INVESTIGATION OF THE ASSASSINATION _OF PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY a me m % » ptt i ” a O ant I X T * edn rl i pg xss APPE N D S ARING HEBEFORE THE SELECT COMMITTEE ON ASSASSINATIONS OF THE U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES NINETY-FIFTH CONGRESS VOLUME VIII _Acoustics, POLYGRAPH, HANDWRITING, AND FINGERPRINT REPORTS € MARCH 1979 é 4 Printed for the use of the Selec t Committee on Assassinations i 4 : SHBTIE LIBRARY ASTOR PUBLIC ae me STENT OLONMB ENT DOCUME a ve NTS 0 DEPARTS GOv-dNMENT ad | may 27 1999 5125 guts NOT CIRCULAIE KF of Assass'n AUTHOR ion of the Investigat eh Pres. TR TITLE Vol. 8 DATE DUE A Q E S N O T C I R C U L A T E NVESTIGATION OF THE ASSASSINATION OF PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY |i inal HEARINGS ELECT COMMITTEE ON ASSASSINATIONS OF THE U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES NINETY-FIFTH CONGRESS VOLUME VIII ACOUSTICS, POLYGRAPH, HANDWRITING, AND FINGERPRINT REPORTS MARCH 1979 Printed for the use of the Select Committee on Assassi nations as U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 46-129 O WASHINGTON : 1979 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Washington, D.C. 20402 Stock No. 052-070-04979-1) SELECT COMMITTEE ON ASSASSINATIONS LOUIS STOKES, Ohio, Chairman PREYER. North Carolina SAMUEL L. DEVINE, Ohio RICHARDSON WALTER E. FAUNTROY, STEWART B. McKINNEY. Connecticut District of Columbia CHARLES THONE. Nebraska YVONNE BRATHWAITE BURKE, HAROLD S. SAWYER, Michigan (‘alifornia CURISTOPHER J. DODD, Connecticut HAROLD BE. FORD, Tennessee LOYD J. FITHIAN, Indiana ROBERT W. EDGAR, Pennsylvania Subcommittee on the Subcommittee on the Assassination of Assassination of Martin Luther King, Jr. John F. Kennedy WALTER E. FAUNTROY, Chairman RICHARDSON PREYER. Chairman HAROLD E. FORD YVONNE BRATHWAITE BURKE TI LOYD J. FITHIAN CHRISTOPHER J. DODD ROBERT W. EDGAR CHARLES THONE STEWART B. MCKINNEY HAROLD S. SAWYER LOUIS STOKES, ex officio LOUIS STOKES. ex officio SAMUEL L. DEVINE, ex officio SAMUEL L. DEVINE, ex officio STAFF G. Ropert BLAKEY, Chief Counsel and Staff Director Gary T. CORNWELL, Deputy Chief Counsel (IT) \ CONTENTS A Study of the Acoustics Evidence Page Related to the Assassination of Presi- dent John F, Been Men ye Ueto mule Patel MM SCS lh tg The Analysis of Yuri Nosenko’s Polyg 1 raph Examination___..____ The Analysis of Jack Ruby’s Polyg 187 raph XanaOnt PE AL Peon The Examination of the Handwritin ae 197 g and Fingerprint Evidence_______ eS ae Ne ___ Zeon RR TS Sate geties Abel Unmet Te 251 ee cota a a) % = es 2) am) ‘ye ey : he ) i _ a 5 i ans ur ow § Pe ee ere is ’ tt 7 Py ie ie it ee re Satrers << s * end) i KRM Min (ine wh to ar ae ae ee ot Gh oo TNE bee parry a 54 m Monae ' dis Mek TAM aSFE ATE wer at a ee memset 4 Ps ae. at . . B12 e : ‘ ere a Oe pi ¢ : “me x , ' . - s * ot < 1 : = TAN, lon ‘ pf yi oo rp WY, Role, Pargageees | - ray ee Tee le ; ~ Sullote ic Pru; ” “ on | et , 1¢é ; oy A 22 wrt aect . . . 2 he Pu iv. : m 5 aS y — = ; - @ e : , hei mrar.: i ya ® ‘. + : rs; Sein} ees Choker t. so 4 8 Loe ee POD « ¥ ; rus —" 7 2 a ATTR SURES 7 < rey on ‘ os oh ana hp +) ‘ Ts i ' Pa a A STUDY OF THE ACOUSTICS EVIDEN CE RELATED TO THE ASSASSINATION OF PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY Report to the Select Committee on Assassinations U.S. House of Representatives Ninety-fifth Congress Second Session March 1979 Ee S———e Ee (1) CONTENTS An analysis of recorded sounds relating to the assassination of President John F. Kennedy by Mark R. --.-- Weiss and Ernest Aschkenasy........ 22-2222 ono ...---... ene nnn cee ence wenn ene seenonssase= Analysis of recorded sounds relating to the assassination of President John F. Kennedy by Bolt Beranek and Newmansine 2202 ct nt ot ec ses se ee f i Pe melt epementaany Boy 3Hj s o's Analysis of earwitness reports relating to the assassination of President John F. Kennedy by Bolt Rerantk and Newman tne. 6083402 PI ESA ee oe on nc coca ccccwsceudeamene=ee Addendum A; Report on the temperature in Dallas, Tex., November 22, 1963........--------------- Addendum B; Report on wind conditions in Dallas, Tex., November 22, 1963........--------------- Addendum C: Memorandum from G. Robert Blakey to the Select Committee on Assassinations on the Mannlicher-Carcano firing test...........-.--------- Pas e els coseackebancagsecaceswassenatae (2) AN ANALYSIS OF RECORDED SOUNDS RELATING TO THE ASSASSINATION OF PRESIDENT J OHN F. KENNEDY* (Prepared for Select Committee on Assassinat Representatives, by Mark R. Weiss and Ernes ions, U.S. House of ment of Computer Science, Queens College, t Aschkenasy, Depart- New York, February 1979) City University of Be nowledgmen ta om aes en LEGS A ak ate ca TIN Page ie OL Ce nena a ae ones SA a oe aa 4 eH MLT Section 1.0 Introduction and SUMMA Y.« ONE PAB IOU TIS Hyare ye ans 4 oe ae ne Le at tee 5 dei Baokerotind ass2 5 ca SRO yN ts be LN aes Materials provided for the examination._._.________ 5 i bes} Characteristics and sources of the recorded 5 1.4 sounds__ Basic principles and methods of analysis._._._____. 6 1.5 Results of the anglysis.. cece ya ab 6 1.6 tt leh gic. se 10 Hintlingy acy Meester = ho eh tlie a 1.7 Outline of the'report e pees Do Basen eee 29 | List oF TABLES - Table 1—List of structures in Dealey Plaza that would have produced echoes of sufficient strength to have been recorded on the DPD tape_-_-_- 23 Table 2.—List of echo paths used in predictions of echo-delay times____-~- 23 Table 3.—Measured and predicted delay times of echoes for a gunshot Hred on-August 20; 191820 22a ee ee 24 Table 4.—Measured delay times of impulses and predicted delay times of gunshot-echoes-for November 22;°1963________ 5 ea oa eee 27 ACKNOWLEDGMENT The authors gratefully acknowledge the support and cooperation of the New York Police Department in providing both the facilities and personnel needed to make test recordings of gunshot sounds. We par- ticularly appreciate the assistance of Set. Eugene McDonnell, Officer Mario Buda, and Officer Steve Baymack of the NYPD communica- | tions division, and Lt. Frank McGee and Sgt. John O’Brien of the | firearms unit. We wish also to express our appreciation for the gener- | ous assistance of Dr. Ali Ghozati of the Queens College Department of Computer Science during the preparation of this report. FOREWORD On September 11, 1978, Dr. James Barger of Bolt Beranek and Newman, Inc. (BBN) presented to the House Select Committee on Assassinations the results of a BBN analysis of a Dallas Police De- partment (DPD) recording that had been made on November 22, 1963. One of the reported findings was that, with a probability of 50 percent, the recording contains sounds of a gunshot, or at least sounds as loud as a gunshot, fired from the so-called grassy knoll area of Dealey Plaza in Dallas; they were received by a microphone on a DPD motor- cycle that was moving on Elm Street at a speed of about 11 mph in the same direction as the Presidential motorcade. On October 24, 1978, the committee authorized the authors of this report to conduct an independent examination of that portion of the recording to determine with more certainty whether the sounds in question were of such a shot. The analysis was completed by the middle of December 1978 and described in a public presentation to the committee on December 29, 1978. This report describes the method and results of that analysis. 5 1.0 INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY Il Background On November 22, 1963, in Dallas, Tex., at the being fired in the assassination of President time that shots were John on a Dallas Police Department (DPD) motorcycle F. Kennedy, a radio a stuck microphone was transmitting sounds that apparently had DPD radio network that were being recorded over channel 1 of the at an analysis of this recording, authorized by DPD headquarters. In mittee on Assassinations, Dr. James Barger the House Select Com- and his colleagues at Bolt Beranek and Newman, Inc. (BBN) isolated four pulses and identified them as probable sounds groups of sound im- merely random noise. They calculated that the of gunshots, and not statis that these identifications were correct were, in order tical probabilities of occurrence of the sounds, 88 percent, 88 percen of increasing time t, 50 percent, and 75 percent. BBN found that the probable cause of fourth of these groups of impulses were noises the first, second, and originating in the vicinity of the sixth floor south as loud as gunshots the Texas School Book Depository (TSBD) east corner window of probable cause of the third group of impulses in Dealey Plaza. The sound from the vicinity of the so-called grassy was a similarly loud Plaza. BBN also found that all of the groups knoll area of Dealey up by a microphone on a DPD motorcycle and of sounds were picked that at the time of the ‘hird probable gunshot, the motorcycle was on Elm Street in Dealey Plaza, moving at a speed of about 11 miles per hour ‘ion as the motorcade. On October 24, 1978, the in the-same direc- commi ‘he authors of this report to perform an independen ttee authorized he sounds on the DPD recording to determine t examination of ertainty if the third group of impulses was cause with a higher level of yunshot from the grassy knoll. d by the sounds of a ‘2 Materials provided for the examination At the time we began our analyses, we were provided ng materials: with the follow- 1. A high-fidelity tape-recorded copy of the original DPD recording. 2. A high-fidelity tape-recorded copy of the DPD tape that had been examined by BBN. recording 3. A high-fidelity tape-recorded copy of the sounds that were recorded by BBN during an acoustical recons of gunshots periment conducted in Dealey Plaza on August 20, truction ex- 4. A topographical survey map of Dealey Plaza, plotte 1978. of 1 inch equal to 10 feet. d at a scale 0. A map of Dealey Plaza, plotted at a scale of feet, on which the locations of microphones used 1 inch equal to 40 tion experiment were indicated. in the reconstruc- 6. Aerial and ground level photographs of Deale relevant surrounding structures, y Plaza and In addition, the committee staff provided to us ems of informations, such as the heights of build various necessary ings te distance to objects not shown on the maps, the locatiin Dealey Plaza, iooter during the BBN reconstruction experiment on of the DPD *rature in Dealey Plaza at the time of the assass and the air tem- € reconstruction experiment. ination and during 6 sources of the 1.3 Preliminary review of the characteristics and recorded sounds mitted on channel 1 During 1963, communications that were trans m were recor ded continuously on of the DPD radio dispatching syste a micro phone on a mobile a Dictabelt recorder. On Nove mber 22, 1963, appar ently becam e stuck in the transmitter that was set to channel 1 minut es continuously p.m. and for about 5 “on” position at about 12:28 we first listen ed to this transmitted sounds that it picked up. When conta ined a nearly we found that it interval on the DPD recording, es, and clicks . Also continuous noise, with occasional speech, whistl s that BBN al were the sound recorded on the Dictabelt in this interv sound s resem bled identified as probable gunsh ots. To the ear, these ot. Howev er, as Dr. Barge r static much more than they did a gunsh verifi ed, the equip- — testified in September, and as we indep enden tly g syste m was not ment that was used in the DPD radio dispatchin and it was therefore designed to handle sounds as intense as a gunshot, poor fidelity. Conse- likely to have recorded such sounds with very s could be distorted quently, we recognized that these static-like sound sounds, theoreti- nshot sounds. On the other hand, such static-like sources, some r of other cally could have been generated by a numbe distu rbanc es in the acoustic, some related to electr ical or mecha nical equip ment. Some test DPD radio transmission, reception or recording red to determine the more discerning than the human ear was requi probable cause of the sound impulses. 1.4 Basic principles and methods of analysis of recorded To answer the basic question, “Was the third group” with a high sounds generated by a gunsho t from the grassy knoll? for some charac- level of certainty, these sounds needed to be examined ted by such @ teristic that they would have had if they had been genera gunshot, and would not be likely to have had ifmost they had not been. Of the several characteristics that can be used, the effective and most sequen ce of delay times of the muzzle -blast echoes. reliable one is the explos ive blast The firing of a gun generates a very loud, very brief gun. This sound, which typica lly lasts about five at the muzzle of the 95 millis econds ), one-thousandths of a second (0.005 second s, or from the gun. If the muzzle blast strikes spreads out in all directions e andwill move a wall of a structure, it will be reflected from the surfac the corner Tf the muzzle blast strikes away from it in a new direction. out from the of a structure, it will be diffrac ted, that is, it will spread reflect ed and diffra cted sounds are corner in many directions. These which they closely the echoes of the muzzle blast. Like the muzzle blast, they arrive from increasingly distant locations. : time taken for the muzzle blast to be heard at some locationg The and on the tota echoes to be heard also depends on the speed of sound ce fron distance each echo must travel, which is the total of the distan 7 the gun to the echo-producing object and then to the listener. Since distance traveled by the muzzle blast to a listener must be less than the distance traveled by one of its echoes, the bang of the muzzle blast is the always heard first. Then the echoes that are produced by the muzzle blast bouncing off the corners and surfaces of structures are heard. If we now assume that the sound source (the gun) and the listener are located in a typical urban environment, with a number of random spaced echo-producing structures, it is possible to see that the pattern ly of sounds a listener will hear will be complex and unique for given pair of gun and listener locations. For example, assuming a any fixed location of a listener, the echoes that he hears and the times at which he hears them will be related uniquely to the location of the gun, since for each different location of the gun, even though the distances from the listener to the various echo-producing objects are the same, distances from these objects to each gun location are different. Conse- the quently, the times at which the echoes are heard will be different for each location of the gun. Similarly, assuming a fixed location of the gun, any change in the location of the listener will change the distance s between him and the echo-producing structures, and thus the timing of the pattern of sounds he hears. If the listener is in motion as the muzzle blast and the various echo sounds reach him, the times at which he hears the muzzle blast and its echoes will be related uniquely his location when he hears each sound. to A listener cannot tell, from the sounds of a gunshot, when the gun was fired. He can determine only the times that elapse between the muzzle blast and each of its echoes. These elapsed times are called the echo-delay times. Because the echo travel times are uniquely related to the locations of the gun and the listener, the echo-delay times are unique to any given pair of those locations. Hence, if we know the tem- perature (and thus, the speed of sound) and the location of the echo- producing structures, echo-delay times can be used to characterize the sounds of a gunshot for any pair of shooter and listener locations. The “listener” that we have discussed, of course, could be either a human ear or a microphone. If a microphone receives the sounds and they are subsequently recorded, the recording becomes a picture of the event, not unlike a “fingerprint,” that permanently characterizes the original gun and microphone locations. Kcho-delay times in such recordings can be measured easily and precisely by producing a graph of their waveforms on an oscillogram, or oscillograph. Such a graph is shown in figure 1. The narrow peaks represent individual sounds of brief duration (that is, impulse-sounds ). The heights of the peaks correspond to the loudness of the impulse- sounds; the spacing between peaks corresponds to the time that elapses between them. The largest of the impulse peaks is the muzzle blast. The peaks that follow it are its individual echoes. The distance between the peak that is identified as the muzzle blast and each peak that repre- 8 of the echo. To convert sents an echo is a measure of the delay time this distance to a time measuremen t, it 1s multi plied by the time-scale examp le, the muzzl e blast impul se in figure 1 and of the graph. For the sixth peak identified as an echo are 47 milli meter s apart. Since the milli meter (1 msec /mm) , the measured time-scale is 1 millisecond per echo-delay time is 47 milli secon ds. ry 8 £ Ss LJ! = | > ” Y Q wo LW tee 3 3} a oO 5 # muzzle blast shock wave ALISNALNI wae ONDOSat aay tee 9 It is easy to see how such a graph may be used for identification poses. It provides a picture of the complex, random spacing pur- s of the echo-delay times. When the temperature of the air and the locatio the echo-producing objects are known, the graph is uniquely ns of to a particular pair of gun and microphone locations. This related complex picture can be compared to other such graphs. If the random pattern of echo-delay times (the spacings between peaks) matches in any such graphs, it may be concluded that the sounds and listener two locations that produced both graphs were the same. Of course, it may be that no second graph can be found that matche the first. Using the fingerprint identification process as an analogy s a latent fingerprint taken from a knife found protruding , if from a murder victim’s body is given to the FBI for identification, it that no matching “known” print is on file at FBT headquarters may be that the murderer cannot be immediately identified. Furthermore, and police may proceed to take fingerprint samples from all of the the suspect In the case and find that none match the one found on the murders weapon. In the end, the latent fingerprint may not be identified. Applying the analogy to the graphs of sounds, our problem was see if any of a number of assumed pairs of shooter and microphoneto locations would produce a pattern of sounds whose graph would match the graph of the sounds in question on the DPD tape. Before begin- ning the search, we knew that, just as in fingerprint identification cases, in the end we might find no match. If that occurred, of course, either of two conclusions would be required: (1) The real shooter } microphone locations could not be identified, or (2) the sounds and | tape were not produced by a gunshot in Dealey Plaza. On the other on the } hand, if we found a shooter and microphone location that in combina - } tion would cause the same unique, random pattern of echo-delay times } that were contained on the DPD tape recording, those sounds could ') be identified as probably being caused by such a gunshot. | For the sounds on the DPD recording, we knew what two of the 4 four conditions that determine echo-delay time were at. the time of the J assassination. We knew what the speed of sound was and we knew where the major echo-producing objects were (and still are). We did ‘not know exactly where to locate the gun, nor did we know through 4 which sequence of locations on Elm Street to move the microphone. » Therefore, we had to determine numerous hypothetical sequences of echo-delay times for gunshots that may have been fired from a variety of locations on the grassy knoll and picked up by microphones that moved through a variety of locations on Elm Street. This was accom- plished in the only practical way possible—by predicting (i.e., mathe- matically calculating) the echo-delay time sequences that would be Jobtained for the various locations of a gun and a microphone. | After numerous comparis ons between the echo-delay times for the | sounds on the DPD recording and various predicted patterns for |combinat assumed motorcycle and shooter locations that did not match, a : ion of motorcycle and shooter locations was found which mathematically produced a predicted pattern that showed strong Similarities to the pattern of impulses on the DPD tape. However, to etermine with a high level of certainty if these two sequences of echo- de]elay times, which were derived from different data, represented the same source, it was not enough to show that the sequences looked alike. 10 tive sense, that is, by use ofa They had to be shown to be alike in an objec tially misleading ap- method of comparison that disregarded potena computation of the ded by pearances. Such a method was-.provi nces. The binary corre- binary correlation coefficient of the two sequeer that is exactly 1.0 if lation coefficient of two sequences is a numb approaches zero as they the sequences are identical and that rapidly the binary correlation grow more dissimilar. As used in this analysis, delay times in each the numb er of echo- coefficient takes into account that coincide. Echoes in of the sequences and the number of echoes delay times differ by a the two sequences are said to coinc ide if their cidence window,” can small amount. The smaller this amount, or “eoin y corre lation coefficient, the be made while maintaining a high binar seque nce represents a greater will be the proba bilit y that the DPD cunshot from the grassy knoll. 1.5 Results of the analysis sequence of echo- Two different comparisons were made between the delay times on the DPD tape and the most similar sequence of pre- s was between those dicted echo-delay times. One of the comparison the average back- recorded sound s that were signif icantl y louder than that would have been recorded ground noise and those predicted echoes delay times of ss. In the other compa rison , the with comparable loudne , up to a predi cted echoes all of the recorded sounds and of all of the compa red. econds from the muzzl e blast, were total delay of 50 millis be 0.79 for The computed binary correlation coefficient was found to the first comparison and 0.75 for the second . In both of the comparisons described above, the coincidence window and was set at +1 millisecond. That is. a measured echo-delay time 1 a predicted one were said to coincide only if they were no more than ted at levels greater than millisecond apart. For sequences that correla 0.7 with a coincidence window of +1 millisecond, the statistical prob- ability was 95 percent or more that the sequences represented the same source—a sound as loud as a sunshot from the grassy knoll. Put alternatively, the probability that the sounds on the DPD recording were generated by sources other than a sound as loud as a gunshot originating from the grassy knoll is 5 percent or less. 1.6 Findings The results of our analysis of sounds on the DPD recording permit the following findings: 1. The recording very probably contains the sound of a gunshot that was fired from the grassy knoll. The probability of this event is computed to be at least 95 percent. 2. The microphone that picked up the sounds of the probable gun- shot was on Elm Street and was moving at a speed of about 11 miles per hour in the same direction as the motorcade. At the time the probable gunshot was fired, the microphone was at 4 point about 97 feet south of the TSBD and_about 27 feet east of the southwest corner of the building. (For both distances, f the uncertainty is about +1 foot.) | 3. The probable gunshot was fired from a point along the east-west : line of the wooden stockade fence on the grassy knoll, about 8f feet (5 feet) west of the corner of the fence. | 11 1.7 Outline of the Report The method and results of this analysis are described in detail in the sections of the report that follow. The sounds on the DPD recording are described in section 2. Following in section 3, is a discussion of the nature of the problems in this analysis and of the considerations that underlie the method of solution. Section 4 discusses the steps that were taken to implement the procedure for predicting echo-delay times and describes the method and results of a test of this procedure. Section 5 discusses the methods that were used to determine and to compare echo-delay times for the recorded and predicted sequences. 2.0 DESCRIPTION OF THE RECORDED SOUNDS The DPD recording contains a wide range of sounds—speech, clicks, whistles, motor noises, sirens and even the sound of a carillon bell. Mostly; the recording contains sounds generated during normal com- munications on channel 1 of the DPD radio dispatching system. The speech transmissions usually were preceded and followed by sharp clicks. These were keying transients, probably generated by the switch on the transmitter microphones when they were turned on or off. Occasionally, a transmission was attempted while another one was in progress. When this occurred, the interference between the two trans- mitters usually generated a brief whistle, known.as a heterodyne tone, that immediately followed the keying click of the oncoming micro- phone. At a time that the BBN analysis estimates to have been about 12:28 p.m., a microphone on a mobile unit apparently became stuck in the “on” position and began to transmit a continuous noise that is believed to be the sound of a motorcycle engine. For the first 2 minutes of the stuck-microphone transmission, the sound level of this noise is fairly constant. Occasionally, clicks and whistles can be heard through the noise, indicating attempts by other transmitters to use the channel. At several points, voices can be heard, but, being obscured by the noise, they cannot be understood. At 133 seconds after the start of the stuck-microphone transmission, the level of the noise drops by about 6 decibels (that is, to about one-fourth of its previous level). At almost the same moment a voice can be heard, communicating a brief but unintelligible message. This is followed about 3 seconds later by a series of randomly spaced, loud clicks and pops that lasts for at least 10 seconds. Some of the clicks occur singly, some in groups. Only one of them is accompanied by a heterodyne whistle and by an audible but unintelligible voice. 3.0 THE NATURE OF THE PROBLEM AND THE METHOD OF SOLUTION 3.1 Distortion of therelative intensities o f the echoes The sounds on the DPD recording that are thought to be those of gunshots begin about 5 seconds after the decrease in the level of the con- tinuous noise and last for about 8 seconds. To the ear, these sounds resemble static, not gunshots. However, the equipment that was used in the DPD radio dispatching system in 1963 would have distorted the sounds of gunfire. The effect would have been to compress the peak amplitude of the sounds of the muzzle blast and of its strongest echoes, making them only slightly louder than those of some of the weaker 12 echoes. Furthermore, if the microphone was on a DPD motorcycle in the motorcade, most of the many very weak echoes of the muzzle blast would have been obscured by the noise of the motorcycle engine (which is possibly the source of the continuous noise on the DPD recording). — Consequently, the sounds of a gunshot would have been recorded as a sequence of very brief impulse-sounds (the muzzle blast and its loudest echoes), only a few of which would have been larger than the accom- panying engine noise, and none of which would have sounded to the ear like gunshots after being distorted by the limiting circuitry of the DPD radio and recording equipment. 32 Waveforms of the sounds on the DPD recording The waveforms of sounds in the DPD recording are shown in fig- ure 2. The waveforms in the bracketed region include the group of impulse-sounds that the BBN analysis identified as a probable gunshot from the grassy knoll. This segment of the recording begins 144.9 seconds after the start of the stuck-microphone transmission and lasts for 0.36 seconds. The noise thresholds shown in the figure indicate the average peak levels of noise (mostly motorcycle noise) that can be heard immediately before and after this segment. aeee yUaWBas Buluie1UOS asjnduu! SPUNOS 46-129 O asiou PjOysasuy f35=2 3YND @ IS SNYOS 40 3SAWVMSGNNO NI S 3HL GdG SNIGHOO3Y 14 Figure 3 shows the bracketed region in greater detail. The narrow peaks that exceed the thresholds, as well as many of those that do not, are the waveforms of the impulse-sounds that may be the sounds of a gunshot. Impulse peaks that are less than 1 millisecond apart are con- s sidered to be part of the same impulse. Altogether, 15 impulse exceed the threshol ds. Five of them occur in the first 85 millise conds following the one that is labeled as the muzzle blast. The remaining nine impulses occur in the 100-millisecond wide interval that begins about 280 milliseconds after the assumed muzzle blast. SOUNDS RECORDING DPD THE IN OF WAVEFORMS OF GRAPH EXPANDED FIGURE 3 15 3.3 Possible sources of the impulse sounds While it was possible that the louder impulse noises were the dis- torted sounds of a gunshot, it also is possible that they could have been generated in other ways. For example, they could have been the sounds of misfiring of the motorcycle engine. They could have been static-li impulse noises generated by the motorcycle’s ignition system ke picked up by the transmitter. The microphone that was stuck in and “on” position could itself have been the cause of impulses if from the time- to-time it became unstuck and turned off briefly and then immediately turned on again. Impulse noises in the recording could also have resulted from scratches in the dictabelt on which the recording made. Other components of the communication system could was have been malfunctioning, producing electrical or mechanical disturbances that would have been recorded as clicks. 3.4 Method of the analysis The essential questions to be answered were: “What is the source of the impulse-sounds in the DPD recording? Are they derived from the sounds of a gunshot that was fired from the grassy knoll and picked up by a microphone that was moving on Elm Street, or are they derived from one or more of the many other possible sources ?” These questions could be answered with a high degree of certainty if the impulses could be shown to exhibit a characteristic that they would be expected to exhibit if they had been generated by a gunshot, and would not be likely to exhibit if they had not been. As explained in a : . © Section 1, such a characteristic is found in the unique pattern of time delays of echoes that buildings and other structures in Dealey Plaza would generate for a gunshot fired from the grassy knoll. If the im- pulse noises are the distorted sounds of a gunshot, their spacing should closely match that predicted for a shot fired from some location on the grassy knoll and “heard” by a microphone traveling along some path on Elm Street at 11 miles per hour. The closer the match between the actual and the predicted sequences, the greater the probability that the impulses are the sounds of a gunshot. If no shooter and microph location can be found that can produce a sequence of echoes that one closely matches the sequence of impulses on the tape recording, then have to be concluded that the impulses were not generated byit would sounds _Teceived by a microphone moving on Elm Street from a gun fired on _ the grassy knoll. _ The procedure for determining the probable cause of the specifie _ group of impulses on the DPD recording thus consisted of d three steps. First was to calculate the pattern of echo delays that would be pro- duced by a gunshot from a variety of locations on the grassy and recorded by a microphone moving along a variety of knoll paths on Elm Street. Then, select the Sequence of predicted echoes that Closely matched the actual recorded sequence of impulses. Finally, most pute the probability that impulse sounds generated by sources com- than the predicted gunshot could occur by chance in a sequence other Would match the selected echo sequence as closely as did the that DPD recording. actual 16 4.0 IMPLEMENTATION OF THE ANALYSIS 4.1 Preliminary considerations The implementation of the three-step procedure of the analysis required the consideration of a number of questions. Each of these affected either the results of the analysis or the method by which the required echo-delay time sequences were obtained. 4.1.1 Source of the gunshot sounds If a gun was fired from the grassy knoll during the assassination, the would-be assassin reasonably could have used either a rifle or a pistol, since the target would have been less than 150 feet away. Since rifles typically fire bullets that travel faster than the speed of sound, the firing of a rifle generates two intermixed echo sequences composed of the echoes of the muzzle blast and the echoes of the continuously generated shock wave that is created by a bullet in supersonic flight. On the other hand, most pistol bullets do not fly at supersonic speeds. A pistol that fires a subsonic bullet generates only the set of echoes of the muzzle blast. Since we did not know what type of gun, if any, had actually been used on November 22, 1963, we sought only to com- pare the DPD tape with predicted sequences of echoes of muzzle bes tanee would have been present regardless of the type of weapon red. 4.1.2 Placement of the gun on the grassy knoll The BBN analysis indicated that the gun was in the vicinity of the grassy knoll. During the acoustic reconstruction experiment that was conducted by BBN in Dealey Plaza on August 20, 1978, shots were fired from behind the wooden stockade fence on the grassy knoll. This location was consistent with available eyewitness and earwit- ness testimony. It was a reasonable one since it afforded good visibility of Elm Street while providing good cover for the shooter of a gun. At any other location on the grassy knoll either the visibility or the cover would have been substantially poorer. However, it is uncertain exactly where a shooter would have stood behind the fence, since equally good locations can be found up to 25 feet along the fence either north or west of its corner. 4.1.3 Placement of the microphone on E'lm Street The BBN analysis placed the stuck microphone on Elm Street in the vicinity of the fourth microphone in the third array of microphones that were set up in Dealey Plaza during the acoustic reconstruction experiment. As illustrated in figure 4, the microphones were located in the center of the street at points 18 feet apart along the route of the Presidential motorcade, from the intersection of Houston and Main Streets to the location of the Presidential limousine on Elm Street in Zapruder frame 312. The sounds of a gunshot from the grassy knoll received by each of these microphones were recorded during the ex- periment. Later, BBN determined the degree of match between the *The DPD recording does contain a series of impulses that precede the large im- pulse ultimately determined to be the muzzle blast. The probability that these earlier impulses were the sounds of supersonic shock wave was discussed by Dr. Barger in his testimony before the committee on Dec. 29, 1978. See Vol. V of the hearings before the select committee, 94th Cong., 2d session (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1979). 17 recordings from each of thes e on the DPD recording by calcmic efficients. A coincidence window ulatin of +6 millisecon FIGURE 4 MICROPHONE LOCATIONS AT DEALEY PLAZA tion in Dealey Plaza and the impulse sequ e low values of the binary correlation ence on the DPD recor ding. lated for all of the other microphones coefficients that were calcu- microphone location either on Elm indicate that Street or on hich a sequence of echoes caused by a shot from th 18 the sequence of impulses be heard that was even moderately similar to that for the purpose of on the DPD recording. It was there fore clear y Plaza for which echo analysis the microphone location in Deale ity of microphone 4 of sequences had to be obtained was in the vicin t from halfway between array 3. This region extends along Elm Stree ophones 4 and 5, and microphones 3 and 4 to halfway betwe en micr cycle with the stuck from curb to curb (since the presumed motorleft of the center of the arate alae could be anywhere to the right or street). 4.1.4 Selection of the coincidence window by use of the binary To compare sequences of impulses and echoes mine how many first to deter correlation coefficient, it was necessary the micro phone s that were echoes coincided with impul ses. Ideal ly, 1f could have been spaced used in the acoustic reconstruction experiment 1 foot apart, and very closely along the route of the motor cade. say, curb to curb, impul ses and echoe s that were within 1 milli- spread from dered coincident. For second of one another could have been consi in the middle of the practical reason s, the micro phone s were locat ed many possible shooter street and spaced 18 feet apart. Also, only one of calities, the coin- locations was used. To take into account these practi +6 milliseconds. If a cidence window for BBN’s analysis was made have been few window of +1 millisecon d had been used, there would of the calculated bi- points of coincidence in any comparison, and all the chances nary correlation coefficients would have been small, since have been small that a micro phone and a shoot er would have would ve a been arbitrarily located in precisely the correct positions to recei ses to sequence of echoe s that coinc ided with the seaue nce of impul coinc idenc e wind ow to +6 within 1 millisecond. By increasing the in- milliseconds, the number of coincident impulses and echoes was creased, However, so was the possibility that an impul se gener ated by a source other than a gunsh ot would appea r to coinc ide with an echo. ted The major consequence of this was the value of 50 percent compu as the statistical probability that the impulses under examination were caused by the sounds of a gunshot. To increase the certainty in our findings above a 50-percent level, we had to be able to reduce the coincidence window to as low a value as possible, preferably to +1 millisecond or less. Theoretically, this could be accomplished by placing microphones 1 foot apart ‘in the region of interest and conducting additional test firings in Dealey Plaza from various locations on the grassy knoll. With respect to the microphone location problem alone, the relevant area on the street would be 720 square feet. Therefore, if, as in the BBN acoustic recon- struction experiment, microphones were placed in arrays of 12 each, a total of 60 arrays would be required for each position of a gun fired on the grassy knoll. Clearly, this approach was impractical. 4.15 Prediction of echo sequences | The only practical way to obtain the needed echo sequence was to predict them analytically. Using fundamental principles of acoustics, it was possible to compute the time it would take for the sound of a muzzle blastto travel from a gun at any assumed point on the grassy knoll to a microphone at any assumed point on Elm Street. Knowing where the echo-producing objects were in Dealey Plaza, it was also 19 possible to compute the time it would take for echoes of the muzzle blast to travel from the gun to the microphone. Subtracting the muz- zle-blast travel time from the echo travel times yielded the require sequence of echo-delay times. d The principles of acoustics that underlie this approach are described in detail in BBN Report. No. 3497 that was submitted to the commit- patin January 1979.* The essential principles can be summarized as ollows: 1. ee sounds spread out in all directions from the source of the sound. 2. If the medium (in this case, air) through which sound travels is uniform, sound will travel in straight lines from the source and at the same constant velocity in all directions of travel. 3. The time taken for sound to travel from one point to another can be computed by dividing the distance between the points by the speed of sound. For example, at a speed of 1,100 feet per second, it will take 0.5 second for sound to travel a distance of 550 feet. Conversely, the distance traveled by a sound can be computed by multiplying the travel time by the speed of sound. 4. Sound traveling through air will reflect from the surfaces and teat from the corners of structures such as buildings, walls and columns. 4.2 Information needed to predict echo-delay. sequences Before the echo travel times could be calculated, it was necessary to determine three things: (1) Which objects in Dealey Plaza would produce echoes in the region of interest on Elm Street for a gun fired from the vicinity of the grassy knoll; (2) how far these objects were from the locations of the gun and of the microphone; and (3) what was the speed of sound under the conditions for which the echo travel times were to be predicted. When the required information had been obtained, it was used first to determine the accuracy of the echo pro- cedure. Then it was used to predict echoes for comparison with the impulses in the DPD recording. 4.2.1 Identification of echo-producing objects The objects in Dealey Plaza that would generate relevant echoes were identified with the aid of a topographical survey map of the plaza that was drawn to a scale of 1 inch equal to 10 feet. Most of these objects were corners of buildings or of walls that, as illustrated in figure 5, produced muzzle blast echoes in the selected region on Elm Street by diffracting the incident sound of a muzzle blast that was generated in the vicinity of the grassy knoll. Two of the objects, the wall of the DCRB and the curved wall at the reflecting pool, produced echoes by reflecting such a sound. In all, we were able to identify 22 objects that would generate echoes of sufficient. strength that they would have been recorded on the Dictabelt recording. (See table 1.) 4.2.2 Measurement of distances in Dealey Plaza The distances of the echo-producing objects from positions of a gun and a microphone were determined by direct measurement on the *This report follows the present report. 20 survey map. By comparing the known widths of buildings in Dealey Plaza with measurements made on the map, we found the distances measured on the map to be accurate to about 0.5 foot. We measured distances on the map in millimeters, to the nearest half-millimeter. This simplified the making of measurements by providing a decimal FIGURE 5 PATHS OF THREE MUZZLE BLAST ECHOES scale. To simplify the calculation of the travel time of the echoes, we converted the speed of sound to an equivalent value for map dis- tances that were measured in millimeters. For example, a speed of sound of 1,123 feet per second was converted to 2,852 millimeters per second for map measurements made in millimeters. 21”. 4.2.3 The speed of sound The speed of sound in air is primarily a of the air. At a temperature of 65° Fahrefunction of the temperature nheit, it is 1,123 feet per increases at a rate of 1 foot per secon d per degree Fahrenhcit. By comparison, humidity has a negligible effect on the speed of sound firmed by a photograph that was taken . time. In it, a sign on top of the TSBD in Dealey Plaza at about that can be seen on which the time bureau varied from the temperature in the resulting error of 3 feet per seco Dealey Plaza by 3° Fahrenheit, nd the speed of sound at 65° Fahrenheit. is less than 0.27 percent of resulting error in the computed echo For most of the echoes, the -delay time would be less than Wind also will affect the speed of soun it by an amount that depends on the d, increasing or decreasing spee between the direction of the wind and d of the wind and on the angle However, the delay time of an echo, the direction the sound travels. whic the muzzle blast travel time from the h is determined by subtracting by wind only to the extent that the echo travel time, will be affected wind affects the echo and muzzle of wind on the delay times of these becoming significant only for windspeeechoes is comparatively small, ds hour. The weather bureau recorded wind greater than 40 miles per 1963, as ranging only between 13 knots s in Dallas on November 22, and 17 knots, which is roughly equal to 15 to 20 miles per hour.** 4.3 Accuracy of the echo prediction procedure Before proceeding to predict sequences with the sequence of impulses on the DPD of echoes for comparison recording, the accuracy of * See addendum A to the acoustics reports, **The actual recordings made at Dallas Love Field were 13 knots at 11:55 a.m., 13 knots at 12:30 p.m., and 17 knots at 1:00 p.m. See addendum B to the report. acoustics 22 ted ac- the echo prediction procedure was tested. Given the estima elay times curacy of the map, we expected to be able to predic t echo-d econd for specifi ed locatio ns of a gun and a micro- to within +1 millis cy would phone. However, it was essential to verify that this accurang objects be achieved in practice and that the identif ied echo-p roduci t on Elm lane generate significant echoes in the region of interes treet. of the echoes To test the procedure, we predicted the delay times microphone 4 that would be received by a micro phone at the locati on of the grassy knoll of array 3, as shown in figure 5, for a shot fired from on experiment. by the DPD shooter during the acoust ic recons tructi echo-delay times We then compared the predicted echo-delay times to that was fired actually recorded on the BBN tape record ing of the shot . At the time that the test shot was fired, the by the DPD shooter heit. Ac- temperature in Dealey Plaza was appro ximat ely 90° Fahren used for the speed of sound was 1,150 feet per cordingly, the value is compu ted second, As discussed in section 4.1.5, the echo-d elay time from the by subtracting the muzzle blast travel time (185.2 msec.) ed by dividing echo travel time. The muzzle blast travel time 1s obtain gun and the micro phone in Dealey Plaza the distance between the (213 feet) by the speed of sound. the measurement For echoes produced at the corners of structures, of echo 2 in was simple and direct. For examp le, the path procedure the map, the seg- As measu red on figure 5 consisted of two segments. 499 millim eters shoote r to the diffra ction point was ment. from the eters. The total and from that point to the microphone was 92 millim sound-speed con- path length, 591 millimeters, when divided by the travel time of 0.2024 second stant (2921 mm/sec) yielded an echo from the echo (202.4 msec). Subtractin g the muzzl e blast travel time . travel time yielded an echo-delay time of 17.2 milliseconds necessary first For an echo produced by a specul ar reflect ion, it was occur. Such reflec- to locate the point at which the reflection would e at which the tions occur at that point on an echo- produ cing surfac of the echo path to that surfac e is a minim um. At that total length e for which the point, the reflecting surface will be tangen t to an ellips gun and the micro phone are the locii and the total locations of the The required length of the echo path is equal to the sum of the radii. ted by the follow ing proced ure. First, a non- ellipse was easily genera le length extensible string was cut to a length greater than the probab the string was of the echo path on the topographical map. One end of to a pin at the locati on of the gun and a portio n of the string near tied on of the its other end was wrapped tightl y aroun d a pin at the locati phone . The string was then pulled towar d the reflec ting surface micro was by the point of a pencil. With the string drawn taut, the pencil its point drew an are on the map in the region of the | moved so that string | line that represented the reflecting surfac e. The length of the was then adjusted until the are was just tangent to the line. The point } ion. at which the arc touched the line was the desired point of reflect gun to the point of reflec tion and then to the micro- } The path from the } phone (the echo path) was then measured. The total distance of the echo path divided by the speed of sound was the echo travel time. Sub- treclang from it the muzzle blast travel time yielded the echo-delay ime. 23 TABLE 1.— List of structures in Dealey Plaza that would have produced of sufficient strength to have been echoes recorded on the DPD tape Object No.: Identification tN 4a amelie 9 South shelter: South door, east post. p ph a ReRAE 9 South shelter: East door, south Oi post. ree South shelter : East door, north x eee post. North shelter : South door, west post. Di wee North shelter :South door, east post. Orn Sees © North shelter : East door, south post. (pss FS North shelter :East door, north post. Bp petdaeewf Wall “A,” 2 Sige ee. Wall “A”: Corner 1. ri yeathie2ais fi Wall “A”: Corner 2. the Bae eS Column “A” ?: Southwest corner. i oe oe Wall “B”*: Corner 1. 1B ot Bae 4 Wall “B” : Corner 2. ie ee ee Column “B” *: West corner. Li Ea Wall at the north end of the reflecting 10 cS ~eee! pool. DCRB: Southwest corner. AY freedry e DCRB: Northwest corner. 1857 ae DCRB: West wall (front of building). 19 222 Fee DCRB: Roof edge on west wall. 20 coe 8 eer DCRB: Southwest corner. pA ie me,PE New DCCCB: Northwest corner. 7) a ree dS Se DCRB—New DCCCB: Alley wall between buildings. * Wall “A” is a concrete wall on the north side of Elm St. that runs in an east- west direction. Corners 1 and 2 are at the east end of the wall. The direction of the wall changes from east to northeast at corner 1, north at corner 2, and from northeast to * Column “A” is a concrete column on the north side of Elm St. near the in- tersection with Houston St. * Wall “B” is a concrete wall on the south pool. It runs in a generally north-south side of Elm St. near the reflecting direction. Corners 1 and 2 are at the northern end of the wall. The direction of the wall changes from north to north- east at corner 1 and from northeast to east at corner 2. “Column “B” is a concrete column on the south side of Elm St., at the northern end of Wall “B.” TABLE 2.—List of echo paths used in the predictions of echo-delay times Path No.: Echo producing objects (Identification numbers ) > Ca arpa R Detirsiteaetalacells itil leah allanol tartanin re ACTIN ee Pe jepedis 1 OES VE ON DOMSEG OTSA TEAST MUMS Bank oer eis poet Ione oil) clecienww i ® a 2 25 ba lergia leoaienyer at Bi dis rant pin-r a Seat HE 9 aL ot Fg yey) ws $0 Sana 2,8 1 RS epee nAcar nets, “RANT OR Pieads pe iy nett Fae 0 © SRSA pean ieee alcat Pep pens 803 SS Sabi e Sia l Aine. tnd ice 5 IDET QOL EOSOE OTT TO TRAE sT ro oe Repke Serotonin as 4 rset Gas ota lan it Fl Nisa MONA e TOT Fan Rasta -crurcnrsacen tr tere 6 tag a satel lien aad aemeaiit rc ee ee ake tA T sg hand at GA 12 nee ee fee ee eer eis Paes Wien Ny Oe ah ce 13 oe RGIS ET USM [ARE USS Nc eeeere erst aso dane i salad 14 Soaks aki Tne ROAeT 3,13 BE ecarict aierrnat ie ee eens bd Re a Te a 3, 14 acre nne erste ee eee UES. pee VOD TEL. ehakaary iam 3,15 cee ai TdT ea 1 SEAa RS ee a mm Rae 16 SEN JAR SSSI TY SRT Tt My ps ati eerie Ie hiaastseaae 8,13 ete eet wi) boils pam, Nyisanbnt | ae st le 19 NREL yl CONE TENSE Oe ra LT hs 18 be n GY LID, uiguriaiea sh hipaa wigel ne ee erune 21 oer tit cbt onl alg va et ere etre Nish Naa On AT aMly OF Mile STB Tee 22 en Pao tennsaRhiar 4,19 er eS ORT Ta 6,19 ater eee 0-2 can nee inn to yoann Bm arct ST Th BANS 20 daseteehiee i “cist cskh sadt a weeTR SARTOAT ce ee NT Se incr Mn Wl yb, Ra aeraia 17 Te 23 24 FOR A GUNSHOT FIRED ON AUG, 20, 1978 TABLE 3,—MEASURED AND PREDICTED DELAY TIMES OF ECHOES {In milliseconds] a ee Echo-delay time # Echo A ——— travel time Predicted Measured Deviation Echo path 192.3 7.0 7.3 0.3 [oe ec icacenancdecsecereseuttveesrers 196. 0 10.8 11.2 4 Dere a ao canto k nceeees aa 13.1 3 aes ee ere Pe 198.6 13.4 Ce 201.7 16.5 16.9 4 Pie ie eens egy oe an in ee 16 9 3 Oe nicectedstsacsdnqnepseoseacs 202. 4 17.2 5 tte 213.0 27.8 28. 3 9 Gog a eee on ceeernan-sseene 27.8 29.8 2.0 7 ie Be ee 213.0 3 215.4 30.1 29.8 Secs Ae es PRS ye gigt down oneness 32.9 0 aetsiaee Ma SS 218.1 32.9 OS a sip 4 paren iy 228.4 43.2 42.3 Ld Ui ee i ee ee, ee es LS 9 ea Pore or 229, 4 44.7 45.6 TELA at a 52.3 52.9 6 |Vik Apia ke 0G ie a beled Pe ene 232.5 1.8 243.4 58. 2 60.0 132 X We. 1 See... Fee eens gn -- 2-2 252.7 67.5 68. 3 8 1428 ee Pero sos eee ess eee 2.5 259. 9 74.7 76.9 Ee eS a benerys prey eee he ey ae PE 81.9 82.5 6 1G OR ies en a tne «teas Spetae-esa ses>™ 26/.1 26/.4 82.2 83.1 9 TEAS eS RS Es RS A 266. 6 %! e284 a ens Sematew ene ehesseets 451.6 266. 7 18864 455.0 269. 8 269. 2 6 jeeps Ae RL i Mp a ee ap Aimee EE a 458. 1 212.9 212.2 20M SE Rae Se ae ° BY Seek. oe eens 284.0 282.3 Li (EET Sa aiee See ee apy 2 epee 469. 2 482.8 297.6 29/.7 1 Oo as eo sentn oes ce eee ee eee ak he ee ee WE en ni oi Bae 482.8 297.6 pa) AY De 302.0 303. 2 1.2 26 SOO Mere not cccacescewe-ssens 487.2 esas 49/.8 312.6 313.0 4 255 ee eat eet Reece 3.6. 1 354. 0 2.1 Fa Ape es AE RP SG GP RINE 541.3 travel time is computed to be 185.2 ms. 1 For the calculated locations of the gun and the microphone, the muzzle biast Using the methods described above, 26 echo paths were defined for 22, ecnu-producing ovjects.” or some ot these paths, the muzzle blast — sound bounced oit more than one echo-producing object. ‘he echo- producing objects and echo paths are listed in tables 1 and 2. The travel times and the delay times tor the predicted echoes are listed in table 3. Also listed are the echo-delay times determined by analysis of the time waveforms of the sounds received at microphone 4 of array 3 for the shot fired by the DPD shooter from the grassy knoll. These wave- forms, which are shown in figure 6, were obtained by playing back the recording of the sounds that were picked up by the microphone, modi- fying the reproduced signal so as to approximate the effect that a microphone of the type used by the DPD in 1963 would have had on the signal, and then graphing the resulting signal. A 60-Hz tone that was recorded in one segment of the recording made during the testing in August 1978 made it possible to calibrate the time scale of the graph at 1 millisecond per millimeter. The first waveform appearing in the graph, the large peak at the left-hand side, corresponds to the super- sonic shockwave of the rifle bullet. The second large peak is the waveform of the muzzle blast. Following it, with generally diminish- Ae heights, are the waveforms of the echoes of the muzzle blast. The . ay time of each echo was determined by direct measurement of the ‘reer Mees ag oe ocks ae the muzzle blast waveform to that ne echo. umpberec 1 j viape echoes identified ineen Onli Paes More Soa _ Phe deviations between the predicted and measured echo- i listed in table 3 were in part due to small errors in the era of i * e At the time of the presentation of our findines an Tyee, 99 1972 9» a had be defined. After that date, four additional paths were de fined. hpi 25 gun and the microphone. The from a map of Dealey Plaza microphone location was det that showed where microphon ermined be placed during the reconstru es were to the map, 1 inch equal to 40 ction experiment. However, the scale of feet, limited the measureme about plus or minus 2 feet. nt Therefore, the actual location accuracy to phone may have deviated Similarly, there were no from the indicated one by of the micro- measurements taken of a foot or two. the exact location — muzzle blast } FIGURE 6 FILTERED WAVEFORMS OF GUNSHOT SOUNDS RECEIVED AT MICROPHO NE 4 OF ARRAY 3 vhere the DPD shooter sto od as he fired each shot moll. Consequently, it was from the grassy Ocations that were used likely that the gun and the microphone lightly in error and that for the echo-delay time predictions were Ne resulting predictions if these positions were adjusted correctly, would be closer to the ime, Measured echo-delay An analysis of the dat cations were sufficien a listed in table 3 shows that the assumed tly accurate for the Purpose of this test. The d measured echo- lation of predicted 26 millisecond. These results are delay times about this average was 0.7 echo prediction procedure. well within the accuracy required of the ON THE DPD RECORD- 5.0 COMPARISON OF THE SEQUENCE OF IMPULSES ECHOES ING WITH SEQUENCES OF PREDICTED 1963 5.1 Prediction of echoes for November 22, Using the techniques descr ibed in secti on 4, we predicted echoes and have been heard in echo-delay times for gunshot sounds that would 1963. The predictions were Dealey Plaza at 12 :30 p.m. on Nove mber 22, air tempe rature was made given the following conditions: (1) The gun was somewhere 65° F (with a possible error of 3° F); (2) the ; (3) the micro- along the wooden stockade fence on the grassy knoll Elm Street (see sec- phone was somewhere in the regio n of inter est on ng with the motor cade at a speed of about 11 miles tion 4.1.3) and movi the same as those er hour; and (4) the echo-producing object s were identified in table 1. ed a few more The procedure that was used to predict echoes requir the conditions steps than the metho d descri bed in sectio n 4. Since a speed of 11 required the microphone to be moving on Elm Street at had to be on of the micro phone on the map miles per hour, the locati ied on the map moved in a similar manner. First, a location was specif receiv ed the muzzl e blast. Then, the micro- at which the microphone was moved along a path corre spond ing to the path it would have phone predicted traveled on Elm Street during the time it received all of the it would muzzle blast echoes . The locati on of the micro phone at the time ating the have received each particular echo was determined by calcul position | distance the micro phone would have moved from the initial to the at a constant speed of 11 miles per hour during an interval equalce (for echo traveltime. Small deviat ions about this estima ted distan echo example, +1 millimeter) did not materially affect the predicted then obtained by the travel time. The predicted echo-delay times were procedure described in section 4. 5.2 Correction of time delay measurements were The delay times of the impulse sounds on the DPD recording ms, measured directly from a graph of the sequence of impulse wavefor such as the one shown in figure 3. To simplif y the measur ement of time. cond intervals, the graph was plotted with a time scale of 1 millise per millimeter (1 msec/mm). Howeve r, before the measur ements factor to could be used, they had to be multiplied by a time-correction of the DPD Dictabe lt machine . As was correct for an error in the speed shown in the BBN analysis, the DPD recorder was running slow at the time the recording was made. Consequently, when the recording 1s played back at the faster, correct speed, the recorded impulse sounds will be heard closer tovether than they actually were at the time the recording was made. This error could be corrected by multiplying the time intervals measured on the graph by a time-correction factor. The BBN analysis showed that between 12:22 p.m. and 12 37 p.m., the average speed of the recorder was 0.95 of correct speed. The actual speed at any time during this interval could have been from 0.94 to 0.96 of true speed. Accordingly, the time-correction factor could range from § 1.04 to 1.06. An adjustment in the measurement of impulse delay times would also be necessary if the temperature in Dealey Plaza at 12:30 p.m. 0M § 27 November 22, 1963, was not 65° F’, as was initially ass puted delay time of each pre umed. The com- dic percent for each 1° F diff ted echo would be in error by about 0.1 erence between the true and the assumed value of 65°F. The effect on the temperature predicted echoes only from 0.99 to 1.01. Assumi and recorder speed occurred ng that the differences in in such a way as to compound temperature the combined factor that wou one another, ld correct for both recorder speed and we could use any value betwee n 1.08 and 1.07 to adjust the measured TABLE 4.—MEASURED DELAY TIMES OF IMPULSES AND PREDICTED DELAY TIMES OF GUNSHOT ECHOE NOV. 22, 1963 S FOR [In milliseconds] Echo path Echo Echo travel time Impulse delay time delay time Deviation + ES 5 Sl eee 2 8 es onLSI SIs teccancer ceaay 202.4 6.5 EE” 206.8 6.3 0.2 Rees nore gee 10.9 10.5 a SS eee ays 211.0 15.1 c4 5: Beirere nner sons Sensi 214.7 14.7 4 ee 18.8 19.3 SENS 217.0 ast 5 secr E eS a ae ae 20.1 1.0 SR“n S 224.3 28.4 e aaa EE: 225.2 27.4 1.0 ee ee oe eg 29.3 30.3 oe Ia 227.1 1.0 a peraeae 31.2 31.6 a ean ~ eh aae thes 230.6 34.7 4 1 New eeneme mo eS hs 244, ] 34.1 -6 48.2 48.7 PS ledeatat tee 241.5 45.6 25 e e 45.4 C4 3_ | Sate. es ior 250. 3 54.4 ee. aL ny 255.2 54.2 32 pee 59.3 59.7 ) ge men ne 266. 0 70.1 4 ) hr 273.4 69.4 Auf a een aD 77.5 77.4 a: ee fare 281.8 85.9 Ay er en 276.7 85.3 6 ee I 80.8 80.2 «DORSE Pie 473.9 -6 VaPanTT ie mae 278.0 278.6 aa ape Sear el 479.8 283.9 .6 ERE TE 479.8 283.7 oe Spetawrwee sess -w gee ip 283.9 283.7 a fp 489. | oe ae a TIN 293. 2 292.1 rcalarelacetanee aeee en 506. 8 310.9 1.1 SIEDE y 507.9 310.5 -4 a eae aa 312.0 312.4 BE Sree nee ND 509. 6 313.7 Sige. 4 eer 524.0 328. 1 -6 Le 327.5 -6 565.0 369.1 369. 2 , time 1.6 sec — one shot from the TSBD aimed near the limousine position seen in frame 313 3. time 7.8 sec — one shot from behind the fence on the knoll aimed near the limousine position seen in frame 313 4, time 8.3 sec — one shot from the TSBD aimed between the limousine position seen in frame 313 and the triple underpass. 47 inf Conclusions Based on Results of the Acoustical Reconstruction The conclusions drawn from the results of the matches ob- tained by our analysis were presentéd at the Public hearing before the committee on September £29704 Essentially, we had The correlation detector Produced several false that alarms could be identified as Such. These false alarms are Spurious matches caused by uncertainty of the exact motorcycle position with respect to the known Positions of microphones used in the reconstruction test. Therefore, some of the correla- tions that indicated the four shots must also be suspected as false alarms. This uncertainty introduced by the suspected false alarms can be expressed as a set of probabilities on the possible true outcomes. These Probabilities were calculated independent observation. Thus, the individual Probabilities that the shots occurred at each of the four times are: Shot 1. 88% based on three matches Shot 2. 88% based on three matches Shot 3. 50% based on one match Shot 4. 75% based on two matches. The probability that the four possible shots found by the correlation detector include at least two correct detections is high, about 96%. The probability that there are three correct 48 detections is lower, about 75%. The probability that all four are correct is only about 29%. The combined probability that there are three correct detections, and that the third (knoll) shot is among them is about 47%. 1.5 Independent Analytical Extension of the Reconstruction Test The Committee sought to have the uncertainty in the test results reduced, particularly with respect to the 50% probability of the third (knoll) shot. Professor Mark Weiss and Mr. Ernest Aschkenasy of Queens College were authorized by the Committee to conduct an analytical extension of our acoustical recon- struction test. They first identified the objects in Dealey Plaza that caused each echo that appeared in the echo pattern we had found to indicate the possible third (knoll) shot. Next, they calculated how this echo pattern would be modified for receivers in the neighborhood of the microphone from which the echo pattern was obtained. Finally, they were able to show that 10 echoes of 12 in one of their calculated echo patterns matched with 10 sound impulses of 14 on the DPD tape recording — each one to an accuracy of + 1ms. The first of the 10 matching impulses was found to occur 7.6 sec after the first impulse indicating the first shot. We examined the results of this independent study and judged both the technique and the parameters they used to be correct in every detail. We further concluded that the odds were only about 1 in 20 that their very precise match could have been achieved by chance — i.e., if the 14 sound impulses on the DPD tape were all noise and did not include echoes from a knoll gun- shot. For this reason, we conclude that there is a 95% probability that there was a gunshot fired from the knoll at about 7.6 sec after the first one. 49 1.6 Findings The results of our analysis of the tape-recorded evidence, together with the independent analysis of the echo-pattern with match the third (knoll) Shot, permit the. following findings: iS The recorded sounds on Channel 1 of the Dallas Police radio dispatch System probably include the sounds of four gunshots fired in Dealey Plaza at about 12:30 pm on November 22, 1963. The recorded gunshot sounds were sensed and transmitted by a police radio mounted on a motorcycle in the motor- cade and positioned at distances ranging from 120 ft to 160 ft behind the Presidential limousine. The first probable shot was fired at about LE SOC ey from the TSBD. The motorcycle position was then on Houston St. having only about 3 sec earlier slowed in preparation for the left turn onto Elm St. No shock wave indicating a Supersonic projectile is seen ase a precursor to the sounds of the muzzle blast, and none is expected, Owing to the position of the motorcycle with respect to the expected trajectory of the bullet. Therefore, no conclusion can be drawn about whether this first acoustic disturbance was due to a rifle or to a sound impulse as loud as the report. ef avrifle, However, the sound did originate in the Wicinity of “the sixth floor af the TSBD. The second probable Shot was fired about 1.6 sec after the first one, also from the TSBD. At this time the motorcycle was just at the corner of Houston and Elm. Again, no shock wave is seen as a precursor to the sounds of the muzzle, and, again, none is expected. 50 5. The third probable shot was fired about 7.6 sec* after the first one, and it was fired from behind the fence upon the "grassy knoll." At this time, the motorcycle was proceeding westward on Elm St. about 80 ft west of the intersection with Houston St. An apparent shock wave.is seen as a precursor to the sounds of the muzzle blast. Inasmuch as a supersonic projectile would show such a precursor when the motorcycle is in this posi- tion, the third shot is probably from a rifle. 6. The fourth probable shot was fired about 8.3 sec after the first one, and it was fired from the TSBD. The motorcycle was on Elm St. about 90 ft west of the intersection with Houston St. An apparent shock wave is seen as a precursor to the sounds of the muzzle blast. Since the trajectory of the bullet would have been over the motorcycle, such a precursor would be expected for a rifle shot. Therefore, the fourth shot is probably from a rifle. 7. Additional police radio transmissions are intermittently recorded on the tape during and after the last two probable shots. These transmissions contribute a few electrical impulses to the noise background in which the impulses of gunfire are set. However, these noise impulses are too few in number to have a material effect on the accuracy by which the echo patterns of the acoustical reconstruction match the impulse patterns on the DPD tape. *This time was obtained from the independent study of Weiss and Aschkenasy, and it differs by about 0.2 sec from the time obtained by our correlation detector. 10 51 These findings were presented at public hearing before Committee the on December 29, 1978. At that hearing, Officer McLain HB. of the DPD testified that he had been riding his motor= cycle on the left-hand Side of Houston Ove, approaching Elm St. when he heard a Single shot. After the hearing, he said that he remembered that he had turned on his siren Shortly after the assassination and moved with the motorcade to the hospital. However, the appearance of McLain in Photographs taken in Dealey Plaza just after the assassination Suggests he did not leave the area with the motorcade. Unless McLain turned on his own siren, the absence of the Siren sound on the tape is con- sistent with McLain's behavior as documented in Photographs and it may have been his motorcycle. Section 2 of this report describes the acoustical nature of gunfire — i.e., what could be expected after appropriate filtering of the Channel 1 tape, if it did indeed contain the sound of gunfire. Section 3 reports the procedures used to process the tape and the results of this processing. Section 4 describes the five Screening tests, and Sec. 5 reports the results of the acoustical reconstruction of gunfire in Dealey Plaza. Section 6 discusses additional relevant sounds on the Channel 1 recording. Finally, Sec. 7 describes our review of an independent analysis of the match between our acoustical reconstruction and the sounds of the probable third shot. ala 52 at NATURE OF RADIO-TRANSMITTED SOUNDS OF GUNFIRE 2.1 Overview The discharge of a rifle creates two sources of impulsive sound of the muzzle blast and the sound of the shock - sound — the wave shed from the supersonic bullet as it travels at a speed greater than the speed of sound. Figure 1 illustrates the difference in how these two impulsive sounds travel through the air. The shock wave, for example, has a direct path of travel that resembles a cone, while the sound of the muzzle blast spreads spherically from the source. In addition to traveling at different speeds and in dif- ferent ways, these impulsive sounds travel over several different paths before arriving at a receiver — in this case, a microphone. Figure 2 illustrates these paths. The first sound impulses to arrive travel in a straight line from the source to the micro- phone; this sound path is called the direct (D) .pathassit includes reflections (D,) from impulses traveling the direct path and striking the ground very near the microphone. Later sound impulses arrive at the microphone after first reflecting from large surfaces, such as building facades and the ground; these sound paths are called reflected (R) paths. Even later sound impulses arrive at the microphone after first diffracting from the corners of buildings and the edges of other large objects; these sound paths are called diffracted (TM, ep paths. A weaker set of sound impulses, arriving at the microphone just after the direct arrival, are scattered first by small objects such as poles, people, and automobiles. After striking these scattering objects, these weaker sound impulses arrive at the microphone over the scattered (S, P) paths. Finally, reflections tis ih A eu0Z jO ejzznw1SB1g ve Aju %. @U0Z jO yOOUS eAeMpue vA ojzznwiSB/g A jajjng Asojefes) vung®: oot ieuing ® is 53 J@AN@SQO jueeddy UO}}De1 JO 1q e]zzn }SB/g ‘eABM PesUsS ueym r1ng Ww "© Jugleddy UONDe1I1 JO g yD0US ‘eaemMPesues oot veym ye1Ing 1 ‘® dee Pea SIAM LY OML SIWIL YIL4SY ONTYI4 40 “13771N@ 54 Building Source of Impulsive Sound ——> Building U, U,, Amplitude Threshold Amplitude of Significance Time Fire FIG. 2. ECHO PATTERNS CAUSED BY DIRECT, REFLECTED, DIFFRACTED, AND SCATTERED IMPULSIVE SOUNDS IN AN URBAN ENVIRONMENT. 14 55 from distant objects (U) arrive over various reflected but paths, these signals appear much later than those arriving the by all previously described paths. All sound impulses arriving at the microphone that are loud enough to be heard over the environmental noise would be trans- mitted over the radio connected to the microphone. In this case, the environmental noise consisted primarily of the very loud, repetitive noise made by the engine of a moving motor- cycle. This noise was found to be only about 10 aB lower than the loudest gunfire impulse recorded. Thus, only the very loudest gunfire sound impulses would actually be detectable above the engine noise. The loudest sound impulses from gunfire are considerably louder than the loudness of Speech, for which the radio was designed to Operate. These loud impulses overdrive the radio circuitry. Because of the limiting circuits in the radio transmitter, very loud sounds are recorded in distorted fashion and appear as much weaker signals than they really are. [In fact, despite the difference in loudness of signals traveling over the several paths illustrated in Fig. 2, each is recorded as having about the Same amplitude. “After the Sounds that were picked up at the microphone had been transmitted to the DPD radio receiver, the output of the receiver was recorded on a Dictabelt recorder. The circuitry of the receiver and the characteristics of the recorder also affected the transmitted Signals. The recorded loudness of the sounds transmitted from the motorcycle radio with the stuck microphone were additionally affected somewhat by simultaneous transmissions from other officers in the motorcade. An FM radio receiver, such as the one in DPD headquarters, receives 15 56 best from the transmitting radio having the strongest. transmitted signal and can accommodate at the same time all receivers whose transmitted signal strengths differ by less than the receiver capture ratio. Thus, the effects of severe environmental noise, of the limiting circuitry of the radio transmitter, of simultaneous radio transmissions, and of the recording characteristics of a Dictabelt recorder were such that any waveforms that would emerge from an analysis of the tape would be severely distorted. What these waveforms would look like without such distortion is illustrated in Fig. 3. the upper portion of The waveforms shown in/this figure were produced by a Mannlicher-Carcano with Western Cartridge Co. ammunition and picked up by a microphone positioned 30 ft from the muzzle and 10 ft to one side of the bullet's trajectory. The muzzle- blast waveform reveals a peak pressure impulse having a sound pressure level of 137 dB re 2x10~°N/m*. For comparison, Fig. 3 also shows the corresponding waveforms for an M-1 rifle. Despite the differences in loudness (amplitude) from one weapon to the other, the shock wave and the muzzle blast can be seen to have characteristic shapes. Sounds processed from the Channel 1 tape could be expected to contain these shapes, but in distorted fashion. The shapes could be expected to be com- pressed in amplitude and to be accompanied by indications of overdriving of the radio circuits. They would also be accompanied by waveforms produced by the arrival of sound echoes from several sources, as described in the rest of this section. 16 57 MANNLICHER-CARCANO Shock Wave ~t— Muzzle Biast at 30 ft 137 dB 0 10 20 30 40 TIME (msec) Shock Wave | | ~t— Muzzle Blast at 30 ft 145 dB 0 10 20 30 40 TIME (msec) FIG. 3. MUZZLE BLAST AND SH OCK WAVEFORMS FOR MANNL ICHER-CARCANO AND M-1 RIFLES. AT, 58 2.2 Propagation Over the Direct Path distance from the muzzle in the TSBD to the nearest The location of the motorcycle microphone is 60 ft and possible possible location (at Houston and Main) is to the farthest Loss in amplitude of the sound of the muzzle blast 260 ft. path is due principally to the spherical spread- over the direct sound as it travels outward from the source of gun- ing of the weakening (attenuation) is accounted for by the fire. This 20 log(D/30), where D is the length,.in.ft,.of. the quantity The estimated loudness of the muzzle blast at path of travel. the nearest possibly motorcycle location is 137=. 20, log (607307, which is equal to 131 dB re 2x107°N/m*. The estimated loudness blast at the farthest possible location is equal of the muzzle to 118 dB re 2x1075N/m?. both the muzzle blasts and the shock waves would be Thus, over the direct path with sound pressure levels greater received 100-dB limiting sound pressure levels of than the approximately radio. The result would be both an indication of the motorcycle the system and a compression of the recorded ampli- overdriving tude. 2.3 Propagation Over Reflected Paths reflections will always occur from below the micro- Ground the specular reflection point. Since the path length phone at the reflected path is only a few feet longer than for the of path, the amplitude of ground-reflected sounds will direct equal the amplitude of sounds arriving over the direct nearly path. 18 59 Building reflections occur only when a building facade includes a specular reflection point for the source and micro- Phone. This condition is met by the buildings on Houston St. for microphones located on Houston near Main St., and it is also met by the Post Office Annex for microphones located on Elm St. The path length for these reflections is the total distance from the source to the specular reflection point and then to the microphone. For microphones on Elm, the path length for reflections off the Post Office is about 1100 ft. The amplitude of such echoes is, therefore, estimated to be 137 - 20 10g(1100/30) = 106 GB re 2x107°N/m? — still loud enough to cause limiting by the radio. All reflected sounds, regardless of the reflecting Surface, arrive at the microphone T seconds later than sounds traveling the direct path. T can be expressed as the ratio AD/c, where AD is the difference between path lengths in ft, and ec is the speed of sound in ft/sec. At Oo PetGuiaeiie ft/sec, and at 90°F, c¢ is 1150 ft/sec. Sounds reflected from the Post Office occur about (1100-100)/1100, or about 0.9 sec later than the direct sounds. , 2.4 Propagation Over Diffracted Paths ‘The amplitude of Sound diffracted by a corner of a building can be estimated as follows.* The ratio of diffracted sound pressure Pa to direct sound pressure P, can be written as: Pate tH €2+1-*Ecose Po Yénkr | E(étl | #See J.J. Bowman, T.B.A. Senior , P.L.E. Uslenghi, Electromagnetic and Acoustic Scattering by Simple Shapes, North-Holland lishing Company, Amsterdam, Pub- 1969 (p. 274), 19 60 from the corner to the source and where € = Oy res the distances microphone, respectively. The angle from the corner to the rays of sound is 6, and k is between arriving and diffracted The” function |F| is a number generally the acoustic wavenumber. between 1 and 2. that can cause diffractions. The There are many corners is typical. The amplitude of a corner of the Records Building its corner and received at Houston sound impulse diffracted from 30 dB lower than that of an impulse and Elm would be about Since the amplitude of the arriving directly from the source. blast near Houston and Elm is direct-path sound of the muzzle 131 dB re 2x107°N/m?, the amplitude of the diffracted about 101 dB re 2x1075N/m?2, still loud enough impulse will be about by the radio and to be quite audible. to be somewhat limited of diffracted sounds vary continu- The total path lengths by the direct path length and by the ously between limits set length. Thus, diffracted sounds should longest reflected path of the direct arrival and the time of occur between the time of the reflection from the Post Office. the arrival 2.5 Propagation Over Scattered Paths enough so that kd=2, where d is the nominal Objects small object, will scatter sound in all directions. diameter of the in the muzzle blast impulse is contained Substantial energy Hz, wherevk =#2.84fteu. tihus; objects at frequencies near 500 of about l ft satisfy the scattering require- having a diameter could be light poles, people, and motorcycles. ment. Such objects 20 - 61 The loudness of scattered sound diminishes rapidly with in- creased distance from the Scattering object. For this reason, only sounds scattered from objects fairly close to the microphone would be loud enough to be recorded. Scattered sounds loud enough to be picked up by the micro- phone would arrive just following strong direct, retlected, and diffracted sounds. These scattered arrivals tend to increase the apparent time interval in which the primary signals arrive. el meei29°0O - 79 - 5 62 OF EXAMINING AND PROCESSING THE DPD CHANNEL 1 TAPE 3s RESULTS tape we received on May 12 from the Committee The first of needle noise, indicating that it had a very scratchy overlay dub of a recording. In was a very poor or multiple-generation gave us an electromagnetic tape recording July, the Committee as an original dub made by the DPD, as well that was identified record. We tnen made our own dub on as the original Dictabelt from the original Dictabelt record and compared magnetic tape made by the DPD. We digitized both our dub with that reportedly ours and that made by the DPD, plotted the dubbed tapes — process, and found them to be vir- outputs of the digitizing In this way, we determined that the Dictabelt tually identical. the source of the data on the DPD-dubbed tape record was really that we were using for analysis. DPD Channel 1 tape, there is an interval of about On the beginning a little after 12:28 pm, in which 5-minute duration, traffic on this channel is disrupted by a continuous the radio remote transmitter, presumably because its transmission by some button was stuck in the "on" position. As described transmit A, we input this entire interval into a digital in Appendix for subsequent detailed listening, viewing, and computer, This section describes the results of that examina- processing. tion. 3.1 The Unprocessed Waveform Data we made a high-resolution graphical plot of the First, signal, at a scale of 5 in. per 1/10 sec, for waveform of this visual examination. The plot of the entire interval detailed ee 63 comprises a roll of paper 12 in. wide by 234 ft long. Reduc- tions of excerpts of this plot are reproduced in Fig. 4. [In this figure and in the following discussion, time is noted in seconds from the beginning of the interval. The first region to be noted in Fig. 4 is the area around 131 sec. This region is typical of the high level of motor- cycle noise that characterizes the first 2 minutes of the data. In the region of L3PoEOD 3 3 sec, we can see the amplitude of the noise Slowly drop. Later, when we discover the trajectory of the motorcycle as a by-product of detecting the sounds of Shots, we find that the motorcycle was approaching the corner of Houston and Elm Sts. at this time. Therefore, this diminu- tion of motorcycle noise is probably due to the Slowing necessary to negotiate the 120° left turn at the corner. At about 135.6 sec, we note a single large impulse of relatively long duration. Because of its length and because the region following this impulse is largely free of other impulses, such as the echoes normally associated with loud impulsive sounds, we feel that it is unlikely that this impulse represents the sound of gunfire. The regions around 137.3 to 138.7 and 139.2 to 140.5 sec are notable for a number of brief, loud impulses. These impulse patterns, the first to appear in the data up to this time, were judged as potentially representing gunfire. The region from 144.8 to 147.2 sec, which does not appear in Fig. 4, also contains a large number of impulses of similar character. Because this region is about twice as long as the es ~ T JANNVHD WOU GIGYOITA SWYOIFAVM "Vv, via “JNOHGOUDIW NINLS HLIM YFLLIWSNWYL eH os) eset! o eC! eS int . Or imt 64 o'er! es tt! er cf! or 9G! ez 9G! ec 4o1 ez ef! ~ em ect: ez ttt Ose ead hs a1 ent eo "65! 65 preceding ones, it was identified as possibly representing two separate impulse patterns, and, therefore, as potentially con- taining the sounds of two shots. 3.2 Spectrographic Analysis Another way of portraying acoustical data is in the form of a spectrogram, in which the short-term spectrum of the signal is displayed as a function of time. Two example spectrograms from the region 141 to 148 sec are shownin Fig. 5. In this figure, time runs from left to right across the figure, and frequency from bottom to top. The energy at a given time and frequency is depicted by the blackness of the paper at that point. The region from 141 to 144 sec is only noise. Just after 144 sec, a single loud click occurs, followed by a region of very faint speech (faint diagonal and horizontal smudges that change rapidly), clicks (thin vertical lines), and keying heterodynes (steady horizontal bars). The analysis into char- acteristic frequency components performed by the spectrograph permits us to recognize these events in a way not possible in the waveform patterns. 3/3, MRBMRtT teredsWaveform Data To be sure that the 137- to 147-sec region of the trans- mission contained the only transients of potential importance with respect to gunfire, we attempted to remove the effect of the motorcycle engine noise to see if it was obscuring other transients. For this purpose, we implemented on a high-speed digital computer a noise-canceling filter program that adapts to and subsequently cancels sound components that appear to 25 “3NOHdOUDIN AINLS HLIM MILLIWSNVUL T TINNVHD WOUS GIGYOITY SWHOAFAVM WOUS SWWYIOULIAdS “GS “914 (spuoses) ou, ovt SvL vol ort Zul fo ze = < a | @® c 3 A, N \O Ov crt (spucces) eo)te} oun) 7 bel vel r4 svt 4% a x = < ty]J ® c 3 AY, Oe S¢ 67 be nonrandom (in this case, the Periodic noise of the engine). This filtering algorithm is described in Appendix A. It was tested on a high--fidelity recording of motorcycle engine noise and was found to be very effective in removing it. The adaptive filtering algorithm, when applied to the entire 5-minute segment of transmission, was not so éffective. Figures 6 and 7 show the effect of filtering the waveform from 130 to 150 sec (overlapping the period for which the unprocessed wave- form is shown in Fig. 4). The adaptive filtering removed hum and some low-frequency noise components, but the overall effect was not dramatic. Evidently, the distortions introduced by the radio transmitter, the original Dictabelt recording system, and the subsequent multiple playings of the Dictabelt had added non- random noise components that the adapative filter was unable to remove. Appendix A also describes other Signal-processing techniques that were applied to these data in attempts to remove the motor- cycle noise and to detect and track motorcycle Pilea ne speed. The results in both cases were negative. 27 , *(98S TpI 03 O€T) JINOHdOYDIW AINIS HLIM USLLIWSNVUL T TINNWHD WOU G3IGNYOITY SWHOIFAWM GIYALI4 JATLdvav °9 “914 @5°8E) : Or BEI est ost oS int Or im 68 69 “914of! JATLdvav Q3YNFLTI4 SWYOAFAVM YOIIN aaa WOU4 TANNVH T D AINLS JNOHdOTT) UNIIN 02 OSI YFLLIWHLIM SNVYL (29S 70 4. SCREENING TESTS the four impulse patterns on the DPD As described in Sec. 1, five simple but necessary screening tests. tape were subjected to pass any OG chese simple tests, then If the patterns did not be assumed to have been caused by something they could safely If they were to pass these tests, they other than gunfire. be gunfire, but further analysis would could not be assumed to the screening tests were designed be warranted. Essentially, to answer the following questions: impulse patterns occur at the same time as the 1. Did the assassination? patterns unique? In other words, were they 2. Were the by the same source, and did they appear only caused at this time and nowhere else on the tape? Did the time intervals between the impulse patterns 3. match that of other evidence of gunfire? Did the shape of the impulses resemble the shape of 4, impulses of recorded gunfire? the amplitude of the impulses similar to that of 5. Was recorded gunfire? This section of the report describes how these questions were answered. 4.1 Time of Occurrence determine the time of day when the impulse patterns were To recorded on Channel 1, we examined the Channel 1 and the Channel It is usual DPD practice for the Dispatchers on both 2 tapes. to make frequent time annotations. In doing so, they channels 30 71 refer to two different clocks, which are Synchronized at the beginning of each month and which are read out in full minutes only. An FBI Study concluded that, towards the end of the month, the clocks could differ by as much as 1 minute. The allowable difference in the timing of events on Channels 1 and 2, therefore, was 60 sec. The Channel 1 Segment was a continuous recording that had no time annotations during the period of stuck transmission, but time annotations preceded and followed this period. The Channel 2 Segment was an intermittent recording with, frequent time annotations throughout. A Stopwatch was used to time the events on both channels. Figure 8 illustrates the results of stopwatch timing of the Gray Audograph record of Channel 2 events. Time annotations made by the Channel 2 Dispatcher are plotted against time on the stopwatch for the interval extending from 12:22 pm to 12:40 pm. Lines representing the least-square error fit are drawn through the time annotations. Note that the clock used by the Dispatcher is read out only in full minutes, and occa- Sionally there is more than one annotation for the same minute. _For the events occurring before 12:30 pm on the Channel 2 tape, the slope of the least-square error fit is only 0.4, indicating intermittent operation of the recorder, which stops recording when there are no voice transmissions. At about 12:30 pm, the voice traffic picked up, and the Gray Audograph began recording continuously, as indicated by a least-square error Tit slope of 1.0. Sn “SNOISSIWSNVUYL OIGWY S,43IHD Gdd 40 SAWIL SNIMOHS 18 eo id SVI1 SNOILVLONNVY 3WIL S,YdHILWdSIG 2 TANNVHO OL SLI4 YOUNT JNWADS-1 SNOILVLONNV SWIL 2 ISANNVHO ve-ZL ZE:Zb O€:Z4 82:Zb 92:24 ve-Zt Z2-Zb Ov-Zt St:Zb 9t-ZL 0 uoneuissessy yO OWL peyewsy SSLNNIW — SWIL HOLVMdOLS ae 72 ssediepun ejduy Buyyowoddy,, .dsydsop 0} Bujoo,, Buipsooey ydesBopny Aeid }U8}}/WI9}U] JO POLOd Buypioosey udesBopny Aes snonuyuog jO po}ied 73 The stopwatch time of two successive transmissions from Chief Curry are noted at the left of the illustration between the period extending from 6 minutes to 8 minutes. In the first, he notes that the motorcade is "approaching the triple underpass." After the Dispatcher notes the time as being 12:30, the Chief . announces, "We are going to the hospital, officers." The assassination must have occurred sometime between Chief Curry 's two voice transmissions. Since the slope of the least-square error fit changes at about 12:30, it is impossible to determine precisely the time on the Channel 2 clock when the assassination occurred. The best estimate is 12:30:12 pm. Figure 9 illustrates the results of stopwatch timing of the Dictabelt record of the events on Channel l. Here, the slope of the least-square error fit is 0.95, indicating that the recorder was running 5% too slow and, therefore, was com- pressing time slightly.* The fact that the slope does not change over the course of the entire segment shows that the recorder operated continuously. The onset of the first impulse pattern, or gunfire-like event, on Channel 1 occurred at 12:30:47, Channel 1 time. Thus, the events on Channels 1 and 2 occurred within 35 sec of each other, well within the time difference allowable for this screening test. *Frequency analysis of the power hum on the tape recording also indicated that the recorder had been about 5% slow. Since the hum could have been added when the tape was recorded from the dictabelt, this is not a reliable indication of the original recording speed. 38 “SLNSA3 ANT 1-SYISNNS 40 L3S LSYI4 40 4WIL ONIMOHS ws SNOILVLONNY SWIL S.YSHILVdSIG T TANNVHOD OL LI4 YONNRT JYWNDS-1SV31 =o SNOILVLONNV SWIL | TANNVHO Of:ZL 82:21 92:74 vZ-Zb Z2:Z1 @X!]-e1))UNH Ov-Zt 8E:Z1 9E:Z4 ve-zt ZE:Zk 9 PeyeWNSZ JUGAR OW], }S1J4 JO soyJWSUeLL SSLNNIW — AWIL HOLVMdOLS yOns 34 74 JUGAZ OH!7-O4JUND 3S414 ct 75 4.2 Uniqueness of the Impulse Patterns If impulse patterns similar to those occurring at the tine of the assassination were to be found anywhere else during the 5-minute recording of stuck transmission, then the patterns could safely be assumed to have been caused by something other than gunfire. Thus, we examined processed waveforms for the entire segment of stuck transmission, looking for impulse patterns Similar to those already identified. During the course of this examination, only one other pattern was found. It began about 30 sec after the other four patterns and was comprised mostly of impulses apparently caused by radios keying in, attempting to transmit. This sequence, which lasted for approximately 4 sec, did not resemble the earlier impulse patterns well enough to have been caused by the same source. 4.3 Time Span of the Impulse Patterns If the impulse patterns were caused by the gunfire of the assassination, the time span they occupy would have to be at least as long as the evidence of time between bullet impacts as seen on the Zapruder film. On that film, bullet impact is judged to occur before frame 210 and again at frame 313, an interval of 103 frames. Since Zapruder's camera was judged to be operating at 18.3 frames per sec, the time span between these two events is 5.6 sec. The time span between the onset of the first impulse pattern and the onset of the fourth impulse pattern on the Channel 1 tape is 7.9 sec. When corrected for the fact that the tape recorder was running about 5% too slowly, the real time span is 8.3 sec. 35 -S3ss3Nnqno7 IN3ua344d10 Wud AaS YO4 SITDADNOLOW Gdd AG GASN 3NO JHL OL XDOHS GNV LSV18-3IZZNW “OT “94 YVTIWIS O1GVY 3II10d VW AG GILLIWSNVYL SWUOSSAVM oF (2@sw) owt, (sasw) eu 0 OL 26 76 6tt (9esw) owt) (o@sus) outs 6+ SUUOJSARM gp eUuoYydoJ21W Ie euoydosaW 18 SiZZ0W SUOJOARM XOOUS WOJBAGAM 152) ap yse1gQ OjZZNW Pa}wsues, ‘quoydosai;w Ie peyweuess ‘eu0YydosdjW Ie WO;OARAA IOUS J@aa] HeOd joao} 48eg 77 4.4 Shape of Impulses icteGne impulse patterns recorded on the DPD tape were gunfire, the Shape of the waveforms would have been distorted by the limiting circuitry of the radio transmitter. Figure 10 Shows the nature of these distortions. At the left of the figure is a muzzle-blast waveform obtained from the test firing of a Mannlicher-Carcano ritlés ‘This waveform has a double peak Showing the direct arri val of the muzzle blas t with a strong ground reflection imme diately following. A tape recording of these impulses was fed through a transmitting and recording System similar to that used by the DPD. The characteristics of both these Systems are discussed in Appendix B. The series of five Photographs of transmitted muzzle=-blast waveforms shows the éffect of the System's circuitry on impulse shapes — essentially, the louder the input Signal, the greater the distortion. For example, the top Photograph shows how the loudest Signals, those arriving over the direct path, would be recorded. The signal that was input at 109 dB is a good example of what the reflection from a large and distant Surface, such as the Post Office, would look like. Similar analysis shock-wave of the impulse at the right of the figure illustrates the simple how N-wave of the bullet is severely distorted when the input signal greatly exceeds the 100-dB limiting circuitry of the transmitter. Comparison of these waveforms with the impulse patterns obtained from the DPD tape showed sufficient Similarity that the possiblity that the impulse patterns were caused by gunfire could not be ruled out. 37 90-1290 - 79 = 6 78 4.5 Amplitude of Impulses of the waveforms that would have Another characteristic of the radio transmitter if the been affected by the circuitry as gunfire was their amplitude. The input signal was as loud sounds would be compressed in such a recorded amplitudes of the would appear to be weaker than they way that strong signals signals in the same pattern would, actually were, and weak As can be seen in Fig. 11, this therefore, appear stronger. very loud signals, especially those compression is greatest for content. For example, although adaache with high-frequency the amplitude compression of muzzle- signals were compressed, 100 dB was in every case less than that blast waveforms above the shock waves that are of higher frequency. of difference in amplitude between two When the peak-to-peak dB, they were recorded as having only a 20-dB signals was 30 (muzzle blast) or only a 10-dB difference (shock difference of the input signal decreased, ihe wave). As the amplitude level became more noticeable. This difference in peak-to-peak insight into the characteristics of analysis gave us greater recorded on the DPD tape. The signals the sounds originally appeared to be compressed in amplitude, indi- on that tape also the sounds, as originally picked up at the motor- cating that may have been loud enough to have been caused cycle microphone, Dy, eunr are. 38 | Leer9/ZznW1Se|g B——sY20US @ARM OlL- 0Z- 30 79 0€- G@P-WUOJBABM PS}WSuUel] JO jeAe7 ov- 68 66 601 6LL 6eL 6EL AA WJOJSARjeAa7 ye ay} G@P-euoydoisiw ‘O14 “TI T3A57 40 GALLIWSNVYLSWYOSSAVM SV YW NOILONAS 40 WHOSSAYM T4A37 dV FHL “INOHdOYDIW 80 RECONSTRUCTION IN DEALEY PLAZA 5 ACOUSTICAL tests described in Sec. 4 had Because the five screening of gunfire having been re- failed to disprove the possibility 1 tape, a more rigorous test was required. corded on the Channel reconstruction, therefore, was The objective of the acoustical fingerprints" of the sound of to obtain several "acoustical Plaza to compare with the impulse patterns gunfire in Dealey the Channel 1 tape. If any of the "fingerprints" found on the reconstruction would result in determining matched, then the shots and the locations of the weapon both the timing of each shot. Only those weapon and target and the target for by available testimony were to be tested. locations indicated 5.1 Nature of the Test powerful test for the presence of weak signals The most features, but that are not clearly detectable that have many known noise, is the correlation detection test. because of background distinct steps required to conduct this test. There are six Obtain acoustical measurements, called test patterns, Step 1: of the stgnals to be detected. test patterns are uniquely determined by weapon- These locations for each shot. There were 12 com- target-microphone of weapon-target locations, and they are listed in binations There were 36 microphone locations (3 arrays of d2 Table I. microphones), which, along with the four target locations gare in Fig. 12. Thus, 432 (12 x 36) unique test patterns illustrated obtained. Six of these are illustrated in Fig. 13, where were logarithm of sound-pressure amplitude is displayed as a the function of time, on a scale 16 in. to 1 sec. 4Q 81 5@ . @2 e4\e1 12¢ pcre ne FIG. We MICROPHONE LOCATIONS AT DEALEY PLAZA. 41 "6 GNY ‘8 ‘Z S3NOHdOYDIW “E€ AVUNW LV G3A199I9¥ NOTLINAWWY GNY € “ON LI9UVL LV (NMVXYCHLIM 31ZZNW) GGSL WONS GIYI4 “ET “9I4 40 NOSIUWdWOD VWYON ONY NUYZLSIM HLOG AG GIINGOUd SNYALLWd OHI 1S3L (spuoses) ew) 00 he eWJON euoydoisiW Z UsO18OM 42 e@WON auoydossIw 8 WO1SOM eWwON auoydossIy 6 W0180M 83 TABLE I. SEQUENCE OF TEST SHOTS Weapon Location Target 3 Target 4 TSBD (Muzzle in plane of Shot 1 window) Shot 10 TSBD (Muzzle 2 ft inside Shot 2 plane of window) Shot 11 Knoll (Rifle) Shot 12 Knoll (Pistol) Step 2: Process the 432 unique test patterns into a ltke number of untque echo patterns or "fing erprints." Since the radio receiver compresses the amplitude of loud gunfire sounds into a narrow range of amplitudes, for comparison with the compressed impulse patterns, test-shot echoes that differ greatly in loudness must be compressed so as to differ only slightly in loudness after transmission by the radio. To achieve this compression, we selected Only those echoes in a pattern having sufficient loudness to render them distinct from their neighboring weaker echoes. This echo selection process is illustrated in Figs. 14 through 17, for test patterns of individual shots as recorded by three adjacent microphones. For each of these figures, the geometry of the test shot — i J¢.'; the weapon-target microphone location sequence — can be reconstructed by referring to Figsesr2i AS can be seen from that figure, 12 microphones were placed in 3 successive arrays along the route of the motorcade, beginning at the right of the figure at the corner of Houston and Main. The outputs of the microphones were recorded on channels having the same numbers as the microphones. Thus, the echo patterns 43 84 14 represent the sound of gunfire made by a Mannlicher- in Fig. 2 ft within the plane of the TSBD Carcano rifle, withdrawn at the target located closest to the TSBD, and window, fired ane I and 6 located on Houston St. picked up by microphones before the turn onto Elm. these four figures, 14 through 17, very loud In each of from the echo patterns recorded by the three echoes were selected Those echoes judged to have been caused adjacent microphones. Dealey Plaza — e.g., direct arrivals of shock by some feature in ground and building reflections, etc. — wave and muzzle blast, by dots that are connected hy nearly vertical were identified reason the lines are not vertical is that the micro- lines. The enough apart to receive the same sound at dif- phones were far 14 is again used as an example, the ferent times. When Fig. lines at the left of the figure indicates slope of the vertical closest to the weapon location and was, that microphone 6 was microphone to pick up sound arriving by the therefore, the first and by other short paths. The slope of the lines direct path right of the figure indicates that microphone 4 was at the to a major reflecting surface, such as Ehe Post Oriice, closest and was the first to pick up those echoes. From the four groups of echo patterns shown in Figs. 14 17, we selected as "fingerprint" material the following through of echoes: 15, 14, 9, and 10. Again, selection of these number was based on their strength and on an understanding of echoes how all the echoes would be compressed in amplitude by the limiting circuitry of the DPD dispatching system. The same was used to select echo patterns from each of the 432 procedure test patterns. Each echo pattern consisted of dots placed at Wy 9 jouueyy 45 oaod OHI NYFILLVd YO4d LOHS 2 ‘G9S1) F1ZZNW NMVYGHLIM LIDYWL "ON G3AI3934 LY “eT AVUUY 62 SINOHdONDI ‘% “S W GNY9 (T 6. AND 5, (seconds) Time 3) NO. TARGET WITHDRAWN, MUZZLE (TSBD, 7 4, MICROPHONES 2, ARRAY AT RECEIVED SHOT FOR PATTERN ECHO 487s § FIG 46 3) TARGET NO. RECEIVED AT ARRAY 3,» Time (seconds) AND 6. 5s ECHO PATTERN (KNOLL FOR SHOT 8 MICROPHONES 4, 16. IG. "9 GNY ‘S ‘Sb SINOHdOMDIW SE AVYNV LV G3AI999U (€ “ON LI9YVL *£G3S0dX3 J1ZZNW ‘Q9SL) 9 LOHS YOd NYFLLVd OHDI aya! Jia (spuoses) out) 00 $0 | ~ Aw a jouueyd ETE MI og RRR ST a v 88 48 jouueyd S - jouueyd 89 the time of each echo on a scale of 16 in. per sec, and there was an average number of 12 echoes on each echo pattern. Most echo patterns were of about l-sec duration, or 16 in. long. Step 3: Process tnto tmpulse patterns the segment of the DPD tape recording that passed all five sereening tests. The amplitude of the sounds on each segment was displayed in dB as a function of time, with each second of data occupying 16 in. of the display. The tape segment was subdivided for convenience into six separate segments of about l-sec duration, each segment containing numerous sound impulses.* About 4 sec of data were discarded, because there were no impulses occurring within them. All impulses louder than a threshold value were selected as members of the impulse pattern. This process is illustrated in Fig. 18, where 17 impulses were selected in a 1.2-sec-long segment of the DPD tape that begins at 137 sec from onset of the stuck microphone. Above each numbered impulse in Fig. 18 ts a pair of ver- tical lines separated from the time of impulse by 6 msec. The 12 msec between this pair of lines represents a window in which an echo from an echo pattern recorded during the reconstruction might acceptably occur. The reason for establishing such an acceptance window for the comparison between impulse and echo patterns is that the precise motorcycle position and, therefore, its position relative to the actual test microphone locations, was not known. This subject is addressed further in Sec. 5.2. Three other impulse patterns are illustrated in Figs. 19 through 21. These correspond to DPD tape segments that begin at 139, 145, and 145.5 sec, and they contain 15, 11, and 8 *These segments included the four impulse patterns that passed the screening tests, with the fourth pattern divided into two Segments, and one pattern that did not pass the tests. 49 r 353-28 Er suit ONIGUYOIIN YILLIWSNYYL-AINLS WOYS NYALiVd AS 1NdWI “ST aoie LY ONINNI9SSG 90 91 hs ow 3ISTNdWI NYILLWd WOUS YILLIWSNVYL-XINLS ONIGUOIFY ONINNISSG LV IWIL 6€T “J3S “61 eod5i SvinaWll ONIGHOIIY YSLLIWSNVYL-AINLS WOYS NYFLLVd AS TNdWI “02 fap LY ONINNIOSG 92 De 93 LV ONINNISSG INIGUOIFY YILLIWSNWYL-AINLS WOUS NYILLVd ISTNdWI iC SV anit -JASSS le “Old D3 46-129 O ole ney, 94 The two impulse patterns not illustrated impulses, respectively. so that all six of the l-sec segments contained 4 and 8 impulses, averaged 10.5 impulses each. 4: Correlate each of the 432 echo patterns with each of Step the six impulse patterns for a total of 2592 separate correlation coeffictents. process of correlation, which obtains the measure of The of match between an echo pattern and an impulse pattern, goodness essence of the correlation detector. The process is is the out by sliding the impulse pattern along the echo pat- carried tern until the maximum number of echoes occurs within the acceptable windows of corresponding impulses. This maximum number is called the number of matches. The correlation co- efficient is the number of matches divided by the square root of the product of the number of echoes and the number of im- pulses; 1.€.5 coefficient = NG eee nee P correlation No. of Echoes x No. of Impulses there is an equal number of echoes and impulses, and If if they all match when the two patterns are positioned at one relative time, then the match is perfect and the value of the correlation coefficient is unity (1.0). If there are extraneous impulses or echoes, such as may be caused by noise on the DPD or by an echo-acceptance threshold too low for the recon- tape sounds, thén the match cannot be perfect and the structed correlation coefficient will be less than unity. If the echo pattern is not at all similar to the impulse pattern, there will be only one or two matches, and the correlation coefficient will be only a little larger than zero. 54 95 The correlation coefficients for all 2592 matches were calculated by determining the maximum correlation coefficient possible for each, after sliding each pair of echo patterns and impulse patterns relative to one another. The time of the first impulse on the impulse pattern was noted with respect to the instant that the microphone button became stuck. Step 5: Select all correlation coefficients having values greater than the detection threshold value. The detection threshold concept is necessary because we have observed that noise and experimental uncertainty tend to prevent any perfect correlations (unity value of the correlation coefficient). Whenever an echo pattern matches sufficiently well with an impulse pattern to produce a correlation coefficient higher than the threshold value, that echo pattern is said to pass the detection test. There are two possible meanings to be assigned to each passing of the test. First, if the impulse pattern was truly caused by gunfire, the passing is called a detection. Second, if the impulse pattern was not caused by gunfire — but rather by any other event capable of introducing noise in the radio — then the passing is called ‘a false alarm. Since impulse patterns that are truly caused by gunfire and mixed with radio noise cannot be expected to correlate perfectly with the test patterns, the detection threshold must ‘be set low enough to ensure that no detections are missed. But the lower the detection threshold is set, the more false alarms that can be expected to occur. The analysis described in Appendix C indicated that random noise on one l-sec segment of the DPD tape having about 12 impulses per sec will cause DS 96 fewer than 3.3 false alarms out of 432 echo patterns, provided the detection threshold is 0.6. This rate of false alarms was judged acceptable and was considered necessary to prevent misses. Step 6: Eliminate from the set of detecttons and false alarms the false alarms that can be identified. Since false alarms are caused by noise (unexplainable events), they may occur with echo patterns that represent weapon, target, and microphone positions that are obviously disjoint from actual detections and from false alarms that mimic actual detections. These events can be correctly identified as false alarms and eliminated from further consideration. Only in- dependent (non-DPD tape) evidence can be used to identify those false alarms that may be mimicking detections. 5.2 Problems To Be Solved by the Acoustical Reconstruction Test The acoustical reconstruction test had to be conducted in a safe and timely manner. Therefore, all conceivable weapon, target, and microphone locations could not be reconstructed. Five problems arising from this fact, and their solutions, are discussed here. 1. Where in the motorcade was the motorcycle during the time span of the assassinatton, assuming that tt was in the motorcade? The motorcycle would need to be within the confines of Dealey Plaza in order to pick up the sound of gunfire. From the corner of Main St. and Houston St. to the position of the President's limousine at the time the President's head wound was inflicted is a distance of about 460 ft. Since the pavement 56 oF widens greatly at the corner of Houston and Kim, -abpoubpel5o-ft needed to be covered twice, for a total linear distance of 610 ft. It was judged that there would be time from sunrise until noon to conduct four complete firing sequences. One of these would need to be a repeat to test for the Similarity of two types of ammunition. Only 12 microphones could be used simul- taneously, because of the need to keep 2 channels of a 14-channel tape recorder in reserve for annotation. Therefore, 36 micro- Phone positions would have to cover a distance of 610 ft. Also, the streets in Dealey Plaza are about 40 ft wide, meaning that a motorcycle would likely be no more than about 18 ft from the center of a street. For these reasons, the microphones were spaced 18 ft apart, as illustrated in Fig. 12. Because of the spacing of the microphones and lack of knowl- edge of the precise position of the motorcycle within the motorcade, it was judged that the motorcycle would, in the worst case, have been no more than 18 ft away from a microphone location. The most likely separations were accounted for in Sec. 5.1, Step 3, by the establishing of a +6-msec acceptance window for matching echo and impulse patterns. oe Is live ammunition necessary in the acoustical reconstruc- tion, and does the type of weapon and ammunition make a difference? In Sec. 2, we described how the shock waves generated by rifle bullets would be sufficiently loud at some microphone positions to become a significant part of an echo pattern. The speed of the bullet is important, because it determines the difference in time between perception of the shock waves and perception of the muzzle-blast waves. Therefore, it would 57 98 use the same type of rifle and the same type of be best to ammunition in the reconstruction as was used in the assassina- dictated use ‘of a Mannlicher-Carcano rifle from tion. Evidence of the TSBD, firing Western Cartridge Co. the sixth floor The Committee supplied a similar rifle, but only ammunition. It was necessary to use Norma ammunition for the . 15 WCC rounds. of rifle fire, while the fourth sequence first three sequences was a duplicate of the third, with the exception of substituting for Norma rounds. No significant difference due to WCC rounds ammunition was observed, as can be seen in Fig. 13. the type of Gunfire from behind the fence on the knoll had been alleged although there was no evidence to indicate what type by some, of weapon or ammunition might have been used. The greatest difference between echo patterns caused by two different weapons whenever one fires a supersonic projectile and the other occurs a subsonic one. For this reason, a Mannlicher-Carcano was used to produce the supersonic projectile and a 38-caliber pistol was used to produce the subsonic projectile. Since the knoll- to-target distances were only about 100 ft, it was not necessary to obtain great accuracy in matching test weapons with alleged assassination weapons in this case. 3. Where should the targete be located? Photographic evidence indicated that shots struck the President when his limousine was at the locations indicated approximately in Zapruder frames 200 and 313. Also, evidence indicated that a bullet may have struck the curb on the south side of Main St., near the triple underpass. Finally, our initial investigation of the tape indicated a shot may 58 99 have been fired when the limousine was near frame 160. For these reasons, four targets were selected, and their positions are marked on Fig. 12. 4. Had any stgnificant physical changes been made in Dealey Plaza? An important factor to be considered was the change over 15 years in the physical, and therefore acoustical, character- istics of Dealey Plaza. The absence of the crowd and cars was Judged insignificant, because reflections of sound from these sources would constitute sufficiently weaker signals than those that would be selected for analysis. Thus, only two changes of importance had taken place: the introduction of the Hyatt Regency building a couple of blocks away as a possible reflector of sound and the absence of the building formerly located at the southeast corner of Commerce and Houston Sts. Travel time for a sound wave to reach the Hyatt Regency and be reflected back to the microphone was estimated at 2 sec. Since the four impulse patterns had durations of no more’ than 1.1 sec each, the echo from the Hyatt Regency would not distort the data. ‘The sound waves that originally hit the missing building would have been diffracted by the corner of the building itself, with much of the sound energy being scattered. The reflected Signal from this building would, therefore, have been suffi- ciently weak to have been swamped by the very strong reflection coming off the Post Office Building located at the southwest corner of the same streets. 59 100 For the purposes of reconstruction, therefore, Dealey Plaza judged to have the same acoustical characteristics in 1978 was that it had in 1963. However, when the test was being set up, we found that to shoot from the TSBD at Target No. 2, it was to shoot between two overhead signboards on a sign necessary above Elm St. that was not there during the assassination. This sign could not be moved. The secondary echoes generated by the projectile shock waves impinging on these two signs apparently reduced the correlation coefficients for matches with test shots at this target, for only three were ever found to exceed the detection threshold, and these were identified as false alarms. ‘ 5. How could the listening tests be accommodated? The experts used by Dr. Green* to determine how earwitness accounts of the sounds of gunfire might:be explained needed to hear each of the various test shots from at least four different locations. This requirement was met by our use of four identical sequences of test shots. 5.3 Results of the Acoustical Reconstruction Test Of the 2592 maximum correlation coefficients determined by correlating the 432 echo patterns with the impulse patterns on six tape segments, 15 correlation coefficients exceeded the de- tection threshold value of 0.6. The time and weapon-target-— microphone locations for each of these coefficients are listed in Table II. Inspection of the table shows that no correlations ex- ceeded the threshold value for the two segments beginning at 136.20 sec and 146.30 sec after the time the microphone button became stuck. Fourteen of the 15 correlations that did exceed the ESecen footnove., obs! 1. 60 101 TABLE II. LIST OF ALL 15 CORRELATIONS BETWEEN IMPULSE PATTERNS. OCCURRING IN SIX SEGMENTS OF THE DPD RECORD AND ECHO PATTERNS FROM 432 TEST SHOTS (2592 SEPARATE CORRELA- TIONS) HAVING A CORRELATION COEFFICIENT HIGHER THAN 0.5. Beginning Time of Microphone Array First Impulse on a nd Rifle Target Correlation Tape Segment (Channel Number) Location Location Coefficient** 136.20 sec No Correlations Higher Than.................... 0.5 137.70 sec 2 (5) TSBD* 1 0.8 sf 2 (5) TSBD* 3 0.7 ¥ 2 (6) TSBD 3 0.8 I 2 (6) KNOLL 4 0.7 139.27 sec 2 (6) TSBD* 3 0.8 ad 2 (6) TSBD 3 0.6 4 2 (10) TSBD 3 0.6 140.32 sec 2 (11) TSBD* 3 0.6 139.27 sec 3 (5) KNOLL 2 0.6 145.15 sec 3 (4) KNOLL 3 0.8 + 3(7) TSBD* 2 0.7 < 3 (8) TSBD 3 0.7 145.61 sec 3 (5) TSBD 3 0.8 a 3 (6) TSBD 4 0.8 / 3 (8) TSBD* 2 0.7 146.30 sec No Correlations Higher Than.................... 0.5 §These times are tape times, and they are about 5% smaller than true time because the tape-recording process was about 5% slow. *Indicates Muzzle Withdrawn 2 ft from Plane of Window. Number of Echoes Matched with impulses **Correlation Coefficient = 1.0 [Number of Echoes X Number of impulses 61 102 threshold value occurred at four different instants of time, those beginning at 137.70 sec, 139.27 sec, 145.15 sec, and 145.61 sec. This result shows the possibility of four shots been fired, each at one of the four times listed. The 3 having fifteenth correlation value to exceed the detection threshold occurred at 140.32 sec after the time the microphone button stuck. This lone correlation will be identified as a became false alarm in the next section and, therefore, does not indicate the possibility of a fifth shot. These times are all about 5% too small, because the tape-recording process was found to be about 5% slow (see Sec. 4.1). 5.4 Conclusions about the Acoustical Reconstruction Test It becomes clear upon examination of the weapon, target, and microphone locations for the several echo patterns that passed the correlation detection test at each of the four dif- ferent times, that some are inconsistent with each other. Thus, some or perhaps all represent false alarms. Deciding which are false alarms was greatly facilitated by plotting the microphone locations ror’ esther tne. 15 echo patterns against the time on the DPD tape when it correlated highly. This plot appears in Fig. 22, where zero on the time scale is taken to be the time on the DPD tape where high correlations were first detected. Zero on the distance scale is taken at the point where the Hughes film* shows a motorcycle to be, just as the Presidential *Frames from the film taken by Robert Hughes, an amateur photo- grapher, were introduced as evidence at the December 29 Hearing. This film was taken from the left-hand edge of Houston St., near Main St. With the camera pointed north up Houston St., the limousine is seen just disappearing around the corner after a left turn onto Elm St. A few frames later a motorcycle passes through the field of view, moving from right to left, proceeding north on Houston St. 62 JONVLSIC SNOTV 3NISNOWN GNV JTOADYOLOW ‘SIINOLOSCVYL OSYNSV3N WOUS JTOADYOLOW IWILINI NOILISOd NI‘ ‘LA 2 8 2 -m -m 100 00 400 450 50 (e) 500 AND ELM LIMOUSINE POSITION OF POSITION OF PHOTOGRAPHED TURNED ONELM PHOTOGRAPHED MOTORCYCLE AS LIMOUSINE AS IT CORNER, HOUSTON TURNED ONTO ELM aoWwWWi z = w ir aq = w m es a 2) a = Q z oO uw a = °o > m7 z w = x rr)z 63 1SHi4 LOHS (Q8SL) GNOD3SLOHS (O8S1) 103 QYIHL LOHS (TION) HL48OS LOHS (Q8S1L) TIME MEASURED FROM TIME OF FIRST SHOT, IN SECONDS NOILISOd 4O LS3L SSNOHdOUD SNO1V IN TDADYOLOW 3 HiVd aca a *22 JNOHdOYDIIN SNOILISOd ONOTV ATIJAINOLOW JLNOY JYFHM HOTH SNOILW19YYOI 3am ‘G3NIVL90 SV V NOILINAS 40 “AWIL GALWWILSH SATYOLIFZCWUL JO J19DADNOLOW GNY 40 JHL TWILN3GISSYdANISNOWI1 JYV NMOHS WOYS YIGHL SNOILISOd GALVIIGNI AG JHL SJHONH W1I14LV FHL SWIL 3HL ANISNOWI7 G3NUYNLNMOG W139 “LS 104 disappear around the corner from Houston St. limousine is seen to This motorcycle position is marked M in Fig. 12. onto Elm St. measured in feet from this point along the motor- Distance is eade route. a brief glance at Fig. 22 shows that the microphone Even that correspond to correlations at the three times locations the first impulse tend to progress uniformly forward after motorcade route. This conclusion can be quantified along the by the chi-square test. If the motorcycle were statistically moving through Dealey Plaza at the time of the assassination, not the distance along the motorcade route would be a meaningless coordinate, and the microphone locations for the correlations that exceed the detection threshold would occur at random. chart in Fig. 22 is partitioned into a 2 x 2 table by When the time at 5 sec and distance at 250.ft, we finde, Oy separating 0 correlations in the four sections reading from left to 8, and right, top to bottom. But the expected number of correlations to be found in these four sections, if the correlations occurred at random, are 4.2, 2.8, 4.8, 3.2. The value of chi-square for the observed and expected values is equal to 11.4. There is only 1 degree of freedom in this 2 x 2 table, and the probability that this large value of chi-square could occur at random is less than 1%. Therefore, there is little doubt that the distance coordinate is meaningful, and we conclude that the motorcycle was moving through Dealey Plaza and did, in fact, detect the sounds of gunfire. Looking at the information in Table II Swateh aijal atulyede 722s WMS can determine that at least 6 of the 15 correlations above the detection thresholds are false alarms. These six false alarms are indicated in Fig. 22 with an X drawn over them, and they are: 64 105 The fourth entry in Table II that occurred at 137.70 sec is a false alarm, because it represents a rifle shot fired from the knoll at Target 4 near the triple underpass at a time when the limousine was near the position seen in frame 171. Thus, this shot was fired in a direction opposite to that of the logical target. The entry in Table II that occurred at 140.32 sec is a false alarm, because it occurred only 1.05 sec later than earlier correlations also obtained from the TSBD. The rifle cannot be fired that rapidly. Since there are three correlations plausibly indicating the earlier shot, the one occurring 1.05 sec later must be a false alarm. The fourth entry in Table II that occurred at 139.27 sec is a false alarm, because the motorcycle would have had to travel 130 ft in 1.6 sec (55 mph) to gain that position. SP 3 The second and third entries at 145.15 sec and the third entry at 145.61 sec are false alarms, because the motorcycle would have had to travel at 16 mph to gain the indicated position of only 70 ft behind the limousine at the time of the last shot. The motorcycle noise level (see Fig. 4) decreased by about 10 dB Just 3 sec before the time of the first correlations, indicating a slowing to negotiate the 120° turn onto Elm St. The motorcycle noise level did not increase for the next 13 sec, so it could not have increased speed to 16 mph and maintained it. 65 106 There remain nine correlations that exceeded the detection threshold, and they occur at four different times: Group 1. 137.70 sec — four correlations with test shots from the TSBD at Targets 1 and 3.* Group 2. 139.27 sec — three correlations with test shots from the TSBD at Target 3. Group 3. 145.15 sec — one correlation with a test shot from the knoll at Target 3. Group 4. 145.61 sec — two correlations with test shots from the TSBD at Targets 3 and 4. There is no other acoustical evidence that would help to determine which of the remaining nine correlations are false alarms, if any. Clearly, at least one of the first two groups of correlations and at least one of the second two groups of correlations must contain detections, because the order found in the data would not likely have occurred by chance. The probability that two detections have been achieved and that one is near 138 sec and the other near 145 sec is at least 95%. However, the expected number of false alarms to be found when testing four different impulse patterns is 13 (see Appendix C), and only six have been found. Therefore, it is not unrea- sonable to expect that there are seven more, although that would be the largest number possible since at least two of the remaining nine are probably detections. The best that can be safely assumed is that each of the nine remaining correlations is equally likely to represent a detection or a false alarm. *Possibly because of the presence of an overhead sign that inter- fered with test shots at Target 2, no correlations were found with that target. 66 107 On the basis of this judgment and the assumption that each of the 15 events are independent, the probabilities of several different outcomes can be calculated. The probability that at least two shots have been detected is 96%, the probability that at least three shots have been detected is 75%, and the probability that four shots have been detected is 29%. The individual probabilities that shots occurred at each of the four times at which correlations exceeded threshold are 88%, 88%, 50%, and 75%, listed in order of increasing time. The combined probability that there were three shots and that the third (knoll) shot was one of them is 47%. Our correlation detector that located the origin of gunfire also located the position of the radio that transmitted the gunfire sounds. It is important to show that the motorcycle trajectory determined by the detections is compatible with independent evidence about a motorcycle trajectory. The necessary independent evidence to show this compatibility is partially obtained from the positions of the Présidential limousine and a motorcycle shown in the movie taken by Hughes (see footnote on p. 62). This movie shows the limousine just turning onto Elm St. just before a motorcycle passes that has turned onto Houston St.. from Main St. We estimate that the motorcycle was at point M (Fig. 12) at that sighting. We estimate that the limousine was at the position of microphone 2(9) (Fig. 12) at that sighting, 215 ft north on Houston St. The position of the limousine at the instant of the President's head wound is shown in Fig. 22 at two different times, assuming that either the third or the fourth shot 67 108 struck. Photogrammetric determination of the limousine speed on Elm St. was about 11 mph. The limousine's positions at times before the head wound is by the shown two parallel lines pro- jected backward, having a slope equal to 11 mph. The two times at which the limousine position is equal to its assumed posi- tion when the motorcycle was at point M are shown in Fig. 22. We find that these times were either 6.5 sec or 7.2 sec before the first shot was fired. The motorcycle position at either one of these two times was 180 ft away from its position when the first shot was fired, according to the results of our correlation detector. Therefore, its average speed north on Houston St. would be either 15.9 mph or 18.6 mph, depending upon whether the third or fourth shot caused the head wound. These two trajectories are shown in Fig. 22 also. A precise motorcycle location at the time of the third shot, calculated by Weiss and Aschkenasy, was found to be 5 ft southwest of microphone position 3(4). This location is marked in Fig. 22. The straight line that passes through this point, and best fits the eight other microphone locations that produced echo patterns indicating the other three shots, is plotted in Fig. 22. This line is the estimated motorcycle trajectory on Elm St., and it indicates an average speed of 10.6 mph. The complete motorcycle trajectory shows that the motor- cycle traveled north on Houston St. at about 17 mph. It slowed to about 10 mph at a point about 40 ft south of the corner at Elm St., and then continued west on Elm St. at about 10 mph. This single diminution of speed is compatible with the single 68 109 diminution of motorcycle noise about 3 sec before the first shot is heard (see Fig. 6). We conclude that the motorcycle trajec- tory determined by the gunfire detections is compatible both with the positions of a motorcycle shown in the Hughes film and with the loudness of the motorcycle noise as transmitted to the Dispatcher. 69 mee Ann py an a 110 RELEVANT SOUNDS ON THE DPD CHANNEL 1 TAPE 6. ADDITIONAL gain as much acoustical evidence as pos- In an attempt to was examined for other relevant sounds. sible, the Channel 1 tape primarily of the tolling of a bell, These other sounds consisted noise of sirens, and voice and other transmissions. the 6.1 Bell can be heard faintly at about 152.5 sec. The toll of a bell the location of the bell, and therefore of the It was hoped that could be obtained by acoustically identifying radio transmitter, the bell. spectrum of the 1/3-sec segment containing the The energy shown in Fig. 23. Several peaks evident in the bell sound is are harmonically related. The fundamental frequency spectrum of spectral peaks is 210 Hz. The spectral peaks of this series according to the usual nomenclature used to describe are marked of a carillon bell. The fundamental tone is called overtones The second harmonic, called the strike note, is the hum note. pitch of the bell — in this case, 420 Hz. The at the nominal is a fifth above the strike note. Higher har- third harmonic monics are strong at 1050 Hz and 1470 Hz. The minor third above the strike note is strong, and this fact is characteristic of carillon bells. The tape-recording system was found to be about 5% slow, the time annotations were measured with a stopwatch (see when 9). Therefore, the apparent pitch of the tone would have Fig. a frequency of (1.05) (420) = 441 Hz. 70 @r @9 20° ez" it Qr 00°? °2% 02 2% Or eS seddy,Puyy Pu wud 20° G6 G2 *68 e Ss z 9 i (GP) semog 22° OZ Ti 111 82°29 bb 82 “BS Q2 ‘Or —-—+-— +—— 82° Of G2 Qr- —+— ote + 29° L Oe a2-t Ort Ors Aouenb(2H) esy E o-) ee ADYING WNYLIF 40 dS 3dVL INAW99S ONINIV JHLLNOD GNNOS 40 V “1138 112 the Committee staff did not dis- Careful investigation by earshot of Dealey Plaza. During cover any such bell within tests in Dealey Plaza, the sounds the acoustical reconstruction bells were recorded and subsequently of railroad locomotive bore no similarity to the carillon-like analyzed. These sounds sounds of the original recording. the bell sound on the Channel 1 tape We concluded that from at least one transmitter not recording must contain sounds Plaza at a time near 152.5. sece in Dealey 6.2= 91rens from 263 to 300 sec of the stuck transmission The region a number of sirens. The effect is not contains the sounds of being carried on a vehicle with a wailing that of a microphone many vehicles with sirens coming and going siren, but rather of around the microphone. 6.3 Voice and Other Remote Transmissions just after 264 sec, a voice transmission says, Starting 56 is?" The quality of this voice is such "Anybody know where as if it may have been picked up by the open that it sounds the stuck transmitter, rather than having come microphone of transmitter:on the same channel, but it is im- from a second possible to tell for sure. other cases, there are brief voice signals from In many transmitters. Sometimes these signals are too other remote understood (such as the voice signal shown in the faint to be in Fig. 5), sometimes they are loud but very spectrograms and sometimes they are quite intelligible. These distorted, ie 113 competing transmissions are often, but not always, accompanied by heterodynes, which are tones caused by slight differences in frequency among the competing transmitters. Many times these remote transmissions are very brief (around 0.1 sec) "beeps" with no voice, signifying attempts to make one's desire to use the channel known. This beeping is common practice on a shared radio channel. 3 114 ANALYSIS OF THE POSSIBLE THIRD he REVIEW OF AN INDEPENDENT SHOT about the possible third shot Owing to the uncertainty sought an independent analysis. found in our study, the Committee Aschkenasy of Queens College Mark Weiss and Mr. Ernest Professor to our work that could of an analytical extension conceived or not the match between with more certainty whether determine reconstruction with one echo pattern from our acoustical one a third shot. At a pattern on the DPD tape indicated impulse to the design of this meeting on October 24, we contributed analytical work. as follows. First, they made Their analysis was conducted echo pattern we recorded on graph of the waveform of the a was fired from the knoll at microphone 3(4), when a rifle From this graph, they identified target no. 3 (see Table II). echoes within the pattern. Then, the 22 loudest individual objects within Dealey they identified the 22 echo-producing corresponded to observed echo Plaza by noting which objects — i.e.; by identifying rifle-to-object-to-microphone delay times account for the times each Siatueece sound paths that would were received by microphone ete oe echoes moved the position of microphone Next, they analytically for each time what the echo 3(4) several times by calculating if that microphone used in the pattern would have looked like been located in these other posi- acoustical reconstruction had found that a position about 5 ft tions. After a time, they location of microphone 3(4) represented southwest of the actual motorcycle at the instant the muzzle the true location of the by its radio. Then they cal- blast would have been received each of the 22 echoes received at culated the delay times for 74 ~— 115 that point as it moved down BLM pues Ace LL mph. The resulting Seriesof echoes was found to match with the sound impulses on the DPD tape beginning at about 144.9 sec (see Table 1onah Weiss and Aschkenasy found that 12 of the 22 echoes were loud enough to exceed a threshold that they felt excluded most of the weak echoes that would not be audible in the DPp tape. They found that 10 of these 12 echoes occurred within +l msec of the occurrences of 10 of the 14 impulses on the DPD tape that were loud enough to exceed a threshold. The value of the correlation coefficient that represents this match is 0.77. This value exceeds the threshold value of 0.60 for which we accept a correlation as possibly indicating a shot. The probability that a false alarm will be produced by the correlation scheme used by Weiss and Aschkenasy.is much lower than it is by our correlation scheme, because in our analysis we counted echoes that occurred within +6 msec of the occurrence of impulses on the DPD tape. We were required to count echoes occurring within this larger time interval, because of our anicial uncertainty of the true motorcycle location. We computed the probability that Weiss and Aschkenasy could have obtained by chance their good match between their calecu- lated echo pattern and the impulse pattern on the DPD tape. We observed that they obtained 10 matches, to a precision of +1 msec, ‘out. of 12 test echoes, with 14 impulses in a 320 msec time span. We note, however, that the 12 test echoes were contained in two time intervals of 90-msec total duration. These two intervals were Separated by a span of about 230 msec in which no echoes appeared. Because an echo was counted aah ES 116 time window, shere were 45 possible it occurred within a 2-msec occur. Since one of the 10 occur- windows in which echoes may simply by adjusting the origin of rences can always be matched 9 independent occurrences. The the time scale, there are only by chance 9 or more out of 12 echoes probability of obtaining 13 es 14 time windows out of a possible occurring within any eLnis probability of obtaining by 4S is equal to S¢lGX10" se was obtained on a single try is given chance as good a match as function. However, they were by the hypergeometric probability but about 180 times. This is because required to try not once, have been anywhere in a 40-ft by 18-ft the motorcycle could Since a significantly different pattern rectangular space. by them for each different 2-ft by 2-ft would be calculated were required to examine about 180 different square, they of obtaining just one match by natternis .— The probability independent tries is equal to 5. $x 0-2 chance in any of 180 Therefore, the probability that they eedyaes or about 5%. two matched patterns were due to Me their match because the same source (gunfire from the knoll) is about 95%. 76 117 APPENDIX A. COMPUTER SIGNAL PROCESSING Many of the analyses of the acoustic data were performed on digital computers. In this appendix, we describe these processing methods. A.1 Digitizing When played from a magnetic tape, sound is in the form of a continuous electrical signal. For it to be amenable to processing by a digital computer, its voltage must be sampled, or read, at frequent intervals. The voltage must then be expressed as a digital quantity. The sampling rate must be sufficiently rapid to preserve the high-frequency components of the signal; sampling rates of 10,000 times per sec and 20,000 times per sec were used in this work. The signal must then be digitized with an analog-to-digital converter; the resulting series of numbers is stored on a computer disk- file. A.2 Interactive Playback and Display Once the signals have been digitized, waveforms can be graphically plotted on a computer display; the signals may also be reconverted to sound by a digital-to-analog converter. Interactive signal display, editing, and playback programs make it possible to display any time interval of the signal and to convert it back to a sound signal for listening. This inter- active process of observing portions of the signal waveform and simultaneously listening to it is very valuable. 118 A.3 Plotting In addition to showing portions of the signal waveform on the computer display, we also used the computer and a graphical plotter to make pen-and-paper drawings of the signal waveforms. These high resolution plots, usually made with a : scale of 5 in. per 1/10 sec, provide a permanent record of the signal. Examples of these plots are shown in Sec. 3 6f this report. A.4 Signal Enhancement Computations performed on the digitized signal can produce filtered versions and other representations of the signals. Digital signal processing can accomplish the same kinds of filtering that can be performed in the analog domain, and it can accomplish new kinds of filtering that are impossible by conventional means. Several different kinds of signal processing were performed on the data. Enhancement by Adaptive Notse-Canceling Filter An adaptive noise-canceling filter differs from fixed filters in that it automatically adjusts its signal-processing char- acteristics by means of an algorithm that allows it to predict certain noise components. The particular filtering process* used for the Channel 1 tape allows the filter to separate periodic components of the noise from random components. Periodic components are those elements of an input signal that repeat at regular intervals — for example, the ticks of a clock and a 60-Hz powerline voltage hum. *Widrow, B., Glover, J.R., Jr., McCool, J.M., Kaunitz, J., Williams, C.S., Hearn, R.H., Zeidler, J.R., Dong, E., Jr., and Goodlin, R.C., "Adaptive Noise Cancelling: Principles and Applications," Proc. IEEE 63, 1692-1716 (December 1975). 119 One property of periodic components is that, given suf- ficient past history, they can be predicted; indeed, a perfectly periodic signal can be predicted perfectly. The filter "learns" from the past history of the signal, estimates the signal for the next time period, and subtracts its estimate from the input. What is left are those portions of the signal that the filter cannot estimate — i.e., the random components. A time delay was inserted into the processing system, just ahead of the adaptive filter, to assist in controlling the separa- tion of periodic and random components. Random components having a time duration less than that of the time delay pass through essentially unaffected by the filter. These random components form the primary output of the filter. A second output was the periodic component that was being subtracted out; this sub- tracted information was also saved in digital form on disk. Examination of this subtracted signal, by aural and visual means, yields considerable insight into filter performance. Several test signals were fed into the filter to verify proper operation and to adjust the various filter parameters. The filter performed very well on the various test signals. On the DPD Channel 1 tape, anticipated periodic and un- desirable interferences included components of motorcycle cylinder firing, powerline hum, heterodyne "squeals," and occasional speech. Sections of this tape were played into the filter with a wide range of filter parameter values. Filter action was monitored by listening to both the primary and the secondary outputs. The filter removed residual power- line hum, some speech, and heterodyne "squeals" of time dura- tion longer than that of the time delay. However, it 120 respect to what had been believed to accomplished little with noise. We therefore performed an autocorrelation be motorcycle analysis, as described below. Analysts of Motorcycle Engine Noise Autocorrelation of the sounds on the Channel 1 tape Our interpretation been made much easier if we had had some knowledge would have movements of the motorcycle carrying the microphone. of the if we had had information on when the motorcycle For example, steadily (along a straight street), slowing down was moving shifting gears to Urns asGOrneLr ss0r stopping, we and possibly have been able to infer whether these movements were might with travel into or through Dealy Plaza. However, consistent this information. Thus, to determine the engine we did not have accuracy than is possible from engine loud- speed with greater a computer program that would compute the short- ness, we wrote autocorrelation function of the motorcycle noise signal. time assesses the similarity of a signa? with itself This function in time; if the signal is periodic, this similarity shifted will peak when the signal is shifted by one period. This autocorrelation analysis program was applied to the stuck transmission period on the Channel 1 tape. The results showed no periodicity that we could attribute to motorcycle engine firing. As a test case, this program was also applied to a high-fidelity recording of motorcycle engine noise, and it clearly showed the known periodicity of the test signal. Although our failure to detect the motorcycle engine periodicity is puzzling, it is consistent with our inability to perceive the engine firing clearly when we are listening to the tape, and it is also somewhat consistent with the failure of the adaptive noise-canceling filter to filter out a coherent motorcycle engine sound signal. A-4 121 Enhancement by Spectral Subtraction A third method applied to enhance the Channel 1 signals was the subtraction of a noise Spectrum estimate. This method is currently under development at BBN, under U.S. Government sponsorship, for the enhancement of speech signals in the presence of stationary flat-spectrum additive noise.* It is Similar to, but somewhat more general than, the INTEL enhance- ment method developed by Weiss et at.t We could not tell whether this method would be effective with nonstationary non-flat- Spectrum noise, but since the program was already available, we tried it. In this method, the signal is converted by a Discrete Fourier Transform to a magnitude spectrum and a phase spectrum. A previously computed estimated noise spectrum is subtracted from the magnitude spectrum; the altered magnitude spectrum is then recombined with the phase spectrum converted back to a waveform by an Inverse Discrete Fourier Transform. Several parameter settings for this filtering method were used with a portion of the Channel 1l.tape. None were successful in reducing the motorcycle noise without introducing noise transients attributable to the filtering process. *Berouti, M., Schwartz, R., and Makhoul, J., "Enhancement of Speech Corrupted by Acoustic Noise," IEEE Int:° Conf. on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing, Washington, DC, April 2-4, 1979. tWeiss, M.R., Aschkenasy, E., and Parsons, T.W., "Study and Development of the INTEL Technique for Improving Speech Intelligibility," Nicolet Scientific Corp., Report RADC-TR- 75-108, 1975. A-5 122 TRANSMISSION OF GUNFIRE SIGNALS APPENDIX B. RADIO 1 radio link and recording system The 1963 DPD Channel microphones, radio trans- contained the following components: receiver (Model C9F350), and mitters, an RCA Fleetline radio systems such as this are designed a Dictabelt recorder. Radio incorporate signal modi- carry speech signals and therefore to range and bandwidth of the system fiers to optimize the dynamic Since these signal modi- with respect to voice transmissions. in the transmitter, rather than fiers are usually incorporated device, we focused our efforts in the receiver or the recording the transmitter/microphone com- to simulate the radio link on * bination. in use by the DPD in 1963, Among the radio transmitters found that five different models House Committee researchers were used on motorcycles. These were + Motorola Model FMT-41 * Motorola Model T-31BAT - Motorola Model U-41GGT » Motorola Model T-41GGT * General Electric Model MT-13-N. study, it was very difficult to find At the time of this models and even more difficult to obtain manuals for these With the ‘we were manuals able to access to a working unit. from Motorola factory personnel, we find and with assistance microphone used with the T-31BAT would discovered that the NMN 6006A and that microphones used with have been Motorola transmitters would have had similar the other Motorola Pen 123 characteristics; i.e., they would have been dynamic cardioid types with internal preamplifiers. We have no information about the GE radio model and its microphone. We eventually located a T-31BAT owned by the Boston Metropolitan District Commission Police Department. The MDC kindly made this radio and a GE Model ER51A receiver available to us. The basic scheme used in this and other Motorola radio transmitter/microphone systems of the same vintage is sketched below. This type of circuit limits the slope of the audio IN MIC HOUSING IN TRANSMITTER eesti SS |MIC }—J DIFFERENTIATOR CLIPPER INTEGRATOR }—O MOOULATOR Signal rather than its amplitude. Therefore, it will limit high- frequency signals more than low-frequency signals, as shown in Fig. 11 of this report. The frequency response of the system rolls off at 36 dB/octave above 3 kHz and at 6 dB/octave below 2.3 kHz. The signal, in effect, is differentiated and low-pass filtered. The smoothed, calculated frequency ‘response of the System is plotted in Fig. B.1. Our procedure for obtaining the data shown in Figs. 10 and 11 was to play tape recordings of gunfire, made anechoic by time gating, through a circuit designed to simulate the frequency response and amplitude-limiting characteristics of the Motorola 6006A microphone into a second tape recorder. We then took the second tape to the MDC Police radio shop. There, we played this tape through a variable attenuator (to control the level of the signal being put into the transmitter), through the Motorola AINANDIYS WALSAS INOHdMONIIW/YILLIWSNVYL Lode oid “ISNOdSAU eae 124 JGNLINDNY 125 transmitter, through the GE receiver, and onto another tape recorder. This third tape recording was played back into an oscilloscope and photographed producing the waveforms shown in Fig. 10. Peak-to-peak amplitudes of these waveforms were measured and plotted to produce bop ee i In addition to having had similar effects on the waveforms recorded on Channel 1, the DPD recording Shows evidence of a time constant in the 0.1 to 1.0 sec range. This AGC does not occur in any of the Motorola transmitters. It could, therefore, have been caused by the GE transmitter, by the receiver, or.by the recorder. tO= 129 Oo =79) = -9 126 APPENDIX C. ANALYSIS OF FALSE ALARMS IN THE CORRELATION DETECTION TEST The process of binary correlation that was used to detect gunfire echo patterns among the impulse patterns on the DPD tape can, like any other detector, produce false alarms. This analysis determines the number of false alarms to be expected from random noise impulses on the DFD tape. Each echo pattern contains an average of M = 12 echoes in a 1/2-sec span. But, we consider each echo to have a +6-msec acceptance window to account for echo time differences intro- duced by not knowing the motorcycle position relative to the test microphone positions. Therefore, there are about N = 4o different time slots in which the 12 echoes may exist. Each impulse pattern contains some number of impulses ranging from n = 8 to n = 17, also in a 1/2-sec span. The matching process seeks to find the number of impulses, i, that lie within the acceptance windows of the echoes that comprise the echo pattern. If the impulses are caused by a random noise source, then the number of matches, i, is what would be expected from random sampling n times a population of N that contains M echoes. The probability of getting i matches at random is given by the hypergeometric probability distri- button“ p(N IEMs in ye. The correlation coefficient is defined to be equal to i/YMn. The probability of obtaining a correlation coefficient equal to 0.6 or greater was calculated for N = 40, M = 12, and n= 8,°10, 12, 13, 14, 17. The results forthe six successine values of n were: 4.8x107*, 6.0x107*, 855*105° 10x10"-; 132x105; Sx 10ers 127 For an impulse pattern having 10 impulses (n=10), there are expected (6.0x107*x432) = 2.6 false alarms, because there are 432 echo patterns to correlate with. There were four impulse patterns that were correlated with all 432 echo patterns, and they had n = 8, 10, 12, 17 impulses on them. The total number of false alarms to be expected works out to 13. This number was judged to be acceptably small, so the detection threshold value was set at 0.6. 128 Report No. 4034 Analysis of Earwitness Reports Relating to the Assassination of President John F. Kennedy D.M. Green January 1979 Prepared for: Select Committee on Assassinations Bolt Beranek and Newman Inc. 50 Moulton Street Cambridge, MA 02138 129 TABLE OF CONTENTS page ST OEE LOU RS SND i ed a a Lo ae a weibed SECTIONS 1.55 INTRODUCTION: $5." SaRY, se ma ek ee ee ee eee ail os, HOVALL CATION OF. SOUND), sco Reswit accae eee ren 2 Pree rA UST Ale SURVEY Se weit be onih bse nee en 9 SRABRATI ELD OT? Shotehs . tke noes tthe tee eee eee 9 3: 2epNumbereony Shove; ts ove. 2264. Wav cot... ath 4. REPORTS OF TRAINED UBGEAVERS steeccrers tee 14 ee aePeS CCGONALETONS (Als cee, etn nu Wah nad Cony Aes 16 4.2 Analysis of Observers’ Localization I ¢-Feperey sbYee, Sieg i Seyi s See UR Bp ErTee BE SH P die ote Bele. 5 I 4.3 Loudness and Apparent Size of Acoustic EMAZE Te en ed Cates Fae rr eee eS a eee 18 2+ $2CONCLUSIONS: 0.045 405004, 39 UGROL PER EEO 20 APPENDIX A. TRANSCRIPTION OF OBSERVERS KENOTES tye. Bae faeOns A-1 a Trav’, LIST OF FIGURES AND TABLES page Figure 1. Muzzle blast and shock waveforms from 5,0,0 849,846 © 6 FP 0 F.0.2 2 8666 6 8 8 6 © @ FF, 8.6.2.6. Mannlicher-Carcano Dr Loci of muzzle blast and shock waves at two times after firing of supersonic bullet .........- 4 Observers localizing source of sound along 6.6.6 « 6D 0.6 BUS 8 OC 8)s. 0 2 Slee ©2989 S Fe ee 8 es 6 path of bullet © 0.8 4, Observer location at Dealey Plaza .......eeeeeeee 15 Table I. Thompson's analysis of origin of shotS .....+...- 9 ante House Committee analysis of origin of shots ..... 10 IIl. Number of people reporting various origins as a function of the number of shots reported ........ 12 IV. Accuracy of forced-choice responses as to origin (TSBD or knoll) ...-.s+eeece 2U.IKO> Bees, eee a iv 131 INTRODUCTION The analysis of witness reports comprised (1) an examination of two compilations of testimony given by witnesses present in -Dealey Plaza on November 22, 1963, (2) an analysis of how the sounds of gunfire in Dealey Plaza would be perceived by witnesses located at different areas in the Plaza, and (3) the reports of trained listeners who were present during the acoustical recon- struction on August 20, 1978. The two compilations examined were those by J. Thompson, in his book, Six Seconds in Dallas, and by members of the staff of the House Select Committee on Assassina- tions. All earwitness reports, whether of those present in Dealey Plaza in 1963 or of the experienced listeners in 1978, must be examined with an understanding of the characteristic acoustical behavior of gunfire in a reverberant Space. Section 2 of this report explains how listeners can misjudge the source and number of shots in such a space. Section 3 reports the analysis of the two compilations mentioned above; Sec. 4 details the observa- tions of trained listeners stationed in the Plaza ‘during the acoustical reconstruction. 132 ae LOCALIZATION OF SOUND The nature of gunfire is such that three basic errors in judgment relating to the source and the number of shots are possible: * confusion of the shock wave and the muzzle blast « front-back reversals * misjudgment of interfering echoes. The acoustic stimulus, or shot, has two primary components: the shock wave and muzzle blast (illustrated in Fig. 1); and several echoes, or reflections. MANNLICHER-CARCANO Shock Wave ~t— Muzzle Blast at 30 ft 0 10 20 30 40 TIME (msec) FIG. 1. MUZZLE BLAST AND SHOCK WAVEFORMS FROM MANNLICHER-CARCANO. 133 Because a rifle bullet travels at supersonic Speed, it gen- erates a shock wave that spreads acoustically in the Shape of a cone, with the bullet as the tip of the cone. The muzzle blast, which propagates at the speed of sound, spreads out spherically from the source. Both of these sounds are very loud. The shock wave has a peak sound pressure level of about 135 dB re 2x107-°N/m? 3 and the muzzle blast, a peak of 157 dB re 2x10-5N/m2 ate ere The time between arrivals of these two sounds at a given listener location can vary considerably, depending on the listener's posi- tion with respect to the location of the rifle and the path of the bullet. Since the amplitude of the shock wave diminishes as one over the distance from the source and the amplitude of the muzzle blast diminishes as one over the square of the distance from the source, the relative intensity of these two sounds also varies considerably from one listener location to another. At any reasonable distance, both the conical and spherical waves are essentially Plane waves with respect to a small object Such as an observer's head. Thus, to determine the apparent locus of the Source, we need only take a perpendicular to the appropriate wavefront as it Sweeps over the observer. Figure 2 shows the geometry of the two waves at two different times. The shock wave, at time 1, has just reached the observer; its apparent locus is along the path of the bullet on a perpendicular to the shock wave. At this time, the wave from the muzzle blast has not reached the observer. At time 2, when the blast wave has reached the observer, the apparent source of the shot is on a perpendicular to the plane of the spherical blast wave and, therefore, at the muzzle of the Tega Boga hey 134 rene@ : pesues JO *@) ‘eae uondeq 1 @® sng y911INg ISB/g jueeddy ejzzN ueUM jO pesues ‘@ UONDeNG We ye1ING ‘OAC jUCeddy dsUEUM Asojyoefes) 4904S eaeMpue 8IZZNWSB1g o* oe yO 9U0Z KS a ot :911NG ot ys YE A vy }se]g ejzzNW 3: iam ee ok LOCALIZING SOURCE OF SOUND ALONG PATH OF 137 inflated the number of Shots reported by the Suprised witnesses during the assassination. The source of these echoes can be pre- dicted from the general geometry of the Plaza. For example, one hears a very strong reflection from the Post Office Annex that arrives about 1 sec after the shot, regardless of whether the rifle is fired from the TSBD or the knoll. Because of the long delay, a listener located on the knoll would recognize this as an echo but might place the Source somewhere in back of hin, anywhere from the TSBD to the railway overpass. From near the TSBD, a listener would hear a strong echo from the general Vicinity ror. the railway overpass. However, since the initial disturbance, the shock wave from the bullet, would be almost directly overhead — an anomalous locus, especiallyrif the rifle had been fired from well within the TSBD — this echo would cause some confusion. The general area of the knoll, to the right of the bridge, would then be a prime candidate as the locus of the source. Even though this echo occurs 0.8 sec after the Shock wave, it is the first sound that would make sense to the listener. On the other hand, listeners located near the rail- road overpass would react to the very strong reflections from along Houston St. For listeners in the Plaza area, the location of the rifle muzzle relative to the window opening is a critical determiner of the perceived sound. The further inside the building the muzzle is located, the greater the potential for the shock wave to dominate perception. If the muzzle of the rifle had been withdrawn and, therefore, little or no blast were present for one or more of the shots in 1963, the localization judgments of people in the Plaza would have been based primarily on the shock wave, creating much uncertainty and lack of agreement. 138 During the reconstruction, echoes were heard from the new hotel, but they arrived some seconds after the primary sound and long after the earlier echoes from structures bordering the Plaza. The hotel echoes, therefore, did not interfere with the subjec- ; tive evaluations in any way. 139 3. STATISTICAL SURVEYS 3.1 Origin of Shots According to Investigator J. Basteri, 692 people were present in the Plaza during the assassination. Two surveys of interviews and testimony given by some of these people have classified the witness reports as to the origin of gunfire into four categories: the TSBD, the Knoll, Other (not TSBD or Knoll), and Don't Know (origin uncertain). J. Thompson's compilation in Stix Seconds in Dallas of 190 witness reports is summarized in Table I. TABLE I. THOMPSON'S ANALYSIS OF ORIGIN OF SHOTS. 33 6 126 190 17.3% 3.2% 66.3% 100% This sample of 190 is 27.4% of the total available witnesses. It is difficult to know what, if any, bias is present,in the selec- tion of these witnesses. The sheer size of the sample makes it difficult to believe that a sizeable seléction bias was present. It is also difficult to predict the effect of a selection bias, ale one were present. How could one tell what the witness was likely to report prior to the interview? People were scattered over a large area of the Plaza, but we do not know if equal proportions were selected from each area. This factor could influence the results, since analyses reveal that a person located near the kgoll was more likely to report the knoll as the origin of the shots than any other location; Similarly, a person located near the TSBD was more likely to report the TSBD as the origin of the shots than any other location. 140 — | The House Committee compilation is drawn from witness inter- views by the Dallas Police Department and the FBI and from sworn testimony in the Warren Report. The total number of reports in this survey is 178. With very few exceptions, all these people appeared in the 190 sampled by Thompson. Similar sample-selection © uncertainties apply here as well. The House Committee analysis is summarized in Table II. TABLE II. HOUSE COMMITTEE ANALYSIS OF ORIGIN OF SHOTS. Xe) 21 30 78 178 27.5% 11.8% 16.9% 43.8% 100% Over half the sample had some opinion as to the origin of the shot; the majority of these reported the origin as the TSBD. Twenty-one witnesses reported the Knoll as the source, 30 reported some other location, and only 4 witnesses gave more than a single location for the shots. The four reporting a dual or multiple location are counted as "Other" in Table II. Of the 49 witnesses pointing at TSBD, 13 were at the depository itself, 16 were in the motorcade, and the remainder were scattered throughout the area, including at the Sheriff's Office, the overpass, the knoll, and the triangular park. A breakdown of these reporting the knoll as the origin of the shots show that 2 of 21 were located on the knoll. Eight were on the curb along Elm St. on the knoll side or on that side of the motorcade traveling down Elm St. Four were near the TSBD. One was on the east side of Houston. Five were in 10 141 the triangular area bordered by Elm, Houston, and Main, and one was on the railroad overpass. An analysis of the "Other" responses showed no obvious pat- tern. Some witnesses at the TSBD point toward Houston St.; others point down Elm. Similarly, those at the Sheriff's Office point in an arc ranging from west of TSBD to the railroad overpass. Comparing this statistical analysis with Thompson's, the most striking discrepancy is the relatively low percentage of witnesses reporting origins other than the knoll or the TSBD in Thompson's compilation. Another important difference is in the relative number of people pointing at the TSBD vs the knoll. Al- though the categorization of a given response is somewhat arbi- trary, the major discrepancy in the two compilations must be laid to a difference in classification of responses making up the compilations. Zapruder is listed in the Thompson survey as pointing to the knoll, while his sworn testimony before the Warren Commission was as follows:* Liebeler: But you didn't form any opinionat that time as to what direction the shots did come from actually? Zapruder: No. Hence, House Committee staff placed his response in the "Don't Know" category. 3.2 Number of Shots The House Committee compilation also categorized witness re- Sponses according to number of shots attributed to the four *Warren Report, Vol. 7, p. 572. 11 BEI 29910 57g: 1 49 142 different categories of origin. This analysis is summarized in Table III. TABLE III. NUMBER OF PEOPLE REPORTING VARIOUS ORIGINS AS A FUNCTION OF THE NUMBER OF SHOTS REPORTED No. of Shots Reported Reported Origin Don't of Shot 2 £.0Yoa 3 Know Total 2 38 2 1 46 .5)* (1.9) (35.5) (1.6) (2.4) Don't Know *Expected number of judgments if origin and number of shots are independent judgments. tgeven other witnesses report 1, 4-5, 5, 6, or 8 shots. Reports as to the number of shots range from 1 to 8. Of the 178 witnesses, however, the vast majority, 74.2% (132/178), reported 3 shots, and the mean number reported was 2.98. Given the scatter in the reported sources of the gunfire, one tenable hypothesis is that only people in certain locations might hear the knoll shot. We therefore sought to investigate to what extent the data matrix was interrelated, i.e., to what extent does one judgment influence the other? One test for Ae 143 this interrelation is to assume the converse — namely, that the Judgments are independent and to determine how well we can predict the entire data matrix on the basis of this hypothesis. The expected number, which is given in parenthesis beneath the number of people actually reporting, is calculated by determining the probability of each report from the margins and assuming that a particular cell, the intersection of that row and column, can be calculated from the product of the probabilities. For example, 20/171 = .117 report the shot coming from the knoll and 132/171 = -772 reported 3 shots. Thus, the joint occurrence of both events, assuming they are independent, is (.772) (.117) = .09, and the expected number of such reports is (.09) (171) = 15.4. The number of people reporting shots in this cell of the matrix is 11, 4 or 5 fewer than expected. ‘By and large, the predictions are excellent, and there is'no reason to Suspect that the two responses are other than independent. 13 144 4. REPORTS OF TRAINED OBSERVERS On August 20, 1978, Dr. Dennis McFadden of the Psychology Department of the University of Texas and Dr. Frederick Wightman of the Department of Audiology at Northwestern University listened to the three sequences of shots fired during the acoustical re- construction and recorded their impressions. Appendix A contains a transcription of their notes. Their reports concerned the apparent origin of shots, any apparent secondary sources or echoes, how loud the shots were, and any other remarks they felt appropriate. Initially, we were uncertain as to how easy it would be to determine the correct location and what degree of consistency there would be among the observers. Hence, for the first sequence, and during most of the second, the observers were located about 1 m apart and in such a way that I could see and compare their responses. The approximate observer locations for each sequence are indicated in Fig. 4. During the first sequence, Dr. Wightman correctly localized all 17 shots, and Dr. McFadden missed only 1. Their general qualitative descrip- tions and descriptions of the reverberations were also highly consistent. We were, therefore, more confident about the consistency of the reports, and during the latter part of the second sequence, Dr. McFadden moved from his original location at the curb at the top of Elm directly in front of the TSBD, to across Elm on the southwest corner of Elm and Houston. For the third sequence, Dr. Wightman and I observed from the grassy triangle formed by Elm, Houston, and Main Sts., while Dr. McFadden observed from the railroad tracks, above the northern curb of Elm. 14 E 145 FIG. 4. OBSERVER LOCATIONS AT DEALEY PLAZA. 15 146 My own impressions and the reports of Dr. William Hartmann, investigator of the "jiggle analysis," were very similar to the McFadden and Wightman, although my own hearing is those of impaired by about 50 dB in my left ear. The primary manifesta- of this difficulty was my failure to hear some echoes if tion they occurred to my left. Thus, it would seem that our observers, because of their special training and experience, are only slightly more acute concerning nuances of the echoes and rever- berations and, perhaps, in separating the shock wave and the blast wave than are untrained people. The emotional condition of our observers during the test and the emotional condition of the people during the assassination were undoubtedly quite different. The influence of such emotion on the localization judgment may be quite large, but there is no way to quantify this factor. 4.1 Test Conditions The shot sequence was unknown to both of the observers. Because repeats of certain shots were requested during the sequence, I was also uncertain — despite knowing the planned sequence. We requested three motorcycles to be running during the test to provide some background noise that would approximate the orig- inal listening conditions in Dealey Plaza. Unfortunately, these newer motorcycles were not very noisy, but the shots were so loud that any reasonable level of background noise would have been low in comparison with the shots themselves. Our listening conditions were, therefore, essentially representative of those at the time of the assassination, except for our being able to hear some very-low-level, long-delay echoes that originally might have been inaudible. 16 147 Our observers did know that there were only two possible locations for the marksman, whereas there was considerably more uncertainty on this issue at the time of the assassination. Signal uncertainty of this kind generally does not seriously degrade the accuracy of judgments, but it does depend on the number of potential alternatives. In this case, das we shall see, the localization reports made by the trained listeners ‘were, for the most part, of general areas, rather than specific windows of a building. The total number of potential locations was not, therefore, large and, thus, was likely to be represen- tative of localization responses given at the time of the assassination. 4.2 Analysis of Observers' Localization Responses The descriptive comments made by the observers are difficult to compare with any degree of precision. However, there was clear agreement in their reports with respect to the apparent loudness of the sounds and echoes and the apparent size of the © acoustic image. After each test shot, we asked the two observers to guess whether the shot was fired from the TSBD or the knoll, independent of what the apparent locus might be. Table IV is an analysis of this forced-choice data. TABLE IV. ACCURACY OF FORCED-CHOICE RESPONSES AS TO ORIGIN (TSBD OR KNOLL) Sequence Dr. Wightman Dr. McFadden 12/12 100% 11/12 92% Overall Overall Agreement 82% 17 148 The average accuracy of the reports is nearly 90%, and the consistency between the two observers is 82%. Also, the average accuracy is nearly exactly the same whether the shot came from the TSBD or the knoll. Thus, this analysis shows high accuracy in localizing the source of the sound and reasonably good con- sistency. ; 4.3 Loudness and Apparent Size of Acoustic Image All observers rated the rifle shots as very very loud, and they were unable to understand how they could have been described as a firecracker or backfire. Only the pistol, which was subsonic, produced a moderate loudness. Practically all the rifle shots, whether fired from the knoll or the TSBD, appeared to be diffuse and to occupy a very large acoustic space. For example, the sound did not seem to come from the sixth floor window of the TSBD, but from the right upper side of the building. This apparently large source loca- tion may be a result of acoustic scatter of the muzzle blast — either because of the building in the case of the TSBD or because of the trees in the case of the knoll. Only the pistol shot appears to have a reasonably constrained acoustic image and, for that reason, could be localized with some precision. One might consider whether silencers would change the appar- ent loudness of the size of the image. The Garinther-Moreland study* reports the average attenuation produced by a number of silencers as being about 18 dB for all weapon-silencer combina- tions. Sound from the supersonic weapons tested were attenuated *"Acoustical Considerations for a Silent Weapon System: A Feasibility Study," 1966, p. 70. 18 149 by 18.6 dB and 37.5 dB, but even with this reduction, the peak overpressure was still very large. Two rifle-silencer combina-= tions produced peak overpressures of 138 dB and 120 GB at 3.8 m, clearly loud enough to be easy to locate and clearly audible above the motorcycle and crowd noise. 19 150 5. CONCLUSIONS 2 It is difficult to draw any firm conclusions relating the reports of witnesses in the to the Plaza possible locus of any assassin. Confusion between the shock wave and muzzle blast, front-back reversals, confusion caused by echoes, and the startle of the witness could all be used to impeach the testimony of any particular witness. There is no way of knowing which, if any, of these factors was most significant with respect to any single observation made on November 22, 1963. Thus, one witness can be assigned no more credibility than any other. For example, even if a shot was fired from the TSBD, the witnesses on the standing knoll would likely report the source of the shot in the following way. The witness would presumably localize on the basis of the shock wave. With the path of the bullet behind the President's car, the witness would perceive the apparent locus of the shot as being on a line from himself to the bullet's path — i.e., in the street or open park behind the path of the bullet. .Since this location is impossible, a front-back reversal is likely. This front-back reversal would place the source 180° behind the bullet path and, hence, on the knoll. Despite this uncertainty, two general remarks seem worthwhile _ one based on the test, the other on the statistical analysis. First, it is hard to believe a rifle was fired from the knoll. Such a shot would be extremely loud, even if silenced, and it would be hard to imagine anyone in the vicinity of the knoll missing such an event. An unsilenced pistol firing sub- sonic bullets also seems unlikely because this shot was the easiest to localize of all the shots fired. It produced the least reverberation. As an acoustic image, it was much sharper 20 e ee AP ee Sh CO t os =~) gt 151 and less diffuse than that of the rifle, sounding much like a firecracker. It is, however, conceivable that had a pistol been fired from the knoll at about the same time a rifle was fired from the TSBD, the pistol shot would have been less easily localized, or even completely masked from some vantage points. As an isolated shot, however, it is extremely easy to localize. Finally, if one accepts the hypothesis that a marksman fired from the knoll and that other shots were fired from Some other location, then it seems most unlikely that only 4 of 178 witnesses would report a single location as the origin of the shots. Despite the various causes of confusion in the locus of any Single shot, a second shot from a different location should be distinctive and different enough to cause more than four witnesses to report multiple origins for the shots. el 152 APPENDIX A. TRANSCRIPTION OF OBSERVERS' NOTES The tabular information in this appendix was transcribed notes made during the acoustical reconstruction on from August 20, 1978 by two trained observers — Dennis McFadden and Frederick Wightman. Included in this table, along with their responses, are the number of the shot in each sequence of test firing, the. origin of the shot, and the target fired upon. For convenience in determining the positions of rifle, target, and listener, the reader may refer to Fig. 4 of this report. Abbreviations used within the table are as follows: - TT always refers to the TSBD and K to the knoll. * In the column headed origin, Tp means the rifle was fired in the plane of the sixth floor window of the TSBD, T, means the muzzle was withdrawn 2 ft from the plane of the window, K indicates a rifle shot from the knoll, and Ky represents a pistol shot from the knoll. [‘y :4aAuasqg Sluuag uappe4joW u014D007 :[ ug ssnab yzdou fO ug 300419 ur quoaf fo aapnidoz uo242180d padu04 +SeLg ous 10y929 pue ON : uLbiuo yabuey asuodsey Szuawbpne SARM-N S}USsUMWO) r L . L dass é ar a ‘om °004 putysq Buoy Sutyyeuog L ce L quezezstq AQTTeNb is o wey, “ON —T *yqnos d ssaq worms dash gUu0TPeIeqIaAsI Buoy 153 UuoTPBIeqIsAsI € A-2 T L ‘saz dzeys passy & dreys “qgnos youroynq OSsTe Ld *yoeio *atTzznu ATTeOTYsn guoTI osy woury ddsah t teT—Tngpny} L uOoTPBIEqIeAsI Buoy iE uoTYeteqi Wolf aAer Ld ueyy *ON “€ *yY4QNos AMoysMIOSg ddsb You OS YoTI £9TZzny) ( se ‘ON °€ S L l L 7eYMouI0G Kaj YOTA *ATTBOTYSNooe : d Jedisysueyy aqkey se dds Auese 4 0% G¢ ‘ON °h ON *saoyoa Z 04 € JO wey}? snotaqo *yoevio Trea Jat pue Jeyeemwey} Zuo14s T Wors ‘yynos Tlv suotyereqr WoOLy aaarz “yqnos 9 T L oN 1 *yoBIo Az9,Q yonm OXTT “ON “S z c ‘saz 3SBTq L sdeysag you os yon ~TeAerI bd pue *yYoeio uoTyereq dash dds WoOry “yqnos *Tazoy aNnTQ parBao4y JOAO LTB UT YATY Buyeq 4F Jo eoustsedxe ue OsTy *99.71N0s Jo eBpetaouy fq paqoajse guyeq ATqeqoad e1v s{ueU -Apnf uoyqezypTwooyT *suoy4 -B19qQ19A01 SNOTAGO ON *pnort *ssond *BuoT 004 ST44TT I ‘T0498Td *TTouy a sseT yonm €T JO PUTy “ON uo 4ysTr ayy OL y £ D| @ 4nq ALeyoVI9ITJ *uoy ysenb *sUuOTVBseqIaAaI ou ATayntosqe ‘punos 4yovdu0o ‘UTA TTouy ey : SNOTAGO ON *YORIO ON uo 4uATaA ayy OF y € y ZT pnot Asse, ‘*dumf om epuy *uoysnoy uo ‘Taj O8 punos. ALeyOUIIOITS asnoy 44no0o pawAo4 480K ‘UOTYWteqsterAes snTd “AT paauypad JO puyy pReeys9erQ Tt 154 — yOUIQ "sa, *BUOTYBOOT OTA TITOW y € re ATT@FRTUT punos davys eTsuyg A-3 ‘uysTs0 ssn ITP YYXTS 4B BZTTBSOT OF eTqytssodmy *£,,4J39T 944 04, ATuo suveu esuodses B 8B CASE {AOPUTA TOOTS *yqnos : a *yourg “saz dadab L € Ae OT worry sUuoTYWIeQI9AeL Au] *pepusTq 9ATA ‘ou puptyeq *yuqnos -N puw 4enTq u9sA9 10 TTOUY WO, UOTYWISIGIBAGT JB9TO ON ‘yours daeys uo ATT@9I YON w jou SON ‘prey AM 1eA0 y z y 6 ‘aousTsedxe SAT SSR SUC ‘yours pup qauTq ‘sox dash ds é fr g *) ‘ON OMFT Yonu Axa, eee BACM-N sjuawbpne asuodsay yabue, ulbil4Q “ON S$}UdUMIO) pue 991049 10us 7s5e19 paou04 (*3U0D) ‘T'W Ty (*3u0D) padu04 04S L0y)399 ‘on utbiug yeabue, asuodsay Szuawbipne SACM-N S}UsWMWO) qT x € ee a a aS x Of, ayy UTI “ON ysne ONTT ‘ON “ET d eTIUTS ssediepun/TTouy ‘yoedwoo Aouanbsrj-yZty ‘punosON SNOTAGO ~BieqisAeI *suoty asauy, 4seT omy ToysTd sqzoys Wors TTOUy papunos 04 ano *4Uu8TI q 4n you os ATsnotTaqo wory se PIP ‘oN SET ‘ON ET DUB ‘ON {T putyeq ar3M eiom SYTT WOLJ *ssediaa0 ST L t L ddsa ON) ‘sax I yUTYyy «za, dieys ‘ytoder d TewtutTW aTo£01070 uo m ‘os “189 ‘uoTAeraqr arog ‘ON ysne e@aAaZ (°ST ATUTSYsem8 atdnoo jo *ss0yde 155 dzreys *qya1odea1 A-4 9T L uf L ddsi ATeyTutjeq f£440eI1gpoo punog “uoTIBIeqIeAsT ATeyTUTsJep “sak eaTzzny€ 09 t poos *“se0yoes unbaq 38 “ddSL PeMoTTos £q ATaA dzeys *yoero qi y ur y uo [Touy £440a1d *uTBeyI90uUn 31g ,,*dod,, pepunog eXTT rez putTyeq ‘om sqkey ysnfiN e8ret [oystd Teyjerueyy éTOFST ‘*aTIT4 YON IveTo qnoge ‘woTAerTEq YUTYL reAar eteyy sea ue oye payeootT IaA0Aq *yons4 yoniy] sea UayyUO MN TJeUuIOO JO UTBW pues uoySsnoH * payutod 4seMUO [‘uTeW TY (°7uU0D) wors ddsh 2% UuO14DIOT ‘uzq [oO ep1s YzLOU UO y]DMep1s uN (éut1q O81D) 700048 ap1s 4s8em-ysKe ssouoD padu04 OYS yse 39104) ‘ON uLbiuQ yobue, asuodsay sjzuawbpne Lg pue 18 L Ti iF ATPOSITG *pesyzavao0 suo 3tq *Yooys atdnog gO 3ACM-N d ysne ‘ON euo AI9A yeom SUOTJBIAqGIeAeT SUSUMU) BSuLTMOTTOS °*4t aa1sspu pue *£VTep BuoyT ATTeIOL *punos JuesteslItTp worsy asnjjIp rs L T 1 peeyzeag — you “T = *T AT}OSe1Tp *ysnoyy ‘ON UoTyeooT weyy 156 “TeooT I UMOP pezt PUTY Am JUOTZ zedzreysg pey qdSL gO pesy A=-5 WLY UMOP STUL] ST 94} ySeM-qs¥a WTA UT quorJJo [‘ddSL JO esnedeq peusmmy *SUTYTe? € L T te peeyteao [T z “ON *ON puesut 2“ON uf b e L UWeeM4eq pesyteAGQ pue 04% 1aesu014¢9 pue Jaesuot keTap a Tq SrTeyMeMIOg suUO0S se1Zaep uo SON suoTyeteqteass snotasid wey} *ssoudzeys 0° atdnoo jo *sqzoyus suo*punos quSTY (WTa) 344 UMOp * q2013S ssedizeAo G A Z 7 peaytaagQ ayy Yyonm Ara, *y ‘ON SB oues 4 ‘SON tf € WoIg pooe ssoyds 04 *punos pu2zyeaq “eu Worg “CaSL 9 y Z ¥ Bere T[TOUY suo yonw@ £10¥STd e@ YON A£44e1g TayoRB1IIIATF ‘“HOBIO “ysnoyy Ty (°2U09) 46-129 +Se1@ OUS pue -on ulbiug yobuel asuodsay 0 - squewbpne OACM-N S}UdUIO) § etalrib ee ee a ae a a a aa a L i ee SS = 79 AR peeyteag fon eTZuts soeptsag seoyde WoIZ enTq d mw *punos oY Te ‘eerie408e@ poos 2Uu0 wouyAM 4yjeT uMop) uoysnoy Ad (449 7eq4 4,usea paeketep Azan 8 “i paey04 *BuoT *TT94 msn TToOuy sere ynq ai0m04 246212 JO ‘*4T ul oqezes *suTyy 6. > ATaqTUTJEq TTouy = yoeduop"pnyz 157 93T94T7 uoTyereqteaer JT ‘Aue A-6 2TO4STd OT y TTouy Jetag ydod,, ATayOeIDeITY Ydeoxes @ STITT it £TO4FSTd qsoyeom 004 BSuoT pue@ eT49TT 004 9dINOS OS *I@J MOT *Xouenbery Te y TTouy dog juns aM pey Paessoio 42e14s pue d [OYSTd ‘uTeze ouregse OT daU0s04 pueys UT qUOIZ JO Op-3y JO “OT <=) yopIY yonr4 JaaoAq 4yanod esnoy : UPTP) +, IoJ SsTYyy TeTI} “ATUO ystuTy (sTuq oT AF uMoOg “WTyY OSsTy 2oNee TEVe *pnorT asuep *punos euog d Zuote JUOIy -IMs 9e1d £4 yonu prides “uoTIeIaqIaAeI soeyJO dadsSL T “punos 04) ano q42TI (reer * Am peaou fpoq pue *pesy ‘uaemjzeq I pey (deSM pue UT “ON SGT I paeoy ATUO ‘auo ut UBYy euO OCYde SseT) UBYY JNogeOG) preey azo yuequodumt youq puTYyeqSTYR STTBAAOZ UT “ON qT I joVxY pBay UOTYBOOT ATIVITO freA wUOTyTSsodg *SpTqd esoy Tew wWory oyoe usey4y usuuelg,, pue eTzzny 9 *SsJUOTS peyseU ¢ ON TTouy ¥ t DI ST *asvoyyzaou wWory yroder A-7 pity. pue puodss peyreu usyy UOT 4TSOg pue vere [Touy WoL sTzzny ae ueuuelg,, yw y nT “gous ay} 07 AQTTeNb ,,pnyyz-eTdt43z,, 10/pue ,pnyz—-seTqnop,, 158 TesTo @ SBM ate. pue Squesqe ATTet1eue? ao19aM J UOTYBOOT WOTJ sNOTAQGO OS sSUOTJBIAeqIeASI YoTs aun *‘QeyMeMIOS pegnu sBM 4SBTq aTzznu 9y4 yods yey WOT pue fs,UeMyIBY YYTM P410d08 UT Yonm sem soustsedxe AW ‘*qatoder s,uemyTeH UO YoYo OF B1EeY} OM YUSS UseTD *W'd PUB ‘sqzoYsS snoTasid UO UOTZBOOT BY} WOT ,puMos aTqnop,, TeeTo B pavey oy yey pPePBOTPUT PeY eH ‘“UBUzTeY Tita| UJTA ,,UOTYTSOg UBUUeIg SeUy,, eeu UMOP payoNodo ‘4ae14sS 34} SSOIO’ SBM JT SJOYUS OMQ YxXOU aYZ TOG ‘(eet qyusTI smo 04) CdSL *yoero jo as0ejams yuory BSuotTe usMop daeys AoA - pue IT@ UT YSTY powsess your pue eTzzny oe L t L €T S}USWO) SAPM-N sjuswbpne asuodsay yebue, uLlblug “ON pue 39 Loy) }0US yse1g paou04 (°240)) T°V T’y (*2U09) u014D007 :¢ ug sspdxapun aeao ay; z80u fztoyznos aun] fO "ug Pps2404 3seLg }0YS 9210y) pue ‘on ulbiug yebuel asuodsay szuawbpne SAPM-N $}UaWWO) rg ey x L as L ATeytutyeq ddsL ‘on eTZuts yon@ ptder oyde FJJo qamos d ‘evoare7ou *[TTOouy °4SeTq asnoyuo) Jeurod JO uoysnoy oF ZUFTI ATAUFTIS pues *(UTeW so ‘qqsL wots sanyounft JO € sdutpTIng 378 Ieur0S JO Wd pues *uojsnoy 159 2 L T L ATeyTuTseq dasL Son eTsuts V SeTIITITS1OW eSNJJTP UT a *DadD *4SBTq A-8 snooT weyQ ‘ON *T. worg sTYyy UOTPBOOT AOJ 944 YSITFomg sqaBreq J ATJUenbery presy *‘snozeumu ATqeuosear Buoiys saoyosa JjJO 944 squolj jo ayy s#urptinq BuTuTT UOJSNOH *4S Sp10d9ey) *SpTg_ pue 4ymmop *(asnoy UeqsO aizay4sBA Ue UoTSSeidMT JO wey} BSutuunaz Jjo ut ptdez souenbes WoIZ YZ1OU OF “UNOS FON os ZOZ 4aB71e4 UO UTeW °4S 228g “MOTSQ € %t t L ATezTuTJeq dash ON *YORIO suog poo# *se04de € 07 Hf “DainA mors Uo4sNoY *4g *SSPTQ t L 2 L ATS3TUTIEG “dash o yon JepnoTwey} SnoTasad d *sqous s10Mq ss0yoe*009 ¢ 04 9 TTB UTYUITA [T puooses ZO ‘os OsTy 407 amos oyds wou puTYyeq eNTQ) (T2304 nq 4T 4,USeMezaey Usyy UT) *(€96T *U949TIM SUOTY -oBel pus 4UusTeI4s sqzyZnoyy ae eT *queptjyuoo qa3 04 YSsBy 004 BuTMOD 4sBTq s10W ATTB2eT YON =ETTOUY “ddsL pue TTouy ueeajeq JO puTy *WeaM UOTELEgIeADZy ‘yoeaio auos *“zeeTo JON sddSL *sqzous ddadSb snotasid suos se pnot OS 40ON qdsL qd, *uoTyBIeqteaer Jo A\UeTG *yoBID suloS nf L A-9 *peystsied AquTezyteoun Jo BuTjTees sul, *sqgoyus snotaeid STTOUY ey} SspreMo} oom *4JeT 944 09 SLO YsNf ‘TTOUY ey} ye ezTTecoT ATTB2et 4,UPTP FT 160 ayy wey. qnq ‘sauo snotasrd worl UTBTIO s4yt UT 4yUeTesSTp aq OF peuless Q *ON *TTouy wory Butwod 3q of powiess auou 34nq ‘qgS] Woy oWos pue TTOUy Wors aq 07 poesoddns s1eM sMoOS Mauy IT “uOTYBOOT STUY WOIf-presy Sous ay} JO UTSTIO ayy 09 sB AQuTeyTE0UN AM azBoTPUT OF JUBeTI SBM JUSUMIOD 4SBT STUL ATpeyrew ‘os prenoy ynq you TTouy a.i10p “4F9T *snotasad su 09 ABM SBA 4T SYTT' ION uByy 1aqeTNs *s3pTq “4g uoyYsNoH Wory saoysoe aTzznu pues Aue 4*YOeIO B JO ezom Yon yous bol cqadsh nf d SARM-N ee $] UdUO) szuawbpne 31049 asuodsey yehue, pue qselg ulbiug ‘ON 70US paou04 (°7U0D) T'V EEE TT TW (°7U0D) seg 0YS pue “on utbiug yabuel asuodsay Sjuowbpne eee SAPM-N S}UdUMO) eee Lo nies 2.) ism. |) OT x € TTouy xTUTJep “ATE yeeq “punos aT441TT *suoTzet I eqisaer d £T09STd yUTYR944 AZuTeyIe0 qnoge uN TTouy UOTISZTTB UFTAOOT sTIT4 sqoUSABM eq yp) 04 (8 *420ys BSuorz4s UOTJETJex JJO I dasL *SpTq ATI9eITPputyeq 41 *(TTOUN)sTyL *9u0SF 9¥ smne& Toystd sea yon eiow yoeduoo pue ATIsea “PeZTTBooT TT L T Gass *ATOITUTIEp qoeduog ATTBOTY«*YOTI SNooy FSOWM =z a *punos payreu saoyde WoIy putyeq | om Jjo eNTq 161 co *Teqoy se ZT L T ‘utesy ATa4TuTJ §= ep qyoedmon ATIBq saoyos . You ATTeeI qgsy, *Ieutood “punos *Bu014s ynq ‘queserd ginyYg samoo JJoO) (JO JUOIT JO uoysnoH “49 *S2PTQ €T oo . Z ouregsB ‘ON 22T = hay yonw OXTT “ON ‘ZT d £44019 [[Teus snooj jo *“UOTYBZTTBIOT qT L 2 ouegse ~Z€T Treug == = *snooy 4UZTY #8 reurz0o Wty pue *uoysnoy ST x 2 dqdsh = yony sredazeysATIee ssoyoe gO uoYsnoH *9S *S2PTQ “Te as *yoeIo pood Ar13aA pue Og culesse G t u oe -- ZMOysMOS Iapnoy “Og sB sures nh ut cS Te “4S UTBW UMOP *aTZznu ON qVUSTI sAeCM—-N d es *yoeId pooy uo PeZTTBd0T nh t L 02 (* yous sty} jo ety *004 48 pejyieae pus aTZznu sulog UMOp PBdY PBy) d *a0TJJO ysod Jjo oyog *yoero pooy Laas L uf - oo 6T *4sBTq 344 BuTsouST pue oaea-N 94 ATUO Butsn ATABEeTO SCM I ‘°YS UTeW UMOP ATIOSITp ‘4sBe eNp sodmNOS B JO SUOTSSeIdUT YOUTISTp ATeA paesnoze szoys aseyy JO [Te (pe qreae SBM Pest Au pue BSUTITIM sem JT YOTYM ZuTAMp) 6T “ON JO uotqda0xe U4TM *(qqnos) 4YysTI AW 04 SBM YOTUM *4S UTBW JO qamd YyNos UO 4oesTeY 7B USsyey SOUS Jo JSepuTeUSEY A-11 162. “m344 putyeq pesSe{ But yt1M Am pue ysey omed TTS ‘QT “ON “LT “ON “9T “ON *SBPTQ °9S uo YSsNoH JgO snoTaqo Os 40N ‘asoTgZgo ysod Jjo oyde pooy *qgoeduo0g éTTOUuy xy € u Qt (MoTEeq ees) “OT “ON *** Moly seoyds poyIeu 7SOW se ores “QT ‘ON SB oureg L € * LT *suOS SB pnot se 4ou *TTouy eqkey d L 9gT S}UDUMIO) -- punos yoeduop ,agSL L ¢ SACM-N sjuawbpne asuodsay yebue, utblug “ON BDL0Y) 04S pue qseLg peodu04 (°7Uu09) T°V Ty °#U09) ( pa404 Seg 70US L04999 pue ‘on uLbiug yobue, asuodsey S}usawbpne SACM-N SUaUMO) ouesgsB “sA0qe nf amog uoTzeLeq JJo teaer ysod asdTZJO pue aNTq "T9904 9U2TY UMOp“N pooy *YOBVID OARA = qQU3TY UMOp uTeW “3S sr0W03 WET Aza, Tiny ptenoyCdSL punos SuoT) 10/pue TTouy pues -AOT 163 ynq You ATTB91 Aduenbeszs I 48 *4T S1oMm Woly ssan# J *(Ueoml qanoo *3pTqQ A-12 Z°y s4aduasqg peujy uewzYybBiM uU014.D00T :T un sspabB yzuou fo ung yoau7g ut zuouf fo dapnidnz uo1z180d paou04 quaueddy 0YS 399104) 3D4NO0S Aaepuoras -JdAay ‘on uLbiug yobuey asuodsay uoljdtusseaqg L0y)99 suo,}euaq sseupno7 E L 1h iL ddsL ssozoe (€)°98 € IO ty d u2ZTH Od 2 Lb T L adqsL ssozoe (€)°98 € IO ty : USTH d Od € aE 5 48 7 go ssozoe*4s € Io Usty d aqdsb Od. . t L T L adds Od 164 € IO U2TH d A-13 S L T L dash Od € pue4 sedzeyg Weyy T 0F 4 if dreys ssoyoe € Io *‘q ueyy 3Tq fSoyde seso0yoe Wor 9ByeTDUO0D °4S UT *ezeTd 9 L iu L FISD . Od € IO 4 ynoqy ayxTT*G gnq z “IeTINp be i re L daSL Od Yous 38 *daeyg 4 sutTuutseq 6 I ro DI TTouy — —— cee =m. 04 YUSTI (Mi JO) 2°v (°2U09) quaueddy 20yUS 3dunos Auepuosas —“aAey " ‘oN uLbiuQg abue, asuodsay uoLydtudseg LOY)3D suoLzeuaq ssaupnoy eee ee eee ee oeBe on ee ale ea ee A, OT L € L ddsL = dreys V eT34TT JeTI™Mpweg}*) d yoess 4e@ *Sutuutzeq TT 7, € L ads : Od a ‘ysedzeyg “qseTTems ov D:| € x TToOuy 09 *au0N -- ‘pno7 *TImp aZreT *punos d qusTa4 JO) “(Md St x € x Trouy sUON * *OT39TT1 ‘ext[-reyOVIO ‘uty d eT49TT *qievet ysnoy}y = *£Tyoesz9 rE 165 i ad =f qT DI € xy Trouy — -- *2T23TT gy T-eyoOVs1IeAT OAT * d ssediopun wors yqnos jo *TTouy GT L t L ddsL 2 — Od ssid “yoeip d sntTd sou Te 704 * 9T L t L aqdsh ul quory — nite TING * “MoTTOy *3TqQ 944 SsqtsAot *£Tuo Li x t y Trouy sem SuUTYOOT == ‘pnoT *TIMp esreT ut TrTouy *punos *uOT}OeITp "(9 pue _ sB ; Trouy ATreeTo ‘ se jou 4nq das~ ATreeTo you) 3WYsTs ¢ 4seTq -- -— pue eaogy L € L g *4J°T r quoiy ut 9uO — 3aoqge T d “48eTq 3Tq TH ss0yoe 2 pue T[Touy x € L is *soomos ayeredes [Teus *‘reaeTo you ‘pug ATre9aToO JO UTSTIO 4SBTQ ETI4TT = sjzous ¢ TTouy x FA ¥ 9 *TTouy preao>y = ae =< — peayzeag = Z “2 S ¢SeTq a in ry 166 peyoytd szeyzty *‘su014¢ — — TTouy y 2 L a ; <= ; (Tenbe) dds . ‘asnjjtp Area — 4SBTg = me pue TToOuy x T L € *quozj UT WOTsZ ssoyose quors Buoi4ys *4SeTQ sseT — a ut pues ddsh L T ve io “4Tez SABA YooyS ‘jo yeods (putyeq pus d SutTyoe19 ou *4seTq Btg -- 04 QateAcdr O*f eaoqe) dash Ae T J, T Se. Ad 2 ee ee ee ee ssaupnoy SsuoL}euaq 39L10y) uoljdiudsaqg asuodsay yebue, ulbiug “ON -JdAdyY Aaepuosas 30UNO0S 39 1L0y) 70US quaueddy paou04 wort ddSL 700m28 0870) (éuyq 78eM-7sve ap1s ssouoD Sug HX7DMaPIs UO YzLOU ap1sJO UOLZDOOT + UN (°7U09) 2°v padu04 qusueddy 20YUS 99104) 3dUNO0S Auepuosas -AdAay ‘oN ulbluQ yebue, asuodsay UOLJdLudsag 399104) SU0L}euag ssaupno7 Pe tite net e—antinemapegeSennen ete retiree ee 6 y € >| eTZutgTIMP ON QiavAet y8 -- TIng *9881Tq 4SseTq Wwolsy [Te— a4Tnb @ z TToOUuy — ou “pnyy *uoTSNjuOod OT x € x *TTouy-Te -— mer Sere a ysom putyeq a¥TT-o.re emyoniz4s -JayoBv1d3ITy eXxTT utSeTTeus,, 2xdam0s JO *TT@ A-16 TT LD € BI TTOUY OF 9FPT = 7 aaa d Jo exTT-o7e 167 amyoni4s ou —uOoT}sSenb estooid “UOTYEZTTBIOT Ty SYTT-Taeyoesr.9aI TTeus *20mMos ot L t L sAOGYpuBw PazBAo>yoe a a d TTOUuy _* QteAsy Wory Meu Te7zOy Zuo14s 4seTq IO YOous *SABM €T L t y *TTOuy eaoge — 2 — TeraAas *qiaaeI dzeys 3seTq — szeysTy "yoqtTd T BuoI4s -3TA},, deus , 10458OO€ ‘desu * Tayoeig =< i dads L = L 8 d *SuTysetd —- == ‘asngsitp ddsh L ote L z *(quorzy *4SB8TQ etoseq Hows -- — ut 20) ddSL L Z pt 9 *IaTTSeus ; ‘qseTq teuuTYyy ‘eTzuTS i = adadsL L 2 L S "JET 04 Qtovar d *(€S% UT se) Oye Te zOH -- TT? — ddSb L 2 L v4 "48BTQ sseT — zedaeyg °* feTep ; ZuotT 1a4gze oyoe Te 70H -- -- ads L qe L € “keTap d ZuotT Jeqjye oyoe Te 30H -- -- dds L is L 2 168 A-17 ; IOOTJ ad : 4qsBeTq ‘worg -- aS 439 GaSb L 1 L iE ’ "ug fo aun Ayaeyqnos 280uW aYy2 daao sspdiepun uQ :¢ Uu014DOOT 4seTq szedzeys ‘ET exTT qnoqe TToOuy ¥ t a ST 4S8TQ TINP : qieAar jo -- ne -- szo~T *TTOUY Ds t pt qT eee eS ssaupno7 suolzeuag 3991049 uolqdiuoseag esuodsay yahuey ulblug “ON -AdAay Auepuoosas 3dUNOS a2L0yu) 30yS quaueddy paouo04 (°2U0D) 2°V 2°v (°3U09) paduo4 _ qusueddy 20uUS 39104) 9DUNOS Auepuosas -AdAdy ‘oN uLbiuQg yebuel, asuodsay UOL{dLudseq 3210y) suoLzeuagq sseupno7 ee ae a eee oe crop esceemncey ecco es | € ¥ TTouy — 3Tq - ate she 4seTq — *‘SuTmoog peoiq eFeut araymM 2azooys "SBM OT pt € I TTouy — = a -= a , TTeus aomos astoeid-BD0T uot} *IIYOVBII3aITJ tl L T L dqgdsL -- -- 169 d NTT"9 A-18 ro L gE L adsi — ; 4 -- sro SutTyoe19 UeygOT €T i ro L ddsL -— oe BIg YsBeTqQ — S}OTJO d qdtaaer IOJg "des qT nf 2 nf daddsL —— — queasy UT SJUOrT STHFTT Z *syoeiro ST x c L ddadSLtO ut at = 3Tg 4seTq — “esngsIP ws Co ke 9T L € L *qgSsL ertom -— -- MOTTOH *4SeTqaeiom TBOOT d “e84Tutsep 0F 4WQ *ZOOTS 1A “tL € L ddsL -- =~ daeyg *6T PXTT v7 or TTOUy S2 SIOOTS daeus yours worg uyg oe = casi te TTouy “ddSL pue *ee ext a €2 *6T weyy 3SBTq SSeT ITeTTUTS 0% *6T A-19 yoVIO wey} *qseTq addsi pue [TTouy oe *sn *4s8TqQ gO 4UOTsZ UT QUSTI Worg 170 © - -— *TTOuy 3tq Tdé cues “61 <> “ddSL pue TTouy sB = 0d *TTOwy aaoqe st yoRszo d — 3SBTqQ ueuy SHoBIO oe ry “ddSL pues [Touy 6T Ar ui y [*(PeAom BdUEeTaM) ssoroe WoL OY are 93M] *4seTq *asnjysjtp *MOTTOH, os —— *TTouy 3tq x € x QT ssaupno] SUOL}eUaq uoL}dLuosaqg 1L0uU) 39 asuodseay yoebuel uLbiug ‘oN -AdAay ddUNOS Aaepuosas L0y)99 30US quaueddy padu04 (°7uU02) ov AppenpDuM A: Report ON THE TEMPERATURE IN Dawuas, TEx., NOVEMBER 22, 1963 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration ENVIRONMENTAL DATA SERVICE National Climatic Center Federal Building March 23, 1979 Asheville, N. C. 28801 -Reply to: D5422/MR/1bd/(09684) Mr. Gary Cornwell Deputy Chief Counsel-Select Committee on Assassinations House Office Building Annex No. 2 Washington, DC 22180 This is in response to your telephone call of 3/22/79. We are furnishing the materials listed below: DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE CERTIFIED COPIES: SURFACE WEATHER OBSERVATIONS Dallas, Love Field, Texas November 22, 1963 Daniel B. Mitchell Director NOAA FL 24-325 (Rev. 9-76) 172 ‘s— U. S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE , CD-64 Asheville, (REVISED) é North Carolina Dac 01°17 HXRKHIKK March 23 igus I HEREBY CERTIFY that the annexed is a true copy of the SURFACE WEATHER OBSERVATIONS for Dallas (Love Field), Texas, November 22, 1963 on file in the National Climatic Center, Asheville, North Carolina echnical Assistant Gra hea Information Services Division (Official title) I HEREBY CERTIFY that Clyde M. Branks who signed the foregoing certificate, is now, and was at the time of signing, Technical Assistant, Information Services Division, National Climatic Center and that full faith and credit should be given his certificate as such. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto subscribed my name, and caused the seal of the Department of Commerce to be af- Twenty- fixed this third day of March 3 one thousand nine hundred and Seventy-nine For the SECRETARY OF COMMERCE: Daniel B. Mitchell Director, National Climatic er Certifying Officer eso wo 5 Seanc 8c Roes SCRCE a fo REEEE Aha N soneCIRSRCRERCNOUCUMCRC Ii U1 asse TTT d SET aina i a fei a ae yf REL ERE ESESER CRE Bi=-129 0.- 79 - 492 ras fh an : dies aeae fa ene | * ey pei 173 [| day eA ACge ERtEERE KINSER S cayPRRSCERS ia: rE EC ERE PORPEEEPECS Ca Be aie aTERR F ve : it iTi: EE: Rere er leg pe rp SOP IF NAARAGRAR NRE Ty ose ENRET ? whe ei? we ng O59 eT CEEECEECELCE Be Be CeeEer EFEPERLEEEHite a i CECE SERGE ESSERE ettaal | Poa wri ech eee Pt 2| eH | aed Bh a a Oe SCREECECECeCRER ER RRR Sa S URDEcebeeeceee Creeer ESR UIa a £7 IORECKEERSREPS o_o REED fall [elEtEER /PERERESSO a} IS ae IS =e) fed OHA TeRCRERRERCRS cc Eee SIRE |__Lennee Lave 9 BT Tbh rae es : Ba BUT (OCRERSREREE ]| | RRESSSSERROONDrE ATO CCE Wet [Ya99l¢ §F] dole IdolTTT TTT ede NANANSAANAPORDS TTR SC a ETE TT TTT LETT BC aDCEE AUMMmN col hidddeedactt salt ralddde TIMI IN NY| [ia tia ivifi BECEEE ED 2p iadBRELSOTTESOTOCHTEGE tls tigig ig R Mt PAGE eCLONAMTEOTOOVOSHOOHND EET LETTE aL SOHNE LCCEMMIOTEOHOATOREATOVID rr) reer REEGCSEEELI FE ONOOROOTOOROOROL aT reeerd FEUCLACLAEPLLL EMDNEEHCC:BRUNNRERERUGUGGOGEED De — CEEECEEESUUAARER 175 AppENDUM B: Report on WInp ConpirTIons IN Daas, Tex., NovEMBER 22, 1963 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration ENVIRONMENTAL DATA SERVICE National Climatic Center Federal Building March 30, 1979 Asheville, N. C. 28801 Reply to: D5422/MR/1bd/ (09684) Mr. Gary Cornwell Deputy Chief Counsel Select Committee on Assassinations House Office Building Annex No. 2 Washington, DC 22180 This is in response to your telephone call of 3/22/79 and related correspondence. We are furnishing the materials listed below: DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE CERTIFIED COPY: WIND GUST RECORDER CHART Dallas Naval Air Station, Texas November 22, 1963 Daniel B. Mitchell Director NOAA FL 24-325 (Rev. 9-76) 176 U. S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Asheville, FORM CD-64 ; ) North Carolina PRESCRIBED BY Work M ee: 19 D.A.O. 201-17 the WIND GUST RECORDER 1 HEREBY CERTIFY that the annexed is a true copy of for Dallas Naval Air Station, Texas, November 22, 1963 CHART en ae onitile to the National Climatic Center, Asheville, North Carolina Technical Assistant Information Services Division (Official title) I HEREBY CERTIFY that Clyde M. Branks who signed the foregoing certificate, is now, and was at the time of signing, Technical Assistant, Information Services Division, National Climatic Center and that full faith and credit should be given his certificate as such. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto subscribed my name, and caused the seal of the Department of Commerce to be af- fixed this Thirtieth day of one thousand nine hundred and For the SECRETARY OF COMMERCE: bela We Whe Daniel B. Mitchell irector, National Climatic Cente Certifying Officer aehy a, Baie Poe Aesae FaaRes?ACHE a St picket, 3is 4% Rares Fp ho hot J Hho hE le op ad \ae Pin ~~ a ae 183 ApDENDUM C: Memoranpum From G. Rosert BLAKEY TO THE SELECT COMMITTEE ON ASSASSINATIONS ON THE MANNLICHER-CARCANO Fririna Trst MEMORANDUM TO: ALL COMMITTEE MEMBERS ay FROM: G. Robert Blakey, Chief Counsel and Director GP an? Ke SUBJECT: Test on Mannlicher-Carcano DATE: March 22, 1979 Yesterday, with the assistance of Sgt. Cecil Kirk and other members of the D. C. Police Department, the staff conducted a second test of the time necessary to fire two consecutive rounds from a 6.5 mm Mannlicher-Carcano rifle similar to that found on the 6th floor of the Texas School Book Depository on November 22, 1963. The test was conducted primarily to answer the question, would it have been possible for Lee Harvey Oswald to fire two shots in less than 1.7 seconds? Our test shows that it is. As you recall, the estimated trigger pulls for the shots that the acoustics analysis identified as #1 and #2 occurred approximately 1.66 seconds apart. (See my previous memo on correlating the shots) In addition, the test was designed to provide some insight into the difficulty Oswald would have encountered in firing three consecutive shots within 8.31 seconds, at least two of which were less than 1.7 seconds apart, and at least two of which hit the targets at the noted ranges. From knowledge of the difficulty involved in so shooting, it may be possible indirectly to infer something about the probability, as opposed to the possibility, that Oswald did so. Nevertheless, even the most improbable event may have occurred. Thus, to answer the ultimate question of whether Oswald did fire the first two shots 1.66 seconds apart and hit his target at least once in so doing, as much information as available in addition to that gathered in yesterday's testing should obviously be taken into consideration. This, of course, was what the Committee did in reaching its decisions on Decem- ber 29, 1978, when it reviewed the previous test firing data, together with other evidence such as the acoustics analysis, and the physical evidence (e.g. the three empty shell casings found on the TSBD 6th Farsi The test was conducted yesterday between 10:00 a.m. and noon at the Lorton Correctional Facility firing range in Virginia. The National Archives, represented by Mr. David Paynter, brought the Oswald rifle (C.E. 139) for use in the test, but bench rest firing tests and operation of the weapon established that it was in too poor condition to be used. (The Committee's Firearms Panel had previously noted the weapon's deterioration since 1963, and their final report reflects the specific nature of the deterioration). Consequently, a similar weapon was used for the actual testing. This rifle was one of the two previously used in August, 1978 for the tests in Dealey Plaza and will be turned over to the Archives as part of the Committee's files at the end of this month. 184 20 feet The shots were fired from a two story tower (approximately of 143, 165 high), at three targets, statjgned from left to right at distances and 266 feet from the tower.— The rifle was shot by four expert marksmen Masson, and E. E. from the D.C.P.D., Officers D. M. Smith, B. L. Miller, Joe Counsel Gary Cornwell] Lewis, and two inexperienced staff members, Deputy Chief the Also present were Sgt. Cecil Kirk and Officer M. D. Gonzales, and myself. D.C.P.D. Range Instructor. Al] members of the D.C.P.D. who fired the rifle had prior military experience. Officers Lewis and Smith had additional exten- had Masson sive civilian training in the use of rifles, while officers Miller and similar extensive trainingin the use of handguns. Each of the officers thus can be considered experts in the use of such weapons. Gary Cornwell and I have had neither military nor civilian training in the use of firearms, although I hunted with rifles as a boy, and Cornwell has hunted with rifles periodically throughout his adult life. Each shooter practiced working the bolt for several minutes (usually 2 to 3 minutes) before shooting. All shots were fired using open iron sights. All times were determined by 3 handheld stop watches. Only 35 shells were fired, including those expences in preliminary tests to determine if the weapon operated properly.—£/ Each officer fired two series of three shots and Cornwell and I each fired one series of two shots. The test established the following: (1) The weapon can be quite accurately fired more rapidly using open iron sights than the FBI tests in 1963 indi- cated, where the telescopic sight was used. For example, Officer Masson, during one test series, hit the body silhouette at 143 and 165 feet on the first two shots, and missed the head portion of the silhouette at 266 feet on the third shot by approximately one inch (1"), taking 2.0 seconds between shots 1 and 2, and a total of less than 5 seconds for all three shots. Two other series, one by officer Smith and another, again, by Officer Masson, were fired in which only 1.9 seconds elapsed between two shots, and one of the three shots scored a "KiT1"_S/ ah The distances were chosen upon the assumption that the 4th shot (Oswald's third) hit the President in the head at frame 312. _2/ We found that the weapon was characteristically difficult to operate, due to its poor basic design, and in addition, the particular weapon we used had badly worn riflings and therefore shot somewhat inaccurately. _ _3/ Normal target range body silhouettes, portraying an individual from waist to head, were used as targets. A "kill" was judged to be any shot that hit the silhouette. A "miss" was scored even if the bullet struck the target background, but not within the silhouette. 185 (2) It is apparently difficult, but not impossible -- at least with only minimal practice with the firearm used -- to fire 3 shots, at least two of which score "kills", with an elapsed time of 1.7 seconds or less between any two shots, even though, in the limited testing conducted, no shooter achieved this degree of proficiency. (3) It is not difficult to fire two consecutive shots from a Mannlicher-Carcano within 1.66 seconds, and to "point aim", if not carefully "sight" it, on the target on each shot. Cornwell fired the rifle twice in 1.2 seconds, and I fired it twice within 1.5 seconds. In both cases the second shot missed, but was close to the silhouette. In fact, my second shot only missed the silhouette by approximately 2". (4) There was ample time for Oswald to have fired 3 shots, hitting with two of them, within 8.31 seconds. Al] series of 3 shots were fired in less than 8 seconds, two were fired in 5 less than 7 seconds, two in less than 6, and two in less than 5.2 _—_ _4/ The first shot in the test series, of course, routinely scored "kills" since there was no time pressure imposed in aiming the rifle in preparation for that shot. _5/ In light of the difficulty involved in making the first two shots in 1.66, I note that showing that it is possible does not offer any reason why he would have acted so quickly after the first miss. he ~ F ar haat - pe - fy C- ved a it 1 ee 6 ' ne A Ete? 22an : oe NSoe > ime ae a wt 7 Beh fii NGISG «2,3 J a s an P Se Pitt eos, Ry ae oa i ey Sat ganitger eR eaO0 nal ovis, ox TT esi +s . : a PY £ aT ul i ot St be Mans! e,t, * "i ae 4 beghl eo aoa? deat ac 12; Wt ad Rice ns ’ mA ai) suhas af. touit fy ios eae age Pi ue J¢ Ag panes 4 2 jntesay 720' ‘ 7 s 2 ve eae 2 TR “apes ‘3 ‘ ~ » be i; = @ \ bt xi tage. "3. Bey “Th oa : ‘d paraph. FEA, apa pte Pen iid einer ie a : <4 fe 8 s75> {eo OKs eeay aese 2 gatie At = 2c chy a PU oa wt2 tnt 41. 4B; <- Pee a. ‘ wos peta! ety oF tee’,mia 4) oa: {nes Say seals Pips ‘marie itt nt dota ; wt Stabs may eohabasuls hesqueristages ana: an ‘ b ng , (re *Or ag 4 1s f ct “sont os Pines rf hats a, se ot me : . @ ye den cack setae ¢as, ; * ae 1 teeth Bag, Veta ADEM fp eh , a be (, hut ae \ d teat? i ; Le t * hs Pa aT, yea sats. of‘ ier + PKS pee anisee80d7 1.Ser es ‘age sa} bra a ara 2: Ay! dtu had dog anal a hee resumption J ii ty , Epa aahi = hist ere ‘a ' a ee Ghirartat Hieeenee Me ; igi Ge iMag. ped Hee iePak: . i THE ANALYSIS OF YURI NOSENKO’S POLYGRAPH EXAMINATION Submitted by Richard O. Arther, President, Scientific Lie Detection, Inc., New York, N.Y., and Director, National Training Center on Polygraph Science Report to the Select Committee on Assassinations U.S. House of Representatives Ninety-fifth Congress Second Session March 1979 (187) CONTENTS Paragraph ae ee en ee 1 Introduction_.-:---~--=-+=—---<--- <- <2 ---n == aan on sens ooo se aee eenl ee -- Selection of the expert. .--122¢---2-b2 4-82-40 -- Sa ee ee 11 ProcedUteS +2 --ea.- 2b cere oo oe ne een oe eens Bpahn enh a2indo cshnnnnnanon ssn 13 A polygraph examination. -_—--------2-2-35-3- co a ce ee eee eee 18 Findings and conclusions of Richard O. Arther "on eae ea oe 18 Materials examined .2.--{22--202---=L2 +2 $4 ne nn 8 seen esata ene 8 eer ee eee 21 2 2-2 on anne noe nn aan ee eee ee eee Procedures. 5009 oT Evaluation of the polygraph examinations- - -------------------------------------- 52 Comparison of the 1966 and 1968 examinations - .--_--------------------------------------------- nace eee kone 55 Opinions. «<2. --+-~-6- -a2—4-2e n-nense sas ae 9 anne INTRODUCTION* (1)** As part of its investigation into the possibility that Lee Harvey Oswald was involved in a conspiracy to assassinate John F. Kennedy, the select committee looked into whether he might have been a Soviet agent. (2) One controversial source of information on this point has been a former high-ranking KGB official, Yuri Ivanovich Nosenko. No- senko had been, on two occasions, in charge of coordinating surveil- lance and recruitment of American tourists in Russia. At the time of Oswald’s defection to Russia, Nosenko claimed to have personally reviewed Oswald’s file. | (3) In February 1964, Nosenko defected to the United States and was placed under custody of the Central Intelligence Agency. Because of strong doubts within the Agency that Nosenko was a bona fide defector, he was later placed in solitary confinement for 3 years. He was subjected to extensive interrogation, and during three periods took polygraph examinations: April 4, 1964; October 18, 1966; and Au- gust 6, 1968. The examinations were wide-ranging, but only the second dealt with Oswald in any depth. On all occasions, Nosenko maintained categorically that the KGB had never been interested in Oswald and had never used him as an agent. (4) The polygraphist conducting the first two tests concluded that on the first test Nosenko had lied, though not to the Oswald question. On the second, he had lied to two of the Oswald questions. Another polygraphist conducted the third test. He concluded that Nosenko was answering truthfully. (5) In the 1970's, the CIA investigated the overall handling of the -Nosenko matter and concluded, with respect to the first two polygraph tests, that they should be considered “invalid or inconclusive” because of deficiencies in the way they were conducted. For example, the first had been designed principally to create a hostile atmosphere for Nosenko. The polygraphist was instructed to tell Nosenko that the tests showed he was lying, regardless of what they actually showed. (The expert, in fact, interpreted the results as showing that Nosenko was lying.) However, the CIA did conclude that the third examina- tion was valid and that the results could be considered credible. (6) The Warren Commission was aware of the Nosenko issue, but was unable to make much of it since most of the material was classified ‘and unavailable. Similarly, critics of the Warren Commission have ‘not dealt with it in any depth. *Materials submitted for this report by the committee’s polygraph consultant were compiled by HSCA staff members G. Robert Blakey and Whitney Watriss. **Arabic numerals in parentheses at the beginning of paragraphs indicate the paragraph number for purposes of citation and referencing; italic numerals in parentheses in the middle or at the end of sentences indicate references which can be found at the end of each report or section. (189) 9 46-129 0 - 79 - 13 190 endent analysis of (7) The select committee decided to have an indep nation had never the polygraph tests conducted. First, such an exami had been prop- been carried out. Second, it wished to know if the tests be considered erly conducted and interpreted and if the answe rs could le certainty that credible. If so, then it could be stated with considerab not, the committee n. If Nosenko was a valuable source of informatio if any, relation would explore other avenu es in order to decide what, Oswald had to the KGB. Selection of the expert to conduct an (8) The committee retained Richard O. Arther by Nosenko. independent analys is of the three polyg raph tests taken commit tee’s polyg raph panel that Arther had been a member of the He had Ruby and James Earl Ray polyg raph tests. examined the Jack prior icatio ns and lack of been selected because of his extensive qualif involvement with either assass inatio n invest igatio n. Mich- (9) Arther received a B.S. with honors in police science from Colum- igan State University in 1951, and an M.A. in psycho logy from e in New bia University in 1960. Arther has been in private practic Inc., and d Scienti fic Lie Detecti on, York City since 1963. He founde Science. He cofounded the National Training Center of Polygraph John Jay has taught at Brooklyn College, Seton Hall Univers ity, the al Justice and the Gradua te School of Public Admin- College of Crimin istration of New York University. two (10) Arther has authored over 200 professional articles ands and books. He is a member of the Academ y of Certifi ed Polygr aphist the American Polygraph Association. Procedures related to (11) As noted, Arther was asked to analyze the material ted they had been validly conduc the three examinations to determine if 2, 1978, he and interpreted and if the results were credibl e. On June in Langle y, Va. Fol- made the first of three trips to CIA headquarters tests, he lowing procedures standard for an analysis of past polygraph ed the polygr aph charts “blind, ” that 1s, withou t any knowl- review The irrelevant. edge of whether the questions were control, relevant, or on the charts purpose was to try to determine solely from the tracings ure was ed to be lying. This proced to which questions Nosenko appear then followed on two separat e occasio ns. After each review, Arther which questio ns were control , checked the question sheets to determine ant (see below for an explan ation of these terms). relevant, or irrelev (12) The other trips were made on June 7 and August 24. Subse- fol- quently, Arther submitted his final report, which appears in full _lowing this introductory section. A polygraph examination to (18) A polygraph examination records physiological responses questions asked. The polygra phist attempt s to design the examina - tion in such a way that the truthful person will react to the control struc- questions and the lying person to the relevant questions The test ture must be constructed so that it poses a threat to both the truthful and untruthful person. The polygraphist attempts to determine the “psychological set” of the examinee. He tries to determine, by reading the physiological activity of the examinee in the polygraph charts, what 191 questions or question areas pose the greatest threat to the examinee’s well-being. A “psychological set” is ‘‘a person’s fears, anxieties, and apprehension, [which] are channeled toward that situation causing the greatest threat to the individual’s well-being. He will tune in on that which is of a greater threat, and tune out that of a lesser threat.” * (14) Responses to questions are recorded on a polygraph chart, which consists of tracings produced by three different types of psychological reactions associated with the circulatory, nervous, and respiratory systems: 1. The breathing pattern is recorded by means of a rubber tube placed around the person’s chest. 2. The Galvanic skin response is measured by placing the attach- ments on either the fingers or the pelms. 3. Changes in blood pressure, heart beat, and pulse rate are ob- tained by a standard blood pressure cuff placed around the up- per arm. (15) Questions are broken down into three categories : 1. Relevant—those pertinent to the investigation. 2. Irrelevant—hopefully, meaningless, nonemotion-producing ones to get the person used to being questioned and giving answers. 3. Control—nonrelevant, to which it can be assumed the person will lie during the test. These provide a standard for comparing the responses to relevant questions. If a person reacts more to a proper control question than to the relevant questions, then he is considered to be truthful to the relevants. On the other hand, if he reacts more to the relevants than to the proper control ques- tion, he is considered to be lying to the relevants. (16) Relevant, irrevelant, and control questions are interspersed throughout the polygraph chart. The examination may consist of various series covering various relevant issues. Each relevant issue must be asked a minimum of two times in a series, but as many times as necessary to conclude that relevant issue successfully. Each series should have a minimum of two charts, but as many charts as necessary to conclude the relevant issues in that series successfully. (17) The procedure for a polygraph examination is as follows: The polyeraphist first conducts a pretest interview, during which the test questions are read to the person exactly as they are going to be asked. It is vital that all questions be properly worded and discussed with the person. Then the actual test is conducted. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS OF RICHARD O. ARTHER Materials examined (18) On June 2, 1978, I went to Central Intelligence Agency head- quarters to study the nolygraph examinations administered by the CIA to Yuri Ivanovich Nosenko. I was given what they claimed was the complete file. When I asked for the polyeraphists’ handwritten notes, handwritten question sheets, chart analvses and other papers from the examinations, I was again told I had the complete file. This amazed me, since I had been given only official reports, typed test *From the Curriculum of the U.S. Army Provost Marshal General Poly- ‘graph School, Ft. McClellan, Georgia. 192 questions and charts. Handwritten notes have always been included in every polygraph file I have ever reviewed. Either on this day, June 2, or on June 7 (the date of my second visit), I asked for the tape record- ings from the examinations. I was told there were none. ‘This also greatly surprised me. | (19) On both June 2 and June 7, CIA polygraphists were assigned to me to provide all the background information they had on all three examinations. I was assured that they were holding nothing back. (20) Mythird trip to the CIA headquarters was on August 24. Again I had a polygraphist assigned to me. I was given only material pro- vided in June. Procedures June 2 visit (21) The purpose of this visit was to get an overview of Nosenko’s polygraph examinations, including the quality of the test questions and testing procedures, and to conduct an analysis of the polygraph re- cordings to determine if I agreed with the interpretations of the CIA polygraph experts. (22) I spent the first several hours analyzing the polygraph reac- tions—without knowing if any given question was a relevant, irrele- vant, or control. Such a procedure is referred to as a “blind chart analysis” and is a standard one, designed to eliminate all preconceived opinions a polygraphist might have as to a person’s truthfulness. That is, I formed my opinions as to Nosenko’s truthfulness to each test ques- tion prior to knowing if any given question was a relevant, irrelevant, or control. (23) Only after I finished this blind chart analysis did I learn which questions were relevant, irrelevant, or control. I then determined if I agreed with the CIA expert’s analysis of Nosenko’s polygraph recordings. (24) On June 2, Kenneth Klein, committee counsel, asked if I wanted to conduct my own polvgraph examination of Nosenko and/or personally interview the two CIA polygraph experts. I replied that I would consider both possibilities. June 7 wisit (25) On June 7, I returned to CIA headquarters to reevaluate the polygraph examinations, decide if Nosenko should be given another polygraph examination, and determine if interviews of the two CIA experts would prove beneficial. I also did another blind chart analysis to determine if I was consistent with my June 2 analysis. The results were substantially identical. August 24 visit (26) The objective of this visit was to reevaluate the charts and question sheets to make sure that my preliminary written report was | as accurate as possible. I had had to write it from memory as the CIA requested I not take my notes away from the Agency’s control. Evaluation of the polygraph examinations Apr4, il 1964 (27) The April 4, 1964, examination was administered exactly 2 pean after Nosenko had defected. It consisted of relevant questions, divided into 13 individual tests. more than 50 (The great major- 193 ity of polygraph examinations are limited to three or four relevant issues.) (28) It was obvious that the CIA’s purpose was to determine Nosenko’s truthfulness to a wide variety of issues. Only one question in one test dealt with Lee Harvey Oswald: “Did you tell us the truth about Lee Harvey Oswald ?” The answer was “Yes.” (29) The wording of this question is very general. It is the type of broad question that many polygraphists use only at the very end of a test, after at least three or four relevant questions have been asked on the same issue. (30) Further, this question was the 51st one asked. It occurred in the 12th test and was the 8rd of 11 questions in the test. Because important questions are generally placed at the beginning, with ques- tions of lesser importance near the rear, it would appear that the Oswald issue had an extremely low priority. (31) As noted, in this examination over 50 relevant questions were asked. Fred E. Inbau and John E. Reid, authors of the classic text- book on polygraphy, Lie Detection & Criminal Interrogation (3d edition, 1953), recommended that no more than three relevant test questions be asked. This is because the more a person is asked relevant questions, the more likely he will become “test-tired,” that is, even though lying, he will not react because he has become emotionally exhausted. . (82) Further compounding this situation, the examination started at 10:45 a.m. and ended at 3:15 p.m.—a period of 414 hours—whereas the usual polygraph examination lasts less than 2 hours, with four or five separate tests. Again there is a definite risk that a person will become “test-tired” if the examination runs too long. (33) Although the CIA expert’s opinion was that Nosenko gave a “reaction” (I presume by this he means that Nosenko was “lying”) to 6 of the 11 questions, he listed Nosenko as showing “no reaction” to the Oswald question. (34) In both my blind chart analyses, I picked the Oswald question as showing the greatest valid “lie” reaction by Nosenko, certainly greater than those for the six questions indicated by the CIA expert as having produced lies. (35) In spite of all the above problems, which would normally lead a polygraphist to believe that Nosenko should be “emotionally unre- sponsive,” Nosenko gives a substantial “lie” reaction to the Oswald question. October 18, 1966 (36) The October 18, 1966, examination was administered by the same CIA polygraphist who had administered Nosenko’s 1964 exami- nation. In his written report, dated October 23, 1966, he stated: (37) The specific purpose of the October 18, 1966, polygraph test was to: a. Attempt to establish whether subject was in fact ac- tually involved in the Oswald case while Oswald was in the Soviet Union, or if his association with the Oswald case was only part of his cover story legend. b. Determine if subject was personally active in the Oswald case in 1963 after President Kennedy’s assassination. 194 . uctions from c. Ascertain if subject received special instr ding the Gove rnme nt regar KGB to pass on to the American Oswald case. 18 and_ ended (38) This series of examinations began on October ns had to do t of the first day of exami natio on October 28. The thrus 19 Oswald. The subsequent examinations, that is, October with appear through October 28, had nothing to do with Oswald. It would nko/Os- that the CLA now fully appreciated the significance of Nose mine st was doing his best to deter wald, and that their polygraphi Nosenko’s truthfulness regarding Oswald, In (39) During the examination, Nosenko was asked 32 questions the ted which the name Oswald appears. On my blind analysis, I selec following questions as containing valid indicators of lying: 1. Did you receive special instructions about what to tell Ameri- cans about the Oswald case? (No) 9. Was Oswald recruited by the KGB as an agent? (No) 3 Did the KGB consider Oswald abnormal? (Yes) 4. To your knowledge did Oswald talk to a KGB officer in Mexico? (No) 5. Is your contact with the Oswald case part of your legend? (No) 6. Did you hear of Oswald prior to President Kennedy’s assassina- tion? (Yes) 7. Did you hear of Oswald only after President Kennedy’s assassl- nation? (No) 8. Did you personally order —-----————, in 1959, to col- lect material on Oswald? (Yes) 9. (hecil KGB instruct you to tell us Oswald was a bad shot? O 10. Did the KGB give the Oswalds any kind of help in their de- parture from the Soviet Union? (No) (40) When a liar is asked a large number of relevant test questions, he will not react as lying to all questions. Instead he will pick out the questions most significant to him and react as lying only to those. Gen- erally, the questions he does not regard as significant, he will not re- act to, even though he is lying. (41) _ On test series 1, the CIA expert wrote that the “most significant reactions” were to questions 1 and 6 above. For test series 2, the CIA expert wrote that the “most significant reactions” were to questions 5, 6 and 7 above, plus two questions not on my list.* (42) By having the Oswald questions the first day of this second series of polygraph examinations, both the validity and reliability were greatly increased. August 6, 1968 (43) The third series of polygraph examinations was administered in August 1968. These examinations were conducted by a different CIA polygraph expert. The first series of tests was administered on August 2. _ *Since my blind analysis involved selecting only the two or three ques- tions to which Nosenko was reacting the most strongly within each test, I did not expect to agree fully with the CIA expert. 195 (44) Twenty-three relevant test questions were asked, but not one had to do with Oswald. The second day of testing was August 6, 1968. At this time, 27 relevant questions preceded the first Oswald question, of which there were 2. (45) It is obvious that once again the Oswald issue was considered extremely minor. As noted, the Oswald questions did not occur until quite far into the procedure. The longer a question is postponed, the more likely a liar will come out as “truthful” because he has become “test-tired,” that is, unresponsive. On the first day, the polygraphist himself acknowledged the possibility of Nosenko’s becoming unre- sponsive when he wrote, after the sixth test of August 2, 1968: No further polygraph tests were administered on this date because the examiner did not want to run the risk of fatigue setting in and thus possibly causing adrenalin exhaustion. (46) Thus he stopped on August 2, after 6 tests and 23 relevant ques- tions. Yet on the second day of testing (August 6), 1t was not until test 7 and the 28th relevant question that he first asked about Oswald. (47) Further, the wording of the two Oswald questions was very startling: 1. Did you actually review the KGB file on Oswald? (Yes) 2. Did Lee Harvey Oswald receive any KGB training or assign- ments? (No) (48) No date was referred to within this first question, a serious error in wording. Nosenko was claiming that he had reviewed Os- wald’s file before the assassination. Therefore, the question should have been worded : s (49) “Before November 1963, had you actually reviewed Oswald’ out the date meant that Nosenko could have KGB file?” Leaving Os- truthfully answered this question even if he had first reviewed In fact, he could have reviewe d it wald’s file after the assassination. to 1 week before he was told to defect and still come out as truthful the question. the word (50) The second question is also very poor in that it has questions. “or” in it, which automatically means that it 1s really two happens When there are two questions within one question, if a person the other, to be truthful to one of those questions and lying about generally he will come out as truthful. training but (51) For example, if Oswald did not receive any KGB possibly Kennedy , Nosenko could was told to assassinate President truthfully answer “yes” to this question . Comparison of 1966 and 1968 examinations directed (52) Not only was the first day of the 1966 examination very specific totally toward the Oswald issue, but the questi ons were was the case. and basically worded properly. In 1968, neither an opinion that (53) In 1966, the CIA polygraph expert rendered was lying both about why he defect ed and as about Oswald. Nosenko aphist render ed an opinion that On the other hand, in 1968, the polygr even had antial ly truthf ul.” This second expert Nosenko was “subst possibi lity on : “Ts there any Nosenko answering truthfully to the questi cans? ” ch an officer to defect to the Ameri that the KGB would dispat Answer: “No.” 196 . ion every (54) The HSCA_ has informed me that without except s stated intelligence officer interviewed—includ ing KGB defect ors—ha fact that the KGB is capable of dispatching an officer to defect. The ul that Nosenko denies this and the polygraphist finds him truthf makes the entire examination suspect. Opinions (55) 1. For two major reasons, there would be no point in inter- viewing the two CIA. polygraph experts. First, the charts spoke for themselves. Second, since I supposedly had the complete case file, iF would rather go by the file than by someone’s memory of what hap- pened some 10 to 14 years ago. (56) 2 Another polygraph examination is not recommended for Nosenko. After such a long period of time and such extensive testing, the results could not be trusted. (57) 3. The polygraph examination given on October 18, 1966, should be considered the most valid and reliable of the three regarding Lee Harvey Oswald. Given the state of the art in 1966, this examination met the criteria of validity and reliability. (58) 4. Both the 1964 and 1968 examinations involving Lee Harvey Oswald should be disregarded because of the large number of inherent deficiencies in both examinations. (59) 5. On another occasion, I provided four questions which I would have asked had I examined Nosenko: Did the KGB order Oswald to assassinate President Kennedy? Before November 1963, had you ever heard of Lee Harvey Oswald ? Did the KGB order you to defect ? Did the KGB instruct you what to tell the Americans about Oswald? (60) Note: My August 16, 23, 24, and 28 review of the reports, charts, and my blind chart analysis at the Select Committee on As- sassinations’ offices served only to strengthen the above opinions. THE ANALYSIS OF JACK RUBY’S POLYGRAPH EXAMINATION Submitted by Richard O. Arther, President, Scientific Lie Detection, Inc., New York, N.Y., and director, National Training Center of Polygraph Science, New York, N.Y. Charles R. Jones, President, Polygraph Division, Lincoln M. Zonn, Inc., New York, N.Y. Benjamin F. Malinowski, President, Malinowski Polygraph Services, Inc., Savannah, Ga. Report to the Select Committee on Assassinations U.S. House of Representatives Ninety-fifth Congress Second Session March 1979 (197) CONTENTS Paragraph ae 1 Introduction... -----= ---<---- -s 2 nae Hn oo 0 ow ani Sh nn a hase aes en 2 S4 See ea eee 3 nnn nnn nnn nnn nnn nnn A polygraph examination. -..--.-------- -----------+------ <= = 22 nn nn nnn22 nn nnn -------- nnn nnn nnn nnn ------ 12 Ruby’s polygraph examination -------- -------- -------- re ee re ee ee ee wl eee 18 Interpretations of the polygraph OXAMINAON = 24 Selection of the panel. ..--_. ---4-=------ 4-22 - “pas n- 2 no nn aeons = ow nn aa ss Fa E aa Rae ---- ---- -- -- = -- <2 -- == 22 enn nn nnn nn nn nn nn nn nn nnn nn n= 30 Examination procedures--------..-------- nn nn rn------ nnn nnn 37 Report of the polygraph panel-.- -------- -------- -------- <7 <7-------- -- 27-2 ----------------- 37 Crucial factors affecting the examination _----.--------------------------------- eran ee 50 Loss of control... 2-22 2-2 2s 2 oe sn se on a a a pe an ae awa -==-- -- 6 2 oo oo enn nn ann 2snn -----ann nnn nnn es nm nnn naan anna ----- - a= 58 Other factors._..---- an a wae eee oe 95 Chart analysis_... 2. -< 2s. <2 ---- ob en on sa anes eo ns oe en aa ene aa nw ne saree INTRODUCTION* (1) On July 18, 1964, Jack Ruby voluntarily took a polygraph examination to test his truthfulness. Even though the Warren Com- mission disclaimed any reliance on the results of the test, (7) the committee believed that popular interest in such tests, as well as the possibility that new investigative “leads” might emerge, warranted a review of the examination. (2) The committee was specifically prohibited by its own rules (2) from using either failure or agreement to take a polygraph examina- tion, or the results of a polygraph examination, as a basis for fact- finding in any public hearing or report. Such restrictions did not apply, however, to a review of polygraph tests previously adminis- tered. The committee therefore engaged a panel of experts to review the Ruby polygraph examination to determine if it was properly con- ducted and analyzed. A polygraph examination (8) ek Tn we . 1 } (a = a *, oe one x ~ ; ’ - ive pase Per * ry = - OE é Pee the! See eet of ar Tae 7 OR a" © a 4> Pal= aip-a>. oele -_ > ,°) 4 — * ‘ 's ry }* . s >A iA % } 7. - ~ i ’ r : > > i} < ‘ " 4 , nf . H ' a4 ‘ «? . y v n \ 4 ‘ ‘. \ ‘ wd 1 ha % A 4 . as -~ ~— Pinte hey can the chief Salve « 7 ln ont ae Santioy be oul o + 7 ¢ 47 “~ mh) x3 Pet id i 5 4 a} ark! el pial ye 9 z ‘oe ‘ 3s yas? a mir 5 ’ 4 { " y \ t ' " . bs 4 “ ‘5 - » << ‘ 7 4 s 4 ‘se + , ‘ } a is ’ i ~— aa 2 4; ’ ‘ ‘; 4 4 a : vs , ’ a a * — > : i 4 l a . va i) * ” a : : de ht ‘ * 7, ’ { * é a ‘we? Pies 4. > eee , es | | « te : ~ 7, -% . 7 : : : es > @ a» tad =>) sa” Zn % ' : i ’ pe. Fee ; oo : F pay ok, y: ie 289. :, 2 nae any? Byes io rT pty ae ty ae THE EXAMINATION OF THE HANDWRITING AND FINGERPRINT EVIDENCE Submitted by Joseph P. McNalley, examiner of questioned documents, Valley Cot- tage, N.Y. David J. Purtell, examiner of questioned documents, Chicago, Ill. Charles C. Scott, examiner of questioned documents, Kansas City, Mo. Vincent J. Scalice, president, Forensic Control Systems, Inc., New York, N.Y. Report to the Select Committee on Assassinations U.S. House of Representatives Renner Congress Second Session March 1979 (223) CONTENTS Paragraph Introduction The committee’s approach... -_--------------------------------------------- Selection of the experts_...-.---------------------------------------------- Issues addressed by the experts. ....-.-----..----------------------------- Eividence-examined 5 se 28 she oe ee ee ae eee ae Procedures: .2- ee ee eee as aaa s eae eee eee eae Summary of conclusions. -------------------------------------------+------- Findings and conclusions of Joseph P. McNally----------------------------- Proced tires. ees Oe ee ee re Sa ee eee Concltisions: mt oo ne oe oe eee ee ee a oo ee ee ane are Findings and conclusions of David J. Purtell_---..-------------------------- ProcedtUrestt 22225. ee Se ae ee eee ee Pindings se ee ee ee oe a ee eee See ee ae Bindings) ee a ae eee es re ee Concluding remarks Seo s se oe a Findings and conclusions of Vincent J. Scalice_...-----------=-------------- (224) INTRODUCTION* (1) Several critics of the Warren Commission have speculated that there were two Lee Harvey Oswalds. Two versions of this theory have been put forward. One is that the real Lee Harvey Oswald never re- turned from the Soviet Union; instead, an imposter was sent on a sinister mission. The second is that others, for whatever purposes, used Oswald’s name. (2) One of the first proponents of the two-Oswald theory was a philosophy professor named Richard Popkin, who in 1966 published a book entitled “The Second Oswald.” (/) Popkin cited the numerous instances recounted in the Warren Commission report in which people claimed to have seen or dealt with Oswald under odd or suggestive circumstances. Examples included Oswald being seen at a rifle range,(2) driving a car,(3) and in the company of two Latin-looking men seeking financing for illegal activities from Mrs. Sylvia Odio (a Cuban refugee leader in Dallas).(4) Popkin concluded that the cases of apparent duplication could plausibly be interpreted as evidence that Oswald was involved in a conspiracy, culminating in the events of November 22, 1963. (5) (3) Sylvia Meagher, in “Accessories After the Fact,” also criticized the Commission for not seriously considering the two Oswald pos- sibility, ‘“* * * much less evaluate[ing] the evidence for or against such an explanation.” (6) (4) The Warren Commission discounted the incidents, principally on grounds that they had occurred when it was concluded that Oswald was elsewhere—in Mexico at the time of the rifle practice,(7) en route to Mexico at the time of the Odio meeting.(&) It dismissed other incidents because they involved activities in which Oswald apparently did not engage, such as driving. (9) The committee’s approach (5) In an effort to resolve the two-Oswald issue, the committee decided to convene a panel of experts to examine samples of hand- writing attributed to Oswald. These samples were taken from numer- ous documents purportedly written and signed by Oswald in the last 7 years of his life. They were organized according to five significant periods: (1) October 1959 through September 1959, when Oswald was in the Marines; (2) October 1959 through June 1962, when Oswald was in the Soviet Union; (3) July 1962 to September 1963, when Oswald lived in Dallas and then in New Orleans; (4) the final week of September 1963, when Oswald visited Mexico; and (5) from the end of September 1963 to the day of the assassination, when Oswald lived in Dallas. The panel was to determine if the handwriting on the documents was that of one person. *Materials submitted for this report by the committee’s questioned documents panel were compiled by HSCA staff members G. Robert Blakey and Whitney Watriss. (225) 226 (6) The committee also decided to retain another expert to verify, independently, that one or more of Oswald’s signatures was in fact his. Co make such a determination, the committee sought all finger- print cards which Oswald had signed. Three were found in the FBI records, two of which were signed: One, dated October 24, 1956, was from Oswald’s induction into the Marines; the second, of August 9, 1963, was from his arrest in New Orleans; and the third, unsigned, was dated November 22, 1963, the day of his arrest after the assassina- tion. The expert was to determine if the fingerprints were all Oswald’s, which would verify the signatures as Oswald’s. (7) The committee reasoned that if these determinations could be made, the two-Oswald theory would be far less plausible. If not, it would be more authoritatively established. (8) This approach of the committee was substantially different from that of the Warren Commission. The Commission had used the documents for evidentiary purposes, for example, to determine if Oswald had used the alias “Hidell” or to link Oswald with the purchase of the Mannlicher-Carcano rifle. It had accepted as fact that certain of the documents had actually been signed or written by Oswald and compared these with “unknown” documents to establish evidentiary links. (9) The committee, on the other hand, did not assume that any of the documents were written by Oswald. Instead, it sought to prove that one or more signatures were positively Oswald’s and that all the documents had been written by the same person. Selection of the experts (10) The committee asked the president of the American Society of Questioned Document Examiners for recommendations on the leading experts in the field of questioned document examination, specifically handwritten documents. The committee then asked each of the people he recommended for their suggestions. Three names appeared consistently. After ascertaining that none had had a prior connection with the FBI or the Kennedy case, the committee requested that they undertake an examination of various documents. The panel members, all of whom belong to the American Society of Questioned Document Examiners, were Joseph P. McNally, David J. Purtell, and Charles C. Scott. | (11) McNally received a B.S. and an M.P.A. in police science from the John Jay College of Criminal Justice, University of New York City in 1967 and 1975 respectively. He started in the field of questioned document identification in 1942 with the New York Police laboratory. He has been supervisor of the document identification section of the police laboratory, training officer in the police academy, commanding officer of the police laboratory, and handwriting expert in the district attorney’s office of New York County. He retired from the police de- partment with the rank of captain in 1972 and entered private practice. He serves as a consultant to New York’s Human Resources Administration. (12) McNally is a fellow of the American Academy of Forensic Sciences, and a member of the International Association for Tdentifi- cation, and the American Society for Testing and Materials. He has lectured at the University of New York City, Rockland College, and the New York Police Academy. by | 227 (13) Purtell received a Ph.B., with a major in mathematics and chemistry, from Northwestern University in 1949. He began” his career in questioned document identification in 1942 with the Chicago Police Department, where he served as document examiner in the scientific crime detection laboratory. He retired in 1974 as chief docu- inet examiner and captain of police, and entered private practice in 1973. (14) Purtell is a fellow of the American Academy of Forensic Sciences and served as chairman of the questioned document section and chairman of the program committee. He is a past vice president and president of the American Society of Questioned Document Ex- aminers. Purtell has lectured at Northwestern University, the Uni- versity of Illinois, the University of Indiana and St. Joseph’s College, among other schools. He has presented and published numerous scientific papers. (15) Scott received an A.A. degree from Kansas City Junior Col- lege in 1930 anda J. D. from the University of Missouri School of Law in 1935, whereupon be became a member of the Missouri bar. While at- tending law school, he founded the University of Missouri at Kansas City Law Review and was its first editor-in-chief. He began his career as a questioned document examiner with the Federal Reserve Bank in 1935 and has been in private practice since 1946. The first edition of his three-volume book, “Photographic Evidence,” was published in 1942. ae in its second edition, it has become the standard textbook on the subject. (16) . Scott served on the first board of directors of the American Board of Forensic Document Examiners. He has conducted seminars on scientific document examination for more than 20 State bar asso- ciations, written numerous professional articles, and, since 1954, has eee an adjunct professor of law at the University of Missouri School of Law. (17) The expert selected for the print—finger and palm—analysis was Vincent J. Scalice, president of Forensic Control Systems, Inc., of New York City. (18) Scalice, before entering private practice, served with the New York City Police Department from 1956 to 1977, where he attained the rank of detective first grade. He has been a lecturer and instructor on crime scene examination and latent print identification at the New York City Police Academy, a lecturer on fingerprint identification and courtroom technique at Brooklyn Law School, and he formulated and taught a course on crime scene examination for the detective division of the New York City Police Department. Issues addressed by the experts (19) The committee asked McNally, Purtell, and Scott to address four issues: 1. Were the signatures “Lee Harvy Oswald” and “Lee H. Oswald” on the various documents written by the same person? 2. Was the script writing on the various documents, which was purported to be Oswald’s, done by the same person ? 3. Was the Russian writing on the various documents, which was purported to be Oswald’s. done by the same person? 4, Was the “historical diary” written in one sitting? 228 to (20) Subsequently, the committee asked Purtell and McNally look at whether the signature “A. J. Hidell” on the June 15, 1968, Fair Play for Cuba card was written by Marina Oswald. In addition, McNally was asked to determine whether the signature “Jack Ruby” on the undated Cuban identification card had been written by Jack Ruby. (a1), Scalice was asked to verify that the finger and palm prints which appeared on the three cards were of the same person. Subse- quently, he was asked to examine some other documents. Evidence examined . (22) Handwriti ng—The committee gathered some 50 documents to be examined.* Following is a list and description of those items. 1. October 24, 1956. Original of U.S. Marine Corps enlistment contract and record, service No. 1653230, signed Lee Harvy Os- wald. Blue ink; nib pen. Location: Department of Defense (here- inafter DOD). (JFK exhibit F-479.)** 9. October 24, 1956. Carbon of item 1, with an original signature, Lee Harvey Oswald. Blue ink; nib pen. Location: DOD (JFK ex- hibit F479a.) 3. October 24, 1956. Loyalty certificate for personnel of the Armed Forces, signed Lee Harvey Oswald. Blue ink; nib pen. Location : DOD. (JFK exhibit F—481.) 4. October 24, 1956. U.S. Marine Corps examination of applicant by recruiting officer, signed Lee Harvey Oswald. Blue ink; nib pen. Location: DOD. (JFK exhibit F-480.) 5. October 24, 1956. U.S. Marine Corps record of emergency data, signed Lee Harvey Oswald. Blue ink; nib pen. Location: DOD. (J FK exhibit F478.) 6. October 24, 1956. Armed Forces fingerprint identification card, numbered 327 925 D, signed Lee Harvey Oswald. Blue ink; ballpoint pen. Location: Federal Bureau of Investigation (here- inafter FBI). (JFK exhibit F-482.) . October 25, 1956. U.S. Marine Corps miscellaneous information and index form (NAVMC 118(1)-PD), signed Lee H. Oswald. Blue-black ink; nib pen. This document bears a second signa- ture, reading Lee H. Oswald, dated October 28, 1956, blue-black ink, nib pen; and a third signature, reading Lee H. Oswald, dated May 2, 1957, black ink, nib pen. Location: DOD. (JFK exhibit F483.) 8. May 8, 1958. Identification card, U.S. Forces, Japan, signed Lee H. Oswald. Location: National Archives (hereinafter Ar- chives). Found in Oswald’s wallet on the day of his arrest. (FBI exhibit D-225: B 1-9; JFK exhibit F—505.) 9. September 10, 1959. U.S. passport No. 1733242, signed Lee H. Oswald. Faded blue ink; ballpoint pen. Location: Archives. (Warren Commission exhibit 946, hereinafter CE 946; JFK exhibit F—486.) examina- 63; the difference in numbers is due to that of items n na one number than here more listed copy of an item, that is, an original and a photo reproduction. ** mint a cd k Hig :aes of most of the documents appear at the end of this report. Numbers 53 , were not available, but are contained in committee files at the Archives. 229 10. September 10, 1959. Photograph of passport bearer of U.S. passport No. 1738242, appearing on page 4, signed Lee H. Os- wald, and photograph of “Baby Lee Oswald,” on page 14, signed June Lee Oswald, father. Black ink; ballpoint pen. Location: Archives. (CE 946; JFK exhibit F486.) A. September 11, 1959. U.S. Marine Corps notice of obligated service, signed Lee Harvey Oswald. Blue ink; ballpoint pen. Location: Archives. (JFK exhibit F—485.) 12. September 11, 1959. U.S. Marine Corps security termination statement and index, signed Lee Harvey Oswald. Blue ink; ballpoint pen. Location: DOD. (JFK exhibit F-484.) 13. September 11, 1959. Carbon copy of Armed Forces of the U.S. report of transfer or discharge, signed Lee Harvey Oswald, ue ; carbon copy signature. Location: DOD. (FBI exhibit -18. 14. September 14, 1959. Selective Service System registration card, signed Lee H. Oswald. Black ink; ballpoint pen. Location: Archives. (JFK exhibit F—487.) 15. September 14, 1959. Selective Service System registration cer- tificate, signed Lee H. Oswald. Black ink; ballpoint pen. Loca- tion: Archives. (JFK exhibit F—505.) 16. October 16, 1959 to March 27, 1962. Historical diary, 12 hand- written pages. (Only p. 11, dated July 15, 1961 to January 4, 1962, was examined, as all other pages were badly stained with fingerprint developer and are entirely unsuitable for handwrit- ing examination.) Location: Archives. (CE 24; JFK exhibit F491.) 17. November 3, 1959. Declaration requesting revocation of U.S. citizenship, signed Lee Harvey Oswald. Purple ink; nib pen. Location : Archives. (CE 244; JFK exhibit F488.) 18. November 15, 1959. Photocopy of handwritten account of inter- view with Miss Aline Mosby, UPI reporter. Unsigned. (The original of this document was also submitted but could not be examined because it was completely covered and stained with fingerprint developer.) Location: Archives. (CE 2717; JFK exhibit F489.) 19. 1960, undated. Political discussion, handwritten on stationery of the Holland-American Line; 15 pages. Blue ink; nib pen. Location: Archives. (FBI exhibits 128 and 124; CE 25; JFK exhibit F490.) 20. 1962, undated. Self-questionnaire. Location: Archives. (FBI ex- hibit 116; CE 100 and part of 24.) 21. 1962, undated. Photocopy of document identified as a self- questionnaire. Original was stained and unsuitable for exami- nation. Location: Archives. (JFK exhibit F402.) 22. January 17, 1962. Affidavit of support, addressed to the Ameri- can Embassy, Moscow, U.S.S.R., signed Lee H. Oswald. Blue ink; nib pen. Location: Archives. (CE 775; JFK exhibit F492. ) 23. February 20 (1962). Russian script on lined paper, from “Alek” to “Marina” and “June.” Location: Archives. (BI exhibit 134; CE 59; JFK exhibit F493.) 24. March 24, 1962. Entry papers of Marina Oswald, including a fingerprint identification card. (FBI exhibit D-10.) 230 25. June 10, 1962. Two-page handwritten letter to the “Worker,” 23 pen. int West 26th Street, signed Lee H. Oswald. Blue ink; ballpo Archiv es. Date was appended with a differe nt pen. Locati on: ment marke d “A. Johns on exhibi t No. 1”; JFK exhibi t (Docu F-494. ) Os- . duly 13, 1962. Letter to Leslie Welding Co., signed Lee H. wald; written on part of a page from a yellow legal pad. Blue ink; ballpoint pen. Location: Archives. _ October 9, 1962. Application for P.O. Box No. 2915, signed Lee H. Oswald. Black ink; ballpoint pen. Location: Archives. (CE 791; JFK exhibit F-496.) . March 8, 1963. Photocopies of a note in Russian to Ruth Paine from Marina Oswald. Location: Archives. (CE 404.) _ March 12, 1963. U.S. postal money order No. 2,,202,130,462, bearing handwritten fill-ins as follows: Klein’s Sporting Goods, A. Hidell, P.O. Box 2915, Dallas, Tex. Blue ink, ballpoint pen. Location: Archives. (CE 788; JFK exhibit F-509A and 509B.) 30. March 12. 1963. Enlargement of microfilm reproduction of Klein’s order form for rifle from A. Hidell, superimposed on en- velop, postmarked March 12, 1968, addressed to Klein’s, Dept. 358, 227 W. Washington Street, Chicago 6, Il., with return ad- dress: A. Hidell, P.O. Box 2915, Dallas, Tex. Location : Archives. (CE 773; Cadigan’s exhibit 1; JFK exhibit F-504.) 31. May 4, 1963. Photograph of man with rifle and newspapers. On the back of the photograph is a handwritten notation read- ing “To my friend George from Lee Oswald 5/ IV /63” and, in Russian, the statement “Copyright G de M.” Also in Russian is writing which translated as “Killer of Fascists—Ha-Ha-Ha!!!” Blue ink; ballpoint pen. Location :House Select Committee on Assassinations (hereinafter HSCA), which obtained it from the effects of George de Mohrenschildt after his death in 1977. (JFK exhibit F-183 and 184, F-382 and 383.) 32. May 26 (1963) * T'wo-page letter to Fair Play for Cuba Commit- tee, signed Lee H. Oswald. Blue ink; ballpoint pen. Location: Archives. (Document also marked “V. T. Lee No. 2;” JFK exhibit F-497.) 33. June 15, 1963. Fair Play for Cuba Committee, New Orleans chapter, signed Lee H. Oswald, with A. J. Hidell signing as chapter president. Found in Oswald’s wallet on the day of his arrest. Location: Archives. (J FK exhibit F-505.) 34, June 24, 1963. Passport application, signed Lee H. Oswald. Blue La er ae pen. Location: FBI. (CE 781; JFK exhibit 30. June 24, 1963. Passport photograph attached to item 34, signed Lee H. Oswald. Blue ink; ballpoint pen. Location: Archives. 36. August 9, 1963. Fingerprint identification card of New Orleans Police Department, signed Lee H. Oswald. Blue ink; ballpoint pen. Location: Archives. FBI current arrest or receipt, dated August 12,1963. Location: Archives. (JFK F-400.) 37. August 9, 1963. Photocopy of fingerprint card and attached mug shots, New Orleans Police Department, signed Lee H. Oswald. Location: FBI. *Year was derived from content. 231 38. August 28, 1963. Handwritten letter to Central Committee C. P. (Communist Party), USA, signed Lee H. Oswald. Blue ink; ballpoint pen. Location: Archives. (Document also marked “A. Johnson exhibit No. 4”; JFK F-498.) 39. September 27, 1963. Photocopy of a page from a hotel register, signed, on line 18, “Lee, Harvey Oswald, U.S.A. (Texas) PHOTO. U.S. citizen.” Location: Archives. (FBI exhibit D-36; JFK F-499.) 40. September 27, 1963. Photographs (one of the entire document and one of the signature) of the original of the visa application, Cuban Consulate, Mexico City, signed Lee H. Oswald. Loca- tion: Archives. (CE 2564; JFK F-407, entire document.) 41. September 27, 1963. Photograph of the carbon copy of item 40, shown to the committee staff when they met with Presi- dent Fidel Castro in Havana, Cuba, with an original signature, Lee H. Oswald. Location: HSCA. (JFK F-408.) 42. fon (no date), 1963. Letter to the Russian Embassy. (JFK —500. 43. October 15, 1963. Employment application, with face sheet signed Lee H. Oswald. Blue ink; ballpoint pen. Location: Ar- chives. (FBI exhibit D-18; JFK F-—503.) 44. October 16, 1963. Employee’s W-4 withholding exemption cer- tificate, signed Lee H. Oswald. Blue ink; ballpoint pen. Loca- tion: Archives. (FBI exhibit D-90; JFK F-501.) 45. November 1, 1963. Application for P.O. Box 6225, two cards, each signed Lee H. Oswald. Blue ink; ballpoint pen. Location: Archives. (CE 792; JFK F-495.) 46. November 1, 1963. Receipt for key to P.O. Box 6225, signed Lee H. Oswald. Blue ink; ballpoint pen. Location: Archives. (CE 792; JFK F495.) 47. November 8, 1963. Two photographs of a facsimile copy of a handwritten letter to Mr. Hunt. One is of the entire document, the other an enlargement of the signature. These were obtained by the committee from a researcher in Dallas, Tex. Location: HSCA files. (7TFIK F-506.) 48. November 9, 1963. Photomechanical (halftone) reproduction of a typewritten letter to the Consular Division, Embassy, U.S.S.R., Washington, D.C., signed Lee H. Oswald. Location: Archives. (Photomechanical reproduction—CE 15; JFK F-500.) 49. July 18, 1964. Exemplar (standard) signatures and writing of Jack Ruby. Location : Archives. 50. Undated. Photograph of unsigned rough draft of item 48. Loca- tion: Archives. (JFK F—500.) 51. Undated. Handwritten speech, nine pages. Green ink: nib pen. Location: Archives. (“BI exhibit 117; CE 97; JFK F-508.) 52. Undated. Two receipts for salary from the Texas School Book Depository, signed Lee H. Oswald. (FBI exhibit 422.) 53. Undated (August?). Photograph of Cuban identification card, flight 751, signed Jack Ruby. (JFK F-583.) Location: HSCA files. 54. Undated. Exemplar writing of Marina Oswald, including seven slips of paper containing the writing “A. J. Hidell.” Location: Archives, HSCA. 232 ary card, expiring December 7, 55. Undated. Dallas Public Libr : Archives. (JFK F505, 1965, signed Lee H. Oswald. Location al B1i-10. of handwriting, 56. Dee Note in Russian, consisting of 10 lines . (FBI exhibit : Archives signed, in Russian, “Alek.” Location 133: CE 40; JFK F-50 7.) of two pages of 11 hand- 7 Undated. Note in Russian consisting Walker incident, referred written instructions concerning the . (FBI exhibit D- to as “the Walker Note.” Location: Archives 30: CE 1; JFK F-510.) Corps, signed Lee sg Undat ed. Certificate of service, U.S. Marineexhib it D-225.) Harvey Oswald. Loca tion : Archi ves. (FBI 4-39 37, Lee Harv ey Oswald ; 59. Undated. Social security card, 4335 exhibit D-225.) unsigned. Location: Archi ves. (FBI Kanko Hotel. Loca- 60. Undated. Complimentary card, GA-Joen 7 tion: Archives. notation on the photo graph s of Oswal d, one with the 61. Three ion: Archives. back. “taken at Camp Pendleton Feb. 5.” Locat handw ritin g : 62, Undated. Slip of paper with the following “The Worke 93 W. 26th St. New York 10, N.Y. The Worker Box 28 Madison Sq. Station, New York 10, N.Y. Embassy USSR. 1609 Decatur St. N.W. Washington, D.C.” Location: Archives. 43. November 22, 1963. Photograph of fingerprint form of the Dallas Police Department. Location: FBI. (CE 627, 630.) Procedures (23) The panel members traveled to Washington, D.C. at various times to examine and photograph originals of documents to be exam- ined. These were located at four places: The National Archives, the Department of Defense, the FBI, and the offices of the commit- tee. The panel members prepared photographs of the originals for further study in their own laboratories. (24) The panel met asa whole on July 6, 1977, to review the original documents and discuss their respective findings. Each member then prepared a final report of his findings and conclusions (these also provide further detail on the procedures followed by each member). (25) The panel followed standard procedures and techniaues in its exam inations. The writings and signatures were looked at individually and in juxtaposition with each other, taking into consideration the gTOss characteristics of the writing process, writing skill, slant, speed, ieoportions of the letters, ratio of small to capital letters, height ratio, ateral spacing, and overall writing pattern. Significant differences were looked for. A stereoscopic microscope was used for minute exam1- — and comparison of individual letters and characteristics. ee ree 108 GREDIROS and compared the inked impressions on the the Pedal nt cards on June 8. 1978, at the latent print section of ureau of Investigation in Washington, D.C. 233 SUMMARY OF CONCLUSIONS (27) With the restrictions and reservations stated in each panel member’s final report,* the members conclude, generally, that the sig- natures and handwriting purported to be by Oswald are consistently that of one person. Because of the poor condition of the historical diary, they are unable to conclude firmly whether it was written at one or more than one sitting. On balance, it appears to have been written at one or a few sittings. (28) Purtell and McNally conclude the name “A. J. Hidell” was written on the 1963 Fair Play for Cuba card by the same person who wrote the exemplars attributed to Marina Oswald. (29) Finally, McNally concludes that the name “Jack Ruby” written on an undated Cuban identification card was by the same person who wrote the exemplars attributed to Jack Ruby. (30) Scalice concluded that all inked finger and palm prints were identical and were Lee Harvey Oswald’s. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS OF JOSEPH P. MC NALLY Procedures (31) I conducted an examination and comparison of the signatures and writings on the items described in this report. At the time of the initial work in Washington, D.C., I made color photomacrographs of the signatures and the writings on these documents. I then made slides from the photomacrographs, which I subsequently projected and studied. The signatures were a particular focus of my examination. (32) I first met with committee staff in Washington, D.C., on Sep- tember 7, 1977, to examine and photograph signatures and writings on documents available at the Department of Defense and the National Archives. On September 17, 1977, I went to the committee’s offices to examine and photograph a photoreproduction designated item No. 47. On May 8, 1978, I returned to Washington, D.C., to make additional examinations and photographs. These were made at the Department of Defense, the National Archives, and the committee offices. (33) On July 6, 1978, I met with other members of the handwriting panel to review the documents examined and to consult with them. Subsequently, I prepared my final report with my findings and conclusions. Conclusions (34) -I. The signatures “Lee Harvey Oswald” and “Lee H. Oswald” on the following documents were all written by the same person : 1,2,4,5, 7,11, and 12. Marine Corps documents. 8. U.S. Armed Forces Loyalty Certificate. 6. USMC fingerprint form. 8. ID card—U.S. Armed Forces, Japan. 9and10. Three (3) passport signatures. 13. Carbon of U.S. Armed Forces Report of Discharge. *In particular, members noted that not all documents were available in their original. It is standard practice in the profession of questioned document examination to make definitive conclusions only about documents examined in their original. Thus the panel members gave only tentative opinions for items provided them in some type of facsimile. 934 14. Selective Service registration. 15. Selective Service card. We Citizenship revocation. 22. Support affidavit. 25. Letter to “The Worker”. 97,45 and 46. Signatures on U.S.P.O. applications (4). 31. Photo of Lee Oswald (back). 39. Letter to “Fair Play for Cuba”. Fair Play for Cuba card. 34. Passport application. 36. New Orleans Police Department fingerprint form, dated Aug. 9, 196 8. 87, Photocopy of New Orleans Police Department fingerprint form. . Letter to the “Communist Party U.S.A.”. . Hotel registry. . Application for Cuban visa. . Photograph of carbon of application for Cuban visa. . Letter to Russian Embassy. . Employment form. . Form W-4. . P.O. Box 6225 application. 3. Receipt for key to P.O. Box 6225. . Photomechanical copy of letter to Russian Embassy. 5D. Dallas Public Library card. (35) I I. The script writing on the following documents was done by the same person: 17. Citizenship revocation. 19. Stationery of Holland-American Line. 20. Self-questionnaire. 21. Photocopy of self-questionnaire. 22. Support affidavit. 25. Letter to “The Worker”. 29, Xerox of Klein’s money order. Letter to “Fair Play for Cuba”. 38. Letter to “Communist Party U.S.A.”. 42. Letter to the Russian Embassy. 48. Photomechanical copy of letter to Russian Embassy. (36) I II. A number of documents have script and handprint, both of which are by the same person (the script writings of these docu- ments correspond to that of documents listed above under I and II): 16. Historical diary. 18. Aline Mosby interview. 26. Employment application with letter. 30. Envelope and order form—Klein’s. 43. Employment application and letter of resignation. STP" V. A few documents have handprint only. On those listed below, all the handprint is by the same person, and it corresponds to the handprint on documents listed above under III. Since the script in items under IIT corresponds to the script in items under IT, it can be concluded that the items under II, ITI, and IV correspond. 9. Inside cover of passport. 27,45 and 46. U.S.P.O. forms—box rental. 51. Speech. 235 (38) V. In summary, the script writing (much of it on documents also bearing the signature of Lee H. Oswald) is identifiable with the signatures, ‘““Lee H. Oswald.” From the script writing on the docu- ments described in section II, it is possible to create composite signa- tures, “Lee Harvey Oswald” and “Lee H. Oswald,” which correspond’ to the Oswald signatures on the documents listed in section I. (39) VI. The Russian language writing on documents 23, 56, and 57 1s by the same person. Although there are a few letter design forms which appear to be in the Cyrillic alphabet, the bulk are in the Latin alphabet and correspond to their counterparts in the script and hand- print in the documents listed in sections I, II, III, and IV above. (40) VII. The two signatures, “Lee H. Oswald,” in item 52 (receipts for salary—Texas School Book Depository) do not correspond to the Oswald signatures as described under section I. The handwriting appears to be more skillful, with a more rhythmic flow. It varies in slant and differs in proportion. The overall writing pattern differs from the Oswald signatures in section I, as do the individual letter designs. The “L” of item 52 is taller and without an eyelet loop at the top right of the “L” as found in the section I signatures. The “H” of item 52 is distinctly different from the ‘““H” in the section I signatures. The “O” of item 52 retraces on itself, not the case in the section I sig- natures, where it loops around at the top right and usually swings into the following “s”. The “d” of item 52 reverses slant to go backhand, which does not occur in the section I signatures. (41) VIII. The signature, “Lee Harvey Oswald,” on the Hunt note (item: 47) does not correspond to the Oswald signatures described under section I. To begin with, the bulk of the documents which are signed with the full name, “Lee Harvey Oswald,” are more formal in tone. For example, the full name appears on all but one of the Marine Corps documents. The full name appears infrequently elsewhere— usually only the first name, middle initial, and last name are used. Further, in the Hunt note, the middle name “Harvey” is misspelled— the “e” appears to be missing; the “H” of “Harvey” differs from that found in the section I signatures; the “ar” of “Harvey” is ellided to a point that does not occur in any section I signatures; the “O” of “Os- wald” is retraced part of the way along the left side, not true of the section I Oswald signatures; and the ending “d” of Oswald is smaller than the preceding “1’’, whereas most of the ending “‘d”’s of the section I signatures are taller than the “1” (only in signatures that appear to be “‘squeezed-in” is the end “d” shorter than the preceding “‘1’’). (42) While the script writing on the Hunt note is similar in pic- torial quality to the writings under section IJ, the format of the note differs from that of the notes and letters of section IJ. The writing line is so exact as almost to give the impression it has been made on a ruled line. Usually Oswald writes in an arhythmic manner—for ex- ample, with an irregular and crooked writing line. This writing cre- ates the jumbled effect apparent in the section II documents. (43) From the examinations of item 47, it was determined that the signature does not correspond with any of the Oswald signatures of section I. Similarly, the writing does not correspond to that in the section II Oswald documents. (44) I would like to note, however, that the quality of the original photoreproductions of the Hunt note was poor. Under the best of cir- 236 cumstances, reproductions lack clarity and detail. Here, as can be seen from the copies, the original photoreproduction was out of focus, giving the document a fuzzy appearance. Accurate analysis was diffi- cult. The note is highly suspicious. The original would have to be checked in order to make a more definite analysis and reachrasa defini- tive conclusion. (45) IX. An examination and comparison was made of writings and signatures on documents attributed to Marina Oswald. The writings on the note (item 28) are such poor copies that it is virtually impos- sible to make a definite determination as to whether they corre- spond with the signatures of Marina Oswald on item 24. There is some similarity between the name in the return address on the envelope of item 28 and the signature of Marina Oswald on her entry papers (item 94), but the return address name is obscured to some extent by the post- mark. The rest of the writing on the note (item 28) is not sufficiently parallel to the writing on her entry documents (item 29) and exem- plars (item 54) to warrant any effective determination. (46) The name, “A. J. Hidell” on the Fair Play for Cuba card (item 33) was examined and compared with the exemplar writings of Marina Oswald (item 54). It was determined that the “A. J. Hidell” of the card (item 33) was written by Marina Oswald (as in item 54). The writing pattern of the signature on the card corresponds with that of the name “A. J. Hidell” as written by Marina Oswald on item 54. The Hidell signature in question is written with the same degree of writing skill as evinced by Marina Oswald. The slant, speed, pro- portions, et cetera, of the Hidell signature is matched in the writings of Marina Oswald. The design, form, and execution of stroke making up the individual letters of the Hidell signature in question (item 33) correspond to those of the letters in the writing of Marina Oswald (item 54). (47) X. The “Jack Ruby” signature on the Cuban identification card (item 53) was examined and compared with exemplars of Jack Ruby (item 49). It was determined that the “Jack Ruby” of the Cu- ban identification card was written by the author of the exemplar sig- natures attributed to Jack Ruby (item 49). While there is an odd “J” in the identification card which does not occur in the Ruby exemplars, the rest of the letters tally in all respects. The signature has been writ- ten quickly, easily, and fluently, consistent with the writing pattern of the known exemplars. The odd “J” may be “accidental” or could be accounted for in additional writing of Ruby, most likely in spontane- ous writing contemporaneous with the signature of the identification card. “Request” writing, such as that of item 49, sometimes differs toa slight extent from “spontaneous” writing. La XT. A check was made of the historical diary (item 16). is = pages were written with the same type of writing instrument. Fi meee eused for 11 of the 12 pages is similar; only the last page ee It Is appreciably thinner. The writing has a continuity from page to page and line to line that is indicative of being written about, or at, the same time. It does not give the impression of being “random” as would be expected of a diary extended over a period of time. It ap- Sia ae this diary has been written within a short period of time and not over any extensive period. 237 Summary of conclusions (49) Virtually all the Lee H. Oswald and Lee Harvey Oswald sig- natures are by the same person. There is some normal variation among the signatures, and no significant differences among the Oswald sig- natures identified as being the same. The overall writing pattern is consistently similar, and the individual letter designs match through- out without major differences. The same holds true for the script and handprint on these documents that are identified as being written by the same person. (50) The same writing is on the U.S. Postal money order to Klein’s (item 29) as is on the various letters and correspondence. The same writing is on the order form and envelope (item 80) as is on the letters and on the inside cover of the passport (item 9). (51) The writing and signatures that appear on the letters (items 95, 32, 38, and 42) agree with the writing and signatures on the U.S. Post Office applications for post office boxes (items 27, 45, and 46). (52) Thesignature and writing on the back of the photograph (item 31) agree with the signatures and script writing of Oswald (sections I and II). (53) Differences indicative of different authorship were found on the “Hunt” note (item 47) and the salary receipts (item 52). (54) It appears that the historical dairy (item 16) was written with- in a short period of time. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS OF DAVID J. PURTELL Procedures 3 (55) Items 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7,8, 9, 11, 12, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 22, 23, 24, 25, 97, 29, 31, 32, 33, 34, 36, 38, 39, 40, 43. 45, 47, 48, 51, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 61, and 62 were studied, both visually and microscopically. A detailed drawing was made of all features observed in the writings. Later, each piece of writing was compared with every other piece of evidence. Pho- tographs were taken of the evidence, and these were studied along with the detailed drawings. Thus the evidence was evaluated a total of three times. Findings (56) The examinations and comparisons revealed that all the writ- ings were executed by a person having limited writing skill. The writ- ings show physical evidence of natural movement and manner, with some normal variations. The carefree qualities and the unrestrained movements associated with genuine writing are present. None exhibit the characteristics of simulation produced by imitators attempting to duplicate the writing of another. The writings have similarities in the formation of letters, quality of writing, movement within the writing, size and proportions of letters and parts of letters, beginning and end- ing strokes. pen pressure, slope of the writing, spacing, alinement, di- rection, and speed. (57) These similarities and the lack of any unexplainable differences resulted in the following findings and opinions: (58) A. One person wrote the signatures, Lee Harvey Oswald, Lee H. Oswald, and Lee Oswald on documents 1, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, 12, 15, 17, 22, 25, 27, 31, 32, 38, 34, 36, 38, 48, 45, and 55. 238 above-listed doc- (59) B. The person who wrote the signatures on the ents 17, 22, 25, 31, 32, 38, uments also completed the messages on docum and 43. the mes- completed (60) C. The person who wrote the signatures and ed the handwrit- sages on the documents listed in A and B above execut ; ing on documents 18, 19, 20, 48, 61, and 62. on docu- the handp rinti ng appea ring (61) D. One person executed Oswal d. ments 9, 27, 34, and 45, all of which were signed Lee H. d the inform ation on the docu- (62) E. The person who hand printe nt above, also hand printe d the materia l on docume ments listed in D bist 23, 56, and 57, (63) FE. With regard to the Russian writing on items characteristics this examin er is not famili ar with this langua ge and the of the various writing systems used, eris- (64) It is almost impossible to distinguish between class charact unless the writing styles of a lan- tes and individual characteristics cuage are known. (65) This examiner is, therefore, unable to render a definite opinion, but can point out that there are similarities between the writing in in items 23. 56, and 57 and the handwriting on the items listed in A, B, and C above. (66) G. With respect to the timespan of the historical diary (item 16), an answer cannot be provided because of the present condition of the paper. The documents had been processed by the silver nitrate method in an attempt to develop latent fingerprints. While a recog- nized method, the drawback is that it soils the paper; the silver nitrate which remains on the paper causes it to turn black in time. Today, the pages are in very poor condition, and though the message can be read in part, it is a very difficult task. One observation that can be reported is that one sheet of paper is of a different weight (thickness) than the other sheets. (67) H. The committee requested that a determination be made as to whether the person who prepared items 24 and 54 also wrote the name, “A. J. Hidell” on the Fair Play for Cuba Committee card, dated June 15, 1963 (item 33). Known (68) Known handwriting of Marina Oswald appears in: Item 24—one fingerprint identification card, dated March 24, 1962; and Item 54—seven slips of paper containing the writing of the name, “A.J. Hidel” and “A. J. Hidell.” (69) The items above were examined to determine their individual writing features, as was the signature on the FPCC card (item 33). The two groups of writings were then compared. (70) The examiner is of the opinion that the person who executed the handwriting on item 54 wrote the name, “A. J. Hidell” on the Fair Play for Cuba Committee card (item 33). This opinion is based on similarities in letter formation, quality of the writings, size, and pro- portions of the letters, beginning and ending strokes, pen pressure, and slant of the writing. No unexplainable differences could be noticed. * | pene ve ery Dart of this report are photographic illustrations i i demonstrating i all the points of Pr smihiritiig and =) made up of signatures geet brian wince 239 Limitations on the examination (71) Five items of evidence were not examined in the original, but were copies. Photocopies have several limitations. They do not repro- duce all the fine details in handwriting needed in making an examina- tion and comparison. At best, they do not produce as sharp an image as a properly produced photograph, and they lack tonal gradations, a result of the contrasting process of reproduction. In addition, it is possible to incorporate or insert changes and alterations into copies. A method frequently used is to paste together parts of documents to make one fradulent document, which is then copied. If the first copy can pass inspection, it will be used; if not, it will be reworked to eliminate all signs of alteration. This amended copy is then recopied for the finished product. This is usually referred to as the “cut and paste” method. (72) Document examiners only render a qualified or conditional opinion when working from copies. They stipulate that they have to examine the original before a definite opinion will be made. (73) Because of problems with the following documents, no definite opinion can be rendered: (74) Item 18, a halftone copy of a photograph of the original docu- ment. This is at least a third generation copy and is not suitable for comparison. (A halftone copy consists of very small dots and not continuous lines.) (75) Item 29 was a Xerox copy made from a microfilm copy. Such a second generation copy has the defects of both processes. (76) Item 39 was a photograph taken without a scale so that the mag- nification or reduction of the writing could not be determined. (77) Items 40 and 41 were very poor quality photographs and lacked scales to determine the size of enlargements. (78) Item 47 was a photograph of an out-of-focus facsimile copy. In- stead of having clear discernible lines, the copy has indistinct and blurred outlines. Such a muddy and unclear copy gives the appearance that it might have been so made for a purpose. (79) It should be noted that pictorial similarities can still be noticed between the handwriting appearing on items 18, 29, 39, 40, and 41 listed above, and the documents that have been identified as being written by one person (see A, B, and C). While the handwriting appearing in item 47 contains some of the pictorial similarities, the qualitv of the writing appears different, and the signature has a strange and distorted appearance. ‘gdx0p varie ~eg61 ‘11 “deg ti oNSLB 1 RAS : : oe ee yeawa PIS ; : oppEUywAsy, AQTaN|eS dry OUTIE - 5567 oe pied 1 No. Cnr cre) auTIeN ~9S61 e280 EO = ery = ’ jddO SNISSSNLIM 4O SURLVEOIS Og ~-— Ft ¥: Prey SY Ine ay — 82 SSiyors of aazruc 0 30 BUN AND! ATTACHMENT FEN “390 968t ‘eZ ~ (op: 382%, PURTELL *$924102° 21D "psosos Siyy Ul B2AIB sou Ss Amon Rater ASBAZUOD sabe IaeMIsTTNY sed ASk. Bi: et A - GS sdrog sktawy H2AIB “eS Mou sD Ul G4 “ay nue ue Ep NNO RS Udy £961- NE Ser 241 ABERQUE JATAGS "EB329% - C06T Se en ee ‘oz < CNET Jawecerey noTawoppidy APR "9t EG6T ~ 84201 Z961- woyaeostddy 203'q 0 xonHB *49 {961 - ataeprygv goa aacddng pessexppy) Oa URDTAMMY "ABSEQUY “MOIR, YT-| HCG “dos 9ayAIss BALIOETAG E UCT IMMIOTUT “PTH - 4109. BUTIEW - L66T 243 FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS OF CHARLES C. SCOTT Procedures (80) 1. I examined all documents except items 8, 23, 24, 28, 52, 56, d7, 60, 61, 62, and 63. (81) 2. Minute scrutiny of the signatures and other handwriting purporting to be that of Oswald was conducted under a stereoscopic microscope with reflected light, sidelight from all angles, transmitted light, and ultraviolet rays. In addition, they were studied under in- frared rays by means of an infrared image converter. (The primary purpose of the first two methods is to detect any evidence of tracings, alterations, erasures, or obliterated writing. ) (82) 3. Microscopic examination was also used to determine the color of ink and type of pen used in the execution of each document. (83) 4. Photographs of original documents were studied in the lab- oratory in Kansas City. (84) 5, Photographic comparison charts of the purported signatures of Oswald were prepared and evaluated for most of the documents. (85) The above-described methods of examination were applied to all original documents submitted for examination, with the exception of two fingerprint cards, dated October 24, 1956, and August 9, 1963 (items 6 and 36), which were not received in time for this type of treatment. . (86) Photographic reproductions could only be compared visually with other photographic reproductions or with original documents. All conclusions based solely upon photographic reproductions are necessarily tentative and inconclusive, since they cannot reveal much about pen pressure and other dynamic qualities of handwriting. Fur- ther, they sometimes conceal, rather than reveal, evidence of tracings, alterations, erasures, or obliterated writing. Findings (87) Question. Are all of the signatures and other writings on the documents purported to have been written by Oswald by one and the same person? (88) Opinion. After very careful examination and comparison of the documents provided, I am of the opinion that, on the following original documents, Oswald’s purported signatures and other writings are all in the same handwriting and were all written by one and the same person. (89) Item 1—October 24, 1956. U.S. Marine Corps enlistment con- tract and record, signed “Lee Harvey Oswald.” (90) Item 2—October 24, 1956. Carbon copy of item 1 bearing an original signature, reading “Lee Harvey Oswald.” (91) Item 8—October 24, 1956. Loyalty certificate for personnel in the Armed Forces, signed “Lee Harvey Oswald.” (92) Item 4—October 24, 1956. U.S. Marine Corps examination of applicant by recruiting officer, signed “Lee Harvey Oswald.” (93) Item 5—October 24, 1956. U.S. Marine Corps record of emer- gency data, signed “Lee Harvey Oswald.” (94) Item 6—October 24, 1956. Armed Forces fingerprint card, signed “Lee Harvey Oswald.” 244 i (95) Item 7—October 25 1956 eT Oona ae Ran three ts ag. int mee formation and index form, BO: ay pass port , sign ed “fee EL U.S. He 9—c.* ** September 10, 1959. ete Item :96) 4 of U.S. (97) Item 10—c.* Sept ed “Lee TT emb Ostade 1959. Photograph on page pera sign Itemd11—S 99)‘ee eptember 11 95. faUnt ,ine Corps notice of ob- hia ae a en 0) Item 12—September 1 ; aa Corps security o term inat on sta teinenits pata ed mber 14, 1959. S 2 eG ; e Service System regis- (101) vat card, signed “Lee H easy 9. Se ectiv Item 15—Septe 02) Item 16—JJuly Bae u 15, 1961 to January 4, 1962. Page 11 of a 12-page berd “L3,a195 : ae requesting revocation (103) Item an Us, Si 17—Novem come A ad se Sa he American t 96( oher19—1 Item Lane asti 960, undated. Handwriting on Holland- 2 ; (105) Item 22—January 17 eel a dressed to anan Embassy, Fe Lae aS: 1 West 26th Au “Worker,” 23 tem 25—J esoFeu eh? ar ea ea 107)e sign “Lee HLOswa> ld Itemed 26— July 13, 4¢ 1962. Letter to Leslie Welding Co., signed “e aaa 2915, ees, Item 27— 108) 9; 1962 yB ch ER oT “Leo 09)edofth sign Item 7EDeto H.31—M ber 4 ARO CAPER of man with rifle. On the ay EE bial e NR “To my triend George ation reading Rk 26, .”| a Cuba Com- 5/1 V/63 ld ay Oswa32—M Oy ottem 26,LOGE) Suee s to alapee (il1)). Osv ee Items 34—J une 25, 1963. Passport application, un signed “Lee H, y ae Item 35—June 25, , 196 1963. Ps attached to ap- aoe photograph s 36—August Be “Lee H. Onetlg : i ' tee Mis ea e asi ININ SHIN OR Se e aR in of the ek eo rae to central committee (ae et tem a 38— Au eee are Ba 5) Item 43—Octob é a4 application, signed ober 15, 1963. Employment Hic debts $281 . (aa :44—O ’ . j ctoberer 16, 1963. Se Ra t tem E (17) Ttem 46Novaitiber t 43 REED = pity: ta agora a ; ‘ed 2008109 , Te vem srabex ~ eae emsap ere 46— N to P.O. Box 6225, key 1, 1963. Receipt for tem i: (hoy, is 51— 73 nn U van Gan Aanhiet fie Aeie e Aa pon esOF e-descri e documents (with the bed foptio exce atatined _ In exam éie Gand pe by re- i er a stereoscopic microsco ected light, side light from al angles, transmitted light, and ultra- *Circa is used b a passport di ecausethan is u which is oftenften different that of the nas _ feos e.y the holder: stay pe 245 violet rays. I also inspected them under infrared, using an infrared image converter. (121) I did not find any evidence of tracing or copying in any of the signatures or other handwriting purporting to be Oswald’s on any of the original documents, nor did I find any material erasures, altera- tions, or obliterations. All seem to have been executed in the ordinary course of business without any suspicious signs. Equally important, all the purported signatures and writings of Oswald on the above- described documents conform with each other in letter formation, slant, proportions, alignment, and connecting strokes—allowing for normal variation. If Oswald’s writing were imitated by some other person, in all probability the imitations would display a slavish uni- formity somewhat like that of rubber stamping. There was no such suspicious uniformity and lack of natural variation in the signatures and writings. (122) Also highly significant was that all the signatures and hand- writing on the above-described original documents were executed with the same type of free, rapid writing movement and without any in- dications of suspicious hesitations or skips. (123) Where, as here, two or more writings conforming with each other in the pictorial aspects of form or design (allowing for natural variation) show evidence of having been written with the same type of writing movement and rhythm, and lack any indications of tracing or other imitiative processes, the conclusion is inescapable that all were written by the same person. (124) With respect to the carbon copies and photographic reproduc- tions submitted for examination, the form or design, slant, proportions, connecting strokes, and the like conformed with the writing on original documents. Therefore, tentatively, and subject to modification should the original documents become available for examination, it 1s my opinion that the following are probably carbon copies or photo- reproductions, as the case may be, of documents bearing writings that conform with the writing on the original documents purporting to be Oswald’s: (125) Item 13—September 11, 1959. Carbon copy of Armed Forces of the U.S. report of transfer or discharge bearing a carbon copy of a signature reading “Lee Harvey Oswald.” (126) Item 18—November 15, 1959. Photocopy of handwritten ac- count of interview with Miss Mosby. (127) Item 21—1962, undated. Photocopy of document identified as a “self-questionnaire.” (128) Item 37—August 9, 1963. Photocopy of fingerprint card and mug shots taken by New Orleans Police Department, signed “Lee H. Oswald.” (129) Item 39—September 27, 1963. Photograph of a page from a hotel register, signed “Lee, Harvey Oswald.” (130) Item 40—September 27, 1963. Photographs (one of entire docu- ment and one of signature on visa application), Cuban Consulate, Mexico City, signed “Lee H. Oswald.” (131) Item 41—September 27, 1963. Photograph of carbon copy of item 40. (1382) Item 47—November 8, 1963. Two photographs of a letter to Mr. Hunt (one of entire document, the other an enlargement of signature). 246 nical (halftone) re- (133) Item 48—November 9, 1963. Photomecha sy, signed “Lee H. production of typewritten letter to Sovie t Embas Oswald.” rough draft of (134) Item 50—Undated. Photograph of unsigned Item 48. 40) and of the (135) The photographs of the visa application (item (item 41) appear to be in the same carbon copy of the visa application as far as handwriting as the other purported signatures of Oswald, design, slant, proportions, connecting the pictorial aspects of form or it 1s strokes, et cetera, are concerned. Because the pictures are fuzzy, impossible to rule out tracing or some other method of imitative writing. (136) It is impossible to determine positively whether the letter to Hunt (item 47) is or is not in the handwriting of the same person as the other writings purporting to be Oswald’s. | (137) The photographs appear to be photographs of a document bearing handwriting of the same person as that in the other docu- ments purporting to be Oswald’s. It is true that the signature is not typical—“Harvey” is misspelled—but that could be due to haste. If not genuine, the original from which this photograph was made 1s certainly a clever imitation. (138) Itis recommended that an effort be made to obtain the originals of all of the above-described reproductions so that they can be sub- mitted to the same thorough examination, given the original documents. (139) Question. Although they purport to be the handwriting of one Hidell, were the postal money order (item 29) and the envelope ad- dressed to Kleins (item 30) actually written by the person who wrote the signatures and other writings which purport to be Oswald’s? (140) Opinion. The original of the money order (item 29) was ex- amined and compared with the original writings purporting to be Oswald’s. I am of the opinion that the fill-ins on the face of this money order are in the handwriting of the same person as the signatures and writings purporting to be Oswald’s. The writing on the money order conforms with the writing purporting to be that of Oswald on the other documents in every material way, including writing movement and rhythm, as well as the pictorial aspects of form or design, propor- tions, alinement, slant, and connections. It is also significant that the writing on this money order shows no indication of being a mere copy or imitation of the writing purporting to be that of Oswald. This money order was submitted in the original, and hence it was possible to give it a complete microscopic examination and to study it under the infrared image converter. ; See ace Suilohe addressed to Kleins (item 30) was available only Bata nites ie “i m a ar gement. This is even less satisfactory Ha date ae aN :;ee or an opinion on handwriting. It can only aspects of form or design. propor- tions, alinement sla it a cpaeciaeica ing on this pig Bh pr Ni strokes are concerned, the writ- er ad eraia: Pie hse oee it purports to be that of one Hidell, ils ginal writing submitted for examination which purported to be that of Lee Harvey Oswald. (142) Megs Question. ¢uestion. WasWas the the diary di (item 16) writt it ls dated, or was it written at ae ? eer eas) nal aa 247 (143) Opinion. While the diary was submitted for examination in original form, it was almost completely unsuitable (with the exception of p. 11) for document examination because of treatment with finger- print developer. Little patches of ink were unobscured, but these were insufficient as a basis for a definite conclusion. From the patches of ink that could be studied, there are indications that the same pen and: ink could have been used to write the entire diary. However, this ob- servation is based solely on microscopic examination; no chemical tests were made or authorized. Use of the same pen and ink (particu- larly when, as here, a fountain pen or a dip pen, rather than a ball- point pen, was used) is more consistent with the diary having been prepared at one time, or over a few consecutive writing sessions, than it is with execution from day to day over the extensive period covered. Concluding remarks (144) As far as original documents are concerned, the conclusion is that the signatures and writings on them which purport to be Os- wald’s are all in the handwriting of the same person. In those instances where reproductions of any kind were examined, it was found that the writing conformed in pictorial aspects with the writing purporting to be Oswald’s on the original documents examined. Only a tentative opinion could be reached as to these reproductions. (145) Attached are two photographic comparison charts, prepared by the examiner, one showing most of the signatures reading “Lee Harvey Oswald,” placed close to each other for ready comparison, the. other a composite of most of the signatures reading “Lee H. Oswald” and of one signature reading “Lee Oswald.” Large mural-size repro- ductions of these charts, suitable for simultaneous viewing by a num-- ber of persons, are being sent to the committee under separate cover. (146) The photographs on these charts were taken by this examiner, who also prepared the charts. They are reliable representations of all of the signatures depicted, and they show all signatures enlarged to approximately the same extent. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS OF VINCENT J. SCALICE (147) The following inked impressions were examined and com- pared at the latent print section, Federal Bureau of Investigation, on June 8, 1978. (148) 1. Fingerprint impressions of Lee Harvey Oswald: U.S. Marine Corps Service No. 1653230 Prints taken by: Ogell W. Melam Date of prints : October 15, 1956 Armed Forces No. 327925D Signed : Lee Harvey Oswald (149) 2. Arrest fingerprint impressions of Lee Harvey Oswald: Dallas, Tex. Police Department Dallas No. 54018 Commission exhibit No. 630 Prints taken by : Not indicated Date of prints: November 25, 1963 Individual fingerprinted refused to sign same 248 (150) 3. Arrest fingerprint impressions of Lee Harvey Oswald: New Orleans, Louisiana Police Department New Orleans No. 112-728 Prints taken by: Arthur M. James Date of prints: August 9, 1963 Not signed by Lee Harvey Oswald | (151) 4. Palm print impressi ons of Lee Harvey Oswald: Dallas, Tex. Police Department Left hand No. 628 Right hand No. 629 , Prints taken by: J. B. Hicks Date of prints: November 22, 1963 (152) 5. Fingerprint impressions of Lee Harvey Oswald: Dallas, Tex. Police Department Commission exhibit No. 627 Prints taken by: J. B. Hicks Date of prints : November 22, 1963 (153) The inked fingerprint and palm prints of Lee Harvey Oswald appearing on exhibits 1-5 are identical and are those of Lee Harvey Oswald. (154) In addition, the following latent impressions were examined and compared with the inked fingerprint impressions of Lee Harvey Oswald at the latent print section, Federal Bureau of Investigation, on June 8, 1978. (155) 6. Latent fingerprint designated 4a recovered from brown paper container (wrapping) and developed by the Federal Bureau of Investigation. I identified it as the left index finger (no. 7) of Lee Harvey Oswald. (156) 7%. Latent palm print, designated 4b, recovered from brown paper container (wrapping), developed by the Federal Bureau of Investigation. I identified it as the right palm of Lee Harvey Oswald. (157) 8. Latent fingerprint recovered from the trigger guard of a 6.5-millimeter, Mannlicher-Carcano rifle, serial no. C2766, processed at the Dallas Police Department. It is of no value for identification purposes. (158) 9. Lift from rifle (designated commission exhibit 139) from the underside of the foregrip at the gun barrel end of the foregrip of a Mannlicher-Carcano, serial no. C2766. I identified five character- istics or points of identity which match the lift. (159) 10. Latent palm print lifted from the underside of the gun barrel near the end of the foregrip, developed by the Dallas Police Department. I examined enlarged negatives which I identified as being identical to the right palm print of Lee Harvey Oswald. (160) 11. Palm print recovered from small cardboard box A (com- mission No. 641), by Federal Bureau of Investigation. I identified it as the left palm of Lee Harvey Oswald. {ag: oe Latent print (designated 2a) recovered from a cardboard s pre pyores by Federal Bureau of Investigation. I identified (162) oe anes DueGr, CNS, 2) of Lee Harvey Oswald. Seegae Be zaten palm print recovered from the bottom of a card- ard carton marked D, developed by Dallas Police Department. ane it as identical to that of right palm print of Lee Harvey 249 (163) 14. Latent fingerprint recovered from page 37 of the Amer- ican Rifleman (June 1963), developed by the Federal Bureau of Investigation. An order blank for Klein’s Sporting Goods Co. had been torn from page 59. I identified it as the right thumb (No. 1) of Lee Harvey Oswald. 251 EKXHIBITS* (1) October 24, 1956. Original of United States Marine Corps Enlistment Con- tract and Record, Service No. 1653230, signed Lee Harvey Oswald. Am ase ee re UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS =e Pe mvvnc 9 (2-90 (nev.2-89) (SOPERSEDES ~ ENLISTMENT AVEC 10 (9D CONTRACT AND RECORD (atv. mn), WOO WoLaz USED) =» ? 24 Oct 1956 ec - Aw IT 6& PLACE OF BIRTH (City) (State or country) -7. RELIGION New Orleans Louisian2 Lutheran 10, HOME OF RECORD AT TIME OF ENLISTMENT STREET AND NUMBER OR RF. D. NUMBER CITY OR TOWN COUNTY OR PARISH STATE OR COUNTRY 4936 Collinwood Street Fort Worth Tarrant Texas N, PLACE AT WHICH ENUSTED (City, county, and State) 12, EFFECTIVE DATE OF ENLISTMENT 1. CONTRACT LIMITATION (if any) A: DAY MONTH YEAR USMC _RS Dallas, Texas 2h Yetober 1956 None ENTRIES AS TO PREVIOUS SERVICE 14. DATE ENLISTED 1S. DATE DISCHARGED 16. REASON oan 18 SERVICE BRANCH OF DISCHARGE ee ee eee ab Sa ae None Claimek ———— 21. RANK TO WE'CH APPO:NTED OR 22 TRANSFERRED REAPPO! 3 me Pvt ro __YSMC i? RDev, San Diego, i's Californi a: 23. Examining Surgeon’s Certificate. (This certification no longer used.) 24. For and in consideration of the pay or wages due in the grades which may from time to time be assigned me during the contin- uance of my service, I do hereby acknowledge to have voluntarily enlisted in the (strikg one) (1) United States Marine Corps Gy Recrvent the HaivetAtotes MarberLups, as a private, and I agree to and with 2 Se JUS2S BOS 0 an ofiicer of the United States Marine Corps (Résérvexas follows: Wame of recruiting orfcer) 25. To enter the service of the United States Marine Corps and to report to such post or station of the Marine Corps as I may ’ be ordered to join, and to the utmost of my power and ability discharge my several services or duties and be in everything con- formable and obedient to the several requirements and lawful commands of the officers who may be placed over me. 26. I oblige and subject myself to serve un- WORD | FIGURE eet pakfoure to less sooner discharged by proper authority ~ AE £ YEARS YEARS Nendevitine’) ‘27. In the event of war or national emergency declared by the Presidentto exist during my term of service, I oblige and subject myself to serve until 6 months after the end of that war or national emergency if so required by the Secretary of the Navy unless I voluntarily reenlist or extend my enlistment. 28. I am of legal age to enlist; I have never been found guilty of a crime except as stated by me to the recruiting officer; I have never deserted from any oz the Armed Forces of the United States, and have never been discharged therefrom for any reason other than recorded herein. 3 29. I understand that upon enlistment in the Reserve of the United States Marine Corps, or upon transfer or assignment thereto, I may not be ordered to active duty without my consent except in time of war, or when in the opinion of the President a national emergency exists, or when otherwise prescribed by law, and that I may be required to nerform active duty during such periods, 80. I HAVE HAD THIS CONTRACT FULLY EXPLAINED TO ME. I UNDERSTAND IT, AND CERTIFY THAT NO PROMISE OF ANY KIND HAS BEEN MADE TO ME CONCERNING ASSIGNMENT TO DUTY, OR PROMOTION DURING MY ENLISTMENT. ; 31. Oath of Entistment: I do sclemnly swear (or affirm) that I will bear true fuitn and ollesiance to the United States of America; that I will serve them honestly and fcithfuily againsé all their encmies Whomsoever; and that I will chey the orders of the Presiden? of the United Stctes and the orders of the ofiicers appointed over me, according to regulations end the Uniform Code of Military. Justice. And I do further swear (or ciarm) that all statements made by me, as now given in this record, ere correct, Ws POE ek a NF EEE IRE” irat name) bl (Middle name ae Lihat TCS (Last name) Subscribed and sworn to before me this_.._24th ______dayof __Octoher__..__ ALD. 955 Sp SIGNATURE eh neAND RANK OF Retaeabitaeil aa RECRUITING OFFICER caicall Li en Bie alk_- aia okay ed Saeed RK. JONES stay > Cant 2 Sve x apo WU. 6. GOVERNMENT PAINTING OFFICE 16—64393-3 3 2 SERA ‘oe —SFK Epes F-4T9 ae 252 _—OUNITED STATES MARINE CORPS * aye 0-15) Satie eos AND RECORD gpa. ENLISTMENT CONTRACT & rsda), WHO WALL OF USED) e & DATE OF SiATH DAY MONTH YEAR | CTY OR TOWN COUNTY OR PARISH D. NUMBER STREET AND NUMBER OR R. F. Street Fort Vorth 12 EFFECTIVE DATE OF ENLISTMENT DAY MONTH YEAR Qa - OR Zi. RANK TO WHICH APPOINTED 22. TRANSFERRED REAPPOINTED Prt | ug USMC _RDen, San Dieso, California 23, Examining Surgeon’s Certificate. (This certification no longer used.) me during the contin- in the grades which may from time to time be assigned States Marine Corps 24. For and in consideration of the pay or wages due enlisted in the (strixe one) (1) United wance of my service, I do hereby acknowledge to have voluntarily iets as a private, and I agree to and with — OES ——— Lette ne pater (Name of recruiting officer) Mtewor cae United wcates Alarine 5 (Reeasice} as follows: Corps as I may Corps and to report to such post or station of the Marine 25, To enter the service of the United States Marine discharge my several services or duties and be in everything con- be ordered to join, and to the utmost of my power and ability lawful commands of the officers who may be placed over me. formable and obedient to the several requirements and FIGURE ys end fries ta un- WORD 26. I oblige and subject myself to serve YEARS YEARS handwriting.) less sooner discharged by proper authority ay President to exist during my term of service, I oblige and subject 27. In the event of wer or national emergency declared byorthenational emergency if so required by the Secretary of the Navy myself to serve until 6 months after the end of that war unless I voluntarily reenlist or extend my enlistment. crime except as stated by me to the recruiting officer; I have 28. I am of legal age to enlist; I have never been found guilty of a and have never been discharged therefrom for any reason never deserted from any of the Armed Forces of the United States, other than recorded herein. Marine Corps, or upon transfer or assignment thereto 29. I understand that upon enlistment in the Reserve of the United Stateswar, or when in the opinion of the President a nationat I may not be ordered to active duty without my consent except in time of required to perform active duty during such periods. emergency exists, or whea otherwise prescribed by law, and that I may be IT, AND CERTIFY THAT NO 30. I HAVE HAD THIS CONTRACT FULLY EXPLAINED TO ME. I UNDERSTAND TO DUTY, OR PROMOTION OED SD BEEN MADE TO ME CONCERNING ASSIGNMENT . i - =) i. 4 . United States of America; 31. Octh ov © onent: § do selemnly swear (or affirm) thet I will bear true faith and allegiance to the obey the orders of the President that | will v2 scm honestly and faithfully egainst all their enemies whomsocver; and that I will reguiations and the Uniform Code of Military of the United States end the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to are correct. in this record, Justice. And ! do further swear (or affirm) that cll statements made by me, as now given SIGNATURE -———. meee mee (First name) 1U. S$. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 16— 6393-3 253 (2) October 24, 1956. Carbon of Item 1, with an original signature, Lee Harvey Oswald. Sagi teas EAge “"S" "UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS ; Shs a ance eee iS ENLISTMENT CONTRACT AND RECORD 8° ta), Mc AL 8xISD) NOV27 1956 2 : Cy: Ww & DATEOF BiaTH & PLACE OF BIRTH (City) (State or country) DAY STREET AND NUMBER ORR.F. D.NUMBER CTY OR TOWN COUNTY OR PARISH STATE OR COUNTRY 6 Collimvood Street. Fort Worth Tarrant WL PLACE AT WHICH ENLISTED (City, county, and State) 12 EFFECTIVE DATE OF ENLISTMENT 1. CONTRACT LIMITATION (if any) DAY MONTH YEAR ee us USMC RS Pallas Texas 2), | Ont cher Fe None _ ENTRIES AS TO PREVIOUS SERVICE Picket d 1& DATE DISCHARGED 18. BRANCH 16, REASON SERVICE OF 18, SERVICE HO. 20. TYPE OF DISCHARGE ——— e—————— —_—_— —_———— To U a srarepl-t peistearatonize Cosme, as a private, and I agree to and with_R, XK, JOURS 3 er of the United States Marine Corps (Peasixe}as follows: Name of recruiting officer) ; 25. To enter the service of the United States Marine Corps and to report to such post or station of the Marine Corps as I may be ordered to join, and to the utmost of my power and ability discharge my several services or duties and be in everything con- formable and obedient to the several requirements and lawful commands of the officers who may be placed over me. 26. I oblige and subject myself to serve un- WORD FIGURE (Word and figure to less sooner discharged by proper authority YEARS Raiee emt reer 27. In the event of war or national emergency declared by the President to exist during my term of service, I oblige and subject myself to serve until 6 months after the end of that war or national emergency if so required by the Secretary of the Navy unless I voluntarily reenlist or extend my enlistment. _ 28. I am of legal age to enlist; I have never been found guilty of a crime except as stated by me to the recruiting officer; I have never deserted from any of the Armed Forces of the United States, and have never been discharged therefrom for any reason other than recorded herein. 29. I understand that upon enlistment in the Reserve of the United States Marine Corps, or upon transfer or assignment thereto, I may not be ordered to active duty without my consent except in time of war, or when in the opinion of the President a national emergency exists, or when otherwise prescribed by law, and that I may be required to periorm active duty during such periods, 80. I HAVE HAD THIS CONTRACT FULLY EXPLAINED TO ME. I UNDERSTAND IT, AND CERTIFY THAT NO PROMISE OF ANY KIND HAS BEEN MADE TO ME CONCERNING ASSIGNMENT TO DUTY, OR PROMOTION DURING MY ENLISTMENT. . 31. Octh of Enlistment: I do sclemnly swear (or offirm) thet | will bear true faith and allegiance fo the thet t will serve them honestly United States of America; and faithfully against ofl their enemizs whomsocver; and thot I will obcy of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the the orders of the Presiden Uniform Code of Military _ dustice. And I do further swear (or affirm) that all statements made by me, as now given in this record, cre correct. Patae “2 ee SIGNATURE .__ fake DomeDea EN IE es Be eB. — Oe PP (First name) (idle name) {Last ealnas Subscribed and sworn to before me thi ——2Ath———--—--— day of —Getobter———_—_—-, A. D. ——2956-- A SIGNATURE AND RANK OF RECRUITING OFFICER ..._§ S-_.7e™ VAL) ee ~--Yf----- baseof | 1G, S, COVERNMEKT PRINTING OFFICE 16—64393-3 BER ees —SFK Emmet F-499 9 = 204 Certificate for Personnel of the Armed Forces, (3) October 94. 1956. Loyalty signed Lee Harvey Oswald. 1S LOYALTY CERTIFICATE FOR PERSONNEL OF THE ARMED FORCES bog ————— policy relating to Defense has the a uthority to establish procedures implementing the national I. PROVISIONS. The Department of to include restrictions as to the Armed Forces. This has been determined by proper authority loyalty of persons entering on duty with with, certaim organizations. sympathetic association certain standards of conduct and membership in, or . . STANDARDS OF CONDUCT g reasonable (©) Advocacy of revolution or of force or violence to alter the existing consti- 3. Conduct which may be considered as establishin tutional form of government of the United States; advocacy of revolu- include but is not grounds for imposing appropriate penalties shall tion or of force of violence to bring about economic, political, or social change. [imited to, one or more of the following: therefor, or intimate and (d) Intentional unauthorized disclosure to any person under circumstances (a) Sabovage, espionage, or attempts or preparations to persons who the which may indicate disloyalty to the United Srares, of documents or sympathetic associations with or voluntary assistance ; subject Of investigation has reasonable cause to believe may be spies or information of a classified or nonpublic character. saboteurs. : oc writings and acts which can reasonably be con- (e) Acting, attempting fo act, of knowingly failing to act when such con- (4) Treason, sedition, opinions or duct 1s calculated to serve the interests of another government in prefer- sidered 23 intended to encourage seditious or treasonable ence to the interests of the United Scates of America. actions. MEMBERSHIP IN OR ASSOCIATION WITH CERTAIN ORGANIZATIONS ments when such denial is atcempted by force, violence, or intimida- 2. Associations which may be considered as establishing reason- tion, OT; able grounds for imposing appropriate penalties include but are not (2) Alteration of the existing form of government of the United States limited to membership in, athliation with, or sympathetic associa- or territory subject (o its jurisdiction, or of the existing economic, move- social, or political order within it when such alteration is through tion with, any foreiga or domestic organization, association, or with the aid of force, violence, or intimidation. ment, group or combination of persons having the following characteristics: (5) Which is disclosed by investigation, or is designated by the Attorney General of the Uniced States to be coralitarian, fascist, comc:znist, or sub- (a) Which practices, seeks to practice, or advocates either: versive, of as having adopted a policy of advocating or spproving the commission of acts of force or violence to deny persons their cigits under (1) Denial, to any person, group of persons, or class of persons within the Constitucion of the United States, or as seeking to alter the form of the United Scares or territory sudject to its jurisdiction, of any right government of the United States by unconstitutional means regardless of or vights which the Federal Constitution guarantees Or protects practice, advocacy, or nonadyocacy of any of the tenets ser fotth in 1 (a) against encroachment by either or both Federal and State overn- and 1 (5) above. 3. Organizations designated by the Attorney General, pursuant to Executive Order 10450, are lissed below: American Polish Labor Council. . Cervantes Fraternal Society. \§ Communist Party, U. S$. A., its subdivisions, sub- China Welfare Ape! Inc. sidiaries and affiliates. American Polish League. American Rescue Ship Mission (a project of the Chopin Cultural Center. : Communist Political Association, its subdivisions, Citizens Committee to Free Earl Browder. subsidiaries and affiliates, including— United American Spanish Aid Committee). American-Russian Fraternal Society. Citizens Commitiee for Harry Bridges. Alabama People’s Educational Association. Citizens Commitice of the Upper West Side (Neu" Florida Press and Educational League. American-Russian Institute, New York (alse known as the American Russian Institute for York City). Oklahoma League for Political Education. Citizens Eniergency Defense Conferen-e. People's Educational and Press Association of Cultural Relations with the Soviet Union). American Russian Institute, Philadelphia. Citizens Protective League. Texas. Civil Liberties Sponsoring Committee of Virginia League for People's Education. American Russian Institute of San Francisco. American Russian Institute of Southern California. Pittsburgh. * , , : Young Communist League. Civil Rights Congress and its affiliated organiza- Abraham Lincoln Brigade. Los Angeles. Abraham Lincoln School, Chicago, Hiinvis. American Slav Congress. tions, including: American Women tor Peace. Civil Rights Congress for Texas. 5 jerk Accion Committee to Free Spain Now, Veterans Ayainst Discrimination of- Civil Rights American Association for Reconstruction in Yugo- American Youth Congress. American Youth for Democracy. Congress of New York. slavia, Inc. American Beanch of the Federation of Greek Mari- Armenian Progressive League of America. Columbians. Associated Klans of America. Comite Coordinator Pro Republica Espanola. time Unions. American Christian Nationalist Party. Association of Georgia Klans. Comite Pro Derechos Civiles. | sane Committee for European Workers’ Re- Association of German Nationals (Reichsdeutscbe Committee to Abolish Discrimination in Maryland. ict. Vereinigung). Comunittee to Aid the Fighting South. American Committee for Protection of Foreign Association of Lithuanian Workers (also knows Committee to Defend che Rights and Freedom of Born. as Lietuviu Darbininku Susivienijimas). Piusburgh’s Political Prisoners. American Comaiictee for the Setclement of Jews in Ausland-Organization dec NSDAP, Overseas Commiitee for a Democratic Far Eastern Poticy. Birobdidjan, Inc, Branchof Nazi Party. Committee foe Constitutional and Political American Cominittee for Spanish Freedom. Baltimore Forum. Freecom. 4 ' American Committee for Yugoslay Relief, Inc, Benjar.in Davis Freedom Committee. Committee for the Defense of the Pittsburgh Six. American Committee to Survey Labor Conditions Black Dragon Society. Committee for Nationalist Action. in Europe. Boston School for Marxist Studies, Boston. Committee for the Negro in the Arts. Aniciwai Council for a Democratic Greece, for- Massachusetts. Committee for Peace and-premrerinuor Vestival in merly known as the Greek American Council; Bridges-Kobercon-Schmidt Defense Committee. Philadelphia. ‘ Greek American Committee for National Unity. Bulgarian American People’s League of the Committee for the Protection of the Bill of Rights. American Council on Soviet Relations. United States of America. © Committee for World Youth Friendship and American Croatian Congress. California Emergency Defense Committee. Cultural Exchange. American Jewish Labor Council. California Labor School, Inc., 321 Divisadero Committee to Defend Marie Richardson. American League Against War and Fascism. Street, San Francisco, California. Committee to Uphold the Bill of Rights. American League fur Peace and Democracy. Carpatho-Russian People’s Society. Commonwealth College, Mena, Arkansas. American Lithuanisn Workers Literary Assuciation Central Council of American Women of Croatian Congress Against Discrimination. (also known as Arrerikos Lietuvin Durbininku Descent (alse kuouwn as Central Council of Congress of the Unemployed. — Literaturos Draugija). American Croatien Women, Nutional Council of Connecticut Committee to Aid Victims of the American Notion: Labor Party. Croatian B'omen). Smith Act. American National Socialise League. Central Japanese Association (Beikoku Chue Connecticut Stare Youth Conference. American National Socialise Party. Nipponjin Kai), Congress of American Revolutionary Writers. American Nationalist Party. Central Japanese Association of Southern Congress of American Women. American Patriots, Inc. California. Council on African Affairs. American Peace Crusade, : Central Organization of the German-American Cerncil of Greek Americans. American Peace sfobilizarion. \ National Alliance (Deutscbe-Amerikanisebe Covacil for Jobs, Relief, aod Housing. American Poles for Peace. Einbeitsfront), Souncil for Pan-American Democracy. 250 wa . Croatian Benevolent ad eb! >) i Kyffhacuser, also known as Kyfthacusee League Pittsburgh Arts Club. Dai Nippon Butwokhu Kai (Military Virrue Society (Kyffhuenser Band), Kyithacuser Fellowship Political Prisoners’ Welfare Committee. of Japan or Military Art Saciety of Japan). (Kyffhaeuser Kameradsebaft), Polonia Society of the WO, Daily Worker Press Club. Save War Relief (Kyffhueuser Krieghshilfs- Progressive German-Americans, also known as Daniels Detease Committee. we . * Progressive Geeman-Americans of Chicago. Dante Alighicei Society (Between 1935 and 1940). Labor Council for Negro Rights. Proletacian Party of America, Dennis Defense Committee. Labor Research Association, Inc. Protestant War Veterans of che United States, Inc. Detroit Youth Assembly. Labor Youth League. Provisional Committee of Citizens for Peace, East Bay Peace Conmittec. League for Common Sense. Southwese Arca. Emergency Conference to Save Spanish Refugees League of American Writers. Provisional Committee on Latin American Affairs. (founding budy of the North American Spanish Lictor Society (tulian Black Shirts). Provisional Committce to Abolish Discrimination Aid Committee). Maccdonian-American People’s League. in the State of Maryland. Families of the Baltimore Smith Act Victims. Mario Morgantini Circle. Puerto Rican Comite Pro Libertades Civiles Families of the Smith Act Victims. Maritime Labor Committce to Defend Al Lannon, (CLC). Federation of .[calian War Veterans in the U. S. A., Maryland Congress Againse Discrimination. Puertorriquenos Unidos (Puerto Kicans United). Inc. (Associazione Nazionale Combattenti Massachusetts Minute Wornen for Peace (not con- Quad City Committee for Peace. Wtaliani, [ederazione degli Stati Uniti d° eee with the Minute Women of the U.S. A., Queensbridge Tenants League. ne.). Revolutionary Workers League. America), Romanian-American Featernal Socicty. Finnish-American Mutual Aid Society. Maurice Braverman Defense Commitice. Michigan Civil Rights Federation. Russian Anirican Socicty, Inc. Frederick Douglass Educational Center. Sakura Kai (Patriotic Society, or Cherry Associa- Freedom Stage, Inc. Michigan Council tor Peace. Michigan School of Social Science. - — composed of veterans of Kusso-Japanese Friends of the New Germany (Freunde des Neuen Yar). Deutschlands). Nanka Teikoku Gunyudan (ltperial Military Friends Group or Southern California Wear Samuel Adams School, Boston, Mass. Friends of the Soviet Union Santa Barbara Peace Forum. Garibaldi American Fraternal Society. Veterans). : f — Washington Carver School, New York National Association of Mexican Americans (also Schappes Defense Committee. known as Asociacion Nacional Mexico-Ameri- Schneiderman-Darcy Defense Commictce. ity. School of Jewish Studies, New York City. German-American Bund (Amerika-deutscber cana). National Blue Star Mothers of America (not to be Seattle Labor Schvol, Seattle, Washingcon. Volkshund). Serbian-American Fraternal Society. German-American Republican League. confused with the Blue Scar Mothers of America German-American Vocational League (Dentsche- organized in February 1942). aa Serbian Vidovdan Council. Amerikanische Berufsge-meinscehaft). National Committee for the Defense of Political Shinto Temples (limited to State Shinto abolisbed Guardian Club. Prisoners. in 1945). Harlem Trade Union Council. National Committee for Freedom of the Press. _ Silver Shict Legion of America. Hawaii Civil Liberties Committee. National Committee to Win Amnesty for Smich Slavic Council of Southern California. Heimuska Kai, also known as Nokubei_ Heieki Act Victims. Slovak Workers Sei ck Gimusha Kai, Zaibel Nihonjin, Heijaku National Committee to Win the Peace. Slovenian-American National Council. Gimusha Kai and Zaibei Heimusha Kai National Conference on American Policy in China Socialise Workers Party, including American Com- (Japanese Residing in America Military Con- and the Far East (a Conference culled by the mittee for European Workers’ Relief. scripts Association). Committee for a Democratic Far Eastern Policy). Socialist Youth League. Hellenic-American Brotherhood. National Council of Americans of Croatian Sokoku Kai (fatherland Society). Hinode Kai (Imperial Japanese Reservists). Descent. . Southern Negro Youth Congress. Hinomaru Kai (Rising Sun Flag Society—a group National Council of American Soviet Friendship. Suiko Sha (Keserre Officers Association, Los vl eae dd War Veterans). National Federation for Constitutional Liberties. Angeles). Hokubei Zaigo Shoke Dan (North American National Labor Conference for Peace. pee Women for Peace. Reserve Otficers Association). National Negro Congress. ‘om Paine School of Social Science, Philadelphia, Hollywood Writers Mobilization for Defense. National Negro Labor Council. Pennsylvania. Hungarian-American Council for Democracy. Nationalist Action League. Tom Paine School of Westchester, New York. Hungarian Brotherhood. Nationalist Party of Puerto Rico. Trade Union Committee for Peace. Nature Friends of America (Since 1935). Trade Unionists for Peace. Independent Party (Seattle, Washington). Tri-State Negro Trade Union Council. Independent People’s Party. Negro Labor Victory Committee. New Committee for Publications. Ukranian-American Fraternal Union. Independent Socialist League. Union of American Croatians. Industrial Workers of the World. Nichibei Kogyo Kaisha (The Great Fujii Theatre). North American Committee to Aid Spanish Union of New York Veterans. International Labor Defense. United American Spanish Aid Committee. Internacional Workers Order, its subdivisions, Democracy. North American Spanish Aid Committee. United Committce of Jewish Societies and Lands- subsidiaries and affiliates. manschaft Federations, also known as Coordi- jannen Association of America. North Philadelphia Forum. lapanese Overseas Central Society (Kaigai Dobo Northwest Japanese Association. nation Committee of Jewish Landsmanschaften Ohio School of Social Sciences. and Fraternal Organizations. buo Kai). United Committee of South Slavic Americans. Japanese Overseas Convention, Tokyo, Japan, Oklahoma Committee to Defend Political Pcis- oners. Uniced Defense Council of Southern California. 1 is United Harlem Tenants and Consumers Organiza- Japanese Protective Association (Retruiting Original Southern Klans, Incorporaced. rganization). Pacific Northwest Labor hool, Seattle, tion. lefferson School of Social Science, New York City. Washington. United May Day Commicrec. Palo Alto Peace Club. United Negro and Allied Veterans of America. lewish Culture Society. Vererans of the Abraham Lincoln Brigade. lewish People’s Committee. Partido del Pueblo of Panama (operating in the Canal Zone). Voice of Freedom Committee. Jewish People’s Fraternal Order. Wale Whitman School of Social Science, Newark, Peace Information Center. Jikyoku Lin Kai (The Committee for the Crisis). Peace Movement of Ethiopia. New Jersey. Johnson-Forest Group. People’s Drama, Inc: Washington Bookshop Association. ; Johnsonites. People's Educational Association (Incorporated Washington Committee to Defend the Bill of Joint AntrFascist Refugee Committee. under name Los Angeles Educational Associa- Rights. tion, Inc.), also known as People’s Educational Washington Committee for Democratic Action. or Council of Progressive Icalian-Americans, Washington Commonwealth Federation. inc. Center, People’s University, People’s School. People’s Institute of Aste’ Religion, Washington Pension Union. Joseph Weydemeyer School of Social Science, Sc. Wisconsin Conference on Social Legislation. Louis, Missouri. Peoples Programs (Seattle, B’usbington). Workers Alliance (since April 1936). ’ Kibei Seinen Kai (Association of U.S. citizens of People's Radio Foundation, Inc. Workers Party (including Socialist Youth Japanese ancestry who have returned to America People's Rights Party. League). after studying in Japan). Philadelphia Labor Committee for Negro Rights. Yiddisher Kultur Farband. Knights of the White Camellia. Philadelphia School of Social Science and Art. Yugoslav-American Cooperative Home, Inc. Ku Klux Klan. Photo League (New York City). Yugoslav Seamen's Club, Inc. THE FOLLOWING ADDITIONS TO AND DELETIONS FROM THE ABOVE LIST ARE ANNOUNCED: ADD: ELSINORE PROGRESSIVE LEAGUE EVERYEODY'S COM‘ITTa2E TO OUTLAW WAR IDAHO PENSION UNION MASSACHUSETTS COM‘ITTES FOR THE BILL OF RIGHTS f ame THE FOLLOWING ADDITIONS TO AND DELETIONS FROM THE ABOVE LIST ARE ANNOUNCED: (CONTINUED) 256 divulge in full, conduct or associations of the char- Il. DECLARATION. (Concealment of, misrePresentation asto, or failure to. separation, certi ficate may constitute grounds for court martial, discharge, l privilege acter set forth in the provisions at the time of execution of athis false statement may be very severe. If Federal Constitutiona or other disposition of personnel. Penalties for making any axpose you to criminal trial, is claimed about all or any part of against self-crimination, i. e., the making of a statement which will l privilege is claimed” under Remarks below, "Federal Constitutiona conduct, membership, or association in question, you may $0 claim or "Federal Constitutional privilege is claimed as to... ,” describing the specific part of any conduct, membership, or association about which claim is made.) CERTIFICATION with, certain organizations, that: I certify, as regards the standards of conduct, or membership in or association with certain organizations and I under-; 1. L have read the provisions applying to standards of conduct and: membership in or association stand them. ¢ under Remarks below. 2. If I have engaged in any such conduct, I have so indicated the nature thereof 3. I have entered under Remarks below, the name(s) of the organization(s ) the above list of which 1 am or have been a member, from engaged in, organizationc! or social acitvtties or by which I amor have deen widbad ee, os which I have attended or been present at, or or activities which they sponsored, or for waich I bave sold, given away or distributed written, printed, or otherwise recorded matter published by shem, or with which I have been identified or associated in some other manzer, or have never been a 4. If I fave not engaged in any such conduct, or have not been associated in any manner with listed organizations, countries, I bave so mernber or participated in the activities of any pro-communist, pro-Nazi, or pro-Fascist organtzations in foreign indicated by writing "NONE” or "None to my knowledge” under Remarks below. I may be subject 3. L understand that ifwhat I state below is found so be incorrect, incomplete, or misleading in any important particular, to prosecution and punishment under the appropriate laws of the United States. 6. L understand the meaning of the statements made in the certifications above. eee ag for a full detailed statement. If associated with any of listed organizations, REMARKS (Use she space provided below and attach additional sheets, if necessary, specify nature and extent of association with each including dates, places, and credentials now or formerly held) TYPED FULL NAME OF PERSON MAKING CERTIFICATION SERVICE NO. (If any) SIGNATURE OF PERSON MAKING CERTIFICATION iALD, Lee Harvey pe 4658230 pe ee ee eee (eC GIVEN UNDER MY HAND THIS ehth pay or October 19 5O TYPED NAME, GRADE AND ORGANIZATION OF WITNESSING OFFICER’ SIGNATURE OF WITNESSING OFFICER R. K. JONES, Captain, USMC,ARO DD iiss 98 PREVIOUS EDITIONS OF THIS FORM ARE OBSO! 4x U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING CFFICE : 1955-0-355363 \\9 257 (4) October 24, 1956. United States Marine Corps Examination of Applicant by Recruiting Officer, signed Lee Harvey Oswald. EXAMINATION OF APPLICANT BY =RUITING OFFICER NAVMC 196 PD (REV. 4-S4) SUPERSEDES NAYMC 196-PD (REV. 2-Si) WHICH WILL NOT BE “SEO INSTRUCTIONS After the applicant's answers to the questions in PARTI heve been typed in, the applicant will road over and sign the form in the presence of the Recruiting OMicer if an applicant admits having ever been arrested, that fact must be affirmatively ahown, regardiesa of the triviality of the offense. Ifan applicant has anawered '‘YES" toone or rors of the questions in PART f, the Recruiting Officer should consult the applicable section of the Marine Corps Manual and (1) Recommend waiver by completion of PART Il and submit, in duplicate, to the Commandant of the Marine Corpa (Code DP) prior to ofecting enlietment of reenlistment, or (2) Explain circumstances under item 31, if offense consists solely of traffic or parck~ ing violation or other minor fature not triable in Federsi or State Courts, and waiver is not required by the Commandant of the Marine Corpa, or (3) Reject applicant for failing te meet the moral requirements + ‘ if applicant is entisted or reentiated, this form will be forwarded with the duplicate of the Enlistment Contract and Record te the Cammandant of the Marine Corpse (Code BGK). 1. ORGANIZATION 2. DATE ss acAO RSUaltee Ceas 3. NAME OF APPUCAKT (in full). Ry Oot 1956 | & GATE OF BinTH 11, PHYSICAL PROFILE OSWALD, Lee Harvey | 18 Oct 39 rs 3. APPLICANT FOR ENLISTMENT If %. IRGHEST GRADE 7. RACE i % AFOT SCORE ae WW, SERVICE NO. (shen assigned) | (COMPLETED IN SCHOOL 465323 Bi 58 or induction PART | SG WR. RAVE YOU EVER SEEN REACTED FOR ENLISTMENT iF SO, WHICH BRANCH, WHEN AND WHY? ANY BRANCH OF THE ARMCD FORCEST Cys | [X)xo 1. HAVE YOU EVER BEEN ARRESTED? WFSO,FORWHAT OFFENSE. WHEN AND WHERE? : C] ws (iq #0 A, HAWE YOU EVER BERK CONVICTED OF& CRIME? z IF50, WHAY CRIME, WHEN AND WHERE? ‘ en Gj MB.WAVEYOUEVERBEENSENTENCED BYANYCONT? “TF50,WHEK. WHERE. FOR WHATOFFENSE. ANDFoRWHAT PemooT (js ERR EAL LIPNGREELI ERASE SAEED IEEE Ei]no RESO MADTNHNGAE SsCi preonis emcee ating ERTS TINA YOU EVER SEEM IN JAH A REFORM OR HeDUSTHIAL «| SS, WHEN AND WHERE? 1. HAVE on TN RE RE EE retreatment (] ts eet entertain (x aasegeeegeene eepcnoeorien orecennmssnttnentfesennes n-nonane nv~speenuni’ +See nner er -teratnasansbuponevnsstssn acs sents sieevisthnanomnerensieuemmshavoniniinsesanee en RD A OED SATEIE BY MF SO, WHEN, WHERE, FOR WHAT OFFENSE, AND FoR WHAT PEUODT [) ws [9 xo —- Seater prec reeeentimemenerveenieheneranyntleesoiists shersnisowpnsiouhanahmetsecovenehosetratepunersbaansesecinomecvasibunai a-sesnpcnopamoe menace onARE YOU HOW oe ON PAROLE, PROGATION, SUPER:SIOK, OR | & 50,60, EXPLAIK. (] ves [3g xo a ere la opel rats escheres jira anon tocaapciatasdss digeurtasnaeser Soe ue NN #9, HAVE YOU EVER BEEN ON PAROLE, PHOBATION, SUPER- | JFSO.EXPLAIN, GIVING DATE OFRELEASE. FORK OF Ctvit, RESTRAINT? 20. I have been cautioned to answer the above questions truthfully; that any constitute a bar to my enlistment, and that any false statement detected subsequent false statement detected prior to enlistinent will the Government and may ultimately result in my discharge from the Marine Corpsto under enlistment will be processed as a fraud against other than honorable egnditions. 30-—-38453-6 i SEE INSTRUCTIONS: aint ‘ ae oy CONMEETED CHEAO JUCRC é ATE: ”nh ReMARKSa (Prfenwatimg ‘ circumstances surround? ng offense: enae. tavlusire invlas dates, component, zt WAS THE ae PC WHICH CONWIE Ks ; ond former service number, if applicant claima any prior serrice m any branch ofthe [”] j crvit / CRIMINAL fried Forces brief estimate ofapplicant's potential calue for mittary service, and other : 4 2 ertinent mfor neation } ‘od “ . m . ty 5 (Applying laws of the State in which De WAS THE OFFENSE FOR WHICH CONVICTED on ADjunicaTED tried) > JUVENILE | petimauency [_]} Fetony [] MIsDEMEAMOR ; Lacsninnsimtanarssione 2A AGE CF APPLICANT AT TIME OF OFFENSES 24 CITY AND STATE IN WHICH OFFENSES WERE COMMITTE eee nn tc 2 WAME GF COURT IM WHICH TRIED DATE ~ MW FOUND QUILTY, WAS COURT ACTION DEEMED oe ADJUDICATION AS A JUVEWILE DELINQUENT, [7] somerion [7] Yoyrurut OFFEKDER OR WAYWARD MINOR: 27. CRFENSE FOR WHICK APPLICANT WAS CONVICTED OR ADJUDICATED 1S PUNISHABLE BY (Apply laws of the State im which tried; if the leng’h of sentence waa indejinite or indeterminate, state the maximum punishment provided for the offenac in the law under which convicted}: nn mmmmariat aR DATE OF RELEASE FROM CONFINEMENT DATE OF RELEASE FROM PAROLE, PROBATION , i OR OTHER FORM OF SUPERVISION OR RE- ee g STRAINT (UNCONDITIONAL) é = 7, EMPLOYMENT RECORD SUBSEQUENT TO CONVICTION OR RELEASE FROM CONFINEMENT (Give inclusive dates} v4 ok 30. INFORMATION WAS OBTAINED BY iF OTHER, EXPLAIN X | Irerview oF APPLICANT VERBALLY FROM CIVIL AUTHORITIES : a ooo % | Reports FROM CIVA. AUTHORITIES |EXAMINATION OF COURT RECORDS ‘nals 32. RECOMMEND THAT WAIVER BEGRANTED Oe O- $3. I CERTIFY that I have personally questioned the appli hose appeare hereon; qualified, in accordance with existing inatrcetions for ea\baneuk fathe tisfied that rina Cone ll a aniourax ‘ DAE hss8-8 cy nok mexMannactorgm ; and that he signed the foregoing questionnaire in my presence, * Strike out when nol applicable FIRST ENDORSEMENT FROM: COMMANDANT OF THE MARINE CORPS TO: , i. Ret: j ia eturned, Enlistment CQ) is ei i$ #0T authorized provided physically and otherwise qualified, SSE y [ee en oe ~ % 3 Sea 1G~S8453-3 U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE -1955—O-s3882— 209 (5) October 24, 1956. United States Marine Corps Record of Emergency Data, signed Lee Harvey Oswald. ot az - RECORD OF EMERGENCY DAi SEE INSTRUCTIONS ON REVERSE BEFORE MAKING ENTRIES 1. DESIGNATOR’S LAST NAME—FIRST NAME—MIDOLE NAME 2 SERVICE NO. 3. GRADE OR RATE 4 SERVICE OSWALD Lee Harvey : UCKC 5. MARITAL STATUS 6 FULL NAME OF SPOUSE 7. ADDRESS (Number, street, city, zone, and State) Not Marriéd cc CHILDREN (List each child of any marriage. If none, so state) FIRSTRONEMOOLEMMMESUSTIANE [Bones ——SSSSSS*dSCmav ToS [ex OnTE CPAT None 9. NAME OF £7)FATHER OR oO MALE GUARDIAN 10, ADDRESS IF LIVING—IF DECEASED SO STATE Robert E. Lee OS'VALD Deceased 11. NAME OF [MOTHER OR FEMALE GUARDIAN if 12 ADORESS IF LIVING—IF DECEASED SO STATE Marzuerite (Tlaverie) OSWALD 4936 Collinwood St., Fort Worth, Texas IN THE EVENT THAT i AM NOT SURVIVED BY A SPOUSE OR ELIGIBLE CHILD { DESIRE THAT PAYMENT CF 6 MONTHS’ DEATH GRATUITY BE MADE TO THE RELATIVE SHOWN BELOW. (The name of father or mother must be repeated if it is desired that he or she receive payment) 13. FIRST NAME—MIDDLE NAME—LAST NAME 14. RELATIONSHIP 1S. ADDRESS ‘ Margaerite OSWALD Mother | £936 Collinwood St., Fort Worth, Texas 16. ALTERNATE RELATIVE 17, RELATIONSHIP 13, ADDRESS. tep- . : John Zdward PIC Brother |4936 Collinwood St., Fort Worth, Texas 19, IN THE EVENT THAT 1 AM LISTED AS MISSING OR OTHER MIL! TARY CIRCUMSTANCES PREVENT S15 FROM TRANSMITTING FUNDS TO MY DEPENDENTS. IT IS MY DES!RE THAT FIRST NAME—MIDDLE NAME—LAST NAME RELATIONSHIP “arcuerite OSWALD Mother ADDRESS RECEIVE EACH MONTH 4936 Collinwood St., Fort Worth, Texas PERCENT OF MY PAY 2. | REQUEST THE FOLLOWING COMMERCIAL INSURANCE COMPAN‘ES BE OFFICIALLY NOTIFIED IN CASE OF MY DEATH IN ACTIVE SERVICE NAME OF COMPANY ADDRESS OF HOME OFFICE PCLICY NO. 21. DESIGNATION OR CHANGE OF BENEFICIARY—SERVICEMEN’S INCEMNITY (PL 23, 32d Cong.) : (Does not operate as a dssignation or change of dencficiary of any insurence contracts issued by Uniled States Gorernment) ALL PREVIOUS DESIGNATIONS OF PRINCIPAL AND CONTINGENT BENEFICIARIES, IF ANY, UNDER SERVICEMEN'S INDEMNITY ACT OF 1951, ARE HERESY CANCELED, AND IT IS DIRECTED THAT SAID INDEMNITY BE PAID TO: RELATIONSHIP . SHARE OR AMOUNT YO EACH BENEFICIARY Marguerite ‘CSWALD fother WITNESSED BY (Signcture on all copies) SIGNATURE OF SERVICEMAN (Sign ail copies) GRADE OR RATE OF WITNESS SERVICE tid, DATE SIGNED , Cantain 952083 2. October 1956 DD FCaM | FES 52 93 ay Replaces Ri r DD D Form 8, 2, 1 Jul 50, which rbic ‘ may be used ed, 1—87492-1 —JFEK Exymair F- 418 260 re ‘ eT EE ae INSTRUCTIONS (Items for which no instructions are printed below are self-expk watory) ~ This form will be completed and maintained current by Item 21.—The indemnity is payable only to persons within all officer and enlisted personnel in accordance with Navy: the following classes: BuPers Manual Art B-2312; Marine Corps Manual_ Par 11223; USCG Pers Cir No. 30-50; AFR 35-38; ANGR 35-38, (1) Spouse (husband or wife). ¢ All items must be completed. In the event you, the desig- (2) Children.—The term “children” includes natural nator, become a casualty the persons named in items 6, 8, children, stepchildren, adoptive children. Illegitimate 9, and 11 will be notified. If notification is not desired due children are included only if designated. ~ to health or other reason state in remarks. If there are no (3) Parents.—The term “parents” includes natural living relatives, the name and address of a friend may parents, stepparents, adoptive parents or persons who be entered in remarks. Continue any item in remarks if stood in loco parentis to the insured at any time prior to necessary. entry into the active service for a period of not less than Item 4.—Enter one of the following: USN, USNR, USMC, one year. Unless designated otherwise by the serviceman USMCR, USCG, USCGR, USAF (for Air Force add “Res” the term “parent” includes only the mother and father or “ANG” as appropriate only if not in active military who last bore that relationship to the serviceman. service). (4) Brothers and sisters—The term “brothers and sis- Item 5.—Enter single, married, widowed, divorced, or ters” includes those of the half blood and those through legally separated. adoption. Item 6.—Spouse to whom alimony or support is legally If the designated beneficiary or beneficiaries do not survive payable must be shown even if divorced or legally separated. the insured, or if none has been designated, the indemnity will be paid to the first eligible class of beneficiaries accord- Items 9 and 11.—If the person entered is in the class of ing to the order set forth above and in equa! shares if the guardian, indicate whether stepparent, foster parent, loco class is composed of more than one person. If this order is parentis, guardian, or adoptive parent. in accord with your wishes state “No Designation.” If the order is not in accord with your wishes you shou!d name the Items 13 and 16.—If you do not desire to designate anyone person or persons in the class to receive the indemnity. Any enter “I decline to designate any person to receive this pay” person so named will be considered a principal beneficiary in your own handwriting. Only designated relatives are unless specifically designated as a contingent. eligible to receive payment without proof of dependency. Item 19.—The “Missing Persons Act” provides that pay DISPOSITION INSTRUCTIONS and allowances continue to accrue to the pay account of any service member for the period he is missing or captured and Navy: Original to BuPers, Washington 25, D. C. Attn.: may be paid to the dependents for support. This item reflects Casualty Branch. your desires and is used as a guide in disposition of your pay. Duplicate—same as original. 1°. eer Allotments to dependents and insurance companies initiated rior to entering a missing status are continued in effect _ Triplicate—file in service record at duty station. unless unusual circumstances indicate changes. Marine Corps: See Marine Corps Manual Par 11223. Item 20.—Completion of this item will insure that insur- ance companies listed are promptly notified when necessary. Coast GUARD: See Personnel Circular No. 30-50. Accuracy in entering policy numbers will facilitate prompt settlement. Arr Force: See AFR 35-88 or ANGR 35-38. enero tere RE EEE ee © Dee See ee ee Sl REMARKS € LF ° > c. 3 “79 = ~- = * “A a =e < 4. 6. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 16—-67402-1 261 (6) October 24, 1956. Armed Forces fingerprint identification card, numbered ° 327 925 D, signed Lee Harvey Oswald. oe ARMED LEAVE THIS SPACE GuANK oF Ok es ‘ ne Be take S o bes : RACES ~ 'e toyIhe FORCES Te, et LAST NAME FIRST NAME MIDDLE NAME (2 ER SS HEIGHT (inches) MASTER aN Hau lth EKMaiGenee ctor = os J sar \ | DATE OF BIRTH ! Tos wl er ab. ts poe =i - - r/ a / ak " . ° weet ; Le vi oye a PLACE OF ENLISTMENT, APPOINTMENT, ETC. SERVICE NO oc WS ri) PLACE OF BIRTH Fi heyet ay gr ae Rahte, re lwy.=)e) te 4 Rose DAtaweity i daa dl : Pte ase weet eter e ee DATE OF ENLISTMENT. APPOINTMENT, ETC. COLOR OF EYES LEAVE THIS SPACE BLANK } j = 38, GOTOESS LOSE Azel - sae ve F L) SCARS AND MARKS COLOR OF HAIR SD Hh ee — ] OCS. / s eels SIGN q WEIGHTna We ; | : : 3 J DATE SIGNED BY OFFICIAL TAKING FINGERPRINTS SEX Sica - SiGe oop sy . TReelSIR See ; 4 io REF. 7 8. LEFT MIDDLE UGEREOUR FINGERS TAKEN SIMULTANEOUSLY 262— Clo car eee nea & Peron peor pe eee ae 4 | Ze ‘Ald IN3al ‘2 wh < ee. 9561 6G 190 : (\ ae Die : ot Dear Sir: . Ni A§- Soff 4? ne Vig) Lia 4° Fay Le ae tee. Some Pn Seek who claims to have resided at ............-- Pm O- aNEPMRE wack. aRene DRS: aS ign ee wes — eS eA $0%s,. ss a eee and whose fingerprints and personel description are recorded tarkostsron applicant for enlistment in the United States ............-.-...-.____... It is requested that the following information be furnished from your files. A return envelope is inclosed for your convenience. oir es ao Very truly yours, 1 Inclosure .! Gal ON ee Return en Gee te E994, Sag) ghia pea Se Loar Bhat angacaret iting Ofices) «% snikii Slane o1 POLICE kG CHECK city v3 STATE GS DATE HAS APPLICANT A POUCE OR SUVERILE RECORD? (other than minor traffic violation) [3 YES O NO IF “YES,"" WHAT WAS THE OFFENSE OR CHARGE, DISPOSITION, AND SENTENCE? aie » IS APPLICANT BOW UNDERGOING COURT ACTION OF ANY KIND? O YES fa]NO IF “YES,"’ GIVE DETAILS ¥ * DOES CIVIL CUSTODY EXIST? J ves CJ NO IF “YES,” SPECIFY is apmucant [] warmizo (1) sevanateo (J owvorceo [1 wivowen L sincur CO marivan STATUS UNKNOWN apd bon e-0r "ce bey bsbe seh REMARKS _ “AD Polo gk 369. . ; a cig pea -eee Epes 263 (7) October 25, 1956. United States Marine Corps Miscellaneous Information and Index Form (NAVMC 118(1)—PD). MISCELLANEOZS .NFOQMATIGN Anu’ .£DEX oa ~ ok elk im a = hes MISCELLANEOUS INFORMATION c. .; 23 Veeyrity Ho 649-9 90779 hye - PHYSICAL PROFILE a : ANUAL ADMINISTRATIVE AUDIT COMPLETED DATE (4, g 3 SiGKATURS Se ArIO RANK Oe ee ee 24,0ct54 Sa Se, -sthLt. usc etal LG tenis + =|3000858 | Ee Msy andl TOTAL SEA AND FOREIGN DUTY REENLSTMENT BONUS: z YEARS: MONTHS: (a) Paid $ Aleve reenlistment bonus ______ for. reenlistment. 5 (Date) (Number) ‘ 2 DATE LAST RETURNED CONTINEN- | PEBD Ue TAL LIMITS OF U. S. reo Be aeine N S (b) Prev pd $ NIN € total amt of reenl bonuses to include______ reenlistment. : DATES IDENTIFICATION CARDS ISSUED (Amount) - * & u (Number) , By dzection, = ae Fy hyta hme toes es tee signature: (7 Zhe S0% DATE ID TAGS ISSUED: soo DATES. cht ipo ec DATE: t BAST —— . err y Articles UCMJ explained to me this date Articles UCMJ explained to me this date €: 2a ra as by ti UCM. as required by Article 187, UCMJ. GAS MASK SIZE: teres a, f acnlel DEPOSIT RECORD BOOK NO: 2 (Signature) green CLASS S\WIMBER: INDEX STANDARD PAGES Sonat DOCUMENTS INSERTED SEaceneee) (Conti ; INITIAL. onpd aa ENLISTIENT CONTRACT NAVMC 115(2}-?D RECORD OF SE.VICE WNAVMC 118(3)-PD ++ FITNESS RCPORTS SJSMITTED NAVMC 118(4)-PD Geers PROMOTION AND REDUCTION NAVMC 118(5)-PD Bal TIME LOST: ALLOTMENT: WEAPONS FIRING NAVMC 118(6)-PD as = a bad INDIVIDUAL TRAINING RECORD NAVME 118(7)-PD Ee SOCUPATIONAL SPECIALTY AND EDUCATION NAVMC 113(3)-PD | z ws < "= COMBAT RECCRI—*EDALS NAVMC 113/9)-PD , ADMINISTRATIVE REMARKS NAVMC 1!8(11)-PD HH OFFENSES AND PUNISHMENT NAVHC 118(12)-PD E28 COURT MEMORANDA A “ NAVMC 118(13}-PD Peas EMERGENCY DATA DD FORM & Ezz LEAVE RECORD NAVMC 118(i6)-PD SEA AND AIR TRAVEL NAVMC 118(17)-PD RECORD OF INDIVIOUAL RIFLE NAVMC 118(20)-SD EZ8 DEPENDENT TRAVEL RECORD NAVMC 1:8(21)-SD x 7 wi goers] Cae DOCUMENTS INSERTED SIGNATUR=OF MARINE (After photo affixed) x9 CA er to CATE OF PHOTOGRAPH 1auls (Lai) (Firat) (Middle) “IPPs oe ad cos 40 ' aa 4 Eoul sa<0 ates 7 MAVBIC net) iPo | (REY. 10 10-53) ((RFU REUAES5 FREVIOUS | EDITION, WHICH IS OBSOLETE AND WILL KOT Ee USED) 16—71105-1 UG. S. GOVERNMENT PaisTins OFFICE : 6 RSS eee BS - Be a es ee eae ae SS ere eee f- ~neee Go Ae CL Gusee ee 264 (8) May 8, 1958. Identification card, U.S. Forces, Japan. 6C6T 4999300 ST (a ® B) wag jo or | A )Ayre mOo-RLAy-U99 - " OV-kUVOLERD tHUPY ‘S104 NVAVE (Ake MF) ‘“8'0 NAC NOLLVOMLP Uv maeut 534 265 (9) September 10, 1959. United States Passport No. 1733242, signed Lee H. Oswald. ANTE Hae 2 oie pega cae € =; ebtpsom leas Bees cae “T. Comnission Exhibit No. 946 - 3323 teh aod ng Sek ae TSteeee erste “a +f wer Terres vi daa’, ENG dale Ibsen a) Se is ; Anee “eANWLUOdHT' ory . dodaild’ 6f;Raye » ey : igts LON GIIVA Inud poudjs a.Aq saan AG osud Oi ¢ asvatd ity tif bouton pus eodtésppe t ead EO te 8,2 AVLVN‘any uday ssNI ats agin “tedavab -— > * a) —, | saeHod Pe mr fy. St OE ast > we. > Sh aCHL bf: 40 SAatton’thaaiooy Wea oui any. tebe MIN 1310 ps as ’ nynod pus basydxa Asodsbud ors osu stibeodd 3q pinoyé qiodased i ERY patatisd AEA ou 943 by: mY Ae + ens Os OOD Poe: at 8d 00 O *y 1? ie Gade tebe ye lpe hab wite a se, helt Ciera tet FEDds OR tthe beslee Doc mates Ay BMY * t a ‘' bd FECT, ‘PUOINWAIDO ‘Yuaurpwauvo ney ‘peony Pwfat ROOYAN7 . siyy, ‘y10dssed Aplodosd ‘powsta st plea JO} 9AvI}UI Je sd1jJUNODssajuN ASIMUDHLO ‘aaLoOIisau ‘ JY SI JOU PI[VAJOJ [2ACI} O} JO ut Auv UTIdI0}9363s10} ay} ssodind Jo SulJ9JUS 10 SutAsos UT 943 pase S90J0J JO YONS B “93838 sryy, zOdssed st jou prBAJoy [9ABI} 0} 94} ZurMor[oy svase JopuN oJjU0D Jo 881T0YINe , F., yRIM YoY9Y} NU,Pe S9}R}G S30P JOU dABY otzeur0jdip ssuorjelor ‘erueqiy ‘sised[ing pus Y ssoy} suorjzsod jo feulyd eas0sypus wreyr-30rA, * Ave be. ’ A pte sopun ystunww07 *Josyu09 Fy 267 SIL ‘WbedSSVd (ARHNI "AUVONMHg do 4 ‘ . , wl - ; “ . . “at 7 ce pay: 7 8 * 901% TTT! TT IT ET EL OTE I OY NLCL LO ii J2metayS ‘puorniazva ‘YitattpuUalnD | : . :; ‘ FUOYOIIVMI punPOW ? PUEOWIOD ehh | Len. ; te 60 oO re (a) iar Pr “ t ; ma ze = S wd o fy = ' ettPe | -sr ~ at ( A. c: tp. Pie - ‘f+! 268 S oP)bs Eea ino :: fa Ho (SE 5. 7 ee | -bS8.L9 06= “Be : ¢ 8 Se ae: e| fo ks fo ee tk ome | ert = ’ EOL wah 4 Cae OMT TEN AEP nt ghey pe Cte ame, NOGNOT 1uOduiy re tals | ‘ soyp oui yu ee hee. | ie 1gts Baspen erIvi Bethecaie ? ; .: & he - ' . Ain PP aotmhee’ . ; Tye ae 5. ; : “ woes | ateC . : AD , ae o8 stertere , D ‘e - tar oer ek LTT 7 : . Pa weneses Be a : {9 . ire iS, cpa Tews fener « ; a . be : 4 bt thee Hoga _ a Pa) ) er nleles ‘ ee Mle ne «ow gyya Lets f,Ae Mts Fee Te Pr " - ees ey p yy . _- : RON etaal ‘Heaodu a a dLonsad Fy euttLo ug cH a] i Oe H, rc fe . , unbdio * . "ae nsoy b 40° . rf “3 eee] wr, ers7 Bingo, ofiW Sul uya & uae Phas ‘ ad el Ne ae ar Hg ear mien00-6s - 004) 4 \ } ayy ; bape Lic Tee, ( 4 ger iui? Ge Ae @ “ease unfy andiod EEmE ETRE oe as | 269 Ps8 Lda yd, BS ‘4 G cau npeduiiivay d a hs snnaivronn ay £7. . ‘ ay pte cn shSf el !e alles Gb aodgn ‘@lou AaRin i a “ONNShOL pip2 “RepPO Pe “A K a oae Ke - HOLAD 2 ULHOIo , A Te % ; ' Lahr i, \ at 4 2 Lied ; $3 hee i eects F ere 4 e@e eee ® eo # ; . & 4 here ' 4 ¢ . 2 @ as aede e >. - ae 2 TEES iN Yeug a cae vHBYNg (fo Base ee Anavoetuug vidouovu ‘j FE ESL? 6 ae 3 OD th TN . eas ee 72 9G ZO . a Aerts CED ees rate A OLF, 8 pores eodoty @dsOU uri du 270 Asgaa where pe ——_ - Seana VOIWGAY . vets Kn 4i y i hi : F ‘ 12. ania Meee ‘: AS r orBil 1 ‘arn , pris ee Py “i . FOO Ea a teehee rien ‘ ‘ , sr : ene oy ' . ‘ ’ 1 5 te Deh ot Aes Bias We ’ a yeo wt Meat rp ne Ayte areen ‘ ieek H ‘ } 2 &pa ' ) .¢ ' ad e _¢ . ° e@eee -@° ae g | anima netow te Sele Ke ble ER THOIMY 20 ae jaie 271 me | i eee Perce STE SNOT ; TMLee Embassy of +ine Unitsa ted “States bes of America e ; i Pos at Moscow, .U.S.S.B. MAY eps 4902. Se Shy ee : THES PASSPORT 15 AMENDED woe “aei: %PPI INCLUDE DAUGHTER — JUNE . Meee LE a o-. 2s +. e a939.9 9 : as : : 7AE Oaks eras » 23% ~ ‘s DS +2 ofRace ietal‘x ail Eh Aaah ANH NOE 3 5 rt 8 ! cg eee | Peas ADMITTED | ee | fae Boel oe or: ——HsteveRe et @8 as ‘feteve ro]. 5 ; 2 : s i Ee3 ~ er a4. L ~ 3 om o : d & ; RENEWED- EXPIRES tice fe, //S2097, | 4° eiff em Ro Yt meus. ANERGib EONSUL bs es Sees weal CY equi. YZSOfiles y, ¢! ie s ej ‘ Fa wet yi eacommeememmras a.seahal .— LPEL _- te > : te. “ppt Far SEN ea * +) TTI r RIT RE WARNING—AtTERATION ORy Me Ation or ENTRIES !8 PROHIBITED ; . ~~ DESCRIPTIVE DATA SEE air ae & XK Pg ANES 4 5 ee -awe NEW cuwtae . ~ ° * Se 7 OC Ts, Jus ne SHIPPING EXPORT 3; - Be SIGNATURE OF BEARER re Rote THis Passport Is Not Varma UNLESS SIGNZD By i THe PERSON TO WHom It Has BEEN IssuED tan Reon OS) * oe thw sivag ' “&) AS Hie *Mew * o oa cea . 2 ALAS A ame stint Secvelany of Hateof theUnitaSealesof cmeries herelay xeguest all whom tt mar yp CONCEKN lo pexmét safely and frcely lo frass, Suey ry and tr case ofneed & give allce ff, Zeca ait eiNs Pg fseae a faseaa ‘heie% vated, wet UG aidandfurclection lotheaboienamed: | . ee ofthe United Hales. Given ee any Hii Souel the yg seal Ae Department. f Sets. dae 57 ne Aik J ie a —: x A ‘: on of a. SS F; ‘< fpesequry zomg WS et pyoDumo)y MDpSTUDIS. Pp oreTig" es np wooap %7, oes sia prnomd : 274 piwonsSeog: mot 9. sown paren canAeLapyen |ane Sahela SITE ARRON OB Oi : Bo famopnT7 Jarjpodsod@arazy oy! : sexsge zazid npr9{e2d elauposy Parte ord : 3 IST C ASI pruapsdy) a 77ST sO AL/ GP oP,bioa EVOL"an te VALOO ZY FaZNd, NRE ary eeeepi ot * ba MIOP Ay, per AeSON "YY o.3 165ella oars in Ad ? . ; ‘ : | ae : ee P : | eS | ® Ee ) oot ad . h. : oe shauna Rts uf Ad i oa 2 3 nett sey | : Sa ns : e *# ° e ® % , DEC YULA onary? ye LAA A ; | \ r) BOR ee es a nt af en oe te en eed tot ShStanbamtien are Ritecar ELST IE TEE TEBE LEBEETS a ~. Se LE 279 (11) September 11, 1959. United States Marine Corps Notice of Obligated Serv- ice, signed Lee Harvey Oswald. - NOTICE OF OBLIGATED SERVICE MAYMC I0228-PD (REV. 10-56) (SUBERSEDES (REV. 2-55) EDITION WHICH MAY BE USED FOR 8-YEAR O8LIGORS) INSTRUCTIONS Prepare in quadruplicate : Original to Service Record Book Duplicate to CMC (Code DGH) Triplicate to member « Quadruplicate to district director concerned X out those words which do not apply OSWALD, Lee Harvey 1653230 |PFC E-2 NAME OF MEMBER SERVICE NO. RANK mos 1. You, having assumed the _~ -year military service obligation prescribed by law upon your (j (enlistment) in the U. S. Marine Corps KUM A alead atid inc Se et RS ad (Branch of Armed Forces initially entered) a/an having served in the United States Marine Corps HLA trom 24 October 192°. ie ll September 19.9, are hereby (released from active duty and transferred to the Marine Corps Reserve) held Kd WAL M/k Aor the remainder of that 6 -year period which ends on _8 December 19 62 unless sooner discharged. During that period you are deemed by law to be a member of the Marine Corps Reserve and will be subject to such training and service as is now or may hereafter be authorized by law for members of the Marine Corps Reserve. 2. You are (assigned to) kbktkdy hh/the (Ready) [thkdhh/Reserve, Class Af (III). You are further (transferred to)” Add hdd #4 Ae . Marine Air Reserve Training Command (Unit or district) be Ebayer which js; Neval fir Station, Glenview, Illinois (Unit or district address) St You have given your future mailing address as: Ji2, West sth Street Forth Worth, Texas 3. This Notice of Obligated Service executed for and on behalf of the United States Marine Corps at: ae 11 September 59 eC joa 2 RTERS cia HEADQUARTERS SQUADRON MARINE CORPS AIR STATION EL TORO (SANTA ANA), CALI FORNIA By n& of oe executing notice) — Ssh, J Rey ee USMCR SIGNATURE OF MEMBER £45442 Ctl @ | EK Ebi biped Sees ait 276 11, 1959. United States Marine Corps Security Termination (12) September Statement and Index, signed Lee Harvey Oswald. SECURITY TERMINATIUN STATEMENT OF NAV FORM 5511-14 HEADQUARTERS AND HEADQUARTERS. SQUADRON U. S. MARINE CORPS AIR STATION EL TORO (SANTA ANA) CALIFORNIA 1. I hereby certify that I have conformed to the directives contained in the U, S. Navy Security Manual for Classified Matter and Registered Publication Manual in that I have returned to the Naval Establishment all classified matter which I have had in my possession, 2. I further certify that I am not retaining or taking away with me from my place of employment (dut3) any document or thing containing or incorprrating information affecting the National Defense of other natter Classified, Top Secret, Secret, or Confidential to which I obtained access during my employment (duty), in any manner whatsoever, 3. I shall not hereafter in any manner reveal or divulge to any person any in— formation affecting the National Defense, Classified, Top Secret, Secret, or ' Confidential, or which I have gained Knowledge during my enployrns (dutz), except as may be hereafter authorized in writing by officials of the Naval Establishment empowered to grant such authority. (If any of the above statements cannot truthfully be made, the word "not" shall be stricken out of the appropriate sentence and a full statement attached hereto indication in detail the circumstances which prevent the making of the state— ment in its original form, includint the names of the persons authorizing the particular hendling of classified matter) | AR te LEE HARVEY OSHALD 1653230 have been informed and am aware that 18 U. S. C., 1946 ed., Sup. IV, 792-797 and the Internal Security Act of 1959 pre-— scribe severe penalties for’ unlawfully divulging information affecting the National Defense. I certify that I have read and understand appendices B, D, E, F, and H of the U. S. Navy Security Manual for Classified Matter, I have been informed and am aware that certain categories of Reserve and Retired personell on inactive duty can be recalled to duty, under the pertinent pro- visions of law relationg to e.ch class for trial by court-cartial fcr unlewful disclosure of information. I have been informed and an aware that the making of a wilfully false statement herein renders me subject to trial therefore, as Raa by 18 U. S. C., 1946 ed., Sup, IV, 1001. folg Officer in Charge Separation Section 11 Sevtember 1959 Date <1 lk NSE a SR TUR ae ATK Exapir F- 4ou at 207 (138) September 11, 1959. Carbon copy of Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge, signed Lee Harvey Oswald, with a earbon copy signature. TL 1, LAST NAME ekg an,© - FIRGT MAME - MIDDLE LEGEND: Insert N/A to the Items below which are net applicable. NAME 2. SERVICE NUMBER 30. © GRADE, RATE OR RANK » DATS OF RANK ae (Day, Month, OSWALD, Lee Harvey 1653230 PYC (Ee2) | “"TMar59 4. DEPARTMENT, COMPONENT AND BRANCH OR 5. PLACE OF BIRTH (City and State orCountry) 6. ~loAY. MONTH YEAR New Orleans, Louisiana wor, |28 Cet |8 DATE PERSONAL DATA §O0. Coveurton 70, RACE HIGNEST CIVILIAN EDUCATION |alo | Brom | Geapl b, sex LEVEL b. MAJOR COURSE OR FIELD @. HEIGHT cf es |f. weIGHT 150 8. U.S, CITIZEN Fives CJ no |®. MARITAL STATUS Single ~i # iN iteiaud es 110, TYPE OF TRANSFER OR DISCHARGE B. STATION INSTALLATION OR AT WHICH EFFECTED.~OCS~“—sSSSSTTTTTTTTCS to Merine Corps Roeorre HaHS , tet El Tore, (Santa Aw), California 1900.28 & CoDHUBo 5th ad of31anc39 EE[LL | Sep [99 C, REASON AND AUTHORITY jd ; | DAY ag |YEAR OR 12. LAST DUTY ASSIGNMENT AND MAJOR COMMAND) TRANSFER emowy gigs ¥ 2 130. CHARACTER OF SERVICE b. TYPE OF CERTIFICATE DATA DISCHARGE AL vPMPPae MCAS EE) Toro (Senteine HOHORABLSE DRT 7S EE ee ee ee eee eee 14. BELECTIVE- SERVICE NUMBER |18. SELECTIVE SERVICE LOCAL BOARD NUMBER, CITY, COUNTY AND STATE 16 DATE INDUCTED 2Ue | | A DAY MON i YEAR = | ¥ v> B/a | wed |17, DISTRICT OR AREA COMMAND TO WHICH RESERVIST TRANSFERRED Sim MARTC 4S, Glenview, Illinois tt Se 8 ee ee ee ee ae Ae eee ee eed 18. TERMINAL DATE OF RESERVE 1@. CURRENT ACTIVE SERVICE OTHER THAN BY INDUCTION b. TERM OF c. DATE OF ENTRY OBLIGATION a SOURCE OF ENTRY nenvics a ears. D ony aha Su ‘Siatseg ENLISTED (Firat Enlistment) oO ENLISTED (Prior Service) Decentisteo ¢ ) fy spi ious 2 Bet 620 bien 9 |% Oet ss 20. PRIOR REGULAR ERLISTMENTS 21, GRADE, RATE OR RANK AT TIME OF 22. PLACE OF ENTRY INTO CURRENT ACTIVE SERVICE (City ond State) SORE eg Prt} — CURRENT ACTIVE SERVICE ya, eS | Dallas, Texas ; 23. HOME OF RECORD AT TIME GF ENTRY INTO ACTIVE SERVICE (Street, RFD, 24. STATEMENT OF SERVICE YEARS MONTHS DAYS ity, C State) a Jay NET SERVICE THIS PERIOD > CREDITABLE f FOR BASIC |(2) OTHER SERVICE 4 U # PAY iG av ERAGE ayiP OM ; zs purposes |(3) TOTAL (Line (1)+ line (2)) 2 b. TOTAL ACTIVE SERVICE z 2 3 “sd ROMS DATA SERVICE 27. WOUNDS y= AS A RASULT OF ACTION WITH ENEMY ForCES (Ploce and date, if known) (477) Ww Nas ¢ OMS F,. 26. SERVICE SCHOOLS OR COLLEGES, COLLEGE TRAINING. COURSES AND/OR POST- GRADUATE COURSES SUCCES SFULLY ¢com 29; POS wee SERVICE TRAINING SCHOOL OR COURSE DATES — + To) MAJOR COURSES” RSES SUCCESSFULLY a s 7% jg o < 350 |Jeckeenvills, Fleride PayF? grentelCl "§Seol UsABE GED ASLe Mlexi, Miscleaipa wTOse ee aN =e-% Se a 300, GOVERNMENT LIFE INSURANCE IN FORCE b. AMOUNT OF TMENT ©. MONTH TMENT < A DISCO D ~, a O YESa Ih No fly aq 0 eae ER See |2!9: VA BENEFITS PREVIOUSLY APPLIED FoR (Specify type) ee ee Re ee 5S es ee Ss b. vA og yess : | > HORS Ce } teump cam leave settiemant duc bat met asttled. 32. REMARKS . Rg bas lert earrent estive duty: Forty-five (45) days : Periods in @ men-pay status: Prom 29Jum58 to 12imgss Z Greed Comtuet Medal peyied comenses Z7JunSS (1st frst) x 4) huh wy Eom e é ee ow ees 5. Sart & BF J > 5 |PERMANENT S38. ADDRESS FOR MAILING PUR oe WT 34, SIGNATURE OF FERSON BEING TRANSFERRED OR DISCHARGED a a eS "36G. TYPED NAME, GRADE AND TITLE OF AUTHORIZING OFFICER i ~~~~ ~*'|@D, SIGNATURE og orricer AUYAonizeD To 81 comb we A.G.dYRES Jy, leotLt USHCR Asa't OIC Seps / DD, im. 214 REPLACES EDITION OF 1JUL 52 WHICH IS ARMED FORCES OF THE UNITED STATES 2 215 Path, OBSOLETE REPORT OF TRANSFER OR DISCHARGE ‘D-layy é pe ‘Ve Teed 278 (14) September 14, 1959. Selective Service System Registration card, signed Lee H, Oswald. 1. NAME IN PULL Last First Middle | SBLECTIVE SaRVICE NUMMER OSWALD 2. PLACE OF RESIDENCE Lee Harve Street and Number or RFD Route VIAWITAELAR . DATE OF BIRTH L¥A 32 West Sth Stee. ee Oct 18, 1939 City, Town, or Village Zone County State 4. PLACE OF BIRTH | Fort Worth _ 7 Tarrant Texas New Orleans, La. 5. MAILING ADDRESS (If different from place of residence) Street and Number or RFD Route “County 6. NAME AND ADDRESS OF PERSON WHO WILL ALWAYS KNOW YOUR ADDRESS Robert Oswald 13 Davenport Ste, Ft. Worth(Brother 7. OCCUPATION 8. NATURE OF BUSINESS, SERVICE RENDERED, OR CHIEF PRODUCT Unemployed 9. FIRM OR INDIVIDUAL BY WHOM EMPLOYED 10. PLACE OF EMPLOYMENT OR BUSINESS Form Approved SELECTIVE SERVICE SYSTEM Budget uw No, 33-R099.7. REGISTRATION : SSS Form No. 1 (Revised 6-11-58) | we £ ae ie VE ATES fan ae ae Se 279 11. Active duty in the Armed Forces of the United States or a cobelligerent nation since Sept. 16, 1940: 3 1653290 __|al'oct' so |"isep'39 BRANCH OF ARMED FORCES OR SERVICE NO. DATE OF ENTRY DATE OF SEPARATION 12. Present membership in a reserve component of the Armed Forces: BRANCH OF ARMED FORCES SERVICE NO. DATE OF ENTRY GRADE ‘USMCR 1653230 1l Sep 59 | Pfe ORGANIZATION LAD ve I affirm that I have verified the foregoing answers and that they are true: Glenview, Ill x ie (Signature of registrant) DESCRIPTION OF REGISTRANT 13. Color of eyes B1lUC Color of hair Brown Complexion ...Med Leeiaduaie Height (approx.) ange rae in Weight (approx.) 150 ihr dane tes, Other obvious physical characteristics that will aid in identification: 9 dent gl OTS wee eye) ae pe kas da Relies oy Abie Geet nT a a I certify that my answers are true; that the person pager has read or has had read to him his own answers; that I have witnessed his signature or mark and that all of his answers of which I have knowledge are true, except as follows: x2 EN Se RS Ns Te a Ns 1 RM Rs) POU wie NEL aa Os Ron mnore Noka era ~~ ee, Sep-1i,-19. Borges re etm ee ¢ of registration) k eee of registrar ) Sitter bx kis 1; iort Worth Wort © exas ( Number ) (City or county) (State) GPO : 1958 OF—449390 / (GT) ‘FT Jequieydeg “GCE IALIJON VAIO WoJSAY UOTIVAJSTS0I ‘OJBOYTJAID : ZAILIVTSFIIAYIS NILSAS tients mcied gai ei on bareha Re wie! | : BAVYIIAILUID NOILVHLSIOSE L prmebenemmaanny : | $342 19 wO10D ; : ° H $1 BINA OF NI AVY) AdtAN3D MAIR FMA DINYGBOIIY BOD BAIMI37IGPAS’ { | Op! °p NOIKZISNOD | 8eT AQALUE TI¥MSO 4 me O51 ereaed alah debe eh Bee | AMOI 77 44 cpte NM) AMOI! } | | "ON SVXIL WOOT QUYO8ON Pit | { IM 2INDOIS AV MOULVEASIO3S eee=@sess se Toe : , ote 3DIAN3S BSGRAN) CUT JA2HKE BO ‘@'2°8 (o) FAIL9I19SJONIS WILSAS GRY ay MON YpaOm qdo4 i quetaey, i WY ; bard ant A a Wee Ps bal “|S i -| : MOS WOM SVE ABT (ree wed Leés twas 81520 SURBTIO ’ ee eo ee i- - e@eteea-es { Sein ‘ i SECT NS Diva) 20 (Hise BIwya) insoe JAILIITAS aid .. SY 1a NO a Pea ° tT “SOA *ydog 65i YOROR 1207) (4VI$ ; 3 R- 6 Sree eee pn IHS MYT NOA OL SIBINOIW JAVH SIM FAV NI IISIL8I NNOA 25$04 mO1$$ TWNOSHId GNY OL NOMAYDIJIANIG! ASILON UNOA WVI0T #0 GUVOR AMY ay YW SIMILHOF SG $3 oF tey E wea ce mt we fe an geence rlsaaon oar Deis "ss3auaav —- 41°09 ePeisc-O 2 i ane 7 * OnyvoS (29279 Jo 9NYND eee ee ee : : emeren RoE C UAE0 A9 92.816 td cdu Sa eee Pe awry eT eS 280 281 (16) October 16, 1959 to March 27, 1962. Historical diary, 12 handwritten pages. oe _, “5 riage gee etc. := Rom leI 76 a ey Arend ~ Ph = B= ber 48. BART From LES Sorte av TRA: ym MEF EB Bete Are. Bid yw CAR Jo pwele/ ‘BeKhs nv" REOCS aa en vxey + “3 | Be yy. Touksi T1cKE7.) meeT 77¥ SWOT bbb Kin SEH kine BET expe wp Hee £ wish 70 peti: for hes. SU 2D She: ae He és LCE be SESC, Bul STOORE C4 Te MECSP , SHE checns aaJS$ PC se 2@ &thi OFS cé ZwDuf; Win PS 7Ae tees, bBefvee 10 SOF, £on7, ASK Wye. beFon Re a Lah rtp whale BOSS [Ee [TOMS LRG UE ae = Sane wer ces (Them wHeus 77, ae i Ae /?- fivacvt sr eI he LATOKM 57 as aac osays.oe 5 S524 weve Sad ew ead. Len, frhe r7e |about, mites 2 : 4 Reasons Fv bore TAs I EXPIBAYO §90 COP L2 UI? Preete ? ae ALO es Sowme7Z ve emo. va my 207 QeATA Py We £457 EXhiB. fw men y ci r3= sw JAC BIZ Weir JAG Lp) — SPW 722, She Gyr Paps a: 2B? “rece Beok “Id€or gy besleevsk,: Sve I TOLR 5% PAA PEE EHUCE my Us 2ae PvE Days wy o‘“y woud Bi re $69 Shi RPE A hPa Aue, Sas S ra ~ PF720 RymnEn TAC BAIR WL Zp yy bey Sees 34 3 fe ‘MO Fieg fy Re Less use OCr)~ Thad” JBL And? seo meae : ee x AM eer oReBTIY OV This IYwWs, 3 D ct anassmy hte S(p-le CPG 77K GALLI AG Sea 7, ee pT Fanty. ott cM) 54 PSA Sar ot “lpr ?7 SA | z: awe we ash why #6, ve Liles Avs Cesrec. = pte Lou 2 Peed Be Tels AE “YUsé Ca¥ CREP ud Ae RATVRE Ts me pe bo bAea ime" Lr Sib led S4¥5 we onde TFT .WeadhPeedEx my Vs cy. Ld» “ phe Be(Ex lzadeog d (7 CMA cCe sauce ints 5 PL y 2 ze “OC A,

Po farAkg Nt Te, sae Bad :ek Heelee AO SAO . rey s | ¢ ; as oi LX0lHL Zvorg 2/4 72 Tks? fey" Df watli Lwligry ith Care. ) STAY AEAT” fe Phomwe WoRty Skee AUUY LRESSES ! On”. 30. Beveh keer, Thee seen (~ teil rhkee OAys Pp gon, trxe Takée YerRes LAW.:T fApv€ xmestKkT &F A Shemdlowa,;7 xi Oct. BL LMAKE My Liscen. LeTh AC POSSALRT 7 2000 Emcee An) TIA wi th Rump FeR A Few rawuiTeS SO SOY: * STAY JY Yosse § Zvi ad ree, - & Fei eR pert WhATL awd KAT ucll LS Leu7 Recomm ewitece h AN ONr Coe Mania tee eon” ern a RES SL usr A PE mi VATE S paard Tkttw EF Cera #4, TAX “By Cts'e sya EPBOSSY FTSAY 4 12:30 9) ance een yo wah The Receft onis) Twewk kine 7° See eed FO caeOe detse aati SIS SF You pn And SAY re Sa fF Take out MY BUNERCAN Gre 9 WuKisT P/EAbe REO SIER” 1 PASS00RT pod ypy sf pn, THe PestI He come 70ght©5596? sta rupks ; - Q eee: mall ~~ £. C3 My peyeriorn’ op LEensrefs 4 Jon Cc eh echt PL ae ¢ Out rb n eAO See: S PO et we 70 te E runyres i en ae rah re 7U 19 2 CW pn7 45 TIEN pre a Celik BphET¥EA HE EG eh es 7S PEA bees Ars Je// PANY L BAve CNT a fis s pre fo FCK PIE 4 Fanw~ ASK Tee ieViale '@ sd s tad Whe Le fOe.d0d To TTAL oe i Ss Seow § ew a aa TT lLeatty + SEaCUI ya ae “Te xe whl, Hes B$scP PUT (VOW Sm AGB TBA Winnyrete Ke xy casks cons Ao ifion he wrib, das | =~ paw hice Ie Oo Thali pasta reret ele 72vs vba | AC Le Fhe sere Rae. A isotuton CPPERS ORE Alou Tine ny PREAPR = a exoie Leeescs 70“ Bila OYe OT” T4H7- bed Fire Jo Posse} ee 2 hdd a eA a Haye P Pw oeei itd AIR AS POTS Ea, eee ee ot zeu CF TAP 4.5.2. LT stead! vd or 2 oowsyvex sel 7o UNvkess~ BEFORE SNVVERR SBys"11w SPYULPs SV Prades BD VAP x vgn ST BOLEES YOu Crom oo ¥ = = Your wysh Te erround om You AS wth yO Absele ASCr, . a Lene gribsssy £thTed fis Envorkkhes PRE wo] 5 PeAdT 4A7- . c Vow my f e my ole4 Si ww, CCW Me ATER TH1S yr, LH Sure. FUSSLAWS i rhe elePENN ee bi Ahead , S160 px. wh |y) OF LAY Firrb Them, 200 Ahacck,/7 Hel32 TPR Lisa Ss Bo) Tp ee WVEr) 1 £ s By JAZ NAME CF CGokSene BS: pypeacr bussed (pho Mik you Ard 07.0 The AMERS Y CAME: Se iptoasadecash wt iene, in en 5.Tapes REL ZE The. 5. ewe WAY 7D Bane Phessekecn me, EY MUA NEMY SE OUEP TAEY B= pesAtibns bn Ws. TARO THE WES OOERS , BITD AL TEX « Be wousd Say “Fs FORTHE Pathe Recor d” 0 WOU CU ORE 0055 P10SEY comes, Orsewee SL pasfhe % REPORTER Es 5 gurek Wes VMords ele He FUMIE calls FRE? parry a) Lr cer PHOMES Sun PAised 97 TAC ale Le 9 = Wyeot pugft n Pho* tlh frara 8 _ ak ; 3 Pore Be ano. 1 - ree) mene slit) REMmeTERs, 3Prone Nol Axzimpes7ed, cals80” AT ly. ey gs =e Be ge BS Bere als, Se LOTTE CORE WOE Oe meine CNS FT Ker7a {ve [mr SIY cor? a BD KKef Ue atenng 2 ‘“ PHELE Bcc WO IS~ 5 Dece To Cre AH wrrekurecd , JS bye fase A noy 7esers Cand Se ‘DCR! PER, SIMMS KcH7 BURL 9 (ve. @oisbpry STOKy Piigw 4c Jakes (ee PRY 3 USTRIED, SEM typ a : ¥ Peano ssiens TBT Hs; CEPAE LP LUE Re2 Rate Ee |Pree eee : mat , Beane £ Keck then Me Tien LERSEOF TBC MTET (OY.od a p| Vov. se, “33 Bult oy ° a 44AEG aS Se ye = CIAL OFFI Bes Come Y Rec : s { 70 77 Aeamwre yy USS TL a 7 eS bee In Fouwd : SEDs eee ae 4 Pm, ho Ww G @ SA Si MEL ie 9 Wears Commvetiip A} - Aidt eal € ats dD. ARYy. NY SOREL vin igs aque a8 al Oe irtg RS ~ x Wov17- 0.30 FS KAve Coun6hT myself 72D Sele Tepe vty - RU S39) A~ KW. pookts ST POKCO 4Y Gell Te sity F deans 2 Oo, 9 2 LS Be oy Aa Fad Headard memepsre wetds sy Rest J (PKxe [Way Room. Riranrpa AARA~v6bCd TROT ZT 75 veg cok ow rae sTHOCG 50 ZL KARLEY Co OuT3 ATP FOR 7%,°5 prawtrn ANd A~hAlE £ see woone SPAN Po wo-ore PCa SVOA\V. no. And -TAON RirIMeA , W440 CAS TAC a STRy p80u7 C. Ytve They ; FoRrorten P, OURny December FT Pid wo money B The byez ed kd x Rimmeg, sald Ae7TE/ LD wes EAP CD AY AfeI F FIOM Y Frog, 2S. om Prtie 2J 2g. LEFT, TAS MOTh L WAS Cylfed 70 TRO PLOT Beco got — mel F WEA aFipts Wh? pshed ME TIE SAME GUEST Ione p aug pp toonth before . Why PrrenR ntl 10 btw me" gy py. an C7 Nee 3s. ew Ye ans EP 3 pint sn he COMA Y OF (259 BOA AYA = AT The Mofeh bent gné tie The PUIV. SD gt wribhwyer © AWAY BAST NEN SHT Spe gives mE » Sry BORAT wy chou, FARA Wen VOPES SACS EMT. GRE NS VEAW ACE OS rates Ve Qu/IY AecenTly sAe 1s MORAVEd MIE Sinnll St LAO boas Botr) LAFPJed , TAAT 16 WAY ME 5 50 STK ICAY JE andlor ppd Comet wg |\TN/-¥ MO ChAn Ge pw Aowli ne —— # Ves Zz #77 CAME Je FAS feRT Or7 € AAW Fete Oy Epp Dez POCuUme nT WOT TRE gau/er C1 Zen chi P WPS be wanTOL Dy * | BR Resvden a t€ domi ’ of win ~ SH fr yothe AMCoa & pagez lhl tv? TAO 5€ nr cZout Ly akig! LZLLS aon ¢ TOE 6 tH we Saks They PRE sng nq 0 TO TKO AY EG yf 7A Ciesla soem ORCA! Ne tN enhsy St T30-T OP Te Cont can TAI Roe nae IN ign 7,akc 40 Money Thonn h Tn€ Fed crore TE LAV Nay OPEC Ee pe CMP ESS L TheVK ThE BErTe/MEV ford A€enVe ELWNYER 22 Tre | PYPeMn) see heyyy Sho pshs Pte New Ahbpy* Seg t yan. &. £60 Jo kel Ross $1 Gow Fox money WNW WE) F Herve SOc, Hobs Phuseiteri!! wih RMufiog Pf fh 4%, 2 Pm TP CARD PI AERC! BPI VO% FO Lye ie 2 The. p Fre Tim 2 ET tenet bic By PRY fort 243K Be/y ? Ay Dery My 1A erie Oy ae 2a HA Le CR Ri, SD Tr f TO Pus kh STZ Fe a PAS as OR LY LUM ae YW ‘ ee F LIE +), PRRMKVOT OE S rVathie KR LEIFER MEV haE YH fap sald - t— Lt, nib Ne eaas: Aa Vi CSAY =". ‘ 00) BET sg bli wp. FType} clad ae, | l 74 5 Let fs Pha bons epee, YY « Serr tof a id OF He ofp cif 46-129 0 - 79 - 19 286 : ¥ theT BY ; : AER, a: wig i i age £0077 pad 707 ROSA eo a et aesSade arias Te EL eenee child A pres tie Wher, aubiish SIeihieeS ROSH Ablow! 23 B/ord csgkistnmdititDocbi foe bag - fue 4as Nee PRA eL PE Dyor Be7:etmek ATONCE. ; Encbljarlt ENEWS AE SEAAPOF, wh? wt/coptes sav fp & r9eel, fhe stv TIPTOR, Commtade va {to ; 1 Pod : HRMS | ; 1a% 7 peice wc atenlFke pid we ‘s 2 tft] Thre Wen | sul7, Fok, e erga esi °" - me afi “Ancdulured pPirtonre ute LT wes Deer.” ee DY [uTERPATER, Lari BETKEF, Ad FA. Teck Lsire- ep tae “eaees ay, Le Mice Sort, 12. 76 MAY 70 range ie F walk Rat, facet cael Ter. @ VAT 1)k 9 Prelany here KAS P shall Werk... ae rrene L need SRoEVTI ANAM CH IArT EFDA Ae Arde Base SIGF Art birek TO ? Bap 2 roles4 Few. XN Jo Pen, «v rye ie f rer tiny of #2/v.) sn STFS S5.°CAKS ae Pel ég jortes ad Tae enielish with Famer. Beet” fe whbnked Fer 7A Com, fad.=: prben, tes Pen OF PLT. O Pusinh hed LEW ery 95 PTs. ee aed oe Sheu et PaY Feripok, Oo. LA SAY toon F SLO HAVE RUES, C, Yen 7O beki A PIB Ss oe $9 Dow SAY. ELF LC fol iply, A Mey < 77¢e ees ce o = ae MEmTEA Mure 2p optre? abate lags, Fee iE We Ife Ay very SOREMCA, LZ Keove 2 chect: Fitor, The es Ned Chess every St oF Tne mwTh "Fo WPA TACC4EA 6 POO tafi 2 ee eeeZe tAJoRky! s “AS Ctr | ZEGER CAseResee Dubus é HAG OPF Ler.) Which TAS Te waleas Stone N hipre tun e PAA Yb ees Ts y. ri 5 SS A! Airbyo E94 FID ett se ¢ Ce- es 7A/ use ey \ ae= LOR ED AEN eacc pana ee. WAY/ Fie re) WAX ORE Ape Jory AF OU 2 brRcon res cores WAI ae wme Vin az7z a Sab ye ass PSR wtTh SPLEVL O ew FR 0 Ate s7 RAV FREEC(CEO. Rug O70» “Od 19 fey PASO Bertierereyg s is Ot te ; Aa ee 4 frr2zbe wit ter be os eerie ad “a con TreCw 7% rye Ay writ FE Py, VAG, pine Ph CNP Kexb.'¢ Teitty rags Ors - frre I wae Qe : ot“, Ca sl Bey 5p “O09 P74 Maer of LATE rer Tie Sige ete . ¢ %¢S2L so A ae Pg ie “Me. Tu Ce Ack OF | 287 ee ae Spee ee re Sea Ot OE eat po A “~~ og - PIAY oPy came ie AES PI as P- Ao Ls Fi ClO2€d ‘ iheWf9SITBlas : : “he API a E A nd oar fa o ; ie hcl £CJ. $=: 2 par 49g AMM O spelleBod fic Seav“cf ert utt hepa ork et Ba al AA TO) S77 fas ty handy owWpag s St: aS m8, Keweme n ECT, LS FI{f peeu,pedCUSTOM F PUP rH The Bren oO a $4 ,t fk Ry : Steer: 'ug Fee "A89, PT MitotF tng a fepos ee The poonwns Zw 77 e —_ - 7 E Pie Be: =Ban) ww,nA Tike ZO CES Outen s BT pn PPATY FiRow By - 5 #02 reople Them oan 7 Loa yy Wry Of i AReeWwTINE : C CHO we L4AwWCe Sa~ na EBS AOS PAINS 40d OW LWT! 2 L977: ten VAT} OhGabete PAR Leowned 266K oes T op. So. RITRRET eet. "ve But 29 KE yp ory WN KY 7r- GLE: wes so A ; l2f¢-F2,-¢ fic PH So ,'5 oe AVE A PUY. CASK YS weMmRd-F Reshee 7 2eZ BE Says mewy Firings, Cf,? A PBA ~ TE basse. “S= = < SOF AW ASH. oe LY Z tn fUFREO SE Otay he bd Ar, Goes Wb a ce Me TO , . : PEARSE aT BIamy 4. PAPVISS Fa ou- eq.2 Mevek Foy uch AZ, cEe oe BAA my 6 7a Os DAR E4Cs Joo bfef a 4e my Veh oP HITE t. : te2 DZ aleve ow TRE Sverss*Iy JAE Fou AB eBe7yy ruc S777 € 2 ce 7A€ feedYS 24 Car Bad! Loz Linyhy Cnt EY Torce Mr» : e Sa Tbe rN P70, Bie a OY MARS. , Coreyugyg a LF We axs = kg 9710 ME C77 t. tog Ae mysyp ACP . rine Ae Sé~ndsw 7 oF Jane ° 91g ty BIER of pe - an) ACf AS >~ ‘ OV Fs Sees A 3 FadWwAZe ooFras Sih Wass . CO Sanne Prvte> < 04 Ce Pod nee os 4 $V a: DS) RY ae PAC we 3 6SeCKEO46 72 J: SP vw rr ‘3 Ce Steins pl BP Emr FORTY BT my Ai ie LLL "? rcky ATRL ive = Puss/ern Fow£ FAVE Bee p COs LBL jy wih A77/¥, WAKE pJ~ ee = TA Apert? RcJory MFO. kos EVP de Te/eus x pee Pree jp—* BALES GARRY FECHLAG TO WE. 4 «BOT Ate WT S7Yimake bipceSte onh TAO nrFez<7 Tyne, S18 art) FEVL [574 bie TRAYS LSet WO, Fiat!s 1%” FLY Rocg Of- LAWTER ew PCO ge Lore A Bes ees le Aaa aeVola aaT L357” oF AMMA TCAs ai: B Ci Rl FROM S10? pT 44 Be TAL. P27usiC conc Cee © YK) 15 f GE Atta eV TCR Bhi BPA Yh WhICE LASEKBP FEW WlCKS we Aert Tu Wilt 100. Z£ mer TRO PO 4IRCES CE Ko“R t—R/s ei of Fo a7. Lo. ; ort awe ‘Weng Jr, —topan 2/2 MEW SB vee 7a “\yoo «3 T2 Hp 7TCtt,'s Awd CZ Lp Z USKHPLYY 7O FRE Z oo Mecre Lemazeey : Go wJ/4 & PREEAYS She st’s SO Ae = 3 F sy, VE Y¥ we ewea ER PLA 7. 70e™ez7's ae “nw Lai Jane ty Ver Fot7z? a.=\ Az CASA CPL! TF RGD APE ta lye VE4yY BNC 17T- Fey, ~ pT Ine OomesDky we 6 ct Ary Tk : oR Mous eae 3 her bm BAU: mers A WOT PFPFA/R by, "rs her dade en yy {ie via ee th 1 Lave with her. She Has REFUd fry more SESE ee = = po wents, jré ARs wa Aad t27 1? ThE Pesouec OA NEL [ite th = = tw 7 bey SCS Ea FORE =a “>= ee e Bad Woo”. VFL *~Y Tre 4. Lee woreetads AF We? Peopyse aul, |Ti.2. BIVER 2 fycpséT fepecty ot trit LYK FP Tre Locag, = cemge WebumEe hime sJAneene BN Re Seth Vp LT PHO POS eT= sae esi *872, Tha REFUS ES 077 Lee is Rérrk Bu c Gee ae, Fe “Ph me PER REPL Oy) 4g1des lS ofa LOVE Ltt tane iredeg, ra yhtl +e Yow eet lernys "Ceca nate fzee Men = POT lyse vec oe o0F- tik BE wr0ur7 Lb pele Ess sth wells22et ei Po BO ragelnl ose ogatnsl deoe fot * tetpow Day z her ek : | S whe, * jf wwds TO UatgeeS B oleLeg F“4 FoeFs ge Win Corniides gne- Atbe2FP -iorn me yt i kg fKo Gk, 289 ey RAY _ ESE RCE 7]PRS Tv 2.Dos Torre, Ohsmeseps are yeas ss BLE ta PE ee BT LEM one Fhe mestl Ecce FO Cee Oa EAT : SL NEGeee IEE Ber Cortled 1 TO ThE Peaxsrornd COFFEE bro! ASHES 67 J~haaie~ O1M Senshi heeS ivan \» 2 Seyto myaly EkPnd MY resi JeuToe.. PALLCR yO Atxee aan Dacciees.Y yh £4leadend Tilt Be S96; ©If =37 L An SIP OE FO Kecous, den ray 2.5, Re PE eT ST ppiy : re WORK 9S OL MLE FAP money Z Ce 4s AMOUALLES Fo BO Ste 7 = Re Phe TOA ES O70 Bstilbr BA¥VS Wo PSOCES 2 fF Rectenrhns mcery az FRAC! AAV oA2 Orovic Es J 4Ave + Me : pee. te MPG PMY FAST Rehued Fo BCR EH ahbedtakd a Proscar: = FOR Miseseen cae my Pes ihors, FST Re “TF weuld Li'Ke 70 to Lk Dust} Pe og tery Maer lies en = Fes, 2689 rece Le rinse SOM L-1$ 2 ft hve Ws 2 ST oF KC Gere #Ac4 TAA E rw 4D :: 72 TAS kus. COMFIKES by Th SECC he > J pry Juttmewt Bur “tknes 5 cypoat Ts me were rev PY 2a SS bas “DY LESiRE FB RETURE, 5 UVISCASTHCE FIOVILAY . nee 5 eli 47 ~ FM ER] yerTJo TROP Lensyweee = BAT PI 770 BOKER £Ys 7 hewr - my juTRoOrced Te B 6X7 a Ly see’ PReuch LAIA-Dt Av! Red ~S Ress pF? whee re ~ ty'Ke, Be VE), Ths WSK 78 Fhe vee rome LS Joe PFO Pe bens. WOC- strewn Sveme /s Afar, 14, : ° PIP Y she ves Mme WEL FONE whmpbe Bol g FRE i J FH AY PO? ~5e-peiw be PREV ahs (8-34 - Le wth) th, LTE bot! 1 ee, “> . TAr/ Hig gt eees Hees 3SIF, fl = 29 we ar Pac 4 of PESO sph ss E. > v,\ \ iS 4\ nt % \y | Caonesite 6ete |e me‘“y, + rages ne “= . ow ae, whl Je ee ““oac vyham Siow ene NESS gy! cer 0, ealiar= ie. Se j a PEE PAB 9 CE 4-0 Wee SF LL Via prawn Of CO ee. tor POS _—— hanes akely Tie f°? about 22 fe. & w/ pebeoriles sts : pees vr 407 perro (et apie 7 vy Aetey ae ~Sacezt J Heal ee aie rick Mw, Ging es be oy, Minuten... : Of OF a He Cay AYU ee KG OVE Eh» ten0 eke FER afarie a due, aa, “4 ate) “D7. TG ee & * wt heed Peasee Py. BOLE ALCOS ED ; uv Kp ae ps ut Ao fs as Bey 5 ilar rb Ale fost Lhe A; oman me bithce, oT EE he é Ge cial yeh 28h 05analog es ee Mon Lag S_ Ke, aK prick, wt urLee Comm g SReeeS Us Thi a ee iste Te i - way DAY WI), paren As KAAS TT s SMA ThE >a THs STibd PF Chim CUCL Se LE SMFH, Bt Pn kihk GA AAS 2 LpeTiny bul 73 Tae PAu pects Sel ad dusted 0X pad mk MY wife MUTAIY Xs Iie Jo 4eTudy 7 (IER, Crd FY a ee — Ber Fes fs s2i6yfTly 5 BAT Thy soce APbES rE eesAea: JF 00 WAPT J wish Fo Le HEP FTO week vacTH7Z. he BSS Tad Fe egy PeT BET G8, es - fey is nel. 4 P””, OR II HE A TT ‘Ae Pop So 685 sy Pita SAA wi~ ba 4e Comes L Pron &< fu FRy OnE AWMeowr 2g OR OA C072 bg WTAE FAST ReaeBone GERRY soins, LEAR Sc ae “ee orerp ee Tae rat reo oe Oe gg, fo ae; edeied |: We Kot erik O WC, ‘ Bu CR 4. BE 4 4 yo ls &Z& SPL yur 20, Veal LET M5 They nurrbor. arse pee vlssceaty FET AAYIK- Fol DON" | oA CERT AEH 7es ME UTE FPO05 Bet! Dry Ad ere" =p e peut . 20oePaton:wyBrat 3? cur hy ay 1 es wrY we JF Arto ; rfoplts Kf Putfe use aaey, ce 22 iy agate 07- 1UTACt méearTlimne : 1g tae yin Ft a SOCE pi rete 18 - Tig.e 7 TLE eid AEGI LOA! 7 77 “a vies UTR Se D. ‘okod* ete, BIT Mase gf tek MEU ; 4 Less. Llewts Aeadk get ote é « ee or 1 hea eter Tey ou BLL Ly ole ~7 tee : MoS iriia Looe-eSeosTunbcan gh = or BNP phe prpek (fywreet? : (8 : BERR AA A EEO oh Ww “YeRe Twit NG, lh The VSA8 Corre howled Soon. | TKIMS TO Pee ABESIORT K VISA 1 AUR UNTO ail Fon, ore ts 20) HOR, PO RA, . CE OF ON 5 ee de ~hEof SRoms6e IG pitohia SOOT RipAS 4: Bcf a. xavtank ay ‘= 4474 Ss Guid AIC ow — ees ely pe UeKkh FRI pasa LC TEY 1 CAl 4S”) : wsk AY TRPVO O74 waciers Fo Tae = wwse pl bet 78. POT [yy BAe Tel? FERRE S ‘yy 728 ve 6 J Av s Gurccles, PUNT er *- VAS ~ PAE HAARALS — .-BE gsbe ae ZeuerP PoP a:LI wrdd Eltrch Ze ce $f siglo : RHOPIAen ~~ lial eTAAS eee7. ae ocr SINCE E si Biiricés = ppold FACCI© ee VE wf ge % Tl?say Jh2- ats aaa 7% rf « pe zt ynenT 40Ne Jree CP LJen Wels i y we SSF rs aEty One Br ThE (PI BOAT FovernT “Gu€és cE PLES LY EZ A 42 Gert ot, a ~- id e BIEVER jposn-ha PRR res Greek Fads €r , pil ERUVAPKE VRRS OF KhtrveKcbs FOK AVE Form Ex FE) Qin0 «' X¥SKou, §F ~~ wWhyn~ Cec. Jftw WE KKE Leta, 5 prrig Glrd ee Boom. Ven Yen |S Beevwntng TO wn ver About bov'ery Je TLE Bes he ated Bivic Aa EL "pip hirely Phin tne sffite roe per Re ye PRIMA sly ue, nt many sO € fer ge 5 77) ee § PRE 2437 Fi BA TZ ee) Wes FI PAPAL A fF Ch 6c AAAA £2 87d . AH « e€ VTE Pax Blic 1S GB Lay Sues, parent fo Cyd ey ee OSREP PI Oe3 VS pice yeh ARH PEE SR ste Kass hor tH Veo GFE CE. She 72 SE UE MVE BEE) Gree Zs. S- LAr eae, SPO Ae SAcen Tee Csriple 7," y, TT Pa eae fid FA fovneat «rage tegen Dn eS STE CHepr- oP Tit wx i) © ee te ET OPT Be ee OR ek bthi 4TH 40mrreK tinny or ae Fag CHE IDEA Fx Ae Ve a Be = rs Pus tt pe ff Fe Boel, gar f. LAU CRESS 45 IA FF S41, F IF a +E s “ApleS Poff 4 2-3 RE SiTars2 Me LAS tO6L NIP TI Y cease F 1d Wrse eit ae Ao, POW 1” fa Wels + ifs hE SOT eit AT Re AR 7 Wy) yew Pais ee Specie, PM. +s Sfgd « Li Fo~ ae PUA ee eee Bag in ie 7 Bey Wve 5; Bs wise Ge Po venerait OLIN DN ars Sr eee ey Mitt ing 08S 15 SS (162 & u. 7i Feel ri Ra $5,;An Ww . wyeA, ib t 04750 F bod Pa = Ov MPRch 1. 70 pave Oney y Manna 15 Swb fased ‘ Pe: -, ‘ x eemcigt pen rw CFRO ax” MUASES sind y Pipi Tbs L Lene : oa RARE 10-00 pring fers BOBY GRE - heave tp fot nk, Be opiten np S70 PPA work ,L Ar? grey Mews. et lp BABY aia ,AXE ~aJted 9 hoy. MAR:wa FEES as we B27 os S eed 5 se s) SurehtWi d Fiabe © wing 22 MALO Letyes tr3 IKA (rs puspited” L Biel 22 bo TO he ss LD hm wer NAC % BC Ax Duro Ma r wicbdle pint fene Thoso Bepwtels Shy HF svon CUSTOP? SuPP AT AY = Rus Some be 70Y FAS, DP KA Vty As Pea l fin d. pe Lg. EReLuse FO. BOVE HER EMP do Fro 29. £4 ies. Thay Wohody knew ee 7 Lois Tne. .BELG TIMEF, TA BP ut ate ‘ To Oldest ote rh as ke £6 FOP eS Ba7 ZA nF Se LY Seb F VW LIE Py vw o's oy the SiPIe hei ok. e LOACE 722008 ae ee Yo pw JA€® FOR PIAA A254, By ag - LIVIN) WA Gui ‘5 fb? FOI - “2 npr BOTORRE I9an SR1P7 OAH On apie fog Reh By , 475-4 awreds Grittle wr et ab esr 255 MmosBOY FAYT « 754 to J stark? fF SAY 1 WY» al wu 54 ae nnladir, BY Regfl“ _1h0 “Z7s MH Sco Tae Say BECOME TS SE0T 2ebttds To %wUuR Les | Tat Same Td me what yor dew wal OR. - 3PY, F487 0 th russe TAK AY 1 Pa you? DB at P00 le PR SCR L228 Fos py Lor, a ; The 4 Rigcor? XL pwStets io olifat MY mibiptAy seh-cl sud 730 H-¢ os Lees nt eee CCctoe 2 Te com ie oa ao : ; fe ns wirtf Br AG Resestp cal? <. ae f ot eee <0 tt Anse, w Aecwaliel torentre tenne keej Hyer Tm 07> we uel une, 2X 236 ve wer é bovko wie Gotach ips DB On leet. Bran Seth ob Aros 20 ref gee: ae ees tee = HANDWRITTEN ACCOUNT OF INTERVIEW; WITH MISS M > FOUND AMONG OSWALD'S PERSONAL | EFFECTAG Sie (OSWALD'S HANDWRITING) | i 295 (19) 1960, undated. Political discussion, handwritten on stationery of the Holland-American Line; 15 pages. of “aes oe hee cers ac ape. tf NEWS UAt eS a ER SESSA tac SRG I RAR dct, " AD 06} gad AER oat re glgeae bydaa i | tga ak 2ttr Soerk pethen sp 4 Pere aelan RD SSA “ Meh hig $ ‘Prawty. wey dye okt 2 tp ay é 34° . ‘ ght fDi. tytAdth ci ory . a 296 F t spat ’ A a 4 ; an : ; : aiee ty wattleAch eh Bed SATA x % i DARL AAA 1 }i" a ‘ ‘4 a- : AU: % + erie eh > eas attf os | S| ts eT MEV GImN ON Hoan eTRaab aa > Bch yay hes Rh yD an ANC + oe hE ES AF be ah nee ie a. < ‘a ae < i % \ Tuek an ye | ih Laat Reel aa4 t a? ¥ Pe mygee ot rH Spy \e- Ra a on ie mo wy 4@ sone uae fee ( a é ¢ , ia rade} es i fe pot . ’ tld ' . eyf Yoke t i] ' ; ve ; i ‘ H j Le po. pnsl ee ‘ ore Vy Sow ( ps Drlnyhgs a . ‘ 300 aug £2 : ons aoecenemmares ene. sone sees aesod 6 yey :eeo Me ars Beg Tie i- Sg rs keemks Sear PonTara :8hyhers Uy : . : ; \Ni ‘ ' a t-t ead TA: PTS. +e SAE OE ase. 1= he. ent aa kane : e ogee Pee7m, ee SS eet ~ mise Ps eS: #=" 2 wee OT rr ay Sed Se af leg t “we ‘ee < £ ° ‘ "4 s ‘ . 4 Uy “ ta ah Yor 2 d “i: ts Ss Vas . ‘ate Kp. wrlomweR og ge si * Pa ~ t sster MyNe ; crhigt a ’ 303 Me) ? tie A : tf: ee: . i é rs Ai AM : v Aye ’ m ‘ a oa wb ti 4 , ee % ,: me £¥i: Ue Ai . a} i toa cg Vie 7 ae a me ah “g'. ‘ Le piss is os ’ + iy " Rey oe , ; : 5 : ‘ 7 , L c ‘e +2 a +, + 7 SARA r Ata ARSE On ROA oea SEA at nto CHES TEN eat a $ 4 a rte Die a Pa ~ mu, Se ta, Cee 305 cise -, 2 «= ee See ey y- : re >os oe Sewe C58 3S SS y acy. 53 Oo s we a et Tel een 306 ERO Newmans F th kaos Alen, & fay . ahCG es a> fb olen toll heeang krclicr ¢ ehh ost bay Akn"bee” yeh SMberene aPtnor’ ed 8 * Ms ates alae MTNI whet fh Fie Sa egy Le ay .. ea dee saps ay. ", Id it hte pd yey AR eget idee ote vel? Og VB) capil gyYyst Psy ak “jf ee benft tT tMyatre4d des ©iti ;Oru ‘m-Hepes, eby: Be shie) Se+ theiy CASS Hy Aly” the i ° x7. 9°; :%‘j atte i*Rok 4 bik’ UL abe eae Be oe 0 Patt) Ged ®ang eee ‘'if eBa4|niMC y>A tiyt: ’>Fai i ee foal be AY ile ai at) mer Othe ‘HAEheae ”?atonal dost LL aeyeas a (UND te eee BeBei ae;: wer 2f Ke4. cuy Pay)og : res hits 4 en ee ane" CN " a Adal EM ‘ : x fi ar a , Pea) wy - by Pues Neerf YA. EF ¥ att ma uf apie. ery. Ss — Se 307 ee Race ne i4 4h 4 ges tet ‘ SRE ce i ¥ uate Bh ¢ ae RS : ass ae e é hebWe A) Pt Cy aw 308 Soe ©owners v Oy APTN Pe ha INE pt mem mr lt LRG, BE acn eh art TLR CTS 4 ;ne s . Alster abi adits eaniacith 7 D-fiee Come RS EE LR BRT REN, Si r¥ 309 ® .. : \ | || 310 (21) 1962, undated. Photocopy of document identified asa self-questionnaire Original was stained and unsuitable for examination. geniseion Exhibit 100 | gag . ay eeAE aie om ee OO? Mii tor, vn od f oa ‘ vje Of sdlaapnas 15 Hall ated 1 Gee ee Seat ah weiter Le SSK onnachiteg’ ve AEF , a) es ROR BCs eae ewe a i 7 7 oh QO Sot. butte nti 3 Zo rwoe Cm ot PLS LA ps Ser. Mev AG, Akar Foe —tisaalds t+ urhack ’ iB ites Pa e po nl wwe het they ¥ " ee he. ito a pe eed got - aibkaneney 4 cohhad sty Thaie oF tH OP be Cote is me coed hes 44 hab A thea) om arod hors), wale maak Joreon were href Ate oom 4, Pa: Arie’ it eee KoKnke 311 eg vftomeen wot I Kerk nt, ver Arm o pote Of he es. eho US @ bad 7 hate “ OR pasar pala aa Apnened ATO A : : ~~ 8 A F freedov, yen a4. yer Ae we al pentane Rinrpragciee, 7 312 ake Cae aseerne fe? Srey Bal fj A bry ink areal Aer, fhe Ah teh Hh A prter onithe 46h forae Lang A om S yom emaent [251 & aps FP ley dick Ecf f/é A a ale aaa 9 Le = eee wd oA! yesh fb leads de esc csap ~ pared haw be, Oo ontyeow ernfrbel tn > Sad xe O] Grv# tcl. UK - prrntd I tactal Axa p-? 2 cv Z ? J? or Gou ae ; Ce aa Gn eg eee ae ee fies Stag Pree en ‘ Oo ptt Ke “ess = ~> &. to nabiony weet) Cre ae Te ti MOee ete fee 1 GO communal! 00 i MG USA, | 313 H en om if Revere ene cretion’ Calta, Wwrere totus 3 2 vardns> fara ote ue Fou Fe Meet el UF 9AOE F nt iement i shane i * ‘ sag 4 + i + . ov % s ‘ ; z u-t oer ee une Owes ww f 4 oT SSA xo bet LeyPa yo rete a “dae x5: a« 2 pay or <4*e37 1% a. 8 -—-~" eee 316 24, 1962. Entry papers of Marina Oswald, including a fingerprint (24)-Mareh identification card. (FBI Exhibit D-10) S/ppgteD STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE win CE, Beare Suro Mo,5-RO40. k Teens AND NATURALIZATION SERVICE =e ORES, BE UKs | Yih 2§ Sg. ome Fite No. 4 Le PO ES To the District Director IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION SERVICE 4 ol The undersigned, whose alien registration receipt number ey WI a OT: new alien registration receipt card. 1. po (a) 1 am attaching the Form 1-151 in my possession and desire a new card because [_] my name hes been changed [the card is mutilated. ‘i £0) iy lionrgistrtion cst dovamest wadD> on or about Berens fs L 1 PE F6S ee under the ¢ following circumstances 2m ia cans och vecelst which wan beaks “or | ascertain its whereabouts, I will report facts and will surrender such receipt or immigrant identification card to the immigration and Naturalization office ; nearest my place of residence. Name at tine “od regist tis SATA S Meme at time ef tawfel admission fer permanent residence 7 PAS Acdnttted “ ge: (ty of town) (etate) Date ofadmisaion ad off NOW! YORK Wd. Juve 42, 096 Nowe of voddel or other moons of conveyance G Destination inU.8, attime ofedmiesion "P7088 APAl?” PokLprd ~pmeritan Fl: WORT TEX S Fa | aes THAN ’ t ; pice {Forms ¢- G~22. 2a, es eo 2h, 72) Ere Ee is < uh aie Ye See eae eet Ts A OMe thse men Pia ccuewe e fined. Hsqicg 317 ‘INSTRUCTIONS , 1? This epplicetion shall be ysed to apply for an alien wegistration card * - changed name. (Note: Upon request, evidence of registration inliew ofone lost, mutilated ordestroyed, or ne surrendered than Form 1-151, such as AR-3 or AR-103, will be replaced with Form I-15)bywithout a lawful permanent resident elien on other fee or epplicetion.) 2. Submit this application in single copy oaly. 3. DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE - An applicant for « new alien registration has been chen seceipt cerd in « cheaged name, whose name registration byorder ofcourt orbymariage, shell attach appropriate such change to this application, docamgntary evidence of 4. PHOTOGRAPHS - You 3required to send with this application 2 identical photographs ofyomrnelt taken within 30 days of the date of this agplicetion. These photographs must be 1% head to point of chin s X 1% inches in size, the distance from top of be approximetely 1% inches. They must NOT be pested on the cards or mounted in any other way, must be on thin papd, heve a light background, andclearly ' group or full-length portraits will not be accepted. DO NOT SIGN show a front view of t face without hat. Snepshots, YOUR avoid possible mutilation of the photographs, write your alien registrationPHOTOGRA S. Using crayan or soft pencil to aumber lightly on the severse of the photo- graphs. 5; DATE OF YOUR ARRIVAL - Ifyou donotknow the exact date ofyour arrival inthe United States, orthename ofthe vessel or port, and you cannot obtain this information by consulting the facts ofyour arrival asyou remember them inthe appropriate your family or friends who came over with you, give blank spaces onthefirst page ofthis farm. Your {nmigrent Identification Card oryour passport, ship's card, orbaggage \bels, ifyouhave them, mayhelp yootoenswer ese questions. 6. FEE - A fee of five dollars ($5) must accompeny this application. Remittances should be made payable to the “‘Immigre- tion and Naturalization Service, Department of Bn If residing in the Virgin Islands, remittences should be drawn in favor of the ‘‘Commissioner of Finance of the Virgie Islands.” If residing favor of the “‘Treasurer, Guem,”’ If you mail this application, attach in Guam, remittances should be deawn in money order or check. DO NOT SEND CASH. The feeis requ for filing ired application and is not retumable regardless of action taken thereon. TO APPLICANT. Do not write below thie line. For use in searching Records of Arrival RECORDS EXAMINED veawtaliecanine RO ES alae RO ci LE Index books ’ RH=129 0 79 = 124 318 Form FS-S10 (Russian) State 3 wi +17 E BATPAHHYHAN CILYRKBA WTATOB AMEPHKH uid - The Foreign Service ofthe United States ofAmerica IEHME HA MOJLYYEHHE HMMBTPAIMOHHOA BH3bI H PEHCTPALHHi OCTPARILA i zs — VISA AND ALIEN REGISTRATION APPLICATION FOR EXMIGRANT Sror Gaasx womkeH GpiTh sanoaHeH B JIBYX sxsemmiapax manymes ‘HAH, CCM OH BAUOAHMETCAOT | HHOTPYonVKIBA: Hi = fla neqwarHiimy 6;YEBaME. nomen Guth RamEcaH wT eTxaMa But gomeunt orneTuTs ua BCEon - pyux, y names meat SSere eHT J T OF aK |mare Nornerbt H& OTC ONLUMX JUCTAX, B ABYX SUSEMELNAPAX, YKRSHIBAR ©coornetors ammeKoro coTpyanuKa. [pa nc | HE TIOMMMCHBAMTE sror Saanx, Toka He Sure NowyauTe aoaeen dalth shaman © A epHkal BHeceno TLATb OJLIAPOB . Gror named eerMonn OO} esSMMETPAGHOREO 4 suse gommno — RBETOCL K KOnCYABCKOMY COTDYA! Jenbrax BAH GaNKOBLIM ot by ANADEX MH B panmoneszoa cymMe BR MecTHDIX ¢ = ters. ALL questions = tb : ae" TIONS: pray Bie ThisThis FiForm m! ust be filled out in DUPLICATE ee or gee letters. blocka ; @ GNSTRUCTIO NS: licable shouldi. graye cy ag4 ; DO : NOT SIGN j this form | nti i answered, if applicable. Questionsw'hich are not app. on the heets, in du splicate using the same numbers as appear immigrant visa $5.00. The feeshould be paid in the consular officer. The feeforfling this application for an we ‘tech before the consular officer.) local currency equivalent or by bank draft, when you appear teen: COKPHITHe CYMeCTBCHAOTO axa Momet HMeTD ‘aananens IPEOCTEPEXSEHME: Beaxce A0mHOe SamBNeHHe BAM ecan ' aanoe wegonymeune @ Coegumenmue Urera. Tame Bu # BLexana B pomcacou ra‘Uirerst, aommue sueaea ait Oe: BO Coeamueunux Llratoa. { RPRVRBOK ALA Lpecsie*owenwsr Bae uo cyay 4/MTM BHICKUISH may poped enyour permanent exclusion from th —— (WARNING: Any false statement or concealment of a material fact for your prosecution and/or | dang rtat could be po ' though you should be admitted to the United States, a fraudulent entry B ° PerHCTpAlHH MCHA KaK mocrpesna Hacrommam s HOA sasprenve O BRIAaTé MBC SMMETPALHOHHOR BHSbI Coenmmemmerx UPraron Bo cn een ene ensee center recencenees nonsense the United States .........- 4 hereby apply for an immigrant visa and alien registration at and state the following facts:) aman: Oy family name ts) i. Moa Qaammen: Moe men: (My first name is) OSWALD, Marina an Ran a et es ce [“= oe manos wamas No pyoows: (My full art Mapuxa Huxonzeesua OCBAJLA ee a annannn SENSES & Gpixl: wanecTeH(aa) MOKTMa AMY MEM, ROXKRA YRAIATD c Sanaa $. iniaEnIn AGC) RAM ROA KOTOpAIN Gaines, coTOpP Mel # MOsLsoRARCH = sarapating Se eeeoeeeieh anon eremalesnae) Ae ees : TAS Sane) ro fenceayydellpener ragsane ng / wrina Hikolaewna OSWALD nee PRUSAKOVA coat ier : : © Gers woernpomnenan: (Thedateofmz birthis pet teyn G4onth} (¥eer} (City or town) / (Country) Bey 17 daly 1941 Severodvinsk ines obl, US&R Mie no ay 2. Mow mpogecess sam aauarae 8 wacrommes wun Gi; punl aed os en Rh Mok wecresayel ampec: Gly present address is) it na ey oP Minsk, St. Komamisticheskaya k, Apt.2h & Mow mom:Gity sex is) 10. Moe cexelimoe Rosomenwe: (My marital status is) pe Cae # Eg} : seneacme; oOcece Oe So eee a ee TMeuat/damyaen Opes Ones? oke i lewR ; Abas “Hh. Mos SAUMONSEDROCTS: (My 2 nationality is) 12, Mon pace: (My race is) “oviet hare i 3® Le "Ye Uda: wee woeaqes & Coexmmemmme [ivark: Quy purpose in going te the United Stetes is) For permanent residence with husband Lee Harvey Onwel.d_ : “Y. A wamepescionn ocrasica p¢ Ulravax Ra RocTomREO? UKR- 18. Pearse uaa (yeamuTe cpox } HyuxT di intend G intend to remain in the United ne eet elininmaiquieisitinmeaipiljaitengs M¢ a r) .%TE W Gecaclfodaol Semone) so meeenaale Gn SS GLUON os TimWe aes a ed tae -r ea oat ®. (8) 2 eay & Coegmmonunse exegyouiemy Amy (yRaxwre nonce i ee a om mat B.agped ovore ema u cteneas paleton. 3) ary RAPS, CCAR te am going totheUnited Statestojointhefollowing (Give sees ye geine ee anor oeaiatin ive Heee aidressif see Item feote)_ 21. Mot nocrossani ampee » Coegumenmux Llrerax Cyner: (My floai eddress in the United States is) See Item #20(a) Srey Henne uomee Rive Relpeen Fens aes Ke Spey oe ape MpecanaremsoTsax AuckMX Cosmmmensaix ; Rm (This form may be obtained gratis atceensbec adhere ofca Sates Onan araan é Pe (ife4/3 ee ee, 319 Forme FS-819 (Russian) 8-17-88 Rage2 22. Mom AmuiNe @umaRcomsle pecypeM CueAyIemme: (My peremal Bonocial rerources are) : OB Seema oh Mem ic Pcs attics TO be Olen MB 23. Peed endeeeae ane ese JOKIMONTA: 8 BOMTROpMACERE M KALWET sTore @ganteNRA: { qmsubenltting thefollowing personel documenta inwup- F]Caaxeremecrac o pomxoum (Birth certificate) []Owene © eonmeed axpete csttiery remee : OS as ()Cupense xe wasmuen (Police certificate(s)) BB Aoxsesromerno 0 ; Gg ym pe Sine cee ee Mr. LeeHarvey OSWALD, Minsk, St.Kommunisticheskaya |, Apt.2h %. Heexa & aapece Momx AeTed woxome 21 raga: (The names and addresses ofmy children under 21years ofage ars} June Lee Oswald, Minsk, St. Kommunisticheskayal, Apt.2h L 5 Hens “neno moei COME, ZOTOpKic RasTpApyWT EMeCYE Ob MUCK: (The names of members ofmy family who are immigrating with me sre) busband and daughter accompanying me to the United States - both of US citisens. 227. Tloanoe man 2 axpec' moerd eras (comm on"yt; yume xezy cwsopra) (The name end address ofmyfather is(itdecensed, 0 stata, giving date) 23 amnzna w aupec “marepe (com yuepas, ysasarre ; } cpm eet rly forayscompat pLiman ere atpore Klavdiya Vasileyvna Prusekova -deceased ; 2 Tloarase amena & gapecs Mosx Czmeakinex pogcTsexumnes xsMped pasine $ret named andetivens ofmynext ofkini my bomen dountey in) Uncle Ilya V. Prasakev, Minsk, St. Kommunistichesakaye 39/42, apt. 20 30. Co spewene moero MOCTEAANATEACTRS, & HOLA 3 CADAYIONX MOCTAX B TORENRE ULOSTE MecEMER BAS HORUIC: ince my sixteenth birthday my placas of residynce for 6 months or more have been) Wesdecenwneys erae fers: 320 Porm FS-S10 (Russian) 6-17-59 3] e eee cepEesuoe a,Scadean cpeeante,SepYmaNS apene SnD Troe Bes wpymon Boxpyr «/ia* aan sHers, (United States immigration laws require thet al of being within any of the classes, described in are unable to answertag 4 pattagaey cena nd t whatever na your answers to these questions, lat theconndlar officerlaable to extablishthetsuchoffenee wasin mindtateetevnor offense and answer to the Lowi a necessarily make you inei bie for a visa.) (Give the correct \ Riu oe Bh Korma-au6o OOBRReNM, APOCTOBARH, NPRBATEYOMN EB CyAy WAR secs ee emir!(Have youeverbeenarrested St.Sar with, indicted ©) ‘Banuaaeen a BetKOrRA woman? | Gave you ever been Bi “Bui MOMMNOESRH, OMEBCTEPORAED!, ine es ete a ore @) Ban amBusnounzonsins, suomncrapenenes Peete amnwty, fehabllitition Gocres, other ectofclemency of siallar action? {if so, explain) ) (2) (a)‘Baum a Borxorna-sa6o HOMeDICND B ROM AH Upecrapenx (mm BOE been placed in an almsbouse (poorhouse or charitable institution)?) Zé) Sanere ax Burwavonoamma, apaaevech amButupodeccuonaAmbin uuiimm Ram Oposarod? (Are you a pauper, beggar or vagrant?) - Tpagaere ax Bul @ KRCTOMMGC BPCMA KAKMM-ABOO (RAKYECKUM HEAOCTATROM WIR BECTOCOOHOCTLIO BAR KOTOpHIe MOryy HORIKATL Ha Bamry cocoOnocTs eT sapaarwears Ha MEBKB? (Are you now afflicted with physical defect, disease or & disability which may affect your ability to earn a living?) fe gi (1) Byaete aa BN 0 COCTOSEME B @amaaconom oTuomexem coxepxate ce6a B Coegnnenmux Ilrarax? (Will (Will you be able to sup- | @) port yourself financially in the United States?) ~@ @) Bex amy Bac xoraa-aado upactys max upworyins yuonomemaremscrse? (Have you ever had one ormore attacks ofinsanity?) Tech ee (©) Crpaanere xx Bai8 nacronmice speN RANCTPAIAAM paxbme nosxonaTwel out?(areyounow orhaveYoueverbeenaf qa om BAAkasent,OGMOPOURMAME APMCTYBAMM, KOMBYALCHAMEBIH RepSELIM paccrpocTsom you now or have you ever been ¢ _ficted with psychopathic personality, cplleney, mental defect’ fits,fainting apelis, convulsions or@ nervous breskdown?) ee (a) Heaserech 2x Bui Teseps wan Geum wm Bei paunwe mapxomanom sas mum keoeuueunns aanscamamint thee Gu aoe fies) | you ever been # narcotic or drug addict or chronic alcoholic?) a GES Si (1) Hexosaance nN y, EGR ae eVzeysme ~f ftZte, ra | (bodoe | Cicer et. 2 Re. m Pies f- as bs . an < Kis Ce Sis [Commission Exhipit No. Ok cs - me te ey oa 331 te, (29) March 12, 1963. United States Postal Money Order #2,202,130,462. | | a rs | ; Fash te ete ae 24 me ACID OTT POY: te Dey : : - ewe . 2 Mali sore cee a Porgen, \ Seem, on 2 74 O77 : weg Re Z Pe ae & oA or Wows bern | . Fnfrs tly ; SHOOF on, HE ers 7° e¢O borigee ergecases TsO A se eteopPe tof > Sie, owrelos, ew ee ce Ee. < é Fev o oh ~ “K Q ® N xa {tu Ses ey] 7 & Sarioo ————— . N — ba | ~” ih rent UC ; a =| acca ie ; ") » © oe hes . ; ty i\| ns ie CO, \ ly (8 eee . " fFCommission Exhibit No. ok | -«-. , od F a eee - ‘ why len F eae - ’ 332 O : 202, 130,482 U.S. Postal Money Order [ijt a WARt': WARE? NOT AAXIMUM VA VAL!D TH iBT : cine ak DO NOT OR MORE THI.N BELOW CASH IF eraTT n PURCHASER-FILL IN INFORMATION RLTERED PURCHASER’S STREET PO. box 29s- ADDRESS NO. HERES Py yf PURCHASER’S CITY AND STATE o I—"4 Is Fin, DO NOT FOLD, STAPLE, SPINDLE OR MUTILA WSITIAT OF 1SSut AP) Yh 333 PAYEE MUST ENDOxwsr BELOW ON LINE MARKED "PAYEE” OWNERSHIP 7. THIS ORDER MAY BE TRANSFERRED TO ANOTHER PERSON OR FIRM ‘€ THe PAYEE WILL WRITE THE NAME OF SUCH PERSON OR FIRM ON THE LINE MARKED “PAY TO” BEFORE WRITING HIS OWN NA**” ON THE SECOND LINE. MORE THAN ONE ENDORSE- _ MENT IS PROHIBITED BY LAW. BANK. AMPS ARE NOT REGARDED AS ENDORSEMENTS. ¥ ; PAY ar ERR OF PAY _Jhe First on National BankofChicag P yt . ~ L4] : & PS é ‘ a ¢7 Eatin : og ' 7 2 , : Be ia is ae es 2 : ; . * al j ‘ ee” he t % , ¥ a : THIS ORDER BECOMES INV. .ID AFTER) 2 THEREAFTER NO CLAIM FOR PAYMEN( JILL BECOA We ~ : AFR Evtiht be ey esmmeiss . = S reroS 334 of Klein’s order (30) March 12, 1963. Enlargement of microfilm reproduction form for rifle from A. Hidell. F“a 3re Ne are ‘4 : to Sa ag b x: <- + 43 ay .4 « a 2*i . ne 3ape‘5 ae -: %hele, po S:Seaha hs Pb oe .: ‘; é Pa BS , : SS 26 L22, YfInby ger ned Poe fees IO ey) oes Ce Cons mo ra). hee he en I : i ¢ ff rie . lt we Vo y Ltiat WV Ae nn, ew Se Br a oo =o ao : : 5 Upge eae Say ay 7 erp dias eat Annee, : ales y Garg AAe BOE eG Cee Nie wer ap a Day 3: a aeei ia Sp fdsaD) wares <2 BF I. it “Bunb Lee#2 Bhie | a pic le i Shel ) 338 oa!Oey SONIRYD ee ee re ees AY tars ~- < Ke GC. ene ff ae, Spore, peers Le GN D Gee Joe ised cease¢ fOr og oe LES : of pies, gi Bled 0. Ch pa aes ee (PELE i CoS whoo ae<7 ~)De nse DS ga —Jd Seep mate * s ‘ —S Le x . é : or ES largtens gell Seinge ple te che een yor 2% aAnes 7 ee UV kf? Cc c, OVD oFge a7 ? Coy FRR $6 igh ae* fe, ee vocom bee es Exhibit #2 339 (33) June 15, 1968. Fair Play for Cuba Committee, New Orleans Chapter. FAIR PLAY FOR CUBA COMMITTEE NEW ORLEANS CHAPTER _ tare ee tO SWAED Rs: A ay SON TS OTT glpeas oS ee TOTES Issued BOT Meteee Chapter President (Reverse side is blank. ) 340 signed Lee H. Oswald. (34) June 25, 1963. Passport application, item 34, signed Lee H. (35) June 24, 1963. Passport photograph attached to Archives. ! Oswald. Blue ink; ballpoint pen. Location: {PE EAOE FER UR testy rForRVW APPROVES MENT OF STATE RUDGE) BUREAU NO. 47-ROB1 1 PASSPORT APPLICATION 4) this Applic ction, Read Information for Passport Applicants on Page (Before Completing BY ALL APPLICANTS A PARTI. TO BE COMPLETED oy (Lost rane) WY, {First nome) (Middle nome) P c fi Pht * Ae! A ‘he : , 0 citizen ee ha the Sar did portment of State for o poss port. hereby apply to the De of the United States, do Mail PASSPORT TO LL BECK. SCAT. STREET. - - OAL LINS — svare : erry ieee) In CARE OF UF NECESSARY) PLACE OF BIRTH Jo Cree CASHES | sf? APPROXIMATE DATE OF ’ i) i y VISIBLE DISTINGUISHING MARKS AOE VG shed at yey Bee PREnCS SP Wew leis it ’ Sam MY PERMANENT RESIDENCE (Street oddress, City, Stata) (Ifsameox in mailing block, write “Seme”) - 'Y OF RESOEN i ca — oe? 4 - yo ’ ¢ PERSONS TO BE INCLUDED IN PASSPORT =) SS. oa This section to be completed only if wife or husband is te be included in applicon?«possport (Include photographic likenesses {WIF £*S) (HUSBAND’S) FULL LEGAL NAME , LOCATION OF ISSUING OFFICE " This section to be completed only H children are to be y/ Scalgperdglotia dtsos (i lanconss loeww r-shared ne Ade th som ~ MAME IN FULL STAPLE ONE PHO NOT MAR FACE TO” ; of} ae J0-2463 600604 AY OM OP: A eaeemamnimatinaind + W263 600004 = (OVER - YOU MUST COMPLETE PAGE2) 341 1) ronmen wuseano On wire was WOT U.S. CITIZEN [rrr raven Pans oe LNVEA — —— ; SAPNCO KEW OR ANS Z ConmpnyY MAME OF SHIP OR AIRLINE muanen OF Previous1 thi feo) Ai we oe LSEX PLEASE NOICATS sueyver, yOuEx [PROPOIED LENGTH OFBTAY OM ad 3 PUN my 4 VA, LIAL P- ar of wo es, wit () vear years (“Je yearns STREET ACORESS. CITY, STATE VS7 PREC A Sf.2 a 6 I have oot (and no other to be includedin the passport has), since acquiring United States citizenship, been aaturalized“as a citizen of « state; ¢ ea a-oath ofmade analfinnation orother formal declaration ofaliegiance to= foreign state, entered of ‘ served in the forces of« foreigo state; accepted orperformed the duties ofany office, post, ocemployment under the governm ent or political subdivision thereof, voted in a political election in a foreign Se aie ee ee pele scite todetermine the sover i over foreign territory. made a formal renunciation ofnationality either in the United States or u diplomaticotconsular officer of the United ¢s in a foreign state, ever sought or claimed the benefits of the aationality of any foreign sate; been coavicted by « court or court martial of competent jurisdiction of committing any act of treasoo against, orattempting by force Be Danna Sunk beating sms against, theUnited Scares, orconspiring tcoverthrow, patdown ortodestroy byforce, the Govemment of or or remained outside of the jurisdiction of the United Seates for the purpose of evading or avoiding ~ ary em in the mili , airofnaval forces oftheUnited States; and amaorand have ostbeen acaaytime fed the period of 12 calendar months g the date ofthis application (and a0other person tobeincluded inthe passport is orhas been atany map toptentne Saagry iod) = memberof any organizationregistered of required to register as a Communist organization under Section 7 the Subversive Activities Contro! Act of 1950, asaaneel. (50 U.S.C. 786)* ( of the above-mentioned acts or conditions have been performed by or apply to the applicant, or to any other person to be in- a { Zolemaly swear (oraffirm) thetthestacements madeo9allthe . of this application are true and that the photograph atrached 7 is « likeness me and ofthose parsons tobeincluded iathepassport. ais : OATH OF ALLEGIANCE i : I do tinsad nd b(orfue doneechee 1c willyb that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States agaiast faith gle aodallegiancetothe same; andthet I teke thisdeoobligatien rod =all enemies, the same; : (To besignedby bas Subscribed andsworn (sified) beforemechi _______ dayof acy Vii, g By i: ¢ ~ _—) _ (SEAL OFCOURT) “TIT tge3 : 342 Orleans Police (36) August 9, 1963. Fingerprint identification ecard of New Department, signed Lee H. Oswald. cre Sate ere “G emer F > 400 a2Z 5 | < “«+i- ; ~~ LEAVE THIS SPACE BLANK ho OS LAST NAME ==.= FIESTNAME< > MIDDLENAME*| AIPZHA D - J3 ——— HARVEY — —_~ LEE sae 2, SEAN= OSWALD 4 se Be wie FATE” yt Fr —] AnD ADDRESS CONTRIBUTOR ¥ Se ~iLYS/ SUPERINTENDENT - aaa eA / CK ge ee Y- 7 POLICE: DEPARTHENT SeGNATURE OF PERSON FINGERPEINTE D = NEW ORLEANS, LA. 112-723 AND MARES AMPUTATION SCARS ' mace FBI NUMBER HERE 4 None SIGNATURE OF OFICIAL TAKING FINGERPRINTS | DATE Arthur M James | 8-9-63 [pO CHECK IF NO REPLY tS DESIRED . th om 343 Pye: FEDERAL BUREAU OF NV ESTOAHON, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 4 TS st Pee ae WASHINGTON, D.C. - : ee za “Tonite yy eee CURRENT ARREST OR RECEIPT “eg >DATE ARRESTED CHARGE OR OFFENSE DISPOSITION OR SENTENCE OR RECEIVED * (If code citation is used it should be accompanied y charge): nove (List FINAL disposition only. If not now available, submit later on FBI Form R-84 for completion of record.) . 8-9-63 | 828 MCS 42-22 dist the peace by creatin 3 " {ascene & € sue. . . :¢ 4 tae! oS nm OCCUPATION : RESIDENCE OF PERSON FINGERPRINTED oa Z Mechn. 4907 Magazine oh If COLLECT wire repinorCouect telephone reply is desired, — epee F : ee, : indicate here riet : 2oar at~. : ; * (1 Wire reply ae * [J Telephone ely FOR INSTITUTIONS USE- ONEX ;seen“ . sf . ” t ae tee ~ ee ae, Tolaphone nuinber paras os BEALENCE, OXDITCS Fo sande ctyseewi meee piacetoewveesed INSTRUCTIONS 1. FORWARD ARREST CARDS TO FBI IM- MEDIATELY AFTER FINGERPRINTING . FOR MOST EFFECTIVE SERVICE. - ee 2. TYPE or PRINT all information. * ' 3. Nore amputations in proper finger squares. - ars : 4. REPLY WiLL reece ee ee an ue oh inin ThisThi Space Please Paste Photograph PEARING ; “YOUR NO.”IN THE BLOCK M&A mea; Since photograph may become detached indicate name, 5. Indicate any additional copies for other agencies FBI number, and arrest number on reverse side whether “in space below—include thejs attached to fingerprint card or’submicted later. plete mailing address. .) | | | j \=fe wate(Rew. 12-17-62) ; at 344 (37) August 9, 1963. Photocopy of fingerprint card and attached mug shots, New Orleans Police Department, signed Lee H. Oswald. —— aan ee Liane ES Pa oREL F Ae Dees Seek Commission Exhibit 1413 N\ ve: \ Mlk oe SM AS ER eee eee ae LEE WARVEY OSK ALD (it) 1328723 esidence Oceupation Place of Birth Arr; list %4:t 8-9-63 bd le Build Complexion Gailiot ete ial fair Cog; “rd 828 MC3 4222 diss t¢he Peace by creating a secne, “yes sirth Date ge sight leight™ yt a 345 (388) August 28, 1963. Handwritten letter to Central Committee C. P. (Com- munist Party), U.S.A. #9 ey ae Cc SEZ So4) rn 2 -¢~~7 aie a OP 4 He is 3 : 3 = 2 , Pa j ; a* ? a" ‘. ee“ott jf 4 Doig a Ne ge Sah 6 Se Letty. be re: a fr. ae sex Lf s ae —_—/ os toa ee an a ae oe a as ee ot ae ie a ae om Ae ee @ Zz 7 7 s - ee | a ri eeyarn, ae (sy boy ere eC a. ll tae ay ro ar poet Ge ae 4 ante a 7! fe Ey =he Po * ies te see ie ee led ae eS i, oad oP LEN ey ‘ es . — Lf) : Ww, , i Pee atan it oe tc ee ne Beee mba kF 1 4ko ae Fa NY Se. gy Pas de -— . a tatty, argu a 2/t "Zi. ope LC bial m4 oH ; ty pnen =) ‘ ; a! ; _ - ers is oe ae ee £ SS Srstng roe Mertens he ig ir aE 2 4- .--—? 46-129 0 - 79 - 23 346 _— ~ ~ . é | Y i a =n eet > ee - = af forme6 2, ecCur ?, AIT a ee t OPP ee Bg eer oe ; ee oe ’ i ee Qe ae “bs ae as s -t--—7-7 Sak Ee * 2. fe ye . pf Ls Lf Decor a =o oS of ; a, /rad ‘ PS we « ° pe # aS he \ ie Pista <= i ok ct sl.Sr Be oe ou“ YS Sr a 3 Pine Jo ~ wet “/ ’ } 7 Pde?) oo tee f ; / -. at aoe a oe” pte Lc , Pf = - rd «nny bee < cre. 9 a a . ~, 2 Ps A Co fons er Tice |Fee oy or C ee | fetes a ” 4 ~~.) 4 - Fa Oe eee Ie t mek 4s ep "oO re ene ee a ere = Jt tc Cr et rT a re af es ; <— ae re "CSSA tegen Pies Cees t c “~) A2f.5 Ae et ea ne - eo * 4 - 2 re ig eeet -} ; ¢ . ok ‘a y ; = / - , < ~sL, ——") id “~~” . a . ae , + re Alea Pe A me £7 =, ec et: vd a of “ Saal otheenzne Fi we geWS ‘ge set pe ae cer — . eons “ aA i“ / ee eerie = Bl hag Jon Sa Fs 64 fs ote a te a ee ? Pe— oy me =eee ““z 3 Cee "de Pa hg ayBT x3 a 8 <, od r c Lie = a erie Pa aeaoe po teu ef cree tee pcs le ets lea Exhibit #4 ' ! a ie oF ag > a ee er a oh Pe | Ge i” Ce WWM Lo a Zi. 2 3 as = “ — cw hes ce X Cj es 2 a ed, 2) Birk arated 3 * ; Tana et - Pe 2 Be eT ated Me 4 Fe ei - : p eg en Oe bal; 2 ETERS CEE oy gh NE a wih = Oe cgi... 2 4 ¢ ~~ . * ° fens =~ Andere oes ed ae #~ ~ —_— ea” 4 - on a RFs : . . 4 2 Wt el Ey fee Coens.) “ an lama, Li +e ee Pee te = see + ‘. - fares tr a he Me vr — mK —_ P ae SA: iz ~f. “8 ane Se. aes ae, : , “s - < Fa ae => a Daath — be ee ies Le : : LA i ii Aeatalecte “ae— eT ah eA p BLO OTE ARE in i cm Creo any a pe A P , . ; : i 2 tn a’ ey 4 < Jor eat 4+ ere we Che = eng =. ad ; , a of, fae A . a io , 2; ~~ +¢ ate ree ie Se £9 Sei a cae Ste aS A Bie oA ee fy 2 at, ow oor las p eee |. icka Juatspavdag ees amesee StemEe OEHC EES EMER SECS OOOO ot SsaIppy awoy Jug Ce Vite Bil ps eee nee caer eee tS -) WIN To *33A01dW3 MOHOL WIVTD YUNOA IJNIGIOHHLIM SNOILdAAXS 4 Qj Oy] $]yy ULL ‘I JI ‘QTONIS pus nod wires uv ‘uondwaxs oy ayy osndyUT, eee Petes snok 6 ‘sdkojdue “IQ t= 6x8 €)'S “OS oO: BS{AUB aly oI] [SMU °Z FI ‘GaIYYVW SLO VOI}dWIdXd Yvast alquaAroyye JOJ purgsny puv SJIAX Jt JOU PIWIV]D UO JOYJOUT "9WIYNIO Bette Pjoy “A “S$ CUOIU] (v7) JT nod wip OdJo Asayy ‘suoTdusoxd 9IAM9G} AINTYas, xvy WO INOK $d3eM (9 J] Nod Wr 9UOJo dsatyj ‘suONdutdxd 9y1IMayy SNTYaly, ynoyM *UOfjdwaxe (2 Jy Nod uNv{>y9aUJay Jo asatpy ‘suondwaxa IM 0,, INS -UJA0 *¢ suoNndwoxy 30; adv puv ssaupurlq aTquatjddv) AJUO0} NOK pur INOA aj1a\ng JOU0) (squapuadap + doay syyy “99 (v) JY NOA JO JNOA ajTAA ]{IMdq Cg sivah Jo adv Jo Japjo Jv dy} puaJO ty ‘vad pus NOA wie]>sity ‘vordwaxa 304 6102 YA ANOA *291 aA f,.7,, jr Og JJIMAq ¢9g JO ‘apjopu NoOA witl> YJogJo asaya ‘suondiwaxa ayna ee es csr (9) jy nod Jo snoA azrA\aru ‘puryqpur nod uly siyj ‘uondwaoxa ayM ay) sandy f,,1,, jr yog aav ‘puiyq °sps0 Jy oy} eatojdura pus HOA tly) 30-00Ssoty- ka Ula SUC eenas ott) Oita) 2 Re NOY e caertO BU ee)oe Seite Os Fer 5 em Sane s} PaAaoq OY “GARY pouljes9 00} Auviu“Xd “p jI NOK WIL]D suONdWaxa 40; auOJo ds0U ‘syUepuadap a}13May} Joquinu jo Yyons ‘suoNdwaxa OG) OU lwit}) “ah ‘suondwe ay} “Siq — UOTjduIaxs 30;zB yUapuadapssayunnod ore payitenbJopuN NIYsurUOT}p UO JayjO (opts sees eee sre : 39]J} 10}992jqPynoys *¢ ppy ay} JaquInU Jo suUONdwaxaYIIYANOA dAvY PauTTE]DDAOgePUL aITIA2U} F103 6 6 6 ee ee Teese A] og OS “pasjape ahs I ATTLUAD Ie) ay) sreseneerG@ ee ee eee ees T yon msysuy dag ‘sahojduia yy JUaWwIeITe JopuN porsod Atd Jod Fuippoyyya [ruonippy ‘9 jo’saquinu JuIpjoyy xa tAy Pstinua we 7 yy 0} Jaqumu at poaoxa Soff s2op'ayray17492 sty) uo paunry> suondusa (a1%q) ia Cecoos y { Se Deo a tree adabaa Saye pees (pousis) 8fneeeeeneee =.neeeeeeecenee -8069L—01—8F0 (44) October 16, 1963. Employee's W-4 Withholding Exemption Certificate. f 7 * Sa ane, See eee pe A BIETENE OLN eG ie orca wentigen rnc eee WR LL _— _— A cue ea in! gensse oer. ah ae, I: KE 4uod YALSVWL . SOd 3LVa XO@ Q3N3d0 3Lva Xoa a3SO19 LSOd 391340 ag- I 6h 3sn A'INO worse fo rduo5 ory uorjeordde SeyrusJNOA is BorNZ scous 03 uniteA7duz0y3rm 9 Jj@ [#3800 @AIJBJe O02 1 oy} Furjue puP 2 osn JO 780g SOLFO "BOXOd 3WYN4O INYOIIdd¥ 3uzIg) 30 (9943 ee fa FEELS 3WYNJO WYIldYO NOILYY 37)OdYOD xOBF pojuer 303 o#n JO (494770 a Pd nwy YO WIN0D ae ; a CC *LY-@BO Sok d ANIMJO SSANISNG 300 (45) November 1, 1963. Application for P a) ssanisna ssauaay‘-on7)400238 pue (owos 3aWOH ssauaay‘-on) ‘300238pue (ewos ee. St a LG=I] Hp \ nS As a2 Fe) eG signed Lee H. Oswald. Blue ink; b allpoint pen. Location: Archives. 3Lva40 eo. NOILYDITdd¥ ea7 IE _— (C E 79 ad ost Office Box 6225, two ecards , each AS )e« Ge cd Wad ates ‘ool Sis Set sh. 9 ye eh, Se Oe ee en ee TTT OE eT ne veoleergyra get cel temmer nc soars rte er rete ake NO 306 signed Lee H. pt for key tor P ost Office Box 6225, (46) November 1, 1963. Recei ion : Archi ves. (CE 792; JFK F-495) Locat Oswald. Blue ink; ballpoint pen. 307 (47) November 8, 1963. Photograph of a facsimile co py of a handwriten letter to Mr. Hunt. 308 (hb alftone) reproduction of a type- . Photomechanical (48) November 9, 1963 Divi sion , Embassy, U.S.S.R., Washingto n, D.C. C onsu lar written letter to the NOX 6225 , OAL »TEXAS FRGHy LES We OSWALD,AYEP.O- VA OS WALD, SOVIET Caoe T, i ; VARINA NICHIL ei CUUSULAR “ prvEsio% EMEASSY J.3-S-R- a \ Oe MAS AINGTCY D.Ce- . “isvc6 1983 Dear eirss h coarade cem ny meetings wit is to in form you of recent events sin Tis Hexicoe Of the doviet Union, Hexies Oitz, Kostin “hs the Eabasay indefin aly because of ny nexican in Mexioo L was tunable to re chance I could not take & which was for I5 days only visa restric tions the nané, zo t retured to a unless I used 5 y real , regasting a nev ‘vis | = Cie ee Vested Statens so thoy » eabausy in Mexico” to contac!+ Mew Soriet 2 “TDhad not pttet a Soviet Eabassy in Rere been able to reach the vere waprepared, had I iness bus the re would have had tine to oonne oaow ac planed, the exbassy mo. theywere, a3. I say asey was not at fault, 4 corne the Soviet exb “_ ake tions: Sipe ate was guil ty of as one broach of regula prep acedthe Cuban co naul repleede a t an glad he has, since been ed in ny el Ke ion is not now interest 3 The Federal Rireu of Investigat ° organization" Fair Play For Cuba Comittes" re activities tn fhe. seograsely Hex OtLeansl state Loutetana) ‘since I no leagor - -of which: I was ssoretary in s, Te=3, . ver, ‘the Fe BI. has vieted us here in Dalla Feskéein that states Howe e. Pe Hasty varaed ne that ac Iengaged in F. P20. onSovenber aats Ageat Janes "interest! in me. urs ES.oie; Te ite: again take on" activities in Toxas the FeBe Rees that At could gettac”os Mesine Nichtlayeva “tats agent tee: *aug that Le ” she could ander P.2.I. » protection’, reaatainthe United States ony protested of couse, tend By. wite str defect. tres.the Soviet Uien 4 thesetactics by the netortous PeBelee visa’ « ance vt ® ‘ga soon: arrival of our “Soviet entr "Please infora us ‘of cha, “as 5 thoy « COme@.. bans ate u of ‘th 8 vy ‘Also ER, ‘authf2 this 43 to hapa AUCREY MARINA — $n DALL partie oat Be 993,35) 2s wes of 7) Ke A Heyy APL ee Py at Ye 309 (49) July 18, 1964. Exemplar (standard) signatures and writing of Jack Ruby. Location: Archives. bs eens \)-Diy O ee y ey SE LEY 7 MY preecee Yuk A G00ge CST a. 360 rough draft of item 48. (50) Undated. Photograph of unsigned Sk AES ee ee Se eee ie oe ee Sey “™ Commission Exhibit 103 ea met“heap Per, Bere- As 22 Uo nfo Spot Ones oh pommemac? tonat20h Exlomng etl ee Mn apoe hRDowhaie bg ee eel Ube bits Can }¢ dek dlieeb Pte th hat ctt Np rae Pri gomme™| EG OL a Bm oO a te eefs 4 eae ae — a) ff ae 4 Zines tsth x xs oo | prlfrccom areok '.isroY 1 orks, = of wo AO Bs SUH KS. S Racin seen Ong vicw of of uta y ; : \ |vk \ steee ee inh Se tenes ape ae estate hel Liitete lad phon Le: chien echettctne bew oils ob. ols tem sbtiLe werk betmaete’eteak site seas 0. !teAigchd 09) rainpeo'storete ' fumes (?float, tanrgsd me AEA fe ene ah aRaemtchinds iba’, aheols pater boty betbalsnts fede Pp duwtedih Coe ee eae Comnwts 124 tytl> te fo OL eee . ~ Me mentary 1 - ; r FO ors " ie if ex mo, —LkezO7 Le sar KAP 5 —7t aes » t a ae a we cor) CoE Se HS Site Come A SSruSTO ne Sees De i Dee my 4 Hires erage F ee Sel RS | > Ba - i Fae 4 361 ee LI 2) we oes aay MMS ee Cbu2120 ee oeeG 2 7™rQ. Sor eee ced camer Lea 46-129 0 ~ 79 — 94 362 (51) Undated. Handwritten speech, nine pages. | Le a 4 Exhibit] for sie Se Beet ik wEmeert gf aris _ he Comorvalesl— Terres has BeTRAyed — Sy mas reamed Ts 7l pees Fi: ee | _ 1 bts Prsjen A FORE Bees CR _OF 10 u22Thpious the ; xe OseEE Le a Me ae oF TAe Uae (ea. / : i: SL GavcerentT bis wis wiz, ret See * os NPT en ties wame_oF. faecdon) OR L1G . i sexvik C__conFORMsTY. ro. The wi'shes OL. ae ee avd 10 ANTE PATIOM OF S022 le comPhelé. dem ination fae eit po es -. Saal 2 The FLRSTERS aad. Se Fk Yate oF See T. Sidizitcd CEercrawm13T__LARL ae oe SIAT ES. AAZE S$Abw Tee 2 a ge —4 LP les a 6 es ee oF The KRer2r4£005 RELAY Ag PROPACANAA pe = tal by Fh2R 2 ; con Be 2 JUTORMA LMA L 50k. p< (ax Bipee wi7Th The Akc4— BETRAYERs- af. a 70S =i fo SvGlzir7e sderz, Lae Taehe cp Be je Symparay . FOR _LALS= 2 42 IURwed The (sen CF Commun 601 pT sie i im ane CHASES JO WESTERN KIAd/., LoS eee ae FOG) SG en 4AAve PEP) Gl CARIES cmon s ss 2 -€verv By 7oevRe CARIy day CApy TALS Sf COUNIZL a rs : TAS EPR 1S Ane rT OF FACTS iO eta pS DE Cee as ereinoe Ae ee eee PIASS EXTER MIA SON: So Type wh 66 Siakial, =td 363 > ear a Se a 6 ee ec —_————.--—weste +o awe The sz _ Vik phessTspimigince 455° Sr ay Jpudurn ~FEse s” > )\——$——_uuwsder_. KA S24 Bins Py he Se el ec ates os oe : a Se pee LoTluns FAS _purepeosemuee yp EESE ee ££ drier. a“ The MONOMER. SL CMTE tere Teeth = pt Pept BT GAS CE. RYOS Sg TAE rave dé. CF tees ed ie oeaei ee 6. _QPETr AVA cK TuRE. So mee, ae ee eee ak Ale SeE229 976 7 PIEPERZEDAT” ny Jas ilk —————prertstValhzed . @y PRE LMM AIST PARTY wes gt £5 paar g aes WSscit Ink a "UPcuBsE Gofd cow 2 — ek. LAC. MREM LIN GG 7 DAS ed Eel, Jo gewowec ** Be aye, 7 ened bs Pe wie 7 OF ond Rewacnie ar ees Fere thetnc StASAE ap -Finn e tins 2 Sev FAE LAAT CF. iTAC~ Lb S. Govenpie pa ates: Preas pPReTesr . ENP MWYeES 2 EN Fa VENI Pe —_ L450 7° lea Led STaeres | AUSSTA a Wet wot roars 7 oa, ZOAT~ AE), Ber pt eran ee ey ‘ jv! EAR Y Sarees = MATL. PIIMVLE 0s WARSAw' Pe PIBMVIVER RE PERN ESE Se BEL Siena tt RE ee oe, EAST CR ERGY MEO CVU hin y PEAS OSE 364 gobi sieves ee Py ae ae me ge te se SY recast ee ALTcata fee BLO AF CNAd i ILI. oe Siete he SCF, Ca me ee Oe PCr LEMS LEN. OOS (OE waite = SY Lo BPP c ST Sagas Te Ee : 7x. pVCaTIF? TARO A. LEAS ee Star ee ee ee SPRITE DG, AE OT OOO Ee Te SOE AARC OR FP eI CFe Fleder ste 7oT Sy PRAGKESS 4wes have wh See . Beer Wiehe nw AUIE PD OIFKES CHAS & a SP et ET = lot pb Le keryReye aK REN Ot ; LE bee ea ee. SR 28k Vin eee 8"Tere wae GUSTIF sAblY YrcéerRT rr , FUTURE 77. Horrid y fh Foe Mss 7 os - TE woakRA AricAd wt ~ggsf. # emove_Th ea? gpsass © COE8STAKE watch prs se Ef FItiNTI] RETARGED #704. wane! fan aeurTeent OF Lleri7ends7. SPAY | CSA 2 a ave JAN CAO, Pe ) SEN Na ina ER men, a A ie ond: tae Lh) CEP IA loses XA 7 Eaarta ? Ares , ae r07k AJ ve nent, Pn Rea, lb. LT o/s) ete OP KE CE AES Fecwil Fi PRE , Yay Ve ae Cae Bey Ae SHAY SRSA CAM Pe tar LA PASAT JOE Fe vf Me EES Uae A ie rs expne : Pree Phas? ~Pyo7E YD, fP--: sng g 4 ‘a'e LIRR pi a’ - Fe: } este + Ae < Ferre We ef ay /? Peete a r: A947 3 eC sar ce BS Eo Menge Py Rice i etede pre AU Soap ee ee ae at oe 2 Ee PPO pied a ltre el net “WELL y EN PMN SCORSESE . STERA LASTS SPL ESCa [8 IVTERVERWTIOW HSI) SY AtABJE FER Prem FIVGERS _ eo rs ee SERRE They ODE , BI7ae se) _ an-2T; a es YS drs en -hawteg a : eee Wit 8 oem 9 Oe Ry CP TAK S064 : ; Es ‘es 2 PORT Y oI CFM SOK) FR 02 PIE RE A Ae Wahhke acer oP ESP AP Pua > Tec. ho apieta ara CMR gia ? s E a rs Doe leere Ae ns ae CA “a eae 9 tt EW A pS TS i a Sia a dl 2) at etof eR Se PBoP ee i sd Za a ware t med te ga Lys res Lew dh rere re FN Ps ie _-—— Fa_lhcers TP he aS oral ; A: wv JS) Pics Seas . Pi we > sxe y Pus. Mire aes Fens, AILS Td aN. 4 << 7 e OE Fe Pe Oise oe Xe em os 4 He ite decom ® iP LRT ae in hE eee Y zn aes ea ‘ We F1h AEBOT GRAY AREAS” tees. Ph OG Ap 3 ?gi Aa ee Aah . ny ie ae RA er rite Peeel Wa e am 0 ee eee wtXk ,7O Leirlenbaii Pe ne FOR e Cs az FAR GR o~ATES Dt ie Pat et | Sipe fo 2s(BIY PMeIER, - eee. Sete RY Os NE BrY LrTeRE ST. SS Pe Be aict AF yO At eer fam ey, rppiekNe ace has PRE ae CRS RAOSSie Liptertug Sten . “ a a es . i a gen at IE IE C 7 LW TERE 27S LA PPP Oe AIL PL? © war’ 3 2 : ° a Pe, a ee YT ta Loess VSN wre 4 as . KA RUS oe ef 3 wack. ae a One ee A a atd yeis FAP ios Ln Ret ee RIT ORAM Ee = So Sees See RA COR BLA E SSE e. ited his Le ATI Zite- Aryl? ap alf ee eee sec, tS. SIS OM KEES eabik. aur ER i BN ee a eho > # d¢ rf = a> Pras sf Fite Sat <—S- ee PP pee —-— -- itd, tue AM oud ign ae OPS real wes A.d ee: Te ES OMI PFCL See / NIPRKAUST— arate Le ASSO OS FAG EON ee tat A. ALAA ZG VF _. T°deategaabngemien LF — -_- 4 | . ; ew her CEPI IA SOP 2K 4 Sy Mi tC UA Se LROP CRT YEce Ae BARE COE Cae a rh sntBe ty y% as The “Rin ohel, SVE C727, ag t= TRoxtara ming hr ed , Keep Re ey ee /y aie 3 man ALY; & PP bach c- edt « re a re 7 AG SF IP Puts Q// Fee € BAe Lave sf M4 a 9 E * ne 4 - ip ° fis BE eS Sed F Chioe Rm - ° ee ra bee RE _ Fag! Tac Sx y Flee 7 ee c . eed Pg a oe Px ao is Se AOR) P xa ape 4’. A ce r "i, Sle = —_ fora aac re Ae Nae “ee SRE KL Ce eres Be eee : Me Cr er es eae ee a de Sg Pe oe Rs iE a e e a ea 367 Pare a eS ee = —---— BUT. FRESE pRezeRed _ 3 Praca GON 200 how Ted oh Faia : , .7 ; RVs et Sheu ft We 2 AT Die ast pes. : See ALA A),PSsSP ore AA AL TPR enemies OE LC. altes ven’ fe OE VO LTR ) opr cl pert? WI BEL CE AOS Son oe sch" — 2 : aor 7RAVUNITy A _SZPP OS ce SE et Se ee bs #Ualidia i PAP Sel Ce. gay per Hl“, ae ae Wes He S88 FOL ors ) P2221 ~ /7? $ oy a ae ASS: ae 2 ov 4 fH ec PMPd Lee. PLZPDL Jo ean a pe . Brod WOK Fen FURPOSF 5 a8 ee,Be ee 7A RE Se FAT Coben. Stet teeialete! ereig Wit. EPONA, sa The ALS bv re ate LithSeiadabs eA PeT ae Tre y S42/f/ Beare Sra A et 6 is PM ge Fg TT P00 10 7X YY oFOe £2 re Ree eG oAP iy awa Fl Oa hl eel eS ei Nm > Blk PPP OP ye +s J eee 7 nies aa,a A Ae 12 nina riieasOd MO Fas FALSE PRSFERPIAR SD spr YO ACU LOS Div thie The Kk gna) Aric ae ¢ A AGE ABA es Fad’ pe ded FW 1 | ie bear. Sloe whe &e 70 ; 00 41 Fe Ry as Se ne Ue 4nt Sead ps ‘Ae pre S277 PPT RIT EE PORON Rah a8 oy ae Ae Sr steig. PPR Ls te CANS, ee *y SRE SS ie Shp . ei Vere . FALL, Py FE Me ‘ A MN Pe SOS * ey 4 ~~ ye 4 pes . w“0M_ i id Ag sp 23 &e 235 ties FARSCST es pg tome PA retinT AS, oO MAQIERELY PET Low p 778K Ie hal Ave eS Foae > ary 4 t oJ a XY F bie a ra Ato ACh =. ae Sa Se a oe, seit eteanne aa : ma 2hb ePS AIP MELA DS SS. LE TRO LEZLEE PPTL Eo bet YZ, ee ee nn ee PACK ee ee ee ated atrs. Ae. Sat a St VG EBS Soak Chen Pi ya 8.oa seThey ee on POLE PR tC LLL . 30 —frLED Ly A LIA oes A a ive! tet C1 SAECO IEE me fo he aC eee UM TSE POLG vos ioe hone CAPERT AY ee ee ee gt IS a AEtf Ha we ee troneiid 2 Fe eS Oeoe ol ) 2 7ety ae Eanes MECH S27PNY Stas a= = EO + VAS Os — RG,ee oo yoters orf... Si eitinaiahattd F2. BPicZe weve 7 WAL ry Prve 746. Ont FAY ell) Be ER BERN Ts. iz = Fiber , Bu7 FORMER ri SRE Bi lana, T7440 ee CBP, R20. yet et pede ota 2 2jMSSCRL. ALSO © . ns aa STte’ APsyy “GPs a of Aon oes Frey Le Cat. teeth MOELS ate. ai Le Pee tine Wee aise eS rAE 2+ Sea Se a * hosel d od pebediniPe at — as sen - ag ee: : FEO, ae - re i roeMaseS cite j : SA va x oe SUV Seenar Om SE aly Sees ~ Z Set ORA-S«- aay wo way “Phe PaiPa> SS J> wWwAEAC at) tis Fe eS o> Mi ESsspe % TAes Be Dance JV ASO AL wr (- OARS > 4i Te VP? Pod at Po 4a BAG ey FE cd) POE LD ot wae dk Fae elerd cy UP). Tat Oe. ve Vilee tie he oy «ANS OS pee ete l PTET eee oe pare eri i bts ite, Wt ARS Baers es ee ore : a a Ps es Wee ha He RL Hay (COIN AL a " FS a wee 20% PAS —e ee ae © md mr.“ ede PM he Eee ih Zme wi a ay ¥| 369 ea Le ic. Paraxhew: sae. Ay Fo SH fer Sus UR eR ACok Borie a 1. aR ee ee PN Pah Ps AS "97, Mey 6. Au se_ 6 F pes Ble ee PNP Cs weiss To C2 Si OLE’ AVS The Trak, Ou! 7____VEz en ag Fy Tg ee eee ae y pe eS MS SVC SS eS OY siaa SKS e Soace. Mou 7 ACCC Sewn JAE. QD f2_» — Pm PF pie a par gaee oN ee po oo ee ei “Oo < oft Peay c = ‘ MA eA RLS HR's FT aor bee TAs ns EL ee Pat at Ae ee mm AK I . CA CLES pas 7% ee ae aes = 4 oe Oe ce|) FA 04) Pry denen sKnAass = ee Prt Oe | Ms Wes rE A Oc. TP'INE FAL_FA eee re nA 7223 hg Ba aN A E M27 } eH ers) AR wry > PAYOO, of) As ved) Uae see ROLE JAE SP AU SS Apdo S MES SWPP ND oo id ad Arisnicpw ne bo Sa ee Oe ae Ss Sietee, Pe fog a fogs A teed BIY Sm poe ROW eS So ke Fy a ead LE ome pT ARE IS OCA Se cos OU ret ge A A A eT sen Aepe gh Ose POVERTY: 2 Tes a5 A ee Bo eaiy eared, ew 2ss fete ) Peas 0 Laas 7 io Shoe oseeas ase 7 4 fa LARS - WeTE ae Pir at de ny ° am oe wage BOT Wo KATP IWAL 11777 _2v Tone TRE < Td Tih i) SY CAT Ur NSS |Sat fo fen OY se ard eee eR wee Tu O- SeLVlA Jd SS ed aa : vie) VEE WY viion Ceyord es Ese ns Taek ag AP ur Bhs SULA Re yi prone (Crk te ASEM 1h ef olytat ep a An Bad; LoS ae tite Tt re FOR ics . hs ; ia PEF ORC PUATye OLE Cee aly hy ~inleinde.. The sete ee 77 eg UF NY C6ME AUD Fil aS geBOO area Renter 370 371 (52) Undated. Two receipts for salary from the Texas School Book Depository, signed Lee H. Oswald. (FBI Exhibit 422 oe tant tx 7 FF _ I, isciceishitinnensiesites Tha sutess 372 Photograph of Cuban identification eard, Flight 751, (53) Undated (August?). signed Jack Ruby. San _TARJETA DE IDENTIDAD/CUBA etalon et ios neces ame a ee he Beomanante: fs sige tae sii iia f “Bireccan Gutenie 1a ecrances a4 Pe 6 Atdran terieg stay Cube a ri g Am oeemme aa i meter nen ieee SPAN RANonscreen wiht PIED OGSOST“ITT ieSea AOSTA osgans a Niewteus ¥ A ppetiias: Name: T Pals & Nacimiento: Country of Berth senate teenie ee a , : Gcapacert : Derw pa tiem is Soe” nasmerrt or Tere tent : ; ss ; BO Eee os” senting Viead> Es: aniomtntasinait ethane | Eaxpte. tateinmigrecion AAA GTN No. lseuvd ot Thate Viewed at fen. a “Erpedvente” Nember — i 43 < Brnte de Rene twue "TEmerese Transpartadora’| Wace Ne | Date Fecha ofge soom iaienathan i eect hn one: niche nmin eaten etme inmt - ab : Pat of Enberienes ce | Carrier Fagat Ne. } i :‘ : ‘ ei seat pee : Drivel Permanente: Permanent Address Birccion marge IAEAS- Addroms aucsag atey om Cob 373 _.C ov4 (54) Undated. Exemplar writing of Marin * ‘ di Oswald, tic eA etety aaron ed c a paper containing the writing “A. J. Hidell.” ried ae ve y iS O.T. Kidel GT Hide YT. fideé il Aooe A 370 OST. fichell CALEB LE ST bp Ab PideCl OF” Hite Ge. FD yw WT ble WT icfLE Y fo ~ oS =) = ro}oC —_o S A oS (mp—CS nN m4 a2 ——) = fTnl— toloS al Pa 376 a — Hy UO UMoID ‘ Tes) Ojse;OW |B 405 eQisuodse? Pjsy 8] semOs;0g YI03° _— SS eee OM eee ‘peyuesesd jou tip e ; esnjoubis t] Ps09 Bsemas0g OYs jf WI) VONoI WEP) Aspsodwey © 10) peBsny? og {1m sjued vay “Asviqgy SYyy JO (NO S01! FA ~ejow Avo Buj4o) usym peyuorosd 0g sihw pue wejshs Sry ree etd Set 4B ee Rete Areagy, ey jo ArveBo Ave yo pein oq Aow pod sjyy- “Ken mee | | = Stn ~~ Uete cae asa w wee MAONH OL INVA TIM AOA ; 4 4 a SN ¢ ttedeiaddesioae dab' ‘ lst nme ga oe? a , Et wns om NA = ae id f; = ied ae (56) ee oe Undated. Note in Russian, in Russ om 3 S 377 consisting cas a — dv | tenn A om of 10 1] | od NM i=) SH “x onl ss) | i See ae , pee amen! ee ed % eet = t-eRogte Sat+g rere hspe get fe 4 ' : 5 Tel AC ONS et ons S tae toons teak eae ‘ Phesd pds To, pis ry a ” ie ‘ ing, signe d, 378 consisting of two pages of 11 handwritten in- (57) Undated. Note in Russian structions concerning the Walker incident, referred to as “the Walker Note.” no nec to Weck pre SeH6gH 6ted 00 kDn. ullt TAS. oPrj de aflt At Lf2 ol l COXF. oe : z this pocutt bly Aas Sree edshr, Antin( Coctthober ¢ :: 2 EE Beef A rye Dry CeLIme.€o Sh? Pepus 7, Metal pion a heePok yenntt oe Jon Xoo 4ingec# @ Cth reole yyy Horvg OP e , | :i: ee | ee’ . ie 5.CpfoO2p ece le d MM eteAN ciesoe te KoJSUstem “< : Gee, : Shes caepene ey ie Sie ; ? Yo Oo : uw KpecY motke mesa rook AH” — (Red CRoss (no-an mck ) Lote oCtnaget LtSe Ie Hhliefates thet) TRE eee, (Ok (ia uipetrr Ita 1H pedetu. eu ~~ 6 a> t WA adie oe j ub wel X hah B 7632 a: tc Gut nlehukou opomkou ise e Bdpod | he Kd# he Ton? Mott! ot ct nll Noa fod une A” depen Nomoplru Mb? 6teoo- holley = i POP YG PE PEL Veecoce SSE | | | 379 380 (58) Undated. Certificate of Service, United States Marine Corps. PROM HARTA GE Hibs GS MATCCL RAT SRT HE Soa UN Ree ul. wee Ge AS BS SI TORS ZN ESS SO TS LS ww CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE ARMED FORCES OF ‘THE UNITED $TATES AD AO SO. SO THIS 1S TO CERTIFY THAT LEE HARVEY OSWALD 1653230 AS we HONORABLY SERVED ON ACTIVE DUTY IN THE 7% (© .'@: %: @ '*@. @°O\ (@ '@. + Wnited States Marine Corps es ig’ var @ ier \easSeer “Igh 7a ©ny ied Link Ve fe 1g '@\ 78. ‘TeV /g* '/e. (6: OO FORM LIZ UC | JANBI SI1GR) RABIN PRTaTeTTA LNUNT Lok MONE i Na Ciehoutinare Oporab (ETE J PERIOO OF ACTIVE DUTY ‘24, Ootober 1956 1l September 1959 & GNAYs RE OF INDIVIDUAL Zz Va & f Vte mnG 4 SIGNATURE Oa "9 TF, 3 OFF H (Typed mame oud grads) AE AVS ifapis drop ix mail We teed. ie Commandant ofthe Md Pia: Pee Semen $6.D.C eee avery } 381 (59) Undated. Social Security card, 483-54-3937. Lee Harvey Mo ae! GC p Oswald: c ; unsi 1gnec ] . SOO MRE Oem PO emewe en ee ee | ot wr cee eee ~—_ enon dyPO OOOO PRES Sue 6nd heh Oe . ACCOUNT WAS 433-5 4-3937 Ceo roe HAS BEEN {£STAOLISHED FOR SEES LEE HARVEY OSWALD —_— me we KEEP this enrd, SIGN It Immediately. STIOW {t to your cmplayer, Mention the number In alt letters about, your account, Tf you lose thls card apply for a duplicate not a new number. Once a year you can get a statement of wages credited Get a form for this purpose from any s. to your account,Administr (11-61) Social Security ation District Office. If you change your name notify the nearest Socla! 1 « Security Administration Rev District Office immediately, TELL YOUR FAMILY TQ NOTIFY THE NEAREST | OF YOUR SOCIAL SECURITY OFFICE IN TITE EVENT PEATIL (has SDVISAMLE TO CET IN TOUCIL WITH A SOCTAL SECURI TY OFFICE WILTEN YOU REACH RETIREMENT AGK OR IF YOU BECOME SEVERELY DISAULED. DUPARTMENY OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, ANO WELFARE Go OA-702 Form WOCIAL SECURITY AOMINIGTRATION SO t om at. ne mee oe he eel ee) OMewes ae am ee 382 EN KANKO Hotel. Location: Undated. Complimentary card, GA-JO (60) Archives. COCOM O E uwou MEPLIMENTS wiJOENKANKa oer v Go) . , 1 mane hg partatin ; of *.2 1seNcemen, j maTOma - +spe4° A pir th Pe a rer |} fo YaCwie Awa ute | ten, 1 | ; roe : ree 1] 52] cov at mt)a 5X OOMAYU Lint \ SciWANTrace Sart en St fi 7 |= ae |Qe aa ; 3 i mel st Gina se) se | 2 4 BANK O 4 HOTEL x S0UNf Se op os : 8 @ \ wccoeestariOn GiniaSt |, fnAGawA] STATION at Menrte a Lea sepa : ie (ARMY BUS) AVEA’ aeemar To ruedwanes” 10 YOSOmmMA . CASPECIAL Siiatisy eciiy TEL. 60-08 e 49-3111 cet, “taken (61) Three photographs of Osw ald, one with the notation on the back, at Camp Pendleton Feb. 5.’ ’ Located in the HSCA files, Archives (unavailable at time of publication). 383 (62) Undated. Slip of paper with the following handwr iting : “The Worke 23 W. 26th St. New York, 10, N.Y. The Worker Box 28 Madison Sq. Station, New York 1D. .N SY: Embassy USSR 1609 Decatur St. N.W. Washington, D.C.” Location: Archives. The work e CS UU NaC TO. S/.. WE Ww KORK 70 > O emma _ FO ris eked — «BOY 2g 1B li$O ay, S713 7 OW MW YORK 09 V 384 L7G 3S VISR 1607 Page 57 MU, Cosi "oe cate (63) iS¥) IWYN o LSM IWYN JIGOIW Jwyn sayouy PERE ¥MSO QT* == ATI ATAUVH | ¥69| TET noni Bs 4 = SOLNEIINOD ONY oe SSIH00V div Sasvilv S343 udg) entg! | me 5 ““@arp7 | aLvO4O Hisid | | OT 6t=9T JSNLYNOIS 40 NOS83dION INGRLUVdS | @. a 4 ey ha > <. » - - a a - a : _ ‘et — Be< : = Sy ates % i ae oe bee vf “ hs Dene he ta : - wo 4. Fi ad te i e Pe ntNest 72) Aj tete aa TS View L- wk het -— os e, : RA AMOSawa)Get! Pe dis a } ‘ Whee ) tl j i Ps if { | Mi i; omX Wha t Kt ‘7 vA a - ; oy J § u 1on As ie Bau f vd 7 Pelli AT i a i why t } avy ‘ wo b ae pli fn . i 4 Jynvath Sana hy ny | ‘ re pa ¥ % is >s) My ¥ ; wa > « nor het mar + By Tosh y wih, an : pant yy, eh ’ | YP h i Po RE a ary iad A 4 by ae eri ways 4 rus Ni’ bible Z fia ry F i a ae y i a Bets aoe ee eter eee Sere es HNO Hem (amy anon. Sse gaye een eis setae - ati eec