cared for in every respect. The Cubans were responsive to the chairman’s concern that there be no publicity — and there has been none to date.

Atmosphere

They were received cordially by Castro, and their counterparts in the discussions. The Cubans were generous and considerate as hosts. Chairman Stokes received the impression that the Cubans want to maintain momentum towards better relations with the US, despite current differences.

Substance

The Cubans anticipated that the meetings would consist of an exchange of intelligence concerning the assassination and were clearly disappointed. The Committee representatives explained that the function of the Committee was solely

to conduct an investigation and that their interest in Cuba was to obtain information which might be pertinent to that investigation. They further explained that in conducting the investigation to date they had obtained some information on a classified basis from various sources and were not at liberty to divulge such classified intelligence. Finally, the Cubans understood the Committee’s position and their attitudes softened. The Committee undertook to provide some information requested by the Cubans which is in the public domain, as for example, the debate on the establishment of the Select Committee and they agreed to look into the possibility of obtaining for the GOC some information gathered by the Ad Hoc Church Committee. A liaison point has been named by the Cubans to continue contact with the Committee. The Chairman envisions that the contact will take place in Washington normally. He does not see a role for the Department or the US Interests Section at this point.

cc: ARA/CCC – Mr. Wayne Smith

US Interests Havana – EYES ONLY Mr. Lyle F. Lane

Select Committee on Assassinations

EYES ONLY – Dr. Robert Blakey, Chief Counsel

Document # 180-10110-10077 Is a 232 page document. It is from Douglas J. Bennet to Blakey. It is dated 5/11/78.

The first page is a May 11, 1978 letter describing that what follows are records from the Central Foreign Policy Records about Lee Harvey Oswald. Also, included are records relating to Marina. There are two copies of this.

There is then a list of LHO files.

Repatriation Loans Warren Commission

Repatriation Loans

Correspondence with Dept re LHOswald

PPT-Oswald

Material relating to after release of Warren Commission Rept.

Dept of State Witnesses before Warren Commission

P-Oswald

Correspondence Dept. with Mother of Oswald

Congressional Correspondence – Oswald

FBI reports re Oswald

SI and PPT re Oswald case

VO – Oswald

SCS file re: Oswald

Oswald SCS file original

Rept. of State Dept LHOswald

Dept telegrams re Oswald

Request for info from Warren Commission ltrs to and from L

Clippings re Oswald

Oswald file – IX

Oswald file – XII

Memo from PPT Warren TF

Report of Dept of State LHOswald – book cover.

There is then an 8 page report on the issuance of a visa to Marina.

It begins, “Sometime in May 1962 the United States Consulate in Moscow issued a non-quota immigrant visa to Mrs. Oswald.” Why the vagueness of the date? Remember John Newman’s book and presentations on his book, “Oswald and the CIA” and how the CIA was saying in October of 1963 that the latest info they had on LHO was a State Dept report dated May 1962? I’m struck by the same date.

The report is very technical and legalese in nature. “There is no question that Mrs. Oswald was entitled to non-quota status under section 205 of the Immigration and Nationality Act, by reason of her marriage to a United States citizen. However, issuance of an immigration visa to Mrs. Oswald in Moscow required determinations under two other provisions of the Immigration and Nationality Act – Section 212 (a) (28), dealing with admissibility of aliens who are members of or affiliated with communist organizations; and Section 243 (g), dealing with the issuance of immigrant visas by consuls in the territory of countries which have refused acceptance of the return of persons sought to be deported from the United States.”

The Section 212 (a) (28) was granted because Marina had to join Trade Union for Medical Unions in order to work. There was a waiver for that.

Page 4 explains about 243 (g) a bit. There was some tit for tat thing going on. We wanted to deport some Soviet nationals, they wouldn’t take them back so we weren’t going to take any new people, this was in 1953. But there was an understanding with the State and Justice Depts that waiver powers existed. It was to be waived to prevent separation of families, and persons eligible for non quota visas and first preference visas. This was supposedly policy as reflected in the Department of State’s Visa handbook last issued on February 15, 1961.

The request for Marina’s petition for a visa went to the State Dept.’s office in San Antonio. The request was approved on February 28, 1962 but the waiver under Section 243 (g) was not approved. No reason was stated for the disapproval. Technically there is no grounds for a waiver, as there is no waiver.

The statutory procedure for handling petitions for non-quota or preference status by reason of relationship calls for a determination of eligibility for such status by the Attorney General, and the responsibility for making such determinations has been delegated to the District Directors of the Immigration and Naturalization Service.

On March 23, 1962 the Director of the Visa Office accepted the advice of the Soviet Affairs Office and prepared a letter for the Acting Administrator of the Bureau of Security and Consular Affairs urging that the INS reconsider the denial. The Soviet Affairs Office wrote an additional supporting memorandum to the Acting Administrator on March 23, 1962. Accordingly, on March 27, 1962 the Acting Administrator, Bureau of Security and Consular Affairs wrote a letter to the Commissioner Of the INS, Dept. of Justice reconsideration of the decision not to waive the provisions of 243 (g) in the case of Mrs. Oswald.

The text of this letter refers to a number of telephone conversations between the State Dept and the INS about getting that waiver.

On May 9 the INS agreed to waive the sanction of 243 (g).

“As the above-quoted exchange of letters indicates, the issue of section 243 (g) in the case of Mrs. Oswald was not handled as a routine matter. While apparently no records of this kind of case are kept, persons in the State Department who regularly deal with consular problems arising in Iron Curtain countries state that refusals to grant waivers in section 243 (g) cases involving close personal relationships were very rare. Apparently, the State Department requested reconsideration in each of these cases by the Immigration and Naturalization Service Central Office.”

Then there is a March 23, 1962 on the immigrant visa case of Mrs. Oswald.

SCA – Mr. Michael Cieplinski

SOV – Robert I Chen

Immigrant Visa Case of Mrs. Marina M. Oswald.

SOV has cleared the attached letter to to Mr. [?], Commissioner of Immigration and naturalization and the telegram to Moscow about the immigrant visa case of Mrs. Marina M. Oswald. In considering this case I believe it would be helpful for you to have the following additional information. It refers to the second paragraph of VO’s memorandum relative to Mr. Oswald’s statements that he intended to reveal information to Soviet authorities about his work as radio operator in the Marine Corps.

Oswald appeared at the Moscow Embassy on July 8 on his own initiative in connection with his desire to return to the United States with his wife. He was questioned at length concerning his activities since entering the Soviet Union. There is quoted below the applicable paragraph from Embassy dispatch No. 29 of July 11, 1962:

“Oswald stated that he had never been called upon to make any statements for radio or press or to address audiences since his arrival in the Soviet Union and that he has made no statements at any time of any exploitable nature concerning his original decision to reside in the Soviet Union. He recalled that he had been interviewed briefly in his room at the Metropole Hotel in Moscow on the third day after his arrival in the Soviet Union by a reporter from Radio Moscow. The reporter represented himself as seeking comments from American tourists on their impressions of Moscow. Oswald stated that he made no more than a few routine comments of a visiting tourist nature, the whole lasting no more than two or three minutes and of no political significance. When queried about a statement which he had made to the interviewing officer at the time of his first appearance at the Embassy on October 31, 1959 to the effect that he would willingly make available to the Soviet Union such information as he had acquired as a radar operator in the Marine Corps, Oswald stated that he was never in fact subjected to any questioning or briefing by the Soviet authorities concerning his life or experiences prior to entering the Soviet Union, and never provided such information to any Soviet orgas. [sic “organizations”] He stated that he doubted in fact that he would have given such information if requested despite his statements made at the Embassy.”

Then there is a telegram from Dept of State to, presumably American Embassy Moscow, dated May 29, 1964.

Department has understood that embassy had previously pouched entire Oswald files to Department. Presence of Oswald supplementary questionnaire in embassy raised question whether there are other Oswald files in embassy. If so please advise and pouch them immediately.

BALL

Then there is a telegram from Helsinki dated May 28, 1964.

Embassy has never maintained records which would provide information requested, as embassy is only occasionally involved in Soviet visa application cases when an American tourist asks advice of Consulate. A check with Finnish police authorities confirms that they also are without pertinent records. conceivably a reference to CAS headquarters may produce samplings of the information desired.

An embassy contact, at our request but without knowing purpose, has sought Soviet visa application time-factor information from three Helsinki travel agencies involved in processing of applications for clients. These agencies report that, uniformly for five years 1959 through 1963, usual time required for receipt of Soviet visa applied for by Americans has been seven to fourteen days.

INGRAM

Another telegram, Control No. 3986, date May 26, 1964 5 pm.

Department may wish refer to Moscow’s monthly visitors reports for 1959 in attempt to contact some “non-official” Americans who may remember Soviet visa waiting period for themselves at that time. Consular officer presently at Embassy Moscow visited Moscow on tourist visa issued in Belgrade in 1959 with waiting period of 2 days. According to Embassy’s information gained from informal conversations with American tourists in 1962-63, waiting periods seem to vary with individuals. One case is remembered wherein American visa application in 1963 was delayed if not denied by Soviet Embassy in United States; American subsequently flew to Stockholm, made application for tourist visa there and flew on to Moscow within twenty-four hours.

Intourist official states tourist visas generally issued within two to three days after application and always within seven working days.

Another telegram, Control 3985 May 26, 1964 4 p.m.

Supplementary questionnaire signed by Oswald, without consul’s signature but carrying Consular seal and typewritten name, being forwarded by Airgram in May 30 pouch from Moscow. Embassy cannot say if this is the original.

In answer to Department questions, Embassy notes that under Embassy’s normal procedure two, rpt, two copies, of questionnaire are filled out by applicant. Normally Consul does not rpt not administer oath inasmuch as bulk of such work is carried out in USSR by mail. In such cases however applicant is asked to have both copies signed by two witnesses. When supplementary questionnaire is filled out in Embassy, Consul does administer oath and sign.

Under normal procedures, if applicant completes form 176 (Registration or Renewal of Passport) one copy of supplementary questionnaire accompanies Form 176 to Department.

Another, control No. 8728, REc’d May 26, 1964.

Questions from the Warren commission.

“The copy of the supplementary questionnaire signed by Oswald on July 10, 1961, and presently in the Oswald passport file does not have the signature of the Consul who apparently administrated the oath to Oswald…

Another, Control No. 8632 May 23, 1964 1:40 am,

From Dept

No 3408 May 22, 11 am.

Action Helsinki 394 Moscow 3408

President’s Commission of the Assassination of President Kennedy has requested further information in response to Dept’s statement in letter to Commission that issuance by Soviets of tourist visa to Oswald in October 1959 in Helsinki was “unusual” because it was within two days after his application.

Report as much statistical information as possible concerning Soviet visa applications by Americans in Helsinki in 1959. Specifically: approximately how many applications? What was average length of time for processing applications? What were the longest and shortest times and approx how many applications fell into various categories of times for processing (e.g., one month, one week, three days)?

Note – Oswald first applied in Helsinki and above requests refer only to Sov tourist visa applications by Americans in 1959 under comparable circumstances.

Next is a cover letter or telegram from American Embassy Moscow dated May 29, 1964. “The Embassy herewith forwards to the Department all papers in its files on Lee Harvey Oswald and his wife, Marina N. Oswald, dated prior to November 22, 1962.” It is addressed for the Ambassador from Thomas A Fain, Second Secretary of Embassy.

An Embassy telegram 3593 dated May 29, 1964.

There is attached for the Department’s information two copies of application executed by Lee Harvey Oswald on July 10, 1961 for renewal of passport. A supplementary questionnaire is attached. The 3″ x 5″ note stapled to the front of the two copies appears to be a reminder for fee collection initialed by the consular office at the time he received the application.

Then a telegram, Control No. 3949 date, May 22, 1964, 6:35 pm,

Action Secstate Washington 3562

For Chayes from Kohler

Deptel 3394.

After thorough check of Embassy files in connection with Department’s memorandum (based on SOV draft responses to four questions), Embassy finds it has nothing to add to detailed answers given.

Then a letter from John C. Guthrie, dated April 20, 1964 to Walter J. Stoessel, Minister-Counselor, American Embassy Moscow.

The Legal advisor recently asked SOV to comment upon four questions which had been presented to the Department by the…(Warren Commission). There is enclosed a copy of the memorandum…

That memorandum is 12 pages long. Dull reading.

On p. 10 a question is asked, “The Soviet government issued Lee Harvey Oswald a passport which described him as being without citizenship, and he was issued a Soviet visa on a temporary, year to year basis. Were these procedures customary at the time Oswald was in Russia?

It is impossible to comment upon whether or not these procedures were “customary’. Decisions of this character are made arbitrarily by the Soviet Government to fit the case in question and apparently to serve Soviet interests. There are apparently two ways to document non-Soviet citizens, i.e., with a Soviet passport for “stateless” persons or with a passport for a foreigner. Oswald held both documents at different times. On January 4, 1962 he was issued a passport for foreigners.

The Commission then wants to know of similar cases to Oswald and the State Dept refers them to the following people and requests they contact them.

1.) Robert E. Webster (there some info here but you know his story)

2.) David P. Johnson – David Johnson was a resident of Philadelphia who with his wife and four year old twin sons went to the Soviet Union in April 1962 with the expressed purpose of taking up permanent residence. The family became disillusioned in several weeks and obtained permission to leave the Soviet Union soon thereafter. Mr. Johnson appeared before the House Committee on Unamerican Activities after his return to the United States.

3.) Tom Mooradian – Tom Mooradian was sent to Soviet Armenia in November 1947 by his American parents of Armenian background for the purpose of being educated in Soviet Armenia. He thereafter lived in Soviet Armenia and is believed to have held a Soviet citizen’s passport. He became a national figure in Soviet society as a basketball player and traveled extensively in this capacity. Only after many years (April 1960) was he able to get permission to leave the USSR. During the period in which he was trying to leave, he visited the American Embassy in Moscow a number of times. It was the Embassy’s belief that his occupation enabled him to visit Moscow more frequently than other applicants for Soviet exit visas.

4.) Father Walter Ciszek – An American Roman Catholic priest who was imprisoned in the Soviet Union from 1941 to April 1955 and thereafter was restricted to certain areas of the Soviet Union. Father Ciszek was permitted to return to the United States in the fall of 1963.

5.) Louis Alhonite – Louis Alhonite resided in the USSR for several years during which time he obtained employment with a film studio. He became disillusioned with life in the USSR and was allowed to leave about two years ago.

6.) Mrs. Mary Dutkanicz – She was the wife of Sergeant Joseph Dutkanicz who defected in 1960 from American Army control in Germany and took his wife and children to Lvov, USSR. Following the usual pattern, Sergeant Dutkanicz soon thereafter became disillusioned with Soviet life and made efforts to return to the United States. Mrs. Dutkanicz was given permission to return in 1962 because of the illness of her mother and grandmother. After arrival in this country she gave birth to another child. She did not return to the Soviet Union and made strong efforts to assist her family in obtaining exit visas. The Soviet authorities informed the American Embassy that Sergeant Dutkanicz died in November 1963. About two weeks ago the Soviet Government finally gave permission for the three Dutkanicz children to be repatriated to their mother.

There is then a letter from Abram Chayes, Legal Advisor to Mr. Foy D. Kohler, American Ambassador, Moscow, dated April 21, 1964 with the draft of responses to the Warren Commissions questions.

Then there is a very odd document about Protection passports issued by Swiss authorities to United States Nationals departing from Cuba. No. CA-6444, January 31, 1961. Only one page of this is here. I believe it is supposed to be at least two pages in length. Dept. of State instruction 2159. Rec’d in Moscow Feb 11, 1961.

Another instruction, A-173, April 13, 1961

Citizenship and Passports: Lee Harvey Oswald

The American Embassy MOSCOW

The Embassy’s Dispatch No. 585 of February 28, 1961 concerning Lee Harvey Oswald has been studied with particular reference to the last two paragraphs thereof. Dispatch No. 659 of March 24, 1961 concerning him has also been noted.

If and when Mr. Oswald appears at the Embassy, he should be thoroughly questioned regarding the circumstances of his residence in the Soviet Union and his possible commitment of an act or acts of expatriation and, as contemplated by the Embassy, his statements should be taken under oath. If the Embassy is fully satisfied that he has not expatriated himself in any manner and if he presents evidence that he has arranged to depart from the Soviet Union to travel to the United States, his passport may be delivered to him on a personal basis only, after being rendered valid for direct return to the United States. For security reasons, the Department does not consider that it would be prudent for the Embassy to forward Oswald’s passport to him by mail.

The Department is not in a position to advise Mr. Oswald whether upon his desired return to the United States he may be amenable to protection for any possible offenses committed in violation of the laws of the United States or the laws of any of its States.

The developments in the case of Mr. Oswald should be promptly reported. In particular, a report of his travel data should be submitted when the Embassy receives confirmation of his travel plans.

It may be added that Mrs. Marguerite Oswald has been informed of the address given by Mr. Oswald in his recent undated communication referred to in Dispatch No. 585 and of his desire to return to the United States. She has also been appropriately informed in the light of Dispatch No. 659.

There is then a memorandum for Mr. David Slawson from Richard A. Frank, an attorney with the Office of Legal Advisor for the State Department. This is dated September 2, 1964.

Subject: Publication of Department documents.

As you will recall, we concluded yesterday that it might be advisable to delete the names of defectors from the Department documents given to the Commission. If the Department decides to recommend this action and if the Commission accepts that recommendation, I suggest the following change be made on Commission Document No. 977: Delete page 3, beginning “to his wife” and ending “for which” and also the first paragraph of page 4, beginning “his skills” and ending “the U.S.” of question 3, attachment A, and replace with the following:

“to his wife to leave the country was not considered a routine matter. We do have detailed information concerning another American defector whose case was somewhat different since he actually obtained Soviet citizenship and was not, therefore, classified as “stateless.”

[I believe they are talking about Robert Webster here.]

“This person applied for Soviet citizenship in the summer of 1959 and received it that fall. At that time he gave up his United States citizenship and the American Embassy submitted to the Department a Certificate of Loss of Citizenship. By the spring of 1960 he had changed his mind and communicated to the Embassy his desire to return to the United States. Early in August he applied for a Soviet exit visa, but it was not until the spring of 1962 that he was able to obtain an exit visa, issued on a Soviet citizen’s passport. Thus, in comparison to Oswald, it took this defector a year and nine months to get permission to leave the Soviet Union. His case differs in that he had been granted Soviet citizenship and was employed in an industry, for which his skills were particularly desired by the Soviet authorities.”

As I mentioned, it may be advisable not to publish certain of the INR Morning Reports contained in Commission Document No. 1135. I am attaching a more polished article which has most of the information in those reports and which could be published. Let me know if you would like to use it.

There is then a draft of a letter to Mr. Rankin. The State Dept wants to delete information in some of the documents they gave to the Commission.

First are the names of defectors that appear in CD 977 and 1114 (documents II-23, 36, 52; III-8, 11; IV-1, 3, 52, 55, 56, 59, 60, 65; V-49; Vi-21; X-63, 73, 75, 77, 78; and XI-6)

Second, Cables to and from Bern which concern procedural steps related to the request from the Commission to the Cuban government for documents (For instance, Commission documents 1081 and 1114 (documents I-1 and I-2)).

Third, Those parts of documents I-42 and 44 of Commission documents 1114 which are completely unrelated to the assassination.

Fourth, names of individuals listed in Commission exhibit 949 who have been denied passports.

Fifth; there must be another page but it’s not included.

Next is a three page letter from, I’m assuming Abba Schwartz to Francis Knight.

Set forth below are answers to the questions from the Warren Commission, as requested in your memorandum of June 15, 1964.

Question:

Precise information concerning the time it took any American “defector” in the Soviet Union to renew his passport or to obtain a new passport.

Answer

Two recent cases in point involve a man and a wife – Morris and Mollie Block – who went to the Soviet Union in 1959 with the apparent intention of residing there permanently. Mr. and Mrs. Block departed Montreal on July 3, 1959 abroad the SS Batory, bound for Copenhagen and Gydnia. Mrs. Block was properly documented with a United States passport. Mr. Block, who had previously been denied passport facilities because he had travelled to Communist China in 1957, in violation of the restrictions contained in his passport, was traveling on a passport he had fraudulently obtained in the name of Henry Warren Stern.

The next information concerning the Blocks was gleaned from an article which appeared in PRAVDA UKRAINY (Ukraine Pravda) of December 12, 1959. This article, attributed to Morris Block, was mainly an anti-United States propaganda piece, which stated in part that Block, a typical American, had arrived in Odessa with his family and was working as a metal worker in a ship repair yard.

On July 7, 1960 Mrs. Block appeared at the Embassy in Moscow. She stated she had separated from her husband and requested her passport be renewed. She was informed that the passport would be renewed and validated for direct and immediate return to the United States when she had completed her travel plans.

Mrs. Block did not again appear at the Embassy until March 5, 1962, at which time she sought passport facilities for herself and Mr. Block. At that time she stated she would wait until passports could be issued to her and Mr. Block simultaneously, as she would not travel without her husband.

On July 26, 1962 Mr. Block came to the Embassy, Moscow, and submitted an application for passport, at which time he admitted he and his wife had been members of the Communist Party USA before coming to the Soviet Union.

Both Mr and Mrs. Block’s passport application were referred to the Department for determination of their citizenship and decision as to their entitlement to passports.

In the absence of information that they had committed any expatriative act it was determined they were citizens of the United States. The Embassy was, however, requested to have both Mr. and Mrs. Block execute – as part of their passport applications – sworn statements concerning their membership in the Communist Party USA.

On January 10, 1963 Mr and Mrs. Block appeared at the Embassy, Moscow, at which time Mrs. Block executed an affidavit concerning membership in the Communist Party USA. This Mr. Block refused to do.

On January 30, 1963 an Operations Memorandum was sent to the Embassy, Moscow, authorizing issuance of a passport to Mollie Block; limited for direct and immediate return to the United States. Because of Morris Block’s refusal to execute the statement regarding Communist Party USA membership, and his previous history of passport fraud, the Embassy was authorized to document him only with an Emergency Certificate of Identity for return to the United States.

Due to difficulties with Soviet authorities Mr. and Mrs. Block were unable to travel from Odessa to Moscow to pick up their travel documentation until July 2, 1963.

Thereafter – until May 1964 the Department was informed that the Soviet government had reached a decision to grant Soviet exit visas to the Blocks.

On June 12, 1964 the Blocks arrived back in the United States.

Question:

In the event there were any “defectors” who, like Oswald, applied for renewals of their passports, or for new passports, after an attempted defection, information should be furnished as to the processing time involved.

Answer :

One individual, who has been reported by the Department of Defense to have been a “defector” applied for and has been issued a passport.

The individual is Paul David Wilson, born September 4, 1929, at Kokomo, Indiana. He applied for a passport at the Office of the Clerk, U.S. District Court, El Paso, Texas, on January 20, 1964 by the Passport Agency, Los Angeles, California.

At the time the passport was issued the Passport Office had no information concerning the background or activities of Paul David Wilson, aside from the information contained in his passport application and his birth certificate.

There is then a letter from Thomas Ehrlich to Mr. Schwartz dated June 11, 1964.

During Mr. Chayes’ testimony before the President’s Commission he was asked to supply for the record precise information concerning the time it took any American “defector” in the Soviet Union to renew his passport or to obtain a new passport. I am not certain that there are any “defectors” who, like Oswald, applied for renewals of their passports or for new passports after an attempted “defection.”

I would appreciate it, however, if you would ask the Passport Office whether there are such cases and, if so, to provide the information requested by the Commission.

There is then a memo from Schwartz to Knight, dated May 20, 1964.

Would you, as soon as possible, forward to me a memorandum which answers the questions and provides the information requested in the attached memorandum from Mr. Chayes.

Then a two page letter from Chayes to Schwartz, dated May 21, 1964.

The President’s Commission on the Assassination of President Kennedy has requested the Department to supply additional information relating to the subject matter of the Department’s letter to the Commission of May 8, 1964. I would appreciate your providing information on the following subjects:

(1) The passport histories of as many defectors as possible I.E., a description of the travels taken by as many defectors as possible after they return to the United States.

(2) A list of those cases where passports have been withdrawn or denied on the basis of 22 CFR 51.136 (b) and (c) and the specific reasons given for the withdrawal or refusals.

(3) In relation to Answer 16 in the Department’s letter, it is stated that a determination was made that a lookout card was not required for Oswald when the Department was informed that Oswald appeared at the Soviet and Cuban embassies at Mexico City. Would you provide a statement indicating whether that determination was made in written form, and, if it was, would you provide a copy of that determination?

[Note, another document that Oswald was at the Soviet and Cuban Embassies. See John Newman’s “Oswald and the CIA” for more.]

(4) a statement indicating whether or not there is a written instruction, regulation, or procedure which states that on telegrams, such as the one from the New Orleans Passport Office to Washington on June 24, 1963, a symbol indicating the city of origin should be marked on the telegram and that the proper marking for New Orleans is “NO”. If such a written instruction, regulation, or procedure exists, please provide a copy.

(5) An example of the type of instruction or piece of paper which is transmitted from the Finance Office to the Passport Office authorizing the preparation of a lookout card when a repatriation loan is made.

(6) A statement as to whether there is a written instruction, regulation, or procedure which states that a lookout card need not be prepared when the Finance Office only provides the name of the individual involved and does not provide his address or date of birth. If such written instruction, regulation, or procedure exists, please provide a copy.

(7) It appears that in July 1961 the Embassy in Moscow stamped Oswald’s passport valid for direct return to the United States only, at a time before he had applied for and received a repatriation loan. Would you verify that this in fact was done. If it was, would you indicate (1) whether or not this is standard procedure, the reason for this procedure in light of the fact that defecting is usually not a reason to deny an individual a regular passport if the defector has not committed an act of expatriation

(8) A list of those people who were known to have seen the Oswald passport file up to the date of the assassination.

(9) The copy of the supplementary questionnaire signed by Oswald on July 10, 1961, and presently in the Oswald passport file does not have the signature of the consul who apparently administered the oath to Oswald. Do you have or know where the original of this supplementary questionnaire is located? Under normal procedures, how many copies of the questionnaire would be completed? If more than one copy is made, would the consul under normal procedures sign all copies? Under normal procedures, would a copy signed by the consul be forwarded to the Department to be placed in the passport file?

Then there is a memo from Edward J. Hickey to Abba Schwartz dated April 23, 1964. This is a draft response to 12 questions from the Warren Commission.

A lot of this has to do with why no Lookout Card was in place when Oswald requested to return to the U. S. One response stands out, “From the file and from the procedures then in effect it appears that someone in the Files or Clearance Section missed the “Refusal” prepared on March 25, 1960 and failed to follow standard operating procedures to prepare a lookout card. The individual who overlooked the “Refusal” cannot be identified from any material or information available to this Office.”

Then there is a 9 page document from the Government of Mexico from their Department of Interior. There is a copy of Mexican tourist card No. 24085. They have Oswald leaving on October 3, 1963. It lists 6 things as being enclosed, only two are here, #1 and #6.

1. Certified photostatic copy of tourist card (F. M. 8) No. 24085, valid for 15 days, used by Lee Harvey Oswald to enter Mexico on September 26, 1963, at Nuevo Laredo, Tamaulipas.

2. Certified photostatic copy of several pages from the register of the Comercio Hotel at No. 19 Fray Bernardino de Sahagun Street, Mexico city, where Lee Harvey Oswald stayed on September 27, 1963.

3. Certified photostatic copy of the reservation sheet of the bus company “Transportes Frontera” for October 2, 1963, on which Oswald’s name appears as No. 4

4. Certified photostatic copies of the records of passenger entry and departure (F. M. 11) at Nuevo Laredo, Tamaulipas, for September 26 and October 3, 1963, which show that Oswald entered Mexico on September 26 and departed on October 3.

5. Certified Photostatic copy of the statement made before Mexican authorities on November 23, 1963 By Mrs. Silvia Tirado Duran.

6. Certified photostatic copy of the report made November 30, 1963, by Inspector Jose Mario del Valle of the investigations conducted in Nuevo Laredo, Tamaulipas, regarding Oswald’s passage through that city.

The Sylvia Duran statement is 5 pages, actually six but that’s just where those who questioned her sign off.

Sylvia states that when she heard the name Lee Harvey Oswald mentioned as the suspect in the assassination of President Kennedy it, “made her remember that that was the name of an American who, at the end of September or beginning of October, had come to the Cuban consulate and applied for transit visa for Cuba, en route to Russia. In support of his request, he had presented his passport, which showed that he had lived in Russia for three years, his work card from that country, in Russian, and letters in that language. He also presented evidence showing that he was married to a Russian woman, and that he appeared to be the leader in New Orleans of the organization known as “Fair Treatment for Cuba,” claiming that he was accepted as a “friend” of the Cuban Revolution.”

Her statement goes on to say, “In view of all that, the declarant, performing her duties, took all his data and filled out the necessary application. He then left the office but returned in the afternoon with his photographs, and the declarant, admitted that she exceeded her duties, unofficially called the Russian Consulate in a desire to facilitate the processing of the Russian visa for Lee Harvey Oswald. However, she was told by that consulate that it would take approximately four months to process his application, which annoyed the applicant, because, he said, he was in a hurry to obtain the visas to go to Russia. He insisted on his right to them because of his background and his support and personal activities in behalf of the Cuban movement. The declarant could not state — because she did not remember — whether he said he was a member of the Communist Party. Her did say that his Russian wife was at that time in New York, from where she would follow him, having come from the above mentioned city of New Orleans;

That when Oswald heard that a Cuban visa, being a transit visa, could not be issued to him until after he had obtained a Russian visa, he became excited and very angry, and so the declarant called Consul Ascue, who was in his private office with Mr. Miraval, who later replaced him. The Consul came out of his office and began to argue with Oswald in English. Ascue finally said, “If it were up to me, I would not give you a visa,” and people like you, instead of helping the Cuban Revolution, only do it harm,” it being understood in their argument, they were referring to the Russian Socialist Revolution and not the Cuban Revolution. Oswald maintained that he had two reasons for wanting a visa so urgently, and they were: his permit to stay in Mexico was about to expire; and he needed to reach Russia right away. Despite the dispute, the declarant gave Oswald a piece of paper identical to the one on which she was writing in the proceedings, on which she wrote her name “Silvia Duran” and the telephone number of the Cuban Consulate “11-28-47,” and his visa application was processed in any case. It was sent to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Cuba, which sent a reply in the routine manner, 15 to 30 days later, granting the visa on the condition that the applicant first obtain a Russian visa. The declarant did not remember whether or not Oswald later called the declarant on the Consulate telephone. She said that her entire conversation with Oswald, as well as the conversation the Consul had with him, was in English, since Oswald did not speak Spanish at all;

That when she saw the photograph that appeared in today’s newspapers, precisely in El Dia, she immediately recognized him and identified him as the one whom she had been calling Lee Harvey Oswald.”

The rest are letters to Congressmen and Senators from the public asking about Oswald and how he got a new passport, the repatriation loan, etc.

Document # 180-10110-10092 Is an 18 page document from the Office of the Adjutant General dated 6/1/71. This is about “Acquisition of Information concerning Persons and Organizations not Affiliated With the Department of Defense”. This appears to be a guidebook, or a new addition of rules to one.

Document # 180-10110-10093 Is a similar guideline to the above. It is 9 pages long, dated 2/9/72. It is a notice that the Archivist of the United States has approved a request to dispose of certain investigative types of records. Might be related to the destruction of records relating to Oswald by the DOD.

Document # 180-10110-10095 Is a really a four page document, though the RIF says one page. It is a Fact Sheet on Marine Corps Aircraft. It is a list of all Marine Corps aircraft stationed at Marine Corps Air Station El Toro and Marine Corps Station Knaeohe, Hawaii, for October through December 1963 is attached at Tab A.

As no Marine Corps aircraft were stationed at Camp Smith, Hawaii during 1963, the listing includes the nearest Marine Corps aviation facility, Kaneohe, Hawaii.

The copies of aviation status board data at Tab B provide additional detail on the number, location, and unit assignments of Marine Corps aircraft.

Information concerning Master logs are not available at Marine headquarters but may be obtained from the Master Flight files located at Washington National Record Center, GSA, Washington, D.C. 20409. Inquiries for specific flights should include Pilot’s name, Model of aircraft, Bureau Number, and appropriate dates of interest.

Who wanted this information and why?

I would like to know the exact layout of Andrews Air Force Base on November 22, 1963, including every aircraft that took off, landed, was parked, who was flying, who was in as crew and / or passenger, who was in the radar tower giving or receiving instructions, and who were the ground personnel, including personnel drawn from other agencies or units to provide any assistance that day.

Document # 180-10110-10096 Is a one page State Department cable from American Embassy Moscow to Secretary of State dated August, `78.

Ref: Moscow 17878

Further questioning of MFA USA Division Counselor Zaytsev July 31 and August 1 regarding transmission of Soviet documents on Oswald (paragraph two reftel) resulted in his clarifying that the only such documents passed to USG were those transmitted to the Warren Commission via the State Department. Zaytsev repeated the line he had taken during initial discussion of this matter July 31. All relevant Soviet documents on Oswald had already been sent to the USG.

Toon

Document # 180-10110-10097 Is a 15 page document from Douglas J. Bennet to Blakey August 8, 1978.

The first page is a letter from Douglas J. Bennet, Jr. to Blakey dated August 8, 1978.

“This responds to the Select Committee’s request of March 7, 1978. On August 3, Ms. Cynthia Cooper reviewed material from the Central Foreign Policy Records concerning Dominick E. Bartone, Sam Benton, Edward Browder Jr., Martin Zamora Fox, John Martino, Michael McLaney, Edward Moss, Norman Rothman, Santo Trafficante, Jr., and Robert Todd. Ms. Cooper asked that the Department release the enclosed records as a result of this review.

“At Tab A, you will find two documents from the records on Dominick E. Bartone. Tab B contains all Central Foreign Policy Records about Robert Todd.

There are two copies of this letter.

Next is a State Dept telegram stating that a Mr. R. J. Todd was in an automobile accident in the town of Veiloa, Switzerland and taken to a nearby hospital. This was in a Orlando newspaper which quoted a State Dept. official. The Dept. found no record of a Mr. R. J. Todd. This report is made by Kissinger.

Another page is a Freedom of Information request by a Robert Todd, who is enquiring about a UFO incident on 11/4/57 in Fort Itaipu, Brazil. Teresa Ferrell found no information relevant to the request.

Then there is Robert Todd’s original request, dated January 20, 1976. Mr. Todd lived at 2526 Belmont Avenue, Ardmore, Pennsylvania. According to Todd two Brazilian Army sentries were injured by a UFO and “High Brazilian” officials asked the American Embassy for help.

Another Robert Todd, from Odessa, Texas requested help in securing a visa for a friend, Merl Gavin, a teacher from Kingston, Jamaica. He wrote to his Congressman, George Mahon. And he (Rep. Mahon) wrote to Leonard F. Chapman, Commissioner, INS. There are 8 letters in total dealing with this visa request.

Then there is a State Dept cable to Cuidad Trujillo sent June 5, 1959.

Federal Grand Jury Miami indicated the following on charges of conspiracy (1) to export munitions of war in violation Mutual Security Act and (2) to bribe United States Officers: Leonard Trento; Augusto Ferrando; Joseph Liquori; Domenic E. Bartone; Samuel E. Poole; Sidney Neubauer; Charles Colle (later two not arrested with original group). Julio Laurent named co-conspirator but not co-defendent.

Trial date has not been set. No charges brought against others arrested on May 22.

The last page is a cable in reply from Cuidad Trujillo to Secretary of State, No. 440, May 25, 1959 3 p.m.

Embassy has so far received no official reaction to arrests GODR CONGEN and staff in Miami and resultant US publicity. No publicity subject yet local newspapers and none expected.

Jim Farley President Coca Cola International had conference with Generalissimo today and after stated to Charge Trujillo in jovial mood and made no mention Miami fracas.

President has declared three days official mourning for late Secretary Dulles and Foreign Minister has sent Embassy appropriate note condolences.

LOFTON

Document # 180-10110-10110 Is a 26 page letter from Douglas J. Bennet to Louis Stokes, dated 9/20/78. This is about Charles William Thomas.

It’s really about Elena Garro de Paz and the Oswald-Duran “affair” and the twister party. For more information on this see John Newman’s, “Oswald and the CIA” p. 377-392. Newman identifies Thomas as, “a CIA covert action operative, and a key player in the development of the Oswald-Duran sex story. That story gained credibility in CIA channels in a way that leaves open an unsavory possibility: the story may have been invented after the Warren Commission investigation to falsely implicate the Cuban government in the Kennedy Assassination.”

The first page is a letter to Stokes dated Sept. 20, 1978:

“This refers to my letter of September 15, 1978 concerning your September 13 request for the declassification and release of six documents about Charles William Thomas and Elena Garro de Paz.

“The Department’s Bureau of Inter-American Affairs concurred in the declassification and release of the major portions of the documents, enclosed at Tab A. These six documents contain certain information which still warrants classification pursuant to E.O. 11652. The deleted information, if released, could damage U. S. Latin American relations or reveal confidential sources and methods which remain a part of U.S. embassy operations.

“The Bureau of Inter-American Affairs also agreed to the declassification and partial release of four other documents, which appear in the CIA files on Elena Garro de Paz. These documents appear at Tab B. However, the Department requests that the Select Committee not make these documents a matter of public record. These documents may assist the Select Committee in understanding the background story of Elena Garro de Paz. However, because the nature and substance of these documents relate more specifically to U.S. Latin American relations and not directly to Ms. Garro de Paz, the Department would prefer that the Committee not cite these documents in the public record.”

Next, is a letter from Charles William Thomas to then Secretary of State William P. Rogers.

In winding up my affairs at the Department of States, there is a pending matter which I believe merits your attention.

Lee Harvey Oswald, the presumed assassin of President Kennedy, was allegedly present at a party given by a Mexican communist sympathizer and attended by the Cuban Consul, a veteran intelligence officer, when he was in Mexico shortly before the assassination. There are allegations that the Mexican government may have been aware of Oswald’s presence at that party and that the Cuban government may have tried to intimidate others who saw him there.

A careful investigation of these allegations could perhaps explain them away. Until then, however, their public disclosure could reopen the debate about the true nature of the Kennedy assassination and damage the credibility of the Warren Report.

Since I was the Embassy officer in Mexico who acquired this intelligence information, I feel a responsibility for seeing it through to its final evaluation. Accordingly, I have prepared a memorandum (enclosed) explaining this information and its initial assessment, keyed to three memorandum of conversations with my Mexican informant.

I believe you would want to consider carefully whether to let well enough alone in this case, or whether the risks attending possible public disclosure of these allegations make further investigation warranted.

The three page memorandum still has redactions. This document is supposed to be open in full! They are very sneaky. The redactions are whited out, not in black ink. The third page clearly has two whole lines of text redacted.

First page of memorandum, dated, July 25, 1969:

” 1. While serving as Political Officer in the U. S. Embassy in Mexico City from 1964 to 1967, I became quite friendly with the Mexican playwright, Elena Garro de Paz. And intelligent, witty, and outspoken woman, I found her very useful if sometimes biased source of political gossip and personal history on significant Mexican personalities. She introduced my wife and me to many important people in Mexico. She was also particularly knowledgeable about agrarian affairs. A biographic report that I prepared on her on May 3, 1966 is attached.

2. On one occasion, Miss Garro inadvertently mentioned to me that she had been at a party with Lee Harvey Oswald and two American companions when Oswald was in Mexico just before the Kennedy assassination. The party had been at the home of her cousin, Ruben Duran. The memorandum of that conversation, dated December 10, 1965, is attached (Tab B). I had not read the Warren Report, but I assumed that if Oswald had been to such a party in Mexico, it would have been well known to the Embassy. I also knew Miss Garo to be something of a professional anti-communist who tended to see a communist plot behind any untoward political event. However, the episode about her being escorted into hiding at an obscure hotel intrigued me. I gave the memorandum of conversation limited distribution within the embassy, and did not send any copies to Washington.

3. A few days later I was called to the office of Mr. Winston Scott, who headed the Embassy’s Political Research Section [whited out] Also present was Mr. Nathan Ferris, the Embassy’s Legal Attache [whited out] They had noted with interest my December 10 memorandum of conversation. They pointed out that there had been

a great many rumors about Oswald at the time of the assassination and that some could not be verified and others had proved false. They asked me, however, to try and get a more detailed replay of Miss Garo’s story. Mr. Scott made clear that the FBI had full responsibility for any further investigations of the Oswald case.

On page 3 paragraph 10 there clearly is still a sizeable redaction.

10. It would appear that whereas the FBI has discounted the Elena Garro allegations, the CIA is still considerably disturbed by them. The CIA may not have pressed for further investigation, however, for a number of reasons: 1) considering the sensitive overlap and subtle competition between two intelligence collecting agencies, it had to yield to the FBI’s clear jurisdiction; 2) there are obvious complications in conducting such an investigation in a foreign country: [ ———————————————-WHITED OUT————————————] Under

the circumstances it is unlikely that any further investigation of this matter will ever take place unless it is ordered by a high official in Washington.

Obviously there is something in “3)” and “10.)” that they don’t want us to see.

There is then a three page biographical data form on Elena Garro de Paz.

Then the December 10, 1965 version of the story.

Then the December 25, 1965 version

The July 13, 1966 version.

There are a few documents in which the exemptions (8) (2) per Francis J. McNeil, ARA 9/15/78 have remained. This may be per E.O. 11652. They are all whited, not black inked, out.

One is about Hernandez, Amador – A Director of Education for the State of Chihuahua, then there is about two and a half lines of text whited out.

Another, a document dated May 12, 1960, “The Consulate learned from a very reliable source that several weeks ago [two lines of text whited out] sent three agitators, [several words whited out] and a third not yet identified,…

And another, dated Jan 13, 1965, a Dept of State Airgram, Mexican Treatment of Sixth Anniversary of Castro Regime. The second page seems to have a whole paragraph whited out, and a large paragraph at that.

Document # 180-10110-10143 Is a 12 page document from Abba P. Schwartz to Frank A. Bartino. It is dated 1/10/64.

The first page is a letter, dated January 10, 1964, from Schwartz to Bartino.

I refer to our recent telephone conversation regarding military personnel who may have defected to Communist countries or areas.

In order to keep up to date the look out records of the Passport Office of the Bureau of Security and Consular Affairs, I would appreciate if you will furnish me with identifying information, particularly names and dates of birth, of military personnel who have defected, including those who may have redefected, to communist countries or Communist dominated areas.

Next, is a memo written on the same date by Schwartz to SCS Mr. Allyn C. Donaldson.

You will recall that in connection with turncoats who arrived in Hong Kong from Red China after January 1961, the Secretary of State determined that repatriation loans would not be granted to such persons. This is, as you know, a change of the policy which was followed under the previous administration.

In view of this position, it has not been determined whether the repatriation of persons other than turncoats who have voluntarily resided in restricted areas, such as Communist China, will be facilitated by the United States Government through repatriation loans. Until a clear-cut case arises and the Secretary reaches a decision, it is not to be assumed that a United States citizen who has voluntarily resided in Red China, or in any other communist country or Communist dominated area to which travel of United States citizens is restricted, will be assisted by repatriation loans.

Then there is an operations memorandum, dated September 8, 1964.. It is from the American Embassy in Moscow to Dept of State. The subject is an affidavit of Robert Korengold.

Enclosed are the original and one copy of the sworn statement of Robert Korengold concerning his brief interview with Lee Harvey Oswald in the fall of 1959. Since the embassy is uncertain as to which bureau of the Department the affidavit would be transmitted, it would be appreciated if SOV would forward the enclosures to the appropriate persons.

One copy of the affidavit is being retained in the Embassy files.

Before me James A. Klemstine, consul of the United States of America at Moscow, U.S.S.R., duly commissioned and qualified, personally appeared Robert J. Korengold, who, being duly sworn, deposes and says as follows:

(1) My name is Robert J. Korengold and I reside at Apt. 272, 15 Kutuzovsky Prospect, Moscow.

(2) In the fall of 1959, while I was working in Moscow as a correspondent for the United Press, I received a report that an individual who wished to defect from the United States to the USSR was at the Hotle Metropole. After several unsuccessful attempts, I finally was able to talk to Lee Harvey Oswald for approximately ten to fifteen minutes at the door to his room at the Hotel Metropole. Mr. Oswald stated that he knew what he was doing and insisted he did not wish to talk to anyone.

(3) After unsuccessfully attempting to elicit further information, I returned to my office where I discussed the matter with Miss Aline Mosby, another correspondent for the United Press. I subsequently telephoned Mr. Oswald who finally agreed to give an interview to Miss Mosby. She later had a long conversation with Mr. Oswald. When she returned to our office, we discussed Oswald’s case. We both were convinced that Mr. Oswald was an individual who had a chip on his shoulder and that when he had an idea or conviction, nothing could induce him to change his convictions.

(4) Mr. Oswald subsequently remained at the Metropole Hotle. Although some stories were subsequently filed on his case until he disappeared from Moscow, I do not remember ever seeing him again. I knew nothing of his later departure from the USSR until after he had left.

And further deponent saith not.

signed

Robert J. Korengold

Subscribed and sworn to me this eight day of September, 1964.

signed

James A. Klemstine

Consul of the United States

Then a telegram from American embassy in Moscow No. 565 September 5, 1964 2:30 p.m.

Consul and Cultural affairs officer interviewed Korengold Sept. 5. Korengold states had short fifteen minute talk with Oswald at Metropole Hotel sometime after latter’s arrival in Moscow. Oswald had nothing substantial to state and Korengold left with impression Oswald individual “with chip on his shoulder.” Oswald subsequently interviewed by Aline Mosby of UP. Korengold recalls no further contact with Oswald.

Then another telegram from State Dept. to American embassy Moscow, No. 610 Sept. 3, 6 p.m.

//LIMDIS//

Emb requested, on behalf Warren Commission, to interview and take statement from Robert J. Korengold, Chief, Moscow Bureau for Newsweek, to determine whether he has any information Oswald that might be of interest. Korengold apparently had been involved with Petrulli and had attempted convince him not renounce American citizenship in fall 1959. McVickar had told Priscilla Johnson, another reporter, that Korengold might know something about Oswald.

Korengold’s statement, even if amounts to declaration that he knew nothing about Oswald (GARBLE) should be sworn before official of embassy. Reply soonest.

GP-________.

RUSK

Action officer please insert GP nbr.

There is another copy of the above.

Another telegram from Trieste to Dept of State, Control No. 1414, No. 22 December 3, 1963 10:44 a.m.

For Chayes from Wise

Reference Department WIROM 25

I have no recollection of any interview with Oswald. to best of my memory, closest contact was single perfunctory exchange of greetings at Embassy. Interviews which occurred were held with other Consular officers.

Through correspondence with Embassy and comments of other officers, I remember Oswald as arrogant person, demanding of his rights as United States citizen and single mindedly devoted to pursuit of his immediate goal whether it be, as at first, renunciation of United States citizenship in favor of Soviet, or later, issuance of passport for return to United States. It was my impression that, in matter of obtaining Soviet exit visas for himself, wife and child, he seemed to experience less difficulty than other Americans in similar position

FIDEL

Lastly, is an Airgram from Amconsul TAMPICO to Dept of State, dated March 16, 1967.

1. During the course of recent evening of buying drinks for a couple of Tampico newsmen, one of them mentioned to me he had recognized the photograph of Lee Harvey Oswald when it appeared following the assassination of President Kennedy. He said he commented on this to his editor at the time. The latter advised him to keep the matter to himself. Later during the evening he requested that I not reveal to anyone what he had told me, claiming to fear for his job if anything came to light at this point.

2. When I approached him subsequently (during daylight hours) for permission to inform the Department of what he had “confessed” to me, his reply was a flat no. He insisted his knowledge of Oswald had been slight. He claimed simply to have met Oswald at the university in Mexico City and to have been aware he wished to travel to Cuba, as well as that the Cubans were not prepared to grant him a visa. He said his contacts with Oswald had been fleeting and of no consequence, and he repeated his request I inform no one. He stated again he would lose his job if the matter came to light.

3. When I pressed him further, assuring him if I reported the incident, it would be treated in strictest confidence, he finally agreed to my doing so. I believe he is telling me the truth about having met Oswald, as well as that his fear is genuine he will lose his job if the incident receives publicity. I also doubt he can be expected to add much, if anything, to the facts already developed.

RUYLE

Document # 180-10110-10142 Is a DOS document, dated 2/23/65. It is 19 pages long.

The first page is a memorandum for Mr. Mace from Richard A. Frank dated February 23, 1965. The subject is “Persons seen by Oswald at the United States Embassy in Moscow”.

1. On October 31, 1959, Oswald appeared at the United States Embassy in an attempt to renounce his United States citizenship. He was received by a receptionist. He was interviewed by Richard E. Snyder. During the interview, Mr. John A. McVickar was present in the room during other work. Apparently, as Mr. Oswald left, he exchanged remarks with Mr. McVickar and a secretary.

2. On July 8, 1961 and July 10, 1961. Mr. Oswald appeared at the Embassy to secure his United States passport. He again dealt with Mr. Snyder.

3. On July 11, 1961, Mr. Oswald returned to the Embassy to discuss a visa for his wife. He dealt with Mc. McVickar.

4. After corresponding with the Embassy in order to obtain a repatriation loan, Mr. Oswald apparently went to the United States Embassy on July 1, 1962, and signed a note promising to repay $435.71 to the United States government. Apparently, this matter was handled in the Embassy during his visit by Winifred Williams.

Next are two pages which seem to instruct what to do with “Defector Type Cases” and the issuance of passports and the proper notification to Security / Intelligence agencies. When this document was written is unknown but it is stamped Nov 10, 1964, which might only refer to when it was received. This is written by Francis G. Knight.

1. Purpose. The purpose of this instruction is to insure, insofar as possible, that cases falling within the category of cases designated as “Defector type Cases’ are thoroughly reviewed prior to the issuance of passport facilities and that information concerning this type of case is at all times promptly disseminated to appropriate Security / Intelligence Agencies.

2. Background. The importance of “Defector Type Cases” and the proper review of such cases was spotlighted by the assassination of President Kennedy and the subsequent investigation by the Warren Commission of the Department’s procedures in connection with the Oswald case. In its report the Commission concluded, “Investigation of Oswald’s complete dealings with the Department of State…reveals no irregularity suggesting any illegal actions or impropriety on the part of government officials. The Commission believes, however, that in applying its own regulations the Department should in all cases exercise great care in the return to this country of defectors such as Oswald who have evidenced disloyalty or hostility to this country or who have expressed a desire to renounce their United States citizenship and that when such persons are returned, procedures should be adopted for the better dissemination of information concerning them to the intelligence agencies of the Government.”

3. Definitions. Cases within this category cover a wide and somewhat vague area of activity. It is almost impossible to draw an arbitrary line defining what cases come within the category, “Defector Type Cases.” The inclusion in or exclusion of, cases from the category will require the exercise of intelligent judgement by the responsible individuals. The definition outlined below are not to be considered as exclusive but only as guidelines in determining whether a case falls [ a word or two is obliterated] category.

a. Defector – relates to any person in possession of, or having had access to

information affecting the national security or the conduct of foreign affairs

who travels or proposes to travel with the intent to adhere to a foreign

government or ideology to the detriment of the United States.

b. Expatriate – refers to United States citizens who have not lost their

citizenship but who have resided abroad under circumstances indicating

a transfer of allegiances to a foreign country or ideology

c. Repatriate – refers to United States citizens who are returning to the United

States after residence abroad under circumstances indicating they may

have transferred their allegiance to a foreign country or ideology.

d. Persons suspected of disloyalty or subversion – relates to persons whose

activities, organizational affiliations or relations with officials or

organizations of foreign governments are such as to render their

allegiance to the United States suspect. This includes all persons who have

evidenced disloyalty or hostility to the United States or have expressed a

desire to renounce their United States citizenship.

4. Responsibility.

a. Legal Division. The responsibility for handling “Defector Type Cases” has

been assigned to the Legal Division (PT/LS). PT/LS shall insure that

refusals coded “AL” are placed in the lookout file in all appropriate cases.

They will review such cases prior to the issuance of any passport facilities

and will disseminate information concerning such cases to appropriate

agencies.

b. All Divisions All Divisions of the Passport Office are responsible for

reporting and forwarding all cases which appear to fall within the category

“Defector Type Cases” to the Security Branch of the Legal Division.

There then is a memorandum from Francis G. Knight to Mr. Abba P. Schwartz dated July 6, 1964. The subject is repatriation loans.

I cannot find any inconsistencies in my memorandum to you dated June 22, 1964. it is clear and unequivocal and not it conflict with any previous statement, written or oral, made by this office on the subject.

The arrangements made by the Passport Office and Office of finance are spelled out in a memorandum dated January 16, 1962, and this memorandum is part of the record submitted to the Warren Commission.

The underlined and emphasized wording in your memorandum of July 1, 1964 is correct. Equally correct is the information in my memorandum to you dated June 22, 1964.

I agree that there is an obligation for the Department to make every effort to have look out cards prepared when repatriation loans are made and to this end the Office of Finance issued instructions on April 16, 1964, to all diplomatic and consular posts overseas to provide the place and date of birth of the individual making application for such loans.

It seems to me that this action is the efficient way of handling the situation. The Passport Office cannot guess at the identity of the individual. There is no reason to engage in a guessing game when the information must be available at the post taking the application for the loan. This is precisely why the Passport Office recommended and agreed that the Office of Finance obtain this information prior to advising us of such a loan.

The entire situation is now academic since the Office of Finance is insisting on obtaining the information we require prior to informing this office of the granting of the loan. But we suppose, in a case of extreme confusion and aberration the Office of Finance should send us the name of a Joseph Smith or Robert Jones or John Adams or a thousand other names on which we have scores of files, without any further identification, we would have to return it to the Office of Finance for further information. In such cases a card could not be made because we would have no way of identifying the individual. A unidentifiable card in the file is a waste of time and money and it would revert the file to the “old days” when anyone whose name was distasteful for the time being had a stop card filed for the purpose of delaying service.

As I have pointed out, this situation which pertained two years ago, no longer exists. It has been corrected at the source, namely, at the overseas posts where the discrepancy and incompleteness of information originated.

There is then a 4 page instruction for look out cards, dated February 20, 1964.

A two page attachment on preparing lookout cards. Then a three page instruction for clearance procedures.

There is then a three page report from Allyn C. Donaldson to Mr. Schwartz dated June 17, 1964. Subject: Repatriation loans to individuals being repatriated from communist countries or areas. Reference is made to a memorandum from Schwartz dated June 12, 1964.

Our records have been checked for the current Fiscal Year 1964 and no repatriation loans were granted to any known turncoats or defectors during this period.

In accordance with your request, all future loan applications which are received from any Iron Curtain country will be submitted to your office for approval. We have enclosed for your information, those applicants in Iron Curtain countries who have been granted repatriation loans since the beginning of the current Fiscal Year 1964. It will be noted that there is a heavy demand made upon the repatriation funds for the return of destitute United States nationals in Rumania. The demand is continuing. In the early part of the current fiscal year the Rumanian government changed its policy after many years and is permitting United States nationals to depart for the United States. In almost every case these individuals are without private resources, and are dual nationals.

There is then a two page attachment listing various people, from certain countries and how much was loaned, etc.

There is then Schwartz’s June 12, 1964 memo.

As you are aware, some time ago in connection with the last turncoat who arrived in Hong Kong, I decided with the approval of the Secretary that the Department would not grant repatriation loans to any turncoats.

I would appreciate your informing me whether or not any repatriation loans have been granted to defectors other than turncoats since the above determination was made. If any such repatriation loans have been granted, would you indicate the name of the recipient, the date of the loan, the amount of the loan, and the area from which he was being repatriated.

Hereafter no repatriation loans are to be made to any individual being repatriated from any Iron curtain country, Red China, or any communist dominated area without the express approval of the Administrator of Deputy Administrator of SCA.

Document # 180-10110-10141 is a 10 page document on George DeMohrenschildt. It is dated 9/26/57.

First, there is a two page report from the Department of State, Office of Security. It is from the Security Office in Bonn. It covers the period September 9 -26, 1957.

Synopsis – Confidential source identified subject as Georges Von Mohrenschildt, born 4 April 1911, Mozyrz, USSR; that subject was a journalist of Polish nationality and that he was a student at the Institut Superieur de Commerce d’Etat, Antwerp and the University de l’Etat at Liege. Subject did journalistic work for the Polish journal “Slowe” of Wilno while attending the University at Liege. Subject awarded doctorate and “sciences consulaires” degree in 1935. He was sentenced to eight days imprisonment in 1931 for resisting an officer, drunkenness and use of a false name; sentence suspended pending completion of three year probation. Embassy, Brussels files negative.

There is then a two page report from Caracas.

Synopsis – Mr. Santiago Segovia of the Personnel Department of Pantepec Oil company stated no company records exist for 1945-1946, but personally remembered applicant, worked with him in oil fields during these years. Good personality, background, character, average habits. Left company on good terms to work on project in California. Advised Mr. Warren Smith, former president of Pantepec could furnish more information. Mr. E. H. Adkins, Servicos Industriales, Creole corporation, advised no record of employment of applicant. Record checks through Embassy sources and local police check revealed no information. Status closed.

There is then a 6 page report on Mohrenschildt from Mexico.

Investigation in Mexico disclosed the following:

1.) sources of information and indices in the American Embassy in Mexico had no information on the captioned subject.

2.) Inquiry at Secretaria de Gobernacion (Mexican Imigration Service) revealed certain biographical information on the subject which included that he was questioned by the U. S. law enforcement agency as a German spy suspect.

3.) Interview of several informants in Mexico revealed that the subject had an unfavorable reputation. He “lived” with a woman in Mexico and passed himself as a baron. So far as informants were aware, he was not employed in Mexico and was considered an adventurer and incompetent.

Document # 180-10110-10140 Is a one page document dated January 23, 1943 concerning deMohrenschildt and his marriage to Lilia Perdo Camargo. Entry to Mexico was granted and that he can marry Camargo.

Document # 180-10110-10139 Is from R. B. Shipley, Dept of State dated 10/8/42. George DeMohrenschildt is alleged to be a Nazi agent. Refer any application to the fraud section.

Document # 180-10110-10138 is a one page document dated 1/4/57 on de Mohrenschildt. It is his letter to a Miss Sheppard in the Passport division requesting the accelaration of granting him a passport for him and two of his friends.

Document # 180-10110-10137

Is a four page document.

First is a letter from Earl Cabell to David M. Abshire, Assistant Secretary for Congressional Relations dated June 8, 1971. Second is Abshire’s letter to Cabell dated May 27, 1971. Third, is a two page letter from De Mohrenschildt to Rep. Cabell about his claim against the government of Haiti. DeMohrenschildt states he and his staff performed a detailed survey of Haiti while he was there March 1963 to September 1967.

Document # 180-10110-10136 Is a one page letter from Douglas J. Bennet to Blakey dated November 6, 1978. Ms. Sorell Brady and Mr. Robert Genzman requested the release of certain documents to the Select Committee on Assassinations. Therefore, I have enclosed these documents from various record systems at the appropriate tabs.

Tab A contains documents from the Central Foreign Policy Records on George de Mohrenschildt. Enclosed at Tab B are the Passport Records and at Tab C are the Security Records on Mr. de Mohrenschildt which Ms. Brady selected for release. At Tab D and Tab E, I have enclosed documents from the Central Foreign Policy Records and the Security Records of Lee Harvey Oswald which Mr. Genzman requested during the course of his review.

There are a few FBI records noted as duplicates with this release

Document # 124-10035-10420 Is a copy of Document # 124-10027-10161 from the 10th Batch.

Document # 124-10144-10355 Is a two page document. It is a cover page and Cover page B to a report by Charles S. Harding of the Atlanta office, dated 12/12/63. this is supposed to be a 34 page report.

Document # 124-10173-10071 Is a 36 page report, only two pages are here. It is from SAC, NY to Director dated 12/3/63.

John J. Abt, representing Arnold Johnson advised that Johnson will make available correspondence between Lee Harvey Oswald and the Communist Party, USA.

Document # 124-10242-10265 Is a copy of the above.

Document # 124-10023-10245 It is a copy of Document # 124-10144-10082 from the 10th Batch. Is a 2 page report from F. J. Baumgardner to W. C. Sullivan dated 11/25/63. Only one page is here. Document # 124-10144-10082 from the 10th Batch has both pages.

On the evening of 11/24/63 I called our New York Office and told them that

Lee Oswald had been corresponding with certain Party leaders and instructed our New York Office to make every effort to obtain any such correspondence.

At 3:55 p.m., 11/25/63, ASAC Roney of our New York Office called and furnished the following information.

NY [ ]-S advised this date that upon examining old dictation notebooks used by her at Communist Party headquarters she discovered notes of a letter dictated to her early in September 1963, by Arnold Johnson to a Mr. Oswald. Informant stated that in her shorthand notes no date appears nor does the full name of Oswald appear nor does his residence address appear. The body of the letter reads as follows:

“Dear Mr. Oswald: Your letter of August 28 to Elizabeth Gurley Flynn was turned over to me for reply. Since I received your letter of September 1 indicating you are moving to Baltimore, I suggest that when you do that, that you get in touch with us here and we will find some way of getting in touch with you in that city.

“While the point you make about your residence in the Soviet Union might be utilized by some people, I think you have to recognize that as an American citizen who is now in this country, you have the right to participate in such organizations, including the Fair Play for Cuba Committee, which are of a very broad character and often it is advisable for some people to remain in the background, not the underground.”

Document # 124-10143-10038 Is a copy of Document # 124-10018-10491 from the 10th Batch.

A correction (Note, this document was found among the 12th Batch material)

Document # 124-10058-10007 This little guy was bitterly fought over. Only three pages in length it has four pages from the ARRB explaining 13 postponements.

It is from the Legal Attache in Mexico City to the Director dated 4/10/64. This is about Joseph Bernstein, Reva Frank Bernstein. See Document # 124-10079-10230 from the 11th Batch for more information on the Bernsteins.

It states that enclosed are 37 copies of a letterhead memorandum (LHM), 25 for Dallas, 1 for Detroit, one for New York. What about the other 10?

Additional instructions were being sent to the Detroit and New York offices. The Mexico office is not in receipt of those instructions and wants to know what they are.

There are apparently quite a few Mexican informants still living who are protected.

---

 

ARRB 13th Batch

The Federal Register February 20,1996 p. 6346-6347Reviewed by Joseph Backes

---

FBI Documents: Open in Full

1.) Document # 124-10023-10241

2.) Document # 124-10023-10242

3.) Document # 124-10027-10402

4.) Document # 124-10034-10056

5.) Document # 124-10063-10017

6.) Document # 124-10068-10068

7.) Document # 124-10069-10030

8.) Document # 124-10069-10051

9.) Document # 124-10069-10394

10.) Document # 124-10070-10076

11.) Document # 124-10070-10088

12.) Document # 124-10070-10350

13.) Document # 124-10072-10150

14.) Document # 124-10072-10402

15.) Document # 124-10081-10324

16.) Document # 124-10084-10205

17.) Document # 124-10087-10331

18.) Document # 124-10087-10336

19.) Document # 124-10095-10117

20.) Document # 124-10100-10265

21.) Document # 124-10111-10170

22.) Document # 124-10119-10143

23.) Document # 124-10119-10221

24.) Document # 124-10119-10261

25.) Document # 124-10128-10024

26.) Document # 124-10142-10166

27.) Document # 124-10163-10135

28.) Document # 124-10167-10052

29.) Document # 124-10171-10143

30.) Document # 124-10171-10193

31.) Document # 124-10178-10262

32.) Document # 124-10183-10178

33.) Document # 124-10184-10259

34.) Document # 124-10228-10062

35.) Document # 124-10228-10069

36.) Document # 124-10229-10111

37.) Document # 124-10230-10423

38.) Document # 124-10240-10290

39.) Document # 124-10249-10417

40.) Document # 124-10257-10477

CIA Documents: Open in Full

1.) Document # 104-10001-10008

2.) Document # 104-10001-10035

3.) Document # 104-10001-10103

4.) Document # 104-10002-10039

5.) Document # 104-10002-10084

6.) Document # 104-10003-10006

7.) Document # 104-10003-10030

8.) Document # 104-10003-10032

9.) Document # 104-10003-10179

10.) Document # 104-10003-10193

11.) Document # 104-10015-10032

12.) Document # 104-10015-10298

13.) Document # 104-10015-10305

14.) Document # 104-10015-10339

15.) Document # 104-10015-10344

16.) Document # 104-10016-10042

17.) Document # 104-10017-10056

HSCA Documents: Open in Full

1.) Document # 180-10075-10092

2.) Document # 180-10076-10011

3.) Document # 180-10077-10207

4.) Document # 180-10077-10208

5.) Document # 180-10078-10450

6.) Document # 180-10089-10019

7.) Document # 180-10089-10024

8.) Document # 180-10089-10215

9.) Document # 180-10089-10227

10.) Document # 180-10110-10082

11.) Document # 180-10110-10106

12.) Document # 180-10117-10177

13.) Document # 180-10118-10068

NARA Documents; Open in Full

1.) Document # 178-10004-10022

2.) Document # 179-40001-10233

3.) Document # 179-40001-10430

4.) Document # 179-40001-10431

FBI Documents: Postponed in Part

1.) Document # 124-10003-10038

2.) Document # 124-10012-10057

3.) Document # 124-10027-10396

4.) Document # 124-10049-10006

5.) Document # 124-10049-10007

6.) Document # 124-10065-10076

7.) Document # 124-10068-10016

8.) Document # 124-10068-10034

9.) Document # 124-10069-10000

10.) Document # 124-10069-10065

11.) Document # 124-10070-10083

12.) Document # 124-10070-10297

13.) Document # 124-10070-10309

14.) Document # 124-10070-10347

15.) Document # 124-10072-10190

16.) Document # 124-10074-10030

17.) Document # 124-10074-10142

18.) Document # 124-10075-10040

19.) Document # 124-10075-10086

20.) Document # 124-10075-10087

21.) Document # 124-10075-10088

22.) Document # 124-10075-10121

23.) Document # 124-10075-10209

24.) Document # 124-10076-10049

25.) Document # 124-10077-10025

26.) Document # 124-10077-10059

27.) Document # 124-10077-10195

28.) Document # 124-10081-10142

29.) Document # 124-10081-10224

30.) Document # 124-10081-10228

31.) Document # 124-10087-10328

32.) Document # 124-10087-10332

33.) Document # 124-10100-10040

34.) Document # 124-10100-10306

35.) Document # 124-10102-10077

36.) Document # 124-10102-10200

37.) Document # 124-10103-10219

38.) Document # 124-10105-10245

39.) Document # 124-10108-10046

40.) Document # 124-10108-10090

41.) Document # 124-10108-10141

42.) Document # 124-10110-10420

43.) Document # 124-10112-10058

44.) Document # 124-10119-10129

45.) Document # 124-10119-10134

46.) Document # 124-10119-10142

47.) Document # 124-10119-10287

48.) Document # 124-10125-10102

49.) Document # 124-10126-10080

50.) Document # 124-10126-10124

51.) Document # 124-10126-10345

52.) Document # 124-10127-10018

53.) Document # 124-10133-10055

54.) Document # 124-10143-10394

55.) Document # 124-10160-10009

56.) Document # 124-10163-10133

57.) Document # 124-10169-10052

58.) Document # 124-10178-10493

59.) Document # 124-10182-10122

60.) document # 124-10272-10091

CIA Documents: Postponed in part

1.) Document # 104-10015-10030

2.) Document # 104-10015-10035

3.) Document # 104-10015-10037

4.) Document # 104-10015-10058

5.) Document # 104-10015-10129

6.) Document # 104-10015-10150

7.) Document # 104-10015-10158

8.) Document # 104-10015-10178

9.) Document # 104-10015-10220

10.) Document # 104-10015-10223

11.) Document # 104-10015-10227

12.) Document # 104-10015-10240

13.) Document # 104-10015-10259

14.) Document # 104-10015-10269

15.) Document # 104-10015-10330

16.) Document # 104-10015-10348

17.) Document # 104-10015-10364

18.) Document # 104-10015-10375

19.) Document # 104-10015-10385

20.) Document # 104-10015-10396

21.) Document # 104-10015-10402

22.) Document # 104-10015-10403

23.) Document # 104-10015-10410

24.) Document # 104-10015-10435

25.) Document # 104-10015-10448

26.) Document # 104-10016-10007

27.) Document # 104-10016-10022

28.) Document # 104-10017-10000

29.) Document # 104-10017-10008

30.) Document # 104-10017-10009

31.) Document # 104-10017-10010

32.) Document # 104-10017-10011

33.) Document # 104-10017-10021

34.) Document # 104-10017-10035

35.) Document # 104-10017-10048

36.) Document # 104-10017-10052

37.) Document # 104-10017-10062

38.) Document # 104-10017-10063

39.) Document # 104-10017-10068

40.) Document # 104-10017-10076

41.) Document # 104-10017-10080

42.) Document # 104-10018-10000

43.) Document # 104-10018-10004

44.) Document # 104-10018-10005

45.) Document # 104-10018-10006

46.) Document # 104-10018-10041

47.) Document # 104-10018-10048

48.) Document # 104-10018-10055

49.) Document # 104-10018-10065

50.) Document # 104-10018-10082

51.) Document # 104-10018-10092

52.) Document # 104-10018-10094

53.) Document # 104-10018-10096

54.) Document # 104-10095-10001

HSCA Documents: Postponed in Part

1.) Document # 180-10084-10094

2.) Document # 180-10086-10235

3.) Document # 180-10101-10053

4.) Document # 180-10102-10278

5.) Document # 180-10106-10011

6.) Document # 180-10107-10194

7.) Document # 180-10111-10065

8.) Document # 180-10115-10028

9.) Document # 180-10120-10343

Additional Releases (Major surprise! They were actually there in the ARRB releases Box. I’m stunned!)

HSCA Records

1.) Document # 180-10110-10034

2.) Document # 180-10110-10035

3.) Document # 180-10110-10036

4.) Document # 180-10110-10037

5.) Document # 180-10110-10038

6.) Document # 180-10110-10039

7.) Document # 180-10110-10040

8.) Document # 180-10110-10041

9.) Document # 180-10110-10042

10.) Document # 180-10110-10043

11.) Document # 180-10110-10044

12.) Document # 180-10110-10045

13.) Document # 180-10110-10046

14.) Document # 180-10110-10047

15.) Document # 180-10110-10048

16.) Document # 180-10110-10049

17.) Document # 180-10110-10070

18.) Document # 180-10110-10072

19.) Document # 180-10110-10077

20.) Document # 180-10110-10096

21.) Document # 180-10110-10097

22.) Document # 180-10110-10110

23.) Document # 180-10110-10136

24.) Document # 180-10110-10137

25.) Document # 180-10110-10138

26.) Document # 180-10110-10139

27.) Document # 180-10110-10140

28.) Document # 180-10110-10141

29.) Document # 180-10110-10142

30.) Document # 180-10110-10143

31.) Document # 180-10110-10092

32.) Document # 180-10110-10093

33.) Document # 180-10110-10095

FBI Documents: Postponed in Part

1.) Document # 124-10035-10420

2.) Document # 124-10144-10355

3.) Document # 124-10173-10071

4.) Document # 124-10242-10265

5.) Document # 124-10023-10245

6.) Document # 124-10143-10038

FBI Documents: Open in Full

1.) Document # 124-10230-10106

2.) Document # 124-10079-10230

FBI Document : Postponed in Part

1.) Document # 124-10058-10007

The Review

FBI Document review (of those Open in Full)

Document # 124-10023-10241 Is a one page airtel from SAC, New Orleans to Director dated 9/24/63.

To: Director, FBI (105-82555)

From: SAC, New Orleans (100-16601)

Subject: Lee Harvey Oswald

IS-R-CUBA

Re Bureau letter 8/21/63.

Enclosed are nine copies of letterhead memorandum concerning captioned matter.

Confidential Informant No T-1 is identified as NO 1213-S who was contacted on 9/9/63 by SA WARREN C. DEBRUEYS. The sources mentioned in the characterization of the “Fair Play For Cuba Committee” are identified as NY-3164-S and NY 3467-S.

Investigation of OSWALD is continuing, and a report containing the results thereof will be furnished to the Bureau together with the recommendation of the New Orleans Office concerning further action concerning OSWALD.

Document # 124-10023-10242 Is a 25 page document from Milton Kaack to Director dated 10/31/63. Only two pages are here. These are two cover pages to an LHM. The first page refers to Kaack’s plan to interview Lee Oswald’s mother, Mrs. Margaret Oswald, 1308 Eagle Street, Apartment 3, in Vernon, Texas, concerning subject’s whereabouts. And will attempt to locate Lee at 2515 West 5th street in Irving.

Cover page C is the second page giving identity of sources and file where located.

NO T-2 is NY 2002-S*

NO T-3 is NY 694-S

NO T-4 is NY2750-S

NO T-5 is CSNY 48-S

NO T-6 is Mrs. Andrea McCormick, 8313 Palm Street, New Orleans, Louisiana

Under Administrative they report, “The following information was furnished to the Bureau by Legat, Mexico City, with the instructions that it be classified secret and not be further disseminated.

“CIA, Mexico City, advised legat, Mexico City on October 18, 1963, that Lee Oswald contacted a Vice Counsel VALERIY VLADIMIRIVICH KOSTIKOV at the Soviet Embassy on September 28, 1963, inquiring for a response from Washington, D.C. to an unknown request made by him. Oswald was again in contact with the Soviet Embassy, Mexico City, on October 1, 1963.

Document # 124-10027-10402 Is missing

Document # 124-10034-10056 Is missing

Document # 124-10063-10017 Is missing

Document # 124-10068-10068 Is missing

Document # 124-10069-10030 Is a one page document from SAC, Chicago to Director dated 12/11/63.

PCI Gloria Mata, this office, advised SA Robert A. Cook this date that she had received information that Diana Hunter, known as “The Goddess”, who is a stripper and was working in a Cleveland night club, at the time Ruby killed Oswald, flew to Dallas as soon as she heard that Ruby was involved. PCI advised that she had heard that Hunter formerly lived with Ruby when working for him in Dallas.

If not already done, Dallas will attempt to locate and interview Hunter re her association with Ruby.

Document # 124-10069-10051 Is missing.

Document # 124-10069-10394 Is missing.

Document # 124-10070-10076 Is missing.

Document # 124-10070-10088 Is an 18 page document from SAC, Las Vegas to Director dated 11/25/63. Only one page is here.

Re Bureau Teletype to all SACs, Chicago teletype, Milwaukee teletype, and Dallas telephone call, all this date.

Following investigation conducted at Las Vegas. Records Las Vegas police department negative on Ruby, November 25, `63. Det. Ted Rosen to SA Leo. A Stevens. Records Clark County Sherrif’s office negative on Ruby, November 25, `63, Lt. Bart Jacka, to Stevens. Gambling informants and sources LV 26-C, LV 127-PC, LV 117-C-TE, Charles Edward Anderson, PCI, Harry Coopersmith, PCI, Emanual Freedman, PCI, All contacted November 25, `63 negative concerning Ruby. Las Vegas indices negative Re Yudie Jacobs, Art Wayne, and Sammy Menosh.

Document # 124-10070-10350 Is a two page memorandum from Rosen to Belmont dated 11/27/63. Only one page is here.

Subject: Joseph Brantley Brown

Criminal court, District Judge

Dallas, Texas.

The following information is contained in Bureau files concerning the captioned individual and is being submitted pursuant to your request. It is noted that the “Washington Post” issue of November 27, 1963, contained an article indicating Judge Joe B. Brown will preside at the trial of Jack Ruby, accused murderer of Lee Harvey Oswald. Bureau files indicate Brown’s true name to be as it appears in the caption.

We have not investigated Judge Brown. In October, 1959, in connection with our General Intelligence Program, a potential confidential informant, Ivan Irwin, advised that the grand jury in Dallas, Texas, was “rigged”. According to Irwin, Judge Brown had aligned himself with Dallas County District Attorney Henry Wade. Irwin stated that he considered the grand jury “rigged” because the grand jury was planning on indicting Dallas County Commissioner Mel Price. Judge Brown, according to the informant, decided that it would be necessary for him, Judge Brown, to take a rest before the actual indictment of Price, in order that Brown’s political foes could not connect him with the actions of the grand jury. It appeared that Mel Price, Dallas Commissioner, had been scrutinizing the financial dealings of other commissioners, as well as [the] District Attorney’s Office. No further information in this connection is noted in our files. (63-4296-12-302)

In September, 1960, in connection with our investigation in Dallas, Texas, to locate one William H. Keys, a conditional release violator, we ascertained that one Dick J. Curtis was being held by Judge Joe B. Brown having been “booked” by the local police as “hold for Joe B. Brown.” Curtis was interviewed in Judge Brown’s office, in the presence of Judge Brown and a Dallas Deputy Allen Sweatt. Curtis related that he had met Keys, our suspect, previously, and Keys had run off with his, Curtis’s wife. Keys had threatened Curtis and indicated that if Curtis…(continued on missing page)

Document # 124-10072-10150 Is a 3 page document from SAC, in El Paso, Texas to Director. It is dated 11/25/63.

On November 25, 1963, Mr. Harry Thomas, 705 Arizona Street, El Paso, Texas, advised he was associated with the AP in Chicago, Illinois, in the early 1930’s and resided for a time at the Olympic Hotel, 1016 North Clark Street, Chicago. The hotel was operated by a man named Rubenstein who used various first names, namely Harry, Jack and Abe. Rubenstein had a violent temper and was seen beating up an unidentified individual on one occasion. Rubenstein reportedly was part owner of a number of night clubs up and down Clark Street, including McGoverns Liberty Inn and was reportedly tied in tightly with the rackets in Chicago. Mr. Thomas said he did not know if the above-mentioned Rubenstein was identical with the man who shot Lee Harvey Oswald in Dallas.

Gerald Wolfe, owner of Ramada Inn in El Paso as well as a chain of restaurants, was introduced to subject two years ago in Dallas by Harmon Scheppe, owner Scheppes Dairy, Dallas, but has had no further contact with subject. On November 24 last Wolfe was telephonically contacted by Scheppe and reminded of meeting subject. Wolfe said Scheppe is personal friend and business associate of subject and is in position to furnish extensive info re subject.

No leads being set out for Chicago.

Dallas requested to interview Scheppe re subject.

Butel this date instructed all offices contact gambling informants re subject. Gambling informants in El Paso division contacted with negative results except for following info —

On Nov. 25, `63 PCI Joseph Lewis Prensky, theatrical booking agent, El Paso, Texas, who has furnished reliable information in the past, and whose identity should be protected, advised that the subject was known by most theatrical agents to use exotic dancers. In Feb. `62 Prensky talked to the subject over the telephone concerning the employment of Beth King, exotic dancer, who was looking for work. The subject talked in a very pleasant manner but did not employ Beth King in view of the fact that he did not have an opening for her. Prensky said he had no additional contacts with the subject and had no personal knowledge of the subject’s background and associates. Prensky said the subject was never known to spend any time in El Paso, Texas.

Document # 124-10072-10402 Is missing

Document # 124-10081-10324 Is a four page report from SAC, Cleveland to Director dated 12/30/63. Only two pages are here, and those two copies of one page. So, it may really be only a two page report.

PCI Ernest L. Nemeth, who has furnished reliable information in the past, on December 11 last related that he recently met a girl in a bar in the theatrical section of Cleveland who during course of conversation mentioned she once worked for Jack Ruby in Dallas. PCI only knew her as “Yum-Yum” and believed she is an exotic dancer of Syrian extraction. “Yum-Yum” was identified as [sic, “and”] subsequently interviewed instant date.

Stella Bray, Nee Kalifia, also known as Mrs. Charles Bray, The Village Apartments, Cleveland, Ohio, is a stripper who uses the professional name, “Yum-Yum”. On instant date she related that during summer 1956 she had a three month engagement at Jack Ruby’s.

(The rest is missing and presumably on page two)

Document # 124-10084-10205 Is missing

Document # 124-10087-10331 Is a 4 page document from SAC, Chicago to Director dated 11/26/63. It is about the Polish reaction to the assassination of President Kennedy. On November 23, 1963 Professor Robert Barry Farrell of Northwestern University and Behdan Lewandowski, (I hope I didn’t misspell that. This doc is terrible to read) Polish Ambassador to the United Nations, and Manfred Lachs, Special Advisor for Disarmament Matters to the Polish Foreign Minister met, according to a source, where they talked about the assassination. “Lewandowski commented that his first reaction to the assassination was the possibility of a military coup d’etat in the United States; however, Lachs had convinced him that such a reaction was unfounded and based on a lack of knowledge of the American political system.”

“Lachs and Lewandowski then discussed the inefficiency of the Dallas Police Department, and commented that the Chief of Police in Dallas had impressed them on his television interviews as being an “incompetent idiot.” Lachs commented that the arrest of Lee Oswald and his identification as a Communist was probably a whitewash by the inefficient police department to dig up a scapegoat for the incident, and Lachs compared the arrest of Oswald to the Sacco and Vanzetti incident. Lachs commented that no disciplined Communist could have committed the assassination, since it was contrary to the interests of Khrushchev as there was no alternative in the United States as good as President Kennedy.

“Lachs and Lewandowski appeared very shocked by the incident and commented that as a result of the assassination, they were very uncertain of the future and anticipated a possible change of relations between the United States and the Soviet bloc. Lachs and Levandowski both stated that the Poles had no definite assessment of the new president, Lyndon Johnson, and did not know what he would be like…

“Lachs and Lewandowski both were fearful that the assassination would cause a hardening of U.S. policy towards the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe in general, and they both expressed fear that McGeorge Bundy, the Advisor to President Kennedy for National Security Affairs, would exert even more influence on U. S. policy in the near future. Both Lachs and Lewandowski referred to Bundy as unbending and unyielding, and Lewandowski referred to Bundy as “an American Stalinist.”

Professor Farrell later remarked to the source that the murder of Oswald would be taken by the Soviet bloc to have been committed with the connivance of the Dallas Police to cover up their own inefficiency and to eliminate the possibility of having to bring him to trial.

Document # 124-10087-10336 Is missing

Document # 124-10095-10117 Is a copy of Document # 124-10069-10030.

Document # 124-10100-10265 Is missing

Document # 124-10111-10170 Is missing

Document # 124-10119-10143 Is a copy of Document # 124-10072-10150.

Document # 124-10119-10221 Is missing.

Document #124-10119-10228 Is a copy of Document # 124-10070-10088.

Document # 124-10119-10261 Is a copy of Document # 124-10070-10088.

Document # 124-10128-10024 Is missing.

Document # 124-10142-10166 is a 5 page report. It is a copy of Document # 124-10072-10150. Really two copies. All of the information fit into two pages, and then the rest is the report again this time on three pages.

Document # 124-10163-10135 Is missing.

Document # 124-10167-10052 Is missing.

Document # 124-10171-10143 Is a copy of Document # 124-10023-10242.

Document # 124-10171-10193 Is missing

Document # 124-10178-10262 Is missing

Document # 124-10183-10178 Is missing

Document # 124-10184-10259 Is missing

Document # 124-10228-10062 Is a copy of Document # 124-10023-10241.

Document # 124-10228-10069 Is a copy of Document # 124-10023-10242.

Document # 124-10029-10111 Is a copy of Document # 124-10023-10242.

Document # 124-10230-10423 Is a copy of Document # 124-10023-10241.

Document # 124-10240-10290 Is missing

Document # 124-10249-10417 Is missing

Document # 124-10257-10477 Is missing

CIA Documents: (of those Open in Full)

All missing.

HSCA Documents: Open in Full

Document # 180-10075-10092 is a one page Outside Contact Report. In the Marina Oswald folder of the Secret Service’s declassified JFK materials, James H. Martin, Marina’s first business manager, used the name of Leroy Gutch (then of Pompano Drive, St. Petersburg) as a reference. Gutch disclosed the following in an interview conducted by phone.

Martin and Gutch were neighbors: Martin lived across the street with his wife and two sons. In St. Petersburg, Martin managed the kitchen and luncheon for a local college. The Martin family also worked a large newspaper route for the St. Petersburg Times and Evening Independent. Approximately 5 years ago, Martin left for Oklahoma with his family to take a position with Ramada Inn Motels. Gutch has not heard from Martin more recently than 3 or 4 years ago.

They recommend seeing the OCR on Marietta Viter.

Document # 180-10076-10011 Is missing.

Document # 180-10077-10207 Is a three page document from Leadis C. Matthews to Blakey, dated 8/10/78. It is a memorandum or summary of a deposition. Dr. Charles Laburda is a clinical psychologist at the Veterans Administration Hospital in Bonham, Texas. He supervised the treatment of Seymour Weitzman since 1974.

Weitzman testified to finding a particle of bone fragment from Elm Street and giving it to a Secret Service agent.

Document # 180-10077-10208 Is the 25 page statement of Dr. Charles Laburda. Dr. Laburda told Mr. Matthews that Mr. Weitzman was a chronic schizophrenic. He was constantly in fear of his life. Also, he would tell people some things to make them happy and get them to go away. This was the case with Mr. Weitzman’s identification of Watergate figures being in Dealey Plaza.

Dr. Laburda stated that Mr. Weitzman was on 800 mg. of Mellaril, which was increased to 1,000 mg. a day. Dr. Laburda stated that that is 200mg. above maximum which is generally used but Mr. Weitzman tolerates it well. Mr. Weitzman was also on 300 mg. of Elavil, an anti-depressant medication, which contributes also to regulating his sleep pattern.

Mr. Weitzman told Dr. Laburda that he believes positively there were two people shooting. That he saw some men crouching behind some bushes. Now he does not know who it was, but after the shooting the man was not there. I asked him at the time that it could have been somebody from the police and he said it could have been but then he said he found a spent cartridge at that time, and it was from a Mauser rifle 7.65 in that area. I suspect that these things are partly elaboration of somewhat what he had heard, what other people said, and speculation that had been advanced in the last ten years, so I could not say that this was the idea that he had at that time, but he told me that he believed from the beginning that there was more than one person shooting.

Document # 10078-10450 is a 7 page document interview summary of Secret Service Agent Ernest Ignacio Aragon dated 3/25/78.

He started with the Secret Service in 1953 in Albuquerque, New Mexico, then he went to Los Angeles, California for two years, then to Washington, D.C. He was subsequently transferred to the White House Detail and in June 1961, largely because he spoke Spanish, he was transferred to Miami, Florida.

When he arrived in Miami, the office consisted of SAIC John Marshall and SA Robert Jamison. The bulk of the office work consisted of check forgery cases but Aragon spent a lot of his time developing Cuban Intelligence and working on Presidential Protection since ca. 1961, President Kennedy spent his weekends at Palm Beach.

Aragon said that he became aware of the deficiencies of the Secret Service in Presidential protection very early in his career. Because of his work on Cuban subjects in Miami he became friendly with some CIA operatives working out of the Miami Station. He was reluctant to identify them but was persuaded to do so and told the writer that he dealt with Ted Shackley, Bill Finch and Mitch Lawrence. Finch was head of the Miami office and Lawrence succeeded him. Aragon discussed with Chief Rowley the need for more formal liaison with the CIA and as a result, was asked to come to Washington in 1962 to discuss it further. He hitched a ride to Washington from Palm Beach on Air Force One.

Aragon met with Richard Helms, Goshen Zogby, Victor Wallen and Clark Simmons* in Washington. Aragon said representatives of the FBI were also present at this meeting. He said that arrangements were made for the immediate coordination and dissemination of intelligence information relating to the protection of the President.

___________________________

* The writer talked to Sam Papich, also in Albuquerque, N. M., who had been liaison between the FBI and the CIA in that period. He identified Wallen and Simmons as being with the Cuban and Latin American desks at the CIA at the time. Zogby’s name was not familiar to him. Helms was DDP. Papich acknowledges that he was aware of this meeting but he did not attend it.

___________________________

After the meeting Aragon conferred with Chief Rowley, Assistant Chief Paul Paterni and Chief Inspector Edward Wildy and informed them of his activities. The Chief advised him to contact Bob Bouck and S.A. Brown in PRS and brief them.

Aragon said that he had conflicts with SAIC Marshall over the handling of Cuban Intelligence and Marshall was resentful of Aragon’s dealing directly with the chief’s office in Washington. Marshall’s resentment resulted in harassment and hampered Aragon in pursuit of Cuban Intelligence, he said. On January 20th, 1963, Aragon was again summoned to the Chief’s office to assist in a survey of the effectiveness of PRS.* Aragon said there had been complaints about its effectiveness, particularly regarding the dissemination of information to the field. Only with great difficulty was he able to get a copy of this report, later in Miami.

Aragon told the writer that SAIC John Marshall and Gerald Behn, head of the White House Detail, were at sword’s point over who had the responsibility for protection of the President when he was in Florida. It reached a stage where Chief Rowley had to issue a directive reasserting the prerogatives of the White House Detail.

In March 1963, Aragon had occasion to interpret for President Kennedy in connection with a Florida visit of Peruvian students. He did so but missed some words, and he felt that his translation was not perfect. He therefore requested Marshall to

________________

* He worked with Chet Miller on this.

_______________

send him to a Spanish-language school which the F.B.I. ran in Washington, D.C. It was not until 1966 that the request was approved and Aragon left for the school.

Aragon said that he was familiar with Somersett and Milteer. Indeed, his DR’s for the period 11/29/63 indicate Milteer’s name and “PRS.” Aragon said he only knew the basic details of the Milteer tape. Again, SAIC Marshall shut him out and he was unable to learn what the SS had done with the case or obtain more specifics when President Kennedy arrived at Miami International Airport on November 18th. Aragon had a detail at the airport for Kennedy’s arrival speech. The President was speaking from a portable podium and SA Aragon was in front of him facing the crowd. A Latin-American newspaperman shoved a “shot-gun” type microphone up from the crowd. Aragon said his heart almost stopped beating but he wrestled the microphone from the man and the President went on speaking.

When asked why helicopters were used to transport President Kennedy to the Americana Hotel on Miami beach, Aragon said, “Well, Mr. Kelly, I suppose the most logical reason was the time of day. It was rush hour (ca. 5;00 p.m.) and that would be the quickest way to get him there.” He was never aware of any “last minute change” from motorcade to helicopter based on a security threat, i.e., Milteer. “They kept me in the dark about a lot of things but that’s one I would have known about,” Aragon said.

He told me that in 1964 President Johnson was due to fly to Miami on Air Force One. The SS received information that Orlando Bosch was going to ram Air Force One and knock it out of the sky. “We had three planes similar to Air Force One fly down. The real one landed at Palm Beach and the Secret Service helicoptered Johnson to Miami, ” he said. “This was the only time I recall helicopters being substituted,” Aragon told me.

The writer questioned Aragon about names of Cuban activists such as Manuel O. Rodriguez, who appears to have been connected with Miami and Dallas. He could not recall specifics but said that if he had worked on him, the records of his interview or reports would be on file at Secret Service in Washington, D.C.

Aragon was more than mildly critical of the performance of the Secret Service in the area of Presidential Protection. He said that most agents including some of the White House Detail were less than proficient in their approach to this subject. “I did not consider the protection of the President a statutory obligation; I considered it a personal one,” he said.

Alone, of all the agents interviewed thus far by the writer, former SA Aragon seemed to feel that the Secret Service was not always doing its best to protect the President. He recalled how on the November 18th, 1963 visit he went to the Americana Hotel where President Kennedy was giving a speech. In the lobby he saw SA McIntyre standing alone. He went up to pass the time of day with him and McIntyre allegedly said: “What am I supposed to do? I don’t know what to do.” Aragon said he was in the process of explaining his functions to him when SA Coughlin came up. He suggested to Coughlin that he instruct him on his duties.

Aragon speaks eloquently and with some knowledge about Secret Service procedures. He outlines their strengths and their shortcomings. He appears very credible. Although reluctant to lose his privacy in the process, he would be a good witness.

Document # 180-10089-10019 Is related to the assassination of Robert F. Kennedy. This comes from Jim Garrison’s files. 26 pages dated 6/7/68. People of the State of California vs. Sirhan Bishara Sirhan. This is really The Grand Jury of the County of Los Angeles, The People of the State of California, Plaintiff vs. Sirhan Bishara Sirhan, Defendant. No. A-233421. Reporter’s transcript of Grand Jury Proceedings Friday June 7th, 1968. This is an excerpt, it starts with page 6 and goes to p. 30, concentrating on the testimony of Dr. Henry M Cuneo and Dr. Noguchi.

Document # 180-10089-10024 Is 69 pages of the Report on the Medicolegal Investigation of Senator Robert F. Kennedy. Really 66 pages.

Document # 180-10089-10215 This is 57 pages of documents received from the Veteran’s Administration Hospital dated 1/14/77. This VA hospital is in North Chicago, Illinois. This is information on Mr. Ivo A. Tucci.

There is a two page index listing 21 items. This is duplicated.

Robert Tannenbaum requested info on him on December 17, 1976.

But who is this guy?

Document # 180-10089-10227 is a copy of the above.

Document # 180-10110-10082 Is more stuff on the RFK assassination. 66 pages.

Blakey subpoena this stuff. Daryl Gates sent it to him on June 12, 1978. It’s in three sections.

Section I is on James Braden AKA Eugene Hale Brading.

Section II is “The Potential Involvement or involvement of organized crime or individuals affiliated with organized crime in the assassination of Senator Kennedy and President John F. Kennedy.” This is a 182 name list.

Section III contains all pages listed in the investigation summary under Kennedy, John F. The reference pages are also included for clarity and continuity.

Section I begins with the p. 1426. Much is spent in a reaction to the writings of Peter Noyes.

Section I

Investigation into the activities of James Braden revealed that he had an extensive police record, that he had been involved in several confidence schemes and that he had served time in both Federal and State prisons. It was learned that Braden had been the head of an oil company named, Empire Oil corporation. Braden was also in Dallas, Texas on November 22, 1963, and was questioned by that jurisdiction after being arrested in a building in which he didn’t belong. That structure was located across the street from the Dallas School Book Depository building from which the shots were fired at President John F. Kennedy. The speculation by Peter Noyes suggested that James Braden was actually the man being sought by District Attorney James Garrison of New Orleans instead of Edgar Eugene Bradley of North Hollywood, California.

Because of this possible connection between Braden and the John F. Kennedy assassination, Noyes hypothesized that Braden somehow established himself in a conspiracy through Arnoff, Dubrin and Kassab to kill Robert Kennedy. Investigation revealed that the ties between the above persons were not sufficient to warrant support for Noyes’ theory

Particularly lacking in this hypothesis is any real connection between Sirhan and any of the other participants. The only known tie is that of Michael McCowan. There was no evidence to suggest that McCowan had ever had a contact with Sirhan prior to his employment as defense investigator. In addition, McCowan’s association with the others was limited to Kassab and had ceased after 1963. McCowan stated in an interview that he had had no recent contact with Kassab. Noyes’ hypothesis was based upon the premise that McCowan was in some way involved in the assassination conspiracy and that he was hired as defense investigator to keep an eye on Sirhan. therefore, the ties between McCowan and Kassab ultimately must be tied with James Braden and the John F. Kennedy assassination.

The investigation in no way supports such a tenuous premise and in fact the alleged ties between several of the parties are non-existent, nor does Sirhan’s personal history suggest possible ties with any of these participants.

In connection with Braden, several other allegations were suggested. One alleged that Vincent Di Pierro, an Ambassador Hotel employee and witness in the Sirhan trial, was actually named Victor E. Pereira, an ex-convict and associate of Braden’s. This allegation was disproven.

In suggesting that Braden was at the scene of John F. Kennedy’s assassination, Noyes directed investigators to several unpublished photographs which showed two men being led away from the Texas Book Depository by two policemen. These two men allegedly resembled James Braden and James Earl Ray, the convicted assassin of Martin Luther King. James Earl Ray was in prison from March, 1960, until his escape in April, 1967. A comparison of the photographs and pictures of Braden revealed no resemblance.

Mafia Connection With a Conspiracy

Peter Noyes proposed several unrelated hypotheses with regard to James Braden and a possible tie with Sirhan and the assassination. Noyes’ primary allegation required that there be some ultimate tie with McCowan. Noyes contacted investigators of the Department several times on the premise that he was hoping to assist the investigation. In this regard he would suggest various options which he felt might uncover a conspiracy. He advised investigators that he had “penetrated” the defense investigation staff through one of its members. Though he declined to name him he hinted broadly that the man was Robert Kaiser, the writer originally retained to write an inside story on Sirhan for a national magazine.

As the investigation progressed Noyes proposed that Braden had been somehow tied to the Friars Club card game scandal and in a real estate development controlled by the Mafia. From this premise Noyes conceived that the Robert Kennedy assassination was inspired by the mafia and that Braden and David Kassab were the principals. Noyes felt that the Mafia would want Robert F. Kennedy killed because of the alleged pressure brought by Robert F. Kennedy on the mafia while he was the Attorney General.

As with the potential Arab conspiracy allegation, investigators set out to establish the extent of Mafia involvement with Braden and Kassab and ultimately to prove or disprove any Mafia involvement with Sirhan.

Investigation revealed that both David Kassab and James Braden have possible Mafia connections. The investigation of Kassab revealed that he had at one time been involved in a scheme to swindle a group of U.C. L. A. students during a European travel tour. An associate of Kassabs, George Dimitrovich, was subsequently convicted with Kassab for the swindle. Intelligence reports indicate that there was a tie between Joe Sica, a known mafia figure, and Dimitrovich; and, though it was never proven, it was suspected that Sica received a part of the money taken in this scheme. The only other possible known connection between the Sica family and Kassab was a mutual acquaintance between them and Karl Hoogoian, a member of the Board of Directors of the San Fernando Trash Collection Association. This potential tie was found to be nothing more than a mutual acquaintance. This is the extent of Kassab’s known association with the Mafia.

Braden has a slightly more extensive connection with the Mafia. While in prison, Braden corresponded with Anthony Smalldone, a known Mafia figure, regarding several small oil ventures in which Braden was interested.

Braden was also a business associate of Victor E. Pereira. Both were acquainted with the Smalldone brothers. Pereira and Braden had been involved in several swindles, one involving a large sum of money from one of Pereira’s wives. In addition, Braden was shown to have had some association with an Arthur Clark, Sr., now deceased, who was a one time member of the Detroit Purple Gang. This constituted the extent of Braden’s known Mafia connections.

Except for the probable obvious connection between the Sica brothers and the Smalldone brothers in the overall network of the mafia, the tie between Kassab and Braden within the Mafia itself is not well supported. As was previously shown, the tie between Kassab and Braden through Gerald Chase, Joe Arnoff and Dr. Dubrin was not well founded. The connection which is attempted within the Mafia must also rely on the strength of the other relationship and this was not found. In addition, the tie must ultimately hinge upon the Kassab-McCowan relationship which has been shown to have been weak.

If the assumption continues that McCowan was to be the inside contact with Sirhan, the existence of a previous association between Sirhan and any of the parties, including McCowan, must be shown. As discussed earlier, this relationship did not exist.

As shown earlier, Victor E. Pereira and Vincent Di Pierro, the trial witness, were two different persons. The potential tie from this angle was therefore broken.

Peter Noyes also learned of information which linked defense attorney Russell Parsons with the Mafia. The investigation substantiated his claim and revealed that Parsons had represented the Sica brothers in some legal matters dating back as far as the mid-1950’s. This tie with the Mafia removes the necessity for a complicated series of contacts to Sirhan through Braden to McCowan. However, the same requirement is necessary to link the Mafia with Sirhan through Parsons to McCowan directly. That requirement would be some prior association between Sirhan and any of the parties, especially McCowan or Parsons. This relationship has not been shown.

It should be pointed out that any conspiracy theory must show that Sirhan was sufficiently influenced to commit the crime. In order to exert such an influence the conspirator would require more than a superficial of chance relationship with Sirhan. The extensive background investigation into Sirhan’s history does not suggest that such a relationship ever occurred or existed.

The investigation of James Braden, the Kassabs, and the Mafia was concluded at this point. No evidence was discovered which would strengthen the complicated hypothesis which Noyes had created. In fact, the investigation tended to weaken and disprove the allegation. However, due to the potential truth in the discovery that James Braden may have been the man wanted in the Garrison investigation in New Orleans, the F.B.I., was given all information on this matter. The investigation regarding Braden, his oil interests, Louisiana oil interests and the John F. Kennedy assassination is not within the jurisdiction of the Department.

Right-Wing Conspiracy Allegation

At another point in the investigation of the allegations made by Peter Noyes, he constructed another set of circumstances. In brief his premise was that the Minutemen, an ultra-right wing group, formed a conspiracy to kill Robert F. Kennedy and…

Section II

(2) The Potential involvement or involvement of organized crime or individuals affiliated with organized crime in the assassination of Senator Kennedy and President John F. Kennedy.

NOTE: The 182 name list supplied by the Select Committee on Assassinations was used to conduct this search.

Page numbers from the summary index have been added after every subject on the attached list whose name appeared in the index.

1. Jean Aase – Chicago – No

2. Anthony Accardo – No

3. Phil Alderisio – No

4. Gus Alex – No

5. William Alexander – No

6. James Allegretti – No

7. Vincent Alo – No

8. Salvatore Amarena – No

9. Evelyn Eleanor Archer – No

10. Andrew Armstrong – No

11. Robert Bernard (aka Barney) Baker – Teamster, Chicago – No

12. Dominic Bartone – No

13. Sam Battaglia – No

14. Karen (Carlin) Bennett – No

15. Sam Benton – Miami and Louisiana – No

16. Benjamin (Benny) Binion – Texas and Nevada – No

17. Joseph Bond – No

18. Joseph Bonnano – No

19. James (Jim) Braden, aka Eugene Hale Brading – California – No

20. Bunny Eileen Curry Breen, aka Carol O’Connor – No

21. James Eckford Breen – No

22. Morgan Holbert Brown – California and Texas – No

23. Fred Browning – No

24. Fiore Buccieri – No

25. Bill Buffalino – No

26. Russell Buffalino – No

27. George Butler – No

28. Richard Cain – Chicago – No

29. Joe Campisi – No

30. Sam Campisi – No

31. Bruce Carlin – No

32. Dino Cellini – No

33. Eddie Cellini – No

34. Jackie Cerone – No

35. Frank Chavez – Puerto Rico Teamster – No

36. Nick Civella – No

37. Joe Civello – No

38. Arthur Lewis Clark – Yes, Page 1429

39. Anthony Colosacco – No

40. Joseph Columbo – No

41. Janet Conforto – No

42. Vic Corona – No

43. Curtis Laverne Crafard

44. Napoleon J. Daniels – No

45. I. Irving Davidson – No

46. Thomas E. Davis, III – No

47. Patrick Dean – No

48. Paul DeLucia, aka Ricca – No

49. Sam DeStephano – Chicago – No

50. Johnny Dioguardi – No

51. James Henry Dolan – No

52. Allen Dorfman – No

53. Paul Dorfman – No

54. Ben Darrow – No

55. Leopoldo Ducos – No

56. Thomas Eboli – No

57. Charles English – No

58. David W. Ferrie – No

59. Joe Fischetti – No

60. Rocco Fischetti- No

61. Frank Fitzsimmons – No

62. Martin Fox – No

63. Pedro Fox – No

64. James Fratianno – No

65. Carlo Gambino – No

66. Jim Garrison – Yes, pages 84, 94, 114, 518, 583, 709, 716, 719, 720,

1207.

67. Anthony Giacalone – No

68. Joseph Giacalone – No

69. Vito Giacalone – No

70. Sam Giancana – No

71. Harold Gibbons – No

72. Frank Richard Goldstein – No

73. Salvatore Granello – No

74. Eva Grant – No

75. Herman Greenspun – No

76. John M. Grizzaffi – No

77. Alexander Gruber – No

78. Peter Guarisco – No

79. Harry Hall, aka Harry Haler – No

80. Carlos Hernandez – No

81. Victor Espinosa Hernandez – No

82. James Hoffa – Yes, pages 568, through 571, 912, 1000, 1111, 1115,

1192, 1220

83. James Hoffa, Jr. – Yes, pages 965, 966, 1000, 1172, 1192

84. Tom Howard – No

85. John C. Jackson – No

86. Milton Jaffe – No

87. Paul Roland Jones – No

88. Fay Kirkwood – No

89. Patrick Kirkwood – No

90. Sidney Korshak

91. Raymond Franklin Krystinik – No

92. Paul Labriola – No

93. La Cosa Nostra – No

94. Jake Lansky – No

95. Meyer Lansky – No

96. Frank Laporte – No

97. John LaRocca – No

98. Maurice Lerner – No

99. George Lewis – yes, page 290

100. Nick Licata – No

101. Pete Licavoli – No

102. George McGann – No

103. Robert Ray McKeown – No

104. Michael (Mike) McLaney – No

105. William McLaney – No

106. Gordon McLendon – No

107. Roland McMaster – No

108. Lewis J. McWillie

109. Robert A. Maheu – No

110. Alvin Malnik – No

111. Gabriel Mannarino – No

112. Sam Mannarino – No

113. Anthony Marcello – No

114. Carlos Marcello – No

115. Joseph Marcello – No

116. Pasquale Marcello – No

117. Peter Marcello – No

118. Salvadore Marcello – No

119. Vincent Marcello – No

120. Vincent Marchesi – No

121. Mario Marino – No

122. Russell Douglas Matthews – No

123. Frank Matula – No

124. Albert Meadows – No

125. Donald Medlevane – No

126. Maurice Medlevane – No

127. Edward Meyers – No

128. Lawrence V. Meyers – (there is no “No” or “Yes” here)

129. Murray M. (Dusty) Miller – No

130. Isador Miller – No

131. Mike Miranda – No

132. Charles Nicholetti – No

133. Chuckie O’Brien – No

134. Marina Oswald – No

135. Michael Ralph Paine – No

136. Ruth Hyde Paine

137. Mrs. Syvia O’Brien Paris – No

138. Edward Grady Partin – No

139. Leonard Patrick – No

140. Ralph Paul – No

141. Sam Paxton – No

142. Nofio Pecora – No

143. Mrs. Nofio Pecora – No

144. Victor Emanuel Pereira – Yes

145. Nancy Perrin – No

146. Juanita Dale Phillips, aka Candy Barr – No

147. James Plumeri – No

148. Alfred Polizzi – No

149. Joseph Poretti – No

150. Anthony Provenzano – Yes, Pages 115, 1192, 1220

151. Frank Ragano

152. Fred Randaccio – No

153. Max Raymond – No

154. Joe Rivers – No

155. John Roselli – No

156. Norman Rothman – No

157. Earl Ruby – No

158. Jack Ruby – No

159. Mickey Ryan, aka Roy William Pike – No

160. Earl Schieb – No

161. Mike Shore – No

162. Theodore Shulman – No

163. Sidney Sieband – No

164. D’Alton Smith – No

165. Anthony Spelotro – No

166. Joseph Stacher – No

167. John Eli Stone – No

168. Frank Timphony – No

169. Robert James Todd – No

170. Joe Tonahill – No

171. James Torello – No

172. Charles Tourine – No

173. Santo Trafficante – No

174. Louis Triscaro – No

175. Irwin S. Weiner – No

176. Abraham Weinstein – No

177. Jean West – No

178. James Woodward – No

179. David Yaras – No

180. Anthony Zerilli – No

181. Joe Zerilli

182. Anthony Zoppi (aka Tony) – No

There are then a series of pages 91, 114, 568-571, 716;

an unnumbered page but bearing upon the statements of Mrs. Anita Stewart on p. 91, 720,

an unnumbered page with a paragraph of information for each the names Conklin, Dennis T.; Conrey, Maureen; Cooney, Annabel;

Cooper, Fred; Cooper, Leon;

another page with the names Davies, Jack; and Davis, Leonard;

another with the names De Nier, Veronica; Denis, Franklin Diego; Dennis, Lee; Desist, Samuel; Destutels, Kristine;

p. 965;

a page with the names Garcia, Ernestine; Garcia, Irene; Gardner, John; Gardner, Wesley; and Garson, Joseph;

a page with the names Hively, Ken; Hodges, Linda Lee; Hoffa, James Jr.; Hoffa, James Riddle; Hoffmeister, Velda;

p. 1111

p. 1115

a page with the names Stevens, David O.; Stevens, Theodore; Steward, Richard; Stewart, Anita; Stewart, Anthony; and Stewart, James;

a page for the names Turner, Jessie (Mrs.); Turner, Wallace; Twinning, Howard; Tyson Theron. [this is probably page 1192]

p. 1193

p. 1220?, Wright, Donald; Wrightson, James; Wylie, (Mrs.) Wynn, Howard; Wynn, Keenan

Section III

This section contains all pages listed in the investigation summary under Kennedy, John F. The reference pages are also included for clarity and continuity.

Index Page Reference Page

1 95

94

115

429

492

518

534 84

583 582-584

709 709

715 714

720 719

895

909 908

912

1007

10055

1060

1205 1204

1207

The information in Section II and Section III is extremely fragmentary, and basically useless. Without the full report and the data from which the report and conclusions were drawn it is impossible to review.

Document # 180-10110-10106 Is a one page document from Albert Maxwell to files. It is in regard to the return of stolen property dated 9/12/78.

On August 22, 1978 Staff Investigators Al Maxwell and Jack Moriarty conducted an interview of William F. (Bill) Alexander, in his office located at 1025 Elm Street, Suite 500, Dallas, Texas. Mr. Alexander is a former A. D. A. under Henry Wade and was the Chief Prosecutor during the Jack Ruby trial.

During the course of the interview Mr. Alexander gave me a folder and a 402-page transcript of the pre-trial investigation of Ruby. The interview continued for four hours and a xerox copy was made of the investigation report later while I was making notes of the interview. The folder was inspected and the photograph was viewed after examination of same. It was decided that the photograph did not aid in the investigation of the Committee.

The photograph was mailed back to Mr. Alexander to be returned to his files.

This was stamped “Committee Sensitive”.

Document # 180-10117-10177 Is a 87 page document from the FAA on David Ferrie. There is a remarkable portrait studio photograph of David Ferrie in his pilot’s uniform, with a much smaller photograph of Ferrie that is more familiar, that being with the, for lack of a better term “fright wig” and grease eyebrows. Ferrie was at one point a normal looking guy.

Document # 180-10118-10068 Is a 162 page document. Only 19 pages are here. Only the pages dealing with Forrest Sorrels, an Outside Contact Report, and Maurice Martineau are here.

Outside Contact Report

I called Forrest Sorrels, former agent in charge Secret Service, Dallas office, now retired, to try to arrange for an interview. I told Mr. Sorrels who I was and asked him if we could arrange for an interview. He was very abrupt, stating, “If you want to know what I have to say, read my testimony in the Warren Commission Report. I have nothing to add or detract from that.” He then told me that he would not talk with me and before I could say anything else, he stated, “That’s all I have to say” and he hung up.

I did not pursue the matter, not wanting to cause an incident.

There is a brief biography of Martineau given.

Maurice Martineau was retired from the SS in 1978. He entered the SS as a Special Agent in 1940. In 1954 he was promoted to Special Agent in Charge (SAIC) of the field office in Grand Rapids, Michigan. In 1955, he transferred to Milwaukee, Wisconsin as Special Agent in Charge (SAIC) and remained in that position until 1961, at which time he was transferred to Kansas, Missouri.

In February 1963, he was sent to the Chicago, Illinois field office as Assistant Special Agent in charge (ASAIC). From 1969 until he retired in 1972 he was an “Inspector” in the Inspections and Review Division of the Secret Service.

During the assassination of President John F. Kennedy, Mr. Martineau was in Chicago. At the direction of Thomas Kelly, Secret Service Inspector, he became involved in a limited post-assassination investigation.

Then there are three pages detailing the questions asked.

GENERAL LINE OF INQUIRY

WITH REGARD TO PRESIDENTIAL PROTECTION AND SECURITY

1. What were the function and responsibility of Secret Service field offices/White House Detail for Presidential protection and security?

2. Who in the field offices assumed primary responsibility?

3. What systems and goals were developed and maintained in regard to:

a. Identification of individuals who represented a threat;

b. Identification of groups who represented a threat;

c. Determining the modus operandi of both individuals and groups;

d. Acquaintance with the motivation of both individuals and groups;

e. Acquaintance, awareness and knowledge of geographic range of both

individuals and groups.

4. Were there difficulties between the protective purposes and the practicality of protective operations?

a. Manpower to perform necessary procedures?

b. Considerations for legal and political rights?

c. Lack of cooperation and coordination with other agencies?

d. Access to desired information?

5. In what manner and with what emphasis did the Field Office / White House Detail concern itself with Presidential protection and security?

a. Coordination with White House Detail Advance Agent?

b. Nature and thoroughness of discussion with Secret Service senior officers

regarding effectiveness of intelligence information?

c. Nature and thoroughness re the use of liaison contacts?

d. Interoffice cooperation and coordination between White House Detail and

field agents?

e. “Significance” attached to un-nullified threats?

f. Consideration given high incidents or criminal activities in various cities;

e.g., number of shootings, types of weapons used, etc.?

g. Consideration given to prior hostile political demonstrations; White House

Detail index on local or regional hostile groups?

h. The extent to which threats from one region were considered in protective

efforts in another region?

6. What procedures were established for the purpose of establishing liaison contacts with other investigative and intelligence agencies?

a. FBI

b. CIA

c. State Department

d. National Security Council

e. Office of Naval Intelligence

There is then a 7 page interview summary of an interview with Maurice Martineau. These 7 pages are the same as Document # 180-10087-10191 in Batch 10.

There is then a 6 page SS document dated 11/26-11/29/63. Apparently it took them 3 days to type it. This document is referred to in the 10th Batch Document # 180-10087-10137. This 6 page SS document is what is shown to Martineau by the HSCA, “Martineau recalled nothing about the Mosley information until HSCA staff read a portion of a Secret Service memo (q.v.) written by SA Ed Tucker (and which Martineau signed as “Approved by”) which outlined the SS 1963 interest in Mosley, whom it appears was an informant.”

NARA document review

Document # 178-10004-10022 Is an exact copy of the one below. However, the RIF on this one gives you a better clue as to what the document is. Deposition of Charles Hall Steele Sr. taken on 4/07/64.

Document # 179-40001-10233 Is a one page document. It is a page of testimony. No idea from whom or to whom. It is the same document as Document

# 179-40001-10233 but the RIF here has no information in the “From” “To” or “Title”

fields. But it’s substance is mentioned briefly in Document # 179-40001-10432.

“X : 73 Mr. Steele: He “was called by the priest and told that [his son Charles] had tried to get in a little girl’s pants.”

So this is the testimony of Mr. Steele from Warren Commission Volume 10 p. 73.

Document # 179-40001-10430 Is a 3 page document from Stuart Pollak from the Department of State to J. Lee Rankin dated 6/18/64. Really only one page is here. It is a copy of page 3 of Document # 179-40001-10432 from the previous 12th Batch.

Document # 179-40001-10431 Is an exact copy of the above.

FBI documents postponed in part

Document # 124-10003-10038 Is a two page document from SAC, Albuquerque to Director dated 3/6/64.

About two weeks ago employer of this informant, Everett D. Schafer, Pyramid Commercial Refrigeration Service, Albuquerque related following information.

About January 10 last Schafer and his wife, Frances, were in Dallas visiting Schafer’s brother, Carl Schafer. Brother is oil and securities promoter at Dallas. At Carl Schafer’s residence at [the] time were a German writer, name unknown, working on story of Mrs. Lee Harvey Oswald, Mrs. Oswald’s business manager, name unknown, and an attorney named Tom, last name unknown but possibly Howard who was supposed to be attorney for Ruby. Everett D. Schafer allegedly learned that Mrs. Oswald’s attorney and business manager are getting a perchange [sic] of funds donated to her and that Tom Howard was afraid he was going to be replaced as attorney for Ruby. Informant states has not heard Everett D. Schafer repeat this information to anyone else and believes if Everett D. Schafer were interviewed, he would be compromised.

Informant advised witnessed Everett D. Schafer call brother in Dallas on Christmas Day from Albuquerque unlisted number 855-4405. Source at Mountain State T and T, Albuquerque, show station to station call to Dallas LA 8-5858 on that date.

Above furnished to Dallas in view of indicated association of Tom Howard, Ruby’s attorney, with representatives of Mrs. Oswald. If Carl Schafer interviewed, phrase questions so that AQ [ ] will not be compromised. Inserts being forwarded to Dallas.

Document # 124-10012-10057 Is a one page document from R. W. Smith from W. C. Sullivan dated 11/23/63.

At 12:10 p. m. November 23, 1963 Special Agent Thorton Wood of the New York Office advised Special Agent Russell S. Garner, Supervisor on duty, that according to

[ blank ] President DeGaulle and the Prime Minister of France will attend President Kennedy’s funeral.

Document #124-10027-10396 Is missing

Document #124-10049-10006 Is missing

Document #124-10049-10007 Is missing

Document #124-10065-10076 Is supposed to be 787 pages. 4 are here. Only the cover page and 3 other cover pages are here. It is from Manning C. Clements to Director dated 12/21/63.

Cover Page B:

Administrative

On 12/16/63 PCI Edmond F. Zufferey, Roswell, N. M., advised SA William L. Eddy that he had just returned from El Paso, Texas and Juarez, Mexico. The PCI learned through Roberto and Willie Moya, Mexican nationals who operate night clubs in Juarez, that two female performers in Juarez had previously worked for Jack Ruby in Dallas, Texas. These girl performers were identified as Candy Cane and Julie Summers. The booking agent for these two girls is Joseph Prensky at El Paso, Texas. The PCI stated that Cane and Summers can be located through Roberto and / or Willie Moya at Juarez. PCI Zufferey did not ascertain if Cane and Summers possess pertinent information concerning Ruby, but furnished the information inasmuch as they formerly worked for him.

Cover Page C:

At Baltimore, Maryland

Information from the Chesapeake and Potomac Telephone company of Maryland, Baltimore, Maryland, reflecting no record of Baltimore Publications, Inc, Angola Building, or phone TL 6-2770, was furnished on December 13, 1963, by BA CS # [there is a little dab of black ink] to Special Agent J. Stanley Rotz.

On December 17, 1963, Postal Inspector H. A. Wescott, Baltimore, Maryland, advised Special Agent Rotz he had checked appropriate files and individuals in the Baltimore, Maryland Post Office but could find no recollection of an Angola Building in the area.

Cover Page

Administrative

At Tampa, Florida:

On December 5, 1963, TP [ ]-S advised that Dottie Visovatti, former waitress, Rennie’s Restaurant, Orlando, Florida, formerly worked for Jack Ruby in Dallas, Texas.

Document # 124-10068-10016 Is a two page document from SAC, Denver to Director dated 11/25/63.

DN [ ]-C frequented Clover Bar next door to Sherman Hotel, Chicago, Illinois, 1946 to 1949. He described this bar as a hangout for hoodlum element. At that time it was operated by Ira Colitz who was described as a personal friend of Colonel Jacob Arvey, well known Chicago political figure. Colitz possibly was recently a candidate for Alderman in Chicago and resides in penthouse apartment on Michigan Boulevard.

Informant related Jack Ruby, whom he identified from Newspaper photographs, frequented Clover bar in about 1946 or 47 and was an acquaintance of Ira Colitz and possibly was a former school mate of Colitz on the West Side of Chicago. He does not know nature of Ruby’s activities in Chicago.

Document # 124-10068-10034 Is a three page document from SAC, Atlanta to Director dated 11/25/63. Only one page is here.

Re Bureau tel to all SACs Nov. 25, `63.

AT [ ] -C advised during latter forties he knew racketeer named Paren FNU Paren Rubin around Daytona, Fla, but knew nothing concerning his activities. Pictures of Ruby appear similar to Rubin as he knew him then. Informant suggested that following people should have complete knowledge of Ruby if identical with Rubin.

Mattie Tracy, Daytona, Fla., A bookie, gambler and prostitute procurer.

Johnnie Whalen, Daytona, Fla. If Whalen still living, is probably night club operator.

M. T. Browning, Daytona, Fla., PD.

Tom Johnson, former Chief of Police, South Daytona, Pd.

Informant advised above people, particularly Whalen and Tracy, were buddies of Batista of Cuba when Batista in this (rest missing)

Document # 124-10069-10000 Is supposed to be 330 pages. It is from Manning C. Clements to Director dated 12/19/63. Only 5 pages are here. The cover sheet states that this report is on Jack Ruby. The 5 pages give the identities of informants.

Page one is a copy of Document # 124-10069-10030.

Page two, Cover Page D:

On December 10, 1963, PCI [ blacked out ] Chicago, informed SA William F. Hood, Jr. that about 1948 or 1949 a Bob Mullenix, a private investigator, had conducted the Wastepaper handlers Union, Chicago, Illinois. About November 1962, Mullenix was killed in an automobile accident and thereafter, his files were sent to a brother, John C. Mullenix, 1232 West Maypole South, Springfield, Illinois. These files possibly contained information regarding Ruby’s association with Dorfman.

Page three, Cover Page L:

Information concerning New Orleans telephone number 524-4322 was furnished to SA Nathan O. Brown on December 13, 1963 by Mrs. Edith Hudson, Central Office, Southern Bell Telephone and Telegraph Company, whose identity should be protected.

Page four, Cover Page M:

Information concerning telephone number 524-4322 was furnished on December 16, 1963 to SA Nathan O. Brown by Mrs. Barbara Boyd, Central District Office, Southern Bell Telephone and Telegraph Company, New Orleans, Louisiana, whose identity should be protected.

Document # 124-10069-10065 Is a 120 page document from Manning Clements to Director dated 4/3/64.

The cover sheet for the LHM states that 3 items were enclosed to the Bureau.

(1) Envelope and letter addressed to Jack L. Ruby

(2) Two-page handprinted Application for Employment of Jeno Farkas

(3) Four pages of handwriting reported to be that of Farkas.

Cover page C:

Reference is made to pages 40-48, report of SA Manning C. Clements, 2/18/64, relative to allegations Ruby was in Cuba in late 1962 and early 1963, and specifically to the allegation he traveled to Cuba by air from Mexico City.

Legat, Mexico City, by communication 3/6/65, furnished information received from CIA in a memorandum dated 2/27/64 as follows:

“Information available to this office fails to confirm that subject left Mexico for Habana, or arrived in Mexico City from Habana by air anytime during 1962.”

Reference pages 23-29 report of SA Manning C. Clements, concerning efforts to identify one “Davis,” with whom Ruby had allegedly been in contact regarding shipment of merchandise to Cuba.

The Miami Office has advised as follows;

On 3/5/64, MM [ ]-S true name [ ] advised he had seen newspaper photographs of Jack Leon Ruby but had never seen him before, never had any dealings with anyone with that name and had never met him in Houston, Texas.

It is noted MM [ ]-S is from [ ] and Miami, Florida, and does not have any criminal record.

Miami sources and informants were contacted with negative results concerning the identity of Davis.

Local federal agencies advised they do not know anyone possibly identical with Davis.

Reference is made to page 772, report of SA Manning C. Clements, 11/30/64, Dallas and Dallas airtel 1/29/64, concerning a notation found in effects of Ruby, as follows:

“Carlos Camorgo (probably Camargo), telephone 14-9628, Mexico City.”

Cover Page G:

The following investigation was conducted by SA Thomas A. Bronstad:

At San Antonio

On March 6, 1964, Reverend Wayman Whitney, age 47, 716 College Street, Belton, Texas, furnished the following information and requested that his identity as the source of the information not be disclosed. He said that he is presently working for Mary Hardin-Baylor College, Belton, in contacting prospective students and donors of funds for the college.

He explained that on June 30, 1942, he left Kelly Air Force Base, San Antonio, Texas, where he had served as a cadet and went to work for KTBC, a radio station at Austin, Texas, owned by Lady Bird Johnson. Later in 1943, and continuing into the fall of 1944, he was employed by WRR, a radio station owned by the City of Dallas. He said he was a staff member under a Civil Service organization for this radio station.

Reverend Whitney said that while connected with this radio station in Dallas about twenty years ago, he had observed a gambling syndicate situation in existence at Dallas with a local leader named Denny Pugh. He said he was not aware of the individual who took Pugh’s place after his death, but that if Jack Leon Ruby took his place, a knowledge of the gambling setup at Dallas might explain Ruby’s motive in killing Oswald.

Reverend Whitney advised that as he recalled there was an out-of-town gambling syndicate trying to move into Dallas during about 1943 and 1944, and during this period, Cat Noble, a Dallas hoodlum, was a victim of several car bombing attempts. He said someone conceived the idea of putting Denny Pugh at the head of gambling in Dallas in an effort to exclude foreign interests. He described Pugh as a carnival worker, working out of Fair Park, Dallas. Pugh was given unlimited power and even had the approval for all electrical installations in Dallas and other local utility work. He was allowed to put in gambling casinos all over Dallas with no payoff to the local officers on the beat. On regular intervals, however, raids were made on these casinos and the fines collected went into the City treasury. He indicated Denny was a moral man, however, got into some type of trouble with a carnival woman and subsequently died in a narcotics coma.

Cover Page H:

Reverend Whitney continued that Denny Pugh operated out of a small electrical shop across the street from the fair grounds. This shop was owned by Carroll Sands and was known as the Sands Electrical Shop. During that time, Mr. Hinkle was commissioner at Dallas and had his office in the same building with Denny Pugh.

Reverend Whitney added that he did not know who succeeded Denny Pugh after Pugh’s death, but it would seem to him, Whitney, that if this method of operation has not stopped and if there is a line of succession that would reach Ruby, then Ruby may be the man in control of the gambling syndicate at Dallas.

He said the only people he knew who could describe the system subsequent to the death of Denny Pugh would be:

1. Mrs. Emma Ried who was formerly secretary and bookkeeper for Sands Electric Shop and worked for Pugh. He said she is now manager of the South and East Dallas Chamber of Commerce whose offices recently moved from the fair grounds.

2. Carroll Sands would know if he is still alive.

3. His ex-wife, Mrs. Carroll Sands, also known as A. Z. or Azey, would know about the syndicate.

4. Reverend Ray Morelan who was formerly at the Northside Baptist Church, Baytown, Texas, and has now moved from this address with forwarding address unknown. Morelan was formerly an engineer for North American Aviation, Ft. Worth, who knew all the gamblers in North Richmond Hills, a suburb of Ft. Worth.

5..Criminal District Judge Byron Mathews, Ft. Worth, would know the entire situation as he formerly represented various gamblers and knew the inner workings of the syndicate. He indicated that Mathews had connections with Trujillo of the Dominican Republic.

Cover Page I

The following investigation was conducted by SA Robert L. Chapman:

At Nuevo Laredo, Mexico

On November 25, 1963, PCI Jose Camacho advised that an American male was at the Papagayo Club at Nuevo Laredo and had made the statement he was acquainted with Jack ruby, the person who had killed Lee Harvey Oswald.

On November 25, 1963 SA [ ]-C advised that he had located the above person named James Wells at the Papagayo Club and that Wells was then at the Nuevo Laredo Police Department.

Document # 124-10070-10083 Is a three page document from SAC, San Antonio to Director dated 12/02/63. Only one page is here.

Enclosed to the Bureau are eight copies letterhead memorandum pertaining to Ruby possibly traveling to Bandera, Texas, to gamble.

Two copies of letterhead memorandum enclosed for Dallas. One copy is being furnished to Secret Service, San Antonio.

The source of information is SA [ ]-C whose identity is known to the Bureau and who advised that he believed that Ruby is possibly known to Ralph Mitchell.

Bennie (Last Name Unknown) who operates Bennie’s U-Bar Guest Ranch, and Pat (LNU) who operates Pat’s Dry Goods Store, all Bandera, Texas, and whom the informant believed engaged in gambling with Ruby.

Document # 124-10070-10297 Is a two page document from SAC Cleveland to Director dated 11/27/63. Only one page is here.

RE Baltimore Tel to Bureau and Cleveland, Nov. 27 instant.

RE info furnished by Dale Dawn, Baltimore.

CV [ ]-C-TE was contacted on Nov. 25 last negatively re subject and recontacted by SA John, J. Barrett this date on basis of re tel. source, whose identity must be concealed, is owner of bar mentioned re tel. Source stated does not know one Ruby Paren LNU end Paren from Texas. Advised has discussed subject’s killing of Oswald with sources girl friend, Taffy Twist, a former stripper who resides at the Colony Hotel and sources knows that Taffy has no info concerning subject nor Ruby Paren LNU end paren reportedly from Texas.

Document # 124-10070-10309 Is missing

Document # 124-10070-10347 Is a two page document dated 11/26/63 from SAC, Albuquerque to Director dated 11/26/63.

ReButel to all SACS, 11/25/63.

Albuquerque teletype to Dallas, same date.

Hoodlum Connection

Enclosed herewith for the Dallas Division are 32 copies each of three page insert to be inserted in the Administrative Section of report submitted to the Bureau mentioned in referenced Bureau teletype dated 11/25/63.

For the information of the Bureau, the same information is furnished in referenced Albuquerque teletype to Dallas, 11/25/63, and contains results of negative contacts with informants familiar with gambling and hoodlum activities at Albuquerque, Roswell, Grants and Clovis, N.M. Also, for the information of the Bureau, contact with AQ [ ]-C revealed that this informant once met Ruby in an unknown hotel in Dallas, Texas, many years ago, but was unable to recall any events whatsoever concerning this contact.

AQ[ ]-PC furnished information concerning Ruby by stating he met him at the Carousel Club in Dallas, Texas, on a visit approximately eleven months ago. Informant advised Ruby was a good friend of Lou Lebby, Albuquerque resident and minor gambler. Informant learned through Jack Hardee, Jr., the later presently being a fugitive, (Bufile : 88-21156), that Ruby had a “good in” with the Dallas Police Dept., which would be borne out from his observation that Ruby had a B-girl operation where drinks were pushed heavily with no interference from the police department. AQ [ ]-PC had a brief conversation with Ruby.

On 11/25/63, Lou Lebby, 722 Sundown Place, SE, Albuquerque, N.M., who requested his name be kept confidential, is a previously admitted former bookmaker in Chicago, Ill. He grew up in Chicago in the same general area as Jack Ruby, known to him as Sparky Rubenstein. States as a child was not closely acquainted with Ruby, but knew Ruby’s father as the neighborhood drunk. Lebby described Ruby as emotional, unstable and a person who made his living primarily from “scalping” tickets to sports events in Chicago and at one time traveled throughout the country selling punch boards prior to the Senator Kefauver investigations.

Lebby described Ruby as an extremely stubborn person and a publicity hound due to Ruby’s emotional instability. Lebby did not think it unusual when Ruby was reportedly more upset over the death of the President than the death of his own father. Lebby said he was surprised when Ruby actually killed Oswald, adding that he would think it more proper that Ruby would shoot him in the leg with a .22 caliber weapon in order to get publicity.

Lebby saw Ruby approximately 1 1/2 years ago at Dallas, Texas, for the first time in more than 20 years. He knew of Ruby’s presence there and visited him at the Carousel Club where they talked briefly of old times. Lebby knew of no specific connections of Ruby at Chicago, Illinois, or with the Dallas Police Dept., and stated that Ruby had no contact with organized criminal, hoodlum or subversive element. He did not know Oswald and knew of no connection between the two.

Document # 124-10072-10190 Is a four page letter, (only two here, Page 2 and Page 4 missing) from SAC, Chicago to Director dated 11/26/63.

Tony Leonardi, manager of the Playhouse Cafe, 550 North Clark Street, Chicago, advised SAs William A. Meincke and Joseph G. Shea on 11/26/63 that he has been associated with the operation of strip joints in Chicago for over 25 years. He advised that he knew practically every owner and male employee in such business over the years. He advised that Jack Ruby was never associated in the nightclub business in any way in Chicago for the past 25 years. Leonardi advised that he feels that it is likely that Ruby may be confused with one Harry Rubenstein who was a successful strip joint owner from 1946 to sometime in the 1950’s. Harry Rubenstein.

Page 3

…frequented a gambling place formerly operated by Joe Tuchman, now deceased, in the vicinity of Damen and division street in Chicago. Ruby, according to Warshawsky, was a small time better and frequented the place more for the free food which was offered in those days than for gambling activity. Warshawsky said that Ruby would put down a “few bets” each week of small size. In those days Ruby was considered to be “loner” and that he had no close friends. Warshawsky knew him as a loud and boisterous individual with a quick temper. Warshawsky advised that to his knowledge, Ruby had no connection with anyone in Chicago for many years.

CG [ ]-PC was contacted by SA William F. Roemer on 11/25/63 but at that time had no personal knowledge of Ruby. On 11/26/63, CG [ ] -PC advised that he had solicited information from politicians of the 24th Ward, the former.

Document # 124-10074-10030 Is missing.

Document #124-10074-10142 Is a 659 page document from Manning C. Clements to Director dated 12/19/63. It is basically just a copy of Document # 124-10069-10000. It has Cover Page C which is about Mata, then Cover Page D about Mullenix, then one we haven’t seen previously, Cover Page H.

Cover Page H

Burton Johnson, Vice President, Westfield Metal Products, Westfield, Mass., telephonically contacted SA Walter F. Brady, Springfield Mass., 11/25/63. Johnson, who requested name be kept confidential, advised that Bob Sparks, Orbit Industries, 2700 Weisenberger, Ft. Worth, Tex., who is a customer of Johnson, called Johnson morning of 11/25/63 concerning business order. Incidental to business conversation, Oswald was shot and understood Oswald had been seen going into Jack Ruby’s place for the past month through a rear door. Johnson does not know source of Sparks’ information but feels FBI should be advised of above. Johnson stated he was unable to furnish any additional information.

Then there is Cover Page L.

Document # 124-10075-10040 Is a two page letter from SAC, Albuquerque to Director dated 3/6/64. It is a copy of Document # 124-10003-10038.

Document # 124-10075-10086 Is a 374 page report from Manning C. Clements to Director dated 1/31/64. Only 8 page are here, and those are two copies of four pages. Cover Page A, Cover Page G, Cover Page H, Cover Page L.

Cover Page G

Information concerning long distance telephone calls was furnished by R. A. Burrow, Chief Special Agent, Southwestern Bell Telephone company, Dallas, Texas, to SA Robert C. Lish on January 24, 1964, concerning telephone numbers LAkeside 8-4775 and RIverside 7-2362.

One Zola Slayton, Zoo Bar, Dallas is reported to have known Ruby and to be able to furnish information concerning him.

Zola Slayton was identified to be identical with Zaola Slayton Willia, who is a PCI of the Dallas Office and has been interviewed concerning her knowledge of Ruby.

The following investigation was conducted at Youngstown, Ohio:

On January 13 and 14, 1964 Cleveland Confidential Informants who are aware of some phases of Communist Party activities in the Youngstown, Ohio, area, were contacted and advised that they did not know Mrs. Anne or Anna Volpert also known as Mrs. Ralph Volpert.

They further advised that they have no knowledge of Jack Ruby.

A review of Cleveland files of the FBI revealed no identifiable information with regard to Mrs. Anne or Anna Volpert or Mrs. Ralph Volpert.

On January 13 and 14, 1964 the following informants were contacted negatively by SA James W. De Garmo, jr., at Youngstown, Ohio; it is to be noted that all these informants have furnished reliable information in the past:

CV-248-S CV-480-S

CV-440-S CV-495-S

Administrative

Re speech by Orin Fenton Potito, St. Petersburg, Florida, January 16, 1964.

On January 17, 1964 TP [ ] PCI (RAC) furnished to SAs James P. O’Neil and James E. Wallace the following information:

On the evening of January 16, 1964 a dinner sponsored by Oren Fenton Potito was held at Donat’s restaurant, 6001 Haines Road, North St. Petersburg, Florida. The dinner meeting was informal public in nature and approximately 41 persons were in attendance.

The source has identified Potito as a member of the National States Rights Party (NSRP) in the Spring of 1963 at which time Potito resigned while holding the office of National Organizer. Since that time Potito has held meetings of a public nature under various titles all of which are non-existent organizations. He is not known to have any national affiliation at the present time although he is in contact with various leaders of right wing groups in the United States.

In the course of his speech of some 3 hours following the dinner Potito touched on the association between Lee Harvey Oswald and Ruby.

Potito identified Ruby, real name, Rubenstein, as a Communist Party member since 1929 and through this connection linked him to Oswald. He identified Oswald as a Communist through his association with the Fair Play for Cuba Committee (FPCC).

According to Potito only two organizations knew the route of the parade in Dallas on November 22, 1963 for any period of time prior to the parade and these two were the United States Secret Service and the Dallas Police Department. Ruby had insinuated himself into the Police Department circle, obtained the route and arranged with Oswald to take the job at the state school building along the route to carry out the assassination.

Potito said the “Surgeon General’s report” on the assassination stated the first bullet entered the President’s throat below the adams apple clearly showing that two persons were involved with the first shot being fired from the bridge across the park way in front of the car. To further substantiate this, Potito said there was a bullet hole in the wind shield of the President’s car.

Cover Page L

The following reflects additional investigation to identify and locate people who sent telegrams to Jack L. Ruby so they could be interviewed. This investigation has been unsuccessful:

On January 19, 1964, the Denver Office advised that Mr. A. Lotz, manager, Western Union Office, Denver, Colorado, whose identity should be protected, advised on January 8, 1964, that in order to find a record of a telegram sent by Pat McNamara, Denver, Colorado, in November or December 1963 that he must have the date that it was sent and any other identifying information concerning McNamara, such as a Denver address or telephone number.

On January 20, 1964, the following information was received from the New York Office:

CS NY 3, on December 30, 1963, was unable to locate a record of telegram sent by Mr. and Mrs.Charles Smith, Bronx, New York, to Jack Ruby at Dallas, Texas, on November 24, 1963. The source indicated a further search would be made in an effort to locate this telegram.

CS NY 3, on January 15, 1964, said that he could not locate any record of the Smith telegram and therefore was unable to furnish any information about this telegram.

Document # 124-10075-10087 Is a 238 page document from Manning C. Clements to Director dated 1/17/64. Only 3 pages are here. Cover Page A, Cover Page H, Cover Page I.

Cover Page H

With reference to the name “John Rogers, Post Office Box 10707,” with no further identifying data, appearing on a note pad belonging to Jack Ruby, Mr. L. Allen Maddox, clerk in the office of the U. S. Post Office Inspectors, Room 500, U. S. Terminal Building, 207 South Houston Street, Dallas, advised SA Harold R. Dobson on January 10, 1964, that there is no post office box numbered 10707 in the Dallas, Texas, Metropolitan area. Post office box numbers in that area jump from 10704 to 10715. He suggested that the Ft. Worth, Texas, Post Office might possibly have a box number 10707.

The information from the records of the Bank of Dallas pertaining to the joint savings account and safety deposit box of Eva Grant and Jack Ruby was furnished to SA James S. Weir by Betty Calvert, Assistant Cashier, Bank of Dallas.

On December 26, 1963, LA [ ]-C advised SA Homer E. Young that “Stripper SIRS” is Siri Putnam, who is presently engaged at “The Follies theater”, Los Angeles, California.

On January 3, 1964 Leon Cornman, PCI, business agent, American Guild of Variety Artists, New Orleans, Louisiana, was contacted by SA Alvin J. Zimmerman in an attempt to determine the identity of Kitty (last name unknown), who is reported by Dallas stripper Candy Cane to have been associated with Jack Ruby. Cornman advised that the only stripper he knew by the name of Kitty who worked in New Orleans was Kitty Raville. He advised Raville committed suicide in New Orleans in August or September 1963.

Cornman stated his records indicate one Vivian Mellinger, known as Kitty DeVille, a stripper, paid union dues at New Orleans August 17, 1963, but he does not believe she is currently working in New Orleans and does not know her present whereabouts.

Joseph Francis Civello with whom an interview is reported here-in subject of a Dallas Anti-Racketeering file. Civello was in attendance at the Appalachin Meeting.

Cover Page I

On January 14, 1964 DL [ ]-C advised SA Alfred D. Nealy that Roy Kimes (Roy Eugene Kimes, FBI # 228 639, a well-known Texas and Oklahoma police character, now deceased) brought Jack Ruby to his home at Farmersville, Texas. He stated that Kimes was trying to buy a motel located north of Durrant, Oklahoma, and was trying to promote Ruby into financing the purchase of this motel for him. Informant stated that he accompanied Kimes and Ruby to Colbert, Oklahoma, where they let him out and on their return picked him up and returned to Farmersville. He stated that this was the only contact he had with Jack Ruby. Informant stated that this incident was from six to seven months after Kimes had been released from the Texas State Penitentiary and approximately four years ago.

Document # 124-10075-10088 Is a copy of the above.

Document # 124-10075-10121 Is a 4 page document, only 2 pages are here and that two copies of one page. It is from SAC, San Antonio to Director. It is a copy of the one page from Document # 124-10070-10083.

Document # 124-10075-10209 Is a four page document from SAC Houston to SAC, Dallas. It is dated 12/04/63. All four pages are here. Really two copies of two pages. This is about Mary Ann McCall.

HO [ ]-C, contacted by SA Leverette A. Baker on November 26 and December 1 and 4, last advised on last contact he saw Mary Ann McCall in Dallas at which time she did not freely discuss instant matter.

Informant stated McCall reported a number of Dallas officials were taking money from Ruby for various reasons and Ruby was considered a PD pawn. She reportedly stated Ruby probably was “encouraged” to shoot Oswald by some remark such as “if someone did it nothing would happen to him since he could get off on an insanity plea”, thus by suggestion and encouragement Ruby did shoot Oswald.

Informant stated McCall has not yet furnished him names of officers taking payoffs from Ruby.

NO FD 302’s or insert being submitted.

Dallas should locate and interview Mary Ann McCall without disclosing or compromising informant.

There is important notation on the first page. McCall’s home telephone number LA1-3059. Another number which looks like a phone number is RI7-4893, perhaps another number for McCall.

Document # 124-10076-10049 Is missing

Document # 124-10077-10025 Is a 6 page document from SAC, Chicago to Director dated 11/25/63.

Administrative -CG[ ]-PC advised SA John R. Bassett on 11/24/63 that he had been a close friend of subject Ruby for many years in Chicago. This informant advised that “Sparky” was hot tempered on occasions but was generally of a good disposition. He stated that Ruby was an excellent fist fighter. According to this informant, Ruby, in the mid 1940’s operated a “book” over a restaurant located east of Kedzie Avenue on the north side of Roosevelt Road in Chicago. Subject was a close friend of one Abe Zuckerman, also known as “Zuckie”. In the middle 1940’s according to the informant, Zuckerman was shot and the informant believed that this occurred because Zuckerman did not cut Leonard Patrick, one of Chicago’s top hoodlums in on the profits of his book. Shortly after this shooting, Patrick told the subject to leave town, accusing him of operating a book without Patrick’s sanction. Patrick warned the subject that if he did not leave Chicago, he would “get what Zuckie got”. The subject left Chicago at this time for Dallas, Texas where he ran a club owned by his sister. Informant advised that he has not been in touch with the subject in recent years and was completely at a loss to understand the subject’s action in shooting Oswald.

PCI Frank DiLeonardo advised SA John W. Roberts jr., on 11/24/63 that Jack Ruby had, at one time, been close to Ross Prio, Chicago top hoodlum. This informant further advised that Ruby had been a close friend of one Joe Scaramuzzo who owns a gun shop on Halsted Street near Taylor Street in Chicago.

The Chicago division records contain no information concerning Abe Zuckerman, also known as “Zuckie”. The same records reflect that Joseph Scaramuzzo is the owner of Scaramuzzo and Sons gunshop, 801 S. Halsted St. Chicago, Illinois. It should be noted that three of the four guns used by members of the Nationalist Party of Puerto Rico in the shooting at the House of Representatives, Washington, D.C. on March 1, 1954 were purchased by one William Galetty, Gary, Indiana from Scaramuzzo and Sons, 801 S. Halsted St. Chicago.

CG [ ]-C advised Sa Joseph Shea on 11/24/63 that he believed the subject was related in some manner to one Harry Rubenstein. The informant advised that Harry Rubenstein had owned the Hotel Olympic on N. Clark St. on Chicago’s North side. Approximately 15 years ago, Harry Rubenstein killed a man in this hotel, but by a payment of $25,000 dollars to a Chicago police captain, was able to fix this charge. According to this informant, Harry Rubenstein had good connections with certain unknown criminals in the Chicago area but was not considered by the informant to be a member of the organized criminal element in this city.

It should be noted that the records of the Chicago police department reflect one Harry Rebenstein (did they misspell?), a hotel owner on the near north side, as having been sentenced to one year probation on a charge of manslaughter in 1946.

CG [ ]-PC advised SA Joseph G. Shea on 11/24/63 that the subject was related to Harry Rubenstein who formerly operated two or three bars in the Chicago loop area. According to this informant, the subject worked as a bartender for Harry Rubenstein in a bar at the banker’s building in Chicago-x loop. The informant advised that in 1942 or 1943, Jack Rubenstein attempted to enlist in the United States Navy but was rejected when he failed to pass the physical examination. The informant described Jack Rubenstein as extremely patriotic but moody. This informant was unable to furnish any information concerning Harry Rubenstein’s present whereabouts or activities.

Bernard Glickman, protect identity, advised SA John R. Bassett on 11/24/63 that he does not know the subject. Glickman advised that he had contacted a person known to him whose identity he would not reveal, who recalled the subject as a friend many years ago in the area around Independence Boulevard and Roosevelt Road in Chicago. According to Glickman, this source stated that the subject was not connected with the criminal element the (should be “in”) Chicago. This source indicated that Rubenstein was good natured but on occasion was extremely hot tempered. According to this source, the subject had left Chicago in the late 1940’s for Dallas, Texas where he operated a club belonging to his sister. Glickman advised that he had made an unsuccessful attempt to contact Anthony Accardo in an effort to obtain information concerning the subject.

It should be noted that Anthony Accardo is a high ranking member of Chicago’s criminal element. Bernard Glickman is known to be a close associate of many of Chicago’s top echelon criminals and has, in recent years, been active in the management of several ranking prize fighters.

All other Chicago informants negative and Chicago files reflect no information pertaining to subject’s involvement with Chicago criminal element.

Document # 124-10077-10059 Is a 3 page document from SAC, San Juan, Puerto Rico to Director dated 11/26/63. Only one page is here.

Administrative Page. At San Juan, Puerto Rico, [ ] PCI,

[ ] for Local 610, Hotel and Restaurant workers Union (HRWU), SJ, advised SA Royal L. Blassingame on November 26 instant: Anna Maria Del Valle, Secretary – Treasurer, HRWU was approached by Miguel Cruz, organizer for local 901, Teamsters Union (TU) who made a statement “Now that we’ve taken care of President Kennedy, we’ll have no trouble in taking over things.”

[ ] Also furnished above info to Thomas A. Kennelly, Departmental Attorney, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington.

Details: At SJ, PR. Possible connection between Jack Leon Ruby and Teamsters Union (TU). The following investigation was conducted by SAs LaVerne J. Moore and Royal L. Blassingame.

Anna Marie Del Valle, Secretary – Treasurer, Local 610, Hotel and Restaurant Workers Union (HRWU) advised on November 26, 1963 that she is acquainted with Miguel Cruz as an organizer for local 901, Teamsters Union (TU), SJ. on Friday, November 22, 1963, at about 5 P.m., Miguel Cruz made this statement to her: “They killed Kennedy and the second will be Ramos Ducos.”

Leopoldo Ramos Ducos is president of local 610 HRWU.

Document # 124-10077-10195 Is a copy of Document # 124-10070-10297.

Document # 124-10081-10142 Is a two page document from SAC, Houston to Director dated 9/25/64.

Re: Houston airtel to Bureau dated 9/24/64

Enclosed for Dallas are 25 copies each of the following items:

FD-302 re interview of Hazel Kingcaid, Operator of Desert Room Lounge, Houston, Texas;

FD-302 re interview of Peter Flores

FD-302 re interview of Paul Polo Guerrero;

FD-302 re interview of Martin Rizo, aka., Marty Rizo, Rachael Rizo;

Insert reporting miscellaneous investigation at Houston conducted 9/21, 22/64.

It is to be noted that HO [ ]-C (protect Identity), advised on 9/21/64 he never knew of Jack Ruby ever having been in the Desert Room Lounge nor had he ever heard of Ruby’s having been there. He did not recall James J. Kneiding or Wayne Craven. He informed that Marty Ruiz, aka., Rachael Ruiz, is probably identical with Marty Rizo, aka Rachael Rizo. He further noted that “Paul” is probably identical with Paul Guerrero and that “Pete” is probably identical with Pete Flores. CI stated these three were frequently in the Desert Room Lounge together. On 9/22/64, HO [ ]-C furnished the whereabouts of Rizo and Flores in Houston, Texas.

On 9/21/64, PCI [ ] (Protect Identity), advised that Paul Guerrero resides at 310 Crosstimbers, Houston, Texas, and is a hairdresser at Gulfgate Beauty Salon, Houston.

Document # 124-10081-10224 Is a one page document from SAC, Chicago to Director dated 12/10/63. It is a copy of Cover Page D from Document # 124-10069-10000

Document # 124-10081-10228 Is a two page document from SAC, NY to Director. It is dated 11/30/63. This is about an alleged link between Jack Ruby and Chief Curry.

New York [ ]-S advised that at 12:15 PM November 30, 1963 Wieslaw Gornicki, Polish Correspondent of the Polish Press Agency, in a conversation with

(?) Lewanowski, Polish Ambassador to the United Nations stated that he had information indicating that the correspondent / name not given / of the Indian publication “Blitz” was in Dallas the day of the attack / assassination and apparently obtained documents stating the Police Chief Curry and Ruby were members of the

“MS SESIDE” / PH/. Gornicki was to verify this information December 2 next and Gornicki also indicated this information would be published in the near future by “Blitz” which he described as an anti-American publication. The list of non United States nationals accredited as correspondents and representatives of information media by the United Nations as of October 31, 1963 lists Ramesh Sanghvi of Indian nationality as associated with “Blitz”. Wieslaw Gornicki of Polish nationality was listed as associated with the Polish Press Agency.

Document # 124-10087-10328 Is a two page document from SAC, Washington Field Office to Director dated 11/26/63.

Page 1 is an airtel. “Enclosed are five copies of an LHM dated and captioned as above. The source of information is [ ].

“The LHM is classified “Confidential” since information furnished could result in identification of a confidential informant of continuing value and compromise the future effectiveness thereof.

On November 26, 1963, a confidential informant who has furnished reliable information in the past, advised that Venezuelan Ambassador Enrique Tejera-Paris, under instructions from Venezuelan President Romulo Betancourt, had invited Drew Pearson, newspaper columnist, to observe elections in Venezuela “next Sunday.” Pearson revealed that there were plans being made for a memorial service for President Kennedy “that evening” and he felt he must attend. He, therefore, declined the invitation to observe the elections.

Pearson indicated that he was trying to organize approximately 40,000 members of the Protestant, Catholic and Jewish religions to stage a march on President Kennedy’s grave in order to do some thinking on the question of hate and intolerance.

According to the informant, Tejera has stated that the death of President Kennedy has had a tremendous impact on Latin America.

* * *

Go to Part Two

The 12th batch

Part Two

---

Document # 180-10087-10190 Is a three page interview summary of Robert Motto dated 12/30/77. Really only two.

On 12/30 77, the writers interviewed Motto at Holiday Inn, room 1526. Mr. Motto is now chief investigator for the Cook County Public Administrator’s Office. In 1963 he was Special Agent Robert Motto of the Chicago office of the United States Secret Service. We discussed with him his activities in connection with the proposed visit of President John F. Kennedy to Chicago on November 2, 1963.

Motto told us that he was involved in checks and counterfeiting enforcement during this 1963 period. As if anticipating the thrust of our questioning, he stated that about a year or two ago a newspaperman came to see him and questioned him about this November 1963 period. He could not recall the reporter’s name, but the man told him he was going to make him the hero of the piece. This put Motto on his guard and he said he didn’t tell the man anything about his activities at the time. “As a result, he murdered me in the article,” Motto said.

Motto told us that he could not recall exactly what specific activities he was engaged in from October 30th through November 2nd, 1963 except that he went to the Air Force – Army game at Soldiers Field on November 2nd. “The trip was canceled. I think they told us at the game, but we decided to watch it anyway,” Motto said. “When I got back to the office, someone said there had been threats,” he told us. We pressed him for information as to the identity of his informant, but he could not recall who in his office told him. He does not recall surveilling any Latin/Cuban types during that period, but he does not rule out this possibility; he simply does not recollect. The names Rodriguez and Gonzalez mean nothing to him.

Motto asked us if we had talked to Bolden yet. We replied in the negative and asked him who Bolden was. He launched into a vituperative discussion about Abe Bolden, the Negro Secret Service Agent who allegedly attempted to blow the whistle on the Service in 1964. He was arrested in Chicago and charged with attempting to sell file information to a counterfeiter who had been arrested by the Chicago office.

On the day President Kennedy was shot in Dallas, Motto was in Cincinnati, Ohio, working on a big case. He said he returned to Chicago and helped in the post-assassination investigation — but again he was vague on specifics.

Motto said that he had a copy of the magazine article he referred to earlier and would send it to us when he located it.

Document # 180-10090-10122 Is a 4 page section of Thomas Kelly’s Briefing Paper for the President’s Committee on the Warren Report. It is dated 10/10/64. So this was used for the Dillon Committee.

Prior to November 1963 and except on very rare occasions, most of which involved the use of military personnel on military bases or on occasions such as inaugurations, manpower assistance to the Secret Service for physical protection of the President was limited to the police agencies (local and state) in the area where the President visited.

The FBI and CIA furnished support in the area of preventive intelligence. Frequently, their representatives accompanied the Secret Service during the travel of the President, especially during foreign travel, but they furnished no personnel for the physical security measures.

Prior to November 1963, the general theory on which the Secret Service conducted Presidential protection was that satisfactory physical security could be provided by a small corps of well trained, dedicated men. The methods employed were secret, and the public and others assumed that many measures were taken which in fact were not – and this served as an important deterrent. Budget experience and political considerations seemed to rule out a more ambitious program.

Since November 1963, and the seemingly general recognition that the protection of the President and his family should utilize manpower in excess of that available to the Secret Service, the Secret Service has requested and received support from other Treasury enforcement agencies, the FBI and other Federal investigative agencies.

Treasury agents from the various law enforcement branches of the Internal Revenue Service (Inspection, A&TT and Intelligence), Bureau of Customs, the U. S. Coast Guard and the Bureau of Narcotics have been used to supplement Secret Service personnel on nearly every occasion of the President’s travel outside Washington. The Secret Service has requested and used 537 Treasury agents and their work involved 7,979 man hours between February 11, 1964 and August 31, 1964.

The procedure by which the Secret Service can call upon other Treasury agencies for manpower assistance was formally authorized by the Secretary of the Treasury on March 19, 1964. It is under the general supervision of the Treasury’s Director of Law Enforcement coordination, who also has supplied guidelines on protection to the other Treasury enforcement agencies. The Treasury has conducted an inventory of the numbers of its agents stationed in various parts of the United States and overseas. Under standing instructions the Secret Service draws on the other Treasury agencies in proportion to the number of agents each agency has available in the relevant geographic area. Adjustments are made when emergency situations require different allocations. Advance agents in the field can obtain assistance directly from Treasury agencies in the area and need not clear these requests through headquarters.

The Secret Service has used other Treasury agents mainly for advance building and route surveys and as members of special teams stationed in strategic positions along the route or in buildings along the President’s route of travel. They have not been used in investigations and only in rare instances for neutralization procedures.

Since November 25, 1963 and through September 30, 1964, the FBI has loaned to the Secret Service 363 agents from 20 field offices on 43 different occasions to assist the Service in Presidential protection. The present system for obtaining assistance from the FBI has been to request agents from the national headquarters. Thus far all agents requested for the protection of the President have been supplied although the FBI has requested that, in view of the many demands on FBI’s limited manpower, it would appreciate such requests being kept to a reasonable level and restricted to protection of the President himself.

FBI agents have been used as members of special teams at strategic points along parade routes during Presidential visits and occasionally in the motorcade. The FBI has stated that it would not permit its agents to be used in the neutralization of those identified as possibly dangerous to the President.

The Secret Service has also occasionally used the assistance of

U. S. marshals and other Federal law enforcement agents. The numbers are very small.

In its long range plan the Secret Service has requested sufficient additional personnel so that, except in time of heavy Presidential travel, it believes that it will not be necessary to call on other Federal agencies for assistance in providing for the physical protection of the President. The Secret Service is presently considering what requests it will have to make for assistance in times of heavy Presidential travel and for help in neutralization procedures if the number of persons classified as risks grows substantially. For the present the Service intends to have its agents supervise all cases of neutralization and henceforth not to assign the responsibility to other agencies whose experience in this extremely sensitive area may be limited.

Document # 180-10090-10128 Is a 7 page part of Tom Kelly’s Briefing Paper to the Presidents Committee on the Warren Report (The Dillon Committee).

There is a Charge-Out Record signed by Marwell of the ARRB on 10/2/95.

The purpose of a motorcade is generally to permit as many persons as possible to see their President. The route is determined by the local “host committee,” local law enforcement officials, and the Secret Service. A complete survey is then made of the route by police and the Secret Service.

The purpose of a route survey is to identify potential points of danger and establish counter measures. Agents or police are then assigned to locations such as rood tops, etc. The routes surveyed are usually those from airports to downtown and between hotels and places of public assembly where the President is expected to stop.

The first step in a survey is an observation process to identify vantage points for rifle or thrown objects. Roof tops, obstructions, large drainage ditches, overpasses, waterways, manholes, construction work, natural growth, bridges and other physical things along the route that might present a hazard are examined and catalogued. Special attention is paid to locations where explosives might be hidden and detonated as the President approaches.

During the survey of the motorcade route, the local enforcement officials and the Secret Service decide on the number of personnel needed to cover the areas and where they will be placed prior to and during the passing of the Presidential motorcade.

In addition, an alternate route is selected at various locations along the motorcade route which will permit the motorcade to leave the route in the event of danger. Along the route, intersections are selected where the motorcade or the main portion containing the President or the First Family can be diverted to alternate routes leading to an airport or other departure point. The alternate routes are inspected for the same hazards as above stated. Moving patrol cars operate on the alternate route within prescribed areas to keep the route open in the event it is necessary for the motorcade to be diverted.

With the exception of locations along the route where it has been predetermined that the motorcade will stop, Secret Service and Treasury enforcement personnel augment the police, and additional agents are deployed behind the people assembled there or interspersed in the crowd whenever this can be done.

Prior to November 1963, building surveys along the route of a motorcade were developed by the Secret Service only on those locations where the route and the timing of the motorcade would be known long in advance, e.g. inaugurals. Subsequent to the assassination, the Secret Service stepped up its building surveys, and orders were issued that each field office would conduct a building survey along those routes which in the future might be used by the President. All offices are in the process of conducting these surveys and 25 have completed the surveying of the cities in their areas. Those completed include New York, Chicago, St. Louis, Miami, Kansas City, Detroit, Los Angeles, Louisville, Dallas, Cleveland, Houston and San Francisco. Surveys of all major cities in the United States will be completed within a month.

A building survey encompasses a block-by-block physical inspection of buildings and an interview with the occupants of each of the buildings which are adjacent or overlook the route. Conducting such a survey represents a considerable task. There is a call for skill, ingenuity, and a capacity for evaluating and identifying danger points, and the devising of countermeasures to be effected for the time the President is in the area. Certain types of buildings are considered prime risks, such as empty warehouses, etc. Other buildings are considered to present a lesser risk; e.g., public or municipal buildings where guards are employed and access is limited.

Since November 1963, we have conducted the surveys in various ways. Each requires a concentration of manpower and the work is intensive although it lasts for a limited period. In New York City in March 1964, a survey was made of the routes generally used by the President. These included the routes from the airports to downtown and between the hotels where the President usually stops. The survey was accomplished by Secret Service and Treasury agents teamed with city detectives working in two-man teams. Forty-four teams were used. It took seven working days to complete the survey. In May 1964, a similar survey was made in Chicago, covering the route from O’Hare International Airport to the Conrad Hilton Hotel. Thirty-two two-man teams were used for five days. Not included in these days mentioned is the clerical time for the preparation of reports and data forms.

In Atlantic City, a survey was made of the routes from the airport to the convention hall and in Newark, New Jersey, the route from the airport to the Lincoln Tunnel. In the latter two surveys, the work was done by uniformed officers of the city police or in rural areas by the New Jersey State Police having jurisdiction. The officers assigned worked individually.

At each address, the occupant, owner, or building manager is contacted. Any available security intelligence and identifying data concerning the person contacted is recorded for future reference. There is left with the person contacted the telephone number of this service and the police department so that information can be reported. The contact is requested to furnish any information which might come to his attention concerning (1) the occupants of the building which would indicate any abnormal behavior toward or interest in the President; (2) abnormal activity during the time the President is expected; (3) the presence of any suspicious persons in the area; and (4) any person displaying abnormal interest in securing space which overlooks the parade route. From the information obtained during the contact with the occupant of the building, two 5 x 8 cards are prepared. The cards reflect whether access to the roof of the building can be controlled. These cards are filed in the police department involved and in the office of the United States Secret Service. In the remarks column, there is attached any information that might be available on firearms stored in the building or owned by the occupants and any information concerning any mental aberrations of occupants of the building known to the person contacted.

Hazards found must be offset by establishing post duty for agent personnel and police officers when the President is present and the safeguards employed are dependent upon circumstances. The survey also facilitates the advance programing of security communications that will best serve our needs while the President is in the motorcade. The communication facility for a Presidential movement must be of a scope to insure radio and/or telephone contact between the President’s car (plane, helicopter, train), Secret Service cars, security aircraft, designated police cars, designated networks of security post and the Secret Service command post, police headquarters, and others.

The results accomplished by a survey cannot be calculated to continue indefinitely. The benefits derived are in direct relation to the length of time of the survey and the time of the President’s visit. If the elapsed time is extended, benefits will diminish due to physical changes from construction, from changes in occupancy, etc. Resurveys will be periodically conducted, however, a resurvey or bringing one up-to-date is easier and less time-consuming than the original.

In view of the present ability of the President to decide to visit a city and to get there swiftly, building surveys must be kept as current as possible.

The building survey is by no means a cure-all for this outer perimeter security. It is merely a plus factor in Presidential protection. A building survey, such as now being conducted, would not have brought to light Oswald in the Texas School Book Depository Building. He was there as an employee; he had a right to be on the sixth floor. None of his movements or characteristics were suspicious insofar as the management of the building were concerned. Unless we have prior information that an occupant of a building or an employee of a firm on the route is a known risk, he may not come to our attention through a building survey.

We have not found it practicable to attempt to secure the names of every employee working in every building along a motorcade route. This would involve thousands of names. In order to make any meaningful check of this number of persons, we would need the name, date and place of birth of each of the individuals we listed. In the usual time allotted to us, even with mechanical equipment, to check the name of an individual reported to us during a visit against this index of employees and occupants would be a task beyond our present capabilities, because involved in these names checks would be a determination of identity, the risk the person represents to the President, and the question how he is to be neutralized.

Questions occasionally arise concerning the civil rights of occupants of these buildings; that is, the right to personal privacy. Frequently, occupants of buildings which overlook the parade route consider it an evasion of their privacy to be questioned concerning their possession of legally obtained firearms, whether they intend to have guests in their office during the motorcade. Questions also arise concerning some occupants along the parade route who may be considered eccentric, but who have evinced no interest in the President. These areas and pockets of questionable security must be identified and evaluated and neutralized if considered necessary, but building surveys furnish no guarantee that the building is “sanitized”. Obviously, people cannot be arrested or moved out of a building to which they have the right to access even though they may be considered by some enforcement official to constitute a risk to the President.

Experience has shown that the day before the President arrives and while the President is in the city, the police department and the Secret Service are deluged with calls from people along an extended motorcade route. It has been necessary in each instance to set up extra police lines to handle these calls.

Building surveys represent a considerable investment in time and money, but the Secret Service considers them desirable if the President is to be protected properly while riding in a motorcade, even if an armored car is used, lessening the danger from rifle fire. Buildings furnish a vantage point for thrown explosives or material which could cause panics or rioting in the streets below.

Document # 180-10090-10134 Is a 6 page part of the briefing paper, this time on Participation in Advance Arrangements for the President.

Prior to the assassination of the President, personnel of the Protective Research Section did not physically participate in the advance arrangements of the President. This was left largely up to the field office involved and the advance survey team from the White House Detail.

Since the assassination, the procedures have been changed so that where possible a member of the Protective Research Section joins each advance survey team to establish liaison with local offices of federal and local intelligence gathering agencies and to provide for the immediate evaluation of information received from them.

A “Trip Index” is maintained at PRS on a geographical basis in which is carded the names and other identifying information of persons considered a risk to the safety of the President. This Trip Index file is maintained on a daily basis by several agents assigned in PRS through whom is funnelled information on persons of protective interest. It is constantly updated and the information evaluated on a daily basis. These agents prepare photographic albums of the high risks in particular areas and also on a national basis. These photographic albums are furnished to the White House Detail agents and to the local field offices and they are systemically reviewed and updated.

As soon as the Protective Research Section receives notice from the White House Detail of a pending trip of the President to a given area, the Trip Index is examined for that and surrounding areas and a complete list with identifying information is prepared. As an assist to the Trip Index file, the agents responsible for its maintenance examine the geographical section of the master index to insure that any information in that index has not been overlooked. In addition, the master files on all organizations, and their activities, and the composite files on racial situations, picketing, etc., are reviewed. The prepared list of persons considered of protective interest, together with resumes on any organizations evaluated of concern and the general racial situation, as well as other information on bomb disposal facilities, etc., is immediately forwarded to the Special Agent in Charge of the field office involved, with copy to White House Detail.

From the first notice of a pending trip until the actual visit, or function the President attends, the Protective Research Section furnishes additional intelligence received by them by the fastest means of communication to both the field office and the advance PRS agent assigned to the operation.

As soon as the PRS advance agent arrives at the scene of the pending visit he confers with the Special Agent in Charge of the district involved and reviews with him, or a designated field agent, the list furnished by PRS, as well as any additional files the field office considers worthy of review. An evaluation of the known situation at that time is made.

The advance PRS agent then establishes liaison with the law enforcement agencies in the area, including, but not limited to the FBI, military, local and state police, and through their intelligence sections arranges to coordinate all activities and to ensure [Note, “to ensure” is written in] the rapid dissemination of information.

After the liaison is established the advance PRS agent, with the assistance of the field office, arranges to neutralize and minimize the danger presented by each individual risk. This neutralization ranges from insuring that the risk will not be physically near the President at any time he is at a given location to the actual surveillance of certain risks. The neutralization is accomplished by both Secret Service personnel and other law enforcement and intelligence agencies. It also consists of immediate investigation of any current intelligence where warranted.

The PRS advance agent maintains daily contact by telephone with the supervisors of the Protective Research Section, keeping that Section abreast of his activities, and for the receiving of any additional intelligence of interest gathered at that source. Likewise, he confers daily with the advance White House Detail survey team and the local field office, keeping them apprized of information directly affecting the physical aspects of protection.

As the President’s visit approaches a command post is established near the location of the function through which all preventive intelligence is funnelled. A group of Secret Service agents and plain clothes local police are attached to the command post to be made available to the PRS advance agent to take immediate action on any intelligence received or on any incident arising prior to or during the actual visit of the President. Any information received at the command post requiring immediate notice to the agents who are in close proximity to the President is transmitted to them by the PRS advance agent through radio and other fast contact.

After the President has left the area, the PRS advance agent confers with the local field office, furnishing them with the necessary information to document the liaison and activities conducted in connection with the intelligence received. In addition, the PRS advance agent, upon his return to Washington, documents his own activities.

All of the information including notice of the trip is then permanently documented in the Protective Research Section in a Trip folder so that at any time an examination of the Trip folder will reveal not only the steps taken prior to the trip of the President but also liaison established, intelligence received, action taken on any intelligence, and any incidents occurring during the actual physical presence of the President in a given area.

Due to the limited personnel of the Protective Research Section, it has not been possible to assign an advance PRS agent on every trip of the President. In those instances where one is not assigned, the responsibility for the liaison and coordination of preventive intelligence is designated to the local Special Agent in Charge of the field office involved. Budgetary provision and justification for six additional special agents for advance PRS work has been made.

Document # 180-10093-10026 Is a 2 page interview summary of Roger C. Warner. It is dated 5/25/78.

Roger Warner’s present assignment is as supervisor of the Washington, D.C. Field Office. He entered the Secret Service in February 1963 and was assigned to the Washington Field Office. In December of 1964 he was assigned to the P.S.D. (Protective Support Division). The function of P.S.D. was to give training to young agents for Protective Support and also to provide Protective Support. From February 1972 to the present time he was assigned to the Washington, D.C. Field Office.

Roger Warner had spent about three years with the Bureau of Narcotics prior to joining the Secret Service. While with the Bureau of Narcotics he had attended the Treasury School. He attended Secret Service School after being assigned to the Washington, D. C. Field Office.

Most of his experience came from on-the-job training. He had been assigned to Henry Kissinger when Kissinger was with the National Security council.

President Kennedy’s visit to Dallas in November 1963 was Roger Warner’s first Presidential Protective-type assignment.

He had no prior Presidential protection training. On the evening of November 21, 1963, Warner was assigned to protect the Presidential Suite in the Hotel Texas, Ft. Worth. He stayed there until he was relieved at midnight. He spent the night in Ft. Worth and stood by when the President made a speech in front of the hotel on the morning of November 22nd. Warner and another agent drove from Ft. Worth to Love Field. They arrived before the President’s plane. Warner was assigned to secure the President’s plane. On arrival the President walked along the fence-line and Warner stated that he was having lunch at Love Field, when a voice came over the P. A. system ordering people to return to the planes and stand by. Warner got word from agent Bill Patterson that the President had been shot. He then got running accounts on the radio. He helped clear the area around the planes of civilians. Warner observed the hearse arrive and the casket being loaded on the aircraft. Agent Mike Howard came over and told Warner that a subject had been arrested driving at a very high rate of speed from Dallas towards Fort Worth. The Fort Worth police thought this may be a suspect in the President’s shooting. Mike Howard and Warner were to go to Fort Worth and talk to the subject. While they were in the process of speaking to the subject, a report came in that Oswald had been arrested.

Document # 10094-10459 appears to be missing

Document # 180-10096-10460 Is a two page document from Barry Portman to the HSCA dated 6/23/78. This is an outside contact report.

Portman represents Charles Tourine in a federal criminal case in San Francisco.

Barry Portman represents Charles Tourine in a Federal criminal case in San Francisco, the present status of which is the Government’s appeal of a district dismissal of the indictment.

Portman, a very good friend of mine, talked to Tourine whose bottom line position is as follows:

1. Since the Committee cannot guarantee that there will not be “leaks” of his information or the fact that he even provided information, he has nothing to say.

This view is strengthened by the fact that “one of his neighbors was found floating in the Bay of Piscayne”.

Since he has always been a “stand up” guy with his associates it is better for him to “be out front resisting cooperation with the government”.

2. If Tourine receives a Congressional subpoena, it will cause him problems but the Committee should be assured that it faces a “great Meyer Lansky” with all the attendant medical background. Should he actually have to appear, the worst penalty he faces is contempt of Congress which he could purge himself of as the Committee goes out of business.

3. Tourine refuses to talk informally or off-the record because the track record of Congressional Committees on secrecy matters is poor.

Document # 180-10104-10324 This is a 3 page interview summary with SS agent Conrad Cross.

Conrad Cross stated that he entered the Secret Service, June 1961 and resigned November 1966. He was assigned to the Chicago Field Office for the entire length of his career but he had worked numerous other areas on loan (temporary assignments). He had no recall of the proposed Nov. 2, 1963 visit by President Kennedy relative to assignments or incidents. He only knew that the President was supposed to come to Chicago, but cancelled the visit. Cross stated that the name Thomas Arthur Vallee was familiar and he remembers that it was Ed Tucker’s case. He doesn’t remember any details because he was not involved. He had no recall of any incidents involving a threat to President Kennedy by any Cubans around the same time as the Valle incident.

We began discussing Abraham Bolden and Conrad Cross stated that he knew Bolden well, although they did not socialize too often. He stated that when Bolden was arrested, he (Cross) couldn’t understand some of the allegations against Bolden regarding time and place, because he was with Bolden on some of those dates. Cross stated that he believes Bolden was set up, but he has no idea who would have done it. Cross stated that Bolden had a big mouth and did not think before he said things. He believes this was a contributing factor to Bolden’s troubles. Bolden had a personality clash with ASAIC Maurice Martineau and they were always at each other.

Cross stated that the Bolden incident was the main cause of his resignation. Cross became very disillusioned with the Secret Service because he felt Bolden had been “shafted”. He stated that he began to feel useless and lost faith in the Secret Service and felt it was time to get out. Cross stated his supervisors tried to dissuade him but he resigned. He stated that he holds no malice and had been proud to be an agent. He states that he felt his training had been very good. he attended Treasury School, Secret Service Training School and Questioned Document School.

Document # 180-10106-10100 Is a two page letter from Blakey to James Golden dated 10/19/77. Mr. Golden is with the Law Enforcement Assistance Administration of the Department of Justice.

Some time ago we discussed your making some discreet inquires among those Secret Service Agents who were motorcade participants, to determine their current attitudes toward the assassination and willingness and to assist in our inquiry.

Enclosed is a list of the 16 people who were involved in the motorcade. It contains their addresses and telephone numbers.

It would be helpful to the course of our investigation if you could do whatever you can and let me know – even the negative results – as soon as possible.

The 16 agents he names are:

1.) Bennet, Glen A.

2.) Greer, William R.

3.) Hickey, George W., Jr.

4.) Hill, Clinton J.

5.) Johns, Thomas L.

6.) Kellerman, Roy H.

7.) Kinney, Samuel A.

8.) Kivett, Jerry D.

9.) Landis, Paul E.

10.) Lawson, Winston G.

11.) McIntyre, William T.

12.) Ready, John D.

13.) Roberts, Emory P.

14.) Sorrells, Forrest V.

15.) Taylor, Warren W.

16.) Youngblood, Rufus W.

Document # 180-10108-10349 Is a 4 page letter from Burt W. Griffen to W. David Slawson. It is dated 4/16/64. This is really Warren Commission stuff. It concerns Sylvia Odio.

Interview with Dr. Burton C. Einspruch, Dallas, Texas,

(3:00 to 4:00 P.M. Monday, April 13, 1964)

Secret Service Agent William Patterson and I spoke with Dr. Einspruch at Parkland Hospital. Dr. Einspruch a psychiatrist, stated that he has treated Miss Odio since approximately April 1963 and that he saw her on the average of once a week from the beginning of that period until the President was assassinated.

He had first indicated to us that the rumors about Miss Odio’s love affairs were false. Later, however, he did state that the story we had heard about her affair with a Puerto Rican law professor, is true. He also stated that Miss Odio did date Leonard Marcus, although he does not think the affair was as great as Mrs. Connell indicated to us. (It should be pointed out that Mrs. Connell also believed that Sylvia Odio was exaggerating her affair with Mr. Marcus.) Dr. Einspruch further stated that he did not believe that the affair with Father MacChann was as serious as we were led to believe by Mrs. Connell. We did not press him on this matter, however.

Dr. Einspruch described Miss Odio as coming from a very high social position in Cuba. He stated that she had been educated for 5 years in Philadelphia, that she had written some stories which had been published in Latin American journals, and that she composes poetry. He described her as a beautiful, brilliant, well-spoken, charming woman. Dr. Einspruch confirmed the stories Mrs. Connell had given us concerning the anti-Castro activities of Miss Odio’s father. He stated that Miss Odio’s father had organized an anti-Castro group while he was in prison in Cuba. Dr. Einspruch further stated that Miss Odio has two brothers, two sisters, and four children with her in Dallas. She also has a brother, Cesare Odio in Miami. Miss Odio’s ex-husband, Guillermo Hemera, is believed to be living in Ponce, Puerto Rico.

In describing Miss Odio’s relationship with Dallas Cubans, Dr. Einspruch stated that she was never really part of the Cuban community but that her real place was at the very top of the social ladder among American Dallas socialites. He stated that her social position in Dallas results from having exploited her father’s business contacts in the United States. He confirmed Mrs. Connell’s statement that Miss Odio had worked for a while at Neiman-Marcus.

In describing Miss Odio’s personality, Dr. Einspruch stated she is given to exaggeration but that all the basic facts which she provides are true. He stated that her tendency to exaggerate is an emotional type, characteristic of many Latin-American people, being one of degree rather than basic fact. He stated that Miss Odio is friendly with two Cubans psychiatrists. He stated that, in general, Cuban activities in Dallas center around the church, but he did not describe the extent of Miss Odio’s participation.

Dr. Einspruch stated that he had great faith in Miss Odio’s story of having met Lee Harvey Oswald. He stated that, in the course of psychotherapy, Miss Odio told him that she had seen Oswald at more than one anti-Castro Cuban meeting. One of these meetings was apparently at her house, he believed, and Miss Odio’s sister also saw Oswald at the house. Dr. Einspruch says that Miss Odio reported to him that Oswald made Inflammatory comments about Cuba. The term “inflammatory” is Dr. Einspruch’s and he could not clearly indicate what it was that Oswald had said. In fact, I got the impression these comments were pro-Castro.

I asked Dr. Einspruch about the blackout Miss Odio had on November 22, 1963. He stated that on that occasion he did not treat Miss Odio. Miss Odio was handled then by a general practitioner, Dr. Louis Shlipac, of Irving, Texas. Dr. Shlipac was the physician for the company at which Miss Odio was then employed. Dr. Einspruch did not know whether or not Oswald’s capture was the precipitating factor in the blackout.

I asked Dr. Einspruch if he believed that Miss Odio would give information which would be harmful to her Cuban friends. He stated that he did not. Previously, he had stated to me that he thought that Miss Odio and all of the local Cubans were afraid that they would be blamed for the Kennedy assassination. It had been Dr. Einspruch’s belief prior to our interview that such a fear was what precipitated Miss Odio’s blackout on November 22. However, he stated to me that he never questioned her on the particulars of this blackout. He also stated that the period just before the assassination of the President was one of great anxiety for Miss Odio. I did not question him as to the basis of that anxiety since he initially stated to me that he did not wish to violate the doctor-patient relationship in our interview. Nevertheless, I should add that at the end of our interview Dr. Einspruch offered to obtain any information that we desired from Mis Odio if she proved reluctant with us.

In pursuing the question of Miss Odio’s possible reluctance to give information that would hurt her Cuban friends, I asked Dr. Einspruch why it was that Miss Odio might have told Mrs.Connell about her knowledge of Lee Oswald. He stated that Mrs. Connell, at the time of the President’s assassination, was Miss Odio’s closest friend in Dallas. He stated, however, that their relationship had begun to cool at that time. He stated that Sylvia Odio had slept at the Connell house on more than one occasion.

I drew the inference that it may have been possible that Miss Odio wished to confide in Mrs. Connell as a means of cementing their deteriorating relationship. Dr. Einspruch observed that he thought the anxiety which Miss Odio felt after the assassination may have caused her to tell Mrs. Connell about Oswald and that that episode was one of lack of self-control. It should be emphasized that at all times Dr. Einspruch felt that the story about Lee Oswald was completely true.

In describing Miss Odio’s relationship with Mrs. Connell and other persons in Dallas, Dr. Einspruch observed that there may have been a certain amount of jealousy between Miss Odio and Mrs. Connell. He stated that it was his understanding that Mrs. Connell had had a few affairs of her own, although these were not subjects of notoriety in the community and were only known to some of his colleagues in the psychiatric profession. He felt that Mrs. Connell may have cooled on Miss Odio because Miss Odio was more of a social success than Mrs. Connell. Dr. Einspruch stated that Miss Odio had unquestionably passed Mrs. Connell on the Dallas social ladder. He reiterated that Miss Odio’s closest friends in Dallas now were the John Rogers family. It was my understanding that this family owns Texas Instruments, although Agent Patterson told me it was his understanding that the family owned Texas Industries. Apparently, Miss Odio stayed with the Rogers family after her hospitalization in connection with the Kennedy assassination. The exact timing of her stay with the Rogers family, is, however, not entirely clear to me.

At the conclusion of our interview, Dr. Einspruch offered to be of any assistance that we might desire in connection with Miss Odio. I got the understanding he would use his position as a psychiatrist to encourage her to give us all the information that we needed. He told me that he had an appointment with her at 8 A. M. on Tuesday morning, April 14, that he would mention that he had spoken with us. Dr. Einspruch feels that he has Miss Odio’s complete confidence.

Document # 180-10108-10350 Is another memorandum of an interview by Burt Griffen. This is with Mrs. Connell. It is also dated 4/16/64.

Interview with Mrs. C. L. Connell, Dallas, Texas.

(12:15 to 1:25 P.M. Monday, April 13, 1964)

Mrs. Connell was interviewed by Secret Service Agent William Patterson and me at her home at 6949 Lake Shore Drive, Dallas, Texas. She had previously been interviewed by Agents of the FBI on November 29, 1963. (See Commission Doc. 205, p. 640) Mrs. Connell is an extremely attractive, well dressed, educated, well mannered woman in her late 40’s or early 50’s. Her husband is a CPA and their home is in upper middle or lower upper class area. We questioned her in detail about the background and reliability of Sylvia Odio.

Mrs. Connell stated that Sylvia Odio had come to Dallas from Puerto Rico in April or March of 1963. It is Mrs. Connell’s understanding that Sylvia Odio’s father was an anti-Batista businessman who had temporarily exiled himself from Cuba. His primary business interests seems to be in the transportation industry, although Mrs. Connell could not elaborate. Mr. Odio was an early supporter of Fidel Castro and, Mrs. Connell states, Mr. Odio entertained Castro on more than one occasion in his home in Cuba. Apparently, when Mr. Odio realized that Castro was a Communist, he deserted Castro and began to organize opposition to him in Cuba. As a result, Mr. Odio and his wife were imprisoned. All of his children, however, were able to escape to Puerto Rico or to the United States.

Mrs. Connell, who is an Episcopalian, came to know Sylvia Odio through the Catholic Cuban Relief Committee of Dallas. Mrs. Connell apparently became interested in the work of this Committee after she returned from a trip to Spain in early 1963 or late 1962. She met Sylvia through the Committee. Because Mrs. Connell has a great interest in mental health and Slyvia was having psychiatric difficulties, Mrs. Connell formed a particularly close attachment to Miss Odio. Apparently Mrs. Connell was at least partially instrumental in Miss Odio’s consulting a psychiatrist and obtaining psychiatric help at Southwest Memorial Hospital in Dallas.

Mr. Connell stated that Sylvia was suffering from a mental disease known as grand hysteria. [That “Mr.” Connell might be a typo] Mrs. Connell stated that grand hysteria is common among European women but is rather rare among Americans. It is for that reason that the Southern Methodist staff at Parkland Hospital (Southwest Memorial) took a particular interest in Miss Odio. Grand hysteria according to Mrs. Connell is a condition characterized by black-outs in the nature of fainting spells or other forms of unconsciousness which might last for a period of hours. Mrs. Connell stated, that in Sylvia’s case, apparently the principal cause of this difficulty stemmed from her relationships with men. Mrs. Connell described Miss Odio as an attractive, highly intelligent and gifted woman who had had a series of affairs. Miss Odio is 26 years old and divorced.

Mrs. Connell stated that Miss Odio had an affair with a man in Puerto Rico who was a law professor. As a result of this affair, the law professor apparently lost his job and is now working in Washington, D. C. Miss Odio also became involved with a Catholic priest in Dallas who had been working with Cuban refugees. The name of the priest was Father McChann. Partly because of his relationship with Miss Odio and partly from his own choice, MacChann is no longer a member of the clergy. Mrs. Connell also stated that Miss Odio was amorously involved with Leonard Marcus, a member of the Neiman-Marcus clan. Mrs. Connell stated that she believed that Sylvia was inclined to exaggerate many of her amorous relationships and that she had a great need for recognition.

In connection with Miss Odio’s political activities, Mrs. Connell stated that Miss Odio had been approached by persons in the Cuban community in the hope that she would become a leader of the anti-Castro forces. Mrs. Connell stated that all of the Cubans with whom she had any contact were extremely anti-Kennedy and that Miss Odio shared their sentiments. However, since Mrs. Connell was pro-Kennedy and a recognized liberal in the community, Mrs. Connell believed that Miss Odio soft-pedaled her anti-Kennedy feelings in her presence.

Mrs. Connell reaffirmed that Miss Odio had mentioned meeting Lee Oswald. She further stated that she understood Miss Odio had an hysterical blackout on November 22, immediately after learning of the arrest of Lee Oswald.

Mrs. Connell described John Martin aka Juan Martin as sharing Miss Odio’s anti-Kennedy feelings. Mrs.Connell stated she met Martin twice at Miss Odio’s apartment. She described Martin as being about 5ft. 7 in. tall weighing 130 lbs. and as being a close friend of Miss Odio. She stated that sometime in 1963 Martin drove to Florida where he picked up a car belonging to Sylvia Odio’s brother and drove it back to Dallas.

I questioned Mrs. Connell about Col. Castorr. She said that Col. Castorr’s wife is connected with H. L. Hunt. H. L. Hunt is the father of Lamar Hunt, the owner of the Kansas City football team. The daughter of H. L. Hunt is a Mrs. Hill who is active in right-wing political activities. Mrs. Connell described Mrs. Hill as being in her late 40’s or early 50’s. (It is entirely possible that Mrs. Hill is the mother of Thomas Hill, a former Dallas man in his mid-20’s who now lives in Belmont, Massachusetts, and works as an organizer there for the John Birch Society. Thomas Hill was a leader in the John Birch Society in Dallas before he went to Belmont. Thomas Hill’s name appeared in Jack Ruby’s notebook and may have been taken down when Ruby photographed the “Impeach Earl Warren” sign.)

Mrs. Connell provided the names of the following people who would be familiar with Sylvia Odio: Mrs. Eugene Link (Telephone No. AD 9-3000), Albert Tumaya, Miami, Florida ( a lawyer and a CPA), Marcella Insua, Mr. Insua (Director of Cuban Relief in Dallas), and Hector Isquerido (wife is an employee of Neiman-Marcus).

Mrs. Connell stated that Mrs. Link was a gossipy person and somewhat unreliable; however, she stated that Mrs. Link might have particular information which Mrs. Connell did not have. With respect to all of the Cubans listed, Mrs. Connell indicated that she did not have confidence in their willingness to be forthright and frank if it would hurt the anti-Castro cause. Any direct contact with individual members of the Dallas Cuban community in connection with the Presidential assassination will almost certainly alert the other members

Document # 180-10118-10129 Is a 186 page executive session transcript of Marita Lorenz’s testimony to the HSCA on 5/31/78. Only one page is here and this is page 180, previously withheld because it refers to Marita Lorenz having an abortion.

I went to the JFK Records Collection and pulled this document as it was open in full. It was a bit difficult but I got it.

Richardson Preyer presided as the committee chairman, also present from the committee were Mrss. Dodd and Fithian.

Lawrence W. Krieger was counsel for Marita Lorenz.

On p. 5, Mr. Krieger states that Mrs. Lorenz never executed nor was she asked to execute by the CIA any written agreement of any kind dealing with any information she might have acquired in the course of her employment. (Implying, but not stating, Lorenz worked for the CIA.)

Marita is asked if she ever had an occasion to meet Castro and immediately takes the 5th. Whereupon a grant of immunity from a Judge Bryant was entered into the record as JFK Exhibit No. 122 and handed to Mr. Krieger.

p. 12, Marita states she met Pedro Diaz Lanz when she was in Cuba, in formal meeting rooms with Fidel Castro.

p. 16, Marita states she has seen Frank (Fiorini) Sturgis with ID from the FBI, CIA, and Secret Service in Miami.

p. 19, Marita discusses a plan to kill Castro, apparently given to her by two FBI agents, Frank O’Brien and Frank Lundquist. Sturgis was in Miami and he was to do the briefing. Alex Rorke, who, according to Lorenz, also was an FBI agent, two Cuban brothers and Lorenz drove down to Miami with a shipment of weapons. One of the Cubans was dropped off in the Carolinas for training. The Cubans were the Navarro or Novo brothers. Lorenz was put in a safehouse and stayed there for three weeks. She was talked to by Frank (presumably Sturgis) Alex Rorke, and Pedro Diaz Lanz.

Those familiar with the Marita Lorenz story (See he book “Marita”) know she met Castro February 28, 1959 aboard her fathers yacht, The Berliner. Castro invited her back sometime later and made for her a complimentary uniform of the 26th of July movement. She stayed with Castro for a time traveling with him to the U. S. in 1959 to New York. She meets Frank Sturgis, then known to her as Frank Fiorini. Sturgis convinces her to steal documents from Castro and deliver them to him. She later returns to the U.S., to New York. She has an operation, an abortion, I believe. It is in New York that she is asked to participate in an assassination attempt on Castro.

She was given two capsules of botulinum toxin. Fearing Castro’s agents would discover the capsules she hid them in cold cream, which destroyed the capsules.

p. 23, Marita Lorenz says she met Lee Harvey Oswald in a safehouse in Miami. Pedro Diaz Lanz was also there at the time along with Sturgis, Alex Rorke, Orlando Bosch, and Gerry Patrick Hemming.

She states this was a safehouse run by Operation 40. She describes Operation 40 as a group of trained assassins. She states that Sturgis, Hemming and Lanz were the trainers, as was an unnamed American Colonel.

She states she met Oswald three or four times and this was all in 1961.

During the training of these men she is accidently shot. Bosch patches her up and she is driven back to Miami.

p. 31, She says she met Oswald again sometime after August and prior to November 1963. This is the famous car caravan story from Miami to Dallas. (See Mark Lane’s, “Plausible Denial” p. 294-7)

p. 36, mention is made by a committee man, Mr. Dodd, that Lorenz wrote out the details of her association with Fidel Castro from 1959-1963. He hands it to Lorenz so she can identify it.

Returning to the caravan story, Lorenz had previously been asked to spy upon General Marcos Perez Jimenez by Sturgis. She dos so. As with Castro there is a sexual relationship. A daughter is born. I believe Lorenz married Jimenez. General Jimenez was the former president of Venezuela. Sturgis wanted information on how much aide Jimenez was giving Castro. Robert Kennedy extradites Jimenez in 1963. Lorenz states a lawyer for Jimenez, David W. Walter was threatening her. Apparently, she feared for her life and that is the reason she is at this meeting at Orlando Bosch’s house.

Mr. Dodd is skeptical that they would let Lorenz sit in on this meeting when she has nothing to do with it and is not there for the reasons the others are. He strangely seems to authenticate them by calling them “highly professional operatives” in his question to Lorenz as to why they would let her hear the discussion of the meeting.

She replied she was a member of Operation 40 and had worked for Sturgis before so she was trusted by him.

She states E. Howard Hunt financed Operation 40 from funds he was getting presumably from Washington, D. C.

The caravan consisted of two cars and contained the following people, Lorenz, Oswald, the Novo brothers, Hemming, Pedro Diaz Lanz, Sturgis and Orlando Bosch. They drove straight through for two days rotating drivers. This was on November 16th. In Dallas they stayed at a motel on the outskirts of town.

Lorenz states Jack Ruby came to this motel.

There is an uneasy feeling having Lorenz there. The guys don’t want her there. She doesn’t understand what is going on. She is under the impression they are there to steal weapons from an armory. She claims she has helped them do this before, acting as the decoy. Anyway, she leaves flying back to Miami. She then flies onto New York on November 22. She hears about the assassination on board the plane.

Lorenz states she then discussed this with Sturgis in 1976-77. Just as she is asked whether or not Sturgis admitted if he was involved in the assassination Mr. Preyer interrupts to announce that some members of the committee would like to ask some questions.

On page 68, there is a lovely little exchange between Mr. Dodd and Lorenz’s counsel Mr. Krieger. Apparently, Kreiger was given Lorenz the answers to the questions.

Mr. Dodd. “Counsel, I am asking the witness the questions. I certainly respect your right to be there but it is difficult to be here and sit here and ask the question of the witness and get the answer from you.”

Mr. Krieger. “You are not getting any answer from me.”

Mr. Dodd. “Yes. You are telling her what to say.”

Mr. Krieger. “No, I am not. Not in the slightest.”

Mr. Dodd. “I can hear you; I am not deaf.”

Mr. Krieger. “I am not telling her what to say.”

Mr. Dodd. “We will have a break and you can talk it over with your client. I am trying to get answers from the witness.”

Mr. Krieger. “That is what I want you to get.”

Mr. Dodd. “All right. Do you want to take a minute and take a break and go over this with your client.”

Mr. Kreiger. “If you ask the right questions, there won’t be a problem.”

Mr. Dodd. “I will worry about the questions. I would like to get answers from the witness, not from you.”

Mr. Kreiger. “You won’t get any answers from me, I was not there.”

Mr. Dodd. “Then be quiet when I am asking the witness questions.”

p. 74, when asked directly if E. Howard Hunt appeared at any time at this hotel in Dallas Lorenz said no. Then on p. 75 she leaves the impression that he did.

p. 80, The Committee wants to understand why Lorenz had no ill will towards Bobby Kennedy. Lorenz explains that the Operation 40 people probably thought that Lorenz hated the Kennedys because of Jimenez’s deportation. Lorenz stated that she thinks Bobby Kennedy made a political deal with Romulo Betancourt, the successor to Marcos Perez Jimenez, to extradite him for the theft of millions that Jimenez stole from his country’s treasury and for four counts of murder. Lorenz thought R. F. K. used the General as an example to other dictators not to escape and settle in America. Lorenz had a paternity suit against Jimenez and Irving Jaffe of the U. S. State Dept. asked her to drop it as it was holding up the extradition. David W. Walters had control of a trust fund set up for the daughter. When Jimenez was deported she lost her house and the trust fund but she blamed that on Jaffe and especially Walters . Lorenz claims Walters hired a man to run Lorenz down in a car.

The HSCA people defend Walters calling him a respected lawyer, church goer, and now (in 1978) the U. S. Ambassador to the Vatican.

p. 98, Lorenz thinks Oswald spoke Czechoslovakian.

p. 111-112, Mr. McDonald seems appalled that Lorenz would describe Jack Ruby as “that Mafia punk”.

p. 116, Oddly, Mr. McDonald asks Lorenz if she recalled if Oswald had a limp. What’s that about?

p. 117, Lorenz states she worked for the FBI doing espionage work. Her case agent was Al Chesterone. She says during Watergate she saw a picture in the newspaper and said that’s not Frank Sturgis, it’s Frank Fiorini, and that’s Eduardo. She gave a picture or several taken by Alex Rorke of the training and men at No Name Key to Chesterone. These photos showed herself and Sturgis, Hemming, Lanz and Oswald.

On p. 134, Mr. Kreiger points out the notations made on Marita Lorenz’s written statement which the committee got somehow which was not written for them or to them. (JFK Exhibit No. 123) It was written for Steve Czukas, an intelligence officer with Customs in Miami, Florida.

On page 137 Mr. Kreiger tries to enter into the records a letter from the FBI to Marita Lorenz signed by John F. Malone apparently highly commending Mrs. Lorenz for her work for the FBI.

On p. 138 Mr. Kreiger is allowed to ask Lorenz questions

On p. 139 Lorenz claims Czukas knew of the caravan from Miami to Dallas and that he got this information from someone in the Secret Service.

On p. 140, Lorenz refers to Warren Commission exhibit No. 18 Lee Harvey Oswald’s notebook which has Fiorini’s name in it.

On p. 141 Lorenz claims Sturgis was involved in the assassination of Trujillo.

Mr. McDonald and then later Mr. Dodd do not like that Lorenz and her counsel are reading questions and answers from prepared written papers. Dodd calls it a “script.”

p. 163, in response to a question from Mr. Fithian Lorenz states she did not wait 15 years to tell her story but told it to two agents of the FBI from the Newark field office shortly after the assassination. They were only interested in the whereabouts of Pedro Diaz Lanz and Alex Rorke. Apparently, Rorke was killed two months before the car caravan to Dallas.

The rest of the document is taken up with the HSCA members all but directly accusing Lorenz of perjury. They point out that Oswald is in Russia when Lorenz places him in the Florida Everglades so Lorenz must be lying. Unless there are two Oswalds.

Document # 179-40001-10073 Is a a copy of Document # 180-10108-10349.

Document # 179-40001-10432 Is a 3 page document from Stuart Pollak to J. Lee Rankin dated 6/18/64. This is interesting, it is about deleting certain sections from the testimony of some people.

Passages which if published might involve invasions of the privacy of the witness or which may be thought to be unjustifiably offensive, insulting or defamatory of some person other than the witness, and which may be of insufficient relevance to justify their publication.

Vol. Page

I : 167 Marguerite Oswald: “Reverend French did not show

up” to perform funeral services for LHO.

I : 239 Marguerite: Father of Carol, or Karen, co-employee

of Marguerite at Royal Clothiers in Fort Worth, “was

one of the biggest gangsters in Fort Worth, Tex.”

He was killed by other gangsters.

[Note, there is notation that “Karen’s last name was Bennett- conceivably Karen Bennett-Little Lynn.]

I : 346, 420 Mr. Robert Oswald: Didn’t like Mrs. Paine, and

suspected her of complicity in assassination.

III : 138 Mrs. Paine: Reasons for her separation from her husband.

III : 237 Mr. Truly: Jack Doughtery, employee of TSBD, is “a man who probably needed some treatment when he was a little child, probably of some hormone nature….He has no interest in women…”

III : 336 Mr. Scoggins: When 17 or 18, he was arrested for stowaway on a tug boat.

VI : 214 Mrs. Hill expressed reluctance to have her “twang” her being kidded about it publicized.

VI : 247 Mr. Holland asked that we not publish his statement that official cars park on railroad property because someone “might get in trouble.”

VI : 321 Inspector Sawyer: Charles Givens has previous record for narcotics violations.

VI: 435 Mrs. Roberts: To her sorrow, she was unable to bear children. She is now working for a man who has cancer.

[Note, I think a page is missing here. For below starts on p. -3-]

-3-

IX : 8 Mr. Raigorodsky: He doesn’t like priest at St. Nicholas and suspects him of being “either socialist if not Communist, Communistically inclined.”

X : 73 Mr. Steele: He “was called by the priest and told that [his son Charles][“his son Charles” has

a line through it]

had tried to get in a little girl’s pants.

X : 80 Mr. Geraci : He informed FBI of his friend

[Carlos Bringuier] `s activities. [“Carlos Bringuier” also has a line through it.] Mr. Geraci requested generally that his remarks not be publicized.

X : 250,260 Mr and Mrs. Tobias re Mr. Tobias’ injuries in auto accident; Mr. Tobias states he was and always has been “goofy-headed.”

X : 287 Mr. Barnhorst : Joseph Hummel, resident at YMCA who allegedly knew Oswald, of low intelligence and “no end of trouble to me.”

X : 368 Mr. Davis: Mr. Slack “is just a temperamental hothead.”

Marguerite Oswald also made the following remarks disparaging of others :

I : 130-31, 188 (Criticizing Senator Tower’s reported remarks; I:141(criticizing audacity of Nixon); I : 142,165 (persons Marguerite states have information regarding Oswald’s security connections); I : 178 (disparaging references to Bobby Baker, Charles Van Doren, Fred Korth)

IX : 66 Refusal of Dallas hospitals to treat Oswald baby when ill.

In addition, the record also contains numerous disparaging comments both about and by George DeMohrenschildt and his associates, and also some unflattering comment about other members of the Dallas Russian colony — for example, repeated references to Mr. Bouhe as a busybody, and the like. Although most of this is probably of too great relevance to permit exclusion, below there follows a list of the most egregarious [sic. He probably means egregious.] comments relating to DeMohrenschildt:

[Note, obviously pages are missing here as this list of egregious comments on DeMohrenschildt is not here.]

Document # 179-40002-10050 Is a a copy of Document # 180-10108-10349.

Document # 179-40002-10171 Is a copy of Document # 180-10108-10349.

Document # 179-40002-10314 Is a copy of Document # 180-10108-10349.

---