Mr.Liebeler. Did you ever know Oswald to give Marina any money during the time that Marina lived at your house?
Mr.Paine. No; I did not.
Mr.Liebeler. When Oswald stayed at your home in Irving on the weekends, did he eat all of his meals there?
Mr.Paine. I came only for Friday's supper and would leave and would sometimes be there on Sunday. Therefore, I couldn't be—I was not in a position to say. I think he did.
Mr.Liebeler. Do you know whether he ever made any contribution in respect to those meals?
Mr.Paine. Oh, no, he didn't.
Mr.Liebeler. Did he make any contribution to any of the other expenses of the household?
Mr.Paine. No, he didn't. I for one didn't expect him to. I didn't—I would have been surprised had he done so.
Mr.Liebeler. Do you know whether he packed lunch in the morning when he left for work and took it with him or ate breakfast there before he left?
Mr.Paine. He would eat breakfast there. This again was just what Ruth has told me, he would eat a breakfast consisting of coffee and maybe a piece of toast. I forget what it is. I don't believe he packed a lunch.
Mr.Liebeler. You do believe?
Mr.Paine. I don't believe he did.
Mr.Liebeler. You don't believe.
Mr.Paine. I don't know of it.
Mr.Liebeler. Did Oswald ever discuss finances with you or in your presence?
Mr.Paine. Well, I raised the problem when he obtained the job at the Book Depository Building, I mentioned that one and a quarter, I wanted to confirm at one and a quarter, and I did somehow.
Mr.Liebeler. Why did you want to confirm that?
Mr.Paine. It seemed to me that is still a pretty slim pickings to live on, also I was concerned about how long the job might last, and I inquired, therefore, about the number of people working there and how come he was employed after all after the school year began so if he was employed then it was possible that it was a full year occupation. I would have normally expected the rush of employment to be prior to the school year. And then to lay off after the books had been sent. I was concerned in other words that he should be able to keep his job, but also I would have preferred had it been a little bit more money he would be a happier person.
Mr.Liebeler. That later part is your own surmise?
Mr.Paine. Yes; but it is my own experience.
Mr.Liebeler. In terms of Oswald?
Mr.Paine. He was pleased to get the job, and I avoided talking too directly about the possibility of his losing that job because I felt it was, he would be concerned about the same matter, and now perhaps I was projecting but I do remember not asking as many questions about that as were in my mind just because I didn't want to arouse the anxiety that he must feel in regard to the job.
Mr.Liebeler. Did he ever indicate to you that he felt that the FBI was responsible for his not being able to obtain a job?
Mr.Paine. No; he didn't.
Mr.Liebeler. Did he ever indicate that he thought the FBI was responsible for his losing a job?
Mr.Paine. No; he never mentioned losing a job with me. I surmised from the first time I met him, he was at the Neely Street address, and Marina was packing, took about half an hour to leave and Marina was packing things for Junie. And so he and I sat on the sofa and talked.
Mr.Liebeler. This is before he went to New Orleans?
Mr.Paine. Yes.
Mr.Liebeler. And they were packing to go to New Orleans?
Mr.Paine. No, no; packing to come over to our house for dinner.
Mr.Liebeler. I see.
Mr.Paine. Yes.
Mr.Liebeler. This was the first time you met him?
Mr.Paine. Yes.
Mr.Liebeler. What did he say?
Mr.Paine. And there he mentioned how he didn't have people at work, people who talked about this subject of politics and economics and he also mentioned with some bitterness how his employer made more money than he did and the things that his employer had that he did not have. It was the only time I observed personal animosity, and I thought to myself, he must be rather difficult, that animosity or resentment must show through to his employer.
This was just in what he said. It struck me that these things must happen. When he later lost his job, I don't know whether it was later or not but he may have lost the job already, I didn't realize it, I thought he was still employed there. These seemed to me adequate reasons, sub rosa reasons for his dismissal.
Mr.Liebeler. You never had any indication from anyone that he felt the FBI was in any way responsible for his losing his job?
Mr.Paine. He never mentioned the FBI to me. And I never talked with anyone else who knew him except Ruth. Ruth did, of course indicate, told me of his extreme allergy to the FBI.
Mr.Liebeler. But she didn't indicate that he felt that they had caused him to lose jobs?
Mr.Paine. I think she mentioned this, she asked me not to mention this to other people but I guess you are not just other people. She read this note which he had left on her desk, I had the impression it was a couple of days; actually it was only a day or so. He had written, typed it but had written a rough draft which he left on her desk; she gave the note, her copy of it, perhaps, she copied it for me to read. I didn't really absorb it, I did read it, and I did read he spoke of the notorious FBI.
Ruth cited the letter to me as an example of how he could lie. She hadn't been aware of his lying before. She thought his trip to Mexico, which he mentioned his trip to Mexico in his letter hadn't been true and it was a fabrication, but it was, we talked, therefore, a little bit about his—also, Ithink——
Mr.Liebeler. His feeling about the FBI?
Mr.Paine. We talked a little bit about his abuse of the FBI there. And also I think it was mentioned that, Ruth mentioned to me that, the FBI had been out once or twice or had reported this to me, and that Lee seemed to resent that.
Mr.Liebeler. Let's go back to this letter, when did Ruth first show you this letter, and I take it you are referring to a draft of a letter from Oswald to the Russian Embassy?
Mr.Paine. I didn't know who it was written to.
Mr.Liebeler. But the letter referred to the notorious FBI?
Mr.Paine. Yes; I don't think it was the Russian Embassy. I thought it was a friend to whom he was speaking in a rather braggart way of what he had done. He had gone down to the Cuban Consulate in Mexico, and they had, I think this is the letter, I could be mixed up, and that they had not given him a visa—actually, I had made a mistake in the heading because I thought—it said, "Dear Sirs," but I though it said, "Dear Lisa." Ruth told me it had said, "Dear Sirs."
Mr.Liebeler. This was in Russian or in English?
Mr.Paine. She must have shown me the letter in his hand, therefore, yes. I thought it was "Dear Lisa," English.
Mr.Liebeler. When did she show you this letter?
Mr.Paine. This is a confusing matter, because I was reading some other magazine at the time, and she intruded this thing on my attention, and I didn't really shift attention too well.
Mr.Liebeler. Was it before the assassination or afterwards?
Mr.Paine. It was before, yes. No; afterwards, I would have paid close attentionto it. Since recently, I have, Ruth has, figured out that it must have been, he must have started writing on Friday or something and she cleaned up or removed the desk, it was that time when we moved the furniture. It had been written just prior to that, and we did that on a Sunday night. Maybe she preserved his original draft, I don't remember what happened, because I would have guessed that in order to misread the "Dear Sirs" for "Dear Lisa," I would have seen it, I would have read it correctly in her hand.
Mr.Liebeler. Recapitulate for me, if you can, the number of times and the dates on which you saw Oswald after he returned from New Orleans up until the time of the assassination. You said you saw him, I believe shortly after he returned from wherever he had been.
Mr.Paine. Yes.
Mr.Liebeler. And that was around October 4, was it not?
Mr.Paine. Yes.
Mr.Liebeler. The first part of October. When was the next time you saw him?
Mr.Paine. I think I probably saw him on each weekend except the one preceding the assassination. There were at least one or two, I think there were two before he had a job and then he had a job and a birthday party.
Mr.Liebeler. That would have been October 18, would it not, approximately, when he had a birthday party or represented to you that his birthday was October 18?
Mr.Paine. Yes; he may have celebrated the next daybut——
Mr.Liebeler. And your recollection is that you saw him each weekend after that except for the weekend immediately prior to the assassination?
Mr.Paine. Yes.
Mr.Liebeler. The weekend of November 8, 9, and 10 was a long weekend, was it not?
Mr.Paine. He was there then. I remember we didn't have a long weekend, Bell didn't. He had another day to sit in front of the TV.
Mr.Liebeler. Was that the last weekend that you saw him then?
Mr.Paine. If that is the one prior, two weekends, yes.
Mr.Liebeler. Now, starting at November 8, 9, and 10, which was the last time you saw him, consider when your wife showed you the draft of the letter that we spoke of just before. Would it have been that weekend or after that?
Mr.Paine. Well, I suppose it would be after that. They weren't in the house when she showed it to me or at least he wasn't. I don't remember when he wrote that letter or when we moved the furniture.
Mr.Liebeler. You don't remember whether you saw Oswald after you read the letter or not?
Mr.Paine. That is a good question, I can see some point to it now. One would surmise that, and I would think it reasonable that I would have looked at him with somewhat different point of view after having read the letter, and I don't remember looking at him with that different point of view, so quite possibly I didn't see him again.
Mr.Liebeler. So we would—the conclusion would be suggested that she showed you the letter sometime after November 8 or 9, 1963?
Mr.Paine. Yes; yes, I would guess that she, as I say, I would come to a dinner when he was not there on either of the Tuesday or the Wednesday and that would have been a reasonable time that she would have shown me the letter.
Mr.Liebeler. Did you have a discussion with her about this subject of his having gone to Mexico which was discussed in the letter, was it not?
Mr.Paine. She thought it was a fabrication, a complete fabrication. And she did not discuss, she gave me the letter, and as I say I was reading some other magazine and I read the letter and went back to my magazine. How dense people can be. Butanyway——
Mr.Liebeler. Didshe——
Mr.Paine. So we did not talk about it until later, then she took the letter back and put it in an envelope or something, she didn't want me to see it. She was sort of irked that I didn't.
Mr.Liebeler. Look at it when she wanted you to look at it?
Mr.Paine. Pay more attention to this thing, yes. But she didn't want me to see it again. "If you didn't see anything in it never mind looking at it."
Mr.Liebeler. Did she tell you about any discussions she had with Marina Oswald about Oswald's having been in Mexico?
Mr.Paine. I was under the impression that Ruth didn't know he had been in Mexico until after the assassination and, therefore, and I think Ruth later said, was dismayed also that Marina had been apparently, had apparently known and deceived her in this matter.
Mr.Liebeler. Well, did Ruth mention the fact that Marina had a little charm made out of Mexican peso.
Mr.Paine. Yes; but we didn't put that two and two together there until the FBI came and we looked on our drill press to see if they had used the tools in the shop to mount the sights on the gun and we found these little metal filings and then Ruth remembered that he had drilled out a coin to give to Marina and she never—I can't remember whether she realized then that it was a peso or Ruth hadn't thought that much about it until afterward.
Mr.Liebeler. And you didn't discuss that subject prior to the assassination, with your wife?
Mr.Paine. I didn't know about this whole thing, this medallion.
Mr.Liebeler. Did your wife mention the fact that Marina Oswald had a record of Mexican music?
Mr.Paine. No; I didn't know that until now. I don't recall it.
Mr.Liebeler. Did your wife tell you anything about the nature of her relationship with Marina Oswald during this period from the first of October up to the assassination?
Mr.Paine. It all seemed perfectly reasonable to me. When Ruth had met Marina back in the spring, I had seen that Marina Oswald—when I met them in their apartment, Oswald had spoken very loudly and harshly to Marina, and I thought to myself, isn't it amazing to see a little fellow who insists on wearing the pants, strongly. And then later on in discussions which followed the discussion which followed, that evening at the house, our house, he would not let her have a contrary opinion, and I also saw she was allergic to gibes, and he would gibe frequently.
Mr.Liebeler. She was allergic to them?
Mr.Paine. It seemed to me so.
Mr.Liebeler. They affected her greatly?
Mr.Paine. Yes. This all went on in Russian, and I don't know what he was saying. But I could see the object about which the statement was made, and later Ruth also told me some of the things that he had said.
But I felt that he was keeping her a vassal, and since I was more eager to hear her opinions of Russia than his opinions of Russia, I was eager that she should learn English, and when—Ruth told me that Marina thought she must have to go back to the Soviet Union, and I thought out of largesse of this country it should be possible for her to stay here if she wanted to stay here and she quite apparently did, she struck me as a somewhat apolitical person and yet true, just, and conscientious, so it was agreeable to me to look forward to financing her stay until she could make her own way here.
It added—Ruth also wanted to learn Russian, this was a cheap way for her to learn Russian, than to pay tutoring. And, as it happened, it was costing me less. She didn't go out shopping so much.
Mr.Liebeler. When she was home learning Russian from Marina?
Mr.Paine. When Marina was there to keep her company. She would go mad with boredom, I would think. So that it—we were somewhat saddened, or I think Ruth was, I think we shared—Ruth, of course, didn't want to stand in the way of Marina and Lee if they were happy together, but would have been glad to see Marina break away and make her own way. And she was a nice companion for Ruth.
Mr.Liebeler. Did you have any impression of how Marina and Ruth got along together, what they did with their time during the day, that sort of thing?
(Discussion off the record.)
Mr.Liebeler. Mr. Paine, you mentioned before these curtain rods that were in your garage. Can you tell us approximately how many curtain rods therewere in the garage when you last saw them and tell us when you last saw them?
Mr.Paine. I saw them quite recently, 2 weeks ago.
Mr.Liebeler. How many curtain rods were there then?
Mr.Paine. There might be as many as four.
Mr.Liebeler. Were there ever any more than that?
Mr.Paine. I don't believe so. These were normally up on the shelf above the bench, and for some reason, they recently, I had to take them down, or something like that.
Mr.Liebeler. Do you remember seeing them shortly before November 22 at any time?
Mr.Paine. They never particularly impressed themselves on my recollection.
Mr.Liebeler. Those are all the questions I have.
The testimony of Raymond Franklin Krystinik was taken at 9 a.m., on March 24, 1964, in the office of the U.S. attorney, 301 Post Office Building, Bryan and Ervay Streets, Dallas, Tex., by Messrs. Albert E. Jenner, Jr. and Wesley J. Liebeler, assistant counsel of the President's Commission.
Mr.Liebeler. Will you rise and raise your right hand? Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you are about to give will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?
Mr.Krystinik. I do.
Mr.Liebeler. Mr. Krystinik, I am a member of the legal staff of the President's Commission which has been established pursuant to Executive Order 11130, dated November 29, 1963.
Last week Mr. Rankin sent you a letter and told you that I would be in touch with you, did he not?
Mr.Krystinik. Yes.
Mr.Liebeler. Enclosed with that letter were copies of the Executive Order 11130, and a copy of the Joint Resolution of Congress 137, and the rules of the Commission's procedure in taking the testimony.
Mr.Krystinik. Yes, sir.
Mr.Liebeler. You received those documents?
Mr.Krystinik. Yes.
Mr.Liebeler. The general nature of our inquiry is to ascertain, evaluate and report upon the facts relating to the assassination of President Kennedy and the subsequent violent death of Lee Harvey Oswald.
We wish to inquire of you as to your knowledge of Oswald as a result of your having met him, as we understand it, through Michael Paine prior to the assassination. We also want to question you about some of the events that occurred shortly after the assassination, and some conversation you had with Mr. Paine at that time.
Would you state your name for the record?
Mr.Krystinik. Raymond Franklin Krystinik.
Mr.Liebeler. Where do you live?
Mr.Krystinik. 2121 Greenway Street, Arlington, Tex.
Mr.Liebeler. Where do you work?
Mr.Krystinik. Bell Helicopter Research Laboratory, located at 33006 Avenue E, East, Arlington, Tex. It is a part of Bell Helicopter Co. Their address is Box 482, Fort Worth, Tex.
Mr.Liebeler. How long have you worked for Bell?
Mr.Krystinik. Since June 6, 1960.
Mr.Liebeler. Would you tell us briefly what your educational background is, Mr. Krystinik?
Mr.Krystinik. I started grade school in Caldwell, Tex. I moved to Bryan and finished grade school in the Smetana School at Bryan, Tex. And from there to Fredericksburg. At Fredericksburg I went to St. Mary's CatholicSchool and grade school, and from Fredericksburg to Grand Prairie, Tex. I went to high school in Grand Prairie, Tex. Graduated in 1950.
I went to work for Chance Vought Aircraft Aviation from high school. Went into the Navy in 1952, I believe. I don't remember exactly. I have to look it up. I was married in 1954. Got out of the Navy in August of 1954. Started to school at Arlington State College in September of 1954, and I graduated from Arlington State in June of 1956.
Went to Texas A&M, I think starting in January of 1957. I graduated from Texas A&M in June of 1960. On June 6, I went to work for Bell Helicopter. These are just approximate dates. I think they are just about right, but I am not right sure. If you need it, I can give you the exact dates.
Mr.Liebeler. This is all right. What kind of work do you do for Bell Helicopter?
Mr.Krystinik. I am a research engineer. I work in the research group.
Mr.Liebeler. Your work relates to helicopters and their design?
Mr.Krystinik. Actually right now; no. Right now, I am working on what I think the company could classify as a flying machine. Is that adequate?
Mr.Liebeler. Yes. When were you born?
Mr.Krystinik. August 31, 1932.
Mr.Liebeler. Are you presently married?
Mr.Krystinik. Yes, sir.
Mr.Liebeler. Do you have any children?
Mr.Krystinik. Yes; I have three.
Mr.Liebeler. Do you know Michael Paine?
Mr.Krystinik. Yes; I do.
Mr.Liebeler. When did you meet him, approximately? And under what circumstances?
Mr.Krystinik. Approximately in June of 1961, if I remember correctly. I was assigned to the research group on a temporary assignment, and at the research laboratory I met Michael and worked with him then off and on up through now.
Mr.Liebeler. You are working with him now?
Mr.Krystinik. Yes.
Mr.Liebeler. Did there come a time when you met Lee Harvey Oswald?
Mr.Krystinik. Yes; I did.
Mr.Liebeler. Would you tell us about that?
Mr.Krystinik. I went to a meeting of the American Civil Liberties Union on the campus of SMU. I don't remember the date, except I do remember it was the night after Mr. Stevenson's unhappy visit to Dallas when the lady, I believe, swatted him with a placard.
Mr.Liebeler. That was sometime in October of 1963?
Mr.Krystinik. Yes; it was October of 1963. Oswald was at the meeting, and Michael introduced me to him. He had told me about the man before.
Mr.Liebeler. What had Michael Paine told you about Oswald?
Mr.Krystinik. I mean told me that at the time there was a Russian lady living with his wife Ruth and that just exactly, I can't remember his exact words, but there was this fellow who was an ex-Marine who had defected to Russia. I can remember that he told me that, that he defected to Russia, and the fellow decided it wasn't for him and he came back to the United States. And was, in general, a misfit and not capable of holding a good job; generally dissatisfied, and didn't accept the responsibilities for his family, and Michael's wife had taken Marina to help her for the time being.
That was the reference made to him prior to having met him.
Mr.Liebeler. To the best of your recollection, is that all Michael Paine told you about Oswald?
Mr.Krystinik. At that particular time we discussed him—during that period of time Michael was eating supper with us on an average of once a week, and we discussed the man as being odd, or at least a little different. Michael said he couldn't understand the man exactly. He commented that he shirked or ran from responsibilities. As long as he had money and had a job, he was willing to stay around his family and support them, but when he lost a job and didn't have the money, he apparently took off. I can remember him tellingme that about him, and when I met him at Selecman Hall, I didn't feel overly happy to meet the man, or that I had made an acquaintance of value.
They were there before my wife and I came. As we walked in and sat down, Oswald was there, and it didn't occur to me then that he might be the man. Prior to the meeting starting, he introduced me to him.
Michael, I am referring to—Michael introduced me. I need to keep my chain more correct, straight. Michael introduced me to Lee Oswald. As the meeting started, about that time—before the meeting first there was a little bit of talk. I don't remember what the chairman of the meeting said prior to the film starting.
They showed a film about a Senator or Congressman or legislator, some form of public servant who was running for reelection in Washington State, and the far right people wanted him out in a campaign, stating that his wife had connections with the Communist Party, and apparently she had had connections during her college days but had severed relations with the party and had given evidence to the FBI and an investigating team and apparently was clean at the time, or had no connection with the party at the time. And they showed in a film how the far right or an extremist movement could greatly damage a citizen that was of value to the United States. That was the essence of the film.
After the film there was discussion about the Civil Liberties and about the film in general and about the movement in the South and the integration movement and the talk concerning General Walker. The first notice I made of Oswald is when he stood up and made a remark about General Walker in reference to him not only being anti-Catholic but anti-Semitic in regard to his comments about the Pope. Then he made further comments that a night or two nights before he had been at the General Walker meeting here in Dallas. That was my first real notice of him.
Mr.Liebeler. Oswald said to the assembled group at that time that he had been to a meeting 2 days prior at which General Walker was present?
Mr.Krystinik. I think it was 2 days prior.
Mr.Liebeler. That meeting would have been just the night before Mr. Stevenson came to Dallas?
Mr.Krystinik. Yes, sir; I think, or it could have been the same night. I don't remember the exact date.
Mr.Liebeler. What did Oswald say about General Walker?
Mr.Krystinik. That was it. That was his comment about Walker, and it struck me at the time. I mean my ears perked up when he said Walker was anti-Catholic in reference to his comments about the Pope. I can quote that. That is exact. I am Catholic and I wanted to hear what he said. He didn't say what General Walker had said.
Mr.Liebeler. Did he indicate any hostility toward General Walker either by words or by his deeds?
Mr.Krystinik. At the time it seemed like Michael had commented to me prior that the man was a Marxist, and I have never met anyone before that I had known to be a Communist or a Marxist or Leninist or Red, and I was interested mainly to see what the man looked like, how he thought and what he felt. It seemed to me, in watching and listening to him, that rather than being violently against General Walker, he was stirring in dirty thoughts that you shouldn't like General Walker. He didn't say General Walker is a bad guy. He just made comments that General Walker is anti-Semitic and anti-Catholic, and he was spreading a little seed of thought. That was the way it impressed me.
Mr.Liebeler. You didn't get the feeling that Oswald had any particular violent thoughts towards General Walker?
Mr.Krystinik. I didn't at this time. I had no idea he was violent until I heard on the radio he had shot the President.
Mr.Liebeler. Did anybody respond to Oswald's remarks about General Walker?
Mr.Krystinik. There were other people that discussed it, and then they discussed the bad display the people from the far right had put on when Mr. Stevenson was in Dallas, and it was regrettable that extremists would act likethat. But any exact comment about General Walker I really don't remember.
Mr.Liebeler. Did Oswald say anything about this Stevenson affair?
Mr.Krystinik. I couldn't say. I don't really remember.
Mr.Liebeler. Did he tell you that he had been at the meeting at which Stevenson had had his difficulty?
Mr.Krystinik. No, sir; he didn't tell me that. He told me, I think just me he had mentioned, if I remember exactly, he had mentioned to Michael and said, "I was there," in reference to the meeting of the General Walker group.
Mr.Liebeler. Are the remarks that you have told us about, the only remarks that Oswald made to the entire group that evening?
Mr.Krystinik. The only ones I can remember and swear that I know was the one in reference to General Walker not only being anti-Semitic but anti-Catholic and in regard to his comment about the Pope.
Mr.Liebeler. Did Oswald comment on the John Birch Society as well as General Walker?
Mr.Krystinik. I know there was mention about him in the group. The group commented on the John Birch Society, and I don't remember exactly whether Oswald commented on them, too. I would like to be of help to you, but I don't remember.
Mr.Liebeler. Just give us the best recollection you have.
Mr.Krystinik. That is it so far.
Mr.Liebeler. How did Oswald impress you when he stepped up and addressed the group? Did he impress you as being articulate, intelligent, or was he not that way?
Mr.Krystinik. At that particular time he just made the one statement. After the meeting, I talked to him for about 15 minutes primarily about economics.
Mr.Liebeler. Was anyone there besides you and Oswald?
Mr.Krystinik. Yes, sir; there was a Mr. Byrd Helligas.
Mr.Liebeler. Did he take part in the conversation with you and Oswald?
Mr.Krystinik. Yes; a little bit, to the best of my memory. Oswald was the fellow that impressed me, and I was paying attention to what he was saying, and I am afraid that Mr. Helligas didn't make an impression on me. I don't remember what he said, except he did enter into the conversation at different times. I am afraid most of my attention was directed to Oswald. The hair was up on the back of my neck. I was irritated by the man a little. Not real bad, but he bothered me some.
Mr.Liebeler. Was it what he said that bothered you, or was it his attitude?
Mr.Krystinik. Attitude more than exactly what he said.
Mr.Liebeler. What was his attitude?
Mr.Krystinik. Well, the attitude that I felt was that he was talking down to me. I felt like he was. That he was better than I was, to a certain degree, and he acted as if he had complete command of the argument and was on top all the time. I felt that a couple of different spots in the argument I had him practically beaten and he wouldn't accept my argument. He turned his back and would go down a different avenue.
Mr.Liebeler. He figuratively turned his back?
Mr.Krystinik. Yes, sir; that is it.
Mr.Liebeler. Reconstruct for us, as best you can, at this point, the discussion that you and Oswald had. Tell us as best you can recall what he said and what you said and what the argument was about.
Mr.Krystinik. Well, after the meeting was over we went back to the back where they had coffee. I believe they had doughnuts, I am not sure, but they had a table of refreshments, at least, and I am sure there was coffee. I wasn't interested in the coffee.
Michael, my wife, and Oswald, and I, walked to the back of the room together. I approached Oswald and commented to him that Michael had told me about his political background a little bit, and I understood that he had been to Russia. I asked him what he felt communism had to offer that was better than he could find in the United States. He kind of shrugged his shoulders and didn't make any particular comment then.
I forget exactly the trend of talk at that particular moment, but as we talkedfor just a couple of minutes, or at any rate as we talked, I told him I had met his wife at the Paine's over in Irving and that he had a beautiful little girl, he should be real proud of them. And he commented, "They are nice." And that was to let it go at that.
I forget, or I do forget now about exactly what the next few comments were. We did start talking about communism versus capitalism. He said that in capitalism the employer exploits the worker. I asked him just what he meant by exploiting. He said he takes a man's labors and makes a profit from them without actually putting in any effort of his own. I said that wasn't true. I considered myself to be a capitalist, or at least to be a firm believer in the capitalistic system. At the present time I had an employer and he paid me a fair salary and I was real glad to work for him for the salary I got.
He commented that my employer was taking my efforts without putting in any efforts and was reaping a profit from my efforts, and he wanted to know if I thought that was fair or not?
And I said that I was happy. I am satisfied with what I have, and I feel it is fair, and I used an analogy that in turn I am an employer. I have two fellows who work for me building patterns for which I pay them $3 an hour and they are tickled to get the $3 an hour. They are real glad to get it. And that I make $4 an hour off of their efforts. My profit is $1 an hour, and that I bought the machinery, I bought the material. I have gone out and hunted up the work, and the $1 an hour from each of those two fellows is my wage for going out and getting the work, and my wage is comparable to my investment.
He said, you are exploiting labor. You are not doing any work. And he commented then, well, that is all right for you. In your society it is not a crime to exploit the worker. He didn't say, "to exploit the worker." He said, "In your society it is not a crime." He was referring to exploitation of the worker, supposedly.
Mr.Liebeler. Go ahead.
Mr.Krystinik. That is really about all I remember from the conversation itself. Oh, wait a minute, we did talk about freedom. I asked him what about the freedom in Russia. And he said, "Well, they don't have as much actual freedom." I have forgotten what he said exactly in reference to where they didn't have the freedom. We were talking about actual civil liberties themselves in the United States versus Russia. He said the United States by far has more civil liberties.
I said, what do you think about the movement in the South in reference to Mr. Kennedy? And he said he thinks that Kennedy is doing a real fine job, a real good job, I have forgotten.
Mr.Liebeler. So far as civil rights were concerned?
Mr.Krystinik. Yes, sir. That was the only comment that was made in reference to President Kennedy. I forget whether that was the only time he expressed any emotion, and I have forgotten the exact words, he is doing a real fine job, or very fine job. I can't remember exactly what he said.
He impressed me as having a lot of big words, and my immediate impression was he was fairly well read, but talking with Michael later and recalling the conversation later, it was pointed out, Michael brought it to my attention, and after I think about it I agree with Michael, that he had available to him a lot of two-bit vocabulary words, but not necessarily correctly used. This was a later impression, but the immediate argument, I was interested in what he was saying rather than how he was saying it and the way he had gone about saying it.
Mr.Liebeler. You were particularly impressed, however, by the emphasis that Oswald placed on his remark that President Kennedy was doing a good job as far as civil rights were concerned?
Mr.Krystinik. At the immediate time I wasn't particularly impressed. After the President was murdered, I felt that there was at least an emphasis of note, if not connected. I do remember him saying, him placing emphasis on the way he said it.
Mr.Liebeler. And the impression you received of his attitude toward President Kennedy was one of approval and one of favor?
Mr.Krystinik. I would say yes. I don't know about President Kennedy in general, how he felt, but in reference to the civil rights issue, the impression I had was that he was favorably impressed by Mr. Kennedy.
Mr.Liebeler. Did Oswald express his attitude toward any other government official, during the course of his conversation with you?
Mr.Krystinik. I can't really remember. I have heard Michael Paine comment that Oswald had at one time written a letter and left it laying around the house, and that his wife, Ruth, had found this letter. It was in the typewriter. I can't remember exactly the details, but that he had referred to the notorious FBI. Apparently he didn't care for the FBI.
Mr.Liebeler. Did Michael tell you that before or after the assassination?
Mr.Krystinik. It was after.
Mr.Liebeler. It was after?
Mr.Krystinik. Yes, sir.
Mr.Liebeler. Prior to the time of the assassination, however, you had no feeling that Oswald had any particular hostility toward any government official or toward the government in general? Would that be a fair statement?
Mr.Krystinik. I can't really say because I don't know the exact time sequence. After a little time is passed, it is hard to pin it down.
Michael and I discussed the man at length after the assassination, and we talked about him a whole lot, so I don't really know whether it was before or after, but I now feel that he was very definitely against all enforcement people in general, and I don't know exactly when this impression came to me. But if I didn't already have this impression beforehand, I certainly had it afterwards.
I do know that beforehand, that he didn't get along with his employers and his fellow workers, or at least his employers, and he wasn't able to keep a job, and he didn't have respect for his employers, and this might possibly extend to law enforcement officials.
Mr.Liebeler. Do you feel that Oswald was, in general resentful of authority? There was resentment of his employers?
Mr.Krystinik. According to Michael, talking to him, we didn't talk about specifics, it was strictly generalities. It was 15 minutes that I talked to him, or 15 minutes or so that I talked to him.
Mr.Liebeler. Is this meeting that you had with Oswald in the ACLU, the only meeting you ever had with Oswald?
Mr.Krystinik. That was the only time I saw him up until I saw him on television.
Mr.Liebeler. And your impressions are based upon your conversation with him during that time at the ACLU meeting?
Mr.Krystinik. Based on that and what Michael and I have discussed in reference to him.
Mr.Liebeler. In the course of the conversation with Oswald at the ACLU meeting, did he tell you that he was a Marxist?
Mr.Krystinik. Yes. It seems to me that I commented to him that, "You are a Communist and I am a Capitalist," and I can't remember exactly what it was, but he corrected me and he said, "I am a Marxist." When I addressed him as a Communist, he said, "I am a Marxist."
Mr.Liebeler. He corrected you then when you said he was a Communist and indicated he was not a Communist?
Mr.Krystinik. Yes.
Mr.Liebeler. Did you ask him what the difference was between those theories?
Mr.Krystinik. No; I don't remember having asked him that.
Mr.Liebeler. And he didn't elaborate on that?
Mr.Krystinik. No.
Mr.Liebeler. Did Oswald tellyou——
Mr.Krystinik. Oh, excuse me, there was one other thing that I, at the time when he commented on the capitalistic system exploiting the worker, I came back at him with the idea, you mean to tell me in Russia they don't exploit, that the State doesn't exploit the worker, and he stated that it is worse than here. He did say that.
Mr.Liebeler. That the exploitation of the worker was worse in Russia than it is in the United States?
Mr.Krystinik. And the State exploited the worker.
Mr.Liebeler. Did he indicate to you any desire to return to the Soviet Union?
Mr.Krystinik. No, sir.
Mr.Liebeler. Did he indicate any desire to go to any other country?
Mr.Krystinik. To me; no.
Mr.Liebeler. Did you know at the time you talked to Oswald that he had been active in the Fair Play for Cuba?
Mr.Krystinik. No, sir; I never heard of the organization until I read about it in the Dallas Morning News in reference to Oswald.
Mr.Liebeler. Did Oswald tell you he was a member of any Marxist or Communist group?
Mr.Krystinik. No. His only comment was that, "I am a Marxist."
Mr.Liebeler. Did you have any impression as to whether he was a member of any group, Marxist or Communist group?
Mr.Krystinik. In reference to what Michael had told me that he defected to Russia and that he claimed himself as being a Marxist, now I am afraid that in my mind I felt he was a Communist or a Red, and my immediate impressions were that even though he had nothing to offer me with which to place trust in him, I didn't trust him and kind of considered him, I guess I looked at him really like someone at a dog that might bite. I disliked the man. I disliked him without him giving me personally an actual reason. I disliked him before I met him on the basis of conversation with Michael. I disliked him when I met him in that I felt he was talking down to me and felt he was somewhat better than I was. He acted as he felt he had complete command of the conversation, was leading it, and was controlling what was going to be said, and I like to talk too.
We talked back and forth, but rather than a pleasant discussion, it was more of an argument.
Mr.Liebeler. You got no impression at any time during the course of your meeting with Oswald that he was an actual member of any Communist or Marxist group?
Mr.Krystinik. I felt that he was, but that was only by saying, "I am a Marxist." To me, that categorized him. But as to any specific organization, I had no impression that he belonged to any specific group.
Mr.Liebeler. Did Oswald display any anger to you during the course of your conversation with him?
Mr.Krystinik. I can't remember, really. I don't think so.
Mr.Liebeler. Have you now told us, to the best of your recollection, the entire conversation that occurred between you and Oswald on that occasion?
Mr.Krystinik. Only to the best of my recollection. I am sure that we talked more.
Mr.Liebeler. Did he mention anything to you about having been in the Marines?
Mr.Krystinik. He didn't. Michael had told me previously that he had been in the Marines.
Mr.Liebeler. Had Michael told you that Oswald received an undesirable discharge from the Marine Corps?
Mr.Krystinik. Yes.
Mr.Liebeler. But you didn't have any discussion about that with Oswald?
Mr.Krystinik. No.
Mr.Liebeler. Did you have any discussion with Oswald about his impressions while he was in the Soviet Union?
Mr.Krystinik. I did ask him to tell me about Russia, but then the conversation diverged back into the economic end of the capitalism versus communism. He commented that the work hours were long and the pay wasn't particularly good. That was about the main thing. It was just that long in reference to the Soviet Union and we were back to capitalism. He didn't seem to care to talk particularly about it.
Mr.Liebeler. His remarks about the pay and working conditions in the Soviet Union were a general remark?
Mr.Krystinik. Just general.
Mr.Liebeler. He didn't tell you how much he was paid or what kind of job he had?
Mr.Krystinik. Well, he didn't. Michael, I believe, told me afterwards, if I remember correctly, that he was doing something in an electronic firm or electrical industry.
Mr.Liebeler. But Oswald himself told you nothing about his stay in the Soviet Union other than you have already told us?
Mr.Krystinik. Basically.
Mr.Liebeler. What happened after the meeting was over?
Mr.Krystinik. As we were going out, I commented to Michael that we were going to have to set this boy up in business and convert him. And he said that the only thing he approached humor, he commented, "The money might corrupt me." I can remember that as a quote.
Mr.Liebeler. That is what Oswald said?
Mr.Krystinik. That is what Oswald said.
Mr.Liebeler. He said that in a joking manner?
Mr.Krystinik. In a joking manner.
Mr.Liebeler. Other than that, however, Oswald did not indicate any particular sense of humor to you?
Mr.Krystinik. No humor. He indicated no violence. He impressed me as being cold. You can talk to some people and say they are warm and sincere. He impressed me as being cold and stereotyped. He had fixed notions in his head, and I had the impression he had his mind made up regardless of how good an argument you presented. His mind was made up that he was not going to admit, regardless of how strong it was.
Mr.Liebeler. Did you subsequently discuss with Michael Paine your argument with Oswald?
Mr.Krystinik. Yes; I did.
Mr.Liebeler. Prior to the assassination?
Mr.Krystinik. Prior to the assassination.
Mr.Liebeler. Would you tell us generally what you said and what Michael said?
Mr.Krystinik. Michael said that he knew of what was coming, so he went on off and talked with my wife and with another fellow. There was no point in him sticking around. He knew Oswald had a closed mind.
He didn't say, "closed mind." Michael is a rather unusual type of person. He is careful not to overly, severely criticize anyone or make unkind comments about other people, even though he himself has sensitive emotions and feels—you have talked with him. I guess you have the same impression.
Mr.Liebeler. Is that all that you and Michael said about your (conversation) discussion with Oswald?
Mr.Krystinik. With reference to this conversation, I related to him just about what Oswald had said to me. It wasn't exactly in detail. I didn't talk about him, as long about the actual conversation, as I have talked to you. He said that he knew how it was going to go and there wasn't any point in his staying around. He knew how Oswald would react.
Mr.Liebeler. He indicated to you that he had had previous similar experiences?
Mr.Krystinik. Yes.
Mr.Liebeler. Did he tell you about this in specific detail?
Mr.Krystinik. Only that he argued with him and the man loved to talk economics, and that at first he was very, very interesting to talk to, but that once the man had said all that he wanted to, or all that he was particularly interested in, it was then a repeat, and that it was always all locked in in a small little body, that he didn't particularly have any area for growth, that he had a certain fixed image in his mind, and was reluctant to have it improved or changed.
Mr.Liebeler. Did Michael indicate to you that Oswald received any periodicals or literature concerning economic or social and political questions of the time that you discussed?
Mr.Krystinik. Prior to the assassination, no, he didn't. I am trying to—I forget now exactly—I have read the newspapers and I heard so darn muchabout it on the radio and television, it is actually hard to strain out exactly who said what. I know that he had gotten Communist literature, and I can't remember whether it was from Michael or from the news media that I heard this.
Mr.Liebeler. Can you recall any other discussions between Michael Paine and yourself, concerning Lee Oswald that occurred prior to the assassination?
Mr.Krystinik. No, sir; not really.
Mr.Liebeler. The occasion that you met Oswald at the ACLU meeting was the only time at which you ever met Oswald, is that correct?
Mr.Krystinik. Yes.
Mr.Liebeler. You mentioned that you had met Marina Oswald and child prior to that time.
Mr.Krystinik. Yes; Michael had bought an old blue—he had a French Citroen automobile. At any rate, he had the two cars and he wanted me to drive either his car home or follow him home in my car. And he was taking the Oldsmobile to Irving and I followed him in my car and took him back to the research laboratory and picked up his Citroen. At any rate, when I drove the car in, he went into the house and brought Ruth out and Marina. And all I remember is one little girl. I didn't see the baby. The little girl came out with her mother and Ruth introduced me to Marina. She impressed me at the time as very sweet and very polite. I spoke as slowly and as distinctly as I could to her in English, Texan to be exact, and she turned to Marina—Marina turned to Ruth and spoke to her in Russian, and I asked Ruth if I was talking too fast, and Marina said I am talking too Texan.
At any rate, that was about it. I told her that she had a beautiful little girl and hoped that she would like the United States. And she commented that she did, that it was a wonderful country. That I can remember for sure. That impressed me, because it seems that where there is a possibility of a Russian saying something nice, it is nice to have a compliment. At least I felt complimented.
Mr.Liebeler. Marina indicated that to you in English, is that correct?
Mr.Krystinik. I can't remember whether it was the words, but that was the way I took it to be. It was my thinking, yes.
Mr.Liebeler. Did Marina understand the remarks that you had made to her in English?
Mr.Krystinik. Apparently she followed the trend, but she turned to Ruth for exact interpretation, and Ruth told me that I wasn't talking too fast, just too Texan. That was Marina's comment.
At first I was talking just to Marina back and forth, and she said just a few words, and I asked her how old the child was, and if I remember exactly, 2 or 3. I have forgotten. But one- or two-word answers, and I had no trouble at all understanding her up to that point. When Ruth entered into the conversation, she turned and relied directly and totally upon Ruth. I talked to her only about 5 minutes in all. I talked with her while Ruth was looking at the car with Michael. I mean I talked to her rather than with her.
Mr.Liebeler. This was after Marina had given birth to the second child. Is that correct?
Mr.Krystinik. Yes; seemed like only a week or 2 weeks.
Mr.Liebeler. Was there any discussion of Lee Oswald at that time?
Mr.Krystinik. No, sir; his name wasn't mentioned. I hadn't met him at that time.
Mr.Liebeler. Have you ever met Lyman Paine? That would be Michael's father. Did you ever discuss Lyman Paine with Michael?
Mr.Krystinik. Only once. We talked about him a couple of times, but one time Michael, just prior to Michael buying the land in Irving for his future shop.
Mr.Liebeler. Can you tell us approximately when that was?
Mr.Krystinik. No, sir; I can't remember, but it was about a week prior to his buying the land.
Mr.Liebeler. I see.
Mr.Krystinik. I can fix the time. He had commented that he had been invited by his father to the west coast for the weekend.
I know that the previous time Michael had been saving his money to buy this land, and I feel that he didn't have enough money at the time, and he flew out on a Friday evening, if I remember correctly, and flew back to Dallas early Monday morning, and he was sleepy and tired at work that day. We talked and I asked him if he had a nice time visiting with his father, and he commented that he had a nice time and that his father had a very nice party. And it seemed this was somewhat of an international party. He talked about this Negress that he had met who was extremely interesting. Her husband had written a book on labor, and he talked mainly about this woman and the conversation he had with her.
Mr.Liebeler. This conversation occurred at a party that Lyman Paine had given in Los Angeles is that correct?
Mr.Krystinik. Yes; that's right. He didn't tell me in detail why he was particularly interested. He said she was a very interesting person, and that he had talked to a group of other people, several other people. He said that there was a man from West or East Germany, and I remember he said that there were some Chinese people there, and I don't remember whether they were or were not from the Communist bloc. I don't remember that. But he commented on several other people that were, in my book, I would say they were each one an extremist of some form or other at the time—at the time that he was telling me about them. They were at least very different than you would meet on the street. That doesn't make them bad, don't misunderstand me. That was the impression I had. He didn't say they were Communist or bad people or anything like that. They were just very, very different.
Mr.Liebeler. Did Michael indicate to you that his father had been active in the affairs of the Communist Party?
Mr.Krystinik. No; he didn't. I asked him what his father did, and he said he was an architect, and that was the comment. It seemed there was some mention made about a Communist or a fellow that had communistic interests being at the party, and I asked him what kind of people does your father associate with. He said he didn't know really what his father does. That was his comment. He didn't know what his father does, that he really knows that he is an architect and that is about it. That was Michael's comment.
Mr.Liebeler. Did you ask him what kind of a man his father was?
Mr.Krystinik. No, sir; not really. I talked to him about it very little, and I do know that just shortly after he came back from Los Angeles, Michael did buy this plot of land and he did pay cash, $3,000, and I had the impression that prior to his going to Los Angeles he didn't have the money.
I had that impression because he commented that there was time for him to pay or give—we were talking about church donations during the coffee break one day shortly after that, and he commented that he was really going to have to do something about his bank account, it was time to pay his pledge dues at the Unitarian Church and he didn't have the money in the bank, and 3 or so weeks later he had $3,000, for a plot of land, so I am assuming, I am not a detective, that he had gotten the money from his father or from Art Young, who is his stepfather. One of those two persons, he had gotten the money. He had, if I remember correctly, Art Young was in Texas, so one of these two places he had gotten the money. Those are the impressions I had, that he had gotten it from his father.
Mr.Liebeler. Did you have any discussion about this with Michael?
Mr.Krystinik. No, sir; I didn't. I want to make it clear that I don't know. These are impressions that I had.
Mr.Liebeler. Did Michael tell you that he went to Los Angeles for the purpose of visiting his father?
Mr.Krystinik. No, sir; he didn't state it in that way. He said that his father offered to pay for the plane ticket to the west coast, and he thought it was a wonderful opportunity to visit his father, and this was the discussion prior to his leaving.
Mr.Liebeler. He was not sent to the west coast on business for Bell Helicopter?
Mr.Krystinik. No, sir; he has been sent to Pennsylvania on Bell Helicopter business. I am aware of that.
Mr.Liebeler. But so far as you know, he was not sent to Los Angeles on Bell Helicopter business?
Mr.Krystinik. No, sir; so far as I feel that if he had, that he would have told me.
Mr.Liebeler. You are a friend of Michael Paine's?
Mr.Krystinik. I would like to consider myself a friend of his, and by my telling you things, I feel that I am still a friend of his. I think that he is—I feel that he has absolutely nothing to hide, and in all honesty, I don't feel that what I tell you can in any way hurt him, and if it would hurt him, he has been going—he has been doing something he shouldn't have been doing, and if he has, why we need to know about it, because that is just the way I feel. I don't feel like I am squealing on him.
Mr.Liebeler. Did Michael tell you that his father had called him shortly after the assassination?
Mr.Krystinik. No, sir; he didn't.
Mr.Liebeler. As far as you know, the last contact Michael had with his father is when he went to Los Angeles shortly prior to the time he bought this tract in Irving?
Mr.Krystinik. Yes, sir; that is the last comment he made to me.
Mr.Liebeler. Where were you when you learned that fact that the President had been shot?
Mr.Krystinik. At the research laboratory. We were listening to the radio. We had listened to the President's speech from the Texas Hotel parking lot in Fort Worth. I think that almost every one at the laboratory honestly really liked President Kennedy and was all for him. We were much interested in him whenever he did make a speech. I believe during working hours we always listened to his speech, and we were listening to the radio at the time. When the first report came in, they had been talking about the motorcade through downtown Dallas, and switched to the Market Hall, and the commentator was talking from the Market Hall, and the first comment there, was a report that there was shots fired at the President. And he didn't say he had been hit.
Then there was some discussion on the radio, and then it came through, this is official that the President of the United States has been fired at by an assassin or an attempted assassination. And in a little while it came through he had been hit and taken to Parkland Hospital, and the reports were that he and Governor Connally were both hit and both considered to be in serious condition. And it came through that they were both alive but both in extremely critical condition. And finally, I think it was about an hour later the report came through the President had expired. And Michael exhibited real outward emotion. He had his back turned and his head was down slightly and he really cried. And I don't feel that Michael is the type that could make crocodile tears in seriousness.
Mr.Liebeler. Was Michael with you when you first heard of the fact that the President had been fired at?
Mr.Krystinik. Yes, sir; we were all in the lab in the office.
Mr.Liebeler. Did you eat lunch with Michael that day?
Mr.Krystinik. No, sir; I didn't. I don't think I did. I do eat with him quite often off and on. Most of the time I stay at the lab and drink my can of Metrecal.
Mr.Liebeler. To the best of your knowledge, you did not eat with Michael?
Mr.Krystinik. I recall I did not that day, no.
Mr.Liebeler. But also to the best of your recollection, you were both in the lab?
Mr.Krystinik. We were both in the office portion of the lab. Michael has a stereo hi-fi that he brought to the lab for use by all of us.
Mr.Liebeler. You were there at that time when you first heard that the President had been fired at?