Mr.Fenley. Yes; I made myself acquainted to him after the conversation with Hamblen, but he was the only other person that I could identify as being there. I was trying to think by that—now Marsh was still in town, so it must not have been—we could go back to the file on this thing and find that story, and it would have been about 2 days before that story appeared.
Mr.Hubert. Let me make this point to you. I notice from the calendar that I have before me of the year 1963 that November 28 was Thursday and was Thanksgiving. Could you relate this meeting with Hamblen to that date?
Mr.Fenley. It seems to me it might be—my memory on these things is terrible—but it seems to me that it might have been around Thanksgiving, now that you mention it.
Mr.Hubert. Would you say that it was within the week immediately succeeding the shooting of Oswald?
Mr.Fenley. I couldn't be positive, but I think it could have been; yes. This could be checked very easily by going to the newspaper file and getting the date and then going back a couple of days.
Mr.Hubert. This Mr. Carter, I think you said, checked with Mr. Hamblen? That is, he told you he did?
Mr.Fenley. Yes.
Mr.Hubert. On the same day that you told him about it, which was the next day?
Mr.Fenley. The next day after; yes.
Mr.Hubert. I think you mentioned that he said that you suggested that he check it out with Hamblen, and that he did right away, or in a few hours?
Mr.Fenley. I would have written the story myself, except I felt a little dubious, I must say, of it and I wanted George to do the same thing and see if the story matched. So now, frankly, I am not too positive when George actually talked to Hamblen, but I believe the story appeared on a Saturday morning. So if it could have been Thanksgiving, if Thanksgiving would be on a Thursday, and George talked to him on Friday, it would appear for the Saturday paper.
Mr.Hubert. But you have a recollection that Clark spoke to you after having spoken to Hamblen?
Mr.Fenley. Yes; I am certain of that.
Mr.Hubert. Before the story appeared?
Mr.Fenley. Yes.
Mr.Hubert. And told you that the story he got from Hamblen was about the same as what you told him Hamblen told you?
Mr.Fenley. You mean Carter?
Mr.Hubert. Yes; George Carter.
Mr.Fenley. Yes.
Mr.Hubert. Is there anything else, sir, you would like to comment upon concerning this matter?
Mr.Fenley. No; Gee, I wish I—I am still very curious about this, but what results, if any, this yielded, frankly, I don't mean this for the record, but I frankly heard that he recanted the tale.
Mr.Hubert. Let me ask you this. This is a part of the formality of closing these depositions. I don't think, and I ask you to state whether you concur, that there has been any conversation between us this morning other than that which has been recorded in this deposition?
Mr.Fenley. No.
Mr.Hubert. You do concur?
Mr.Fenley. I concur.
Mr.Hubert. Thank you very much, sir.
Mr.Fenley. Yes, sir.
The testimony of Aubrey Lee Lewis was taken at 11:30 a.m., on July 14, 1964, in the office of the U.S. attorney, 301 Post Office Building, Bryan and Ervay Streets, Dallas, Tex., by Mr. Leon D. Hubert, Jr., assistant counsel of the President's Commission. Dean Robert G. Story, special counsel to the attorney general of Texas and Sam Kelley, assistant attorney general of Texas, were present.
Mr.Hubert. This is the deposition of Aubrey Lee Lewis. Mr. Lewis, my name is Leon Hubert. I am a member of the advisory staff of the general counsel of the President's Commission. Under the provisions of Executive Order 11130 dated November 29, 1963, and the joint resolution of Congress No. 137, and the rules of procedure adopted by the President's Commission in conformance with that Executive order and the joint resolution, I have been authorized to take a sworn deposition from you. I state to you now that the general nature of the Commission's inquiry is to ascertain, evaluate and reportupon the facts relevant to the assassination of President Kennedy and the subsequent violent death of Lee Harvey Oswald. In particular as to you, Mr. Lewis, the nature of the inquiry today is to determine what facts you know about the death of Oswald and any other pertinent facts you may know about the general inquiry. Now I understand, Mr. Lewis, that you appeared here today by virtue of a letter requesting you to do so, addressed to you by Mr. J. Lee Rankin, general counsel of the staff of the President's Commission.
Mr.Lewis. Yes.
Mr.Hubert. When did you receive that?
Mr.Lewis. It was Friday.
Mr.Hubert. Friday, the 10th, is that correct?
Mr.Lewis. Yes.
Mr.Hubert. Will you stand, please, and take the oath? Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you are about to give in this matter will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?
Mr.Lewis. I do.
Mr.Hubert. Will you state your name?
Mr.Lewis. Aubrey Lee Lewis.
Mr.Hubert. Where do you live?
Mr.Lewis. 2321 Tolosa Drive.
Mr.Hubert. What is your occupation?
Mr.Lewis. I am an assistant branch manager.
Mr.Hubert. Of what?
Mr.Lewis. Western Union Telegraph Co.
Mr.Hubert. Where?
Mr.Lewis. 7620 Lemmon Avenue.
Mr.Hubert. In what city?
Mr.Lewis. Dallas, Tex.
Mr.Hubert. How long have you been so occupied?
Mr.Lewis. Five years.
Mr.Hubert. What was your occupation prior to that time?
Mr.Lewis. U.S. Navy.
Mr.Hubert. And prior to that?
Mr.Lewis. High school.
Mr.Hubert. How old are you?
Mr.Lewis. Twenty-six.
Mr.Hubert. So that all of your adult life you have been employed by the Western Union?
Mr.Lewis. Yes, sir.
Mr.Hubert. Have you held the same position all that time?
Mr.Lewis. No; I have held the same position about the last year and a half.
Mr.Hubert. What are your general duties in that capacity?
Mr.Lewis. I am an operator to receive and send telegrams, and advise the other personnel, instruct the new personnel about the daily routine of the office.
Mr.Hubert. Is that branch number known by a particular designation or number?
Mr.Lewis. It is B-2 branch office.
Mr.Hubert. On Lemmon?
Mr.Lewis. Yes; 7620 Lemmon Avenue.
Mr.Hubert. Do you know Mr. C. A. Hamblen?
Mr.Lewis. Yes, sir.
Mr.Hubert. What is his first name?
Mr.Lewis. Curtis.
Mr.Hubert. Is he employed by the Western Union?
Mr.Lewis. Yes, sir.
Mr.Hubert. Where?
Mr.Lewis. At 2034 Main, Dallas, Tex.
Mr.Hubert. That is the downtown office?
Mr.Lewis. That is the main branch; yes, sir; main office.
Mr.Hubert. How long have you known him?
Mr.Lewis. I have known him the better part of 5 years. About 4½.
Mr.Hubert. Have you ever worked with him?
Mr.Lewis. Yes, sir.
Mr.Hubert. When?
Mr.Lewis. You mean what years, or when?
Mr.Hubert. I have specifically in mind sometime prior to November 26.
Mr.Lewis. I worked under him nearly 3 years.
Mr.Hubert. Where was that?
Mr.Lewis. That was at the main office, 2034 Main. He is the early night manager.
Mr.Hubert. At the Main Street branch?
Mr.Lewis. Yes, sir.
Mr.Hubert. So that you worked under him at the Main Street branch until about 2 years ago?
Mr.Lewis. About a year and a half ago.
Mr.Hubert. Now were you working with him either at the Main Street branch or at the other branch that you mentioned sometime during the fall of 1963?
Mr.Lewis. Yes, sir.
Mr.Hubert. Where was that? Which one?
Mr.Lewis. That was at the Main Street; 2034 Main.
Mr.Hubert. How did you come to be working there?
Mr.Lewis. I was pulled in from my job because they were short downtown. People were on vacation.
Mr.Hubert. How long a period did you work with Mr. Hamblen then at the Main branch?
Mr.Lewis. I was down 2 weeks altogether, and he was out the first week. I relieved him the first week, and then I relieved this other fellow the second week, and I worked under him the second week I was there.
Mr.Hubert. So that you worked under Mr. Hamblen at the Main branch during the early night shift for 1 week?
Mr.Lewis. Yes, sir.
Mr.Hubert. Could you place that week?
Mr.Lewis. It was in October, I believe. I am not for sure.
Mr.Hubert. Would that be a matter of record on this part?
Mr.Lewis. It is in the paper there. I don't know exactly what date it was.
Mr.Hubert. I now show you a photostatic copy of a document dated Dallas, Tex., December 4, 1963, addressed to Mr. Wilcox, apparently signed by Aubrey Lee Lewis, which has heretofore been identified as follows: "Exhibit No. 3006 in the deposition of Laurance R. Wilcox at Dallas, Tex., March 31, 1964, WJL." I have shown you this photostatic copy of this document which I have just described, and I now ask you if that is a photostat of your signature?
Mr.Lewis. Yes.
Mr.Hubert. Is this document addressed to Mr. Wilcox and identified as I have stated a moment ago, a correct statement of facts, so far as you know?
Mr.Lewis. Yes, sir.
Mr.Hubert. Now I wish you would give us further details concerning the incident to which reference is made in this Exhibit No. 3006, Wilcox' deposition, with reference to Hamblen's difficulty with a man named Oswald?
Mr.Lewis. Well, as I said, I was working the early night money order counter, and this party approached me and said he had a money order, and I asked him for his identification, which he didn't have any at that time. And I asked him could he obtain some, and he said he guessed he could if he had to. He left and came back with some identification. I believe it was a little Navy ID release card. And I paid him on that. He gave me quite a bit of trouble.
Mr.Hubert. Of what nature?
Mr.Lewis. Oh, he was cursing and telling how lousy everything was.
Mr.Hubert. Did Mr. Hamblen have any part in that matter?
Mr.Lewis. I beg your pardon?
Mr.Hubert. Did Mr. Hamblen have any part in this matter?
Mr.Lewis. Well, yes. When we have difficulty with anybody, he comes up and helps us.
Mr.Hubert. Did he come up on this occasion?
Mr.Lewis. Yes, sir.
Mr.Hubert. Did he speak to this individual?
Mr.Lewis. Yes.
Mr.Hubert. Can you tell us what conversation or statements passed between Mr. Hamblen and the individual?
Mr.Lewis. It was just about the identification, about that you have to have it before you can get your money.
Mr.Hubert. Prior to the time when the man went off to get the identification?
Mr.Lewis. Yes.
Mr.Hubert. How long was Mr. Hamblen with this man?
Mr.Lewis. I couldn't say for sure. I don't really know.
Mr.Hubert. How long were you with him on the first occasion?
Mr.Lewis. The first occasion I would say about 4 to 5 minutes.
Mr.Hubert. Now how long after having left to get the identification did he come back with his identification you referred to?
Mr.Lewis. It wasn't long. I would say about 15 to 30 minutes.
Mr.Hubert. Did Mr. Hamblen see him then?
Mr.Lewis. Yes.
Mr.Hubert. How do you know that?
Mr.Lewis. Because he came back up to the counter.
Mr.Hubert. Mr. Hamblen did?
Mr.Lewis. Yes.
Mr.Hubert. Why did he do that? Did you ask him to?
Mr.Lewis. He saw him come in, and he came back and helped me out with him.
Mr.Hubert. Was this person disagreeable on the second occasion?
Mr.Lewis. He was somewhat disagreeable—still in a nasty mood—you might say.
Mr.Hubert. When you say nasty mood, could you give us an example of what physically happened that you characterize as nasty?
Mr.Lewis. Well, cursing and telling us how lousy we are, and that he had been paid money orders before and never had to have any identification. And just generally what everybody else tells us. It is nothing new. We hear it quite often.
Mr.Hubert. Do you remember this person's name?
Mr.Lewis. No, sir.
Mr.Hubert. Did Mr. Hamblen tell you that he had had difficulty with this man prior to this occasion?
Mr.Lewis. No, sir.
Mr.Hubert. Did he tell you that he had ever cashed any money orders for this person prior to this occasion?
Mr.Lewis. I don't believe so, no, sir.
Mr.Hubert. Do you recall any address to the payee?
Mr.Lewis. The YMCA is the only address that he gave me.
Mr.Hubert. Was the telegram money order addressed to the YMCA?
Mr.Lewis. Yes, sir; as far as I can remember, it was.
Mr.Hubert. Well, now, as I understand it, it must have come in with the telegram?
Mr.Lewis. He came in with the check.
Mr.Hubert. The check?
Mr.Lewis. Yes, sir.
Mr.Hubert. Your recollection is, the check was addressed to the YMCA, to an individual at the Y?
Mr.Lewis. We have a rubber stamp at each branch office which is stamped at the top of their checks where it was issued, and as I recall, it was issued at the Cotton Exchange office.
Mr.Hubert. At the Cotton Exchange office?
Mr.Lewis. Yes, sir.
Mr.Hubert. Of Dallas, Tex.?
Mr.Lewis. Dallas.
Mr.Hubert. So that there was someone in Dallas sending a money order from the Cotton Exchange office?
Mr.Lewis. No, sir. That is where it was addressed, to the Cotton Exchange.That is where the money order was sent to. I have no idea where it was sent from.
Mr.Hubert. Well, what is this part then about, YMCA?
Mr.Lewis. We have an "Office Issued" and there is a rubber stamp on the check where it was issued at, but I have no idea or know where it was coming from. That was where the check was written up at, at the Cotton Exchange.
Mr.Hubert. And it was addressed to the payee?
Mr.Lewis. To the payee at the YMCA.
Mr.Hubert. How are those checks handled? For instance, when it was issued by the Cotton Exchange branch, would it have been mailed or delivered?
Mr.Lewis. Delivered by boy.
Mr.Hubert. Delivered by boy?
Mr.Lewis. To the clerk.
Mr.Hubert. To the addressee?
Mr.Lewis. To the clerk at the YMCA. The clerk signs for it and keeps them there in a little box they have there.
Mr.Hubert. Do you know of your own knowledge whether this was done in this case? That is to say, that the clerk receipted for it at the YMCA?
Mr.Lewis. So far as I know, that is how it was handled.
Mr.Hubert. I mean if you know that absolutely, or are you just assuming that is the way?
Mr.Lewis. I am just assuming that is the way it was handled.
Mr.Hubert. You don't have any particular knowledge on this occasion?
Mr.Lewis. No; I don't.
Mr.Hubert. Can you give us a description of this individual?
Mr.Lewis. The only thing I could remember was that he was of a feminine, very slender build fellow.
Mr.Hubert. What do you mean?
Mr.Lewis. Well, he talked funny and peculiar.
Mr.Hubert. Did he have an accent?
Mr.Lewis. No accent. Just the way a person acts.
Mr.Hubert. What was his mannerism?
Mr.Lewis. Mannerism was feminine.
Mr.Hubert. In what way?
Mr.Lewis. Well, I don't know how to describe it.
Mr.Hubert. Just an overall impression?
Mr.Lewis. Just an overall impression, of the person. As far as remembering his weight and height and everything like that, I wouldn't. I have no idea.
Mr.Hubert. Was he dark complexioned?
Mr.Lewis. Dark complexioned.
Mr.Hubert. Do you remember the color of his eyes?
Mr.Lewis. No, sir.
Mr.Hubert. Had dark hair?
Mr.Lewis. That is the only thing I remember.
Mr.Hubert. How was he dressed?
Mr.Lewis. I don't recall that either.
Mr.Hubert. Was he alone?
Mr.Lewis. No, sir. There was a companion with him.
Mr.Hubert. How did you know that the person with him was with him? In fact was a companion?
Mr.Lewis. They were talking. They came together and left together both times.
Mr.Hubert. I understand you to say that the companion of the payee that we have been talking about was of a Latin American or Spanish type?
Mr.Lewis. Yes; that I do recall.
Mr.Hubert. By that, you mean what?
Mr.Lewis. Dark complexioned, and just looked of Spanish descent.
Mr.Hubert. Latin American?
Mr.Lewis. Latin American descent.
Mr.Hubert. They were speaking English?
Mr.Lewis. Normal speech in English.
Mr.Hubert. Did you notice any Spanish accent?
Mr.Lewis. The fellow had a Spanish accent.
Mr.Hubert. He was accompanied by the boy with a Spanish accent?
Mr.Lewis. Yes.
Mr.Hubert. Do you recall anything else that happened?
Mr.Lewis. No, sir; I wasn't paying much attention to him.
Mr.Hubert. I don't mean the exact conversation, but just the general situation.
Mr.Lewis. No; I wouldn't know.
Mr.Hubert. How would you describe the person of Spanish accent insofar as build and size and weight?
Mr.Lewis. He was of short and slender build.
Mr.Hubert. Shorter than the payee?
Mr.Lewis. About the same.
Mr.Hubert. About the same weight?
Mr.Lewis. Approximately, yes.
Mr.Hubert. Do you remember how he was dressed?
Mr.Lewis. No, sir.
Mr.Hubert. Do you recall how much the money order was for?
Mr.Lewis. No; it was for a small amount. I don't recall the exact amount.
Mr.Hubert. You had never had any other business with this payee before?
Mr.Lewis. No, sir.
Mr.Hubert. You didn't have any afterward?
Mr.Lewis. No, sir.
Mr.Hubert. And Hamblen did not mention to you that he had had any before?
Mr.Lewis. No, sir. The first time I knew about that was when we went into our district manager's office.
Mr.Hubert. Now, I show you a picture which I have marked for identification on the back thereof on the lower right-hand corner the following words: "Dallas, Tex., July 14, 1964, Exhibit No. 1 of Aubrey L. Lewis." I ask you if this picture resembles the person that you have been testifying about as the payee on the occasion you have mentioned?
Mr.Lewis. I couldn't say if it resembled him.
Mr.Hubert. You have no recollection whether it looks like him at all?
Mr.Lewis. I sure don't.
Mr.Hubert. You said he had dark hair?
Mr.Lewis. That is true. He had dark hair, but as far as any features, I don't remember the eyes or nose or anything. I don't recall them.
Mr.Hubert. You don't recall, as I understand from your statement, that the man's name was Oswald?
Mr.Lewis. No, sir; I do not recall that.
Mr.Hubert. You are familiar with the fact that Mr. Hamblen says he was Oswald?
Mr.Lewis. Yes; I am familiar with that.
Mr.Hubert. But you don't remember?
Mr.Lewis. I don't remember.
Mr.Hubert. You cannot tell us now whether or not the picture shown in Exhibit No. 1, which in fact is a picture of Lee Harvey Oswald, was the man you have been testifying about as the payee of that money order?
Mr.Lewis. I couldn't say for sure.
Mr.Hubert. Can you say for sure either way that it was or it was not?
Mr.Lewis. No; I can't be sure.
Mr.Hubert. In other words, it could be and it could not be?
Mr.Lewis. Yes, sir; it could be and it couldn't be. I have no way of knowing.
Mr.Hubert. You will not say it was not that man?
Mr.Lewis. I wouldn't say it wasn't, but I wouldn't say it was, because it could be. I don't know.
Mr.Hubert. Do you recall making any comments to Mr. Hamblen on the occasion that you have been testifying about, and after this payee had left, that you would like to punch the heads of people of this character?
Mr.Lewis. Yes; I made that statement.
Mr.Hubert. You made that statement to Mr. Hamblen?
Mr.Lewis. Yes, sir.
Mr.Hubert. Why was that?
Mr.Lewis. Well, he is just a person that kind of gives you a bad time. You can do without that kind. You don't have time to fool with them.
Mr.Hubert. Now when did it first come to your attention that it was possible that the man that had dealings with you, as you have testified, might be Lee Harvey Oswald?
Mr.Lewis. Mr. Hamblen, after I had gone back on my job quite sometime, called me at home one night and asked me did I recall when I had paid that party, and I told him I recalled it.
And he asked me did I recognize him as being Oswald, and I said, "No, I have never put it together." I just never did. And I still can't picture the two. I had forgotten all about it.
Mr.Hubert. When was it that Hamblen approached you, as you say he did, and asked you about this?
Mr.Lewis. I don't recall the date, but it was a couple of weeks after the assassination, after he was killed.
Mr.Hubert. You say then it was about the first week in December?
Mr.Lewis. I would say somewhere along in there. I am not for sure, but it was a short time span.
Mr.Hubert. Would it thus have been about 2 months after you had had this episode, that this episode occurred between you and this man?
Mr.Lewis. Yes, sir.
Mr.Hubert. Then your memory did not associate the payee with Lee Harvey Oswald?
Mr.Lewis. No, sir.
Mr.Hubert. At that time had you been shown or looked at pictures of Lee Harvey Oswald?
Mr.Lewis. I had seen him on TV.
Mr.Hubert. Have you at any time prior to today been shown a picture of Lee Harvey Oswald as I have shown it to you?
Mr.Lewis. I don't recall if Mr. Wilcox had one or not. I am not sure. But I saw it in the newspapers and on TV, and I don't recall seeing one that day. I could have. He possibly had one.
Mr.Hubert. What I am talking about is the day that inquiry was focused upon the possibility of this payee as Lee Harvey Oswald. Were you then shown a picture and asked if it was that man as I have done today?
Mr.Lewis. I believe I was. I am not for sure, but I believe Mr. Wilcox had one at the time.
Mr.Hubert. I think you have described the identification card which this payee ultimately produced and which you ultimately recognized?
Mr.Lewis. Yes, sir.
Mr.Hubert. I believe you said it was a Navy ID card?
Mr.Lewis. It was a little release card you get when you get out of the service.
Mr.Hubert. Did it have a picture on it?
Mr.Lewis. No, sir. It just had his name and some of them have serial numbers and some of them don't.
Mr.Hubert. So the identification established then was that the person who held the telegram also held a card addressed to the payee of the telegram?
Mr.Lewis. Yes.
Mr.Hubert. Did he have a library card as well?
Mr.Lewis. I believe it was a library card also.
Mr.Hubert. That didn't have any picture?
Mr.Lewis. That didn't have a picture; no. This ID that he had wasn't very good at all, as far as we considered identification to pay money orders.
Mr.Hubert. Why not?
Mr.Lewis. We like to have pictures on identification and some legal papers, you might say; insurance and driver's license.
Mr.Hubert. Driver's license?
Mr.Lewis. Driver's license; yes.
Mr.Hubert. Did you ask for that?
Mr.Lewis. I asked for it, and he didn't have any.
Mr.Hubert. Did he say he didn't drive?
Mr.Lewis. He didn't make comment. He said he didn't have any license.
Mr.Hubert. You think it was about a half hour after the first episode that he returned with the other identification?
Mr.Lewis. Yes, sir.
Mr.Hubert. Was the Latin American looking person with him on both occasions?
Mr.Lewis. Both occasions; yes.
Mr.Hubert. All right, sir, have you anything to add?
Mr.Lewis. No, sir.
Mr.Hubert. I think you made reference to the fact that the check from the Western Union, which was the subject of this whole episode, had been purchased by someone and payable to the payee involved at the Cotton Exchange branch?
Mr.Lewis. Cotton Exchange branch.
Mr.Hubert. Is that in Dallas?
Mr.Lewis. Yes, sir; it is in the Cotton Exchange Building. I think it is on NorthErvay.F
Mr.Hubert. All right, sir, I ask you whether you concur with me that since I have met you today, which was the first time we ever met, there has been no conversation between us other than that which has been covered in the deposition in one way or another, is that correct?
Mr.Lewis. That's correct.
Mr.Hubert. Thank you very much, sir.
Mr.Lewis. Thank you, sir.
F608 North St. Paul, one block from Ervay and YMCA.
F608 North St. Paul, one block from Ervay and YMCA.
The testimony of Dean Adams Andrews, Jr., was taken on July 21, 1964, at the Old Civil Courts Building, Royal and Conti Streets, New Orleans, La., by Mr. Wesley J. Liebeler, assistant counsel of the President's Commission.
Dean Andrews, having been first duly sworn, was examined and testified as follows:
Mr.Liebeler. Mr. Andrews, as you know by now, I am an attorney on the staff of the President's Commission. I have been authorized to take your deposition pursuant to authority granted to the Commission by Executive Order No. 11130, dated November 29, 1963, and joint resolution of Congress, No. 137.
I understand that the Secret Service served a subpena on you last week to be here today, so you have had the requisite notice for the proceeding.
As you are a member of the bar—as you know, of course, you are entitled to counsel, but you can probably forego that if you want to. You also know that you have all the usual privileges not to answer questions on the grounds of incrimination and whatever other privileges you might have and want to exercise.
Mr.Liebeler. Would you state your full name for the record, please.
Mr.Andrews. Dean, and the middle initial is A, A for Adams, Andrews, Jr.
Mr.Liebeler. I am correct, am I not, that you are a member of the Bar of Louisiana?
Mr.Andrews. I am a member of the bar of the State of Louisiana.
Mr.Liebeler. And you regularly practice law in the city of New Orleans?
Mr.Andrews. That's my office; yes.
Mr.Liebeler. Where do you live?
Mr.Andrews. 207 Metairie Lawn Drive. That's in Metairie, La.
Mr.Liebeler. Metairie Lawn Drive in Metairie?
Mr.Andrews. Yes.
Mr.Liebeler. Where do you maintain your offices?
Mr.Andrews. 627 Maison Blanche Building, New Orleans.
Mr.Liebeler. I am advised by the FBI that you told them that Lee Harvey Oswald came into your office some time during the summer of 1963. Would you tell us in your own words just what happened as far as that is concerned?
Mr.Andrews. I don't recall the dates, but briefly, it is this: Oswald came in the office accompanied by some gay kids. They were Mexicanos. He wanted to find out what could be done in connection with a discharge, a yellow paper discharge, so I explained to him he would have to advance the funds to transcribe whatever records they had up in the Adjutant General's office. When he brought the money, I would do the work, and we saw him three or four times subsequent to that, not in the company of the gay kids. He had this Mexicano with him. I assume he is a Mex because the Latins do not wear a butch haircut.
Mr.Liebeler. The first time he came in he was with these Mexicans, and there were also some gay kids. By that, of course, you mean people that appeared to you to be homosexuals?
Mr.Andrews. Well, they swish. What they are, I don't know. We call them gay kids.
Mr.Liebeler. Had you ever seen any of those kids before?
Mr.Andrews. None of them.
Mr.Liebeler. Have you seen any of them since?
Mr.Andrews. Since the first time they came in?
Mr.Liebeler. Since the first time they came in?
Mr.Andrews. Yes.
Mr.Liebeler. You have?
Mr.Andrews. Yes.
Mr.Liebeler. Did they ever come back with Oswald?
Mr.Andrews. No; Mexicanos came back.
Mr.Liebeler. Where did you see these gay kids after the first time?
Mr.Andrews. First district precinct. Police picked them up for wearing clothes of the opposite sex.
Mr.Liebeler. How many of them were there?
Mr.Andrews. About 50.
Mr.Liebeler. They weren't all with Oswald, were they?
Mr.Andrews. No; Oswald—you see, they made what they call a scoop and put them all in the pokey. I went down for the ones I represented. They were in the holding pavilion. I paroled them and got them out.
Mr.Liebeler. You do represent from time to time some of these gay kids, is that correct?
Mr.Andrews. Yes.
Mr.Liebeler. You say that some of the gay kids that you saw at the time the police arrested this large group of them for wearing clothes of the opposite sex were the ones that had been with Oswald?
Mr.Andrews. Yes.
Mr.Liebeler. Were you able to identify them by name?
Mr.Andrews. No; you see, they just—we don't even open up files on them. We don't open a file. We mark what we call a working file. We make a few notes and put it in the general week's work. If you come back and the office is retained, we make a permanent file and—but these kids come and go like—you know.
Mr.Liebeler. When were these people picked up by the police as you have told us?
Mr.Andrews. Let me think. Some time in May. I went and checked the records. I couldn't find nothing on it. I believe it's May of 1963.
Mr.Liebeler. They were picked up in May of 1963?
Mr.Andrews. On Friday.
Mr.Liebeler. That was after Oswald had been in your office?
Mr.Andrews. After Oswald's initial contact. I think he had come back with this Mexicano one more time.
Mr.Liebeler. Before these people were arrested?
Mr.Andrews. Yes; then the second time he came back, we talked about the yellow paper discharge, about his status as a citizen, and about his wife's status.
Mr.Liebeler. Now before we get into that, let me try and pin down how longit was after the first time Oswald came in that these kids all got arrested. All 50 of them for wearing these clothes?
Mr.Andrews. I don't know it was 50. That I can't remember.
Mr.Liebeler. Was it a month? Two months? A week?
Mr.Andrews. No; it wasn't that. Ten days at the most.
Mr.Liebeler. I suppose the New Orleans Police Department files would reflect the dates these people were picked up?
Mr.Andrews. I checked the first district's blotter and the people are there, but I just can't get their names. You see, they wear names just like you and I wear clothes. Today their name is Candy; tomorrow it is Butsie; next day it is Mary. You never know what they are. Names are a very improbable method of identification. More sight. Like you see a dog. He is black and white. That's your dog. You know them by sight mostly.
Mr.Liebeler. Do you remember what date it was that that large arrest was made?
Mr.Andrews. No; every Friday is arrest day in New Orleans. They clean them all up. The shotgun squad keeps the riots, the mugging, and all the humbug out. They have been doing that very effectively. You can pick just any Friday.
Mr.Liebeler. This was on a Friday?
Mr.Andrews. It had to be a Friday or Saturday.
Mr.Liebeler. In May of 1963?
Mr.Andrews. Yes.
Mr.Liebeler. After you saw these kids at this big pickup on Friday or Saturday, did you ever see any of them again after that?
Mr.Andrews. No; still looking for them. They owe me a fee.
Mr.Liebeler. They are always the hardest ones to find.
Mr.Andrews. They usually pay. They are screwed in.
Mr.Liebeler. What did Oswald say to you about his own citizenship status? You say that he mentioned that the second time he came back. What did he talk to you about in that regard?
Mr.Andrews. They came in usually after hours, about 5, 5:15, and as I recall, he had alleged that he had abandoned his citizenship. He didn't say how; he didn't say where. I assumed that he was one of the people who wanted to join The Free World and—I represented one or two of them. They had belonged to The World Citizenship—I explained to him there are certain steps he had to do, such as taking an oath of loyalty to a foreign power, voting in a foreign country election, or some method that is recognized defectively as loss of citizenship. Then I told him, "Your presence in the United States is proof you are a citizen. Otherwise, you would be an alien with an alien registration with a green card, form 990."
Mr.Liebeler. Had he told you he had been out of the country?
Mr.Andrews. Yes.
Mr.Liebeler. Did he tell you where he had gone?
Mr.Andrews. No.
Mr.Liebeler. Since he had been out of the country, the fact that he was back and didn't have an alien card was proof he was a citizen?
Mr.Andrews. Yes.
Mr.Liebeler. Do you remember any other part of the conversation?
Mr.Andrews. When he asked the questions—I don't know which visit it was—about citizenship of his wife, I asked the birthplace or origin cited for citizenship purposes—that's what counts—and he said Russia, so I just assumed he had met someone somewhere, some place, either in Russia or in Europe, married them, and brought them over here as a GI, a GI bride, and wanted to go through the routine of naturalization, which is 3 years after lawful admission into the United States if you are married, and five years if you are not, maintain the status here in the States cumulatively for 5 years.
Mr.Liebeler. Did he indicate that he wanted to institute citizenship proceedings for his wife?
Mr.Andrews. Yes; I told him to go to Immigration and get the forms. Cost him $10. All he had to do was execute them. He didn't need a lawyer. That was the end of that.
Mr.Liebeler. How many times did he come into your office?
Mr.Andrews. Minimum of three, maximum of five, counting initial visit.
Mr.Liebeler. And did you talk about different subjects at different times? As I understand it, the first time he came there, he was primarily concerned about his discharge, is that correct?
Mr.Andrews. Well, I may have the subject matter of the visits reversed because with the company he kept and the conversation—he could talk fairly well—I figured that this was another one of what we call in my office free alley clients, so we didn't maintain the normalcy with the file that—might have scratched a few notes on a piece of pad, and 2 days later threw the whole thing away. Didn't pay too much attention to him. Only time I really paid attention to this boy, he was in the front of the Maison Blanche Building giving out these kooky Castro things.
Mr.Liebeler. When was this, approximately?
Mr.Andrews. I don't remember. I was coming from the NBC building, and I walked past him. You know how you see somebody, recognize him. So I turned around, came back, and asked him what he was doing giving that junk out. He said it was a job. I reminded him of the $25 he owed the office. He said he would come over there, but he never did.
Mr.Liebeler. Did he tell you that he was getting paid to hand out this literature?
Mr.Andrews. Yes.
Mr.Liebeler. Did he tell you how much?
Mr.Andrews. No.
Mr.Liebeler. Do you remember telling the FBI that he told you that he was being paid $25 a day for handing out these leaflets?
Mr.Andrews. I could have told them that. I know I reminded him of the $25. I may have it confused, the $25. What I do recall, he said it was a job. I guess I asked him how much he was making. They were little square chits a little bit smaller than the picture you have of him over there [indicating].
Mr.Liebeler. He was handing out these leaflets?
Mr.Andrews. They were black-and-white pamphlets extolling the virtues of Castro, which around here doesn't do too good. They have a lot of guys, Mexicanos and Cubanos, that will tear your head off if they see you fooling with these things.
Mr.Liebeler. What were they like?
Mr.Andrews. They were pamphlets, single-sheet pamphlets.
Mr.Liebeler. Just one sheet? It wasn't a booklet?
Mr.Andrews. No.
Mr.Liebeler. What color were the pamphlets? You say it was white paper?
Mr.Andrews. White paper offset with black.
Mr.Liebeler. Could it have been yellow paper?
Mr.Andrews. I am totally colorblind. I wouldn't know. But I think it is black and white.
Mr.Liebeler. You are colorblind?
Mr.Andrews. Yes. Most of them wanted it around there. You give it to them, the people look at it and they drop it, right now.
Mr.Liebeler. Do you remember what day of the week this was that you saw him handing this stuff out?
Mr.Andrews. It was in the middle of the week, around Tuesday or Wednesday.
Mr.Liebeler. Where is the Maison Blanche Building? What street is it on?
Mr.Andrews. 921 Canal Street. It is on this side. It is bounded by Dauphine and Burgundy.
Mr.Liebeler. How far is it from the International Trade Mart?
Mr.Andrews. It depends on what route you take. If you come up Camp Street, it would be two blocks to Canal and four blocks toward the cemetery; so it would be about six blocks. It would be six blocks no matter which way you went, but you would walk four blocks on Common Street or Gravier, and then two blocks over the other way.
Mr.Liebeler[handing picture to witness]. I show you a picture that hasbeen marked as "Garner Exhibit No. 1," and ask you if you recognize the individual in that picture and the street scene, if you are familiar with it.
Mr.Andrews. This is Oswald.
Mr.Liebeler. That's the fellow who was in your office?
Mr.Andrews. Yes.
Mr.Liebeler. Do you have any doubt about that in your mind?
Mr.Andrews. I don't believe; no. This is him. I just can't place it. This isn't where I saw him. This is probably around the vicinity of the International Trade Mart.
Mr.Liebeler[handing picture to witness]. I show you another picture that has been marked for identification as "Bringuier Exhibit No. 1," and ask you if you recognize anybody in that picture and the street scene.
Mr.Andrews. Oswald is marked with an X, and a client of mine is over here on the right-hand side.
Mr.Liebeler. Is that a a paying client or what?
Mr.Andrews. No; paying client [indicating]. And this dress belongs to a girl friend.
Mr.Liebeler. Which one is your client?
Mr.Andrews. It should be three. There's two sisters and this young lady [indicating].
Mr.Liebeler. What's her name?
Mr.Andrews. I don't remember.
Mr.Liebeler. You are referring to the woman that appears on the far right-hand side of the picture with a handbag on her arm?
Mr.Andrews. Yes.
Mr.Liebeler. Now you say Oswald is marked with an X, and you identify that as the man that you saw in your office and the same man you saw passing out pamphlets?
Mr.Andrews. Yes.
Mr.Liebeler. I call your attention specifically to the second man who is standing behind Oswald to his right and facing toward the front wearing a white, short-sleeved shirt and necktie, who also appears to have some leaflets in his hand. Have you ever seen that man before?
Mr.Andrews. The Mexicano that I associate Oswald with is approximately the same height, with the exception that he has a pronounced short butch haircut. He is stocky, well built.
Mr.Liebeler. The fellow that I have indicated to you on "Bringuier Exhibit No. 1" is too slightly built to be associated with Oswald; is that correct?
Mr.Andrews. He is stocky. Has what they call an athletic build.
Mr.Liebeler. Was this other fellow taller than Oswald or shorter than Oswald?
Mr.Andrews. Very close. Not taller. Probably same height; maybe a little smaller.
Mr.Liebeler. How much would you say the Mexican weighed, approximately?
Mr.Andrews. About 160, 165.
Mr.Liebeler. You say he was of medium build or heavy build?
Mr.Andrews. Well, stocky. He could go to "Fist City" pretty good if he had to.
Mr.Liebeler. How old would you say he was?
Mr.Andrews. About 26. Hard to tell.
Mr.Liebeler. Do you remember what he was wearing when he came into the office with Oswald on these different occasions?
Mr.Andrews. Normally, different colored silk pongee shirts, which are pretty rare, you know, for the heat, or what appeared to be pongee material.
Mr.Liebeler. Did you ever talk to this other fellow?
Mr.Andrews. Well, he talked Spanish, and all I told him was poco poco. That was it.
Mr.Liebeler. Do you speak Spanish?
Mr.Andrews. I can understand a little. I can if you speak it. I can read it. That's about all.
Mr.Liebeler[handing picture to witness]. I show you a picture which has been marked "Frank Pizzo Exhibit No. 453-C," and ask you if that is the sameman that was in your office and the same man you say was passing out literature in the street.
Mr.Andrews. It appears to be.
Mr.Liebeler. Would you recognize this Mexican again if you saw him?
Mr.Andrews. Yes.
Mr.Liebeler. Do you remember telling the FBI that you wouldn't be able to recognize him again if you saw him?
Mr.Andrews. Probably did. Been a long time. There's three people I am going to find: One of them is the real guy that killed the President; the Mexican; and Clay Bertrand.
Mr.Liebeler. Do you mean to suggest by that statement that you have considerable doubt in your mind that Oswald killed the President?
Mr.Andrews. I know good and well he did not. With that weapon, he couldn't have been capable of making three controlled shots in that short time.
Mr.Liebeler. You are basing your opinion on reports that you have received over news media as to how many shots were fired in what period of time; is that correct?
Mr.Andrews. I am basing my opinion on five years as an ordnanceman in the Navy. You can lean into those things, and with throwing the bolts—if I couldn't do it myself, 8 hours a day, doing this for a living, constantly on the range, I know this civilian couldn't do it. He might have been a sharp marksman at one time, but if you don't lean into that rifle and don't squeeze and control consistently, your brain can tell you how to do it, but you don't have the capability.
Mr.Liebeler. You have used a pronoun in this last series of statements, the pronoun "it." You are making certain assumptions as to what actually happened, or you have a certain notion in your mind as to what happened based on material you read in the newspaper?
Mr.Andrews. It doesn't make any difference. What you have to do is lean into a weapon, and, to fire three shots controlled with accuracy, this boy couldn't do it. Forget the President.
Mr.Liebeler. You base that judgment on the fact that, in your own experience, it is difficult to do that sort of thing?
Mr.Andrews. You have to stay with it. You just don't pick up a rifle or a pistol or whatever weapon you are using and stay proficient with it. You have to know what you are doing. You have to be a conniver. This boy could have connived the deal, but I think he is a patsy. Somebody else pulled the trigger.
Mr.Liebeler. However, as we have indicated, it is your opinion. You don't have any evidence other than what you have already told us about your surmise and opinions about the rifle on which to base that statement; is that correct? If you do, I want to know what it is.
Mr.Andrews. If I did, I would give it to you. It's just taking the 5 years and thinking about it a bit. I have fired as much as 40,000 rounds of ammo a day for 7 days a week. You get pretty good with it as long as you keep firing. Then I have gone back after 2 weeks. I used to be able to take a shotgun, go on a skeet, and pop 100 out of 100. After 2 weeks, I could only pop 60 of them. I would have to start shooting again, same way with the rifle and machineguns. Every other person I knew, same thing happened to them. You just have to stay at it.
Mr.Liebeler. Now, did you see Oswald at any time subsequent to that time you saw him in the street handing out literature?
Mr.Andrews. I have never seen him since.
Mr.Liebeler. Can you tell us what month that was, approximately?
Mr.Andrews. Summertime. Before July. I think the last time would be around—the last could have been, I guess, around the 10th of July.
Mr.Liebeler. Around the 10th of July?
Mr.Andrews. I don't believe it was after that. It could have been before, but not after.
Mr.Liebeler. Now, you mentioned this Mexican that accompanied Oswald to your office. Have you seen him at any time subsequent to the last time Oswald came into your office?
Mr.Andrews. No.
Mr.Liebeler. Can you tell us approximately how long a period of time elapsedfrom the last time Oswald came into your office to the last time you saw him in the street handing out literature?
Mr.Andrews. I would say about 6 weeks, just guessing.
Mr.Liebeler. And you have never seen the Mexican at any other time since then?
Mr.Andrews. No. He just couldn't have disappeared because the Mexican community here is pretty small. You can squeeze it pretty good, the Latin community. He is not known around here.
Mr.Liebeler. Have you made an attempt to find him since the assassination?
Mr.Andrews. Yes.
Mr.Liebeler. And you haven't had any success?
Mr.Andrews. No. Not too many places they can go not being noticed.
Mr.Liebeler. Was there anybody else with Oswald that day you saw him handing out literature?
Mr.Andrews. Oh, people standing there with him. Whether they were with him or not, I wouldn't know.
Mr.Liebeler. Did it appear that there was anybody else helping him hand out literature?
Mr.Andrews. There was one person, but they had no literature. They weren't giving anything out. Let me see that picture of that little bitty guy, that weasel before.
Mr.Liebeler. [handing picture to witness]. This is Bringuier Exhibit No. 1.
Mr.Andrews. No; he resembled this boy, but it is not him. It is a pale face instead of a Latin.
Mr.Liebeler. When you talked to Oswald on the street that day, did he give you any idea who was paying him to hand this stuff out?
Mr.Andrews. No; he just said, "It's a job."
Mr.Liebeler. My understanding is, of course, that you are here under subpena and subpena duces tecum, asking you to bring with you any records that you might have in your office indicating or reflecting Oswald's visit, and my understanding is that you indicated that you were unable to find any such records.