Chapter XX: Front Matter (20)

Mr. DULLES. When we were in Dallas, it was suggested to us that the press, radio, and news media kind of took possession of city hall there, and it was a question of throwing them out by force of arms or leaving them there. Do you have any comment on that?

Mr. WADE. I don't know how they got in. I don't see how they could run those big cables right through the chief of police's office there without somebody giving them permission. However, I have no way of knowing how they got in.

Mr. DULLES. It was suggested to us that the chief of police was out at the airport and did not get back, and found them in there when he got back at 3 o'clock.

Mr. WADE. How they got in I have no idea, but the whole mechanics of the thing--for instance, in the homicide office, the whole office--you probably have seen it--I don't imagine it is as big as this room. It is cut up into little offices.

Mr. DULLES. I was in there; yes.

Mr. WADE. If you know, when I went into the office, went into that office there Friday night, you had to push people back to open the door to get out. You had police having to move the crowd, and they were just stacked down that corridor, and it was a situation that should not have developed.

Of course, you have a situation where the press yell that the American people have a right to know their President had been assassinated. I don't say there are not two sides to the situation, but I think when they get to interfering with the processes of law there is bound to be a middle ground or some way to work it out. I can't solve it.

Mr. DULLES. So far as you know, have all documents of any evidence, of any kind whatsoever, collected by State and local authorities in Texas been turned over to the Federal authorities and the President's Commission?

Mr. WADE. So far as I know they have. We have either sent it to the Commission or to Mr. Waggoner Carr, and I assume whatever he gets he sends to you all. I don't know of any documents; I don't know whether--you don't have a transcript of the trial, but that will be testimony.

The CHAIRMAN. How long was the transcript, Mr. Wade?

Mr. WADE. I don't know how many pages. I don't think--we don't have our copy of it. We ordered a copy, and so--he filed a pauper's oath, so I don't have any idea how long it will be. It was about 2 weeks of testimony, an argument, and also 2 weeks of picking the jury. They took all that down, all questioning of prospective jurors, so all that will be in the transcript.

The CHAIRMAN. Will that all be in the record on appeal?

Mr. WADE. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. Have they made any extra copies, do you know?

Mr. WADE. I know they are making some extra copies that have been bought by individuals, I believe Life magazine, some of those magazines have ordered a copy.

The CHAIRMAN. I see; yes.

Mr. WADE. We are having to pay for ours. We are having to pay for ours, and, of course, we will handle that, we will use that when briefing our case on appeal.

The CHAIRMAN. Do you know what it will cost? You don't know that yet?

Mr. WADE. I think--we think--our copy will be $3,000. I mean I have got that figure in my mind, because the Commissioners' Court kicked about us having to pay court reporters who are working for the county, but I think the court reporters wrote the law, but I have got in mind $3,000, but that is a copy. The original usually is twice that much, but of course, a copy is all you would want. But you can write Mr. Jimmy Muleady. He is the official court reporter of that court.

Mr. DULLES. You have testified with regard to the Hudkins and Goulden rumors that the FBI or CIA or some other Federal agency might have employed Oswald. One or the other of those correspondents indicated that he got his information from some high official that he refused to identify--he or they--refused to identify. Do you know anything about that?

Mr. WADE. No; Hudkins, as I recall, wrote in his article--I don't know who the high official is, but I imagine they are basing it on me or the police or someone--Hudkins put in his article, you know he wrote all this stuff, he is a wild writer, and he said, "Henry Wade said he doubted whether it would be public information" or something.

Well, he came running into me one day there and said, "Now, I have got all kinds of evidence that he is working for the FBI."

And I said, "Well, fine, I have none myself," and he said, "What would you think about it?"

I said, "Well, you are getting onto a situation that I don't know whether it ought to be public information or not." I mean, I asked, suppose he did, I don't know whether it would be something that ought to be written or not, well, more or less trying to get him not to write the article, and I said, "Assuming it is so, I don't see you are doing any good writing it."

So he quoted from that. That is all the conversation I had with Hudkins, and you can get that--I haven't seen the Goulden article, and didn't talk with him. I haven't seen Joe Goulden--I assume it is Joe Goulden. He left Dallas and went with a Philadelphia paper. So if it is the situation, if I have seen it I don't remember anything about it, if he wrote a story.

But the high official, all I can tell you anything on that, I have absolutely no evidence myself or any personal knowledge that he worked for the FBI or any Federal agency, and the only thing I have heard are rumors on the subject, and none of them that has got anything to base it on that I know of.

Does that cover that?

Mr. DULLES. That covers that.

You referred to the statement attributed to you made prior to Oswald's killing that the case against him was closed. I understand you say that was not correct, you did not make that statement.

Mr. WADE. That is right. To the best of my knowledge, I never said that. I mean that is what burned me up more than anything, more than any other statement on television when I saw it. I had not been on television. They have written this in the Dallas papers and some woman wrote in and said she saw me say it on television. But I would like to see a picture of it because the case never had actually been opened as far as--I mean, we weren't investigating the case. I think that night I told them, of course he is dead, there is no way of trying him. But the purpose, one other purpose in that interview Sunday night was to point out that I am sure the agencies will go on investigating it for the benefit of posterity, and I actually, if not in that interview, the following day, said I agreed with some Congressmen who said they thought they ought to have a Federal investigation on a national level of this thing.

Mr. DULLES. Do you know whether any other Texas officials made any such statement?

Mr. WADE. I don't know whether anybody did. They quoted the chief of police. They quoted Fritz on it, and then they started quoting me on it, which is all saying that. But so far, to the best of my knowledge, I never told anybody the case was closed, and I really think that Fritz must have said something about it, and then people think the captain of detectives and the district attorney and the chief are all about the same, and it finally drifted over to me because I left the police station and never had a word to say until that night when I was on television.

Mr. DULLES. Do you know whether there were any official transcripts made of the various interrogations of Oswald from the time he was captured to the time of his killing?

Mr. WADE. If there are any, I have never seen them. I have asked for them, but you are dealing with a man who not only doesn't make transcripts, but doesn't even make notes. Captain Fritz is the one who interrogated him most of the time, and if you--if there is any written evidence of what he said it must be from the FBI or the Secret Service or someone who interviewed him. I assume they make a record of what he said to them.

Mr. DULLES. If any transcript was made we would have had it, would we not? So far as you know?

Mr. WADE. The only thing I know I never have seen one, and I don't have one of an interview, and I don't know of any--you should have it, but you are dealing with Fritz there who interviewed Ruby, and Melvin Belli went right into the conversation with Ruby, and Belli at 4 o'clock that afternoon made everything admissible, and we couldn't get a thing, couldn't put Fritz on the stand because he couldn't remember anything that was helpful. I mean, he could remember Ruby rambling around the situation, but I don't know of any transcript like that that I have that you don't have.

Mr. DULLES. In your talks, going back to your talks, with Mr. Carter at the White House----

Mr. WADE. Carter; yes.

Mr. DULLES. Carter--did any questions come up in these conversations about not raising the issue that he was a Communist or that there might be a conspiracy or something of that kind?

Mr. WADE. No, sir; that conversation, I'm rather sure sometime Friday afternoon, and he called me and said, "Are they making any progress on the case?" You see, Cliff Carter and I are close personal friends. I have known him, and they were all upset, and I said, "I don't know. I have heard they have got some pretty good evidence." I think that is the only conversation I had with him.

Somebody told me, Mr. Carr, I believe, or Barefoot Sanders, that they had had some conversations with some Washington officials, and I have got an impression it was the State Department, but it might have been--that they--concerning the international conspiracy angle. I didn't discuss it because it was silly, I mean the whole thing was a silly deal.

I mean, if you would prove he was a Communist, suppose he gave a statement he was a Communist, I wouldn't have put that in a murder charge because I had to prove it.

Mr. DULLES. That is all I have, Mr. Chief Justice.

The CHAIRMAN. I think that is all, Mr. Wade. Thank you very much for your cooperation.

Mr. WADE. I appreciate what you all are doing and your problems you have got up here. I know if I were in your place I would hate to listen to somebody like me talk 5 hours.

The CHAIRMAN. All right. We will recess until 2 o'clock.

(Whereupon, at 12:50 p.m., the President's Commission recessed.)

Afternoon Session

TESTIMONY OF PATRICK T. DEAN

The President's Commission reconvened at 2 p.m.

(Chairman Warren presiding and Mr. Dulles present.)

The CHAIRMAN. All right, gentlemen.

Do you have a statement?

Mr. RANKIN. Sergeant Dean asked if he couldn't appear before the Commission and testify. We took his deposition in Dallas, and he asked, when he signed his deposition, whether he couldn't appear personally, so we are permitting him to do this.

The CHAIRMAN. We are very happy to have you, Sergeant. Will you raise your right hand and be sworn, please?

You solemnly swear the testimony you are about to give before the Commission shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?

Mr. DEAN. I do.

The CHAIRMAN. Be seated, please.

Mr. Rankin, you may examine the witness.

Mr. RANKIN. Sergeant, will you give us your name, your address, please?

Mr. DEAN. Patrick T. Dean. I live at 2822 Nicholson Drive in Dallas.

Mr. RANKIN. Are you connected with the police department in Dallas?

Mr. DEAN. Yes, sir.

Mr. RANKIN. What is your position?

Mr. DEAN. I am a sergeant on patrol.

Mr. RANKIN. How long have you been an official in the police department?

Mr. DEAN. Eleven and a half years.

Mr. RANKIN. Will you tell us briefly any training or experience you have had?

Mr. DEAN. Well, I worked as a patrolman for 5 years. Then I was promoted to sergeant and remained in the patrol division. I have since been in the patrol division the rest of the time.

Mr. RANKIN. You have given us your deposition, have you not, Sergeant?

Mr. DEAN. Yes, sir.

Mr. RANKIN. And is that correct and true as far as anything you know?

Mr. DEAN. Yes, sir.

Mr. RANKIN. Is there any part of it that you want to change or correct or modify?

Mr. DEAN. No, sir; I feel the main reason I wanted to appear before the Commission was about the 20 or 25 minutes that was off the record that I feel I would like the Commission to have on the record, and this is between Mr. Griffin and I. He was the original one who started my deposition.

Mr. RANKIN. Well, do you want to tell that at this time?

First, is there anything about what you said on the record that was not correct?

Mr. DEAN. No, sir.

Mr. RANKIN. And the truth?

Mr. DEAN. No, sir.

Well, Mr. Griffin had questioned me about 2 hours, or maybe a little longer. There was no problems at all, no difficulties. And after that length of time, a little over 2 hours, Mr. Griffin desired to get off the record, and he advised the court reporter that he would be off the record and he could go smoke a cigarette or get a Coke, and he would let him know when he wanted him to get back on the record.

Well, after the court reporter left, Mr. Griffin started talking to me in a manner of gaining my confidence in that he would help me and that he felt I would probably need some help in the future.

My not knowing what he was building up to, I asked Mr. Griffin to go ahead and ask me what he was going to ask me. He continued to advise me that he wanted me to listen to what he had to say before he asked me whatever question he was going to ask me. I finally told him that whatever he wanted to ask me he could just ask me, and if I knew I would tell him the truth or if I didn't know, I would tell him I didn't know.

Mr. Griffin took my reports, one dated February 18, the subject of it was an interview with Jack Ruby, and one dated November 26, which was my assignment in the basement.

He said there were things in these statements which were not true and, in fact, he said both these statements, he said there were particular things in there that were not true, and I asked him what portions did he consider not true, and then very dogmatically he said that, "Jack Ruby didn't tell you that he entered the basement via the Main Street ramp."

And, of course, I was shocked at this. This is what I testified to, in fact, I was cross-examined on this, and he, Mr. Griffin, further said, "Jack Ruby did not tell you that he had thought or planned to kill Oswald two nights prior."

And he said, "Your testimony was false, and these reports to your chief of police are false."

So this, of course, all this was off the record. I told Mr. Griffin then this shocked me, and I told him it shocked me; that I couldn't imagine what he was getting at or why he would accuse me of this, and I asked him, and Mr. Griffin replied he didn't or he wasn't at liberty to discuss that particular part of it with me, and that he wasn't trying to cross-examine me here, but that under cross-examination he could prove that my testimony was false, and that is when I told Mr. Griffin that these are the facts and I can't change them. This is what I know about it.

I quoted Ruby just about verbatim, and since he didn't believe me, and I was saying they were true, we might as well terminate the interview.

Mr. Griffin then got back on the record, or before he did get back on the record, he said, "Well now, Sergeant Dean, I respect you as a witness, I respect you in your profession, but I have offered my help and assistance, and I again will offer you my assistance, and that I don't feel you will be subjecting yourself to loss of your job," or some words to that effect, "If you will go ahead and tell me the truth about it."

I again told Mr. Griffin that these were the facts and I couldn't change them, so with that we got back on the record.

Mr. RANKIN. Did you ask Mr. Griffin to ever put this part that was off the record on the record?

Mr. DEAN. No, sir; I didn't.

Mr. RANKIN. Why didn't you at that time?

Mr. DEAN. Well, now the discussion was, I said, "Mr. Griffin, I have waived my rights for an attorney, of which I don't feel like I need one." I still don't feel like I need one.

The CHAIRMAN. And you do not need one either Sergeant.

Mr. DEAN. True.

The CHAIRMAN. You will get along all right.

Mr. DEAN. Thank you.

I said, "I have come over here with the idea of giving you all the information that I have." In fact, I had some additional information that I had gotten the night before, and it was a call that I had received from some man in Victoria, Canada, who said he had a reel of movie film that he had taken of the assassination.

I got this man's name, where he called from, had the police department in Victoria check to crisscross the number, and I gave him the name--well, all the information as to where the call had originated from, his name, also this man's attorney, he had given me his name, and I told him that the reason the man had called, had called especially for me at the police department, was that he had a reel of movie film that he had taken the day of the assassination and that these--or the camera was on the President at the time of the assassination, and he described to me the position as to where he was, which was across and in trajectory of the line of fire, and that he felt that in addition to the assassination that he had gotten the School Book Depository.

I told Mr. Griffin at the time that I had told this man--I can't remember his name, the FBI has gotten it, and at the time I gave it to Mr. Griffin, I told this man on the telephone from Victoria that night that he should send these things, this film, that he said wasn't developed, to the Warren Commission.

He said, that is when he told me that he had contacted his attorney in Victoria and that his attorney's name was Batter, and he spelled it for me, B-a-t-t-e-r, and his attorney had advised him not to send this information to the Warren Commission but to contact someone in Dallas and send it to them.

This man told me that he had read something about my testimony and that he asked me would it be all right for him to send it to me, and I told him, "Yes," and I said I was supposed to go back to the Warren Commission and he could send it to me, and I would make it available for them.

This was just additional information that I told Mr. Griffin that I was--this is an example--I was there to help them in any way I could.

Mr. RANKIN. Now, the differences in your testimony that Mr. Griffin was discussing with you off the record, you have gone into that in detail on the record, haven't you, in your deposition?

Mr. DEAN. Yes; I believe I have, about how Ruby entered the basement or how he told me how he entered the basement. Also that he had thought two nights prior when he saw Lee Oswald on a showup stand with a sarcastic sneer on his face is when he decided if he got the chance he would kill him. This was the thing that I testified in court about. I was cross-examined in court.

Mr. RANKIN. And you have explained all that in your deposition, haven't you?

Mr. DEAN. I believe so; I am not certain.

Mr. RANKIN. And did he ask you about why you didn't have your--this information about his planning to shoot Oswald the night before, or on the Friday----

Mr. DEAN. Now, are you asking did Mr. Griffin ask me why I didn't----

Mr. RANKIN. Why you didn't put it in your February--in your statement before the February 18 one?

Mr. DEAN. Yes, sir; I believe he did, and I explained to him this wasn't the subject--the subject of that November 26 report was my assignment. I didn't put any of the conversation as to what Mr. Sorrels and I talked to Mr. Ruby about. I did put at the closing paragraph, I think, and I have a copy of it here, that my main concern was how he got into the basement and how long he had been there because I was in charge of the security of the basement.

Mr. RANKIN. So you didn't put it in your prior reports?

Mr. DEAN. No, sir; this was later on. Chief Curry--I think probably it was February 18--and I think I probably wrote it that day, called me to his office and asked me had I heard all the interview of Ruby and Sorrels, and I told him that I did, and he asked me could I remember it pretty well, and I said, "Yes, I believe I can remember most all of it," and that is when Chief Curry told me that, he said, "Well, you are going to have to testify to it because Mr. Sorrels can't because he says he didn't warn Mr. Ruby when he was questioning him.

Well, this was fine with me. I wrote the report. This was February 18.

Mr. RANKIN. Did you tell Mr. Griffin at that time that you thought it was unimportant or had some other reason for not including it?

Mr. DEAN. I believe that I told him that the investigation, the focal point, was as to how he got into the basement. There was an officer, and I knew who the officer was, I assigned him there myself, and I felt this was more of a part of the investigation in which it was investigated--Officer R. E. Vaughan was investigated as to whether or not he let Ruby into the basement or saw him in the basement, and, of course, he was cleared of this. I know of no--the only information I passed on about that was when Jack Ruby told me how he entered. I told my superiors and then they carried it on from there as far as the investigation.

Mr. RANKIN. And about his planning to shoot him prior to the day that----

Mr. DEAN. Now, this wasn't--the only time that I put that in the report was February 18.

Mr. RANKIN. Yes; did you explain to Mr. Griffin in your prior testimony why you didn't put it in?

Mr. DEAN. I believe that I did; I am not sure.

Mr. RANKIN. Do you want to add anything to that, just anything that you wanted, to the Commission?

The CHAIRMAN. Do you recall whether you were asked that specific question or not, Sergeant? May I ask, Mr. Rankin, was he asked that question, and did he answer it?

Mr. RANKIN. I have to look at the record to be sure.

Mr. Chief Justice, in answer to your question, he was asked about what was the first time that he had given this information and if this was the date. He was not asked for any explanation as to why he didn't give it at any earlier time.

The CHAIRMAN. Then we can't blame him if he didn't answer why.

Mr. RANKIN. No; I just wanted to find out if he wanted to add anything at this time that would complete the record.

The CHAIRMAN. Yes; all right.

Mr. DEAN. Well, my main concern has been in some way this got out to the papers. The only thing I told the papers was that I can't give any statement. I said I have no comment, and I feel that the accusation started with my denial because I haven't had an opportunity to deny it. The story came out in the papers and it has been on the radio several times, and, in fact, several times since the original, some weeks or so after the paper learned of it of the so-called rift, as they put it.

They had the one side of it that he accused me of lying. He didn't use the word "lie," he just said, "These are false statements, and when you testified in court you testified falsely." He didn't use the word "lying," and a lot of papers have since then used the word "lying."

I feel like the accusation is a lot stronger than my denial because I haven't denied it. I haven't made any statement at all to press or radio or any news media. I just told them it will have to come from the Warren Commission or some other source.

Mr. RANKIN. What I was asking, Sergeant, was whether there is anything that you would like to tell the Commission or add to your testimony about why it wasn't in the earlier statement prior to February 18 that you haven't already told us.

Mr. DEAN. Well, I don't think I would like--if I could, I would like to know why Mr. Griffin had accused me of perjury. Of course, this is something for you people to know, but I just--he wouldn't discuss it with me.

The CHAIRMAN. Well, Sergeant, I want to say to you that, of course, without knowing what your conversation was with Mr. Griffin, I have never talked to Mr. Griffin about this. I didn't know that you had this altercation with him, but I want to say this: That so far as the jurisdiction of this Commission is concerned and its procedures, no member of our staff has a right to tell any witness that he is lying or that he is testifying falsely. That is not his business. It is the business of this Commission to appraise the testimony of all the witnesses, and, at the time you are talking about, and up to the present time, this Commission has never appraised your testimony or fully appraised the testimony of any other witness, and furthermore, I want to say to you that no member of our staff has any power to help or injure any witness.

So, so far as that conversation is concerned, there is nothing that will be binding upon this Commission.

Mr. DEAN. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. But, as I say, I don't know what your conversation was with Griffin, but I am just telling you as to what the limitations of the members of our staff are.

Mr. DEAN. Yes, sir; thank you. That is about all I had.

Mr. RANKIN. That is all I have, Mr. Chief Justice.

The CHAIRMAN. Well, thank you, Sergeant, for coming and feeling as you do, I am glad you had the frankness to come and talk to the Commission, and offer to testify concerning it.

Mr. DEAN. Thank you. I appreciate the opportunity.

The CHAIRMAN. All right, Sergeant.

Mr. DEAN. Thank you. It is nice to have met you.

Mr. RANKIN. Waggoner, do you want to take the stand for a minute about that conversation?

The CHAIRMAN. You are going to ask the General about it?

Have you been sworn?

TESTIMONY OF WAGGONER CARR

Do you solemnly swear the testimony you are about to give before the Commission shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?

Mr. CARR. I do.

The CHAIRMAN. Be seated, please.

Proceed, Mr. Rankin.

Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Carr, will you state your name and position for the record?

Mr. CARR. I am Waggoner Carr, attorney general of the State of Texas.

Mr. RANKIN. And you are a practicing lawyer, are you?

Mr. CARR. Yes, sir; before I was elected, I was practicing law in Lubbock, Tex. Now, of course, being attorney general, this has taken me out of the private practice. Prior to that I graduated from law school at the University of Texas, had my pre-law with a BBA degree from Texas Tech. I have been an assistant district attorney for the 72nd judicial district in Texas; county attorney of Lubbock County for 2 years; served in the Texas House of Representatives for 10 years, the last 4 of those years being as Speaker of the House, and was elected attorney general in 1960.

Mr. RANKIN. You are the same Waggoner Carr who has participated from time to time in observing these hearings and cooperating with the Commission regarding its work?

Mr. CARR. Yes.

Mr. RANKIN. Insofar as the State of Texas is concerned?

Mr. CARR. Yes.

Mr. RANKIN. Were you here when Henry Wade was testifying with regard to a conversation between himself and yourself, this morning?

Mr. CARR. Yes, sir.

Mr. RANKIN. Would you relate to us that conversation as you recall it, both what you said and what he said?

Mr. CARR. As I recall, it was around 8 or 9 o'clock at night on November 22, 1963, when I received a long-distance telephone call from Washington from someone in the White House. I can't for the life of me remember who it was.

A rumor had been heard here that there was going to be an allegation in the indictment against Oswald connecting the assassination with an international conspiracy, and the inquiry was made whether I had any knowledge of it, and I told him I had no knowledge of it.

As a matter of fact, I hadn't been in Dallas since the assassination and was not there at the time of the assassination.

So the request was made of me to contact Mr. Wade to find out if that allegation was in the indictment.

I received the definite impression that the concern of the caller was that because of the emotion or the high tension that existed at that time that someone might thoughtlessly place in the indictment such an allegation without having the proof of such a conspiracy. So I did call Mr. Wade from my home, when I received the call, and he told me very much what he repeated to you today, as I recall, that he had no knowledge of anyone desiring to have that or planning to have that in the indictment; that it would be surplusage, it was not necessary to allege it, and that it would not be in there, but that he would doublecheck it to be sure.

And then I called back, and--as I recall I did--and informed the White House participant in the conversation of what Mr. Wade had said, and that was all of it.

Mr. RANKIN. Was there anything said to you at any time by anybody from Washington that if there was any evidence that was credible to support such an international conspiracy it should not be included in the indictment or complaint or any action?

Mr. CARR. Oh, no; absolutely not. There was no direct talk or indirect talk or insinuation that the facts, whatever they might be, should be suppressed. It was simply that in the tension someone might put something in an indictment for an advantage here or disadvantage there, that could not be proved, which would have very serious reaction, which the local person might not anticipate since he might not have the entire picture of what the reaction might be.

Mr. RANKIN. Thank you. That is all I have, Mr. Chief Justice.

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Attorney General, I don't know whether you will be testifying on any other subject before the Commission or not, but in the event that you do not, and both of us are not here in the Commission again at the same time, I want to say to you for the record that from the very beginning of our investigation your cooperation has been complete, it has been enthusiastic, and it has been most helpful to the Commission.

The Commission and I all appreciate it very much indeed.

Mr. CARR. Well, thank you, sir. I will say this, that it has been a very pleasant experience for us, and I think set a good example of how a State government and a Federal Government can cooperate together where we have common objectives such as this, where we are trying to determine the facts and nothing else.

Mr. DULLES. May I add my voice to that, Mr. Chief Justice?

The CHAIRMAN. Yes; indeed, you may.

Mr. DULLES. I know that has been true as far as I am personally concerned, and during our trip to Dallas, Mr. Carr was of great help to us.

Could I ask just one question?

The CHAIRMAN. Yes, indeed.

Mr. DULLES. Was there any indication in the call from the White House as to whether this was a leftist, rightist, or any other type of conspiracy or, as far as you recall, was just the word "conspiracy" used?

Mr. CARR. As far as I recall, it was an international conspiracy. This was the idea, but I don't know whether the word "Communist" was used or not, Mr. Dulles. It could have been, or maybe I just assumed that if there was a conspiracy it would only be a Communist conspiracy. I don't know which it was, but it was a perfectly natural call.

The circumstances that existed at the time, knowing them as I did, and the tension and the high emotion that was running rampant there, it was not inconceivable that something like that could have been done, you understand, without any thought of harming anyone or any thought of having to prove it, as long as you didn't know that under our Texas law you have to prove every allegation made in an indictment. If you didn't know that, it might seem logical that someone might put something like that into an indictment, factual or not.

Mr. DULLES. Thank you very much.

Mr. CARR. But there was no such thing going on.

The CHAIRMAN. Well, General, I think that will be all then. Thank you very much.

Mr. CARR. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. The Commission is adjourned.

(Whereupon, at 2:50 p.m., the President's Commission recessed.)

_Tuesday, June 9, 1964_

TESTIMONY OF RICHARD EDWARD SNYDER, JOHN A. McVICKAR, AND ABRAM CHAYES

The President's Commission met at 10 a.m., on June 9, 1964, at 200 Maryland Avenue NE., Washington, D.C.

Present were Chief Justice Earl Warren, Chairman; Senator John Sherman Cooper, Representative Gerald Ford, and Allen W. Dulles, members.

Also present were William T. Coleman, Jr., assistant counsel; W. David Slawson, assistant counsel; Charles Murray, observer; and Dean Robert G. Storey, special counsel to the attorney general of Texas.

TESTIMONY OF RICHARD EDWARD SNYDER

(Members present at this point: Chief Justice Warren, and Mr. Dulles.)

The CHAIRMAN. Gentlemen, the Commission will come to order. Mr. Coleman, would you make a statement as to the purpose of the meeting this morning?

Mr. COLEMAN. Mr. Chief Justice, the first witness is Mr. Richard E. Snyder, who is presently first secretary in the American Embassy in Tokyo, Japan, and was second secretary and consul, American Embassy, Moscow, U.S.S.R., in 1959, and remained in that post in Moscow through at least the middle of 1961.

Mr. Snyder will be asked to testify concerning Lee Harvey Oswald's actions when he came into the American Embassy in Moscow on October 31, 1959, and stated that he desired to renounce his U.S. citizenship, the actions which the Embassy took at that time, and the information which it gave to the State Department.

Mr. Snyder also handled the interview of Oswald when he appeared at the Embassy in July of 1961, and had his passport returned to him, and will be asked to testify about the return of the passport.

Mr. Snyder will also be asked to identify for the record the various Embassy dispatches and State Department instructions which were exchanged concerning Oswald in 1959, 1960, and to the middle of 1961.

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Snyder, it is customary for us to read a statement of that kind to the witness, so you will be apprised of what we are going to interview you about.

Will you please rise and raise your right hand and be sworn?

Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you are about to give before this Commission shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?

Mr. SNYDER. I do, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. You may be seated.

Mr. Coleman will conduct the examination.

Mr. COLEMAN. Mr. Snyder, will you state your name for the record.

Mr. SNYDER. Richard Edward Snyder.

Mr. COLEMAN. And what is your present address?

Mr. SNYDER. 118 Geary Drive, South Plainfield, N.J.

Mr. COLEMAN. Are you presently employed by the Federal Government?

Mr. SNYDER. Yes, sir.

Mr. COLEMAN. In what capacity?

Mr. SNYDER. As a Foreign Service officer of the Department of State.

Mr. COLEMAN. Where are you presently stationed?

Mr. SNYDER. In Tokyo, American Embassy.

Mr. COLEMAN. Directing your attention to the fall of 1959, were you employed by the Federal Government at that time?

Mr. SNYDER. Yes, sir.

Mr. COLEMAN. Where were you stationed?

Mr. SNYDER. At the Embassy in Moscow.

Mr. COLEMAN. What was your title?

Mr. SNYDER. Second secretary and consul, sir.

Mr. COLEMAN. I take it that you have had called to your attention a copy of the joint resolution which was adopted by Congress with respect to the Commission.

Mr. SNYDER. Yes, sir.

Mr. COLEMAN. And I also take it that since you have been back in the country that you have had an opportunity to look at the various State Department files dealing with Oswald.

Mr. SNYDER. Yes, sir.

Mr. COLEMAN. Calling your attention to the date of October 31----

Mr. DULLES. Could I ask one question, Mr. Coleman, about that? What previous posts had you had before going to Moscow?

Mr. SNYDER. Well, my first post in the Foreign Service----

Mr. DULLES. I am interested as an old Foreign Service officer.

Mr. SNYDER. I see. I served for a brief time in HICOG in Frankfurt, Germany and then for about 2 years in Munich, in the consulate general, which was my first post in the Foreign Service.

My second post, I spent 1 year in the boondocks of Japan, in Niigata, on the Sea of Japan, in a one-man cultural center.

Mr. DULLES. As a Foreign Service officer?

Mr. SNYDER. As a Foreign Service officer; yes, sir. I was assigned to this duty at a time when USIS was still part of the State Department, and when I reached my post it had already been separated, so I was on loan to them. And then a year and a half in Tokyo. Then a summer and an academic year at Harvard, in Russian area studies.

Mr. DULLES. In what school there?

Mr. SNYDER. In Littauer.

Mr. DULLES. Did you learn Russian at that time?

Mr. SNYDER. No; I had had Russian in college before.

Mr. DULLES. So you speak Russian fairly fluently?

Mr. SNYDER. Fairly fluently; yes, sir.

Mr. DULLES. And then Moscow was your next post?

Mr. SNYDER. And then Moscow for 2 years; yes, sir.

Mr. DULLES. What 2 years?

Mr. SNYDER. July of 1959 to July of 1961. I arrived there just before the Vice President.

Mr. COLEMAN. Directing your attention, sir, to October 31, 1959, did you have occasion to see Lee Harvey Oswald on that day?

Mr. SNYDER. Yes, sir.

Mr. COLEMAN. Had you ever seen him before?

Mr. SNYDER. No, sir.

(At this point, Representative Ford entered the hearing room.)

Mr. COLEMAN. Had you ever heard about him before?

Mr. SNYDER. No.

Mr. COLEMAN. Could you state for the Commission just what happened when you saw Mr. Oswald on October 31. 1959, indicating the time of day, what he said, and what you did?

The CHAIRMAN. Before you answer that question, may I say that this is Congressman Ford, a member of the Commission.

This is Mr. Snyder of the State Department now stationed in Tokyo, and who was stationed at the Embassy in Moscow when Oswald attempted to defect.

Representative FORD. Thank you.

Mr. SNYDER. Well, as for the time of day, I am afraid I draw a blank. I can make some assumptions as to the time of day, for what they are worth.

But since I told Oswald--and you will come to this, I think, a little later on--that the Embassy was closed theoretically at the time, I presume this was a Wednesday afternoon or perhaps a Saturday afternoon, but I just don't recall.

Mr. COLEMAN. For the record, I think it was a Saturday, sir.

Mr. SNYDER. Was it a Saturday?

So, at any rate--if it had been a morning, I could not have used this particular approach with him. So I presume it was an afternoon.

Oswald came into the Embassy without prior announcement. He didn't call or in any other way communicate with us, to the best of my knowledge.

Mr. DULLES. You had no way of knowing he was in Russia?

Mr. SNYDER. I had no previous knowledge of his presence; no, sir.

At any rate, he came in to me cold, so to speak. I was told that an American wanted to see me, wanted to see the consul. And I am not sure whether I went out and brought him in or whether he was taken into my office by someone else. At any rate, this was my first meeting with Oswald.

I will be glad to give you such recollections as I have as to his general demeanor and this sort of thing, if you would like.

Mr. COLEMAN. Yes, sir.

Mr. SNYDER. And I might inject at this point something which I mentioned to Mr. Slawson before our session began, and that is that I reviewed the files, our own files, on Oswald, enough to refresh my memory as to the basic facts and the chronology of events and this sort of thing, but I have attempted not to go too deeply into details with the thought that what the Commission is interested in, presumably, is what I honestly remember at the time and not so much what may have been planted in my mind by reviews since that time.

As to his general appearance, I do recall that he was neatly and very presentably dressed. I couldn't say offhand whether he was dressed in a suit and shirt, though I think probably he was. At any rate, he presented a nice physical appearance.

I presume that he was well shaven. Otherwise, I would not have had this feeling about him--that he, in general, was competent looking.

He was extremely sure of himself. He seemed to know what his mission was. He took charge, in a sense, of the conversation right from the beginning. He told me in effect that he was there to give up his American citizenship. I believe he put his passport on my desk, but I am not sure. I may have asked for it. In general, his attitude was quite arrogant.

Mr. DULLES. Could I ask one question there? When you say you presume you asked for it, you mean you asked to see it--you didn't ask to take it from him?

Mr. SNYDER. No, I asked to see it. If he didn't put it on the desk, then I asked for it early in the game--one way or the other.

He told me, among other things, that he had come to the Soviet Union to live, that he did not intend to go back to the United States, that this was a well thought out idea on his part. He said, again in effect, "Don't bother wasting my time asking me questions or trying to talk me out of my position."

He said, "I am well aware"--either he said, "I am well aware" or "I have been told exactly the kind of thing you will ask me, and I am not interested, so let's get down to business"--words to that effect.

Well, he was a very cocksure young man at that time.

I am not sure that he sat at all throughout the interview, but certainly in the early part of it he did not.

I asked him--I recall asking him to take a seat, and he said, no, he wanted to stand. He may have relented later on.

At any rate, I did nevertheless probe about and elicited a bit of information about him which was in my report to the Department of State.

Mr. COLEMAN. Sir, was anyone else present at the time you were talking to Mr. Oswald?

Mr. SNYDER. No; I believe Mr. McVickar was in the next room. But there was no one in the room with us at that time.

Mr. COLEMAN. How long did the interview with Mr. Oswald last, approximately?

Mr. SNYDER. Well, I would have to pull it out of the air, really. It would be on the order of magnitude of half an hour. It might have extended to three-quarters of an hour, something of this sort.

Mr. COLEMAN. Other than the passport, did he give you any other piece of paper?

Mr. SNYDER. Yes, yes; he did. He gave me a written statement saying something along the line of what I have said he mentioned to me orally. That is, that he had come to the Soviet Union to live, that he desired to renounce his citizenship, that he was going to become a citizen of the Soviet Union, words to that effect.

Mr. DULLES. We have that written statement, do we not?

Mr. COLEMAN. I have marked as Commission Exhibit No. 913 a photostatic copy of a handwritten letter which is signed by Lee H. Oswald, and ask you whether that is a copy of the letter that Oswald gave you on October 31, when he appeared at the Embassy?

(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 913 for identification.)

Mr. SNYDER. Yes; I would say it is, sir.

Mr. COLEMAN. After he gave you the letter and the passport, did he do anything else?

Mr. SNYDER. No; after his initial statement of purpose and intent, and after giving me this statement, the interview was then pretty much in my hands. He was, I would say, a reluctant interviewee from there on.

He had announced initially his desire not to discuss the matter with me, but simply to get on with the business for which he had come and, therefore, anything else that was to be said was up to me to get said.

Mr. COLEMAN. Did you at that time go through whatever formalities are required for a person to renounce his citizenship?

Mr. SNYDER. No; I did not.

Mr. COLEMAN. What does an American citizen have to do at the Embassy to renounce his citizenship?

Mr. SNYDER. Well, the law requires, in general, that an American citizen, to renounce his citizenship, must appear before--I am not sure whether the law confines it to a consular officer--but at any rate must appear, in the case of the Foreign Service, appear before a consular officer, and swear to an affidavit in the proper form, something of this order. In practical terms, it means that the consul draws up a statement, the content of which--the exact wording of which is contained in our regulations, and has the person swear to it in his presence.

Mr. COLEMAN. Well, did Mr. Oswald ask for such an affidavit?

Mr. SNYDER. I don't think he asked for such an affidavit in those terms. I am not sure that he understood that completely, what the procedure was. But he did ask to renounce his citizenship.

Mr. COLEMAN. Well, did you provide him with the affidavit?

Mr. SNYDER. No, sir; I did not.

Mr. COLEMAN. Why didn't you provide him with the affidavit at that time?

Mr. SNYDER. Well, as the consul and, of course, the responsible person at the time, it didn't seem to me the sensible thing to do--in the sense that--I can't, I suppose, speak for all consuls, but it is sort of axiomatic, I think, in the consular service that when a man, a citizen comes in and asks to renounce his citizenship, you don't whip out a piece of paper and have him sign it. This is a very serious step, of course, an irrevocable step, really, and if nothing else you attempt to provide enough time for--to make sure that the person knows what he is doing. You explain, for one thing, what the meaning of the act is; and, secondly, again speaking for myself--I cannot speak for the Foreign Service in this--provide a little breather, if possible make the man leave your office and come back to it at a later time, just to make sure--for what value there is in making sure--that the man's action is not something completely off the top of his head.

Representative FORD. Mr. Chairman, would it be helpful for the record to have put in the record at this point whatever the law is in this regard, and whatever the Department regulations are on this point?

The CHAIRMAN. That may be done; yes.

Mr. COLEMAN. I would like to say, sir, at 2 o'clock the Legal Adviser to the State Department is coming in, and he is going to put it in at that time.

Mr. DULLES. May I ask a question at this point?

Mr. COLEMAN. If you want it in now, we can indicate the sections which are applicable.

Representative FORD. I think there ought to be some citation at this point, because the witness is talking specifically about the process of the law and the regulations.

The CHAIRMAN. Do you have the law there, Mr. Snyder--is that the law?

Mr. SNYDER. I brought nothing with me, myself.

The CHAIRMAN. I saw a book there that you were looking at, and I thought that would suffice.

Mr. SNYDER. Shall I read the section of law, sir?

This is the Immigration and Nationality Act, section 349(a)(6).