ASSASSINATION ARCHIVES

AND RESEARCH CENTER

  • Founder’s Page
  • AARC PRESIDENT DAN ALCORN
  • About the AARC
  • NEW AARC Lecture Series – 2024/2025
  • AARC 2014 Conference Videos
  • Analysis and Opinion
  • BILL SIMPICH ARCHIVE
  • COLD WAR CONTEXT
  • CURRENT FOIA LITIGATION
  • Dan Hardway Blog: Sapere Aude
  • Destroyed Files
  • DOCUMENTS AND DOSSIERS
  • FBI Cuba 109 Files
  • FBI ELSUR
  • Gallery
  • JFK Assassination Records – 2025 Documents Release
  • Joe Backes: ARRB Document Release Summaries, July 1995-April 1996
  • JOHN SIMKIN ARCHIVE
  • The Malcolm Blunt Archives
  • MISSING RECORDS
  • News and Views
  • Publication Spotlight
  • Public Library
  • SELECT CIA PSEUDONYMS
  • SELECT FBI CRYPTONYMS
  • CIA Records Search Tool (CREST)
  • AARC Catalog
  • AARC Board of Directors
  • AARC Membership
  • In Memoriam
  • JFK Commemoration Lecture Series – 2024

Copyright AARC

Joe Backes, ARRB Summaries: Page 15.

 

ARRB 13th Batch

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

Filed Under: Uncategorized

Joe Backes, ARRB Summaries: Page 14.

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.


Filed Under: Uncategorized

Joe Backes, ARRB Summaries: Page 13.

 

The 12th Batch

The Federal Register January 30, 1996 p. 2996-2998
Reviewed by Joseph Backes


FBI Documents

1.) Document # 124-10017-10252

2.) Document # 124-10035-10119

3.) Document # 124-10050-10395

4.) Document # 124-10170-10115

5.) Document # 124-10241-10111

6.) Document # 124-10255-10334

CIA Documents

1.) Document # 104-10015-10033

2.) Document # 104-10015-10159

3.) Document # 104-10015-10215

4.) Document # 104-10015-10225

5.) Document # 104-10015-10230

6.) Document # 104-10015-10243

7.) Document # 104-10015-10255

8.) Document # 104-10015-10346

9.) Document # 104-10015-10372

10.) Document # 104-10015-10386

11.) Document # 104-10015-10400

12.) Document # 104-10015-10420

13.) Document # 104-10015-10425

14.) Document # 104-10015-10444

15.) Document # 104-10016-10011

16.) Document # 104-10016-10012

17.) Document # 104-10016-10025

18.) Document # 104-10016-10026

19.) Document # 104-10017-10022

20.) Document # 104-10017-10033

21.) Document # 104-10017-10036

22.) Document # 104-10017-10040

23.) Document # 104-10017-10049

24.) Document # 104-10017-10057

25.) Document # 104-10017-10058

26.) Document # 104-10017-10073

27.) Document # 104-10018-10001

28.) Document # 104-10018-10007

29.) Document # 104-10018-10042

30.) Document # 104-10018-10076

31.) Document # 104-10018-10080

32.) Document # 104-10018-10088

33.) Document # 104-10018-10089

34.) Document # 104-10018-10091

HSCA Documents

1.) Document # 180-10070-10273

2.) Document # 180-10070-10276

3.) Document # 180-10071-10164

4.) Document # 180-10075-10118

5.) Document # 180-10076-10049

6.) Document # 180-10080-10131

7.) Document # 180-10080-10276

8.) Document # 180-10082-10451

9.) Document # 180-10085-10498

10.) Document # 180-10086-10342

11.) Document # 180-10087-10190

12.) Document # 180-10090-10122

13.) Document # 180-10090-10128

14.) Document # 180-10090-10134

15.) Document # 180-10093-10026

16.) Document # 180-10094-10459

17.) Document # 180-10096-10460

18.) Document # 180-10104-10324

19.) Document # 180-10106-10100

20.) Document # 180-10108-10349

21.) Document # 180-10108-10350

22.) Document # 180-10118-10129

23.) Document # 180-10140-10022

NARA Documents

(This is Warren Commission stuff)

1.) Document # 179-40001-10073

2.) Document # 179-40001-10432

3.) Document # 179-40002-10050

4.) Document # 179-40002-10171

5.) Document # 179-40002-10314

FBI Document Review

Document # 124-10017-10252 Is a one page document from SAC, Dallas to Director dated 01/06/64. This concerns FBI fears that the Communist Party, USA might conduct their own investigation of the assassination. DL-6-S states that he had no information about that. William James Lowery Jr. (former DL-2-S) and Mrs. Ruth Lowery (former DL-15-S) likewise stated they had no information.

Document # 124-10035-10119 Is a 21 page document from Henry A. Welke to Director dated 12/03/63. Only two pages are here. The cover page and cover page B identifying some informants.

It was considered advisable to set forth all information from Norfolk Division sources in this report instead of setting forth incomplete information in referenced report.

Following news of the assassination of President Kennedy inquires were initiated on Clarence Otis Pennington, potential bombing suspect; Elizabeth Paukovits Hull, Communist Party member, and Wallace Eugene Branner, contributor to American Nazi Party. Because of their background, these persons were considered suspects.

(There is notation that copies were destroyed in 1973 and 12/16/76.)

Investigation concerning them, however, was curtailed when the Bureau advised that Lee Harvey Oswald was principal suspect and because Norfolk Division had no information linking them to Oswald or the crime.

SA Lemuel W. Kerr observed Clarence Otis Pennington on the morning of November 23, 1963.

This report is classified confidential inasmuch as unauthorized dissemination could jeopardize effectiveness of NF T-5 and NF T-6, who are continuing sources on CP activities.

INFORMANTS

Identity of Informants File Where Located

NF T-1 is Judge Hugh Reid, NF 105-690-7

Juvenile and Domestic Relations

Court, Arlington County, Virginia

NF T-2 is Reverend James W. Cole, CE 105-1010-145

600 Wilcox Street, Marion,

South Carolina

NF T-3 is Earl B. Baker Lewis, Sr. CE 105-1010-211

Rural Mail carrier, Richlands,

North Carolina

NF T-4 is William Lane Forbes NF 157-8-81

Confidential Source Contacted by

SA Lemuel W. Kerr

NF T-7 is Doctor James W. Holley, III NF 137-969

PCI (RAC)

Document # 124-10050-10395 Is a three page document from SAC, New Orleans to Director, dated 2/25/67. This is a really, interesting one!

For information purposes, No. 1309-C advised on February 24, 1967 that he received information that the individual using the name Clay Bertrand is actually Clay Shaw. Informant stated he called Louis Ivon, investigator for Garrison, and told Ivon that he had heard that Clay Shaw and Clay Bertrand were one and the same, and although Ivon would not confirm this information, [Ivon] appeared very upset and wanted to know where informant developed this information.

Aaron Kohn, managing director, Metropolitan Crime Commission, advised February 24, he had received information that Clay Bertrand and Clay Shaw were one and the same. Kohn advised he picked this information up from one of 89 news sources that contacted him on February 24, 1967.

Kohn advised that he also received information that there is a man named Clay Bertrand living in Lafayette, Louisiana, a real estate broker that lived in New Orleans about the time of the assassination of President Kennedy. Kohn unable to supply additional information re Clay Bertrand of Lafayette, Louisiana.

Both 1309-C and Aaron Kohn advised that Clay Shaw was the former managing director of International Trade Mart, New Orleans, Louisiana.

Both Kohn and 1309-C advised that information available to them lead them to believe that Shaw has homosexual tendencies.

1309-C advised that he had received information from a person that is a friend of a friend of Bill Reed of WWl-TV news service, New Orleans. This fourth-hand information is that Sam “Monk” Zelden, prominent New Orleans attorney, has in his possession an application, not otherwise identified, in which Oswald as a reference listed Jack Ruby. No. 1309-C does not know what kind of an application or if this is even true.

No investigation conducted. Information being received from established sources.

Document # 124-10170-10115 Is a copy of Document # 124-10035-10119.

Document # 124-10241-10111 Is a memorandum from Regis L. Kennedy about Pershing Oliver Gervais.

Captioned informant called my home at about 8:00 PM and asked for me. My wife told him that I was at the office. Gervais then called the office and spoke to me. He stated that he wanted to tell me again that he nothing to do with the Garrison investigation of the Kennedy investigation.

Gervais stated that Garrison is trying to hatch an egg and “you know what happens when an egg does not hatch, there is a big smell”.

As Gervais is a close associate of Garrison he is being discontinued as a PCI and no contact will be made with him until this matter is concluded.

It is my personal opinion that Gervais was trying to find out if I was working at the time of the call.

Document # 124-10255-10334 Is a copy of Document # 124-10035-10119.

CIA Document Review

Document # 180-10015-10033 Is missing.

Document # 180-10015-10159 Is missing.

Document # 104-100015-10215 Is a one page document from Brussels to Director dated 11/29/63. They report no traces on Oswald.

Document # 104-10015-10225 Is missing.

Document # 104-10015-10230 Is a one page document from Director to The Hague, France dated 11/29/63.

1. We are looking for evidence of the travel of Lee Oswald and his Russian wife on their May and June 1962 return from the Soviet Union. ONHA 23606 from the Hague to [digraph]TOPAZ, dated 15 June 62, transmitted film of eight U.S. Passports photographed by [crypt] at Amsterdam Schipol airport around then. Please check film on outside chance one is Oswald.

2. Pls slug answer only as above. Send copies if you find Oswald’s.

Document # 104-10015-10243 Is a one page document from Chief of Station, the Hague, to Chief of WE dated 11/29/63.

Ref A. HAGU 5063

B. HAGU 5069

Attached for Headquarters information are three recent [crypt] reports and one memorandum for the record, the essence of which was cabled to Headquarters in reference A. We are also attaching a list of documents, noted in Hague station card indices, which make mention of persons by the name of Oswald. Due to the age of these documents, none of them are now available at the Station.

It is signed by Richard R. Consley

Document # 104-10015-10255 Is a one page document from Frankfurt to Director dated 11/30/63.

Film routinely forwarded KURIOT. Search files reveals no prints made of [digraph]TOPAZ.

Document # 104-10015-10346 Is a 2 page document, Memorandum for Record dated 11/27/63.

1. On 27 November 1963, [crypt] showed Richard R. Consley a memorandum which the Dutch Foreign Office had written to [crypt]. This memo was dated 25 November 1963, and it reported a conversation which one Mr. Slot, a member of the Dutch Foreign Office, had had with Ricardo Santos, 3rd Secretary of the Cuban Embassy, at a reception given by the Soviet Ambassador on 7 November 1963.

2. Mr. Slot reportedly asked Santos a question concerning the attacks made against the Cuban mainland by Cuban refugees. Santos’ reply to this questions was, “Mr. Slot, just wait and you will see what we can do. It will happen soon.” Asked by Mr. Slot to be more specific about what would happen soon, Santos merely replied, “Just wait, just wait.”

3. The memorandum goes on to say that Santos has a brother living in the U. S. His name and address are not known, but he and Santos write to each other regularly. This brother is reportedly pro-Castro, but went to the U.S. at the insistence of his wife, who is “conservative”. The subject matter of the letters between the brothers is reportedly nothing more than “family affairs”.

OSVALD “dit DORVAL,” Jean Nicolas

WNH-2864

OSVALDO-Silva-Baetzner, Carlos

201-280299*

OSWALD Brothers

MSZA 450, file 8-6, 23 Aug 50 *

OSWALD, Felix

ONHA-5328, 27 Jul 55; EAVA-11965, 10 Oct 55

OSWALD, Jean (Alias Jean DORVAL)

OFPA-9382, 12 Oct 54

OSWALD, Jean

ONHW-2059, 16 July 54, Attachment 1

OSWALD, Jean Nicholas

ONHW-2581, 16 Nov 54

Oswald, Rudolf

MSZA-450, file 8-6, 23 Aug 50*

OSWALD, Viktor

MSZA-450, file 8-6, 23 Aug 50*

OSWALD, Victor

WNHA-707, 21 July 50

OSWALD, Victor

WNHA-514, 27 Mar 50

OSWALD, Victor

WSM 375, 11 Apr 50

OSWALD, Victor

WSM 375: WNHA-705

OSWALD, Werner

MSZA 450, 23 Aug 50*

Same document. File [ ] was entitled “East-West Trade, MSZA Reports.” File destroyed 17-1-57.

Written notation CIA file number [ ] – 6 – 6/4

Document # 104-10015-10372 Is missing.

Document # 104-10015-10386 Is a one page document from Director to The Hague dated 11/27/63.

1. New York Times report confirmed by Immigration records shows Oswald, his wife and four month child arrived New York 13 June 1962 aboard Holland American Liner Maasdam.

2. Also request checks with consulates Rotterdam and Amsterdam.

3. PLS slug future traffic on this subject RYBAT GPFLOOR only.

Document # 104-10015-10400 Is a one page document from the Hague to Director dated 11/27/63.

1. [ ] reports that Paul Degroot learned of President Kennedy’s assassination as he was watching TV on the night of 22 Nov. Degroot and wife had just returned home from vacation.

2. A summary repeat summary of Degroot’s spontaneous reaction to the news of President Kennedy’s assassination folls: President Kennedy’s death is not good because it was with much difficulty that he was brought to the point where nuclear test ban treaty could be signed. Who knows what will happen now. Now Mao will get his chance. President Kennedy was not a free agent anymore and he was killed because he went to far in appeasing the Soviet Union.

Document # 104-10015-10420 Is missing.

Document # 104-10015-10425 Is missing.

Document # 104-10015-10444 Is a one page document from CIA to Dept. of State, White House, and the FBI. It is dated 11/28/63.

Our station in the Hague has reported that on 23 November 1963, a local Castroite named Maria Snethlages talked to third secretary Ricardo Santos of the Cuban Embassy in the Hague and said that she knew the “Mr. Lee” (sic) who murdered President Kennedy. She characterized “Lee” as a man full of hate and violence, and speculated that he had been “misused by a group.” She said she had written to Gibson (undoubtful [sic, “undoubtedly”] Richard Gibson, U.S. citizen of Lausanne Switzerland, born 13 May 1935, a Castro sympathizer, who had visited the Netherlands recently and was in contact both with the Soviet Ambassador and the Cuban embassy).

Later on 23 November, Maria Snethlage talked again to third secretary Santos and said that “Mr. Lee of the Fair Play for Cuba Committee” had been slandered. It was another person, “named Lee Oswald,” who had done it. Snethlage is reported to have been in Cuba in January and again in May 1963.

Dutch authorities have informed us that on 7 November, in talking about attacks by Cuban refugees against the Cuban mainland, Santos had replied “Just wait and you will see what we can do. It will happen soon.” Asked to be more precise, Santos had replied “just wait, just wait” Santos is reported to have pro-Castro brother in the U. S. A.

A very sensitive source reports that after his conversations with Snethlage Santos was furious because she had contacted him.

Document # 104-10016-10011 is missing

Document # 104-10016-10012 is missing

Document # 104-10016-10025 is a one page document from Director to Berlin, Frankfurt, Bonn, and The Hague dated 12/02/63.

1. We need confirmatory info on the travel of Lee Oswald with his wife and oldest child on their return from the Soviet Union to the United States. The American Embassy in Moscow gave them two train tickets from Moscow to Rotterdam on 1 June 1962 and they presumably left that day. Infant needed no ticket. They sailed from Rotterdam on the Maasdam on three June 1962 and arrived in New York on 13 June 1962. Presume their train route was Moscow Bialystok Warsaw Berlin Hannover, but not sure of routing from there on. Pls check German railroad schedule.

2. Names are Lee Harvey Oswald, born 18 October in New Orleans, LA., traveling on U.S. passport 1733242 issued 10 September 1962, Marina Nikolayevna Pusakova or Prusakova Oswald born 19 July 1941 in Minsk, presumably on Soviet passport, and infant June Lee Oswald born 15 Feb. 62.

3. German mission addresses pls check own files and liaison records and all appropriate police, immigration, passport, visa, and travel records. Cable data on travel and on any other info you have on them.

4. For HAGU: pls recheck your liaison and ship manifests on basis above new info.

Document # 104-10016-10026 Is missing.

Document # 104-10017-10022 Is a one page document from Berlin to Director dated 12/03/63.

1. Current German railway schedule shows daily connection Moscow-Brest-Warsaw change over at East Berlin for Loehne-Osnabrueck-Bentheim-Ammersfoort-Utrecht-Rotterdam. Leave Moscow at 1815 and arrive at Rotterdam approx 40 hours later at 1036 hours.

2. Same train without changeover in East Berlin goes on to Helmstedt, Braunchweig-Hannover on to Koln, but changeover possible at Hannover with stops at Menden, Loehne, Osnabrueck, Bentheim, Ammersfoort, Amsterdam, Utrecht and Rotterdam.

3. Also possible for a passenger using this route to transfer in West Berlin to trains destined for Hannover or Hamburg and in these cities to board one of several daily trains to Rotterdam.

4. Check of all available West Berlin records on subjects ref negative.

Document # 104-10017-10033 Is missing

Document # 104-10017-10036 Is missing

Document # 104-10017-10040 Is missing

Document # 104-10017-10049 Is a one page document from Director to The Hague dated 12/05/63.

1. FBI very interested in name and address and details on Ricardo Santos’ pro-Castro brother who lives in U. S. Can you learn this from [ ]NAPSIS for passage to FBI here?

2. The Mr. Lee mentioned by Maria Snetlage was probably Vincent Lee who replaced Richard Gibson as head of the Fair Play For Cuba Committee in New York.

Document # 104-10017-10057 Is missing

Document # 104-10017-10058 Is missing

Document # 104-10017-10073 Is a one page document from The Hague to Director dated 12/04/63.

1. [ ] records show that one M. Oswald, male Russian citizen born 17 July 1941 in Archangel, residence Moscow, entered Netherlands 3 June 1962 by train at Oldenzaal border point.

2. In spite discrepancies, which can easily be attributed to haste and carelessness on part of border personnel, HAGU inclined believe above data refers to Oswald’s wife Marina.

3. [ ] checking with Holland America line for ship manifest information.

Document # 104-10018-10001 Is missing

Document # 104-10018-10007 Is a one page document from The Hague to Director dated 12/09/63.

[ ]NAPSIS has no further info re: Santos brother. Will have

[ ]SIGMA alert niece to note address on PBPRIME mail for Santos.

The HSCA Review

Document # 180-10070-10273 Is a 7 page document dated 1/19/78. It is an interview of Secret Service Agent Abraham Bolden by HSCA staffer Jim Kelly and Harold Rese.

The HSCA staffers thought Bolden could provide details on a possible conspiracy to assassinate President Kennedy in Chicago on November 2, 1963.

Bolden was from East St. Louis, Illinois and joined the Secret Service in 1959. He worked counterfeit cases in Chicago and in the summer of 1961 he was assigned to the White House Detail. He was the first Negro agent assigned to this detail. Bolden spent only three months in this detail and was evidently shocked at what he saw. He complained to his supervisor, Harvey Henderson, and to James Rowley, then head of Secret Service about the general laxity and the heavy drinking among the agents who were assigned to protect the President. He also resented the slurs against blacks which were called to his attention from time to time, eg., the separate housing facilities for black agents on southern trips. He was transferred back to Chicago.

While attending a refresher course in Washington in mid-May, 1964, Bolden was returned to Chicago on a subterfuge and subsequently arrested and charged with soliciting a bribe, obstruction of justice and conspiracy in an alleged attempt to sell SS file information to a Chicago counterfeiter. His first trial, in July 1964, resulted in a mistrial; his second trial, a month later, in a conviction. He was sentenced to serve six years. He appealed and in June, 1966, the U. S. Supreme Court declined to hear the case.

The writers found Bolden not at all bitter about the 1964 case although we did not dwell on it. We questioned him about the events which allegedly took place in Chicago just prior to and on 2 November 1963.

Bolden told us that around October 30, 1963, he recalled a long teletype message coming in to the Chicago office from the FBI. It was unusual, he told us, for the FBI to cooperate on any cases with the SS. But Mary Cooney, a clerical person working in the office at the time, and now believed to be deceased, took this message to the ARSAIC, Maurice Martineau. Prior to the telex, there was a phone call from the FBI. Bolden doesn’t know if it was a local FBI (Chicago) or Washington Hdq. calling.

There were only about 13 agents in the Chicago SS office at the time and the substance of the teletype and the telephone call alleging a threat against the life of the President on an upcoming trip (2 Nov) to Chicago was quickly disseminated.

Surveillance was undertaken by the agents on two of the four subjects identified with the threat. Because Bolden was black, he and another black agent, Conrad Cross, were excluded from the “north side” Chicago surveillance because it was a predominantly white neighborhood. Through a series of blunders, the surveillance was “blown” by Agent Jay Lloyd Stocks and the two subjects were apprehended and brought in to the Chicago SS office. Bolden’s awareness of the progress of this surveillance came partly from office gossip and partly from his monitoring the SS radio channels in his car. In any event, he said Agent Stocks was subject of some earthly comments from his fellow agents.

Bolden recalls that James Rowley called from Washington and suggested that Martineau use a COS file number. Bolden explained that a CO (for Central Office) number was issued only in or from Washington Headquarters and an “S” for Secret or Sensitive was given when they wanted to sequester information contained in the file. He explained that these files were kept separate from all others and that SS could say they had nothing in their files on a subject when in fact a “COS” file existed. He said as far as he knew, these were never destroyed (underscoring ours). In addition to the COS file number, Bolden said that all agents who were involved in this surveillance activity were told by ATSAIC Martineau to turn in their notebooks. All memos were typed, he told us, by a Charlotte Klapkowski (sp?) who is now working at Headquarters in Washington and is close to retirement age. “now don’t expect her to tell you anything. She is very loyal to the Service and wouldn’t say anything she thought would hurt them in any way,” he told us. The memo copies were all sequestered by Charlotte on this surveillance.

Bolden recalls that in addition to Stocks, Agents Strong, Motto and Noonan were involved in the apprehension of the two men. On Saturday morning, November 2, Bolden was in the office early. He recalls that the interrogation rooms were littered with cigarette butts and coffee cups, evidence of a night-long interrogation. He saw only one of the two men they had apprehended. He describes this man as swarthy, stocky, “a truck driver type” is the way he described him. The man was 5’9″ or 5’10”, wearing a jacket and shirt with open collar. His hair was dark and he had a crew cut which is described as “Detroit style.” The writers showed Bolden our Committee “mug” book containing 1 through 71 and 73-81, {Interesting, how many “mug” shots did they have? Why delete #72?} and he stated that the facial structure of photo # 74 was similar to that of the subject being questioned by agents in the office. Picture # 74 is listed as “unidentified – possibly Jim Braden.” It is directly underneath Thomas Vallee’s picture in the mug book. Vallee, #76, was not recognized by Bolden at all, although he was familiar with the case which was described in the article written by Edwin Black in the Chicago Independent, a now-defunct publication, dated November 1975. On page ten of this article entitled “the Plot to kill JFK in Chicago, November 2, 1963 – Twenty Days Before Dallas,” the writer is checking all arrests in the city of Chicago. He says: “Then we checked every arrest in the entire city on those days. Who arrested them? Why? Any weapons? It took weeks. In the process we develop leads: Look for Cuban names. Look for the name Bradley. Look for the name Braden. Nothing came of it.” (underscoring ours).

Bolden recalls that one of the men had a Spanish-sounding name. He said the SS agents took their pictures with a Polaroid camera. The agents’ notes were typed up and the memos were then taken to O’Hare Airport and given to a crew member (pilot?) of a commercial flight to Washington where he believes an SS employee met the flight and delivered the material to Headquarters. The two suspects in Chicago were turned over to the Chicago Police who took them away in a patrol wagon. He recalls that at least one of the two had a Spanish-sounding name.

Bolden recalls Tom Mosely’s name mentioned in the office around that period (Nov 1963). He said when Agent Tom Kelly arrived in Chicago from Dallas on or about 11/26/63, he mentioned a John Heard or Hurt. They searched the office card files for a similar sounding name. He also recalls that he and Conrad Cross were sent to check out a mixed Black-Spanish neighborhood on Rockwell Street to determine where a certain person who resided there was on 11/22/63. They were unable to locate the person, who had moved, and Bolden could not recall the subject’s name. The PRS had a record of the person from a previous threat. Bolden was critical of the activities of PRS, saying they did not do a thorough job. He did not further elaborate.

Bolden, whose 43rd birthday coincided with our interview, was accompanied by his wife, Barbara. He told the writers that he is now working for the National Lead company, 1800 S. Peoria Street, Chicago, as night supervisor in quality control. He is also a minister in the Islamic Faith and teaches a course in religion in Chicago.

Bolden told the writers that he made notes of some of the things that he uncovered in connection with the events of October 30 – November 2, 1963 but that when he was arrested in 1964, this notebook was seized by the government (Secret Service). He said that he would have no objection to testifying in Washington under oath relating to the matters which he discussed with us in this interview.

Bolden related to the interviewers that he was the informant who supplied the information for Edwin Black’s article in the Chicago Independent, Nov., 1975

Document # 180-10070-10276 Is a five page interview summary with Edward Tucker dated 1/19/78.

On 1/19/78, the writers interviewed subject at his office (L-3) at captioned address (First National Bank of Chicago, FNB Plaza Dearborn and Madison Streets Chicago, Illinois) Tucker was with the Chicago office of the Secret Service in November 1963. We talked to him about a projected visit by President J. F. Kennedy which we had been told was canceled at the last minute.

Tucker told us that for security reasons, on or about October 30, 1963, he recalls going to interview a subject named Vallee, who was supposed to represent a threat to the President. This was a customary practice prior to Presidential visits. Accompanied by Agent Tom Strong, he visited Vallee at his roominghouse on the north side of Chicago. He was troubled by his conversation with Vallee, who he says had one or more rifles in his possession.

Absent any Federal sanctions, Tucker reported back to the Secret Service office about his misgivings. The next day Vallee’s landlady, whom Tucker suspects was the informant, called the Secret Service office and said that Vallee had told her that he was not going to work on Saturday, November 2nd, the day JFK was coming to Chicago. Tucker said it was this information which caused the Secret Service to alert the Chicago Police Department to place surveillance on Vallee. He is aware that they did and that Vallee was arrested by two Chicago Police officers on November 2nd before the President was due in Chicago.

[Note, I corrected what I believe to be a typo. The document actually says November 22nd, which cannot be correct.]

On that Saturday morning, Tucker’s assignment had been to go to the airport (O’Hare) and meet the President. He did not recall that he was to ride in the Pilot car in the motorcade, but he said he did not go into the Secret Service office downtown and was therefore unaware of any other subjects that the Secret Service might have had in custody at the time. If this happened, he was not informed about it, he said.

When he reached the airport in the morning of November 2, 1963, he was told that the President had canceled his trip to Chicago but that several Members of Congress had arrived and the Secret Service was told to escort them to the Army-Air Force Academy game at Soldier Field. He thinks he went home instead.

Tucker said he was never aware of a telex or tele-type message which came in to the Chicago office from the FBI or anyone else regarding a threat against the President in Oct – November 1963.

The clerical force at the Secret Service consisted of Mary Cooney, whom Tucker said is now deceased, Charlotte Klapkowski, now at Headquarters in Washington and a June Trepinis and Elaine Shelhammer whose present whereabouts are unknown to him.

Tucker could provide no further information on the aforementioned visit in November 1963.

He said he would visit his old office and see if he could look at some old files and maybe refresh his recollection or the events of that period.

We questioned Tucker about a memo he wrote, 12/3/63 (q. v.) concerning Tom Moseby and guns for Cubans “who may be involved in the assassination of the late President John F. Kennedy.” After much prompting, Tucker recalled that Moseby was a Secret Service informant, known as 2-1-266, who was involved with a lot of Latin types, some of whom were bus drivers working in the city of Chicago. He doesn’t recall what happened to the matter but feels that it came about after November 22. He does not recall the Secret Service picking up any of these people in the October 30 – November 2nd, 1963 period.

Tucker was a clerk with the FBI before he entered the Secret Service in 1959. He has been retired for the past 6 years and is in charge of security for the First National Bank of Chicago. He resides at [blank] Elk Grove Village, Illinois (312) 437-2715.

Document # 180-10071-10164 Is a 6 page interview summary with Gary McLeod dated 3/06/78.

There is sometimes a white sheet of paper on these documents used to insulate the original from the metal of a paper clip or some clasp. Unfortunately, this seems to have been left on by some dufus somewhere and it has obliterated a few words of the text.

Agent Gary McLeod when appointed to the Secret Service was assigned to the Chicago Field Office. He (?) there until September 1965 and was then transferred to the Intelligence Division in Washington, D.C. In 1969, he was assigned to the Liaison Division. In January 1976 he was transferred to the Portland, Oregon Field Office. He stated that he has attended numerous “In Service’ classes and schools and each time they become more advanced and technical.

His recollection of the November 2, 1963 proposed Presidential visit is that he met Agent Robert Motto at the stadium on the morning of November 2 and was given a post assignment. A short time later he was notified that the President’s visit to Chicago had been canceled and he was told to go home. He believes that he heard at a later date that the trip was canceled due to the President having a cold. He recalled the name Thomas Arthur Vallee. He remembers Ed Tucker (former Secret Service agent) being assigned to the Vallee case and that it involved guns, but does not recall anything else about the incident. He does not recall the Chicago Police Department becoming involved. He remembers reading the Edwin Black story in the Chicago Independent, several years ago, and couldn’t imagine where he got the information pertaining to the four subjects suspected of being involved in a threat against the President and of Jay Stock’s surveillance. Agent McLeod stated that he felt sure that if this incident had occurred, he as part of the Chicago Field Office would have been aware or informed of what had taken place.

Relative to Abraham Bolden, Agent McLeod stated that he and Bolden were sent to Secret Service school in Washington. The first day of school, he believes on a Monday, Director Rowley had made opening remarks to the class. Someone told him and Bolden that they were to return to Chicago because of a large counterfeiting operation. They were transported back to their hotel, the “Willard,” by one or two inspectors. He believes one was Arvin Dahlquist. They were told to turn over their weapons, because there would not be time to notify the Airline agent. He went along with this, not suspecting anything was wrong. Upon landing at O’Hare Airport, they were met by Agent Dick Jordan and driven into Chicago to the Old Court House. The U.S. Attorneys Office was next to the Secret Service Office. He was taken into the Secret Service Office and Bolden was taken into the U. S. Attorneys office. McLeod, upon entering his office, learned that Bolden was being arrested. He only remembers general conversation with Bolden, on the plane back to Chicago. He did not know anything was wrong and Bolden never gave any impression of anything being wrong. Gary McLeod stated that he liked Abe Bolden. He was impressed with him. McLeod stated that he was personally upset when Bolden got into trouble. He stated that after Bolden’s arrest, he believes he heard that Bolden may have been involved in other things but this was strictly hearsay.

Agent McLeod stated that he remembers Conrad Cross well. Cross was a friend of Abe Bolden. He believes Cross was with the I.R. S. before he joined the Secret Service. He considered Cross a very bright guy with a chip on his shoulder. Cross was very touchy. McLeod stated that he did not believe it was a racial type of thing.

McLeod stated that he doesn’t remember ever having worked a case with Conrad Cross.

Agent McLeod’s recall of the April 1963 visit by President Kennedy to Mayor Daley was that there was an evening parade. He stated that there was no significant threat investigation on that visit. He stated when word was received of a Presidential visit, everything else was put aside in preparation for the visit. He stated that he had never been assigned to the White House Detail but had been sent to other cities for Presidential visits as part of a manpower pull. He stated that Presidential Protection is the Secret Service’s primary responsibility and that investigation of threats is ongoing during the regular work process.

Agent McLeod remembers the name of Tom Mosley and that he was an informant and also a bus driver. He believes they may have gotten Mosely from another agency. Mosely was not his informant. He has no recall of Mosley being involved in any gun deals. He cannot single out any particular group as posing the possibility of a threat against the President.

He remembers the Chicago office receiving official notification of President Kennedy’s death. He stated that the entire Chicago office was involved in the post assassination investigation. He remembers the gun being checked out at Klein’s Gunshop. He had no recall of any Cuban connections or organization in Chicago.

He has no recall of the Secret Service I.D. book being recalled after the assassination, although the color of the I.D. card was changed at a later date.

Agent McLeod stated that as a result of the assassination of President Kennedy several changes occurred. Intelligence agents combined with local agents for advancing a trip. The liaison with other agencies in law enforcement became better, and training took on different facets, such as simulated motorcades. The Liaison Unit was formed as a result of the Warren Commission.

Some of the Intelligence Division duties are to refer threat information to the Field Offices and advance work. He stated that any conversation with the Field Offices were followed up with a teletype.

He stated that he has heard of trips being altered but has never heard of one being canceled because of a threat.

Document # 180-10075-10118 Is a listed as a 4 page document on the RIF but is really 5 pages, 3 of which are the interview summary dated 6/15/78.

George Hickey is retired from the Secret Service since November 1971. In 1963, Hickey transferred from the White House Police to the Secret Service. After President Kennedy’s assassination, he was assigned to President Johnson up to and including the election. He was then reassigned to Vice President Humphrey’s detail. In 1969, he was assigned to the Washington Field Office and remained there until he retired. He attended Treasury School and Secret Service School. Hickey stated that while in the Secret Service he was mostly involved in the driving of autos during visits.

George Hickey stated that he accompanied the President’s limousine and the follow-up car on the plane to Love field. At Love Field the cars were turned over to Agent Kinney. Hickey was assigned to ride in the follow-up car and placed in charge of the AR15 automatic weapon. Hickey stated that he placed the AR15 on the rear floor of the follow up car.

As the motorcade proceeded, Hickey stated that it was a normal, boisterous, friendly crowd. After they made the turn from Houston onto Elm, the Presidential limousine was about 20 feet ahead when Hickey heard what he thought sounded like a firecracker coming from his right rear. He stood up and looked towards the right rear but observed nothing. He heard excited talking in the front of his car and turned to the front. He observed that the President had slumped forward and to the left. Mrs. Kennedy appeared to be aiding him and he was coming to an upright position. Hickey then heard two reports sounding like gunfire and saw what he described as a cloud of dust appear from the right rear of President Kennedy’s head. Hickey stated that he would guess at about 3 to 4 seconds between the first and second shots. He stated that the second and third shots were almost simultaneous.

The motorcade was traveling about 10 miles per hour. Hickey stated he reached down and brought up the AR15. Hickey stated that by the time he cocked the AR15 and turned to the right rear, the follow-up car was starting under the underpass. He stated that he saw Clint Hill holding onto the back of the Presidential limousine. Hill looked back at the follow-up car and shook his head as if the President was seriously injured. They traveled at a high rate of speed to Parkland Hospital.

On arrival at Parkland, Hickey placed the gun back onto the floor of the follow-up car. He stated that it was the duty of the driver of the follow-up car to check the AR15 out to see if it was loaded or unloaded. He went inside the hospital and the President was in the Emergency Room. Hickey went back outside and brought Kenny O’Donnell in to Mrs. Kennedy.

Hickey stated that he drove the follow-up car back to Love Field by himself. He helped place the cars on the C130 aircraft and tied them down. He flew back to Washington on the C130. On arrival they were met by an escort and taken to the White House garage where the vehicles were placed under the security of the White House Police. Floyd Boring came to the garage and told Hickey that statements were being taken at the White House. He proceeded to that location and gave his statement.

I asked Hickey about the theory of Howard Donohue, who has stated that Hickey shot President Kennedy with the AR15. Hickey stated that Donohue has caused him many problems and harassment. He wanted to sue Donohue but was told by private counsel and Secret Service counsel that according to Maryland law he didn’t have much of a case. He stated that with the Secret Service agents and two presidential aides in the follow-up car, if he had fired the AR15 someone would definitely have heard it — unless you want to believe they were all in on a conspiracy.

Document # 180-10076-10049 Is a copy of document # 180-10076-10062 from the 11th batch. It is a police report on David Ferrie.

Document # 180-10080-10131 Is a two page document from Special Agent Francis F. Uteg, USSS dated 6/23/66 on Thomas Arthur Vallee.

Synopsis

Investigation at Chicago revealed that the subject may have returned to Tennessee.

(A) INTRODUCTION:

Reference is made to:

(1) M/R of SA James S. Griffiths, Chicago, dated May 6, 1966

(2) M/R of SA Roger C. Grunwald, Sacramento, dated May 10, 1966

(3) M/R of SA G. Wesley Dunlap, Jr., New York, dated June 6, 1966

The subject was brought to the attention of this Service on October 29, 1963, by Lieutenant Berkeley Moyland, Chicago Police Department. Lt. Moyland advised that the subject had made extreme comments regarding the administration at that time and that he believed Vallee was in possession of weapons. It was later disclosed that Vallee’s room contained a M-1 rifle, a Carbine, and .22 calibre revolver with approximately 1,000 rounds of ammunition. This included bandoliers and clips for the rifle.

(B) GENERAL INVESTIGATION:

On June 23, 1966 the writer interviewed Charles Peterson, President of the Printing Pressmen’s Assistants union which is a part of the International Printing Pressmen and Assistants Union of North America, 222 West Adams Street, room 325, Chicago, Illinois, telephone number 782-3417. He disclosed that the subject had come from Rogersville, Tennessee, in June, 1963, and had gained employment at the I.P.P. Lithographic Service, 625 West Jackson, Chicago, Illinois, and worked for Mr. Nemo Vola until January, 1964. At that time the subject stated that he was going to return to Tennessee.

(C) BACKGROUND AND IDENTITY OF SUBJECT:

Thomas Arthur Vallee is described as white; male; DOB 11/15/33; POB Chicago, Illinois; 5-6; 155 lbs; blue eyes; brown hair; Social Security number [blank]. U. S. Army Serial number 17-460-615; FBI number 677-475 E.

[Note, there is a notation that the blanked out Social Security number is incorrect. This appears to have been written by F. B. Stoner on 10-7-66. The correct number is likewise blacked out.]

(F) DISPOSITION:

Case remains closed.

Two copies of this report and two photographs of the subject are being forwarded to the Nashville office with the request that they attempt to locate the subject in Rogersville, Tennessee. If the subject, in fact, does reside in the Nashville office district, the complete Chicago file in this case will be forwarded to that office.

One copy of this report is being forwarded to the New York and Sacramento offices for their information.

Document # 180-10080-10276 Is a 4 page document dated 2/16/78. It is a letter from Mr. Robert O. Goff to Mr. Blakey.

Reference is made to your recent request that duly authorized representatives of the Select Committee on Assassinations be granted access to certain information in Secret Service files relative to the assassination of former President Kennedy.

In that connection, the information you requested is provided below:

1. Names and addresses of the five Secret Service agents assigned to the protective Research Section and responsible for the processing and control of threats:

Glen A. Bennett

U. S. Secret Service

1800 g. Street, N.W., Rm. 825

Washington, D.C. 20223

Elmer C. Lawrence

705 Tam O’Shanter Avenue

Sun city Center, Florida 33570

Walter Pine

4347 Carmelo Drive # 302

Wedgewood West

Annandale, Virginia 22003

Deeter B. Flore

3703 Bangor Street, S.E.

Washington, D.C. 20020

Thomas White

Route 3, Box 182-A

Miami, Oklahoma 74354

2. Additional names and addresses of Secret Service staff members assigned to the Chicago Filed Office in November, 1963:

Edward Z. Tucker

[blank]

John E. Russell, Jr.

305 Arlington

Grand Haven, Michigan 49417

Nemo Ciochina

U. S. Secret Service

Suite 211

575 N. Pennsylvania Street

Indianapolis, Indiana 46204

Joseph E. Noonan, Jr.

U. S. Secret Service

Room 742

219 South Dearborn Street

Chicago, Illinois 60604

John Gorman

FBI

Chicago, Illinois

Louis B. Sims

Interpol

Department of Justice

9th & Pennsylvania, N.W.

Washington, D. C. 20530

Joseph Paolella

American Security Agents

6600 N. Lincoln

Lincolnwood, Illinois 60545

June M. Terpinas

U. S. Secret Service

Room 742

219 South Dearborn Street

Chicago, Illinois 60604

Elaine J. Shelhamer

U. S. Secret Service

Room 742

219 South Dearborn Street

Chicago, Illinois 60604

Carol (Schultz) Dean

1750 Old Mead Road

McLean, Virginia 22101

James Plichta (Deceased)

Stephen Maynard (Deceased)

Mary Cooney (Deceased)

Jay L. Stocks

U. S. Secret Service

Room 317

Federal Bldg. & U. S. Courthouse

Detroit, Michigan 48226

Sandra J. Lipetra

U. S. Secret Service

Room 742

219 South Dearborn Street

Chicago, Illinois 60604

Charlotte Klapkowski

U. S. Secret Service

1800 G. Street, N. W. rm. 825

Washington, D.C. 20223

Rosemary Lacey

San Francisco, California

(last known)

Additional names and addresses of Secret Service staff members assigned to the Miami Field Office in November, 1963:

Edward Mougin

8360 Glastonburg Court

Annandale, Virginia 22003

Everett Curry

136 N. E. 28th Terrace

Miami, Florida 33137

Charles Howell

U. S. Secret Service

Suite 600

1310 L Street, N. W.

Washington, D.C. 20005

Ruth Aghababian

15600 N. W. 7th Avenue #620

Miami, Florida 33169

3. Access to documents relating to presidential protection and security during the period, March 1963 – November, 1963 will be provided to members of your staff at their convenience upon prior notice that the staff intends to review the material. Since some of the materials are classified, the Staff employee or employees reviewing the files should have and be able to exhibit evidence of the requisite security clearance to review classified information.

4. The file on Joseph A. Milteer is maintained in the Intelligence Division of the Secret Service and is available for review. The only material available relative to the groups requested is contained in that file.

5. Material relating to “Project Starr” is maintained by the Technical Development and Planning division of the Secret Service. Since some of the materials are classified, the staff employee or employees reviewing the files should have and be able to exhibit evidence of requisite security clearance to review classified information.

6. The file on Thomas A. Vallee is maintained in the Intelligence division of the Secret Service and is available for review.

Mr. Rowley’s current address is: 9615 Glencrest Lane, Kensington, Maryland 20795.

[Note, remember this information was current in 1978 and may be very out of date today. Also, people on this list may have since died.]

Document # 180-10082-10451 Is a 3 page interview summary on David Grant.

Mr. Grant stated that he served as the Secret Service White House Detail (SS-WHD) Advance agent for President Kennedy’s trip to Chicago that was scheduled for November 2, 1963. According to Mr. Grant, President Kennedy canceled his appearance, but had requested that the trip continue, despite his absence, “as though he were still there.” Consequently, the trip was carried out exactly as planned with the exception that President Kennedy did not attend. Mr. Grant was informed that the President canceled his trip because of illness.

Mr. Grant’s advance work occupied him for approximately one week prior to the November 2nd trip. It required his continual presence in Chicago from the beginning of that week until the completion of the trip. Mr. Grant also participated with certain JFK military and air force aides in a pre-advance trip in the Chicago area. The pre-advance work was performed during a two week period preceding the Secret Service’s normal one week advance activities.

Mr. Grant stated that his advance work required him to be present a “great deal” at the local Chicago SS office Headquarters. He indicated that while performing his advance duties out of headquarters, he developed several contacts or associations within the SS and with the Chicago P. D. These contacts included making the acquaintance of Chicago-office Special Agents Abraham Bolden, Conrad Cross, and Edward Tucker; they also included working in close professional association with the Chicago office Acting Special Agent in Charge (ASAIC) Maurice Martineau.

Mr. Grant’s description of certain procedures that normally come into use when a local office (1) detects an active threat and (2) reports to Washington about the threat was as follows. First, if there is a threat detected, the WHD Advance Agent is the first person informed because of his position as the agent in charge of all protective operations in the field. Second, the threat is investigated in order to determine its validity. Third, Mr. Grant as WHD advance agent would have reported to the agent in charge of the White House Detail, who then was a Mr. Gerald Behn. This report would have been submitted to WHD-HQ at approximately the same time when the chief agent in the Chicago Office, Mr. Martineau, would have reported the same information to the Chief of the Protective Research Service (PRS) of the SS in Washington, D. C.

However, Mr. Grant stated that none of these procedures was ever put into effect because of the fact that no information about a threat ever came to his attention from any source including PRS, the local Chicago SS office, and the Chicago P.D.

Specifically, Mr. Grant was “not familiar” with the name of Thomas Arthur Vallee, a person who was suspected by the Chicago SS to be involved in a threat and who was detained by the SS. Nor could Mr. Grant “recall” in the context of this trip other instances of the investigation of a threat or the detention of a person.

[Note the quotation marks!! This HSCA staffer knows Grant is lying!]

Mr. Grant went to New York after Chicago, then left for Palm Beach on 11/14/63, then went to Dallas for the three-day period prior to 11/22/63. In Dallas, he assisted Special Agent Winston Lawson, who was the SS-WHD Advance Agent for the Dallas trip.

Throughout his stay in Florida during November 14-19th, 1963, Mr. Grant never heard of threats developing in the Miami area against President Kennedy from any Cuban or any right-wing source. In particular, Mr. Grant could not recall the name of Joseph Milteer. He doubted that he had ever been in touch during this period either with the WHD-SS Advance Agent into Miami for the November 18, 1963 JFK visit or with the local Miami office SS agent who received information about threats from officers of the Miami P. D. Mr. Grant could not remember having talked with either agent.

Prior to his appearance for this interview, Mr. Grant acknowledged having discussed this interview with Mr. Lawson and with Secret Service counsel. Their discussions concerned the kinds of questions that HSCA personnel had been asking and might ask, especially in re the assignments and activities of SS personnel. Mr. Grant said one SS counsel had said that he didn’t know what subjects the Committee’s questions had covered. Mr. Grant’s final remark was that he believed that the primary function of the SS was and is to protect the President.

Document # 180-10085-10498 Is a two page document from Goff to Blakey dated 6/5/78.

Reference is made to your letter dated May 24, 1978, requesting clearance to interview and the last known locations of several Secret Service agents. The information you requested is provided below:

(1) Inspector Ernest Olsson, Jr.

U. S. Secret Service Office of Inspection

1800 G Street, N. W.

Washington, D. C.

(2) George W. Hickey Jr.

(3) Clinton J. Hill

(4) SAIC Warren W. Taylor

U. S. Secret Service

Dignitary Protective Division

Room 944

1800 G Street, N. W.

Washington, D. C. 20223

(5) DSAIC Richard E. Johnsen

U. S. Secret Service

Dignitary Protective Division

Room 944

1800 G Street, N. W.

Washington, D. C. 20223

(6) Thomas Lem Johns

8005 Snowpine Way

McLean, Virginia 22101

(7) SA Max D. Phillips

U. S. Secret Service

Suite 805

Federal Building – U. S. courthouse

650 Capitol Mall

Sacramento, California 95814

Document # 180-10086-10342 Is a 119 page document. Only 6 pages of which are here.

The first two pages give a list of agents and their addresses where known. Some are listed as deceased.

1. Bolden, Abraham Resigned — Address unknown

2. Gopadze, Leon Deceased

3. Grant, David B. USSS — ASAIC, VPPD

Room 295

Executive Office Building

Washington, D. C. (202/456-2354)

4. Howlett, John Joe USSS — Special Agent at

Little Rock, Arkansas

(501/378-6241)

5. Johns, Thomas L. Retired

3321 Culloden Way

Birmingham, Alabama 35243

(703/ 378-6499 or

205/967-1417)

6. Kinney, Samuel A. Retired

341 Bayside Drive

Palm Springs, Florida 33460

(305/965-4296)

7. P. Kirkwood No record as an agent

8. Lawton, Donald J. USSS — Special Agent at

ID Headquarters

1800 G Street, N.W., Room 825

Washington, D.C. (202/634-5731)

9. Lawson, Winston G. USSS – SAIC, Liaison Division

Headquarters, Washington, D.C.

(202/634-5838)

10. McIntyre, William J. USSS – Special Agent at

Inspection Division Headquarters

Washington, D. C. (202/566-8352)

11. Moore, Elmer Retired

[blank]

Bellevue, Washington, D. C. 98005

(206/885-2589)

12. O’Leary, John J. Deceased

13. Olsson, Ernest E., jr. USSS — Special Agent at

Inspection Division Headquarters

Washington, D. C. (202/566-8352)

14. Patterson, William H. USSS — Special Agent

Houston, Texas (713/226-5791)

15. Roberts, Emory Deceased

16. Rybka, Henry Deceased

17. Steuart, Robert A. Retired

5626 W. Purdue

Dallas, Texas 75209

(214/352-1350)

18. Sulliman, Samuel E. USSS –SAIC, New Haven, Conn.

(203/865-2449)

19. Warner, Roger C. USSS — ATSAC, Washington

Field Office, Washington, D.C.

(202/634-5100)

Then there is a memorandum from Glenn A. Bennet to Blakey dated December 29, 1976. This gives a list of 18 more agents with addresses.

1. Glenn A. Bennet USSS-ID headquarters

1800 G. (Room 825)

Washington, D. C.

2. Andrew Berger USSS-SAIC of Baltimore Office

(phone 922-2200)

3. Robert Bouck [blank]

4. William Greer 705 Brunswick Dr.

Waynesville, N. C. 28786

(phone 704-452-4378)

5. George Hickey [blacked out]

6. Clinton Hill [blacked out]

7. Richard Johnsen USSS Headquarters

Protective Forces

1800 G. St., Washington, D. C.

(phone 634-5721)

8. Roy Kellerman 2063 Kansas Ave. N. E.

St. Petersburg, Fla

(phone 813-527-6327)

9. Thomas Kelly USSS-Assistant Director

Protective Forces

1800 G St., Washington, D. C.

(phone 634-5721)

10. Jerry Kivett USSS-SAIC of Atlanta Office

(phone 285-6111)

11. Paul Landis 7512 Cedar Rd.

Chesterland, Ohio

(phone 216-729-2343)

12. Winston Lawson USSS-Headquarters

1900 Pennsylvania Ave

SAIC of USSS Liaison Division

(phone 634-5838)

13. John Ready USSS-Headquarters

1900 Pennsylvania Ave

ASAIC of USSS Liaison Division

(phone 634-5838)

14. James Rowley 9615 Glencrest Lane

Kensington, MD 20795

(phone 301-949-2711)

office – 840-1058

15. Verne Sorrels P. O. Box 749

Dallas, Tex 75201

(phone 214-368-8371)

16. Stewart Stout Deceased

17. Warren Taylor ASAIC P. P. D.

Room 1 EOB

Washington, D. C.

(phone 395-4000)

18. Rufus Youngblood [blacked out]

* * *

Go to Part Two

Filed Under: Uncategorized

Joe Backes, ARRB Summaries: Page 13.

The 12th Batch

The Federal Register January 30, 1996 p. 2996-2998
Reviewed by Joseph Backes


FBI Documents

1.) Document # 124-10017-10252

2.) Document # 124-10035-10119

3.) Document # 124-10050-10395

4.) Document # 124-10170-10115

5.) Document # 124-10241-10111

6.) Document # 124-10255-10334

CIA Documents

1.) Document # 104-10015-10033

2.) Document # 104-10015-10159

3.) Document # 104-10015-10215

4.) Document # 104-10015-10225

5.) Document # 104-10015-10230

6.) Document # 104-10015-10243

7.) Document # 104-10015-10255

8.) Document # 104-10015-10346

9.) Document # 104-10015-10372

10.) Document # 104-10015-10386

11.) Document # 104-10015-10400

12.) Document # 104-10015-10420

13.) Document # 104-10015-10425

14.) Document # 104-10015-10444

15.) Document # 104-10016-10011

16.) Document # 104-10016-10012

17.) Document # 104-10016-10025

18.) Document # 104-10016-10026

19.) Document # 104-10017-10022

20.) Document # 104-10017-10033

21.) Document # 104-10017-10036

22.) Document # 104-10017-10040

23.) Document # 104-10017-10049

24.) Document # 104-10017-10057

25.) Document # 104-10017-10058

26.) Document # 104-10017-10073

27.) Document # 104-10018-10001

28.) Document # 104-10018-10007

29.) Document # 104-10018-10042

30.) Document # 104-10018-10076

31.) Document # 104-10018-10080

32.) Document # 104-10018-10088

33.) Document # 104-10018-10089

34.) Document # 104-10018-10091

HSCA Documents

1.) Document # 180-10070-10273

2.) Document # 180-10070-10276

3.) Document # 180-10071-10164

4.) Document # 180-10075-10118

5.) Document # 180-10076-10049

6.) Document # 180-10080-10131

7.) Document # 180-10080-10276

8.) Document # 180-10082-10451

9.) Document # 180-10085-10498

10.) Document # 180-10086-10342

11.) Document # 180-10087-10190

12.) Document # 180-10090-10122

13.) Document # 180-10090-10128

14.) Document # 180-10090-10134

15.) Document # 180-10093-10026

16.) Document # 180-10094-10459

17.) Document # 180-10096-10460

18.) Document # 180-10104-10324

19.) Document # 180-10106-10100

20.) Document # 180-10108-10349

21.) Document # 180-10108-10350

22.) Document # 180-10118-10129

23.) Document # 180-10140-10022

NARA Documents

(This is Warren Commission stuff)

1.) Document # 179-40001-10073

2.) Document # 179-40001-10432

3.) Document # 179-40002-10050

4.) Document # 179-40002-10171

5.) Document # 179-40002-10314

FBI Document Review

Document # 124-10017-10252 Is a one page document from SAC, Dallas to Director dated 01/06/64. This concerns FBI fears that the Communist Party, USA might conduct their own investigation of the assassination. DL-6-S states that he had no information about that. William James Lowery Jr. (former DL-2-S) and Mrs. Ruth Lowery (former DL-15-S) likewise stated they had no information.

Document # 124-10035-10119 Is a 21 page document from Henry A. Welke to Director dated 12/03/63. Only two pages are here. The cover page and cover page B identifying some informants.

It was considered advisable to set forth all information from Norfolk Division sources in this report instead of setting forth incomplete information in referenced report.

Following news of the assassination of President Kennedy inquires were initiated on Clarence Otis Pennington, potential bombing suspect; Elizabeth Paukovits Hull, Communist Party member, and Wallace Eugene Branner, contributor to American Nazi Party. Because of their background, these persons were considered suspects.

(There is notation that copies were destroyed in 1973 and 12/16/76.)

Investigation concerning them, however, was curtailed when the Bureau advised that Lee Harvey Oswald was principal suspect and because Norfolk Division had no information linking them to Oswald or the crime.

SA Lemuel W. Kerr observed Clarence Otis Pennington on the morning of November 23, 1963.

This report is classified confidential inasmuch as unauthorized dissemination could jeopardize effectiveness of NF T-5 and NF T-6, who are continuing sources on CP activities.

INFORMANTS

Identity of Informants File Where Located

NF T-1 is Judge Hugh Reid, NF 105-690-7

Juvenile and Domestic Relations

Court, Arlington County, Virginia

NF T-2 is Reverend James W. Cole, CE 105-1010-145

600 Wilcox Street, Marion,

South Carolina

NF T-3 is Earl B. Baker Lewis, Sr. CE 105-1010-211

Rural Mail carrier, Richlands,

North Carolina

NF T-4 is William Lane Forbes NF 157-8-81

Confidential Source Contacted by

SA Lemuel W. Kerr

NF T-7 is Doctor James W. Holley, III NF 137-969

PCI (RAC)

Document # 124-10050-10395 Is a three page document from SAC, New Orleans to Director, dated 2/25/67. This is a really, interesting one!

For information purposes, No. 1309-C advised on February 24, 1967 that he received information that the individual using the name Clay Bertrand is actually Clay Shaw. Informant stated he called Louis Ivon, investigator for Garrison, and told Ivon that he had heard that Clay Shaw and Clay Bertrand were one and the same, and although Ivon would not confirm this information, [Ivon] appeared very upset and wanted to know where informant developed this information.

Aaron Kohn, managing director, Metropolitan Crime Commission, advised February 24, he had received information that Clay Bertrand and Clay Shaw were one and the same. Kohn advised he picked this information up from one of 89 news sources that contacted him on February 24, 1967.

Kohn advised that he also received information that there is a man named Clay Bertrand living in Lafayette, Louisiana, a real estate broker that lived in New Orleans about the time of the assassination of President Kennedy. Kohn unable to supply additional information re Clay Bertrand of Lafayette, Louisiana.

Both 1309-C and Aaron Kohn advised that Clay Shaw was the former managing director of International Trade Mart, New Orleans, Louisiana.

Both Kohn and 1309-C advised that information available to them lead them to believe that Shaw has homosexual tendencies.

1309-C advised that he had received information from a person that is a friend of a friend of Bill Reed of WWl-TV news service, New Orleans. This fourth-hand information is that Sam “Monk” Zelden, prominent New Orleans attorney, has in his possession an application, not otherwise identified, in which Oswald as a reference listed Jack Ruby. No. 1309-C does not know what kind of an application or if this is even true.

No investigation conducted. Information being received from established sources.

Document # 124-10170-10115 Is a copy of Document # 124-10035-10119.

Document # 124-10241-10111 Is a memorandum from Regis L. Kennedy about Pershing Oliver Gervais.

Captioned informant called my home at about 8:00 PM and asked for me. My wife told him that I was at the office. Gervais then called the office and spoke to me. He stated that he wanted to tell me again that he nothing to do with the Garrison investigation of the Kennedy investigation.

Gervais stated that Garrison is trying to hatch an egg and “you know what happens when an egg does not hatch, there is a big smell”.

As Gervais is a close associate of Garrison he is being discontinued as a PCI and no contact will be made with him until this matter is concluded.

It is my personal opinion that Gervais was trying to find out if I was working at the time of the call.

Document # 124-10255-10334 Is a copy of Document # 124-10035-10119.

CIA Document Review

Document # 180-10015-10033 Is missing.

Document # 180-10015-10159 Is missing.

Document # 104-100015-10215 Is a one page document from Brussels to Director dated 11/29/63. They report no traces on Oswald.

Document # 104-10015-10225 Is missing.

Document # 104-10015-10230 Is a one page document from Director to The Hague, France dated 11/29/63.

1. We are looking for evidence of the travel of Lee Oswald and his Russian wife on their May and June 1962 return from the Soviet Union. ONHA 23606 from the Hague to [digraph]TOPAZ, dated 15 June 62, transmitted film of eight U.S. Passports photographed by [crypt] at Amsterdam Schipol airport around then. Please check film on outside chance one is Oswald.

2. Pls slug answer only as above. Send copies if you find Oswald’s.

Document # 104-10015-10243 Is a one page document from Chief of Station, the Hague, to Chief of WE dated 11/29/63.

Ref A. HAGU 5063

B. HAGU 5069

Attached for Headquarters information are three recent [crypt] reports and one memorandum for the record, the essence of which was cabled to Headquarters in reference A. We are also attaching a list of documents, noted in Hague station card indices, which make mention of persons by the name of Oswald. Due to the age of these documents, none of them are now available at the Station.

It is signed by Richard R. Consley

Document # 104-10015-10255 Is a one page document from Frankfurt to Director dated 11/30/63.

Film routinely forwarded KURIOT. Search files reveals no prints made of [digraph]TOPAZ.

Document # 104-10015-10346 Is a 2 page document, Memorandum for Record dated 11/27/63.

1. On 27 November 1963, [crypt] showed Richard R. Consley a memorandum which the Dutch Foreign Office had written to [crypt]. This memo was dated 25 November 1963, and it reported a conversation which one Mr. Slot, a member of the Dutch Foreign Office, had had with Ricardo Santos, 3rd Secretary of the Cuban Embassy, at a reception given by the Soviet Ambassador on 7 November 1963.

2. Mr. Slot reportedly asked Santos a question concerning the attacks made against the Cuban mainland by Cuban refugees. Santos’ reply to this questions was, “Mr. Slot, just wait and you will see what we can do. It will happen soon.” Asked by Mr. Slot to be more specific about what would happen soon, Santos merely replied, “Just wait, just wait.”

3. The memorandum goes on to say that Santos has a brother living in the U. S. His name and address are not known, but he and Santos write to each other regularly. This brother is reportedly pro-Castro, but went to the U.S. at the insistence of his wife, who is “conservative”. The subject matter of the letters between the brothers is reportedly nothing more than “family affairs”.

OSVALD “dit DORVAL,” Jean Nicolas

WNH-2864

OSVALDO-Silva-Baetzner, Carlos

201-280299*

OSWALD Brothers

MSZA 450, file 8-6, 23 Aug 50 *

OSWALD, Felix

ONHA-5328, 27 Jul 55; EAVA-11965, 10 Oct 55

OSWALD, Jean (Alias Jean DORVAL)

OFPA-9382, 12 Oct 54

OSWALD, Jean

ONHW-2059, 16 July 54, Attachment 1

OSWALD, Jean Nicholas

ONHW-2581, 16 Nov 54

Oswald, Rudolf

MSZA-450, file 8-6, 23 Aug 50*

OSWALD, Viktor

MSZA-450, file 8-6, 23 Aug 50*

OSWALD, Victor

WNHA-707, 21 July 50

OSWALD, Victor

WNHA-514, 27 Mar 50

OSWALD, Victor

WSM 375, 11 Apr 50

OSWALD, Victor

WSM 375: WNHA-705

OSWALD, Werner

MSZA 450, 23 Aug 50*

Same document. File [ ] was entitled “East-West Trade, MSZA Reports.” File destroyed 17-1-57.

Written notation CIA file number [ ] – 6 – 6/4

Document # 104-10015-10372 Is missing.

Document # 104-10015-10386 Is a one page document from Director to The Hague dated 11/27/63.

1. New York Times report confirmed by Immigration records shows Oswald, his wife and four month child arrived New York 13 June 1962 aboard Holland American Liner Maasdam.

2. Also request checks with consulates Rotterdam and Amsterdam.

3. PLS slug future traffic on this subject RYBAT GPFLOOR only.

Document # 104-10015-10400 Is a one page document from the Hague to Director dated 11/27/63.

1. [ ] reports that Paul Degroot learned of President Kennedy’s assassination as he was watching TV on the night of 22 Nov. Degroot and wife had just returned home from vacation.

2. A summary repeat summary of Degroot’s spontaneous reaction to the news of President Kennedy’s assassination folls: President Kennedy’s death is not good because it was with much difficulty that he was brought to the point where nuclear test ban treaty could be signed. Who knows what will happen now. Now Mao will get his chance. President Kennedy was not a free agent anymore and he was killed because he went to far in appeasing the Soviet Union.

Document # 104-10015-10420 Is missing.

Document # 104-10015-10425 Is missing.

Document # 104-10015-10444 Is a one page document from CIA to Dept. of State, White House, and the FBI. It is dated 11/28/63.

Our station in the Hague has reported that on 23 November 1963, a local Castroite named Maria Snethlages talked to third secretary Ricardo Santos of the Cuban Embassy in the Hague and said that she knew the “Mr. Lee” (sic) who murdered President Kennedy. She characterized “Lee” as a man full of hate and violence, and speculated that he had been “misused by a group.” She said she had written to Gibson (undoubtful [sic, “undoubtedly”] Richard Gibson, U.S. citizen of Lausanne Switzerland, born 13 May 1935, a Castro sympathizer, who had visited the Netherlands recently and was in contact both with the Soviet Ambassador and the Cuban embassy).

Later on 23 November, Maria Snethlage talked again to third secretary Santos and said that “Mr. Lee of the Fair Play for Cuba Committee” had been slandered. It was another person, “named Lee Oswald,” who had done it. Snethlage is reported to have been in Cuba in January and again in May 1963.

Dutch authorities have informed us that on 7 November, in talking about attacks by Cuban refugees against the Cuban mainland, Santos had replied “Just wait and you will see what we can do. It will happen soon.” Asked to be more precise, Santos had replied “just wait, just wait” Santos is reported to have pro-Castro brother in the U. S. A.

A very sensitive source reports that after his conversations with Snethlage Santos was furious because she had contacted him.

Document # 104-10016-10011 is missing

Document # 104-10016-10012 is missing

Document # 104-10016-10025 is a one page document from Director to Berlin, Frankfurt, Bonn, and The Hague dated 12/02/63.

1. We need confirmatory info on the travel of Lee Oswald with his wife and oldest child on their return from the Soviet Union to the United States. The American Embassy in Moscow gave them two train tickets from Moscow to Rotterdam on 1 June 1962 and they presumably left that day. Infant needed no ticket. They sailed from Rotterdam on the Maasdam on three June 1962 and arrived in New York on 13 June 1962. Presume their train route was Moscow Bialystok Warsaw Berlin Hannover, but not sure of routing from there on. Pls check German railroad schedule.

2. Names are Lee Harvey Oswald, born 18 October in New Orleans, LA., traveling on U.S. passport 1733242 issued 10 September 1962, Marina Nikolayevna Pusakova or Prusakova Oswald born 19 July 1941 in Minsk, presumably on Soviet passport, and infant June Lee Oswald born 15 Feb. 62.

3. German mission addresses pls check own files and liaison records and all appropriate police, immigration, passport, visa, and travel records. Cable data on travel and on any other info you have on them.

4. For HAGU: pls recheck your liaison and ship manifests on basis above new info.

Document # 104-10016-10026 Is missing.

Document # 104-10017-10022 Is a one page document from Berlin to Director dated 12/03/63.

1. Current German railway schedule shows daily connection Moscow-Brest-Warsaw change over at East Berlin for Loehne-Osnabrueck-Bentheim-Ammersfoort-Utrecht-Rotterdam. Leave Moscow at 1815 and arrive at Rotterdam approx 40 hours later at 1036 hours.

2. Same train without changeover in East Berlin goes on to Helmstedt, Braunchweig-Hannover on to Koln, but changeover possible at Hannover with stops at Menden, Loehne, Osnabrueck, Bentheim, Ammersfoort, Amsterdam, Utrecht and Rotterdam.

3. Also possible for a passenger using this route to transfer in West Berlin to trains destined for Hannover or Hamburg and in these cities to board one of several daily trains to Rotterdam.

4. Check of all available West Berlin records on subjects ref negative.

Document # 104-10017-10033 Is missing

Document # 104-10017-10036 Is missing

Document # 104-10017-10040 Is missing

Document # 104-10017-10049 Is a one page document from Director to The Hague dated 12/05/63.

1. FBI very interested in name and address and details on Ricardo Santos’ pro-Castro brother who lives in U. S. Can you learn this from [ ]NAPSIS for passage to FBI here?

2. The Mr. Lee mentioned by Maria Snetlage was probably Vincent Lee who replaced Richard Gibson as head of the Fair Play For Cuba Committee in New York.

Document # 104-10017-10057 Is missing

Document # 104-10017-10058 Is missing

Document # 104-10017-10073 Is a one page document from The Hague to Director dated 12/04/63.

1. [ ] records show that one M. Oswald, male Russian citizen born 17 July 1941 in Archangel, residence Moscow, entered Netherlands 3 June 1962 by train at Oldenzaal border point.

2. In spite discrepancies, which can easily be attributed to haste and carelessness on part of border personnel, HAGU inclined believe above data refers to Oswald’s wife Marina.

3. [ ] checking with Holland America line for ship manifest information.

Document # 104-10018-10001 Is missing

Document # 104-10018-10007 Is a one page document from The Hague to Director dated 12/09/63.

[ ]NAPSIS has no further info re: Santos brother. Will have

[ ]SIGMA alert niece to note address on PBPRIME mail for Santos.

The HSCA Review

Document # 180-10070-10273 Is a 7 page document dated 1/19/78. It is an interview of Secret Service Agent Abraham Bolden by HSCA staffer Jim Kelly and Harold Rese.

The HSCA staffers thought Bolden could provide details on a possible conspiracy to assassinate President Kennedy in Chicago on November 2, 1963.

Bolden was from East St. Louis, Illinois and joined the Secret Service in 1959. He worked counterfeit cases in Chicago and in the summer of 1961 he was assigned to the White House Detail. He was the first Negro agent assigned to this detail. Bolden spent only three months in this detail and was evidently shocked at what he saw. He complained to his supervisor, Harvey Henderson, and to James Rowley, then head of Secret Service about the general laxity and the heavy drinking among the agents who were assigned to protect the President. He also resented the slurs against blacks which were called to his attention from time to time, eg., the separate housing facilities for black agents on southern trips. He was transferred back to Chicago.

While attending a refresher course in Washington in mid-May, 1964, Bolden was returned to Chicago on a subterfuge and subsequently arrested and charged with soliciting a bribe, obstruction of justice and conspiracy in an alleged attempt to sell SS file information to a Chicago counterfeiter. His first trial, in July 1964, resulted in a mistrial; his second trial, a month later, in a conviction. He was sentenced to serve six years. He appealed and in June, 1966, the U. S. Supreme Court declined to hear the case.

The writers found Bolden not at all bitter about the 1964 case although we did not dwell on it. We questioned him about the events which allegedly took place in Chicago just prior to and on 2 November 1963.

Bolden told us that around October 30, 1963, he recalled a long teletype message coming in to the Chicago office from the FBI. It was unusual, he told us, for the FBI to cooperate on any cases with the SS. But Mary Cooney, a clerical person working in the office at the time, and now believed to be deceased, took this message to the ARSAIC, Maurice Martineau. Prior to the telex, there was a phone call from the FBI. Bolden doesn’t know if it was a local FBI (Chicago) or Washington Hdq. calling.

There were only about 13 agents in the Chicago SS office at the time and the substance of the teletype and the telephone call alleging a threat against the life of the President on an upcoming trip (2 Nov) to Chicago was quickly disseminated.

Surveillance was undertaken by the agents on two of the four subjects identified with the threat. Because Bolden was black, he and another black agent, Conrad Cross, were excluded from the “north side” Chicago surveillance because it was a predominantly white neighborhood. Through a series of blunders, the surveillance was “blown” by Agent Jay Lloyd Stocks and the two subjects were apprehended and brought in to the Chicago SS office. Bolden’s awareness of the progress of this surveillance came partly from office gossip and partly from his monitoring the SS radio channels in his car. In any event, he said Agent Stocks was subject of some earthly comments from his fellow agents.

Bolden recalls that James Rowley called from Washington and suggested that Martineau use a COS file number. Bolden explained that a CO (for Central Office) number was issued only in or from Washington Headquarters and an “S” for Secret or Sensitive was given when they wanted to sequester information contained in the file. He explained that these files were kept separate from all others and that SS could say they had nothing in their files on a subject when in fact a “COS” file existed. He said as far as he knew, these were never destroyed (underscoring ours). In addition to the COS file number, Bolden said that all agents who were involved in this surveillance activity were told by ATSAIC Martineau to turn in their notebooks. All memos were typed, he told us, by a Charlotte Klapkowski (sp?) who is now working at Headquarters in Washington and is close to retirement age. “now don’t expect her to tell you anything. She is very loyal to the Service and wouldn’t say anything she thought would hurt them in any way,” he told us. The memo copies were all sequestered by Charlotte on this surveillance.

Bolden recalls that in addition to Stocks, Agents Strong, Motto and Noonan were involved in the apprehension of the two men. On Saturday morning, November 2, Bolden was in the office early. He recalls that the interrogation rooms were littered with cigarette butts and coffee cups, evidence of a night-long interrogation. He saw only one of the two men they had apprehended. He describes this man as swarthy, stocky, “a truck driver type” is the way he described him. The man was 5’9″ or 5’10”, wearing a jacket and shirt with open collar. His hair was dark and he had a crew cut which is described as “Detroit style.” The writers showed Bolden our Committee “mug” book containing 1 through 71 and 73-81, {Interesting, how many “mug” shots did they have? Why delete #72?} and he stated that the facial structure of photo # 74 was similar to that of the subject being questioned by agents in the office. Picture # 74 is listed as “unidentified – possibly Jim Braden.” It is directly underneath Thomas Vallee’s picture in the mug book. Vallee, #76, was not recognized by Bolden at all, although he was familiar with the case which was described in the article written by Edwin Black in the Chicago Independent, a now-defunct publication, dated November 1975. On page ten of this article entitled “the Plot to kill JFK in Chicago, November 2, 1963 – Twenty Days Before Dallas,” the writer is checking all arrests in the city of Chicago. He says: “Then we checked every arrest in the entire city on those days. Who arrested them? Why? Any weapons? It took weeks. In the process we develop leads: Look for Cuban names. Look for the name Bradley. Look for the name Braden. Nothing came of it.” (underscoring ours).

Bolden recalls that one of the men had a Spanish-sounding name. He said the SS agents took their pictures with a Polaroid camera. The agents’ notes were typed up and the memos were then taken to O’Hare Airport and given to a crew member (pilot?) of a commercial flight to Washington where he believes an SS employee met the flight and delivered the material to Headquarters. The two suspects in Chicago were turned over to the Chicago Police who took them away in a patrol wagon. He recalls that at least one of the two had a Spanish-sounding name.

Bolden recalls Tom Mosely’s name mentioned in the office around that period (Nov 1963). He said when Agent Tom Kelly arrived in Chicago from Dallas on or about 11/26/63, he mentioned a John Heard or Hurt. They searched the office card files for a similar sounding name. He also recalls that he and Conrad Cross were sent to check out a mixed Black-Spanish neighborhood on Rockwell Street to determine where a certain person who resided there was on 11/22/63. They were unable to locate the person, who had moved, and Bolden could not recall the subject’s name. The PRS had a record of the person from a previous threat. Bolden was critical of the activities of PRS, saying they did not do a thorough job. He did not further elaborate.

Bolden, whose 43rd birthday coincided with our interview, was accompanied by his wife, Barbara. He told the writers that he is now working for the National Lead company, 1800 S. Peoria Street, Chicago, as night supervisor in quality control. He is also a minister in the Islamic Faith and teaches a course in religion in Chicago.

Bolden told the writers that he made notes of some of the things that he uncovered in connection with the events of October 30 – November 2, 1963 but that when he was arrested in 1964, this notebook was seized by the government (Secret Service). He said that he would have no objection to testifying in Washington under oath relating to the matters which he discussed with us in this interview.

Bolden related to the interviewers that he was the informant who supplied the information for Edwin Black’s article in the Chicago Independent, Nov., 1975

Document # 180-10070-10276 Is a five page interview summary with Edward Tucker dated 1/19/78.

On 1/19/78, the writers interviewed subject at his office (L-3) at captioned address (First National Bank of Chicago, FNB Plaza Dearborn and Madison Streets Chicago, Illinois) Tucker was with the Chicago office of the Secret Service in November 1963. We talked to him about a projected visit by President J. F. Kennedy which we had been told was canceled at the last minute.

Tucker told us that for security reasons, on or about October 30, 1963, he recalls going to interview a subject named Vallee, who was supposed to represent a threat to the President. This was a customary practice prior to Presidential visits. Accompanied by Agent Tom Strong, he visited Vallee at his roominghouse on the north side of Chicago. He was troubled by his conversation with Vallee, who he says had one or more rifles in his possession.

Absent any Federal sanctions, Tucker reported back to the Secret Service office about his misgivings. The next day Vallee’s landlady, whom Tucker suspects was the informant, called the Secret Service office and said that Vallee had told her that he was not going to work on Saturday, November 2nd, the day JFK was coming to Chicago. Tucker said it was this information which caused the Secret Service to alert the Chicago Police Department to place surveillance on Vallee. He is aware that they did and that Vallee was arrested by two Chicago Police officers on November 2nd before the President was due in Chicago.

[Note, I corrected what I believe to be a typo. The document actually says November 22nd, which cannot be correct.]

On that Saturday morning, Tucker’s assignment had been to go to the airport (O’Hare) and meet the President. He did not recall that he was to ride in the Pilot car in the motorcade, but he said he did not go into the Secret Service office downtown and was therefore unaware of any other subjects that the Secret Service might have had in custody at the time. If this happened, he was not informed about it, he said.

When he reached the airport in the morning of November 2, 1963, he was told that the President had canceled his trip to Chicago but that several Members of Congress had arrived and the Secret Service was told to escort them to the Army-Air Force Academy game at Soldier Field. He thinks he went home instead.

Tucker said he was never aware of a telex or tele-type message which came in to the Chicago office from the FBI or anyone else regarding a threat against the President in Oct – November 1963.

The clerical force at the Secret Service consisted of Mary Cooney, whom Tucker said is now deceased, Charlotte Klapkowski, now at Headquarters in Washington and a June Trepinis and Elaine Shelhammer whose present whereabouts are unknown to him.

Tucker could provide no further information on the aforementioned visit in November 1963.

He said he would visit his old office and see if he could look at some old files and maybe refresh his recollection or the events of that period.

We questioned Tucker about a memo he wrote, 12/3/63 (q. v.) concerning Tom Moseby and guns for Cubans “who may be involved in the assassination of the late President John F. Kennedy.” After much prompting, Tucker recalled that Moseby was a Secret Service informant, known as 2-1-266, who was involved with a lot of Latin types, some of whom were bus drivers working in the city of Chicago. He doesn’t recall what happened to the matter but feels that it came about after November 22. He does not recall the Secret Service picking up any of these people in the October 30 – November 2nd, 1963 period.

Tucker was a clerk with the FBI before he entered the Secret Service in 1959. He has been retired for the past 6 years and is in charge of security for the First National Bank of Chicago. He resides at [blank] Elk Grove Village, Illinois (312) 437-2715.

Document # 180-10071-10164 Is a 6 page interview summary with Gary McLeod dated 3/06/78.

There is sometimes a white sheet of paper on these documents used to insulate the original from the metal of a paper clip or some clasp. Unfortunately, this seems to have been left on by some dufus somewhere and it has obliterated a few words of the text.

Agent Gary McLeod when appointed to the Secret Service was assigned to the Chicago Field Office. He (?) there until September 1965 and was then transferred to the Intelligence Division in Washington, D.C. In 1969, he was assigned to the Liaison Division. In January 1976 he was transferred to the Portland, Oregon Field Office. He stated that he has attended numerous “In Service’ classes and schools and each time they become more advanced and technical.

His recollection of the November 2, 1963 proposed Presidential visit is that he met Agent Robert Motto at the stadium on the morning of November 2 and was given a post assignment. A short time later he was notified that the President’s visit to Chicago had been canceled and he was told to go home. He believes that he heard at a later date that the trip was canceled due to the President having a cold. He recalled the name Thomas Arthur Vallee. He remembers Ed Tucker (former Secret Service agent) being assigned to the Vallee case and that it involved guns, but does not recall anything else about the incident. He does not recall the Chicago Police Department becoming involved. He remembers reading the Edwin Black story in the Chicago Independent, several years ago, and couldn’t imagine where he got the information pertaining to the four subjects suspected of being involved in a threat against the President and of Jay Stock’s surveillance. Agent McLeod stated that he felt sure that if this incident had occurred, he as part of the Chicago Field Office would have been aware or informed of what had taken place.

Relative to Abraham Bolden, Agent McLeod stated that he and Bolden were sent to Secret Service school in Washington. The first day of school, he believes on a Monday, Director Rowley had made opening remarks to the class. Someone told him and Bolden that they were to return to Chicago because of a large counterfeiting operation. They were transported back to their hotel, the “Willard,” by one or two inspectors. He believes one was Arvin Dahlquist. They were told to turn over their weapons, because there would not be time to notify the Airline agent. He went along with this, not suspecting anything was wrong. Upon landing at O’Hare Airport, they were met by Agent Dick Jordan and driven into Chicago to the Old Court House. The U.S. Attorneys Office was next to the Secret Service Office. He was taken into the Secret Service Office and Bolden was taken into the U. S. Attorneys office. McLeod, upon entering his office, learned that Bolden was being arrested. He only remembers general conversation with Bolden, on the plane back to Chicago. He did not know anything was wrong and Bolden never gave any impression of anything being wrong. Gary McLeod stated that he liked Abe Bolden. He was impressed with him. McLeod stated that he was personally upset when Bolden got into trouble. He stated that after Bolden’s arrest, he believes he heard that Bolden may have been involved in other things but this was strictly hearsay.

Agent McLeod stated that he remembers Conrad Cross well. Cross was a friend of Abe Bolden. He believes Cross was with the I.R. S. before he joined the Secret Service. He considered Cross a very bright guy with a chip on his shoulder. Cross was very touchy. McLeod stated that he did not believe it was a racial type of thing.

McLeod stated that he doesn’t remember ever having worked a case with Conrad Cross.

Agent McLeod’s recall of the April 1963 visit by President Kennedy to Mayor Daley was that there was an evening parade. He stated that there was no significant threat investigation on that visit. He stated when word was received of a Presidential visit, everything else was put aside in preparation for the visit. He stated that he had never been assigned to the White House Detail but had been sent to other cities for Presidential visits as part of a manpower pull. He stated that Presidential Protection is the Secret Service’s primary responsibility and that investigation of threats is ongoing during the regular work process.

Agent McLeod remembers the name of Tom Mosley and that he was an informant and also a bus driver. He believes they may have gotten Mosely from another agency. Mosely was not his informant. He has no recall of Mosley being involved in any gun deals. He cannot single out any particular group as posing the possibility of a threat against the President.

He remembers the Chicago office receiving official notification of President Kennedy’s death. He stated that the entire Chicago office was involved in the post assassination investigation. He remembers the gun being checked out at Klein’s Gunshop. He had no recall of any Cuban connections or organization in Chicago.

He has no recall of the Secret Service I.D. book being recalled after the assassination, although the color of the I.D. card was changed at a later date.

Agent McLeod stated that as a result of the assassination of President Kennedy several changes occurred. Intelligence agents combined with local agents for advancing a trip. The liaison with other agencies in law enforcement became better, and training took on different facets, such as simulated motorcades. The Liaison Unit was formed as a result of the Warren Commission.

Some of the Intelligence Division duties are to refer threat information to the Field Offices and advance work. He stated that any conversation with the Field Offices were followed up with a teletype.

He stated that he has heard of trips being altered but has never heard of one being canceled because of a threat.

Document # 180-10075-10118 Is a listed as a 4 page document on the RIF but is really 5 pages, 3 of which are the interview summary dated 6/15/78.

George Hickey is retired from the Secret Service since November 1971. In 1963, Hickey transferred from the White House Police to the Secret Service. After President Kennedy’s assassination, he was assigned to President Johnson up to and including the election. He was then reassigned to Vice President Humphrey’s detail. In 1969, he was assigned to the Washington Field Office and remained there until he retired. He attended Treasury School and Secret Service School. Hickey stated that while in the Secret Service he was mostly involved in the driving of autos during visits.

George Hickey stated that he accompanied the President’s limousine and the follow-up car on the plane to Love field. At Love Field the cars were turned over to Agent Kinney. Hickey was assigned to ride in the follow-up car and placed in charge of the AR15 automatic weapon. Hickey stated that he placed the AR15 on the rear floor of the follow up car.

As the motorcade proceeded, Hickey stated that it was a normal, boisterous, friendly crowd. After they made the turn from Houston onto Elm, the Presidential limousine was about 20 feet ahead when Hickey heard what he thought sounded like a firecracker coming from his right rear. He stood up and looked towards the right rear but observed nothing. He heard excited talking in the front of his car and turned to the front. He observed that the President had slumped forward and to the left. Mrs. Kennedy appeared to be aiding him and he was coming to an upright position. Hickey then heard two reports sounding like gunfire and saw what he described as a cloud of dust appear from the right rear of President Kennedy’s head. Hickey stated that he would guess at about 3 to 4 seconds between the first and second shots. He stated that the second and third shots were almost simultaneous.

The motorcade was traveling about 10 miles per hour. Hickey stated he reached down and brought up the AR15. Hickey stated that by the time he cocked the AR15 and turned to the right rear, the follow-up car was starting under the underpass. He stated that he saw Clint Hill holding onto the back of the Presidential limousine. Hill looked back at the follow-up car and shook his head as if the President was seriously injured. They traveled at a high rate of speed to Parkland Hospital.

On arrival at Parkland, Hickey placed the gun back onto the floor of the follow-up car. He stated that it was the duty of the driver of the follow-up car to check the AR15 out to see if it was loaded or unloaded. He went inside the hospital and the President was in the Emergency Room. Hickey went back outside and brought Kenny O’Donnell in to Mrs. Kennedy.

Hickey stated that he drove the follow-up car back to Love Field by himself. He helped place the cars on the C130 aircraft and tied them down. He flew back to Washington on the C130. On arrival they were met by an escort and taken to the White House garage where the vehicles were placed under the security of the White House Police. Floyd Boring came to the garage and told Hickey that statements were being taken at the White House. He proceeded to that location and gave his statement.

I asked Hickey about the theory of Howard Donohue, who has stated that Hickey shot President Kennedy with the AR15. Hickey stated that Donohue has caused him many problems and harassment. He wanted to sue Donohue but was told by private counsel and Secret Service counsel that according to Maryland law he didn’t have much of a case. He stated that with the Secret Service agents and two presidential aides in the follow-up car, if he had fired the AR15 someone would definitely have heard it — unless you want to believe they were all in on a conspiracy.

Document # 180-10076-10049 Is a copy of document # 180-10076-10062 from the 11th batch. It is a police report on David Ferrie.

Document # 180-10080-10131 Is a two page document from Special Agent Francis F. Uteg, USSS dated 6/23/66 on Thomas Arthur Vallee.

Synopsis

Investigation at Chicago revealed that the subject may have returned to Tennessee.

(A) INTRODUCTION:

Reference is made to:

(1) M/R of SA James S. Griffiths, Chicago, dated May 6, 1966

(2) M/R of SA Roger C. Grunwald, Sacramento, dated May 10, 1966

(3) M/R of SA G. Wesley Dunlap, Jr., New York, dated June 6, 1966

The subject was brought to the attention of this Service on October 29, 1963, by Lieutenant Berkeley Moyland, Chicago Police Department. Lt. Moyland advised that the subject had made extreme comments regarding the administration at that time and that he believed Vallee was in possession of weapons. It was later disclosed that Vallee’s room contained a M-1 rifle, a Carbine, and .22 calibre revolver with approximately 1,000 rounds of ammunition. This included bandoliers and clips for the rifle.

(B) GENERAL INVESTIGATION:

On June 23, 1966 the writer interviewed Charles Peterson, President of the Printing Pressmen’s Assistants union which is a part of the International Printing Pressmen and Assistants Union of North America, 222 West Adams Street, room 325, Chicago, Illinois, telephone number 782-3417. He disclosed that the subject had come from Rogersville, Tennessee, in June, 1963, and had gained employment at the I.P.P. Lithographic Service, 625 West Jackson, Chicago, Illinois, and worked for Mr. Nemo Vola until January, 1964. At that time the subject stated that he was going to return to Tennessee.

(C) BACKGROUND AND IDENTITY OF SUBJECT:

Thomas Arthur Vallee is described as white; male; DOB 11/15/33; POB Chicago, Illinois; 5-6; 155 lbs; blue eyes; brown hair; Social Security number [blank]. U. S. Army Serial number 17-460-615; FBI number 677-475 E.

[Note, there is a notation that the blanked out Social Security number is incorrect. This appears to have been written by F. B. Stoner on 10-7-66. The correct number is likewise blacked out.]

(F) DISPOSITION:

Case remains closed.

Two copies of this report and two photographs of the subject are being forwarded to the Nashville office with the request that they attempt to locate the subject in Rogersville, Tennessee. If the subject, in fact, does reside in the Nashville office district, the complete Chicago file in this case will be forwarded to that office.

One copy of this report is being forwarded to the New York and Sacramento offices for their information.

Document # 180-10080-10276 Is a 4 page document dated 2/16/78. It is a letter from Mr. Robert O. Goff to Mr. Blakey.

Reference is made to your recent request that duly authorized representatives of the Select Committee on Assassinations be granted access to certain information in Secret Service files relative to the assassination of former President Kennedy.

In that connection, the information you requested is provided below:

1. Names and addresses of the five Secret Service agents assigned to the protective Research Section and responsible for the processing and control of threats:

Glen A. Bennett

U. S. Secret Service

1800 g. Street, N.W., Rm. 825

Washington, D.C. 20223

Elmer C. Lawrence

705 Tam O’Shanter Avenue

Sun city Center, Florida 33570

Walter Pine

4347 Carmelo Drive # 302

Wedgewood West

Annandale, Virginia 22003

Deeter B. Flore

3703 Bangor Street, S.E.

Washington, D.C. 20020

Thomas White

Route 3, Box 182-A

Miami, Oklahoma 74354

2. Additional names and addresses of Secret Service staff members assigned to the Chicago Filed Office in November, 1963:

Edward Z. Tucker

[blank]

John E. Russell, Jr.

305 Arlington

Grand Haven, Michigan 49417

Nemo Ciochina

U. S. Secret Service

Suite 211

575 N. Pennsylvania Street

Indianapolis, Indiana 46204

Joseph E. Noonan, Jr.

U. S. Secret Service

Room 742

219 South Dearborn Street

Chicago, Illinois 60604

John Gorman

FBI

Chicago, Illinois

Louis B. Sims

Interpol

Department of Justice

9th & Pennsylvania, N.W.

Washington, D. C. 20530

Joseph Paolella

American Security Agents

6600 N. Lincoln

Lincolnwood, Illinois 60545

June M. Terpinas

U. S. Secret Service

Room 742

219 South Dearborn Street

Chicago, Illinois 60604

Elaine J. Shelhamer

U. S. Secret Service

Room 742

219 South Dearborn Street

Chicago, Illinois 60604

Carol (Schultz) Dean

1750 Old Mead Road

McLean, Virginia 22101

James Plichta (Deceased)

Stephen Maynard (Deceased)

Mary Cooney (Deceased)

Jay L. Stocks

U. S. Secret Service

Room 317

Federal Bldg. & U. S. Courthouse

Detroit, Michigan 48226

Sandra J. Lipetra

U. S. Secret Service

Room 742

219 South Dearborn Street

Chicago, Illinois 60604

Charlotte Klapkowski

U. S. Secret Service

1800 G. Street, N. W. rm. 825

Washington, D.C. 20223

Rosemary Lacey

San Francisco, California

(last known)

Additional names and addresses of Secret Service staff members assigned to the Miami Field Office in November, 1963:

Edward Mougin

8360 Glastonburg Court

Annandale, Virginia 22003

Everett Curry

136 N. E. 28th Terrace

Miami, Florida 33137

Charles Howell

U. S. Secret Service

Suite 600

1310 L Street, N. W.

Washington, D.C. 20005

Ruth Aghababian

15600 N. W. 7th Avenue #620

Miami, Florida 33169

3. Access to documents relating to presidential protection and security during the period, March 1963 – November, 1963 will be provided to members of your staff at their convenience upon prior notice that the staff intends to review the material. Since some of the materials are classified, the Staff employee or employees reviewing the files should have and be able to exhibit evidence of the requisite security clearance to review classified information.

4. The file on Joseph A. Milteer is maintained in the Intelligence Division of the Secret Service and is available for review. The only material available relative to the groups requested is contained in that file.

5. Material relating to “Project Starr” is maintained by the Technical Development and Planning division of the Secret Service. Since some of the materials are classified, the staff employee or employees reviewing the files should have and be able to exhibit evidence of requisite security clearance to review classified information.

6. The file on Thomas A. Vallee is maintained in the Intelligence division of the Secret Service and is available for review.

Mr. Rowley’s current address is: 9615 Glencrest Lane, Kensington, Maryland 20795.

[Note, remember this information was current in 1978 and may be very out of date today. Also, people on this list may have since died.]

Document # 180-10082-10451 Is a 3 page interview summary on David Grant.

Mr. Grant stated that he served as the Secret Service White House Detail (SS-WHD) Advance agent for President Kennedy’s trip to Chicago that was scheduled for November 2, 1963. According to Mr. Grant, President Kennedy canceled his appearance, but had requested that the trip continue, despite his absence, “as though he were still there.” Consequently, the trip was carried out exactly as planned with the exception that President Kennedy did not attend. Mr. Grant was informed that the President canceled his trip because of illness.

Mr. Grant’s advance work occupied him for approximately one week prior to the November 2nd trip. It required his continual presence in Chicago from the beginning of that week until the completion of the trip. Mr. Grant also participated with certain JFK military and air force aides in a pre-advance trip in the Chicago area. The pre-advance work was performed during a two week period preceding the Secret Service’s normal one week advance activities.

Mr. Grant stated that his advance work required him to be present a “great deal” at the local Chicago SS office Headquarters. He indicated that while performing his advance duties out of headquarters, he developed several contacts or associations within the SS and with the Chicago P. D. These contacts included making the acquaintance of Chicago-office Special Agents Abraham Bolden, Conrad Cross, and Edward Tucker; they also included working in close professional association with the Chicago office Acting Special Agent in Charge (ASAIC) Maurice Martineau.

Mr. Grant’s description of certain procedures that normally come into use when a local office (1) detects an active threat and (2) reports to Washington about the threat was as follows. First, if there is a threat detected, the WHD Advance Agent is the first person informed because of his position as the agent in charge of all protective operations in the field. Second, the threat is investigated in order to determine its validity. Third, Mr. Grant as WHD advance agent would have reported to the agent in charge of the White House Detail, who then was a Mr. Gerald Behn. This report would have been submitted to WHD-HQ at approximately the same time when the chief agent in the Chicago Office, Mr. Martineau, would have reported the same information to the Chief of the Protective Research Service (PRS) of the SS in Washington, D. C.

However, Mr. Grant stated that none of these procedures was ever put into effect because of the fact that no information about a threat ever came to his attention from any source including PRS, the local Chicago SS office, and the Chicago P.D.

Specifically, Mr. Grant was “not familiar” with the name of Thomas Arthur Vallee, a person who was suspected by the Chicago SS to be involved in a threat and who was detained by the SS. Nor could Mr. Grant “recall” in the context of this trip other instances of the investigation of a threat or the detention of a person.

[Note the quotation marks!! This HSCA staffer knows Grant is lying!]

Mr. Grant went to New York after Chicago, then left for Palm Beach on 11/14/63, then went to Dallas for the three-day period prior to 11/22/63. In Dallas, he assisted Special Agent Winston Lawson, who was the SS-WHD Advance Agent for the Dallas trip.

Throughout his stay in Florida during November 14-19th, 1963, Mr. Grant never heard of threats developing in the Miami area against President Kennedy from any Cuban or any right-wing source. In particular, Mr. Grant could not recall the name of Joseph Milteer. He doubted that he had ever been in touch during this period either with the WHD-SS Advance Agent into Miami for the November 18, 1963 JFK visit or with the local Miami office SS agent who received information about threats from officers of the Miami P. D. Mr. Grant could not remember having talked with either agent.

Prior to his appearance for this interview, Mr. Grant acknowledged having discussed this interview with Mr. Lawson and with Secret Service counsel. Their discussions concerned the kinds of questions that HSCA personnel had been asking and might ask, especially in re the assignments and activities of SS personnel. Mr. Grant said one SS counsel had said that he didn’t know what subjects the Committee’s questions had covered. Mr. Grant’s final remark was that he believed that the primary function of the SS was and is to protect the President.

Document # 180-10085-10498 Is a two page document from Goff to Blakey dated 6/5/78.

Reference is made to your letter dated May 24, 1978, requesting clearance to interview and the last known locations of several Secret Service agents. The information you requested is provided below:

(1) Inspector Ernest Olsson, Jr.

U. S. Secret Service Office of Inspection

1800 G Street, N. W.

Washington, D. C.

(2) George W. Hickey Jr.

(3) Clinton J. Hill

(4) SAIC Warren W. Taylor

U. S. Secret Service

Dignitary Protective Division

Room 944

1800 G Street, N. W.

Washington, D. C. 20223

(5) DSAIC Richard E. Johnsen

U. S. Secret Service

Dignitary Protective Division

Room 944

1800 G Street, N. W.

Washington, D. C. 20223

(6) Thomas Lem Johns

8005 Snowpine Way

McLean, Virginia 22101

(7) SA Max D. Phillips

U. S. Secret Service

Suite 805

Federal Building – U. S. courthouse

650 Capitol Mall

Sacramento, California 95814

Document # 180-10086-10342 Is a 119 page document. Only 6 pages of which are here.

The first two pages give a list of agents and their addresses where known. Some are listed as deceased.

1. Bolden, Abraham Resigned — Address unknown

2. Gopadze, Leon Deceased

3. Grant, David B. USSS — ASAIC, VPPD

Room 295

Executive Office Building

Washington, D. C. (202/456-2354)

4. Howlett, John Joe USSS — Special Agent at

Little Rock, Arkansas

(501/378-6241)

5. Johns, Thomas L. Retired

3321 Culloden Way

Birmingham, Alabama 35243

(703/ 378-6499 or

205/967-1417)

6. Kinney, Samuel A. Retired

341 Bayside Drive

Palm Springs, Florida 33460

(305/965-4296)

7. P. Kirkwood No record as an agent

8. Lawton, Donald J. USSS — Special Agent at

ID Headquarters

1800 G Street, N.W., Room 825

Washington, D.C. (202/634-5731)

9. Lawson, Winston G. USSS – SAIC, Liaison Division

Headquarters, Washington, D.C.

(202/634-5838)

10. McIntyre, William J. USSS – Special Agent at

Inspection Division Headquarters

Washington, D. C. (202/566-8352)

11. Moore, Elmer Retired

[blank]

Bellevue, Washington, D. C. 98005

(206/885-2589)

12. O’Leary, John J. Deceased

13. Olsson, Ernest E., jr. USSS — Special Agent at

Inspection Division Headquarters

Washington, D. C. (202/566-8352)

14. Patterson, William H. USSS — Special Agent

Houston, Texas (713/226-5791)

15. Roberts, Emory Deceased

16. Rybka, Henry Deceased

17. Steuart, Robert A. Retired

5626 W. Purdue

Dallas, Texas 75209

(214/352-1350)

18. Sulliman, Samuel E. USSS –SAIC, New Haven, Conn.

(203/865-2449)

19. Warner, Roger C. USSS — ATSAC, Washington

Field Office, Washington, D.C.

(202/634-5100)

Then there is a memorandum from Glenn A. Bennet to Blakey dated December 29, 1976. This gives a list of 18 more agents with addresses.

1. Glenn A. Bennet USSS-ID headquarters

1800 G. (Room 825)

Washington, D. C.

2. Andrew Berger USSS-SAIC of Baltimore Office

(phone 922-2200)

3. Robert Bouck [blank]

4. William Greer 705 Brunswick Dr.

Waynesville, N. C. 28786

(phone 704-452-4378)

5. George Hickey [blacked out]

6. Clinton Hill [blacked out]

7. Richard Johnsen USSS Headquarters

Protective Forces

1800 G. St., Washington, D. C.

(phone 634-5721)

8. Roy Kellerman 2063 Kansas Ave. N. E.

St. Petersburg, Fla

(phone 813-527-6327)

9. Thomas Kelly USSS-Assistant Director

Protective Forces

1800 G St., Washington, D. C.

(phone 634-5721)

10. Jerry Kivett USSS-SAIC of Atlanta Office

(phone 285-6111)

11. Paul Landis 7512 Cedar Rd.

Chesterland, Ohio

(phone 216-729-2343)

12. Winston Lawson USSS-Headquarters

1900 Pennsylvania Ave

SAIC of USSS Liaison Division

(phone 634-5838)

13. John Ready USSS-Headquarters

1900 Pennsylvania Ave

ASAIC of USSS Liaison Division

(phone 634-5838)

14. James Rowley 9615 Glencrest Lane

Kensington, MD 20795

(phone 301-949-2711)

office – 840-1058

15. Verne Sorrels P. O. Box 749

Dallas, Tex 75201

(phone 214-368-8371)

16. Stewart Stout Deceased

17. Warren Taylor ASAIC P. P. D.

Room 1 EOB

Washington, D. C.

(phone 395-4000)

18. Rufus Youngblood [blacked out]

* * *

Go to Part Two

Filed Under: Uncategorized

Joe Backes, ARRB Summaries: Page 12.

The 11th Batch

Part Two


Document # 180-10076-10062 is a 8 page New Orleans police report on David Ferrie giving his arrest background. It is dated August 18, 1961. It is to Joseph I Giarrusso, Superintendent of Police, from August C. Lang, Lt. Acting Commander, Juvenile Bureau

The subject: Contributing to the delinquency investigation, resulting from the runaway of Alexander Landry Jr, WM Age 15 of 5221 Arts. St. The subject alleged to be contributing is David Ferrie WM adult residing 331 Atherten Drive, in Metaire, La.

Fournier and Jenau are the investigators for this. On August 2, 1961 Alexander ran away from home and 24 hours later was found at the house of David Ferrie. Ferrie is supposedly Landry’s unit commander with the Civil Air Patrol. Lawrence Marsh, age 18 was told of Alexander Landry’s runaway status and suspected whereabouts and said he would return the boy home which he did.

On August 5th Al Landry ran away from home again. As of the 17th he has not returned home. The Landrys believe Capt. Ferrie is assisting the boy in his efforts to stay from his home.

The Landrys expressed “a lack of confidence” in Capt. David Ferrie. They say that ever since their son joined the C.A.P. squadron of Capt. Ferrie that he has never been the same.

It is important to emphasize that this C.A.P. squadron is a creation of Ferrie’s and not an official C.A.P. squadron.

The Landrys have been unable to determine if this C.A.P. squadron is legitimate. C.A.P. HQ in New Orleans is investigating and found no record of Ferrie’s squadron in New Orleans and Air Force HQ in Washington D.C. has no record of Ferrie’s squadron. The Landrys state that all the parents of all the boys are concerned about the validity of the squadron and are worried that their children are not getting the required training. The Landrys notified the FBI about this matter.

The Landrys state that Ferrie has taken their son on flights, and loaned him his car while he (Ferrie) was away on a flight. Mr. Landry stated that he personally saw Ferrie take several of the boys to a bar in New Orleans. He has also seen many of the boys staying at Ferrie’s home.

Mr. Landry furnished the names of several other boys in the squadron. One of whom, Layton Martens, was working in an office of the Balter Building for a Cuban organization helping Cuban refugees in the current Cuban situation, which is headed by Mr. Aracha-Smith. Investigators went there looking for Landry. They showed the secretary, Nancy Walker, a picture of Al Landry. She recognized him and stated that he was in the company of Ferrie on two occasions after August 5th.

It was also learned that Ferrie offered his services to Aracha-Smith after the Cuban situation broke.

On August 17 the boy called his mother from Houston, Texas who would return under the following conditions 1.) that she allow the squadron to reform, 2.) that she contact the Airlines (presumably Eastern Airlines) and explain this matter as Ferrie was about to lose his job, 3.) that she contact the other parents and have them withdraw anything said about Ferrie.

On the afternoon of August 17th Mr. Smith contacted the officers. Ferrie had been in to see him and dropped off a typed statement. The statement told a story of Ferrie driving the boy back to his home the night he ran away but the boy ran away from home again claiming to have seen his father and grandfather hiding in the bushes with a weapon. The young Landry was afraid for his life. Ferrie says in his statement that he advised the boy to return home. However, the officers now have two statements that Ferrie was seen in the company of the boy which tends to discredit this typed statement.

In the typed statement Ferrie describes how he too received a call from Al Landry from Houston. Well, where the hell is Ferrie supposed to be when he receives this call? If Landry is not with him, then who is Landry with in Houston?

The investigators went to the Balter Building to question Layton Martens and were of the impression that he was withholding information.

Investigators found Butch Marsch who found Al Landry on August 2nd and returned him to his parents. Mr. Marsch stated that the only way Al Landry will leave Ferrie is when Ferrie tires of him and finds a new boy.

Mrs. Landry explained that at one time Ferrie tried to rearrange Landry’s school schedule. The school called the parents and this idea was stopped.

Investigators contacted David Ferrie. Ferrie questioned the officers to see what information they had on him. Ferrie wanted to know what would be done to the boy upon the boy’s return. (What a humanitarian!) Ferrie harped on the idea that he was interested in the boy’s welfare and felt that things were too tough for him at home. Ferrie insisted that he did not know where the boy was staying in Houston, but he was flying to Houston tonight to see if he could find him and return him to New Orleans.

Lawrence “Butch” Marsch states that he assisted Mrs. Landry because he knew “that all boys go to Ferrie when they run away from home.”

At about 3:30 p.m. August 18, 1961 Officer Fournier received word via the phone from Mr. Smith that he could get the boy back in exchange for a signed statement from the parents indicating that they would not press charges. Smith requested that the statement be notarized.

Amazingly, this was done. The boy was swapped for the statement. Even more amazing, Al Landry wanted to file suit against his parents for taking him away from Ferrie.

The boy explained that he left home with $52 dollars. He said he hitch hiked to the Mississippi Gulf coast on the night he ran away, August 5, 1961. He returned to New Orleans after about 5 or 6 days and went to see Capt. Ferrie. He said he spent August 14th and 15th with Ferrie and then hitch hiked to Houston, Texas where he stayed for another week. He said that when he was in New Orleans with Capt. Ferrie they visited Mr. Aracha Smith. The dates of this are confusing as Nancy Walker placed this event on Monday and Tuesday August 7th and 8th. He said he lived in cheap rooming houses in Houston. He said he called his parents from the Houston airport and also called Capt. Ferrie thus learning of the investigation. He left Houston on August 17 and hitch hiked back to New Orleans.

Officers observed that he was extremely clean and fresh looking for living the way he described.

Officers questioned the boy as to how he got to Houston. He stated that he crossed the Huey P. Long Bridge, and went to Baton Rouge, La., but did not go through Houma, La. The routing maps to Houston will show that you will not cross the river bridge at New Orleans, if traveling by way of Baton Rouge to Houston. The boy was questioned about this and was unable to give an explanation.

Al Landry did admit that Ferrie did take himself and about 50 other boys and bought them beer at Graci’s lounge on Homedale Ave. The young Landry also admitted that he had been to Cuba on several occasions. He did not elaborate as to how he got there, when he was there, or who he went with.

Asked about his trip to Houston again, he did not remember.

Al was taken to the Youth Study Center. Officers talked with the assistant superintendent of the institution. He recalled a similar incident involving another run away boy. That boy’s name was Albert Cheramie.

There was a record in the Visitor’s Record Book of a Dr. D. Ferrie coming to see Albert Cheramie and written in red pencil was “NOT AN OFFICIAL VISIT”.

On August 4, 1960 Albert Cheramie was handled for running away from home and was found at the home of David Ferrie. Ferrie was then living at 704 Airline Park Blvd. Lt. A. J. Scardina, then Juvenile Officer for Jefferson Parish handled the case.

On August 21, 1961 Officer Jenau asked Ferrie if he has a Doctor’s degree and was he treating any patients. Ferrie said he had a degree in psychology and that he didn’t treat anyone but he did give advice. When asked about his visit to Albert Cheramie at the Youth Center in 1960 Ferrie admitted he did indeed visit Cheramie and realized he made a mistake after going.

Officers acquired the name of Eric Michael Crouchet, another member of Ferrie’s Civil Air Patrol. Subsequently, Crouchet made a typewritten statement that Ferrie, “committed acts of crime against nature on him on two separate occasions.”

Crouchet additionally told investigating officers that Capt. Ferrie masturbated him on 4 or 5 occasions, all of which occurred in Jefferson Parish. Crouchet also told of having been given alcoholic beverages at Ferrie’s house.

Crouchet made a statement involving Albert Cheramie. Crouchet said that when Cheramie ran away from home, Ferrie instructed him (Crouchet) to watch Cheramie’s house to see if Cheramie would come home. Crouchet was instructed by Ferrie to put Cheramie in a cab and send him to Ferrie’s house. According to Crouchet, Ferrie told him (Crouchet) that he was going to send Cheramie to Corpus Christ, Texas.

What is this? White Slavery?

On Tuesday, August 22, 1961 a search warrant was issued for the residence of David Ferrie at 331 Atherton Drive. A Passport was found, No. 2188946 for Eumes Albert Paul Cheramie. The picture in the passport was of Cheramie. The date of issuance was two days prior to Ferrie’s visit to Cheramie at the Youth Center.

Ferrie was questioned about the passport. Ferrie said he had it made because he and several other people were planning to go to Honduras to do some mining.

Mr. Hughes Cheramie, father of Albert, stated that he knew about the passport and was trying to get it back for a long time.

Also discovered was the notarized statement given to Aracha Smith in exchange for Al Landry. A letter was also discovered in an envelope, not postmarked. The envelope was marked “Cuban Revolutionary Democratic Front”.

Ferrie was arrested and booked with crimes against nature and Indecent behavior with a Juvenile.

James J. Landry, age 16, brother of Al, gave a statement that Ferrie performed sex acts on him on several occasions.

Ferrie was in deep trouble.

Document # 180-10076-10102 is a one page interview with Eric Michael Crouchet on January 4th, 1967 by Louis Ivon. Garrison apparently is trying to identify the Cuban who was with Ferrie when Ferrie tried to get Crouchet to drop the charges. Crouchet was shown some pictures but couldn’t identify him.

It is impossible to see what Garrison was up to without the same pictures to look at.

Ivons thought Crouchet to be a hostile witness who didn’t want to be bothered.

Document # 180-10076-10123 is a two page document. It is a background arrest record on David Ferrie. On August 24th, 1961 officers received a phone call from Mr. Alexander Landry that Michael Crouchet had come to his house the night before and told of being contacted by David Ferrie. Ferrie was trying to get Crouchet to drop the charges.

Most of the details of this report are the same as those in Document # 180-10076-10124. One additional point of interest was that Officer Jenau received a call from Chief Warrant Officer C. R. Knowlten from Camp LeRoy Johnson, who stated that to his knowledge the charter held by Ferrie was forged. Knowlten contacted the [CAP] National headquarters in Houston and found that there was no charter issued for the Metarire Falcon Squadron. Investigating officers contacted Major Christian, who is the commander of the Civil Air Patrol in New Orleans, who stated that Ferrie was at one time quietly removed from the New Orleans Cadet Squadron of the C.A.P.

Document # 180-10076-10124 is a two page document from Jim Garrison’s files. It is a two page statement from Eric Michael Crouchet. Mr. Crouchet was a 16 year old white male. The report is one of witness intimidation. At about 2:15 p.m. August 23, 1961 Capt. Ferrie walked up to Crouchet and asked him to sign a paper to the effect that everything he had told the police was false and said in anger about Ferrie. Ferrie told Crouchet that this was a way to get him out of trouble without anyone getting hurt. Crouchet answered, “Yea, me disappear.” and Ferrie stated that that could be arranged. Ferrie introduced a man as the Cuban Crouchet was supposed to go to Miami with. If Crouchet signed the ticket Ferrie would get him anything he wanted and if he didn’t he would have a bunch of Cubans after him. Crouchet signed the paper because he was afraid. Ferrie sees Crouchet again around 5 p.m. in front of Crun’s (sp?) Drug store. Ferrie was in his car with two other people. Ferrie asked what Crouchet wanted from the Cubans. Crouchet asked if a motorcycle wasn’t too much. Ferrie said he would like for Crouchet to meet Aracha Smith on Thursday. Ferrie said he had to pick up some things at the Balter Building and had to rush. When Ferrie wanted Crouchet to sign the papers he said that Crouchet was holding up his M-1’s and Bazookas. Ferrie said that one of the Cubans with him was a paratrooper who jumped in the first invasion of Cuba.

Crouchet was questioned by Officer Fournier and Charles Juneau (sp?)

Document # 180-10076-10155 is a 16 page report. It appears to be an arrest record on Thomas E. Beckham age 19 for the rape of Gloria Mae Borja age 14. Thomas is supposedly a Reverend. This document has nothing whatsoever to do with the JFK assassination.

Document # 180-10087-10362 is a 6 page document, with a charge out card by Marwell of the ARRB, of an interview with Tony Zoppi. He was interviewed on March 13, 1978 at 9:45 A.M. at the Riviera Hotel in Las Vegas. Mr. Zoppi was the Director of Public Relations at the Riviera Hotel. He was interviewed by Joseph Basteri and Albert Maxwell

Zoppi had known Jack Ruby since 1952, meeting him while he was employed at the Dallas Morning News as their entertainment columnist while covering the night clubs scene. Zoppi became a good friend to Ruby, he would frequent the Carousel Club. Zoppi claimed to be the only reporter to interview Jack Ruby and to have sat with Ruby at the defense table during the trial. After the trial, Jack Ruby called Zoppi from his cell and the conversation lasted about 40 minutes.

Zoppi tells his HSCA interviewers that he asked Ruby why he did it, “Ruby immediately began to cry, saying how sorry he was for those two poor children being raised without a father.” Ruby also talked of how he was raised without a father. Zoppi recounts this tale from Ruby about how Ruby would visit this orphanage in Oak Cliff on Christmas to bring gifts to the kids and how concerned he was because he would not be able to do that anymore.

Apparently, Zoppi didn’t know Ruby was Jewish.

The interviewers then try to get back on track asking about Ruby’s associations with organized crime in the Dallas area in the late 1950’s and early 1960’s. Zoppi “was quite certain he [Ruby] had no ties with any racket movement in Dallas.” Zoppi admits to having a close friend “who could be described as having friends in the underworld” and because of this friend he was fairly familiar with the criminal structure of Dallas. “Zoppi was firm in his belief that during that era, Dallas could be described as a very clean town.” Zoppi acknowledged that gambling was prevalent in Dallas. His friend whom he did not identify was now deceased and not of Italian origin was part of this gambling empire but Ruby was not part of this operation. Zoppi’s’ friend told him that the criminal underworld knew Ruby was an informant for the Dallas Police.

Zoppi spoke of Joe Civello who had a minor role in criminal activity because he was not too well liked by the Sheriff’s office.

Doesn’t that speak volumes? Does that mean if he was liked by the Sheriff’s office he would be allowed a major role in criminal activity?

Zoppi stated that because of his position with the Dallas Morning News he would have known if the mob had any strong control of the action in Dallas.

Zoppi then offered his explanation as to why Ruby went to Cuba. Zoppi said that he would frequently go to Las Vegas to review acts that were appearing in the various hotels in order to plug those acts to try and lure Texas oil men to the tables in Vegas.

There are some interesting deletions here on page 4 as Zoppi tries to clear up why Ruby went to Cuba. “Apparently someone in Cuba was aware of my role as a newsman because one day in December__________ Jack Ruby called me and asked me how I would like to go to Cuba and write about the clubs there.”

That’s exactly how it appears.

There is another one in the next sentence, “When I agreed that it would suit me fine, Ruby said he had a friend, Lewis McWillie, who managed the Casino in the Tropicana and he would arrange for McWillie to send us ( ) two tickets.”

Now there is room for a word there, a small word, and it’s absence doesn’t seem to alter the sentence but it is odd. No, there is no parenthesis. I’m just trying to visually represent the clear white space

Zoppi goes on to recount that McWillie got the tickets but that Zoppi could not go because one week prior to leaving he got a call from the Sands Hotel informing him that Frank Sinatra, Sammy Davis Jr., Joey Bishop, Dean Martin and Peter Lawford

were to appear there in what was billed as the summit meeting. Zoppi went to this.

Ruby went to Cuba and Zoppi was to meet him there after the holidays. Zoppi could not join Ruby as this was when Castro came to power. Zoppi dismissed the idea of Ruby meeting Santos Trafficante saying they were not in the same league.

How about the same prison?

Zoppi stated he had a slight acquaintance with McWillie and has seen him only a few times.

Document # 180-10093-10496 is a two page report from the Veteran’s Administration. It is an outside contact report to the HSCA, dated 9/27/78.

“Today at the Veterans Administration Liaison Office in B328 Rayburn Building I reviewed the VA file of John David Hurt.

“The file contained numerous documents and medical reports from Hurt’s entry into the Armed forces in 1942 to the present. It catalogued the history of Hurt’s severe psoriatic arthritis which resulted in 100% disability and amputation of several fingers. It stated also that Hurt was hospitalized in 1955 and 1959 for mental disorders, including alcoholism, schizoid reactions and manic depression.

“By the time of the assassination in 1963, Hurt had lost the use of both hands and the amputations were done in 1964.

“The file contained no information pertinent to the assassination. It contained copies of Hurt’s separation papers which stated that he had served in military intelligence in 1945 as an investigator: `Served in the POTT as an investigator conducting investigation of accidents, sabotage, etc. and supervised activities in which civilian and military personnel or property are involved. Collected and safeguarded evidence.’

“Nothing in the VA file contradicts anything Hurt told us about his background when we interviewed him on April 11, 1978.”

They recommended contacting Aleveeta Treon and attempt to pin down the source of the allegation that Oswald tried to call Hurt on 11/23/63. It is signed by Surell Brady.

Document # 180-10097-10495 is a 4 page document of an interview with Glynn A Young. There is a charge out record by Marwell of the ARRB.

Mr. Young ran a printing company at 424 Gravier St. in New Orleans. In the summer of 1963 Lee Harvey Oswald came to his premise two or three times over a three or four week period, concerning the printing of some 2 x 3 cards. He does not recall the requested information but it was something about Free Cuba or some such rhetoric and requesting donations.

Mr. Young recalls quoting a price of $9.00 a hundred or something and Oswald got upset at the price and appeared to him to have a high temper. He believes that he also had some printing done by a Mailer print located at 225 Magazine St. He does not recall Oswald being sent by anybody.

Young states that there was another printing job that Oswald requested a quote price on for printing on 5 1/2 x 8 1/2 sheet and he quoted him a price of $25.00 a thousand. He believes that this work was done by a Jones Printing Company. He states that the difference in the pricing is due to the fact that he is an offset printer and Jones was a letter set printer which would make it cheaper.

Shortly after the assassination, the FBI came in and showed him a copy which contained basically the same rhetoric as he recalls.

He stated that Oswald would come in somewhere between the hours of 12:00 and 1:30, that he was neatly dressed in a shirt, slacks, and states that at the time of the assassination there was quite a bit of feuding going on between the FBI, Treasury and Secret Service.

The only name that he could possibly recall is-he thinks belongs to the FBI-either Quinn or O’Quinn.

When shown the photo album, he was able to identify # 57 as Lee Harvey Oswald; # 5 as Clay Shaw, not that he personally known Shaw, but because Shaw was a public figure in New Orleans and Mr. Young has been in New Orleans since 1946

Document # 180-10097-10328 is the first part of a massive document on David W. Ferrie vs. Eastern Airlines. It is pages 618-867.

Document # 180-10117-10086 is a 7 page document. It is titled “Supplement to OCR of 4-4-78 on CIA-SS relations in 1963”. Sounds interesting.

Marwell looked at this 9/19/95

I. CIA-SS Relations in the Standard Operational Context of Overseas Presidential Protection.

As indicated in the 4-4-78 OCR, no CIA official who participated in the interview of that date had held an official position in any branch of domestic operations. Consequently, the clearest and most comprehensible information was obtained during discussions of those joint SS-CIA operations with which the officers were most familiar– overseas protection.

SS Agents who were engaged abroad in Presidential protection activity benefited from a variety of supplemental supportive services provided by and coordinated by the CIA field station with jurisdiction over the destination of a Presidential visit.

Initially, the CIA role in effecting coordination with the SS was to respond to institutional guidelines established by the SS which (1) enabled the CIA to select information which the SS considered relevant; (2) informed the CIA about proper SS channels for communication; and (3) acquainted the CIA with special procedures for reporting information to the SS. And example of such procedures would be that of “checking off” to determine whether one agency had already conducted an investigation of a threat subject in sufficient detail to eliminate the need for what would otherwise be a duplicative investigation of the subject.

Presidential protection was considered by the CIA officers to be of maximum importance and to have required close inter-agency cooperation, with secured communications lines being made available for instantaneous contact. “Daily contact” was normal.

The specific services which the CIA field station would provide included (1) “names and information,” (2) “logistical support,” and (3) “communications support,” all of which was “coordinated by the CIA.”

A limiting influence on the scope of CIA coordination was the Agency’s conception of the extent of its obligation to provide information. The officers consistently indicated that the information that would be furnished to the SS was never gathered specifically for or because of an SS request. The CIA’s reservoir of information was acquired for its own purposes, and its selection and processing of any information for the benefit of the SS was undertaken only as a secondary (though seriously taken) function, incidental to the regular course of CIA business.

A second limitation on inter-agency coordination was that the CIA recognized no obligation to provide the SS with analyses of the content of CIA and/or SS information except in those instances where the SS specifically requested analysis. Hence, a typical example of CIA-SS contact would involve a joint name trace and a tap-in on existing CIA information. Only rarely, e.g., in the case of a funeral of a head of state which is attended by other heads of state, would the CIA engage and share fully its analytical resources.

II. Preventive Intelligence and Inter-Agency Liaison Procedures

Despite the fact that none of the CIA officials were assigned in 1963 or at any other time to a domestic operations desk, the senior rank of these officials, and their extensive experience and expertise in various areas of intelligence, suggested to both interviewers that Team 4’s comparative perspectives on the SS could be refined by questioning the officials in general terms about processes and procedures used by the CIA for preventive intelligence purposes. The internal operations of the Protective Research Service of the SS provide specific investigative focal points for comparing the preventive intelligence capacities of the CIA and the SS. However, the PRS per se was not mentioned during this interview.

A slightly narrowed context for this line of questioning was provided by mention of the following topics: (1) anti-Castro Cuban-group activism in America in the early sixties, which, as a matter of general knowledge, involved to some extent both extensive domestic monitoring by the CIA of pro- and anti-Castro operatives, and also CIA anti-Castro assassination efforts (cf. Book V Schweiker report); and (2) the threat against American governmental leaders made by Castro after his discovery of the CIA-sponsored attempts against his life. However, neither one of these topics was pursued in substantively factual terms. In effect, the topics were used as hypothetical problems representing opportunities for the CIA to explain the applications of intelligence procedures.

In topic # (1) above, the responses were predicated on the position that the CIA’s Cuban intelligence effort in the early sixties was directed at the Soviet presence in Cuba, and not at any domestic-focus threat. Information currently available to Team 4 contradicts this position, i.e. CIA intelligence, especially the monitoring of Cuban groups, did not stop at the American border. Hence, the official’s frame of reference in defining (as solely Soviet-oriented) certain intelligence procedures used in the early 60’s Cuban effort tended intrinsically to distort their own picture of the overall scope and focus of their operations. Nevertheless, the official’s information about intelligence procedures used in dealing with large, geographically multi-focal groups, was as follows:

1. Field Experience and Special Training.

Perhaps the fundamental method used in developing Agency intelligence resources was to insure that their analysts had both (1) extensive field experience and (2) special training in the same area in which they subsequently become analysts. The clear implication is that a CIA analyst may literally bring to his position years of first hand contact with evolving social, economic, political and other conditions. No parallel practice has yet been determined to have existed in the SS.

2. Computerization.

“Incident Files” and “organization files” are classified, stored and retrieved in accordance with “programs.” Nothing stated about criteria involved in either the design or selection of the programs.

There is an automatic “link-up” and “full sharing” of information with all other intelligence agencies.

3. Flagging.

Apparently the Agency has developed a scheme for separating certain categories of information according to degrees of urgency. The example offered was that of “flagging the files of groups representing direct threats.”

4. Source Development.

If a continuing relationship with a covert source is involved, the source is “asked a specific series of questions.” No information was presented to explain whether the supervising case officer directs the questioning so that the hidden source ultimately becomes a conduit for questions developed jointly or exclusively by the case officer.

5. Data Feeds.

For as long as the SS (or other interested agency) requests a continuing data feed, the CIA will comply.

Issue (2) above, the September 1963 anti-Kennedy threat made by Castro, presented a different question for the CIA operatives to consider. Whereas the observation and monitoring of known groups (e.g. Cuban) requires evaluating the threat capacity of known subjects about whom data is continually being gathered, a threat couched in political rhetoric during a speech made in a foreign country requires a more purely analytical response, even to the extent of using analysis to determine what other indicators should be interpreted in conjunction with such a threat.

One official, in commenting on the Castro threat speech, stated that the selective juxtaposition of varied indicators was common CIA practice. The official addressed the issue of combining indicators in order to develop a systematic, multiple-variable, predictive analysis. To this extent, prevailing thematic statements about the limitations on analysis performed in inter-agency operations was qualified.

Other officials’ responses contrasted with and implicitly rejected this combined-indicator approach. The consensus among the other officials was that the SS does its own analysis; that given the narrow focus (and indeed lack) of CIA analysis, the CIA would accordingly not “speculate” prospectively about hypothetical or unusual combinations of indicators; and that such complex prospective analysis, which one official referred to as “crisis management via predictive systems,” was “not real world” and was “nonsense” which “would not work with sociology.” The Hudson Institute’s efforts in particular were singled out for criticism of this type.

In overview, perhaps it is of special importance to record that the notes on which this OCR-supplement is based were classified by an interviewee as “Secret”.

One permissible inference to be drawn from this classification is that the CIA has other intelligence methodologies and procedures, whether for monitoring of known threat groups or for containment of prospective threats through predictive interpretation of selected relevant indicators, which are classifiable as Top Secret.

Document # 180-10117-10173 is the David Ferrie vs. Eastern Airlines grievance hearing. Pages 1-179.

Document # 180-10117-10174 is more of the David Ferrie vs. Eastern Airlines grievance hearing. Pages 180-368.

Document # 180-10117-10175 is more of the David Ferrie vs. Eastern Airlines grievance hearing. Pages 369-491.

Document # 180-10017-10176 is more of the David Ferrie vs. Eastern Airlines grievance hearing. Pages 492-617.

Document # 180-10017-10179 is more stuff relating to David Ferrie vs. Eastern Airlines. This is 83 pages of letters and exhibits.

Document # 180-10117-10181 is 63 pages from the FAA to John O’Brien. O’Brien was the legal counsel for the Airline Pilots Association which oversaw the, or rather conducted the hearing between Ferrie and Eastern Airlines.

Document # 180-10117-10184 appears to be missing.

Document # 180-10017-10185 also appear to be missing.

Document # 180-10117-10186 is 47 pages from Eastern Airlines about David Ferrie. 3 pages are missing.

Document # 180-10017-10189 are 22 pages from the FAA about David Ferrie and Eastern Airlines.

Document # 180-10117-10190 are 23 pages from the FAA to William Bell, counsel for Eastern Airlines.

The Additional Releases Review

Document # 180-10081-10347 is a 140 page document containing various correspondence collected by Dr. Pierre Finck. Only 7 pages of which are in the ARRB release box. Page 1 is a xerox of a page that says “materials received from Dr. Pierre A. Finck – 3/ 9/78 (autopsy surgeon) Andy Purdy Log in as 1 Look out for receipt.” Page 2 is a cover sheet of Dr. Finck’s design. “I used this material to make copies for the Select Committee on Assassinations. Exception: the draft used for the final text sent with letter of 1 FEB 65 to Brig General Blumberg, was not reproduced*. Found with copy of final text in sealed envelope kept with my personal papers for many years. I opened the envelope after receiving the letter of D.A. Purdy on 25 FEB 78.”

* Cover sheet + 13 P reproduced by Purdy, then what looks like someone’s initials, dated 3/8/78, then Purdy’s initials.

Then we get to the meat of the document. There is a 4 page “Memorandum For Record” , dated Sunday 26 Feb 78. Subject: Transcript from Personal diary. It is from Pierra A Finck, MD, Avenue d’Orbaix 14, 1180 Brussels, Belgium. It is to Purdy, then of course, with the HSCA.

The first paragraph states that Dr. Finck has typed this from his handwritten diary.

Dr. Finck mentions that he has received a phone call 1 Nov 77 in Brussels from a C.S. Petty, P.O. Box 35728, Dallas, TX, 75235, tel 214-638-1131 asking him if he is willing to go to the U.S. to appear before the HSCA. Finck says he is available.

The third paragraph goes on well into the the third page of this four page letter. Finck recounts his attendance 8 DEC 77 at a conference by Loyd Braithwaite, a Criminology Professor from Michigan, on: “Organized Crime and the JFK Assassination” held at the SHAPE High School.

Lansky’s wealth= $ 300 million. Everyone connected with him is a millionaire.

L made money in gambling after prohibition.

WW2: L arranged with OSS to move Luciano (Prostitution) to NYC.

After WW2: Luciano goes to Naples in 1946 (Executive Clemency).

Flamingo Hotel, Las Vegas = from Mafia money (Siegal) S accused to steal [Finck misspells it as “steel”] $5000 a week, sent to Switzerland through his mistress.

Chicago: bug for 6 years in Giancana’s office. Bodyguard Scalzetti = Detective in Chicago Police Dept. fired in 1960. Bug continued.

1959: JFK and RFK investigate organized crime. Chief counsel is RFK. McClellan Committee. At time of 22 Nov 63, RFK very active against organized crime in Las Vegas.

Judy Flexner [Really, Judith Exner] introduced to JFK by Frank Sinatra in Las Vegas in 1960. Mistress of Giancana and Scalzetti. Visited White House in 1961 for 2 and 1/2 years.

Operation Mangos [Mongoose} = CIA covert operation to kill Castro; led by William Harvey. Maheu selected to arrange assassination with Mafia help. 1960: Maheau = right arm of Howard Hughes, 1960: JFK, RFK, Allen Dulles, Director of CIA, did not know association with Mafia to kill Castro. Trafficante jailed and released by Castro; involved in plot to kill Castro.

(page 2)

1962: Scalzetti hired by Cook County Sheriff’s Office. Fired in 1964.

CIA = $100,000; Giancana = $90, for training of Cubans to kill Castro.

JAN 61: JFK learns about plan to kill Castro, not the mafia connection. Bay of Pigs.

JFK becomes suspicious of CIA.

Cubelo = Mr. Amlash = CIA agent in Castro’s entourage. CIA sends poisoned darts to Cuba.

CIA did not inform Warren Commission about mafia role against Castro.

22 Nov 77: John Artime dead at age 47.

McCone, new CIA director, not informed about Cuban Plan

1963: Cubelo becomes double agent. SEP 63: taped press conf of Castro: US leaders should be warned, lives in danger

CIA : Swine Fever in Cuba. Cubans planned to infect Texan cattle with Foot and Mouth disease.

22 NOV 63: CIA gives poisoned pen to Amlash to kill Castro.

Lee Harvey Oswald (LHO) = CIA agent originally operating as Pro Castro Agent. Out of USMC 2 months earlier than foreseen, goes to USSR from 60 to 62. Marina is niece of Secret Police Officer.

Raiken [Spas T.] former German Intelligence Officer = CIA connection, Raiken waited for LHO and Marina when they returned from USSR.

In Haiti, someone offered $70,000 to kill JFK.

Clay Shaw was a CIA agent..

LHO distributed leaflets [note the next two words are “in Cuba”. Finck attempted to obliterate them by retyping over them with an “x”. Keep in mind these are merely the notes taken by Finck from Braithwaite’s presentation. ] On back: address of Cuban Revolutionary Committee= 544 Camp Street.

LHO was an FBI informant for $200/month.

Clay Shaw was member of an anti Castro group. Ferry [Ferrie] principal witness for Garrison, was found dead in hotel room.

22 Nov 63: Cubelo and Artime actually carried out the killing. LHO used as diversion. Actual rifle provided by CIA; admitted in OCT 77. Bought by Clay Shaw.

Similar to rifle found on 6th floor. LHO when arrested had $13 [“on him” retyped over with “x”] Agenda with name, car license no., Tel No of Dallas FBI Chief. Page missing for years, kept by FBI, released in 77. Dallas Police tapes sent to Archives in 76 = missing. Tippit seen with LHO and Ruby. Ballistics evidence related to Tippitt, sent to Archives = missing

Braithwaite does not think LHO was able to kill JFK: poor marksman, rifle in poor shape.

(Page 3)

In the whole scheme of organized crime, witnesses are killed. LHO was a witness in the plot to assassinate JFK.

A stripper in Ruby’s night club said during TV or parade: “This is where it’s going to happen”. Asked to testify, car ran over her head.

Earl Warren and LBJ did not want the truth to be known to avoid a war with Cuba and WW3. EW and LBJ were wrong. Conspiracy of anti-Kennedy Force.

1975: Congress starts its investigation.

1963-1966: 17 witnesses who disagreed with Warren Report died of natural or violent death.

The remaining paragraphs of the letter detail how Dr. Finck got to D.C. to testify for the HSCA.

Document #180-10110-10007 is a 99 page deposition of Yuri Nosenko taken on 6/19/78 at CIA headquarters in HSCA executive session. Present were Stokes, Define, Preyer, Fauntroy, Burke, Sawyer, Dodd, Ford, Fithian and Edgar. Also, Blakey, Cornwell, Berning, Smith, Morrison, Klein and Goldsmith.

The sessions was closed because of evidence obtained by the Committee that the testimony may defame, degrade, or incriminate people. Nosenko was sworn in.

This hearing was recorded on tape. However, only under strict conditions. It’s single purpose was in verifying the transcript. The witness feared any permanent tape made of his voice might get into the hands of KGB agents.

Isn’t that where he is from? Wouldn’t they already have a recording of his voice?

Could it be that he doesn’t want his voice recorded so American intelligence could compare it?

Anyway, the CIA strictly controlled the tape. It was kept at CIA headquarters, handled by a Mr. Gmirkin, a CIA employee, after the HSCA stenographer was finished reviewing the transcript Gmerkin supposedly erased the tape and destroyed it.

Nosenko spoke without an interpreter.

A little background, Nosenko was born October 30, 1927, in Nikolayev, Ukraine.

His father was a prominent Soviet shipbuilding engineer. In 1956 when he died he was a Soviet Minister of Shipbuilding in Moscow.

Nosenko attended various naval schools during WWII. At the end of the war he went to the Institute of International law and English. In 1953 he transferred to the KGB Second Chief Directorate where he was assigned as a counterintelligence officer in the American Embassy Section of the American department. His job was to keep track of American correspondents and U.S. Army personnel residing in Moscow.

In 1955 he transferred to the Tourist Section of the Seventh Department of the Second Chief Directorate.

In 1958, he joined the newly created American-British Commonwealth Section of the Seventh Department.

In January, 1960 he transferred to the American Embassy Section of the American Department.

In 1962 he accompanied the Soviet delegation to the Disarmament Conference in Geneva, Switzerland as a security escort. He remained in Switzerland until June 15, 1962. He then returned to the Soviet Union and resumed his duties in the American-British Commonwealth section in the Seventh Department of the Second Chief Directorate.

In January 1964 he again accompanied the Soviet delegation to Switzerland and at that time defected.

On February 4th he was brought to the United States.

Nosenko was asked what is the function of the Second Chief directorate.

“Prior to 1960 the Second Chief Directorate was responsible for counterintelligence work against all foreigners coming to the Soviet Union, diplomats, tourists, businessmen, delegations, private visitors.

“But in 1960, from January, 1960, the Second Chief Directorate in process of reorganization, took in one fist, put all counterintelligence service which were prior different services in the KGB. Let us say prior to 1960 KGB were involved in counterintelligence work six different outfits. Second Chief directorate working against all foreigners, counterintelligence; Third Chief Directorate counterintelligence work against all Soviet armed forces. Fourth Directorate counterintelligence work against Soviet intelligencia; Fifth directorate counterintelligence work in Soviet industry, economy; Sixth Directorate, counterintelligence work in transport; and Department K counterintelligence worked on all atomic industry enterprises.

There is more information on the breakdown of Soviet intelligence, then on p. 36 we get to Oswald information.

Klein asked if there was an investigation of Oswald once he was named as the alleged assassin of President Kennedy.

“Yes, sir.” This is covered in document # 180-10131-10323. Klein is trying to get from Nosenko what he knew about Oswald and if Nosenko knew that information about Oswald would be important to the United States and thus part of the reason for Nosenko’s defection. Klein goes around in circles with Nosenko, who will not give a straight answer to this, and keeps repeating that he did not know what was important to Americans about Oswald only that KGB was trying to see if they ever approached him in any way. They didn’t but they spied on him to see if he might have some connection to intelligence community in America.

“Honestly speaking, I was thinking that their attitude would be that they understand that he is not stable person, that he is a nut, because all his behavior shows he is a nut, not only trying to commit suicide, but he defected. He was allowed to defect, finally was allowed. How long he was back then he tried again, attempts to go again Soviet Union. He is a tumbleweed, a rolling stone.”

This is the kind of thing the U.S. government wants to hear Nosenko say.

Klein returns to the idea that Nosenko’s knowledge of Oswald might be something Nosenko would use to establish his bona fides. Nosenko finally responds that he didn’t have that thought because the CIA and FBI thought he as a dispatched agent in 1962.

Nosenko admits that his story of a recall telegram wasn’t true. Nosenko demanded to be allowed to defect saying a telegram had been sent for him to return to Moscow immediately. Nosenko had been helping the CIA previously and he invents a “oh no, I’ve been caught you must help me” scheme.

He also admits the question of his rank was not true.

“You see what happened, I was appointed Deputy Chief of Seventh Department in 1962. On analogical cases was appointment of another officer, Deputy Chief in Second Department, Second Chief Directorate. Both had rank of Captain. The position of Deputy Chief of Department, Colonel. In 1963, in September 1963, was made presentation on my next rank; my next rank was to be Major but when it was all confirmed on the level of Department, on the party organization, and all papers were given for signing and further must going in Personnel Directorate, the Chief of Second Chief Directorate General Gribanov decided in my case and in the case of another Deputy Chief of the Second Department also captain himself, must be made presentation on Lieutenant Colonels, what was done in 1963. It was well known fact in Second Chief Directorate, in 1963, December, I was sent on a short trip in Gorki district in search of former KGB officer Cherepanov, who ran away. He tried to contact Americans. He contacted them but it was unsuccessful.

Americans returned the papers, considered him a plant when he was through. He noticed the KGB working against him. He ran away. All over the Soviet Union started the search of Cherepanov. In difference places appeared signals. It was in Gorki district signal. I was sent because I know him personally. I work in same department with him, and search on him in Gorki district, and when I was sent in Gorki district, they put on my travel document “Lieutenant Colonel Nosenko.” This was document with me when I come in January. Surely, of course, human vanity.”

Now Nosenko was held in isolation from 1964 to 1969. In 1967 Nosenko was questioned by a CIA officer named Bruce Solie.

Nosenko became an American citizen in 1974. He has been under the CIA’s care all along and still works for the CIA.

Nosenko is then shown the May 30, 1978 deposition. Nosenko made corrections to the transcript and placed his initials on the lines where corrections occured. (I did not notice them in the copy released.)

Klein was worried that the CIA might have told Nosenko what to say and what not to say. Nosenko says no one told him what to say but, “No, sir. On the contrary, before I met you [Klein] I was told that I must tell everything, whatever questions will be. I even asked if questions will be concerning cases, the names, even these, whatever stuff the Committee would like, “What you know you must answer.” This seems to confirm that Nosenko and CIA did talk about what Nosenko should say to the HSCA.

Nosenko mentions that no one could approach a target without permission from Moscow. There was one exception. “The only one thing for qualification I want to add, that up to September, 1963, none of the KGB’s outfits in Leningrad, in Kieve, in Byelorussia, in any part of the Soviet Union, can make an approachment to any foreigner without permission of Moscow.”

Now in September of 1963, one place had so many tourists and other interesting targets that they changed this procedure and allowed approachment without permission from Moscow, that place was Finland.

“Only in 1963 was making special permission concerning KGB apparatus in Leningrad and only concerning Finnish tourists because a big amount of tourists were coming from Finland and not going to any part of Soviet Union, only Leningrad, and after two, three, four or five days, back to Finland.”

This is interesting as Oswald entered the Soviet Union via Helenski, Finland. Oswald entered in 1959 and the no approach allowed without Moscow’s permission was in effect but it’s an interesting note that Finland was nearly an open door, so much so that the KGB changed their procedures over this area, granted years later.

Nosenko recounts to the HSCA that he saw a cable from the KGB’s Mexico City station about Oswald’s request for a visa.

Bill MacDowall wrote an interesting article on Nosenko on his web site “JFK…The Voice of Reason” entitled, “NOSENKO…THE SPY WHO LIED..AND LIED..AND LIED!”. One of the things Bill wrote that struck me was the Nosenko might be able to destroy the story of Oswald in Mexico City, which might be the real reason he was kept in isolation.

Nosenko points out that because of an American exhibition in Moscow at the time Oswald wanted to defect in `59 there wasn’t anyone from KGB working against him. Nosenko also states that no KGB officer talked to Oswald to check him out before decision to not allow him to stay was made.

Krupnov opens a file on Oswald when they do let him stay. The Chief above him ordered him to open a file on Oswald.

Nosenko mistakenly believes Oswald was drafted into the Marines. Nosenko doesn’t know how he knew or when they knew but stresses over and over again that it was not discussed in relation to whether Oswald could defect or not.

On page 96 Representative Sawyer got upset that Klein was asking questions that Nosenko had already responded to. They apparently adjourned and were to reconvene on Tuesday, June 20, 1978.

Document # 180-10131-10320 is a 21 page deposition of James C. Michael taken 7/27/78. Kenneth Klein took the deposition for the HSCA.

James C. Michael is a registered alias. Mr. Michael is an employee of the CIA. He has been employed there since 1956. In July 1964 he talked with Yuri Nosenko.

Michael was assigned to debrief Nosenko on his KGB career.

“Michael” interrogated Nosenko when Nosenko was in confinement in April or May of 1964. Michael was in the Soveit-Russian Division. The chief of that division was David E. Murphy. Michael had never before debriefed a KGB official.

When asked if he read any files on Oswald prior to debriefing Nosenko, Michael replied no, though he may have read previous debriefings on Nosenko that may have contained information about Oswald.

Nosenko was held in a house in suburban Washington D.C. Michael would visit him two or three times a week, about 3 hours a session. These sessions were taped.

At one point, on p. 10, Klein shows Michael a document, “from CIA folder which states, `H.S.C.A. Requests -25 July 1978′ and in parentheses it has a name which I won’t say on the record. Then it says `Deposition -27/7/78.’ Showing you this report which says `Memorandum for the Record.’ Source AE Donor, Date of Interview 3 July 1964.”

The document is a report of the July 3, 1964 debriefing of Nosenko by Michael.

Klein draws Michael’s attention to p. 63, and there is also the number 18 at the top of the page because this page is part of a newly created file, there is a name, Michael’s true name. Michael is with the Soviet Russian Division, Counterintelligence Group, KGB Branch. Klein then shows Michael another document, “Memorandum for the Record, subject follow up report on the Oswald case, source AE Donor, date of interview 27 July 1964” and with the new numbering system, that is the numbering system of the binder which this report is a part of, it begins on p. 22 and goes through p. 39. On p. 39 is Michael’s true name, typed, not a signature. Both of these reports detail questioning of Nosenko about Oswald. Michael was given a series of questions to ask Nosenko about Oswald.

Nosenko was given a copy of the July 3 report and Nosenko went through it line by line. That seems rather odd to me.

Document # 180-10131-10323 is a 40 p. deposition of Yuri Nosenko. This was taken 5/30/78. So it’s earlier than document # 180-10110-10007. In fact, this one is referred to in document # 180-10110-10007.

Klein is accompanied by a researcher Johanna Smith.

Reference is made to Klein speaking with Nosenko on May 27 and an earlier time in May. The May 27th discussion was in reference to Oswald.

Klein asks Nosenko to tell him everything he saw or heard about Oswald while he (Nosenko) was in Russia.

“It was the fall of 1959. I was working in the 7th Department of the Second Chief Directorate of the KGB, being Deputy Chief of the First Section, which is responsible for American, British and Canadian tourists. To me had come a senior case officer, Major Georgiy Ivanovich Rastrusin. He was responsible for counterintelligence work against Intourists. He had come with a question that an American tourist, Lee Harvey Oswald, made a request to Intourist to stay in the Soviet Union.

“I asked him who is responsible for him and what we know about him and what kind of materials we have, and he answered me that nobody is working against him personally, only him. He found materials, it was several pages only. There was a questionnaire, which every tourist before coming fills out in his country where he applies for a visa, or for the Soviet Embassy through tourist firm.

“There were two checkups but I do not know by what officer, one of the officers of the 7th Department, one to check also the archives center, the archives of the KGB, and the other checkup through the archives of the intelligence service. They have different archives.

“Both these checkups in archives showed no existing materials on Lee Harvey Oswald. He was in the Soviet Union the first time.

“Besides that, there was information received from an interpreter who worked with Oswald, about him. There was a short note made from the Intourist page, what kind of tour Oswald had, how many days he will be in the Soviet Union, and also there was written by hand, by Major Rastrusin, a summary concerning the question which he found out in Intourist concerning the question of his stay, he wished to stay in the Soviet Union.

“Here it is necessary for me to clarify that KGB working against foreign tourists doesn’t have capability to, not everyone, but even 50 percent, in working against tourists, and which orders of the leaders of the KGB — KGB is picking up the interesting targets, who are the interesting targets.

“Any foreign tourist, let’s say, an American tourist, if he had any connection with the intelligence community, he will be very interesting target. This tourist will be given priority of interest by the KGB. Anyone who is working, any tourist working for the Federal Government of the United States is a very interesting target. Anyone who specializes in any field on the Soviet Union or Russia, in general, I mean teach, a professor, assistant professor, who is specializing on Russia, history, language, law or whatever it will be, it is interesting for the KGB, because KGB considers that they can be connected with the intelligence community in the United States.

“Students, young people who are studying in any field of Russia, Russian language, Russian history, Russian economy, is a very interesting target, because there is a chance that they in the future will be working for the Federal Government or maybe for the intelligence community.

“Further, any tourist who has any Russian roots, his parents, grandparents or the tourist himself was born in the Soviet Union, in Russia, because it gives the possibility to the KGB to check all his relatives who are in Russia and to view their work on this basis, having in mind approachment. This is the category of people on whom KGB is paying attention.

“Further, any tourist who appears in the Soviet Union the second time automatically becomes a suspicious person and becomes an interesting target. This is the category of people against whom in general KGB pays attention.

“Oswald didn’t belong to this category of people. That is why he wasn’t paid attention. Besides that, what I said above, there is also an important thing that in this period of time, in 1959, the summer-fall, there was going on in the Soviet Union, in Moscow, an American exhibition at Sokolniki Park. Why? Because almost 95 percent of all who were on the American side working for this exhibition knew the Russian language and the KGB was covering these American personnel very tight. It means not one department was responsible for the American exhibition but every outfit of the whole counterintelligence of the Second Directorate was working also against the exhibition.

“After I looked at the materials which Major Rastrusin showed me, what the 7th Department First Section had on Oswald, in my eyes he wasn’t an interesting target, targets about whom I was speaking before.

“I went with Rastrusin to the Chief of the Section of the 7th Department to whom we reported this material, and then we went further to the Chief of the 7th Department, who looked and there was nothing interesting.

“The second thing, the KGB is not very fond to deal with defectors. If it will be a defector from the intelligence community, a diplomat, an interesting person, they will be interested, but with a person they don’t see any interest in, then they are not burning with wish to deal with him.

“And it was made decision by the Chief of the Department, in the presence of the Chief of the Section, me and Major Rastrusin, to answer, to give an answer to Intourist to ask Intourist to tell Oswald that in accordance with all rules and regulations Intourist is not dealing with people who want to stay, Intourist is dealing only with tourists, that is Intourist will recommend him that in accordance with Soviet procedure, he must go back home, in the United States, where he must, if he wants to come to live in the Soviet Union, he must visit the Soviet Embassy, go to Consular department, where he will talk with people about his wish, and if he would still persist and wants to go ahead, it will be taken normal procedures.

“It was a soft brush, the way you can call it. After that — this is what I remember — after that, the next day or a day and a half, the same Major Rastrusin reports that trouble took place with Oswald. Oswald cut his wrist and was taken to the hospital. How it happened, I asked, and he told me that an interpreter has come to him, to take him on a tour, after it was announced to him before, about they must go in accordance with Soviet procedures. Next day it was —

“Mr. Klein- After it was announced that he could not stay?

“Mr. Nosenko – He couldn’t stay and Intourist has no dealing with this question.

An interpreter has come and was waiting for him 20 minutes, half an hour, he is not appearing. She asked the hotel personnel, Hotel Berlin, in Moscow, to check did Oswald leave the hotel, again, because in accordance with Soviet procedures in hotel any foreigner when leaving the hotel leaves key on the floor where he is living. It wasn’t on the floor. It means he was in the room. And the interpreter was concerned and asked the manager, the administration of the hotel, to check it out, and went with them. They broke the door and in the room they found Oswald lying with cut wrist.

“He was immediately given a call to ambulance, for ambulance, and he was taken to hospital, Oswald, Botkin Hospital, where he was given transfusion plus stitches on his wrist.

“And there in the hospital Oswald again stated that if they, the Soviets, will not allow me to stay, then I will kill myself.

“Again I immediately went to Chief of Section, to Chief of Department and reported what was going on, what happened, and here the office of Chief of Department decided to check him through psychiatrist from the Botkin Hospital, and to invite another one. This task was given to Major Rastrusin to arrange it. In this way both psychiatrists check him independently and each one will write what they found.”

Their diagnosis? “Both mentioned that Oswald was mentally unstable”. Okay, so a decision is made to report to higher ups in the Soviet government that Oswald might kill himself if he can’t stay. According to Nosenko they were fearful of repercussions and reactions if Oswald did kill himself that the Soviet government or the KGB would be blamed for the death so they let him stay.

“It means it was reported to Khrushchev to allow him to stay on the basis of those clarifications what I told.”

A decision was made that Oswald’s stay would be handled through the Red Cross. He was to live in Minsk and receive $700 rubles from Red Cross for living.

In December 1959 Major Kim Georgievich Krupnov, another senior KGB intelligence officer, was ordered to prepare a paper on Oswald. A file register was created on Oswald in the KGB’s center archives. The paper was to accompany the file. It was sent to the KGB of the Belorussian republic in Minsk. Nosenko says he has seen this file. The file told what kind of work to give Oswald.

Nosenko was told to spy on Oswald at his residence and at work. His mail and telephone conversations were to be monitored. Nosenko refers to this as “to control him”. Oswald was followed around. Why? “Oswald was suspected in connection with American intelligence.” Well, why wasn’t he suspected of this prior to being allowed to stay?

That’s the last Nosenko hears of Oswald until 1963 when Oswald tries to get a visa to go to Russia in Mexico City.

At this time Nosenko is Deputy Chief of 7th Department, Second Chief Directorate. Lt. Col. Vladimir Alekseev, Chief of the 7th Department, visited Deputy Chief of Service No. 2 of the Intelligence Service of the KGB, Col. Turalin. Turalin gave him a cable received from the KGB station in Mexico City about Oswald’s request for a visa.

Nosenko did not know Oswald had left Russia. Anyway, Nosenko and Alekseev go to see Chief of Department 9 supposedly of intelligence service of KGB who did not want anything more to do with Oswald saying they had enough of him in `59.

Nosenko uses the same term “soft brush” in handling Oswald.

Soon afterward Kennedy is assassinated. It’s turmoil in the Second Chief Directorate. The chief of this, General Gribanov told Nosenko to immediately contact the KGB in Minsk and tell them to get all their files on Oswald, bring them to Moscow immediately, use a military plane.

Nosenko was also asked to talk to chiefs and see if anyone contacted Oswald. Col. Gruzdev said he couldn’t do anything, Oswald was sending file. Nobody talked to him because there was no indication of what to do.

The files from Minsk arrive. It’s a big suitcase, maybe two. Nosenko says 7 or 8 volumes. The Chief of 7th department, chief of American section, officer Krupnov, Nosenko, 4 or 5 other officers, and officer from Minsk started to look at the files. They are looking for anything on whether KGB contacted Oswald and were preparing to write a report on that.

They are interrupted. In comes Col. Matveev, a deputy chief of first Department, of the Second Chief Directorate. Gribanov changed his mind. They are going to take all files on Oswald, the First American department will get them and they will produce a report which will go to the leader of the KGB and Soviet government.

A few days later Nosenko is talking with Gribanov. Several officers from Second Chief Directorate went to Minsk. One of these investigating officers is a friend of Nosenko, Vladimir Krivosheev. They talked to Oswald’s co-workers at the plant and his friends in this hunting club. The story of Oswald the poor shot is told, he couldn’t kill a rabbit.

HSCA counselor Klein asks Nosenko a series of questions.

“Did Oswald make a written application for Soviet citizenship?”

“I haven’t seen it. He must, but I haven’t seen it.”

“When Oswald slashed his wrist he was taken to a hospital and psychiatric tests were performed by two doctors at the request of the KGB. Did you read the two reports?

“Yes, I have seen them, and read them.”

“Can you remember anything about them?”

“No. I remember the main point of them both, and they coincided in their opinion Oswald was mentally unstable.”

“Before you received these reports was there any reason to believe that Oswald was crazy or not normal?”

“Before reports, before cutting wrist? No, there wasn’t anything known to KGB.”

Klein asked before Oswald cut his wrist who made the decision that he couldn’t stay. The decision was made by Chief of the 7th Department, Second Directorate.

Apparently, both Nosenko and Rastrusin said there wasn’t anything interesting about him. Yet, once allowed to stay he suddenly is suspected of being connected with American intelligence community.

At the time this decision was made Oswald had not been interviewed by any officer of the KGB.

Klein asked if they knew if Oswald was a Marine. Yes, they knew. How they knew Nosenko doesn’t say. Did they know he was a radio operator? Nosenko doesn’t know. The First Chief Directorate was not consulted about Oswald and rejecting his request to stay. Apparently, the Second Directorate had the authority to make the decision.

Klein asked if a microphone was installed in Oswald’s room. Nosenko didn’t know.

Klein asked if Nosenko read the KGB file on Marina. No, but there was material on her in the files that came from Minsk.

Was the KGB familiar with Marina’s background? Yes. It’s unclear when the KGB was interested in her, prior to Oswald meeting her, while he was dating her, or after they made marriage license application. Anyone who had any contact with Oswald was checked out.

According to Nosenko, when Oswald went to Minsk all files went with him, nothing stayed in Moscow. There will only be an indication that a file exists and that the file is in Minsk.

The file was thick because it included all the surveillance reports.

Interestingly, Klein asks if Oswald sent any letters to the Soviet Embassy in Washington, D.C. See “Document Discovery” in “The Third Decade” Vol. 9 #3 p. 40. for an interesting tidbit on Oswald and the Soviet Embassy in Washington D.C.

Klein asked if there was a KGB training school in Minsk. According to Nosenko, in `56-’57 there was a school for young officers but from second part of `57 no. The training educational system of whole KGB was in Moscow, excluding, of course, school of surveillance in Leningrad and excluding military counterintelligence schools, border troops, but for First and Second Directorate, only in Moscow.

Document # 180-10131-10342 is an 87 page deposition from E. Howard Hunt taken November 3, 1978. Present were Robert W. Genzman and Mike Ewing, HSCA counsels and Hunt and his counsel Ellis S. Rubin. Hunt was placed under oath by reporter Shirley B. Dempsey.

Hunt was asked if he ever worked for the CIA. He answered yes and then they immediately went off the record.

JFK Exhibit No. 94 was shown to him, a letter explaining to Hunt that he is under no constraint regarding his prior secrecy oath with the CIA.

He then goes into his story of how after Watergate some people thought he resembled one of the three tramps arrested in Dallas, the story in the tabloid, where he was on November 22, 1963, the Chinese grocery store, first named “Wah Ling”, then “Tuck Cheong”, picked up his kids and stayed at home watching TV. He states he was never in Dallas, Texas until 1971 when Charles Colson asked him to interview General Paul Harkins. He did not meet Sturgis until 1972. He was not in Mexico in 1963. He provided to the Rockefeller Commission 17 different photographs of himself taken between 1961-1964. FBI photoanalysist Lyndall Shaneyfelt compared the photographs and concluded that Hunt and Sturgis are not the tramps.

He sued Alan Weberman and Michael Canfield for their book “Coup d’Etat in America”. The publisher went out of business and returned to Nigeria.

Then “The Spotlight” and “The News Journal” of Wilmington, Delaware printed a story that the HSCA received from the CIA a memorandum from Richard Helms written in 1966 stating that some day it might be necessary to reveal that Howard Hunt was in Dallas on the day of President Kennedy’s assassination.

Hunt demanded that the HSCA confirm or deny that they ever received such a memorandum, and if it does exist to turn it over to Hunt so he could refute it.

The HSCA said they are aware of Hunt’s request and will make every effort to respond to it.

Hunt was asked if he was ever in Texas at any time in 1963.

No.

“Did you at any time in your life receive a letter or any other form of communication from Lee Harvey Oswald or anyone claiming to be him?”

“No.”

He was asked about the Diem cables he forged to implicate President Kennedy in the assassination of Diem and his brother. He admitted doing that at President Nixon’s request. He was asked if he was involved in any manner in the fabrication of evidence to link any person to any assassination. “No.”

Hunt thinks Oswald killed President Kennedy and that Oswald has some ties to the KGB.

Hunt said he was not involved in any way with the CIA’s investigation of the assassination.

He was asked if he had any relationship with Mr. James Angleton or Ray Rocca or if he ever discussed the assassination with either of them. Hunt said he had no relationship with either man and no, he didn’t discuss the assassination or assassination investigation with either man. He knew who the men were but had no dealings with them.

He was asked if during his work for President Nixon in the so-called “plumbers unit” if he and his colleagues ever investigated information provided by a woman who claimed to have data related to Fidel Castro’s personal reaction to the Kennedy assassination.

“I was in Miami with or without Gordon Liddy late `71 or early 1972. I was in a hotel room, I think in the Dupont Plaza in Miami, and I was meeting with Mr. Bernard Baker and another member of our team, Martinez, Mr. Martinez, and Martinez mentioned that he had available a woman who was a recent arrival in the United States. I did not know at the time that Martinez was a contract agent for CIA.” He goes on to say that he interrogated this woman, note this is not Marita Lorenz, and she told of how a “pall of gloom” had settled over the Fidel household because according to her Kennedy was on the verge of making a secret deal, a detente, with the Castro government. Hunt recorded this on audiotape, transcribed it, in the White House, and sent it to the CIA via the White House CIA pouch. Hunt made a summary report on this for Charles Colson.

Mr. Genzman- “Did you or anyone else ever undertake or consider any other investigation of any information pertaining to the Kennedy assassination during your period of working for Richard Nixon?”

Hunt- “Beyond the incident I have reported, I can’t recall anything, no.”

“Was there ever any interest among the people working in the Nixon administration concerning new information about the Kennedy administration?”

Hunt, “…if it could be shown ex post facto that Mr. Castro and President Kennedy had a working relationship, this might have been of some potential value..”

Hunt was asked if he prepared a summary of the information he gave to Colson on the woman who knew what Castro’s reaction was to the Kennedy assassination to President Nixon or Robert Halderman. Hunt said no. Of course, Colson could have shared the information.

Hunt was asked what happened to the summary and tapes of this interview. Hunt said at one time they were kept in his office in the Executive Office Building. He stated that he thought he sent the actual tape over to the CIA. He then recounts how his safe was violated on June 19th, 1972. But that’s an old story. Colson, Dean, Erlichman and L. Patrick Gray forced the safe open. There was an inventory, some material was destroyed. The safe was opened by the General Service Administration on orders of John Dean, 48 hours after the Watergate break in.

Hunt was asked if this interview could have been discussed on the infamous 18 minute gap. He didn’t think so. He never heard anything further on the matter. He was asked if was discussed on the June 23, 1972 smoking gun tape that forced Nixon to resign? Hunt said no.

Hunt filed a motion for the return of the material taken from his safe which if acted upon would have resulted in a court hearing about the contents, the substance of the contents and the chain of custody.

Colson squashed the motion because it would have been embarrassing to the White House. Hunt sued his lawyer for malpractice for acceding to Colson’s wishes.

Genzman wondered if the decision to withdraw the motion was related in any way to discussion of hush money for Hunt or a possible clemency.

Hunt was asked what was Colson concerned about in the safe. Hunt wasn’t quite sure specifically but, “examination of what was left behind was all highly incriminating leads to other people. So obviously there was a kind of division of the spoils by interested people in the White House to take their names out of the folders and leave my name in. That is what happened.”

Genzman, “John Ehrlichman, in some notes which he made in 1971, made reference to an episode in which Nixon was trying to get Director Helms to provide his aides with a copy of a secret internal CIA report relating to the Bay of Pigs. Helms evidently was refusing to make a copy available. In his notes of September 18, 1971 Ehrlichman wrote that Nixon was going to tell Helms that `the President is to have the full file or else. Nothing withheld.’ ”

“In those same notes Ehrlichman wrote that the President stated that `Liddy and Hunt’ were to help read or analyze the material once it was obtained. Do you recall this episode?”

Hunt, “No, this is the first time I heard of it.”

This refers to the CIA Inspector General’s report, which I think has been released, perhaps not fully. I recall John Newman saying he has it from a variety of sources and each one is redacted differently.

Hunt was asked if any such material was made available to you on the Bay of Pigs or on Cuban matters. Hunt said no.

The Ervin Committee, also known as the Watergate Committee, published a CIA employee’s affidavit that Hunt had “transmitted sealed envelopes” to the CIA during the Watergate period, 1971-2.

“Yes, I sent occasional things over to the CIA.” Hunt quantifies that by saying it was not a direct from him to Helms system but that there was an intermediary step of addressing the envelope to Chief Reports Officer, Western Hemisphere Division and turning that envelope over to the liaison office in the White House which then had its own pouch and courier service out to CIA. They may have put the envelope Hunt addressed inside another envelope and addressed it to someone else.

Hunt states that he never addressed anything to Helms directly. Colson thought that Hunt was some kind of continuing intelligence liaison between himself (Hunt) and Helms.

Genzman quotes an excerpt from an interview with Chuck Colson conducted by Senator Lowell Weicker and Howard Baker wherein Colson refers to a meeting his lawyer, David Shapiro had with Hunt. Hunt was making demands for more money.

Hunt wanted to see Colson and Shapiro wouldn’t let him. Hunt allegedly said, “the White House better get on the stick; that he had things on Ehrlichman, Krogh and Young, and that he had tapes.” This implied Hunt had tapes threatening to the Nixon Administration.

Hunt stated the assertion is false. Hunt said Shapiro wrote many self serving accounts of that meeting.

In a 1977 interview in Boston, Hunt stated that he knew of a reported plan to “eliminate” Omar Torrijos in Panama. The article states, “Hunt was asked, did you know of anything about a project to eliminate Panamanian dictator Torrijos. In response the convicted Watergate conspirator answered, Panama was a drug traffic area where the drug could move easily, the CIA said with mixed blessings of the Panamanian Government. There was mixed concern on the part of drug officials and certainly on the part of some of the Latin American drug informants. I think the feeling was if Torrijos didn’t shape up and cooperate, he was going to be wasted. That never happened. I don’t know any of the people asked to participate other than the people in the Plumbers Unit. They have that as part of their brief”.

Genzman, “Do you recall a discussion where the people in the Plumbers Unit were asked to participate?”

Hunt, “No, not at this point, I don’t. All I recall about that is that there were people within the Special Investigation Unit who did nothing but concern themselves with the drug traffic, and they were in liaison with the CIA. One was a gentleman named Minnick, and another was Lucien Conein. It was more an impression I had than anything else.”

When asked if he knew who else was involved in these discussions Hunt mentioned that Liddy during his time as Special Assistant to the Secretary of Treasury initiated or strongly supported Operation Intercept which reduced the drug flow from Mexico. Genzman tries to get back to finding out more of possible assassination plans, specifically in this case Torrijos. Hunt doesn’t think that that plan ever came to fruition. He said Bud Krogh not only had responsibilities for the Special Investigations Unit but was also very active with the DEA. When asked whether he had any direct knowledge that anyone in the Plumbers Unit were in fact asked to participate in a plan of this sort Hunt said he had no direct knowledge.

“I know that Mr. Liddy and Mr. Minnick at one time or another discussed the sense of frustration not only with regard to Panama, but with regard to the Golden Triangle, and Mr. Minick having traveled at White House expense out there to Burma, Laos, and so forth, and come back with a report that the White House found very disturbing. It was in this context that Mr. Torrijos came in focus.”

Genzman asked if any of the Watergate burglars had any knowledge of these discussions. Hunt said he didn’t know.

Genzman then showed Hunt an excerpt from an interview with Manuel Artime. Artime mentions that Hunt approached him to “take care of Torrijos”. Artime goes onto to suggest that Barker and Sturgis were involved in a plan.

Hunt claims to be familiar with this, referring to the document as the Dardis memorandum and asks Genzman if this document has been authenticated. Genzman replies that it has. Hunt replies with a press release from his attorney Ellis Rubin issued December 16, 1977 in response to a Jack Anderson column published the previous day.

“Anderson’s column recites a so-called 1973 secret memo from Richard Gerstein’s investigator, Martin Dardis, allegedly quoting Manuel Artime, Hunt’s close friend and Godfather to one of his children. This office represents both Hunt and Sturgis now, and we were the attorney for Dr. Artime over the years. I would have known of any so-called plot because Dr. Artime confided in me, and I possess the facts concerning both Hunt and Sturgis and all of their activities.

“Jack Anderson made no detectable effort to contact Howard Hunt to refute the charges. He knows I represent both Hunt and Sturgis, and he could have contacted Mr. Hunt through this office. I now ask why did Mr. Dardis and Anderson wait until after Dr. Artime’s untimely death from cancer to make Artime their sole authority for Hunt’s so-called involvement in the conspiracy? Along those lines, I challenge Mr. Dardis or anyone else to produce any written memorandum, signed by Manuel Artime, or a tape recording of his voice substantiating these outrageous lies.”

Genzman asks Hunt, “On November 14, 1972 you transmitted a confidential memorandum to the Nixon circle which asked for further support payments for you and the other Watergate burglars. In the memo you stated, `The Watergate break-in was only one of a number of other highly illegal conspiracies undertaken at the behest of the White House.’ Have all of these other illegal acts now been publicly disclosed?”

Hunt, “As far as I know, they have.”

Genzman asks Hunt to describe these other illegal acts. Hunt goes only so far as to remember the Ellsberg affair and the forging of the Diem cables. Hunt would not go beyond stating those two items.

Genzman, perhaps sensing that Hunt was referring to something, if not several somethings beyond what he is admitting to, asked what was so highly illegal about the Diem cables. “That perhaps may have been the hyperbole of the moment. It was certainly discreditable, and there was a good deal of public outrage when it was made known.”

Not a great answer, but Genzman goes on.

Genzman asks Hunt if he recalls a covert plan called Operation Diamond from 1971-1972. Hunt knew of Operation Gemstone which was an umbrella project for a lot of sub-projects which Liddy drew up and presented to the Attorney General [and this most be a misprint] Mr. Diem [?] and Mr. Magruder for their approval. Hunt did not recollect what Operation Diamond was supposed to be.

Who is this Mr. Diem?

Genzman told Hunt that, “Bernard Barker stated that Operation Diamond was a plan to take strong action against drug smugglers, and he also stated that you approached him concerning this plan. Does that refresh your recollection?”

“Not particularly. I think I now recall Barker having made that statement, but I don’t subscribe to it.”

Hunt could not recall any of the details of this plan nor what happened to this plan.

Hunt is asked several questions relating to Watergate figures, and Ameritez, which was a dead corporation resurrected by Bernard Barker to provide cover for the Watergate entry. According to Hunt, Miguel Suarez allowed his corporation, Ameritez, to be used as the apparent renter of the suite that was used by the break-in people. Hunt said he never knew Miguel Suarez. He did not know or had contact with Daniel Hofgren, a man who worked under Charles Colson. Hofgren apparently had something to do with the Panama problem. Hunt did not know a Miami man named Edmond H. “Skipper” Hill.

Hunt is asked about his interview with General Harkins. According to Hunt, he flew to Dallas, arriving at about 2:00 A.M. interviewing the General at breakfast and leaving Dallas around mid-morning. The purpose of the interview was that the Nixon administration was interested in Harkins because Colson felt that Harkins, as troop commander, took issue with some of President Johnson’s policies and that Harkins would have interesting information on who had started the war and just who had finally lost it. Hunt describes the interview as not very rewarding.

Genzman asked Hunt if he discussed the Kennedy assassination with anyone in Dallas. Hunt, of course, responded no.

Hunt returned to the “Spotlight” article and again asked for the CIA document referred therein. Hunt also asked the HSCA to subpoena Victor Marchetti, Joe Trento and Miss Jacquie Powers of the Wilmington Sunday News Journal, and the people of the HSCA staff referred to anonymously in the article.

They took a break and returned. The deposition is broken up into two parts. Upon returning Hunt is asked what his contact was with Nixon, if any, during the Bay of Pigs. Hunt said none directly. Hunt referred to previous testimony of his on this, and the two books he has written. Hunt had a meeting at the request of Nixon’s then military aide general who was then Col. Robert Cushman, who had served with Hunt in the CIA. Cushman told Hunt that Nixon was the action officer for the National Security Council for the Cuba project. If any help was necessary get in touch with Cushman. Hunt was given Cushman’s private phone number.

Genzman asked Hunt if Nixon was ever aware of the CIA-mafia assassination conspiracy directed against Castro. Hunt said no, “but that it’s certainly not conclusive.” Hunt had no idea if Nixon knew one way or the other.

Hunt was asked if he knew that Tony Verona was being contacted by a member or members of the mafia. “No.”

“Do you know whether any Mafia figures were involved in the Bay of Pigs planning or actual invasion?”

“No, I never heard of any Mafia presence within the project until I guess the Church committee began bringing it out.”

Hunt was asked if he knew of the CIA’s hiring of Mafia figures in an attempt to assassinate Castro during the Bay of Pigs period or later. Hunt said no. He only learned of it during the Church committee.

Hunt is then asked about James O’Connell.

“The name is unknown to me.”

Robert Maheau?

“No contact.”

Edward Lansdale?

“Well, I knew Ed Lansdale from the time he was an Air Force Lieutenant Colonel up through his retirement period –met him, interviewed him in the White House.”

“Do you know of any role which he played in the Bay of Pigs invasion or in the CIA-Mafia plots?”

Listen to this! “No, none. I had not seen Ed Lansdale for many years and then about fall, I think, of 1962 Dick Helms called me in and there was General Lansdale working for MacNamara, [It’s spelled like that in the document but this must be Robert McNamara. Just another incompetent transcriber] I guess, in Defense. He said, `Can you just briefly tell Ed about the Bay of Pigs, and tell him in your opinion what went wrong because he is going to do something else that would have relevance to it. (emphasis added)

What was this?

Sheffield Edwards?

“Sheff was Director of Security. I had no personal contact with him as such.”

Same question about him with Bay of Pigs and CIA-Mafia plots.

“I just never had any contact with him on those subjects.”

William Harvey?

“I think I officially met Harvey once after he took over the remnants of the Bay of Pigs project. I had no personal contact with him. I don’t know what he was really involved in until the Church committee began revealing some of these things.”

Charles Cabell?

“I have no knowledge of his involvement in anything except as portrayed in my book “Give Us This Day.” Cabell came into our war room at an unfortunate moment and delayed the take-off of our strike plans. He was then the Acting Director of CIA.”

“Did you have any other contacts or any type of relationship with Cabell?”

“Only when I was on Dulles’s staff. I would see the Deputy director occasionally.”

“Which years were you on Dulles’s staff?”

“I think that was from late summer of `61 until Mr. Dulles’ retirement, which I think was in `62, if I am not mistaken.”

Retirement my ass, President Kennedy fired Dulles and Hunt damn well knows it.

Hunt explains that he worked for the CIA in a continous relationship from October 1949 to May 1, 1970.

“Any employment relationship with the agency or asset relation with the agency since your retirement?”

“No.”

James McCord?, prior to Watergate.

“None. Never heard of the name.”

Frank Sturgis?, before Watergate.

“I met Frank in late December `71, or January `72, for the first time.”

“Are you sure of that date?”

“Yes.”

“Year?”

“Yes.”

Victor Espinosa?

“I don’t know him.”

Edward K. Moss?

“No.”

“Do you know if Tony Verona knew Ed Moss?”

“No. Tony and I had kind of an adversary relationship during the Bay of Pigs period and tended to keep things from each other.”

Genzman then switches gears and asks about Mexico.

“When did you serve in Mexico as a CIA employee?”

“Let’s see, from December 1950 until March `53 I then went down to the Cuba project in the summer of 1960 and stayed for several months and then left.”

“Is it your testimony that you were never in Mexico in 1963?”

“Yes, that’s my testimony.”

“Did you have knowledge about the CIA’s maintenance of secret photography and wire-tap surveillance operations at foreign embassies in Mexico City?”

“Oh, yes.”

“Would you describe these operations.”

“Well, there was photo surveillance and physical surveillance of the Iron Curtain embassies. Of course in 1953 when I left there it was pretty primitive. In those ten years a great deal of enhancement took place. [10 years?? That would be in 1963.]When I went back in 19 — I have to be careful about this. [Yeah, you sure do.] I went back in 1959. In that 6-year period [Ah, “6 year period”, much better than 10.] a great deal of enhancement has taken place and the physical and photo surveillance of all the target countries, at the station had increased enormously in size, and of course in that period I was on the outside. I was there as a private U.S. citizen, so I don’t really know what they had. But we had sporadic surveillance in the early `50s. I think it was pretty much full time by 1959.”

“Do you have specific knowledge about the surveillance operations in Mexico City?”

“No.”

“Do you have any knowledge about the CIA’s surveillance of Lee Harvey Oswald when he made his trip to Mexico City in the fall of 1963?”

Hunt gives a very interesting answer, “Only what I have read in such books, for example, as “Night Watch” by David Phillips.”

“Do you know whether the CIA ever obtained a photograph or photographs of Lee Harvey Oswald during his visits to the Soviet-Cuban embassies in Mexico in 1963?”

“I have heard it alleged publicly. I have no knowledge.”

“I would like to show you an excerpt from your book, “Undercover,” your autobiography. This deals with the break-in which you conducted for the CIA in Mexico City at a foreign embassy. In this excerpt you stated that your CIA burglary team flew from Mexico City to Dallas after the job, changed identities in Dallas, and then returned to Washington. Can you tell exactly what this change of identities in Dallas consisted of?”

“No, I can’t. I didn’t, of course, go. I think that was the Guatemala embassy. I think in those days you had to change planes in Dallas. There were no direct flights — or Fort Worth.”

“For the record, I am referring to page 88 of your book “Undercover.”

“Can you tell how this change of identities was accomplished?”

Hunt, “Well, Obviously the team had two sets of identities. They had their own and fictitious identities suppled by the agency.

“Was Dallas used as a particular point for such a change of identity operation?”

“No. It just happened that was the first American port where the plane landed after leaving Mexico, and in order to get through customs and immigration they had to revert to their own identities.”

“Did this change of identities involve any physical changes?”

“I have no idea. It was a Staff D team.”

“Can you explain what you mean by Staff D?”

“Yes. That was the name associated with the National Security Agency.”

“Do you have any other knowledge of the use by the CIA of false identities in operations conducted in Dallas or through Dallas?”

“No. I was not particularly sensitive to the name Dallas. I could just as easily have said Fort Worth or Houston, for all I know.”

Hunt was asked about an FBI memorandum written two days after the Watergate break-in, FBI Director Gray stated that Frank Sturgis was, quote, “involved in organized crime activities the details of which are not available,” end quote. Do you know what these alleged Sturgis activities were?”

“No.”

“Do you know what Gray was basing his statement on?”

“No.”

Genzman again asks about whether Hunt knew Sturgis or any of his pseudonyms?

Amazingly, Hunt helps the fool Genzman, “let me help you on this. There came a time during the Bay of Pigs operation when I heard of a man named Frank Fiorini who had powered a plane with Pedro Diaz Lanz dropping leaflets on Havana, and that was the only reference I had heard to Frank Fiorini. Later on when Barker and I were casting about for people to use in connection with GEMSTONE, Barker mentioned the name Sturgis. And I said, “I don’t know anybody named Sturgis.”

“And he said, “Oh, during previous times he was known as Frank Fiorini. You remember he was Pedro Diaz Lanz.” [Now that should say with Pedro Diaz Lanz. Unless something else was going on.]

Now obviously the next question should be, “When did you first meet Frank Fiorini?”, right? But Genzman doesn’t ask it. Idiot!!!!!!!!!

Instead Genzman asks if Hunt was ever associated with organized crime.

“No.”

“Did you ever know Sergio Arcacha Smith of the New Orleans branch of the Cuban Revolutionary Council?”

“No.”

“Did you ever receive mail or other communications from him?”

“No.”

“Did you ever know Guy Bannister in New Orleans?”

I like Hunt’s answer. “No, or anywhere else.”

“What was your relationship during the late `50’s and early 1960’s with David Phillips?”

“I first met Dave when he was a contract agent. He was on the Guatemala project, and at that time we were co-directors on the project. He was the Chief of Propaganda and I was the Chief of Political Action. Later on I saw Dave in Havana, where he was an undercover agent. It was a meeting of chief of stations just before the Castro takeover. I saw Dave again in Mexico City sometime — I can’t remember whether I saw him in 1960 or not, but in any event Dave was a familiar figure in Western Hemisphere operations. The he showed up on the Cuba project and first he worked in Washington and I worked in the Miami [area] and then when I left the Miami [area] at the end of things and came up to Washington I worked with Dave for about a week.

“Where did you work with Dave Phillips for about a week?”

“In Washington.”

“Did you ever meet Dave Phillips in Dallas?”

“No.”

“Did you ever use the alias Knight for a cover name?”

“For him, for my book, “Give Us This Day.”

“Did he himself ever use that alias?”

“No. That was assigned officially to Dick Helms — Knight. He was Fletcher L. Knight.”

“Did you ever use the alias of Bishop?”

“I don’t think so.”

“Do you know anyone who did?”

“No.”

“Do you know anyone by the name of Maurice Bishop?”

“No.”

“Does the name mean anything to you?”

Hunt refers to a civil matter where he was once asked if he knew an individual by that name except it was given to him as Morris.

Oddly, Genzman does pick up the cue here when he didn’t on Fiorini. “Do you know anyone who ever used the name Morris Bishop?”

“No.”

“In any of your last contacts with David Phillips, was the name Maurice Bishop mentioned?”

“No; nor at any time.”

“How and when did you first meet Bernard Barker?”

“Barker was assigned to me in Miami, when I went down there to take over the Revolutionary Democratic Front in the fall of 1960, I guess it was. He was identified to me by the man I replaced as a Cuban who had been an asset of the Havana station, and he was going to be my general, de facto.”

“Did he continue in this relationship with you during the period of preparation for the Bay of Pigs invasion?”

“He did. I left the Miami area shortly before the Bay of Pigs invasion, and I think Mr. Barker stayed on. I next heard Mr. Barker had been redeployed, as it were, to Chicago for training and employment by the agency, since he and many other Cubans were surplus to agency needs at that time.”

“Did you know Pedro Diaz Lanz?”

“I met Pedro on one occasion fully described in my book “Give Us This Day”. I knew, as I mentioned, Pedro Diaz Lanz’s name from the Frank Fiorini episode of the leaflets. Getting into the preconvent period of the Bay of Pigs, I heard our Air Force, Cuban exile air force, needed more pilots. Barker mentioned Lanz…former head of the rebel air force, would be a good candidate. I arranged that Pedro be given a stipend by the Revolutionary Democratic Front…and recommended to Dave Phillips, I think it was, that Diaz Lanz run leaflet flights for Dave Phillips particular interests, and I think there was a good deal of resistance to that in Washington.”

“Did your relationship with Diaz Lanz ever involve any B-25 aircraft?”

“Again. I published the whole thing in my book, “Give Us This Day”. He had an aircraft available. It was under a sheriff’s lien. I suggested to Dave Phillips and others that the lien be reduced or eliminated and the aircraft outfitted and used for propaganda overflights.”

“Did you ever arrange for funds for Pedro Diaz Lanz so that he could effectuate the release of any equipment which was held by the U.S. Customs?”

“Customs, no. My impression was there was a sheriff’s lien on the aircraft.”

“Were you aware that the plane was not owned by Pedro Diaz Lanz?”

“I think in subsequent years Frank Sturgis has indicated to me that he was part owner of the aircraft. I didn’t know that at the time.”

“Were you ever involved on behalf of the CIA in an investigation into allegations of CIA assistance to Pedro Diaz Lanz in the release of the B-25 aircraft in 1961?”

“No, I didn’t know it was ever released.”

Apparently Sturgis made this allegation.

“I don’t to this day know either that the aircraft was released, that CIA provided money for it as I recommended, or that Sturgis talked about it at all. I talked about it with Sturgis a little, but I don’t think I ever learned from him that the aircraft had been released or used during the Bay of Pigs operation.”

“Aside from this aircraft incident, was there any other connection between you and Sturgis before you actually knew Sturgis?” Very good Genzman.

“No, I just had knowledge that Mr. Fiorini was the co-pilot of that plane. There was no connection. I had a collateral piece of information on a man named Fiorini, known as a soldier of fortune in the area. Years later, I was to learn, 1971 or 1972 that Frank Fiorini became Frank Sturgis, who was about to be introduced to me by Bernard Barker.”

“What was Operation Forty?”

“I don’t know.”

“Did you ever know of a boat named Cusa?”

“No.”

“Did you have any knowledge about CIA training operations in New Orleans in 1961?”

“In New Orleans; no. Are you talking about Lake Pontchartrain? That is something else.”

“Lake Pontchartrain, Houma, Louisiana?”

“Yes. Well, part of the exile navy was trained up at that area; that is all I know. and some of the LSTs were maneuvered around the lake, and I think brought down finally.”

“Let me ask you about the locations Belle Chase and Covington.”

“The names don’t mean anything to me.”

“Could you speculate as to why Pedro Diaz Lanz would deny ever having met you?”

“You mean he has denied it? He is one of the few Cubans who has denied it. Most Cubans claim they knew me, knew me intimately, during the Bay of Pigs. It is refreshing.

“No, I don’t, except that I have been in a lot of trouble, and I don’t think Pedro would gain anything from associating himself with me in any way. Too, there is the aspect he is probably a pretty proud individual, and he was first brought to my attention as literally a charity welfare case, although I had ulterior interests in him as a pilot, and I think he realized it, and he doesn’t want to look back on those days when he didn’t have enough food in his house for his wife and child. Again, that is speculation.”

“Did Pedro Diaz Lanz ever work for the CIA?”

“I don’t know.”

“Did Pedro Diaz Lanz ever receive money from the CIA?”

“Well, as I have stated a little earlier, I arranged that money be given to him to settle his immediate needs, and beyond that I have no knowledge of any money that was paid to him. I recommended again that he be taken under the Cuban exile air force at the appropriate rank and be paid the normal stipend paid Cuban exiles.”

“Are you testifying that the money you arranged for him to receive after you had first met him was CIA money?”

“Had to be. Again, I don’t know that it was paid. I assume it was paid.”

“When did the CIA activity at Lake Pontchartrain cease, to your knowledge?”

“I have no idea. It was a maritime operation. I was political; I had nothing to do with the military. I handled the political aspects of it, the government in exile.”

“Were you ever involved in the Frente Revolucionario Democratico?”

“Intimately?”

“Did you have a role in the formation of this organization?”

“Yes.”

“Could you give us details about the formation of this organization?”

“It was covered in great detail in my book, “Give Us This Day”. Briefly, when I was brought into the project, I was told I was to be the political liaison with this government in exile, and we met at the Hotel Ambassador in New York City, and I met the members of the junta at that time, including Manual Artime for the first time, and they and I worked out a rationale, a modus operandi. I approved their articles of incorporation, as it were.”

“What year are you referring to?”

“Summer of 1960. And told them that we would be moving down to Mexico City from there, as indeed we did.”

“Did the CIA sponsor this organization?”

“Oh yes, Through me. I set their budget and exercised a degree of control that one could exercise over the spending of the moneys that we provided.”

“When did CIA sponsorship of this organization end?”

“Well, the new frontier came in and decided that the FRD was too archaic; it wasn’t progressive enough; and it would be supplemented by a new breed of politicians from Cuba, many of whom arrived recently from a close embrace with Castro.

“I was unwilling to bring these elements into the FRD and requested reassignment to Washington, which was granted me. My successors developed the Cuban Revolutionary Committee out of the ashes of the FRD.”

“What was the date of the formation of the Cuban Revolutionary Committee?”

“I would place it about a month before the invasion; I would put it in March sometime, of 1961.”

“Did the CIA sponsor the CRC?”

“To the best of my knowledge.”

“Do you know how long this sponsorship lasted?”

“Very brief. I would say two months or so.”

“What was the relationship between the CRC and its New Orleans branch?”

“I have no idea. I didn’t know they had a New Orleans branch.”

“Did you ever have contact with the Cuban revolutionary delegates?”

“I don’t know who they would be. The name doesn’t mean anything to me.”

“Let me give you some names and have you comment.”

“Luis Rabel?”

“Unknown.”

“Sergio Aracha Smith?”

“Unknown.”

“Arnesto Rodriguez?”

“Unknown.”

“Manuel Gil?”

“Unknown.”

“Frank Bartes?”

“Unknown.”

“Auguston Guitart?”

“No.”

“Frank Delabar?”

“Never heard of him.”

“Would you repeat how you knew about the Lake Pontchartrain operations?”

“Because I was present at the briefings at headquarters when Mr. Dulles and other high officials of the agency were briefed on the project and status of each aspect of the operation.”

“Who was in charge of the operation?”

“Who was in charge of the paramilitary operation? I have forgotten his name.”

“I would like to ask you about your knowledge of or involvement in some of the following: Alpha 66?”

“Just a name to me. I have heard it; that is all.”

“Did you know Antonio Carlos Veciano Blanch?”

“No.”

Movimento Revolucionario del Pueblo?”

“No.”

“Jose Miro Cardona?”

“Very well.”

“Could you give us the details of your relationship?”

“Yes. Dr. Miro was a former, I think, Chief Justice of the Cuban Supreme Court, a very distinguished barrister. He had been counselor-ambassador to Spain and had taken refuge in the Argentine Embassy. I had him brought up from Argentina, when I thought the time was right, and inserted in the FDR leadership as the compromise chief.”

“How about Agrupacion Monte Cristi?”

“The Monte Cristi had delegates in the FRD. I can’t remember the name of the representative.”

“Did you know Jorge Nobregas?”

“No.”

“The next organization is JURE.”

“I have heard of it but the name doesn’t mean anything to me. I think it is an acronym.”

“Did you know Sylvia Odio?”

“No.”

“Rogelio Cisneros Diaz?”

“Duney Perez Alamo?”

“No.”

“Luis Bal Cuena?”

“No.”

“Directorio Revolucionario Estudiantil?”

“The DRE. Dave Phillips ran that for us. Albert Muller is still in prison over there. But that is classified, I think. He was the head of it. He went into Cuba and was captured.”

“Carlos Bringuier?”

“No.”

“Movimento Democrata Cristiano.”

“The Christian Democratic Movement. I have heard of it. It had a delegate in the FRD.”

“Laureano Batista Falla?”

“No.”

“Victor Paneque?”

“No.”

“Movimento Revolucionario Trienta de Noviembre?”

“Thirtieth of November. No I never heard of that.”

“Carlos Rodriguez Quesada?”

“No. I know Felix but not Carlos”

“International Anticommunist Brigade/Interpen.”

“I have heard of it. That is all.”

“Gerald Patrick Hemming.”

“No.”

“Howard Kenneth Davis?”

“No.”

“Frank Sturgis, as a member of that organization?”

“Of the anticommunist Brigard? No, I didn’t know Sturgis was connected with it.”

“Roy Emery Hargraves?”

“No.”

“Lawrence Howard?”

“No.”

“William Seymour?”

“No.”

“Pedro Diaz Lanz, as a member?”

“No.”

“Marcos Diaz Lanz, as a member?”

“No.”

“Mike McLaney?”

“I met Mike McLaney once at Joe’s Stone Crabs in Miami. He was then dating a girlfriend of a friend of mine. That is all. This was sometime in 1960.”

“Maz Gorman Gonzalez?”

“No.”

“Orlando Bosch?”

“No.”

“During the time period 1962 to 1965, where were you stationed specifically?”

“After Allen left, I joined Tracy Barnes’ new Domestic Operations Division, which should have been called the commercial operations division, and I worked for them in Washington until sometime in 1965, when we left for Spain under cover. I think the division had three different locations while I was with them.”

“What were the details of your undercover operation in Spain?”

“Very little. I spoke Spanish. I wanted to get out of Washington. I was looking to Spain as a retirement post. Helms thought it would be a good idea that I get out because my name had become included in the Library of Congress card system. I had written numerous books under pseudonyms and somebody made a mistake and put my true name down. Helms thought this was a bad idea. I thought it was a great idea to get to Spain. My specific purpose for the record — this is classified, isn’t it?”

“Yes.”

“Okay — was to develop working relationships to the extent possible with people who would be in a successor government to Franco.”

“Have you ever heard of AMLASH, a cryptonym?”

“Yes, but only when the Church revelations began.”

“Do you have any knowledge of the AMLASH operations, or AMLASH-1?”

“No. Let me interject this, if I may, that at the time I left the Bay of Pigs operation in the wake of the failure of the Bay of Pigs and joined Allen Dulles’ staff, it was principally to help Allen explain some of the things that went on that he hadn’t known before in his exalted position, and it was made abundantly clear to me in a very pleasant way that having been stained with the failure of the Bay of Pigs that I was to have nothing further to do with Cuban operations, and that it would be probably a good many years before I could expect reassignment to Latin America, if ever. [Shouldn’t that be “very unpleasant way”?]

“So my point is, from 1961 on, I had no current knowledge of anything that was going on in Latin America, no personal knowledge.”

“Did you know Rolando Cubela?”

“No.”

“Did you ever come into contact with AMLASH-1 or other persons connected with the AMLASH operation while you were stationed in Spain?”

“No.”

“Were you ever stationed in France?”

“No.”

“Did you ever participate in or have any knowledge of CIA assassination conspiracies against Castro which were directed from Spain during the period 1964 to 1967?”

“No”

“Were you in Spain working for the agency during the period 1964 to 1967?”

“I think it was summer of 1965 to summer of 1966, to the best of my recollection.”

“A Senate investigation determined that your close friend, Manuel Artime, was involved in Castro assassination plans in Spain during the period 1964 to 1967. Were you in contact with him in Spain at that time?”

“No.”

“Did you have any knowledge of these plans?”

“Not at that time; no.”

“When did you first find out about these plans?”

“When the Church Committee began to expose them.”

“Is it your testimony that Artime never talked to you about these plans?”

“That is correct, at any time.”

“Does the name Terrence Crabanan mean anything to you?”

“No, I don’t know him.”

“Who were your superiors during the time you were working for the CIA in Spain?”

“Mr. Thomas Karamessines”

“Did he specifically give you your assignments?”

“Yes.”

“Are you aware of the allegation that the CIA conducted a substantial investigation during 1974 and 1975 to determine what you were doing in Spain during that period and reportedly concluded it was not possible to determine your assignment there?”

“No, I wasn’t. All they had to do was ask Tom Karamessines. He was the Deputy Director of Plans. They must have asked the wrong man. Helms certainly knew.”

“Did you know George Robreno, in Spain?”

“No.”

“Did you know El Loco?”

“No.”

“Did you know El Mago?”

“No. These are all street names, I gather, sinister people.”

“Do you think the agency would have full records of what your duties in Spain were during this period?”

“It might be in a private file called a bigot file maintained by Karamessines.”

“Why do you think the records might be in that type of file?”

“Because my assignment was a bigot assignment.”

“Why was it a bigot assignment?”

“Because of the high sensitivity. I was going over to deal with people who were to be sucessor to the Franco government. That was a highly sensitive thing.”

“Did your functions include anything besides which you have stated?”

“No.”

They asked him how he was paid. Hunt replied through a commercial bank in New York. They go into questions of what kind of life insurance policies Hunt had, who he took them out from, meaning what companies, and under what names.

“Do you know whether the AMLASH operation was ever subject to security problems or counterintelligence threats relating to the Spanish intelligence services?”

“I had no knowledge.”

Hunt is asked about a number of individuals again.

“David Ferrie?”

“No.”

“Mitchell Werbell?”

“No.”

“Clare Booth Luce?”

“No.”

“William Pawley?”

“I met Bill Pawley — he is now dead, by the way — during the early days of the Bay of Pigs operation. I was taken out there by the project chief — his home was on Star Island, to discuss the situation. Apparently Mr. Pawley had an “in” with the division chief and wanted to have people talk with him from time to time about what was going on. I may have covered that in my book.”

“How about Grayson Lynch?”

“Never heard of him until he made the appearance on the CBS documentary, CIA’s Secret Army.”

“Joseph Shimon?”

“Never heard of him.”

“John Rosselli?”

“I know he was killed; that is all.”

“Did you ever know him?”

“No.”

“Dino Chillini?”

“No.”

“Justin McCarthy?”

They go back to insurance policy questions, something about a policy Hunt had while in Spain. And have an off the record discussion.

“During the fall of 1960 and the Spring of 1961, did you have any dealings with Antonio Verona?”

“Antonio Verona? Yes. I dealt with Tony right up until the Bay of Pigs on almost a daily basis.”

Document #180-10131-10343 is a 34 page document. It is the deposition of J. Lee Rankin before the HSCA. It was taken on 8/17/78.

Mr. Goldsmith wanted to focus on the relationship between the Warren Commission and the CIA. He wanted to know if the agency’s concern over “sources and methods” effected the information they gave the commission. According to Rankin, no. They assumed that if there was a “sources and methods” concern that they would bring that to their attention and they would try to see if there was a way to overcome it.

Goldsmith asked, “…so long as you were getting the substance of the information involved the Commission was not particularly concerned with the source of the information?”

Rankin, “we would look at the information first and if there was some question about credibility or whether it was something that we could rely on, then we might want some verification but that didn’t occur as I remember. We didn’t ask for verification…we were introduced to some of their specialists in Soviet and Cuban matters and we thought they were giving their best.”

Goldsmith, “Did you ever feel there was a reluctance on the part of the agency to disclose sources and methods to the Commission?”

Rankin, “It never came up. I had always known that that was true with the FBI when I was with the Department of Justice and so I just assumed it, I guess, it never was discussed, and I assumed that it was with the FBI.” Rankin said that information touching upon sources and methods was generally written.

Goldsmith asked Rankin if he thought the agency provided information only in response to a request or would they provide whatever they came up with.

“We were assured that they would cooperate fully and give us everything that would have any bearing on the investigation. Now apparently they didn’t.”

Goldsmith, “So you were not working under the impression then that the agency’s responsibility was simply to respond to questions that were addressed to it by the Commission?”

Rankin, “Not at all and if anybody had told me that I would have insisted that the Commission communicate with the President and get a different arrangement because we might not ask the right questions and then we would not have the information and that would be absurd.”

Goldsmith then got into specific questions about sources and methods, “When if ever, did the agency tell the Commission about the photo surveillance operation that the agency had in effect in the Cuban and Soviet Embassy and Consulate in Mexico City.”

“I don’t recall anything about that.”

“So you don’t recall ever being informed about the surveillance operations in Mexico City, the photo surveillance operations?”

“Not photo surveillance.”

Goldsmith then states for the record that he and Mr. Coleman and other staff members went to Mexico City and did see the take from the photo surveillance project. There is then this sentence that I don’t understand, “That was in April of 1964 and actually I was concerned at this point with whether the Commission had been appraised of that prior to that time.”

What was in April of 1964? Obviously not when HSCA personnel visited Mexico City. Is April of 1964 when the Commission was supposed to have been shown these photographs?

Anyway, Rankin responds, “No, I am not aware of it before that either.”

Goldsmith then refers to the photograph we have all seen of the “mystery man” the CIA said was Lee Harvey Oswald which became CE 237 (Volume 16 p. 638) in the context of it being shown to Marguerite Oswald by the FBI shortly after the assassination and her claim that it showed Jack Ruby. That photograph had been provided to the FBI by the CIA. Goldsmith asked Rankin if they, the Warren Commission had any trouble in obtaining an explanation from the agency as to the source of that photograph.

“Yes, I do. I don’t remember their response but I remember there was some problem about getting it.”

Goldsmith then shows Rankin two CIA documents. These have CIA security numbers 2221 and 2222. The first one is a memo written by Mr. Coleman. As of March 26, 1964 he was not satisfied with the explanation that the agency had provided concerning the photograph. That explanation is stated in CIA document #3259, a memo dated 23 March 1964.

Rankin now stated that this did refresh his memory but did not explain the discrepancy. Goldsmith agreed and pressed on asking if the Commission ever did receive an explanation on how the photograph was obtained and who the individual was.

“I don’t recall that they ever got any adequate explanation of it.

“I always thought this question of these photographs had not been supplied to this agency by November 22, 1963 was suspect.”

Goldsmith, “Did any members of the Warren Commission or its staff have an opportunity to review the cable traffic that was generated from Mexico City station to CIA headquarters and from CIA headquarters to Mexico City station pertaining to the Oswald case?” (A fascinating and still unfolding story, to date best summarized in John M. Newman’s “Oswald and the CIA” and if you don’t have this book, SHAME ON YOU!)

“I don’t recall that. Maybe you can refresh my memory if there is anything on that.”

“I am unable to refresh your memory because the information is not available to me.”

Fortunately, we can see these documents, and aren’t they fascinating?

Rankin comments on CIA document 3295 that he was always disturbed by these changes in names and how that could be noticed to anybody that they were sending that out to and that sticks in my mind now.

I wonder if that is a comment on Lee Harvey Oswald versus Lee Henry Oswald.

Goldsmith then moves onto the subject of CIA No. 177, a cable dated October 9, 1963 from the Mexico City station to CIA headquarters. In paragraph two the source indicated is LIEMPTY which refers to the photographic surveillance. He asks if Rankin has ever seen it before. Rankin responds negatively. Goldsmith asks Rankin if he was aware that the photograph Marguerite was shown that she thought depicted Jack Ruby but does not depict Jack Ruby was the same photograph reported in paragraph two of this cable, in other words, “were you aware that not only had the agency reported a contact by Oswald in Mexico City but that it at least at some time, the agency, had a photograph that it thought pertained to Oswald?”

“No, I was not.”

“Do you think that the agency should have made this information available?”

“Of course, It looks as though they were disturbed about what it might reveal about their knowledge and their failure to do something that might have prevented this.”

“Now this cable makes no reference to Oswald’s contact with the Cuban embassy and consulate in Mexico City.”

“That probably is a different wire tap.”

Again, I refer people to John Newman’s “Oswald and the CIA”. There is a large hole in Oswald’s story and this centers around his Cuban escapades. I would also refer people to the videotape of A.S.K. `94 “Newly Released Information”, John’s presentation on that book, which he called “the smoking file”. He emphasized over and over that the CIA deliberately lied about their knowledge of Lee Harvey Oswald being in the Cuban consulate.

We now know for a fact that they have been lying about Lee Harvey Oswald and his activities in the Cuban consulate in Mexico City in the summer of 1963. This can be seen by their deletion of LHO being in the Cuban consulate in their own cables. They said they didn’t know that Oswald was in the Cuban consulate until after the assassination. A position they testified to the Warren Commission about and have held onto for over 30 years.

On page 777 of the Warren Commission Report it states,

“VISIT TO THE RUSSIAN EMBASSY IN MEXICO CITY”

In October 1963, the Passport Office of the State Department received a report from the Central Intelligence Agency that Oswald had visited the Soviet Embassy in Mexico City.290 The report said nothing about Oswald’s having visited the Cuban Embassy in Mexico City, a fact which was not known until after the assassination.

It’s a lie. They knew immediately that Oswald was in the Cuban Consulate. John Newman got none other than Richard Helms to admit that yes the CIA has lied about this. Helms said they lied to protect their “sources and methods”

Helms wrote a memo to the Warren Commission on March 12 1964, where he meets with J. Lee Rankin, Chief Counsel of the Warren Commission, wherein he states that the reason why the information on Lee Harvey Oswald was transmitted to CIA headquarters in the first place “was the combination of visits to both Cuban and Soviet embassies which caused the Mexico City station to report this to headquarters”.

Now we are told, after the assassination, that yes, Lee Harvey Oswald was in the Soviet and Cuban embassies trying to get a visa to go first to Havana, Cuba, then to Moscow. This is suspect from the beginning as Lee had no trouble getting to Moscow in 1959 and had little trouble or none with visas and had no reason to personally visit embassies anywhere. So what’s he really doing there?

We are told not to ask too much about this as the CIA has telephone intercepts and photographic surveillance of Oswald going into the Soviet and Cuban embassies making threats to kill JFK. The Soviet embassy is played up here as Oswald supposedly meets with a KGB agent Kostikov, from “Department 13”, who is supposedly the KGB officer in charge of assassinations in the Western Hemisphere. The Warren Commission is told that if that gets out it’s World War III.

So, since we the CIA think Oswald did the assassination alone, so do you.

Problem, there is no photograph known to exist of Lee Harvey Oswald visiting either compound. In fact, they identified someone who clearly is not Oswald as Oswald. This is CE 287, the “mystery man” unidentified to this day, who Marguerite Oswald thought was Jack Ruby. The CIA said their cameras broke down. It has been established, in the HSCA’s “Lopez report” and Newman’s “Oswald and the CIA” that they had more than one camera position and several opportunities over several days to photograph Oswald, if it was Oswald.

Another problem is the telephone intercept. We have several documents stating that the tape was listened to, after the assassination, by FBI agents Fain and Hosty,

J. Edgar Hoover, and others, all saying it’s not Oswald, then a few days later they say the tape was destroyed prior to the assassination.

The Assassination Records Review Board is looking for a copy of that telephone intercept tape.

Yet, another problem is that the CIA is telling it’s subordinate station in Mexico City, who are requesting information on Lee Harvey Oswald, that as of October 10, 1963 the latest information that CIA headquarters has is a State Department report dated May, 1962.

HUH? WHAT?? Can’t be. Lee Harvey Oswald is still in Russia in May, 1962. Oswald, “the defector”, has come back to the U.S., been in the newspapers, on TV and radio, had a scuffle on the streets of New Orleans handing out pro Castro leaflets, was arrested, demanded and got an interview with an FBI agent while in a New Orleans jail, had a radio debate with Carlos Bringuier, yet the CIA is supposedly ignorant of all of this? Not Hardly.

We now have CIA record and routing sheets, which the HSCA was not allowed to see, that proves that the CIA had lots of documents, most from the FBI detailing information on Oswald after May of 1962. These same routing sheets have the same names as those who signed off on this false story of “latest information…”. The CIA only lied to their own subordinate agency in Mexico City. A similar document sent to the FBI, State Department and the Office of Naval Intelligence does not have this line about “latest information”. Good thing as those agencies would certainly know that the CIA has been reading reports on Oswald later than May of `62 because they have been writing and sharing them with the CIA.

So what’s going on? Well, if you remove these particular 18 months from Oswald’s life you delete all of his Cuban escapades. There is some deception going on with the name Lee Harvey Oswald, the person named Lee Harvey Oswald, files with the name Lee Harvey Oswald, and files with the name Lee Henry Oswald, and a threat to kill the President of the United States in the summer of 1963 in Mexico City.

Whether it really is Lee Harvey Oswald, an impostor, or both, someone is using the name Lee Harvey Oswald.

Lee Harvey Oswald was involved in some kind of deception operation for the CIA months before the assassination of the President.

Goldsmith, asked “assuming that the agency in Mexico City had processed the information that showed that Oswald had been in contact with the Cuban embassy during his stay in Mexico City, do you think that information should have been made available immediately to agency headquarters?”

Rankin, “Yes, and also to the Commission.”

Well the agency did know, immediately, in addition to the above referred to memorandum Helms wrote to Rankin there is a memorandum from George T. Kalaris, Chief of the Counter Intelligence Staff to the Deputy Director for Operations on Sept. 18, 1975 about what the agency knew about Oswald’s 201 file, in that file “There is also a memorandum dated 16 October 1963 from Win Scott COS Mexico City to the United States Ambassador there concerning Oswald’s visit to Mexico City and to the Soviet Embassy there in late September-early October 1963. Subsequently there were several Mexico City cables in October 1963 also concerned with Oswald’s visit to Mexico City, as well as his visits to the Soviet and Cuban embassies.” -document reproduced on p. 462 “Oswald and the CIA”.

There is another document that proves that the CIA knew that Oswald was in the Cuban consulate and that the agency knew it immediately. This is page 268 of Winston Scott’s manuscript, reproduced on p. 514 of “Oswald and the CIA”. “Every piece of information concerning Lee Harvey Oswald was reported immediately after it was received to: U.S. Ambassador Thomas C. Mann, by memorandum; the FBI Chief in Mexico, by memorandum; and to headquarters by cable.” On p. 268-9 of Scott’s manuscript it continues, “and included in every one of these reports was the conversation Oswald had, so far as it was known. These reports were made on all his contacts with both the Cuban consulate and with the Soviets.”

John Newman calls this the dream team, the Station Chief, the head of CounterIntelligence and the Director of the Central Intelligence Agency all saying “we knew” right away that Lee Harvey Oswald was in the Cuban consulate.

This was a busy time for the CIA, who were running many anti-Cuban operations, all beginning with the digraph AM/ (something), for example AM/LASH who was Rolando Cuebela, a close associate of Castro recruited by the Agency who was supposed to murder Castro with a poison pen. We now know of at least 115 AM operations all being run out of the Cuban consulate in Mexico City through our agents inside it.

Now look at the Elden Henson information in Chapter 18 of “Oswald and the CIA”. The CIA was very successfully impersonating people down there.

Now look at the transcripts of the telephone intercepts. They’ve been released. I’ve reviewed them in previous ARRB batch reviews.

Oswald wants to go back to Russia. Why? John Newman asks, “Isn’t that odd to you? Through Mexico and Cuba?! The guy made it in real fast the first time through Helsinki ( Finland ). Anyway, he’s down there and he wants a transit visa through Mexico to Cuba. He doesn’t have pictures of himself. So Sylvia Duran, the Cuban consulate secretary tells him where to go get them done. He goes and gets them. He’s back a second time, fills out the forms in duplicate, signs them. Still no visa. Why? He doesn’t have the Soviet visa, get that then he can have the transit visa. He leaves again, goes to the Soviet consulate. Sorry kid you goofed. You should have done that back in the States. It takes four months if you want to do that here. Oswald goes back, for the third time on (Sept. 27, 1963) Friday afternoon, to the Cuban consulate, saying no problem they’ve approved my visa. He’s lying. Sylvia Duran picks up the phone and checks with the Soviet consulate and, of course there’s been no approval.”

The CIA transcribed all of this. We now have it. There are actually two conversations and they are legitimate. Everything matches the transcript. Everything matches Sylvia Duran’s later testimony. The transcriber, who we now learn is not a CIA person at all but a Mexican with the now defunct Mexican secret police, the DFS, defunct because the head of the DFS was involved in the murder of a DEA agent, Ricky Camerana, (did I get that name right?) anyway, he has no problem recognizing Sylvia Duran’s voice. He states, “The person speaking is Sylvia Duran.” Well, he should recognize her, he listens to her everyday.

Duran states Oswald never returned. That was it.

Ah, but the fun is just beginning with the transcripts.

Oswald makes another attempt to get the Soviet visa on Saturday, Sept. 28. But all the consulates are closed on Saturday and the Russians play serious combat volleyball on Saturday. However, three Soviet guys are there and Oswald gets in. Now Oswald places a gun on the table saying this is what I have to do to protect myself against the FBI and repeats his “Sad Sack” tale trying to get a visa. I also recommend Oleg Nechiporenko’s book “Passport to Assassination” that recounts this story. Nechiporenko was a KGB Col. in the Soviet Embassy. They say do you want to fill out the forms or what? No, he says. He’s finished.

They never see him again. It’s 10:00 A.M. Saturday morning but the fun and games continue. Not an hour later, the phone rings, according to a CIA surveillance, it’s Oswald and Duran. He’s changed his mind. Now he does want to fill out the forms.

These transcripts for after 10:00 a.m. Saturday September 28, 1963 are very odd. They begin with “the woman speaking is later identified as Sylvia Duran”, but it’s the same transcriber who had no trouble identifying Duran the day before. What? He loses his mind in a day? And what does this Duran say? “There’s a man here.” Note, not Oswald is here, but “a man”, a man who says he’s been to the Soviet consulate.

This doesn’t work! She knows he’s been to the Soviet consulate! She knows who he is. He was there before her three times yesterday being a real pain in the ass and lying to her! She’s called the Soviet consulate and talked to Kostikov about him just the day before. If you read the transcript it is readily apparent, line by line, that both Duran and Oswald are being impersonated! These impersonators on the outside do not know what has been going on inside the consulates the day before. They did not have access to the Friday transcript until Monday as stated in the Lopez report.

Once you realize that these are impersonators who don’t know what happened the day before and are just then figuring it out while they are impersonating Oswald and Duran and trying to keep the conversation going it becomes obvious what they are doing.

At the Rio conference the Cuban’s reached the same conclusion.

If Oswald and Duran are really impersonating themselves in some kind of intelligence game, then the reaction of everybody else is very strange.

In the videotape of John’s presentation at the COPA `95 conference John then shows a part of a transcript of a conversation between new President Lyndon Johnson and FBI director, J. Edgar Hoover. This can be seen on page 520 of “Oswald and the CIA”. This is the morning after the assassination. LBJ asks, “Have you established any more about the visit to the Soviet embassy in Mexico in September?” John finds it odd that Johnson asks this question this early. Hoover responds, “No, that’s one angle that’s very confusing for this reason. We have up here the tape…”

Another cover story by the CIA is that we erased the tape before the assassination. So, if anyone wants to investigate this they can say sorry we don’t have any tape.

Yet, Hoover says, “We have up here the tape..”. Hoover continued, “…and the photograph of the man that was at the Soviet Embassy, using Oswald’s name. That picture and the tape do not correspond to this man’s voice, nor to his appearance. In other words, it appears that there is a second person who was at the Soviet Embassy down there.”

John then showed an addendum to a footnote to the Lopez Report. John then showed an FBI memorandum from Hoover to the head of the Secret Service the morning after the assassination that special agents of this Bureau who have spoken with Oswald (Hosty and Fain) have listened to the tape. It wasn’t Oswald on the tape.

John then showed another FBI memorandum from Belmont to Tolson. This again is the morning after the assassination. Dallas agents listened to the tape, from the Cuban Embassy to the Soviet Embassy. This conversation is different than the Oct 1 conversation. This taped conversation occurs on Saturday, October 5, 1963 at about 11AM. Now we have two tapes, two different conversations This is not Oswald’s voice either.

The FBI changed its story a few days later to say oops, we never listened to any tape. (Please see my 3rd ARRB batch review for more.)

Goldsmith and Rankin are trying to figure this out in 1978. It is fascinating reading that they suspect they were and are being lied to. Goldsmith states that the record is the CIA did not know that Oswald was in the Cuban consulate until after the assassination. He admits that it is an issue with the HSCA as to when that information had been obtained and processed.

Rankin, noting the discrepency in the two 10 October 1963 cables coments, “He is too tall.”

Goldsmith, “And the age is not the same either.”

“Do you recall whether the agency ever gave a satisfactory explanation regarding this individual?”

“No, I don’t.”

Goldsmith then shows Rankin the October 10, 1963 cable that gives the correct description of Oswald, reproduced on p.512 of “Oswald and the CIA”. Asked if he has ever seen it before Rankin responds. “No, I’m quite sure I have not.” Goldsmith notes to Rankin that in this cable, the one with the correct description of Oswald, they give an incorrect middle name, Lee Henry Oswald. He then shows Rankin the other October 10, 1963 cable, reproduce on p. 513 of “Oswald and the CIA”. This is CIA No. 2140. This one was sent to the intelligence communities. Rankin notes the misdescription of Oswald. Goldsmith points out that the cable to the Mexico City station with the correct description went out earlier than the one to the intelligence communities, a matter of a few hours.

Goldsmith, “Were you ever made aware of these conflicting descriptions of Oswald in the agency’s cable traffic?”

“Not that I can recall.”

“Well, do you think that if you had been made aware of these conflicts that you would remember it?”

“Yes, I would have asked somebody to check on it. I think they are very curious.

It looks like either somebody quite incompetent or deliberate.”

Goldsmith then points out that Oswald visited the Soviet and Cuban embassies several times over a two day period. And that the CIA had photographic surveillance in effect at both locations, isn’t it “unusual that the agency did not obtain a photograph of Oswald?” The agency’s position is that no photograph of Oswald was ever obtained. Goldsmith asked Rankin if that was an issue in 1964. He got a negative response.

Goldsmith then inquires about the telephone taps asking if Rankin knew about them. Rankin, “Not that I recall.”

Goldsmith then points out to Rankin in CIA No. 2007, 2008, a memo dated January 31, 1964 from Coleman to Slawson which summarizes Oswald’s contact with the Soviet embassy that it makes no mention of telephonic surveillance. Goldsmith also points out to Rankin in CIA 1980 and 1981 another memo from Coleman to Slawson dated April 1, 1964 that there is no mention of photographic surveillance. By deleting where the information came from in this protect the sources and methods game it has the effect of implying that someone actually witnessed Oswald making these visits which strengthens the idea that it really is Oswald. “The point I am trying to make here is that by virtue of the agency not informing the Commission about the telephonic surveillance operation, here at least is one example as late as April of 1964 where the Commission staff members may have been under the misimpression that Oswald had at one time been seen at the embassy when actually the contact was a telephonic contact.”

Goldsmith then asks about the tape. “Was the agency ever asked whether it had obtained and had in existence after the assassination a tape recording of Oswald’s voice?”

“I don’t recall.”

Goldsmith then asks Rankin to look at CIA doc 204 and 205, a cable that starts on 204, dated 23 November 1963. The cable references Oswald’s contact with the Soviet embassy on 1 October 1963 as well as to an earlier contact on September 28, 1963. Paragraph 4 is of interest to Goldsmith because the transcriber states that it was Oswald in both conversations. He asks Rankin if he ever saw it or any staff member saw it, the answer is I don’t know.

“Does paragraph 4 suggest to you that at least on November 23 the agency still had in existence a tape recording of Oswald’s voice?”

Rankin responds rather obtusely, “Well, it is clear that someone or this person made a comparison of some kind of a transcription. Now whether they still had it or whether it was, I can’t tell from the document.”

No, its a tape, not a transcription. How do you compare a voice from a transcript? For a voice you need the sound of the voice, you need the tape.

Goldsmith asks, “Let me ask you this question then. Had this cable been shown to the Warren Commission or its staff instead of simply summarizing the information contained in the cable, would the Commission have asked the CIA to make available any existing transcripts of Oswald’s voice?”

“Yes.”

Again, that should say tape, not transcript.

Goldsmith then goes into the Louis Calderon conversation that seems to imply Cuban intelligence had advance knowledge of the assassination, CIA No. 1950-54, a document prepared by Raymond Rocca in 1975. This transcript was fiddled with as well to make the whole assassination look like, as Peter Dale Scott states, a “Phase One” story of a Communist conspiracy. The Cubans and the Soviets know because Oswald was in both their embassies. He met with Kostikov in the Soviet Embassy and threatened to kill JFK in the Cuban embassy.

Goldsmith asks if Calderon was ever investigated as being involved in the assassination. A red herring caused by manipulation of the transcript. Calderon seems to joke, “Yes, of course. I knew it almost before Kennedy.” Rankin seems to indicate that this transcript was made available to the Commission on p. 20 then states that it should have been supplied to the Commission on p. 21

Goldsmith moves onto CIA No. 3178 which is a memo dated April 22, 1964 to Slawson. Apparently the Commission staffers were not given full information about the surveillance and were still under a misimpression about the Oswald in Mexico City. This is a point Goldsmith made earlier.

“The point that I would be trying to make here is that the fact that the staff was not fully informed about the nature and extent of the surveillance operations seems to have had an impact upon the staff’s perception of what Oswald did during his Mexico City trip. Would you agree with that statement?”

Rankin, “Yes, I think that is correct.”

Goldsmith asks Rankin if he had any comment on the quality of the information the CIA was giving to the Warren Commission. Rankin responds that they were given what the agency thought the Commission should have. Goldsmith then asks, “In light of what you have seen, are you satisfied with what you were given?”

“No.”

Goldsmith then refers to a document about Alvarado Ugarte wherein he (Alvarado) mentions receiving money from someone. Goldsmith thought that was worth investigating and Rankin agreed.

Goldsmith asks how did the Commission investigate if Oswald was a an agent of the FBI or the CIA?

“My recollection was that we had a claim made that Oswald was an agent for the FBI and that part of the claim was that his name would not appear in the FBI files but he would have been assigned a number and that it is only by checking out those numbers that we could determine whether or not he had ever been an agent of the FBI as I recall that if they examined each agent that was under the cover of a number that they would be uncovering all of these agents that they had under a number system and it would be revealing it to the Commission and the staff and that it would be very damaging to the security and the work of the FBI and that J. Edgar Hoover would be willing to swear under oath that Oswald had never been an FBI agent and could come before the Commission and do that rather than to have all of these agents uncovered by this action, and so the Commission decided to accept that.”

“What about the CIA?”

“My recollection there is that there was an assurance from them that he was never a CIA agent.

“In retrospect do you think that that was the appropriate and best manner for dealing with this issue?”

“No. It is obvious that in light of what has happened that you could not rely on those assurances. I don’t know about Mr. McCone, whether there is anything in the record that would show that he ever misrepresented anything that is in the record of the Congress’ committees, but certainly it is evident that you could not rely on Mr. Hoover’s word.”

Goldsmith then inquires about Lee Harvey Oswald’s tax records, if there might be a record in there about Oswald having been given money from either the FBI or the CIA. Rankin was unsure of how that was handled but fairly sure nothing of that importance was revealed.

Goldsmith then rattles off the facts that critics of the Warren Commission point to to show that Oswald had a connection with the intelligence community.

1.) No commercial air traffic for Oswald to have traveled from England to Helsinki at the time that he did.

2.) The ease with which Oswald appeared to have received his discharge from the military.

3.) The ease and speed with which he received his visa to enter the Soviet Union. (in 1959 and without anything to do with Mexico or Cuba!)

4.) The relative ease with which U.S. officials in Moscow and in the States permitted Oswald to return to America after his stay in the Soviet Union.

“What weight, if any, should be given to these factors, do you think, in evaluating whether Oswald was an agent, source of information, or employee of any American intelligence agency?”

Rankin tries to take them individually. The record states that Oswald checked into his hotel in downtown Helsinki on October 10th at midnight. Rankin thinks that since there is no record Oswald could have taken a flight on October 9th or earlier and thus eliminating this idea that he took a flight that arrived in Helsinki at 11:33 p.m. and makes it to the hotel to check in at midnight, accomplishing this impossible feat in 27 minutes. There is a CIA document that states that if Oswald arrived at 11:33 p.m. he could not possibly have arrived at the hotel in 27 minutes. Well since it becomes October 10th at midnight, Oswald did take a flight on October 9th, but Rankin thinks Oswald could have taken an earlier flight on October 9th or even a day or more earlier.

Goldsmith then shows Rankin CIA No. 2137 which was addressed to Rankin dated July 1, 1964 which addresses the issue. It was never resolved.

On the second point Rankin thinks there is ample evidence that the Marines were happy to get rid of him.

On the mater of the visa to enter the Soviet Union Rankin doesn’t think that was a problem for defectors. What nonsense! You say hi I’d like to defect and they open the doors? C’mon!

Goldsmith emphasizes that Oswald got his visa within a mater of days, commenting on that being unusual.

“Well, what I thought was that the fact he was a defector and had close ties with Helsinki and the Soviets and he indicated that he had special information for their benefit like he did, that they would treat it differently than the ordinary visa.”

Oswald had close ties with Helsinki? What’s that all about? Did Oswald announce his desire to defect prior to October 31, 1959 when he so stated in the American Embassy in Moscow?

Goldsmith then goes to the issue of Oswald getting a passport in 1963 despite his earlier attempt to defect within 24 hours of applying for one.

“Well, I never could understand why our intelligence agencies didn’t flag more about Oswald but I never found anything that was given to the Commission that indicated that they were trying to favor him in any way.”

Getting a passport within 24 hours? A returned ex-Marine would be defector? Favoritism? Of course, not. Don’t be silly.

The last question was on Oswald’s easy return.

“Well, I never had any adequate explanation of that. It seemed like the information we were able to obtain in the Commission showed that it was not given any real thought by any part of the government despite the record.

Rankin wanted to ask one question. Did the committee find any credible evidence of a conspiracy? Goldsmith doesn’t answer citing HSCA rules and suggests Rankin ask that of Chairman Louis Stokes or Chief Counsel Blakey. Rankin thinks that they don’t have any such evidence because it would have leaked to the media.

Filed Under: Uncategorized

  • « Previous Page
  • 1
  • …
  • 40
  • 41
  • 42
  • 43
  • 44
  • …
  • 81
  • Next Page »
  • Facebook
  • Twitter

Donate your preferred amount to support the work of the AARC.

cards
Powered by paypal

Menu

  • Contact Us
  • Warren Commission
  • Garrison Investigation
  • House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA)
  • Assassination Records Review Board (ARRB)
  • Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI)
  • Central Intelligence Agency (CIA)
  • LBJ Library
  • Other Agencies and Commissions
  • Church Committee Reports

Recent Posts

  • 20 MAY, 2025: DAN HARDWAY Opening Statement and Testimony to the Task Force on the Declassification of Federal Secrets
  • RFK Jr. asked Obama to probe ‘two gunmen’ theory, called for reexamination of his father’s assassination: new files
  • PRESIDENT’S PAGE
  • Planned Attack on Lady Gaga Concert in Brazil Is Foiled, Police Say
  • JOHN SIMKIN ARCHIVE
Copyright 2014 AARC
  • Privacy Policy
  • Privacy Tools