Chapter XVII: Part 17

Now, my letter is important.

Now, this was addressed to me. This is what I want the Commission to know. This was addressed to Lee, the original. Then I wrote in behalf of my son, and this was addressed to me.

Then I received a letter addressed to Mr. Lee Harvey Oswald.

By now, I am corresponding with these people, and I ask for--I need my letter. And I ask for the reason for the dishonorable discharge, and said that I would act in behalf of my son, because I have pertinent information to that fact.

Mr. RANKIN. Mrs. Oswald, I will ask the reporter to mark this as the next number.

(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 204, for identification.)

Mr. RANKIN. This is correspondence with regard to the dishonorable discharge.

Mrs. Oswald, will you look at a photostatic copy of that correspondence?

Mrs. OSWALD. Yes, that is the letter I just read. That is the back of the envelope. And this letter.

Mr. RANKIN. That is a very poor copy.

Mrs. OSWALD. Is this the letter we taped?

Mr. LIEBELER. I don't believe so, no.

Mrs. OSWALD. I know we taped one, because we could not copy it.

Mr. RANKIN. Can you read it?

Mrs. OSWALD. Yes. "I desire to inform"----

Mr. RANKIN. That is your letter of April 10, 1960?

Mrs. OSWALD. Yes.

Mr. RANKIN. And who did you send it to?

Mr. LIEBELER. May I say this, Mr. Rankin: We did tape that, and I do have a transcription of it here.

Mrs. OSWALD. "I ask for a stay of action, and I will be willing to act in his behalf."

Mr. RANKIN. Mrs. Oswald. I will hand you what I am asking the reporter to mark as Exhibit 205.

I ask you if Exhibit 205 is a correct transcription of your letter.

MRS. OSWALD. Yes.

(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 205, for identification.)

Mrs. OSWALD. "I am writing you on behalf of my son. He is out of the country at present, and since I have no contact with him I wish to request a stay of action concerning his discharge. Also, I desire to be informed of the charges against him. Please state reasons for such discharge. After hearing from you, I will be willing to act in his behalf."

So then comes a registered return receipt, addressed only to Mr. Lee Harvey Oswald.

Mr. RANKIN. Now, will you examine the rest of Exhibit 204 and state whether that is the rest of the correspondence in regard to the matter that you know about?

Mrs. OSWALD. This is addressed to me--this envelope is addressed to me, that is right, sir.

Mr. RANKIN. And those photostatic copies in Exhibit 204 are all copies of your papers that you furnished to us, so we could make them, is that right?

Mrs. OSWALD. Yes, sir, that is correct.

Mr. RANKIN. I offer in evidence Exhibits 204 and 205.

The CHAIRMAN. They may be admitted, with those numbers.

(The documents heretofore marked for identification as Commission Exhibits Nos. 204 and 205 were received in evidence.)

Mrs. OSWALD. I believe, Chief Justice Warren, I am giving information that this Commission did not have before. I do not think they had this return addressee, which is important, because after corresponding with me, as Mrs. Marguerite Oswald, they sent the dishonorable discharge in Lee's name, addressee only, when they knew he was out of the country.

I would like to know why.

That is another reason why I think that Lee was probably an agent.

Mr. RANKIN. What do you mean by that, Mrs. Oswald? Could you explain that a little more?

Mrs. OSWALD. Yes. I do not think they wanted me to have the dishonorable discharge.

Again, they wanted me to be upset and tell people about it, but not have the proof of the dishonorable discharge.

Mr. RANKIN. Don't you think it is possible that they felt he was the one involved, and, therefore, they had to get the word directly to him for legal reasons?

Mrs. OSWALD. No, sir, because, legally--I am glad you brought up the point, Mr. Rankin.

Your copies state that anyone can act in your behalf. And I wrote, as I read the copy, that I would be willing to act in my son's behalf, and I was making arrangements to get money and go there and act in his behalf because I had pertinent information. And they ignored my letter and sent this--yes, sir.

Mr. RANKIN. They may have felt you had not been given authority to act.

Mrs. OSWALD. Well, what they may feel and what they should do--I am saying I am an American citizen, and I have some rights. And when I want to act in behalf of my son, we don't know whether he is living or dead, then I should act in behalf, I should not get a return.

I am glad you are bringing these points up. My rights have been invaded and my son's.

I make that statement for the record.

Now, we shall go to Lee's childhood.

The CHAIRMAN. Yes.

Mrs. OSWALD. Now, Chief Justice Warren, I have pictures of my son that Mr. Jenner would like this Commission to have, because it shows Lee at age 15 and 16, and myself, which was supposed to be a life of psychiatric treatment. And I am more than happy--I volunteered to help my country in every way possible--to let the Commission have everything that I have. But you must understand that these are very valuable pictures, sir. I am having people wanting rights to a book, and these pictures are very, very valuable to me. And I would not want any of these pictures lost. Financially they are valuable, and to my story, sir. And they are the only pictures in existence.

I have sold a few pictures in order to live.

But the way I have done it--the photographer had this picture in particular--have come to my home and copied the pictures and gave it to me back in my hand. I cannot afford to have any of these pictures lost, sir. It is my story that some day I hope to write.

So I was told that if I continue with the life history of Lee as a child and show the pictures, then they would have to be admitted for the record.

Am I correct, sir?

The CHAIRMAN. That is our way of proceeding, yes.

Mrs. OSWALD. So now when I show the pictures, will you personally give me assurance that these pictures will in no way be used?

The CHAIRMAN. No, I cannot do that. The Commission cannot do it. If you have something that you consider your personal property, that you do not want to give to the Commission, you may withhold it.

Mrs. OSWALD. I did not say, sir, I did not want to give it to the Commission.

The CHAIRMAN. Just a minute. I do not believe they bear directly on the matter we are investigating. They might be helpful. They might not be helpful. But you may have the choice of determining whether you want to introduce them or not.

But if you do introduce them, the Commission cannot put any limitation upon the use that it might make of them.

Now, I don't mean by that that we are going to necessarily distribute them or anything of that kind. But the Commission cannot limit itself in the reception of its evidence. It must have the power to do with it whatever is necessary to develop the facts.

Mrs. OSWALD. Well, I give you that power. And I voluntarily would like for you to have everything I have, including pictures. But I just wanted assurance that these pictures would not be exploited in any way. For some reason or other--I am not putting it into words--but these are my personal pictures. And I want the Commission to have them. And it is pertinent to the story, I understand, Mr. Doyle, is that correct--because it shows Lee smiling, and his life and my life in New Orleans, which, I understand that the Commission is very interested in.

Am I not correct, Mr. Doyle?

Mr. DOYLE. Mrs. Oswald, as the situation has developed here, the introduction of the pictures into evidence, of course, must necessarily involve their physical copying, and the retention of the copies in the file. The Commission itself has stated that it can give you no assurance whatsoever concerning the use of these papers.

I would, myself, be of the view that the pictures introduced into the record here would be certainly used for the purposes of the investigation and the purposes of the Commission as established by the Executive order.

But they can give you no blanket--or have not chosen to give you any blanket assurance of the use of the pictures, and have given you completely the choice that if you have any concern about it whatsoever, that you retain the pictures yourself.

The choice they have given you is if you wish to have--to present the pictures to the Commission in the course of your testimony, they will be glad to receive them, they will--there will be copies made of them, the originals, of course, will remain in your custody. Their purposes will be--their use will be the uses of the Commission. But the Commission gives you no assurance whatsoever of the use, and gives you the complete choice of either submitting them or not under those circumstances.

Mrs. OSWALD. Well, being a layman, I understand, I think, what you are telling me, in a way. But, on the other hand, being a layman, I feel actually I have no choice.

You have to understand I am not an attorney.

Mr. DOYLE. But you do have a choice, because you are not here under subpena. Your materials have not been subpenaed. The Commission has advised you openly here that you may submit them or not as you see fit to do. So there is no force, no legal force at all. This is absolutely up to you.

The only thing that has been expressed to you is that they can give you no assurance or guarantee as to what use the Commission will make of them, that they will make what use they believe in their judgment is required by the Executive order and the purposes of their investigation.

Mrs. OSWALD. I understand. And that is why I wanted the Commission to have all pictures that I have.

Now, may I request something? I don't think it is presumptuous of me. Maybe it is.

Could I sign for my rights for these pictures, and then let you have the pictures?

I am afraid that they may get lost.

The CHAIRMAN. I think, Mrs. Oswald, if you have any doubt us to whether a misuse will be made of your papers, or if they are as valuable, moneywise, to you as you think they are, then I would suggest to you that you retain them yourself. We, of course, would be interested to see them, and they might be helpful--I don't know, because I don't know what you have there, or what context the pictures will be in.

But as your lawyer has told you, you are not under subpena here, you appeared voluntarily because you requested to testify before us. Those documents are not under subpena. They belong to you. They are in your possession. I have not seen them. You are at liberty to use them in your testimony or not, as you please.

But if you do, the Commission cannot put any limitations on the use that it will make of them.

Mrs. OSWALD. Even though you have stated, Chief Justice Warren, just now, that you do not know if they are valuable to the Commission--and yet I have information from Mr. Jenner that they are valuable to the Commission, because they pertain to Lee's life at age 13 to age 16.

The CHAIRMAN. Yes, I say they might be. I don't know. I have never seen them.

But the choice is with you, Mrs. Oswald. You may do just as you please. If you wish to testify concerning them, and put them in the hands of the Commission, you may do so.

But the Commission cannot limit itself in the use of its testimony.

Mrs. OSWALD. I want the Commission to have this.

Moneywise, it is more important for the Commission to know this boy's life and my life--but also I need to protect myself financially, because I am a widow, and do not have the money. And this will mean--these are valuable pictures.

I am not questioning the integrity of this Commission or the loyalty. What I am questioning is that possibly they may get lost or someone may somehow or other get ahold of these pictures and exploit them, and get money for them, which has happened to some other pictures already, sir, and then----

The CHAIRMAN. Not those that you have given to the Commission?

Mrs. OSWALD. No, sir--but with another----

The CHAIRMAN. Well, I think, Mrs. Oswald, it would serve no purpose for us to debate the matter. I have tried to tell you very frankly, and your lawyer has told you very frankly and correctly, that you have a free choice to do just as you please. And we will abide by that choice that you may make.

Mrs. OSWALD. May I confer with my lawyer for about 10 minutes?

The CHAIRMAN. Yes. We will take a recess, and you may talk to him.

(Brief recess.)

The CHAIRMAN. Come to order, please.

Mrs. OSWALD. Last night, Mr. Rankin, I read Lee working at one place after Tujaque. I do not know the name, sir. I think he worked there just a few days. He had the keys to the office. And, as I returned home from work one day, another young man was at the apartment, the door of the apartment, and said that Lee was discharged, and that Lee had the keys to the office, and just then Lee walked up and gave this young man the keys.

Now, I do not know the name of the place. And I believe he just worked there, sir, a few days.

I read that afterwards.

If you will refresh me, I will give you any information I have. But it is hard for me to think of everything.

I believe we have cleared up the business today that we have missed.

I have decided--and maybe I am wrong, because to me money is only good as to its use. However, there have been so many things since the assassination that has not been in my favor, I believe that I am going to keep my personal pictures.

The CHAIRMAN. You may do so.

Mrs. OSWALD. If at any time in the future that you would like to have these pictures, I will be more than happy to have copies made and give them to the Commission.

There is another matter, Mr. Rankin, that is very important, that you asked me--Governor Connally's letter.

Mr. RANKIN. Yes.

Mrs. OSWALD. I had read this at the press conference. A letter from Lee Harvey Oswald to John Connally, Secretary of the Navy. This is just written from the newspaper article.

"I have been in the Soviet Union with the full sanction of the U.S. Embassy in Moscow." He asked the Navy Department to take the necessary steps to repair the damage to me and my family. "I shall employ all means to right the gross mistakes or injustices to a bona fide U.S. citizen, an ex-serviceman."

Now, I do not consider this a threat, because I, myself, if I had a dishonorable discharge, and I was a good marine for 3 years, and I felt like it hurt my mother and my children, and my wife, I would make such a statement, because I am a very definite person, as you know by now. I have been testifying for 3 days. And my son is of the same nature. He loved the Marines, and as far as he was concerned, he served his country 3 years. And it was a stigma to me and his children, and he wanted to right the wrong.

So I do not consider this a threat.

He went to Austin. There was an article in the paper--trying to get this rectified, and the young lady gave a very nice report of Lee, said he was very polite.

This is not a threat.

This is just how Lee was tried immediately in a few hours time, newspaper talk, and so on and so forth.

I would state this emphatically more maybe than Lee did, if I had a dishonorable discharge, sir.

Mr. RANKIN. Did you ever hear your son say anything against Governor Connally?

Mrs. OSWALD. No, sir.

But here is what I have written down. The day at Robert's house, when I came in from the country, I, myself, gave Lee the copy--we had many copies--you showed me the copy--I gave him the copy and told him--I had written him and told him about the dishonorable discharge, but I did not send any papers, because I didn't want the Russians to know.

But when I came, I had a scrapbook, and I gave him a copy, Mr. Rankin, of the reason for dishonorable discharge. He says "Don't worry about it, mother. I can fix that. It is no problem."

So then the boy tried to fix it. And this is not a threat. My son is of this disposition, and he felt like he was a good marine. That I know. I would do the same. And I will read it now to Governor Connally: "I shall employ all means to right the gross mistake done to my family and my now dead son."

I expect to write to anybody officially to rectify this mistake.

I have shown this publicly at press conferences, and so I will employ all means to rectify this mistake--the mother of Lee Harvey Oswald. I intended to do that. That is my life's work.

I have the name of the man I talked to.

Chief Justice Warren--I will start from Lee as baby, before I get to this.

Lee was born October 18, 1939, in New Orleans, La. His mother, Marguerite Claverie Oswald, his father's name was Robert Edward Lee, he was named after General Lee. The family's name is Harvey--his grandmother's name was Harvey. And so he was named Lee Harvey Oswald.

Lee was born 2 months after the death of his father, who died from a heart attack, coronary thrombosis.

Lee was a very happy baby.

I stayed home with the children as long as I could, because I believe that a mother should be home with her children.

I don't want to get into my story, though.

Lee had a normal life as far as I, his mother, is concerned. He had a bicycle, he had everything that other children had.

Lee has wisdom without education. From a very small child--I have said this before, sir, and I have publicly stated this in 1959--Lee seemed to know the answers to things without schooling. That type child, in a way, is bored with schooling, because he is a little advanced.

Lee used to climb on top of the roof with binoculars, looking at the stars. He was reading astrology. Lee knew about any and every animal there was. He studied animals. All of their feeding habits, sleeping habits. He could converse--and that is why he was at the Bronx Zoo when he was picked up for truancy--he loved animals.

Lee played Monopoly. Lee played chess. Lee had a stamp collection, and even wrote to other young men and exchanged stamps, sir.

And Lee read history books, books too deep for a child his age. At age 9 he was always instructed not to contact me at work unless it was an emergency, because my work came first--he called me at work and said, "Mother, Queen Elizabeth's baby has been born."

He broke the rule to let me know that Queen Elizabeth's baby had been born. Nine years old. That was important to him. He liked things of that sort.

He loved comics, read comic books. He loved television programs. But most of all he loved the news on radio and television. If he was in the midst of a story, a film--he would turn it off for news. That was important.

And I have stated in 1959, which is in print, that Lee loved maps. Lee would study maps, sir. And he could tell you the distance from here and there. And when he was home on leave, I was amazed. Something was said about an airplane trip. Immediately he knew how many miles in the air that that plane took.

Lee read very, very important things. And any and everything he could do.

Yet he played Monopoly, played baseball.

He belonged to the "Y." He used to go swimming. He would come by work with his head wet, and I would say, "Hurry home, honey, you are going to catch cold."

And I considered that, sir, a very normal life.

I am probably forgetting some things.

So then Robert joined the Marines in 1956--am I correct--that Robert joined the Marines?

No, Robert joined the Marines in 1952. We are now in Fort Worth, Tex., until 1952.

So then I decided, since I was working, I did not want Lee to be alone. Up until this time, sir, he had a brother. So I sold my home at 7400 Ewing Street, and went to New York City, not as a venture, but because my older son, John Edward Pic, lived in New York, and had lived in New York for years. He was in the Coast Guard, as a military man. He has now been in the service 14 years, and at that time it would have been approximately 8 or 9 years--I may be off because that is approximately. So he was stationed in New York. So I had no problem of selling my home and going there, thinking that John Edward would leave New York.

But the main thing was to be where I had family. And I moved to New York for that reason.

Mr. RANKIN. About what date was that?

Mrs. OSWALD. This was exactly August 1952, because I wanted to get there in time for Lee's schooling. And if I am not mistaken, Robert joined the Marines in July of 1952. And that was my reason for going.

I immediately enrolled Lee in a Lutheran school, because Lee was not confirmed--he was baptized in the Lutheran faith, but because of moving around--I had married Mr. Ekdahl in this period and so on, Lee was not confirmed.

I enrolled him in the Lutheran school which took him approximately an hour or longer by subway to get there. It was quite a distance. That is when we first arrived in New York.

I believe that Lee was in that school a very short time, 2 or 3 weeks, because at this time I was living in my daughter-in-law's home and son. And we were not welcome, sir. We were welcome for a few days. But then we were to get a place of our own--because her mother lived with her, and her mother had left to go visit a sister. So Lee and I could come to visit. But we were not going to live with John and his wife.

So we just stayed there a short time.

Mr. RANKIN. Was there any time that you recall that there was a threat of Lee Oswald against Mrs. Pic with a knife or anything like that?

Do you remember that?

Mrs. OSWALD. Yes, I do. I am glad you said that.

My daughter-in-law was very upset. The very first time we went there--I stated before, and I am glad I said that--that we were not welcome. And immediately it was asked what did we plan to do, as soon as we put our foot in the house. And I had made it plain to John Edward that I was going to have a place of my own, that we were just coming there to get located.

My daughter-in-law resented the fact that her mother--this went on before I got there--that her mother had to leave the house and go visit a sister so I could come, John Edward's mother. I had never met my daughter-in-law. She didn't like me, and she didn't like Lee.

So she--what is the word to say--not picked on the child, but she showed her displeasure.

And she is a very--not, I would say so much an emotional person--but this girl is a New Yorker who was brought up in this particular neighborhood, which I believe is a poor section of New York.

The mother had lived in this home all her life. And this girl cursed like a trooper. She is--you cannot express it, Mr. Rankin--but not of a character of a high caliber.

At this particular time she had never been out of this neighborhood, or out of New York. And Lee loved the little baby. And he played with the baby and wanted to hold the baby and everything, which she objected.

We were not wanted, sir, from the very beginning. So there was, I think now--it was not a kitchen knife--it was a little pocket knife, a child's knife, that Lee had. So she hit Lee. So Lee had the knife--now, I remember this distinctly, because I remember how awful I thought Marjory was about this. Lee had the knife in his hand. He was whittling, because John Edward whittled ships and taught Lee to whittle ships. He puts them in the glass, you know. And he was whittling when this incident occurred. And that is what it occurred about, because there was scraps of the wood on the floor.

So when she attacked the child, he had the knife in hand. So she made the statement to my son that we had to leave, that Lee tried to use a knife on her.

Now, I say that is not true, gentlemen. You can be provoked into something. And because of the fact that he was whittling, and had the knife in his hand, they struggled.

He did not use the knife--he had an opportunity to use the knife.

But it wasn't a kitchen knife or a big knife. It was a little knife.

So I will explain it that way, sir.

So immediately then I started to look for a place.

I did find a place, I think, off the Concourse. I do not remember the street.

Mr. RANKIN. Was that in the Bronx?

Mrs. OSWALD. Off the Concourse, in the Bronx. And it was a basement apartment.

I had shipped some of my furniture. It was in a storehouse at this time. So I got it out and put it in this basement.

Lee had his own single bed. It was a one--one great big, big room. But we had the kitchen--regular New York type style--the kitchen and the bedroom and everything together, but large enough--a big one-room apartment. And there was a single bed that Lee slept on, and I slept on the studio couch.

Then Lee went to school.

Mr. RANKIN. Was that Public School 117?

Mrs. OSWALD. I have that information here.

Went to school in the neighborhood, Public School 117, which is a junior high school in the Bronx. It states here he attended 15 of 47 days. This is the place we were living that Lee was picked up by the truant officer in the Bronx Zoo.

I was informed of this at work, and I had to appear before a board, which I did.

Lee went back to school.

Then he was picked up again in the Bronx Zoo. And I had to appear before a board committee again.

Then the third time that Lee was picked up, we were--I never did get a subpena, but we were told that he had to appear at Children's Court. But I never--how I got the notice to appear at Children's Court--I am at a loss, sir.

But I did not contact at this time a lawyer or anything. I did not know. I did not think it was anything serious, because the Texas laws are not like the New York laws. In New York, if you are out of school one day you go to Children's Court. In Texas the children stay out of school for months at a time.

Lee had never done this. So I appeared with my son in court. There was a judge asked me if I want to be represented by court counsel. And I believe I said, yes, I believe I was represented by the court counsel at this particular time. And within a few minutes time--because there were hundreds of people sitting, waiting with their truant children, and it was just like this--you didn't take the time we are taking here, a half hour, to discuss the case. It was done immediately.

My child was taken from me in the courtroom.

Mr. RANKIN. Had he been out of school quite a bit?

Mrs. OSWALD. No, sir. At this time, he had not been out of school quite a bit.

So then I was given a slip of paper--no, I am sorry. I was told where to go, where Lee was, which was another office.

They took Lee from me in the courtroom, two men, officers, presumably. Then I went into another office and here was Lee. Lee was wearing his brother's Marine ring, just an ornament ring. They gave me Lee's ring and the things he had in his pocket, and told me that Lee was going to be at this home, which I think the name was the Warwick Home for Boys. And gave me a slip of paper and told me when I could visit Lee.

And that was all I knew at this particular time.

The child was immediately taken, and I was told to visit the child.

Now, I believe it was--this home was in Brooklyn. I may have the name wrong. It was an old, old home in Brooklyn.

So I went to visit my son.

And I hope some day to rectify this, because I think conditions of this kind in our United States of America are deplorable. And I want that to go down in the record.

Mr. RANKIN. Did they tell you why he was taken to this home, your son?

Mrs. OSWALD. For truancy, yes, sir.

So I had to stand single file approximately a block and a half, sir, with Puerto Ricans and Negroes and everything, and people of my class, single file, until we got to the main part of this building, which had a wire, a very heavy wire, partition wire, a man sitting back of the desk, but a man in the front of the gate that let me in. I had packages of gum and some candy for my son. And I sat down there. And the gum wrappers were taken off the gum, and the candy wrappers were taken off.

And my pocketbook was emptied. Yes, sir, and I asked why. It was because the children in this home were such criminals, dope fiends, and had been in criminal offenses, that anybody entering this home had to be searched in case the parents were bringing cigarettes or narcotics or anything.

So that is why I was searched.

So I was escorted into a large room, where there were parents talking with their children.

And Lee came out. He started to cry. He said, "Mother, I want to get out of here. There are children in here who have killed people, and smoke. I want to get out."

So then I realized--I had not realized until I went there what kind of place we had my child in.

We don't have these kinds of places in Texas or New Orleans, sir.

Then I realized what a serious thing this was. And this is when I decided I needed an attorney.

But Lee, I think, was approximately in that home--I am not sure--5 or 6 weeks, which accounts for his truancy that the papers say that Lee was a truant, that he was out of school so long.

It is because he was in this home, sir. That accounts for a lot of the truancy.

Mr. RANKIN. Did you talk to him about his truancy, say anything to him about it, or ask him about it, how he happened to stay out of school?

Mrs. OSWALD. Yes, sir, I asked Lee.

Well, this comes in another part.

Mr. RANKIN. All right.

Mrs. OSWALD. So I left my son that day, and I think I visited him a couple of times after that. I am not quite sure.

But in the meantime, I engaged an attorney. I do not know the name of the attorney, and I wish I did.

When I told the attorney about Lee--and I have stated this at a press conference--he raised the roof, so as to say. He was indignant. I cannot quote his exact words. But what he said was that New York State picked up these boys and put them on a farm, and they pay these boys to work on this farm for the State of New York.

Now, I may not be saying this exactly. You may have the picture of the home.

But these boys work on the farm and are paid for it, I understand. That is all I can remember, sir, about this unpleasant thing, because I did not think it would ever come in my life, and after the time it happened I tried to put it out of my mind.

But now I am refreshed a little on that.

So Lee was in this home 5 or 6 weeks, I believe. You probably have the record.

So then we were asked to appear to court. I went into court with this attorney. And there, again, real fast we were in the courtroom and Lee was brought in, and Lee sat down by me. And I remember this distinctly, because Lee had ear trouble quite often. And I saw his ear running, and I said, "Lee, you are having an earache." And the judge heard me saying something to Lee.

He said, "What did you tell your boy, Mrs. Oswald?"

I said, "Judge, I asked him if he had an earache."

I didn't know they were going to give me the child then.

So the judge talked to Lee and asked Lee if he was going to be good, and go back to school. Lee answered, "Yes, sir." And he said to me, "Mrs. Oswald, I understand that you and your daughter-in-law do not get along." I said, "That is correct." And he suggested that Lee would be much better off back in the open wide spaces that he was used to instead of in New York, where we had no family then, because the daughter-in-law and son were not friendly with us. And this judge suggested that. And the judge gave me my son, right then and there, gentlemen.

I left the courtroom with my boy. He was given to me in my custody.

Now, that is all I know of the case. The particular case.

From there, we went into an office where there was a probation officer, Mr. John Carro. Mr. Carro talked with Lee and asked Lee if he was going to go back to school.

"Yes, sir."

He reprimanded him a little bit--maybe not that, but gave him a little talk. And he said, "Lee, you are to report to me once a week for probation."

I am going to stress this.

I have been in this Commission 3 days. And you know I am very definite. So I was very definite with Mr. Carro. I did not mince my words. I said, "Mr. Carro, my son is not reporting to you once a week. This is not a criminal offense. He was picked up for truancy, he has assured the judge, promised the judge that he would be back to school. He has promised you he would be back to school. Let's give this boy a chance, and let's see if he will go to school."

"And then, Mr. Carro, if he doesn't go to school, then you can have him report to you."

Mr. Carro didn't take that graciously, which is true. When you don't agree with anyone over you, then you are in the minority, and you just as well make up your mind right then and there, that is it.

So from that time on Mr. Carro pestered me and Lee. Mr. Carro would call me at work, sir, and say that he had gone by the school, and that they were having trouble with Lee. And I went to the school and talked to the principal and she said, "Mrs. Oswald, what happened while the probation officer was here--Lee moved the chair back, and it made a little noise."

And that is what Mr. Carro reported.

In plain words, gentlemen, Mr. Carro was indignant at my attitude, because he was an official.

Mr. RANKIN. What school was that?

Mrs. OSWALD. This was the first school, sir.

Then I moved. I am a little confused. Just a minute.

I took Lee out of the first school because the children knew that he had been in the home, and I thought he didn't stand a chance.

So I moved to help my child again.

And I personally went with Lee to the principal and told the principal--not in front of Lee--had a talk with her--that Lee had been in this home, and that if she could help him in any way, and knew of any friends, children his age that lived in the neighborhood where we lived, I would appreciate it. And she did help. There was a young lady in this building that we lived, in the Bronx--now we are living near the Bronx Zoo.

Mr. RANKIN. Is this the new school?

Mrs. OSWALD. This is the new school. And we are living near the Bronx Zoo, which is 100 and something street.

Mr. RANKIN. And this is Public School 44?

Mrs. OSWALD. Yes, sir--Public School 44. So I talked to the principal and told her about the trouble and asked if she could not help us.

Mr. RANKIN. Now, the place that he was committed to was--do you recall that was Berkshire Farms?

Mrs. OSWALD. No, because he was not committed to a farm, as far as I knew, sir. All I knew was that he was in this home in Brooklyn. He was never committed to a farm, as far as I know, sir. He was in this home all this time. And this is where I am assuming, because I knew nothing about this--the psychiatric treatment took place, and naturally that is why they would have him in this home to observe him.

And, by the way, I was called one day to go to the home and a young lady talked with me. And I sensed that she was questioning me for a reason, because I had been on my own all these years, and I am a business woman. So I remembered one distinct incident. She said, "Mrs. Oswald, how strong do you believe in education?"

And I said, "I believe strongly in education, but not to an extent that a mother should go out and work and deprive her children of a mother's home and love in order to make the extra money to give her children a college education," because I happen to know that a college education sometimes is not as important as wisdom. There are college graduates that do not know how to apply their ability. And so to me--I could never be home with my children. I had to work and leave my children--which was a very sore spot, let's say. I would have given the world if I could have been home and raised my children. And here are women, because of material things, and because they want to give their children a college education, deprive their children of this motherly love, that I myself was deprived of because of an unfortunate affair.

So to get education to that extent, no, sir, I do not approve of it. I think it is more important for children to come home and have someone in that home when they come home from school, and do without a college education. I am strongly for that, because of my experience.

Mr. RANKIN. Was Lee Oswald a good student?

Mrs. OSWALD. I have his records from all the schools in New Orleans, sir. But we are not through with New York--that will show he passed satisfactory grades.

Mr. RANKIN. How about New York? Was he a good student there?

Mrs. OSWALD. I think he was an average student. Yes.

Now, I personally brought Lee to the school and talked to some of the teachers. And they told me that Lee was a bright boy, but that he was bored with school--there was just something there. Lee was in a sense bored with school in this sense--that Lee was an overly bright boy, studious boy, and he should have been placed in a school that we have now, I understand, for special children of this sort.

Mr. RANKIN. But his grades were not too good during this period?

Mrs. OSWALD. They were passing grades, I would say. Now, that is what I know about the New York situation.

Now, it has come out, gentlemen, that he had had psychiatric treatment there. I did not know of any psychiatric treatment there. But now I am assuming naturally he did have it then. There is a report on it.

I wish to say this. I am just a practical nurse. I became a nurse because of my experiences, and I wanted to devote my life to humanity, which I have stated before. But I do know this. I work in hospitals, rest homes, private homes, and all of our hospitals, and all of our rest homes, and all of our institutions are understaffed.

Now, I think you will agree there. We are all understaffed. Every one I have ever been in. So I will say if Lee had psychiatric treatment in this home, there are hundreds and hundreds of children, he could not have had a complete psychiatric examination. We do not know. I do not know if he had a complete. But I will say that according to other institutions, that this institution was also understaffed.

I am going to make one remark to Mr. Jack Ruby. He has to have five psychiatrists. Now, here is one little psychiatric examination on a 13-year-old boy.

So, then we will go to Lee's schooling in New Orleans.

Mr. RANKIN. Before you leave New York, did you ever tell anybody that you took Lee Oswald to New York so he could have mental tests at the Jacobi Hospital?

Mrs. OSWALD. No, sir, never. My child was a normal child--and while in New York. I explained to you he had a dog with puppies. The school teachers talked well about him. He had a bicycle. There was nothing abnormal about Lee Oswald.

It has been stated also I was offered psychiatric treatment which is incorrect. This Mr. Carro I understand is a very big man. He may be supplying the files with all of this. But, sir, it is untrue.

Mr. RANKIN. Then you went to New Orleans after that?

Mrs. OSWALD. No. Then they assigned a big brother to Lee. This is important to the story.

So this man came out to the apartment on several occasions and saw the type person I was and my son was. And he did not see anything wrong with the child. Evidently not. Because he suggested that it might be a good idea--I had told him the way Mr. Carro was doing. Mr. Carro was pestering me, sir, at work, with just little insignificant reports that I would call the school and the principal would assure me everything was all right.

So he thought that it would be better if I would take the child away. And I didn't know I could do that. I didn't know exactly the charge.

So, I said, "Is it all right? They won't arrest us and bring us back?"

He said, "No, there is no extraditing"--that was his words.

So, I wrote Mr. Carro a letter explaining that I was taking--Lee and I were going to New Orleans, and Lee had cousins his age in New Orleans, and I thought the child would be better off amongst his own family. And the judge had recommended that if we could possibly leave New York that it would be better for Lee. And I wrote Mr. Carro the letter, sir. I did not flee New York. I had the decency to write him a letter. And the Big Brother is the one that recommended this.

Now, that is what I know of the New York.

Mr. RANKIN. Do you remember the name of the Big Brother?

Mrs. OSWALD. No, sir; I do not know the name of the Big Brother. But from the newspaper accounts, they know the name. The Big Brother stated how clean the apartment was, and how nice we were.

Mr. RANKIN. And then you went to New Orleans, did you?

Mrs. OSWALD. Yes, sir. Then we went to New Orleans. And we stayed at my sister's house, 757 French Street, and immediately Lee enrolled in--let's get back to this. This is in Fort Worth, Tex. Lee attended the Ridglea West School and graduated--was promoted to junior high in 1952. In 1952 is when we went to New York. Now, we are in New Orleans.

Lee was immediately enrolled in Beauregard School in New Orleans, La., upon arriving in New Orleans. And here is his certificate of promotion to high school. And they have stated that his attendance was very good. He just missed 9 days, I think, out of the whole term, which is considered very good.

Mr. RANKIN. How was he as a student in New Orleans?

Mrs. OSWALD. C grades. He was promoted, or he wouldn't have C grades. So that is two certificates there.

Then I have another certificate. He went to--no, I would not have the certain, and then from the promotion he was promoted to the Warren Easton High School. And that is the school that Lee wrote the note--am I correct?

Mr. RANKIN. Yes. It is already in evidence. He wrote and said you were going to San Diego, and it was not your note at all. He signed your name.

Mrs. OSWALD. That is right. And then, as you know, Robert was discharged from the Marines, and Robert did not want to live in New Orleans. So there again--so we could be a family--and this young boy, who was the youngest, could be with a brother. I moved back to Fort Worth, sir, because Robert was in Fort Worth so we could be a family again. However, I moved in July, and Lee joined the Marines in October. So we were just there a few months.

Lee attended Arlington High School there. And when we came back to Fort Worth, Tex., the school did not know what to do with Lee. Lee, I think, was approximately 2 weeks entering the school. He was too far advanced from the New Orleans and New York schools, and not advanced enough--let's see if I can explain this right--according to his age. He was too old to be in the junior, or vice versa. But I do know, and I have witnesses to this, that Lee could not immediately enter school. They had to have a conference, a board conference, because of Lee's curriculum from school. They didn't know which school to place him in.

Mr. RANKIN. How did he get along with you? Did you get along well together?

Mrs. OSWALD. Yes. Lee was a very quiet and studious boy. None of my children gave me any trouble, thank God. We have no police record, sir, or anything like that. And the children were always more or less home. And particularly Lee. Lee would go to the movies, and things like that. He was a normal boy. But when he was home, he was most happy. And I am of this disposition.

He could keep himself occupied--reading and when he watched a football game on television, he would have the score pad, and things of that sort. And so he was quite happy in his own way.

Now, here is something very important.

While in New Orleans, in order to go to Arlington Heights school, which is one of the ritziest schools in New Orleans, all the wealthy people go there, and we happened to live in the vicinity--Lee wanted a two-wheel bicycle, sir, and I bought him one. So when school opened, Lee went to school on a two-wheel bicycle. Can you picture this. A 16-1/2-year-old boy going to school on a bicycle, when all the other children had their own cars? Just picture this. My children never did want anything, and particularly Lee.

Mr. RANKIN. How did he get along with his brothers?

Mrs. OSWALD. Well, now, at this time he didn't know too much about his brothers. John Edward had been in the service since age 17, so it has been a number of years, other than leaves. And Robert had just finished his 3-year hitch. So you see the brothers have had nothing to do with Lee since age 13 actually--otherwise than visits. Because when Robert came back, then Lee joined the Marines.

Now, this is the U.S. Marine Corps acceptance. And it says "I am very pleased to notify you that your son, Lee Harvey Oswald, has successfully passed the mental, moral, and physical examinations," and so forth. My son was a marine. And I understand a very important marine.

He was in electronics. I have read--one of the marines that was with him said when he defected to Russia they had to change the system. He must have had a real responsible position, if Lee defected to Russia, and all the systems had to be changed. I don't know if this is correct. But this man made the statement, sir.

Mr. RANKIN. Did he have any courts-martial that you knew about while he was in the Marines?

Mrs. OSWALD. I did not know until what came out in the paper. And I have discussed that with several high officials, marines, and so on and so forth. A lot of men, they tell me, carry a gun. And if you did curse an officer, that is done sometimes, too--that is not anything criminal. I mean we all get provoked at some particular time. I am not taking up for the boy. I don't know what happened. But I know I myself would be guilty of that, if someone pushed me, that I may curse him. And I am sure it is done quite often. And I understand that Lee slashed his wrist. I find that from the paper.

Mr. RANKIN. Did you know anything about that? How that happened?

Mrs. OSWALD. No, sir--otherwise than what I know in the paper. I do not know, sir.

Mr. RANKIN. What about a man that was killed, that was one of his buddies in the Marines?

Did you ever know anything about that?

Mrs. OSWALD. No. This is the first time I have heard about that. I haven't even read that in the paper. I did not know about that. If I can help you in any way--his picture in the Marines--there are names of the men on the back. I do not know what they mean. But the names of the men are on the back of picture, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. When was it that he slashed his wrist--in the Marine Corps?

Mrs. OSWALD. I understand when he was in Moscow--is that correct? I do not know otherwise from what I read in the paper. These things, how could I know.

Representative FORD. May I see that picture?

Mr. RANKIN. In the Soviet Union?

Mrs. OSWALD. Yes. And that is why, too, it has been stated that he was possibly an agent, to show, when the Russians would not give him citizenship, he slashed his wrist, to show that he did not want to return back to the United States, and forced the Russians to keep him there. That has been stated.

Mr. RANKIN. Did you ever know that he shot himself while he was in the Marines?

Mrs. OSWALD. I read that in the paper.

Mr. RANKIN. He never told you that?

Mrs. OSWALD. No, sir. And I read in the paper that it could have been an accident.

Mr. RANKIN. Did you know anything about how good a shot he was? Did he ever tell you that?