Chapter XXXII: Part 32

Mr. LIEBELER. Did you talk to him on a transatlantic telephone call in which you told him about the fact or the alleged fact that Lee Harvey Oswald was the person who made an attempt on your life?

General WALKER. I don't recall that name. Did he speak English? I don't speak German.

Mr. LIEBELER. Have you ever seen a copy of that newspaper?

General WALKER. Yes; I have.

Mr. LIEBELER. In fact, I suggest that you have seen the November 29, 1963, copy of that newspaper which had on its front page a story entitled in German "The Strange Case of Oswald", that told about how Oswald had allegedly attacked you.

General WALKER. November 29, that is correct.

Mr. LIEBELER. Now, where did that newspaper get that information, do you know?

General WALKER. I do not. There was an article in the paper that he probably got from me.

Mr. LIEBELER. Well, in fact, the issue of that newspaper has right on the front page what purports to be a transcript of a telephone conversation between you and some other person.

General WALKER. Thorsten?

Mr. LIEBELER. Yes. Hasso Thorsten, is that the man?

General WALKER. He called me in Shreveport.

Mr. LIEBELER. When were you in Shreveport?

General WALKER. He called me the morning of November 23, 1963, about 7 a.m.

Mr. LIEBELER. That is when you gave him this information about Oswald having attacked you?

General WALKER. I didn't give him all the information--I think the portion you are referring to, I didn't give him, because I had no way of knowing that Oswald attacked me. I still don't. And I am not very prone to say in fact he did. In fact, I have always claimed he did not, until we can get into the case or somebody tells us differently that he did.

Mr. LIEBELER. Do you have a record here that indicates when you were in Shreveport?

General WALKER. I don't know that I have a record here. I can tell you definitely when I was in Shreveport.

Mr. LIEBELER. Would you?

General WALKER. Well, starting back to make the record clear, I had a speaking engagement in Hattiesburg, Miss., either the 18th or 19th of November. I went from there to New Orleans and stayed 2 or 3 days. I was in the airplane between New Orleans and Shreveport about halfway, when the pilot announced that the President had been assassinated. I landed in Shreveport and went to the Captain Shreve Hotel and stayed there two nights and returned to Dallas and was walking into my house, just about the time of the immediate rerun of the shooting of Oswald. I had been out of the city on speaking engagements.

Mr. LIEBELER. The question was, when were you in Shreveport, and when did you talk to this man?

General WALKER. I was in Shreveport the night of the 23d and the night of the 22d. Do you have a transcript of my conversation with Mr. Thorsten?

Mr. LIEBELER. Yes, sir.

General WALKER. Sir?

Mr. LIEBELER. I have what appears to be that; yes.

General WALKER. Where did you get that?

Mr. LIEBELER. It is apparently taken from the newspaper. The newspaper itself had a transcript printed right in it.

General WALKER. I believe the article you referred to in the newspaper was separate from the other article in the paper which evolved out of the conversation.

Mr. LIEBELER. Now so that there were in this particular issue of the newspaper two transcripts of a conversation between yourself and Thorsten, and also a story about how Oswald had allegedly fired at you, is that correct?

General WALKER. In the newspaper I remember two separate articles. One based upon the conversation we had between us, as he understood it, and then as a separate article which I consider that the newspaper had done on its own.

Mr. LIEBELER. What was the separate article about? Did that have any reference to the fact that Oswald had allegedly fired at you?

General WALKER. Yes. As I remember the article, it alleged that Oswald was the one that had fired at me, and that this had been known earlier, and that this had been known and that nothing was done about it.

And if something had been done about it at that time, he wouldn't have been the man that--it wouldn't have been possible for him to have killed the President.

Mr. LIEBELER. Well, now, did you tell anybody from this newspaper that Oswald had shot at you and that this had been known prior to the time of the assassination of the President?

General WALKER. No; I did not. I wouldn't have known it. It was much later that they began to tie Oswald into me, and I don't even know it yet.

Mr. LIEBELER. And you certainly didn't know it before November 22?

General WALKER. Or the morning of the 23d, certainly not. I was very surprised to see the article.

Mr. LIEBELER. So the best of your recollection is that you never provided them with the information?

General WALKER. I did not. I didn't know it at the time of this conversation at all. I didn't know it until I started reading the newspaper, which would have been later than then.

Mr. LIEBELER. I think that is right, so that you only had two conversations with these people, is that correct?

General WALKER. In connection with this incident, as I remember, there was a call back to verify something on the original conversation? I don't remember how the conversation came about. There were two telephone conversations; right.

Mr. LIEBELER. They both took place while you were down in Louisiana, the 23d and the 22d of November?

General WALKER. The first one was 7 o'clock in the morning the 23d, and it woke me up.

Mr. LIEBELER. You didn't have the faintest idea that Oswald had taken a shot at you and you didn't make a statement to that effect to the newspaper?

General WALKER. No; I didn't know.

Mr. LIEBELER. You didn't make a statement to the newspaper or anybody connected with it at any other time, isn't that a fact?

General WALKER. No.

Mr. LIEBELER. Is it not a fact?

General WALKER. I might have said that the reports over here had connected Oswald with me some subsequent time.

Mr. LIEBELER. I am somewhat puzzled by the whole thing, because the newspaper in which this apparently appeared is dated November 29, and in fact, that information was not known to anybody that I know of until a later date than that----

General WALKER. Much later.

Mr. LIEBELER. Several days, at any rate.

General WALKER. People began to guess it immediately. I should say guess at it.

Mr. LIEBELER. It might have been that the article was based on speculation, and it might have been the newspaper was postdated too. I think that sometimes happens.

General WALKER. I think that paper was definitely postdated.

Mr. LIEBELER. Yes; that would explain it. That is what I mean, predated.

General WALKER. That is something else.

Mr. LIEBELER. Do you have any other information that you think the Commission ought to have that we haven't already talked about?

General WALKER. Yes. I think the Commission should look into George De Mohrenschildt, if it hasn't.

Mr. LIEBELER. What do you know about Mr. De Mohrenschildt?

General WALKER. I know that my information indicates that he lived next door to the professor that was supposed to have burned up.

Mr. LIEBELER. Do you have any information that would connect De Mohrenschildt to the assassination of President Kennedy in any way?

General WALKER. I have the information the paper had that connected him with the Oswalds.

Mr. LIEBELER. Yes?

General WALKER. Of course, it is common knowledge that De Mohrenschildt was associated with Oswald now.

Mr. LIEBELER. Other than that, do you have any information to indicate that De Mohrenschildt was involved in any way with the assassination of President Kennedy?

General WALKER. Not directly.

General WATTS. Do you have any indirect evidence?

General WALKER. I am tired of them blaming the rightwing, and I have had enough of this, and it is about time that the Commission cleared the city of Dallas.

Mr. LIEBELER. Well, now, do you have any indirect indication or evidence that would associate De Mohrenschildt with the assassination of President Kennedy in any way?

General WALKER. I think it is very important that De Mohrenschildt knew Oswald. I think it is very interesting. My information is that De Mohrenschildt went to Haiti. I have nothing further to add.

Mr. LIEBELER. Now, is there anything else that you think the Commission ought to know that we have not already mentioned here this evening? It is now 7:15.

General WALKER. Where am I at?

Mr. LIEBELER. I didn't mean to suggest--I just wanted to let the record show we are both working very hard.

General WALKER. I will stay here all night.

Mr. LIEBELER. If you have anything else that you think the Commission should know or that you consider to be of material importance, I want you to say so, General Walker, because I think that you have--I hope you realize that the Commission is trying to do the best job that it can with the situation, and that if you can be of help to us, or if anybody else could be of help to us, we want your help.

General WALKER. That is my approach to the problem. We certainly want the truth. We want the truth to come out.

General WATTS. Off the record.

(Discussion off the record.)

General WALKER. I believe it has been released to the press that, and I am not sure that it has, but some information has gotten to me, I can't recall how, but the bullet that was fired at me matched the gun of the type that Oswald used on the 22d. That sounds rather vague, but I believe that is the way the information has come.

General WATTS. This is off the record.

(Discussion off the record.)

Mr. LIEBELER. General Watts has indicated that he had some ammunition the investigators got from Mr. Duff and I request you to forward that ammunition, to deliver it to the FBI in Oklahoma City and ask them to forward it to the FBI laboratory, and I will contact the FBI in Washington when I get back.

General WALKER. Don't you want to clarify that where they found that in the apartment, wasn't it?

General WATTS. Yes. I will get the investigator and get the detailed source of the ammunition and turn the ammunition over to the FBI in Oklahoma City.

General WALKER. I can think of nothing else that I am not sure hasn't already come to the Commission one way or another.

Mr. LIEBELER. Very well. I have no more questions. I want to thank you very much for coming down and appearing before us and giving us the testimony you have. We appreciate it.

General WALKER. Thank you very much. If I can do anything further for you, we will be happy to.

TESTIMONY OF BERNARD WEISSMAN

The testimony of Bernard Weissman was taken at 10:30 a.m., on June 9, 1964, at the U.S. District Courthouse, Foley Square, New York, N.Y., by Mr. Melvin Aron Eisenberg, assistant counsel of the President's Commission.

Bernard Weissman, called as a witness, having first been duly sworn by the notary public, testified as follows:

Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Weissman, could you state your full name?

Mr. WEISSMAN. Bernard Weissman.

Mr. EISENBERG. And your address?

Mr. WEISSMAN. 439 South Columbus Avenue, Mount Vernon, N.Y.

Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Weissman, did you receive a copy of the rules governing this deposition?

Mr. WEISSMAN. I did.

Mr. EISENBERG. Have you had an opportunity to study them?

Mr. WEISSMAN. I have had an opportunity to study them.

Mr. EISENBERG. What is your occupation, Mr. Weissman?

Mr. WEISSMAN. Salesman.

Mr. EISENBERG. How long have you lived at your present address?

Mr. WEISSMAN. Presently or totally?

Mr. EISENBERG. Presently.

Mr. WEISSMAN. About 1 year.

Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Weissman, I now hand you an advertisement beginning "Welcome, Mr. Kennedy," from the Dallas Morning News, Friday, November 22, 1963, which I will mark Weissman Exhibit No. 1.

(Excerpt from Dallas Morning News, Friday, November 22, 1963, marked Weissman Exhibit No. 1.)

Mr. WEISSMAN. Might I interject at this point that since I don't have the advice of counsel, that I reserve the right to refuse to answer any question that I feel may not be in my best interests at the moment?

Mr. EISENBERG. Certainly. Now, under the rules, of course, you are entitled to counsel, and if you wish we can adjourn this deposition so that you can get counsel.

Mr. WEISSMAN. Well, I have tried to get counsel, and I frankly can't afford it, and the counsel I could afford wouldn't take the case.

Mr. EISENBERG. I see. Well, would you wish us to try to make arrangements for a court-appointed counsel?

Mr. WEISSMAN. This would be entirely up to you. I should think possibly that if I can see my way clear to answer your more pertinent questions--in other words, to your satisfaction--it might not be necessary. Otherwise, we can do this some other time.

Mr. EISENBERG. Well, it is entirely up to you. Now, we can adjourn if you want or we can continue and see whether the questions are pertinent in your mind or not.

Mr. WEISSMAN. I would rather continue and to avoid repeating this again, taking time out.

Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Weissman, I hand you this advertisement which I have labeled Weissman Exhibit No. 1, and ask you whether you are familiar with this advertisement?

Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes; I am.

Mr. EISENBERG. Are you the Bernard Weissman whose name appears at the bottom of this advertisement, as chairman?

Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes.

Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Weissman, could you tell us how this advertisement came to be composed?

Mr. WEISSMAN. It is rather simple. A group of individuals in Dallas, friends of mine, got together and decided to express our feeling about the domestic and foreign policy of the Kennedy administration, and we felt that picketing, anything of the nature of picketing, and so forth, wouldn't go, since the Stevenson incident. We decided that the best way to get our point across would be to run an ad.

Mr. EISENBERG. When was this decision made?

Mr. WEISSMAN. The decision was made approximately a week or so before Kennedy's arrival in Dallas.

Mr. EISENBERG. That would be approximately November 15, 1963?

Mr. WEISSMAN. Approximately; a few days more, a few days less, in there.

Mr. EISENBERG. Who were the individuals who participated in this decision?

Mr. WEISSMAN. Larry Schmidt, Bill Burley, myself, and one or two other individuals who I would rather not mention.

Mr. EISENBERG. Can you state the reasons why you don't want to mention these individuals, Mr. Weissman?

Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes. As a matter of fact, it is not that I doubt your sincerity, personally, it is just that I doubt that--or it is my feeling that there are several members of the Commission that might use, if I implicate any individuals or organizations other than the ones I have mentioned, that this may be used as a political weapon later this year and the coming years, and I feel that what with very comprehensive FBI reports and the report I have given to the FBI myself, and the Secret Service, that any loose parts that are left out right now can be pieced together if you desire to do it, from their reports, very simply and very easily.

The reason I don't have the confidence I should have, not in the Commission itself, but in some of the counsel to the Commission, for example, Norman Redlich, if even 5 percent of what I hear about the individual is true, I don't want to have this man in a position to hurt anybody who has been or is an associate of mine.

Mr. EISENBERG. Well, Mr. Weissman, the subject of this deposition, of course, is the advertisement, and it is crucial to that question who composed the ad and who was instrumental in its placement in the newspaper. Now, you are not represented by counsel, and I don't want to press you to answer a question in the absence of representation by counsel. However, since this is the very subject with which the deposition is concerned, I think that if you don't want to answer that question we should stand adjourned until you can obtain counsel, and I will attempt to get a court-appointed counsel for you, if you can't get counsel yourself. If you wish, and we can hold a recess while you think it over.

Mr. WEISSMAN. Call a recess for a few minutes.

(Recess.)

Mr. WEISSMAN. What is your opinion here now? Let me put it to you that way.

Mr. EISENBERG. I think that if there is any question in your mind at all as to what questions you should answer, that you should get a lawyer.

Mr. WEISSMAN. This is what I am going to do. I am going to read you, it looks like about three or four pages, typewritten pages, I will read it into the record.

It will tell the story why I came to Dallas, exactly what I and several of my associates wished to accomplish.

I will name them where necessary and when I am finished I will let this stand as my complete testimony, period, finis, and if at any other time the Commission wants to talk with me, they will have to subpena me and at that time--I want to get it over once and for all.

I am going to tell my story now as to why I did things I have done, how it came about, how the ad happened to fit into this pattern, and it will be all very simple and logical.

Mr. EISENBERG. Go ahead. You understand that when I say to go ahead I don't mean that we will not be asking further questions, but you are certainly welcome to put this in.

Mr. WEISSMAN. I understand. Our preparation to come to Dallas was made approximately----

Mr. EISENBERG. Excuse me 1 second, Mr. Weissman. I want you to be very sure that before you enter this statement in the record you shouldn't consult an attorney?

(Witness indicates.)

Mr. EISENBERG. You are gesturing "no"?

Mr. WEISSMAN. I am gesturing "No"; that is right. About 3 years ago in Munich, Germany, while I was in the service, I and several friends joined or formed a conservative political organization, dedicated to a conservative philosophy, and I am going to read what you might call the constitution or the aims of that organization.

This was originally written by Larry Schmidt, who originally founded the organization, which is known as CUSA, or Conservatism, U.S.A., and this particular copy was prepared for the recruitment of new members and what was expected of them.

It also applies to the members of what we call ourselves, the council. The council originally consisted of myself, of Larry Schmidt, of Bill Burley, of a Larry Jones, who is no longer associated in any way with us, of Norman Baker, who is no longer associated in any way with us, James Mosley, who is no longer associated in any way with us.

How was CUSA organized? CUSA, with its headquarters in Dallas, No. 5417 Louis Street, is broken down into two branches. The stateside branch, which was headed by Larry Schmidt, and the overseas branch, which was headed by myself.

Although both presently function separately from each other, they both have the same organization, etc.

On August 1, 1963, the overseas branch will discontinue being a separate branch and will become completely subsidiary to the main stateside branch.

CUSA is set up similar to the Ford Motor Co. and its dependent, the Ford Foundation.

Ford Motor Co. of CUSA is American Businesses, Inc. or AMBUS. AMBUS will be a private profitmaking corporation which finances its own Ford Foundation, which is Conservatism, USA, a nonprofit, nonpartisan conservative political foundation with the goals outlined above.

The owners of AMBUS are the same as the five partners who are the board chairmen of CUSA, the partners I mentioned before. All positions in AMBUS and CUSA are appointed by the ETC or the executive in the council, which again are the five members of that which has been mentioned.

Every member of CUSA and AMBUS who works for either or both of AMBUS and CUSA full time shall be paid at a salary at least equivalent to that paid a man in a similar position in industry or politics.

In most cases AMBUS and CUSA will pay its people higher salaries.

CUSA is broken down into three divisions: the political analysis division, the recruitment and fund solicitation division, and the foreign affairs division.

AMBUS is divided into two divisions: the business management division and the public relations division.

AMBUS' two divisions fully support the activities of CUSA. Each division has its own organizational setup and subsidiary sections and officers to carry out its functions.

For a copy of this, ask the chief of your particular branch--that is pertaining to a new member. He will be happy to show it to you. For detailed information on the operations of any particular division, ask the chief of the division in question.

Geographically CUSA is broken down into six regions. These are the eastern, northern, southern, southwestern, midwestern, and western regions.

Each region has several States under its jurisdiction.

The headquarters of each region are as follows: eastern, New York City; northern, Chicago; southern, Atlanta; southwestern, Dallas; midwestern, Wichita; western, Los Angeles.

These regional headquarters come directly under CUSA's Dallas home headquarters. Each State within the region also has its CUSA headquarters. In each case the headquarters is located in the capital of each State.

The State headquarters come directly under the regional headquarters in which they are located. Each State in turn is broken down into districts with several counties comprising a district.

Most States are broken down into four or five districts. These district headquarters come directly under the State headquarters and the breakdowns go along as I have mentioned, and it gets smaller and smaller as the areas get smaller.

Both AMBUS and CUSA will have staffs in each of the regional State district and city headquarters. These will be full-time salaried employees.

How does CUSA expect to gain its goals? CUSA is convinced it can induce all other conservative organizations to join it, especially if CUSA has induced a large number, that more and more will want to jump on its bandwagon.

For those organizations that refuse to join, CUSA will bring pressures to bear to end their resistance.

CUSA will also work closely with conservatives in the Republican and Democratic parties.

Among CUSA's members are some of the finest salesmen around, men who know how to convince, how to sell, how to persuade: CUSA intends to work toward monopolization of the money available for rightwing organizations, thus forcing any organizations to come into the CUSA fold.

CUSA will use any method, so long as it is legal and honorable, to attain its goal. A timetable has been set up to guide CUSA's actions, when each project has to be completed, and places these projects in proper timetable sequence.

What will happen to CUSA after it reaches its goals? CUSA shall continue to aid the conservative cause and keep our Government conservative. So long as there is a U.S.A. there shall be a CUSA.

Can I make a career of CUSA? Most definitely. CUSA and AMBUS are big business. Think of CUSA as being the same as a political party like the Democratic or Republican. Even if it isn't actually a third party, it shall function as one. However, if you desire and have the necessary qualifications, CUSA will even run an individual for a political office if it feels you can win.

AMBUS needs good business minds and CUSA needs aggressive political minds.

Above all, CUSA-AMBUS needs salesmen, public speakers, writers, debaters, analysts. Men who think like men of action and act like men of thought.

But CUSA also needs background men, men willing to stay out of the public eye and work quietly to do the planning, thinking, creating, formalizing, and other things in a great cause.

CUSA-AMBUS has established regular wage scales along the line of the civil service, GS-4 to GS-18.

Just what is a conservative, anyway? A conservative is a person who looks at a man or a woman as an individual and respects him or her as a unique human being rather than just a face in the crowd; a member of the mass who believes in individual initiative above collective charity, yet accepts charity where the individual cannot provide for himself; who believes the Government should be supported by the people, not the people supported by the Government; who believes Government should be restricted to those areas of concern outlined in the Constitution of the United States of America, leaving the citizen free to pursue life, liberty and happiness without the overburdens of excessive taxation that restrict such pursuits; who believes that every effort should be made by individuals to provide for themselves first and when that can't be done, help by local, State, or private charitable organizations rather than by Federal Government aid comprised of general taxation; who believes that the Federal Government should not compete with private enterprise or interfere with the rights of the States as outlined in the Constitution; who believes that the best Government is the Government which governs least; who believes that the best interests of the American people should be served by its Government first before the peoples of other countries, yet believes we Americans must help the needy peoples of other countries; who believes the best interests of the U.S.A. should first be served by our Federal Government before the needs of other nations are looked into, yet that we should aid needy nations where aid is justified and deserved, and in the best interests of our country; who believes that the American form of republican government, a government of the people, for the people, by the people, with rule by law and constitution, is the only way of government and way of life for Americans; who believes that although a government and system of law and rule and economics isn't perfect, it is the best one ever attempted by mankind in its long history; who believes that private enterprise and capitalism is the whole basis of our way of life and the reason of our way of life--and the reason our way of life is so richly endowed; who believes that communism is the greatest threat to the existence and freedom of America and must be completely defeated; who believes there can be no peace without victory over communism; who believes that the true revolutionary political system and the true revolution of mankind is the American democracy and democratic and political system; that the enslavement of man embodied in communism is as old as mankind itself, and therefore there is nothing revolutionary about it, even though it has a modern name and foundation and is certainly no good, indeed fatal, to mankind.

Is CUSA identified with any other organization or society? CUSA is associated with no organization or group, be it political, economic, social, fraternal, or religious. CUSA is committed to none, either.

I can interject a footnote of my own at this point. At council sessions we decided to use whatever vehicles were necessary in the way of other organizations to get CUSA off the ground and at the same time keep the name CUSA secret among ourselves, as it was our organization, you might say; no one of the other organizations that we became involved with knew anything about the existence of CUSA or what we had planned to do with it. They did not know, the individuals that we were concerned with did not know, that in many cases, as a matter of fact, we were using them merely as a vehicle to further the interest of CUSA.

Just who does CUSA hope to elect President?

I want to reiterate that this was prepared in late 1961 or very early 1962.

CUSA considers Senator Barry Goldwater (Republican, Arizona) as Mr. Conservative, U.S.A., and wholeheartedly endorses him for the Presidency, although CUSA is not committed to Mr. Goldwater in any way. However, it is felt that he is by far the most outstanding conservative politician and spokesman in the country.

How does CUSA feel about the so-called radical rightwing? CUSA has proof that many so-called radical organizations are not really radical or at least as radical as the enemies or opposition of these organizations would have the public believe.

CUSA loathes extremism of the right, typified by the American Nazi Party, as much as it does the extremism of the left, exemplified by the Communist Party in the U.S.A.

CUSA does not believe, however, that an American can be too radical or extreme in his love or patriotism for his country.

CUSA endorses Americanism, love of country, and patriotism, even if it does not always agree with what some citizens believe is wrong with our country, who is to blame for our faults and our solution to our problems.

CUSA has faith in and believes in many rightwing organizations and their endeavors, although it does not always agree with everything they say or do, the words or actions of their leaders.

On the other hand, CUSA does not condemn a patriot who, in the heat of anger or frustration, says things which are irresponsible and not honestly meant. On the other hand, CUSA cannot subscribe to continued irresponsibility on the part of organizations, its leaders or membership.

This is one reason, for example, recently in Dallas, we decided not to become, at least as far as we knew, to become involved with anybody associated or doing business with General Walker, as an example. We made it a point to try to stay clear of that.

How does CUSA feel about communism? CUSA intends to do everything it can to destroy communism. CUSA is against any philosophy, any organization, any group, any individual which threatens the freedom, way of life, or congressional government of the United States.

CUSA is against any tyranny, whatever its skin or title; against anything indecent, unlawful, or harmful to man.

Can anyone join CUSA? Any citizen of the United States who believes in what CUSA is trying to do and who is not a demagog or dishonest, may join CUSA regardless of race, religion, creed, or ethnic origin. CUSA does not believe that patriotism is contingent upon skin, color, or religion or family background.

Let me say again that this was prepared in 1961, and in its essence has been followed through to the--up until the 22d of November 1963, and this, I think, would give some reasons or give you several answers as to why the ad was placed, why it read as it did.

Mr. EISENBERG. That completes the statement?

Mr. WEISSMAN. That completes my statement.

Mr. EISENBERG. OK; then we will stand adjourned.

TESTIMONY OF WARREN ALLEN REYNOLDS

The testimony of Warren Allen Reynolds was taken at 3:35 p.m., on July 22, 1964, in the office of the U.S. attorney, 301 Post Office Building, Bryan and Ervay Streets, Dallas, Tex., by Mr. Wesley J. Liebeler, assistant counsel of the President's Commission.

Mr. LIEBELER. Would you rise and raise your right hand? Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you are about to give will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?

Mr. REYNOLDS. I do.

Mr. LIEBELER. Please sit down. My name is Wesley J. Liebeler. I am an attorney on the staff of the President's Commission to investigate the assassination of President Kennedy. I have been authorized to take your testimony by the Commission pursuant to authority granted to it by President Johnson's Executive Order No. 11130, dated November 29, 1963, and joint resolution of Congress No. 137.

Under the rules of procedure governing the taking of testimony, you are entitled to have an attorney present at this hearing. You are also entitled to 3 days' notice for the hearing, and you are entitled to exercise whatever rights and privileges, as far as not answering questions are concerned, as are afforded to you under the Constitution and laws of the United States. I assume that you do not wish to have an attorney present, since you don't have one here. Most of the witnesses do not have.

Mr. REYNOLDS. That's right.

Mr. LIEBELER. Would you state your full name for the record, please?

Mr. REYNOLDS. Warren Allen Reynolds.

Mr. LIEBELER. What is your address?

Mr. REYNOLDS. 8707 Mosswood.

Mr. LIEBELER. Here in Dallas?

Mr. REYNOLDS. Dallas.

Mr. LIEBELER. When were you born, Mr. Reynolds?

Mr. REYNOLDS. June 22, 1935.

Mr. LIEBELER. Are you employed here in Dallas?

Mr. REYNOLDS. Yes; Reynolds Motor Co.

Mr. LIEBELER. What kind of company is that?

Mr. REYNOLDS. It is a used-car lot.

Mr. LIEBELER. It is operated by you and by your brother; is that correct?

Mr. REYNOLDS. It is operated by my brother, and I am an employee there.

Mr. LIEBELER. You are not an owner of the corporation?

Mr. REYNOLDS. No, sir.

Mr. LIEBELER. You are employed by your brother?

Mr. REYNOLDS. Yes.

Mr. LIEBELER. Would you give us briefly what your educational background is?

Mr. REYNOLDS. High school.

Mr. LIEBELER. Did you graduate from high school here in Dallas?

Mr. REYNOLDS. Yes.

Mr. LIEBELER. Which school?

Mr. REYNOLDS. Forest Avenue High School.

Mr. LIEBELER. Where is this Reynolds Motor Co. located?

Mr. REYNOLDS. 500 East Jefferson.

Mr. LIEBELER. How far is that from the corner of 10th and Patton?

Mr. REYNOLDS. One block.

Mr. LIEBELER. Were you there at the used-car lot on November 22, 1963?

Mr. REYNOLDS. Yes.

Mr. LIEBELER. Were you there at about, say, after the hour of 12 o'clock noon in the afternoon?

Mr. REYNOLDS. Yes.

Mr. LIEBELER. Tell us what you saw; will you, please?

Mr. REYNOLDS. OK; our office is up high where I can have a pretty good view of what was going on. I heard the shots and, when I heard the shots, I went out on this front porch which is, like I say, high, and I saw this man coming down the street with the gun in his hand, swinging it just like he was running. He turned the corner of Patton and Jefferson, going west, and put the gun in his pants and took off, walking.

Mr. LIEBELER. How many shots did you hear?

Mr. REYNOLDS. I really have no idea, to be honest with you. I would say four or five or six. I just would have no idea. I heard one, and then I heard a succession of some more, and I didn't see the officer get shot.

Mr. LIEBELER. Did you see this man's face that had the gun in his hand?

Mr. REYNOLDS. Very good.

Mr. LIEBELER. Subsequent to that time, you were questioned by the Dallas Police Department, were you not?

Mr. REYNOLDS. No.

Mr. LIEBELER. The Dallas Police Department never talked to you about the man that you saw going down the street?

Mr. REYNOLDS. Now, they talked to me much later, you mean?

Mr. LIEBELER. OK; let me put it this way: When is the first time that anybody from any law-enforcement agency, and I mean by that, the FBI, Secret Service, Dallas Police Department, Dallas County sheriff's office; you pick it. When is the first time that they ever talked to you?

Mr. REYNOLDS. January 21.

Mr. LIEBELER. That is the first time they ever talked to you about what you saw on that day?

Mr. REYNOLDS. That's right.

Mr. LIEBELER. So you never in any way identified this man in the police department or any other authority, either in November or in December of 1963; is that correct?

Mr. REYNOLDS. No; I sure didn't.

Mr. LIEBELER. So it can be in no way said that you "fingered" the man who was running down the street, and identified him as the man who was going around and putting the gun in his pocket?

Mr. REYNOLDS. It can be said I didn't talk to the authorities.

Mr. LIEBELER. Did you say anything about it to anybody else?

Mr. REYNOLDS. I did.

Mr. LIEBELER. Were you able to identify this man in your own mind?

Mr. REYNOLDS. Yes.

Mr. LIEBELER. You did identify him as Lee Harvey Oswald in your own mind?

Mr. REYNOLDS. Yes.

Mr. LIEBELER. You had no question about it?

Mr. REYNOLDS. No.

Mr. LIEBELER. Let me show you some pictures that we have here. I show you a picture that has been marked Garner Exhibit No. 1 and ask you if that is the man that you saw going down the street on the 22d of November as you have already told us.

Mr. REYNOLDS. Yes.

Mr. LIEBELER. You later identified that man as Lee Harvey Oswald?

Mr. REYNOLDS. In my mind.

Mr. LIEBELER. Your mind, that is what I mean.

Mr. REYNOLDS. Yes.

Mr. LIEBELER. When you saw his picture in the newspaper and on television? Is that right?

Mr. REYNOLDS. Yes; unless you have somebody that looks an awful lot like him there.

Mr. LIEBELER. I show you an exhibit that has been marked Pizzo Exhibit No. 453-C and ask you if that is the same man, in your opinion?

Mr. REYNOLDS. Yes.

Mr. LIEBELER. You were in no way, if I understand it correctly then, properly identified as anyone who had told the authorities that this man that was going down the street was the same man as Lee Harvey Oswald, is that correct?

Mr. REYNOLDS. Well, yes and no. When it happened, and after I seen--and you probably know what I did--after I saw the man on the corner of Patton and Jefferson, I followed him up the street behind the service station and lost him. I went back there and looked up and down the alley and didn't see him, and looked through the cars and still didn't see him.

Then the police got there, and they took my name. While they were taking my name, some television camera got me, and I was on television, I am sure nationwide. Then some man that I worked with wanted to be big time, I guess, so he called some radio station and told them what I had done, and they recorded that and ran it over and over and over again over the radio station. And other than that, no.

Mr. LIEBELER. Well, what was it that they said you had done? All you had done was try to follow this man and he got away from you?

Mr. REYNOLDS. And he got away.

Mr. LIEBELER. Then you went back and you looked around for him around the car lot in the area and you weren't able to find him?

Mr. REYNOLDS. I looked through the parking lot for him after. See, when he went behind the service station, I was right across the street, and when he ducked behind, I ran across the street and asked this man which way he went, and they told me the man had gone to the back. And I ran back there and looked up and down the alley right then and didn't see him, and I looked under the cars, and I assumed that he was still hiding there.

Mr. LIEBELER. In the parking lot?

Mr. REYNOLDS. Even to this day I assume that he was.

Mr. LIEBELER. Where was this parking lot located now?

Mr. REYNOLDS. It would be at the back of the Texaco station that is on the corner of Crawford and Jefferson where they found his coat.

Mr. LIEBELER. They found his coat in the parking lot?

Mr. REYNOLDS. They found his coat there.

Mr. LIEBELER. So that he had apparently gone through the parking lot?

Mr. REYNOLDS. Oh, yes.

Mr. LIEBELER. And gone down the alley or something back to Jefferson Street?

Mr. REYNOLDS. Yes. When the police got there, and they were all there, I was trying to assure them that he was still there close. This was all a bunch of confusion. They didn't know what was going on. And they got word that he was down at a library which was about 3 blocks down the street on the opposite side of the street.

Mr. LIEBELER. Down Jefferson?

Mr. REYNOLDS. Down Jefferson. And every one of them left to go there. So when they left, well, I did too, and I didn't know this man had shot a policeman. I wouldn't probably be near as brave if I had known that. The next time, I guarantee, I won't be as brave.

Mr. LIEBELER. No; I can't say that I blame you, although we don't know there is any connection. But we would certainly like to find it, if there is.

Mr. REYNOLDS. There is no connection that you can prove now.

Mr. LIEBELER. Let's come to that a little bit at a time.

Mr. REYNOLDS. Okay.

Mr. LIEBELER. When you were on television, what was shown is that you were talking to the policeman?

Mr. REYNOLDS. They were taking my name. No name was shown, was mentioned.

Mr. LIEBELER. They were just taking down your name?

Mr. REYNOLDS. Just my name.

Mr. LIEBELER. When it was told on the radio about your involvement in it, was it also made clear that you had not, in fact, directed--let me ask the question this way. Was it ever stated either on the television or the radio that you had directed the police to the Texas Theatre?

Mr. REYNOLDS. Not the direction. In the general direction, but not to the theatre.

Mr. LIEBELER. In fact, you were looking for this man who later turned out to be Oswald, in this parking lot which was some distance from the Texas Theatre at that point?

Mr. REYNOLDS. Yes.

Mr. LIEBELER. And you never saw Oswald continue on down the street--on down Jefferson or go in the Texas Theatre, and you never told the police that he had gone in that direction, did you?

Mr. REYNOLDS. I told the police he was going in that direction.

Mr. LIEBELER. He was going--you told the police he went into the parking lot, or what did you tell him?

Mr. REYNOLDS. That he was going west. I told them that he was going west, and I had assumed that he just cut through the parking lot and kept going the general direction he was going in.

Mr. LIEBELER. But he hadn't gotten to Jefferson by the time you had seen him?

Mr. REYNOLDS. That's right. He was about almost half a block before he got to Jefferson.

Mr. LIEBELER. But he was heading toward Jefferson?

Mr. REYNOLDS. Yes; he was heading toward Jefferson.

Mr. LIEBELER. You never saw him after he got to Jefferson?

Mr. REYNOLDS. Yes. When he got to Jefferson, that is when I followed him.

Mr. LIEBELER. And he went which way?

Mr. REYNOLDS. Went down Jefferson, and then he went behind the station, and that is when I lost him.

Mr. LIEBELER. He went around behind the station, and there was a parking lot back there, is that right?

Mr. REYNOLDS. That's right.

Mr. LIEBELER. You went back in the parking lot and you were looking for him there, but you never saw him again after he ducked off Jefferson into the parking lot?

Mr. REYNOLDS. Just on television.

Mr. LIEBELER. Then according to the information that I have, on January 23, 1964, you were shot in the head by a bullet from a 22 caliber rifle, is that correct?

Mr. REYNOLDS. Yes; right there [pointing to right temple].

Mr. LIEBELER. On the right side of your head?

Mr. REYNOLDS. Yes; and it went to here [pointing to left ear].

Mr. LIEBELER. Would you tell us the circumstances in which that happened?

Mr. REYNOLDS. I know this man was waiting for 3-1/2 hours in a basement where I work.

Mr. LIEBELER. In a car lot?

Mr. REYNOLDS. In a car lot.

Mr. LIEBELER. At the car lot?

Mr. REYNOLDS. At the car lot, the Johnny Reynolds Co. And when I went down to turn off the lights in this basement where he had taken the light globe out of the room, I went in there more or less in the dark to turn off the light. It is a switchboard, and when I walked up to it and turned two switches, this man couldn't hardly have been over a foot from me with the rifle, and shot me.

When he shot me, I ran upstairs. I went around to the right about 20 feet and got this towel to, of course, stop the blood, and when I turned around to go call the police, I had assumed all the time that I had been electrocuted for some silly reason, never dreaming I had been shot. But when I saw the man run off, I figured right then I must have been shot, so I ran on in and called the police.

Mr. LIEBELER. When did you see the man run off?

Mr. REYNOLDS. When I ran upstairs and ran around to the right to get this towel, and he came up out of the basement. I saw him and two more people saw him.

Mr. LIEBELER. You then got the towel. Did you call the police?

Mr. REYNOLDS. I was able to call the police. Then I laid down just for a few minutes, and the ambulance got there and carried me to the hospital, and by some miracle, I survived, very much a miracle. The police got the call at 9:19 p.m. in the evening of January 23.

Mr. LIEBELER. Now were you able to identify the individual who ran up out of the basement?

Mr. REYNOLDS. No.

Mr. LIEBELER. Do you have any idea who it was?

Mr. REYNOLDS. No.

Mr. LIEBELER. What kind of fellow did he look like? Did you get a physical description of him?

Mr. REYNOLDS. No; it was just a blur to me. It was just a blur, but the people that saw him said he was around 5 foot 4, weight around 130 or 140 pounds, and was either Spanish or Cuban or Indian or something like that; not Negro.

Mr. LIEBELER. He was not a Negro, but he was of a foreign extraction or foreign appearing, or dark colored?

Mr. REYNOLDS. Yes; dark colored, the way they described him. He had a rifle.

Mr. LIEBELER. Do you have any idea as to why somebody might have wanted to take a shot at you, why did they?

Mr. REYNOLDS. I have no proof. I would say it would be fair to think that somebody shot me on account of they thought I knew something or had some connection with Lee Oswald. It was definitely not people that I would know of, and it hadn't been business. I am sure it wasn't in business form.

Mr. LIEBELER. What did you do in the car lot? Are you engaged actually in selling and trading automobiles?

Mr. REYNOLDS. Yes; generally everything.

Mr. LIEBELER. You can't think of any reason why one of your customers wanted to take a shot at you?

Mr. REYNOLDS. No.

Mr. LIEBELER. Is there anybody else around the company that might have been having trouble with anybody else that maybe you got shot by mistake, or something like that? Is that possible?

Mr. REYNOLDS. We ruled that out.

Mr. LIEBELER. You considered that possibility?

Mr. REYNOLDS. I have considered everything.

Mr. LIEBELER. Did the police conduct an investigation of this?

Mr. REYNOLDS. Yes.

Mr. LIEBELER. Of this shooting?

Mr. REYNOLDS. Yes.

Mr. LIEBELER. In fact, they came out with a suspect, didn't they?

Mr. REYNOLDS. They came out with one, yes.

Mr. LIEBELER. Did you know that individual before he was picked up in connection with this investigation?

Mr. REYNOLDS. Yes.

Mr. LIEBELER. How long had you know him?

Mr. REYNOLDS. I had known him for about 6 or 7 years.

Mr. LIEBELER. Was he a friend of yours?

Mr. REYNOLDS. No.

Mr. LIEBELER. How did you come to know him?

Mr. REYNOLDS. Just in business. Our business with him was bad business.

Mr. LIEBELER. In what sense?

Mr. REYNOLDS. Well, he was a troublemaker. But at no time did I think he was the one that shot me.

Mr. LIEBELER. How did you form an opinion on the question of whether this was the man who shot you? In fact, we are talking about a man by the name of Darrell Wayne Garner.

Mr. REYNOLDS. That was just my personal opinion.

Mr. LIEBELER. You weren't able to see the man who shot you to say whether it was Garner or whether it wasn't?

Mr. REYNOLDS. No; that's right.

Mr. LIEBELER. Isn't it a fact that Garner had been in the car lot on January 20, 1964, trying to sell you an automobile, particularly a 1957 Oldsmobile for which he didn't have a title?

Mr. REYNOLDS. Not that I know of.

Mr. LIEBELER. Have you discussed this with your brother?

Mr. REYNOLDS. Yes.

Mr. LIEBELER. Your brother is Johnny Reynolds?

Mr. REYNOLDS. Yes.

Mr. LIEBELER. He lives at 622 West Five Mile Parkway, is that correct?

Mr. REYNOLDS. That's right.

Mr. LIEBELER. Would it surprise you to know that on January 23 he apparently told the Dallas Police Department that Garner had been in the carlot on January 20 and tried to trade a 1957 Oldsmobile for which he did not have a title, and became extremely upset when he, Johnny Reynolds, wouldn't purchase the automobile from Garner?

Mr. REYNOLDS. I had to keep in mind that it is possible that that had happened and I just didn't, I mean I have been through an awful lot these 6 months, and it is possible that I have just missed it, but I would say I would be a little bit surprised.

Mr. LIEBELER. What kind of person is Garner?

Mr. REYNOLDS. Well, to describe him as best I can, I heard that his mother had $10 hidden one night and he wanted it and she wouldn't tell him where it was, and he held a knife to her throat threatening to kill her unless she did. He is just a complete troublemaker.

Mr. LIEBELER. Do you know where he lives?

Mr. REYNOLDS. No; I heard he was in Las Vegas. In fact, I parked my car at his father-in-law's. He runs a little parking lot right there down the street, and it so happened I pulled into that parking lot when I came here.

Mr. LIEBELER. But you haven't seen him around recently? You don't know where he is?

Mr. REYNOLDS. No.

Mr. LIEBELER. In any event, Garner was released from the Dallas Police Department after they conducted an investigation?

Mr. REYNOLDS. Yes.

Mr. LIEBELER. Into the possibility he might have been involved in the shooting of you?

Mr. REYNOLDS. Yes.

Mr. LIEBELER. Now, do you have any basis for your belief that the shot at you was somehow connected with the assassination, other than pure speculation or surmise on your part?

Mr. REYNOLDS. No.

Mr. LIEBELER. Do you have any idea as to who it might be other than the fact, as you have previously explained before, it might be that since your were associated in some way with Oswald's apprehension in the Texas Theatre, that somebody wanted to get you for that?

Mr. REYNOLDS. A lot of people thought that I followed him all the way to the Texas Theatre and pointed him out in the theatre. A lot of people, just rumors, thought that, and a lot of people still think it.

Mr. LIEBELER. But in fact, there isn't any fact that you can point to or tell me about that would connect up the assassination in any way with the shooting of you on January 23?

Mr. REYNOLDS. I can't think of anything that could be a fact unless we just found the man.

Mr. LIEBELER. For the purpose of our investigation, I mean if there were any connection between your shooting on January 23 and Oswald's arrest for the assassination, we want to know about it. That is perfectly clear, is it not?

Mr. REYNOLDS. Yes.

Mr. LIEBELER. I am asking you if you have any facts that would tie it up.

Mr. REYNOLDS. I have no facts. I just have my own beliefs.

Mr. LIEBELER. And you do believe that there is some relation, do you?

Mr. REYNOLDS. Yes.

Mr. LIEBELER. Do you know Nancy J. Mooney?

Mr. REYNOLDS. No.

Mr. LIEBELER. Have you ever heard of her?

Mr. REYNOLDS. Yes.

Mr. LIEBELER. What have you heard?

Mr. REYNOLDS. I heard that she was with Garner the night that I got shot. I heard that she took a lie detector test that helped free him. I heard that a few days later she was caught fighting and they put her in jail, and she hung herself. I heard that she formerly worked for Jack Ruby as a stripper.

Mr. LIEBELER. Do you know who told you that?

Mr. REYNOLDS. I read it in Bob Considine's article.

Mr. LIEBELER. Is that the only source of your information concerning Nancy J. Mooney?