CHAPTER IV

The Assassin

The preceding chapter has established that the bullets which killed President Kennedy and wounded Governor Connally were fired from the southeast corner window of the sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository Building and that the weapon which fired these bullets was a Mannlicher-Carcano 6.5-millimeter Italian rifle bearing the serial number C2766. In this chapter the Commission evaluates the evidence upon which it has based its conclusion concerning the identity of the assassin. This evidence includes (1) the ownership and possession of the weapon used to commit the assassination, (2) the means by which the weapon was brought into the Depository Building, (3) the identity of the person present at the window from which the shots were fired, (4) the killing of Dallas Patrolman J.D. Tippit within 45 minutes after the assassination, (5) the resistance to arrest and the attempted shooting of another police officer by the man (Lee Harvey Oswald) subsequently accused of assassinating President Kennedy and killing Patrolman Tippit, (6) the lies told to the police by Oswald, (7) the evidence linking Oswald to the attempted killing of Maj. Gen. Edwin A. Walker (Resigned, U.S. Army) on April 10, 1963, and (8) Oswald’s capability with a rifle.

OWNERSHIP AND POSSESSION OF ASSASSINATION WEAPON

Purchase of Rifle by Oswald

Shortly after the Mannlicher-Carcano rifle was found on the sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository Building,[C4-1] agents of the FBI learned from retail outlets in Dallas that Crescent Firearms, Inc., of New York City, was a distributor of surplus Italian 6.5-millimeter military rifles.[C4-2] During the evening of November 22, 1963, a review of the records of Crescent Firearms revealed that the firm had shipped an Italian carbine, serial number C2766, to Klein’s Sporting Goods Co., of Chicago, Ill.[C4-3] After searching their records from 10 p.m. to 4 a.m. the officers of Klein’s discovered that a rifle bearing serial number C2766 had been shipped to one A. Hidell, Post Office Box 2915, Dallas, Tex., on March 20, 1963.[C4-4] (See Waldman Exhibit No. 7, p. 120.)

According to its microfilm records, Klein’s received an order for a rifle on March 13, 1963, on a coupon clipped from the February 1963 issue of the American Rifleman magazine. The order coupon was signed, in handprinting, “A. Hidell, P.O. Box 2915, Dallas, Texas.” (See Commission Exhibit No. 773, p. 120.) It was sent in an envelope bearing the same name and return address in handwriting. Document examiners for the Treasury Department and the FBI testified unequivocally that the bold printing on the face of the mail-order coupon was in the handprinting of Lee Harvey Oswald and that the writing on the envelope was also his.[C4-5] Oswald’s writing on these and other documents was identified by comparing the writing and printing on the documents in question with that appearing on documents known to have been written by Oswald, such as his letters, passport application, and endorsements of checks.[C4-6] (See app. X, p. 568-569.)

In addition to the order coupon the envelope contained a U.S. postal money order for $21.45, purchased as No. 2,202,130,462 in Dallas, Tex., on March 12, 1963.[C4-7] The canceled money order was obtained from the Post Office Department. Opposite the printed words “Pay To” were written the words “Kleins Sporting Goods,” and opposite the printed word “From” were written the words “A. Hidell, P.O. Box 2915 Dallas, Texas.” These words were also in the handwriting of Lee Harvey Oswald.[C4-8] (See Commission Exhibit No. 788, p. 120.)

From Klein’s records it was possible to trace the processing of the order after its receipt. A bank deposit made on March 13, 1963, included an item of $21.45. Klein’s shipping order form shows an imprint made by the cash register which recorded the receipt of $21.45 on March 13, 1963. This price included $19.95 for the rifle and the scope, and $1.50 for postage and handling. The rifle without the scope cost only $12.78.[C4-9]

According to the vice president of Klein’s, William Waldman, the scope was mounted on the rifle by a gunsmith employed by Klein’s, and the rifle was shipped fully assembled in accordance with customary company procedures.[C4-10] The specific rifle shipped against the order had been received by Klein’s from Crescent on February 21, 1963. It bore the manufacturer’s serial number C2766. On that date, Klein’s placed an internal control number VC836 on this rifle.[C4-11] According to Klein’s shipping order form, one Italian carbine 6.5 X-4× scope, control number VC836, serial number C2766, was shipped parcel post to “A. Hidell, P.O. Box 2915, Dallas, Texas,” on March 20, 1963.[C4-12] Information received from the Italian Armed Forces Intelligence Service has established that this particular rifle was the only rifle of its type bearing serial number C2766.[C4-13] (See app. X, p. 554.)

The post office box to which the rifle was shipped was rented to “Lee H. Oswald” from October 9, 1962, to May 14, 1963.[C4-14] Experts on handwriting identification from the Treasury Department and the FBI testified that the signature and other writing on the application for that box were in the handwriting of Lee Harvey Oswald,[C4-15] as was a change-of-address card dated May 12, 1963,[C4-16] by which Oswald requested that mail addressed to that box be forwarded to him in New Orleans, where he had moved on April 24.[C4-17] Since the rifle was shipped from Chicago on March 20, 1963, it was received in Dallas during the period when Oswald rented and used the box. (See Commission Exhibit No. 791, p. 120.)

It is not known whether the application for post office box 2915 listed “A. Hidell” as a person entitled to receive mail at this box. In accordance with postal regulations, the portion of the application which lists names of persons, other than the applicant, entitled to receive mail was thrown away after the box was closed on May 14, 1963.[C4-18] Postal Inspector Harry D. Holmes of the Dallas Post Office testified, however, that when a package is received for a certain box, a notice is placed in that box regardless of whether the name on the package is listed on the application as a person entitled to receive mail through that box. The person having access to the box then takes the notice to the window and is given the package. Ordinarily, Inspector Holmes testified, identification is not requested because it is assumed that the person with the notice is entitled to the package.[C4-19]

Oswald’s use of the name “Hidell” to purchase the assassination weapon was one of several instances in which he used this name as an alias. When arrested on the day of the assassination, he had in his possession a Smith & Wesson .38 caliber revolver[C4-20] purchased by mail-order coupon from Seaport-Traders, Inc., a mail-order division of George Rose & Co., Los Angeles. The mail-order coupon listed the purchaser as “A. J. Hidell Age 28” with the address of post office box 2915 in Dallas.[C4-21] Handwriting experts from the FBI and the Treasury Department testified that the writing on the mail-order form was that of Lee Harvey Oswald.[C4-22]

Among other identification cards in Oswald’s wallet at the time of his arrest were a Selective Service notice of classification, a Selective Service registration certificate,[C4-23] and a certificate of service in the U.S. Marine Corps,[C4-24] all three cards being in his own name. Also in his wallet at that time were a Selective Service notice of classification and a Marine certificate of service in the name of Alek James Hidell.[C4-25] On the Hidell Selective Service card there appeared a signature, “Alek J. Hidell,” and the photograph of Lee Harvey Oswald.[C4-26] Experts on questioned documents from the Treasury Department and the FBI testified that the Hidell cards were counterfeit photographic reproductions made by photographing the Oswald cards, retouching the resulting negatives, and producing prints from the retouched negatives. The Hidell signature on the notice of classification was in the handwriting of Oswald.[C4-27] (See app. X, p. 572.)

In Oswald’s personal effects found in his room at 1026 North Beckley Avenue in Dallas was a purported international certificate of vaccination signed by “Dr. A. J. Hideel,” Post Office Box 30016, New Orleans.[C4-28] It certified that Lee Harvey Oswald had been vaccinated for smallpox on June 8, 1963. This, too, was a forgery. The signature of “A. J. Hideel” was in the handwriting of Lee Harvey Oswald.[C4-29] There is no “Dr. Hideel” licensed to practice medicine in Louisiana.[C4-30] There is no post office box 30016 in the New Orleans Post Office but Oswald had rented post office box 30061 in New Orleans[C4-31] on June 3, 1963, listing Marina Oswald and A. J. Hidell as additional persons entitled to receive mail in the box.[C4-32] The New Orleans postal authorities had not discarded the portion of the application listing the names of those, other than the owner of the box, entitled to receive mail through the box. Expert testimony confirmed that the writing on this application was that of Lee Harvey Oswald.[C4-33]

Hidell’s name on the post office box application was part of Oswald’s use of a nonexistent Hidell to serve as president of the so-called New Orleans Chapter of the Fair Play for Cuba Committee. (As discussed below in ch. VI, p. 292.) Marina Oswald testified that she first learned of Oswald’s use of the fictitious name “Hidell” in connection with his pro-Castro activities in New Orleans.[C4-34] According to her testimony, he compelled her to write the name “Hidell” on membership cards in the space designated for the signature of the “Chapter President.”[C4-35] The name “Hidell” was stamped on some of the “Chapter’s” printed literature and on the membership application blanks.[C4-36] Marina Oswald testified, “I knew there was no such organization. And I know Hidell is merely an altered Fidel, and I laughed at such foolishness.”[C4-37] Hidell was a fictitious president of an organization of which Oswald was the only member.[C4-38]

When seeking employment in New Orleans, Oswald listed a “Sgt. Robt. Hidell” as a reference on one job application[C4-39] and “George Hidell” as a reference on another.[C4-40] Both names were found to be fictitious.[C4-41] Moreover, the use of “Alek” as a first name for Hidell is a further link to Oswald because “Alek” was Oswald’s nickname in Russia.[C4-42] Letters received by Marina Oswald from her husband signed “Alek” were given to the Commission.[C4-43]

Oswald’s Palmprint on Rifle Barrel

Based on the above evidence, the Commission concluded that Oswald purchased the rifle found on the sixth floor of the Depository Building. Additional evidence of ownership was provided in the form of palmprint identification which indicated that Oswald had possession of the rifle he had purchased.

A few minutes after the rifle was discovered on the sixth floor of the Depository Building[C4-44] it was examined by Lt. J. C. Day of the identification bureau of the Dallas police. He lifted the rifle by the wooden stock after his examination convinced him that the wood was too rough to take fingerprints. Capt. J. W. Fritz then ejected a cartridge by operating the bolt, but only after Day viewed the knob on the bolt through a magnifying glass and found no prints.[C4-45] Day continued to examine the rifle with the magnifying glass, looking for possible fingerprints. He applied fingerprint powder to the side of the metal housing near the trigger, and noticed traces of two prints.[C4-46] At 11:45 p.m. on November 22, the rifle was released to the FBI and forwarded to Washington where it was examined on the morning of November 23 by Sebastian F. Latona, supervisor of the Latent Fingerprint Section of the FBI’s Identification Division.[C4-47]

In his testimony before the Commission, Latona stated that when he received the rifle, the area where prints were visible was protected by cellophane.[C4-48] He examined these prints, as well as photographs of them which the Dallas police had made, and concluded that:

* * * the formations, the ridge formations and characteristics, were insufficient for purposes of either effecting identification or a determination that the print was not identical with the prints of people. Accordingly, my opinion simply was that the latent prints which were there were of no value.[C4-49]

Latona then processed the complete weapon but developed no identifiable prints.[C4-50] He stated that the poor quality of the wood and the metal would cause the rifle to absorb moisture from the skin, thereby making a clear print unlikely.[C4-51]

On November 22, however, before surrendering possession of the rifle to the FBI Laboratory, Lieutenant Day of the Dallas Police Department had “lifted” a palmprint from the underside of the gun barrel “near the firing end of the barrel about 3 inches under the Woodstock when I took the Woodstock loose.”[C4-52] “Lifting” a print involves the use of adhesive material to remove the fingerprint powder which adheres to the original print. In this way the powdered impression is actually removed from the object.[C4-53] The lifting had been so complete in this case that there was no trace of the print on the rifle itself when it was examined by Latona. Nor was there any indication that the lift had been performed.[C4-54] Day, on the other hand, believed that sufficient traces of the print had been left on the rifle barrel, because he did not release the lifted print until November 26, when he received instructions to send “everything that we had” to the FBI.[C4-55] The print arrived in the FBI Laboratory in Washington on November 29, mounted on a card on which Lieutenant Day had written the words “off underside gun barrel near end of foregrip C2766.”[C4-56] The print’s positive identity as having been lifted from the rifle was confirmed by FBI Laboratory tests which established that the adhesive material bearing the print also bore impressions of the same irregularities that appeared on the barrel of the rifle.[C4-57]

Latona testified that this palmprint was the right palmprint of Lee Harvey Oswald.[C4-58] At the request of the Commission, Arthur Mandella, fingerprint expert with the New York City Police Department, conducted an independent examination and also determined that this was the right palmprint of Oswald.[C4-59] Latona’s findings were also confirmed by Ronald G. Wittmus, another FBI fingerprint expert.[C4-60] In the opinion of these experts, it was not possible to estimate the time which elapsed between the placing of the print on the rifle and the date of the lift.[C4-61]

Experts testifying before the Commission agreed that palmprints are as unique as fingerprints for purposes of establishing identification.[C4-62] Oswald’s palmprint on the underside of the barrel demonstrates that he handled the rifle when it was disassembled. A palmprint could not be placed on this portion of the rifle, when assembled, because the wooden foregrip covers the barrel at this point.[C4-63] The print is additional proof that the rifle was in Oswald’s possession.

Fibers on Rifle

In a crevice between the butt plate of the rifle and the wooden stock was a tuft of several cotton fibers of dark blue, gray-black, and orange-yellow shades.[C4-64] On November 23, 1963, these fibers were examined by Paul M. Stombaugh, a special agent assigned to the Hair and Fiber Unit of the FBI Laboratory.[C4-65] He compared them with the fibers found in the shirt which Oswald was wearing when arrested in the Texas Theatre.[C4-66] This shirt was also composed of dark blue, gray-black and orange-yellow cotton fibers. Stombaugh testified that the colors, shades, and twist of the fibers found in the tuft on the rifle matched those in Oswald’s shirt.[C4-67] (See app. X, p. 592.)

Stombaugh explained in his testimony that in fiber analysis, as distinct from fingerprint or firearms identification, it is not possible to state with scientific certainty that a particular small group of fibers come from a certain piece of clothing to the exclusion of all others because there are not enough microscopic characteristics present in fibers.[C4-68] Judgments as to probability will depend on the number and types of matches.[C4-69] He concluded, “There is no doubt in my mind that these fibers could have come from this shirt. There is no way, however, to eliminate the possibility of the fibers having come from another identical shirt.”[C4-70]

Having considered the probabilities as explained in Stombaugh’s testimony, the Commission has concluded that the fibers in the tuft on the rifle most probably came from the shirt worn by Oswald when he was arrested, and that this was the same shirt which Oswald wore on the morning of the assassination. Marina Oswald testified that she thought her husband wore this shirt to work on that day.[C4-71] The testimony of those who saw him after the assassination was inconclusive about the color of Oswald’s shirt,[C4-72] but Mary Bledsoe, a former landlady of Oswald, saw him on a bus approximately 10 minutes after the assassination and identified the shirt as being the one worn by Oswald primarily because of a distinctive hole in the shirt’s right elbow.[C4-73] Moreover, the bus transfer which he obtained as he left the bus was still in the pocket when he was arrested.[C4-74] Although Oswald returned to his roominghouse after the assassination and when questioned by the police, claimed to have changed his shirt,[C4-75] the evidence indicates that he continued wearing the same shirt which he was wearing all morning and which he was still wearing when arrested.

In light of these findings the Commission evaluated the additional testimony of Stombaugh that the fibers were caught in the crevice of the rifle’s butt plate “in the recent past.”[C4-76] Although Stombaugh was unable to estimate the period of time the fibers were on the rifle he said that the fibers “were clean, they had good color to them, there was no grease on them and they were not fragmented. They looked as if they had just been picked up.”[C4-77] The relative freshness of the fibers is strong evidence that they were caught on the rifle on the morning of the assassination or during the preceding evening. For 10 days prior to the eve of the assassination Oswald had not been present at Ruth Paine’s house in Irving, Tex.,[C4-78] where the rifle was kept.[C4-79] Moreover, the Commission found no reliable evidence that Oswald used the rifle at any time between September 23, when it was transported from New Orleans, and November 22, the day of the assassination.[C4-80] The fact that on the morning of the assassination Oswald was wearing the shirt from which these relatively fresh fibers most probably originated, provides some evidence that they were placed on the rifle that day since there was limited, if any, opportunity for Oswald to handle the weapon during the 2 months prior to November 22.

On the other hand Stombaugh pointed out that fibers might retain their freshness if the rifle had been “put aside” after catching the fibers. The rifle used in the assassination probably had been wrapped in a blanket for about 8 weeks prior to November 22.[C4-81] Because the relative freshness of these fibers might be explained by the continuous storage of the rifle in the blanket, the Commission was unable to reach any firm conclusion as to when the fibers were caught in the rifle. The Commission was able to conclude, however, that the fibers most probably came from Oswald’s shirt. This adds to the conviction of the Commission that Oswald owned and handled the weapon used in the assassination.

Photograph of Oswald With Rifle

During the period from March 2, 1963, to April 24, 1963, the Oswalds lived on Neely Street in Dallas in a rented house which had a small back yard.[C4-82] One Sunday, while his wife was hanging diapers, Oswald asked her to take a picture of him holding a rifle, a pistol and issues of two newspapers later identified as the Worker and the Militant.[C4-83] Two pictures were taken. The Commission has concluded that the rifle shown in these pictures is the same rifle which was found on the sixth floor of the Depository Building on November 22, 1963. (See Commission Exhibits Nos. 133-A and 133-B, p. 126.)

One of these pictures, Exhibit No. 133-A, shows most of the rifle’s configuration.[C4-84] Special Agent Lyndal L. Shaneyfelt, a photography expert with the FBI, photographed the rifle used in the assassination, attempting to duplicate the position of the rifle and the lighting in Exhibit No. 133-A.[C4-85] After comparing the rifle in the simulated photograph with the rifle in Exhibit No. 133-A, Shaneyfelt testified, “I found it to be the same general configuration. All appearances were the same.” He found “one notch in the stock at this point that appears very faintly in the photograph.” He stated, however, that while he “found no differences” between the rifles in the two photographs, he could not make a “positive identification to the exclusion of all other rifles of the same general configuration.”[C4-86]

The authenticity of these pictures has been established by expert testimony which links the second picture, Commission Exhibit No. 133-B, to Oswald’s Imperial Reflex camera, with which Marina Oswald testified she took the pictures.[C4-87] The negative of that picture, Commission Exhibit No. 133-B, was found among Oswald’s possessions.[C4-88] Using a recognized technique of determining whether a picture was taken with a particular camera, Shaneyfelt compared this negative with a negative which he made by taking a new picture with Oswald’s camera.[C4-89] He concluded that the negative of Exhibit No. 133-B was exposed in Oswald’s Imperial Reflex camera to the exclusion of all other cameras.[C4-90] He could not test Exhibit No. 133-A in the same way because the negative was never recovered.[C4-91] Both pictures, however, have identical backgrounds and lighting and, judging from the shadows, were taken at the same angle. They are photographs of the same scene.[C4-92] Since Exhibit No. 133-B was taken with Oswald’s camera, it is reasonably certain that Exhibit No. 133-A was taken by the same camera at the same time, as Marina Oswald testified. Moreover, Shaneyfelt testified that in his opinion the photographs were not composites of two different photographs and that Oswald’s face had not been superimposed on another body.[C4-93]

One of the photographs taken by Marina Oswald was widely published in newspapers and magazines, and in many instances the details of these pictures differed from the original, and even from each other, particularly as to the configuration of the rifle. The Commission sought to determine whether these photographs were retouched prior to publication. Shaneyfelt testified that the published photographs appeared to be based on a copy of the original which the publications had each retouched differently.[C4-94] Several of the publications furnished the Commission with the prints they had used, or described by correspondence the retouching they had done. This information enabled the Commission to conclude that the published pictures were the same as the original except for retouching done by these publications, apparently for the purpose of clarifying the lines of the rifle and other details in the picture.[C4-95]

The dates surrounding the taking of this picture and the purchase of the rifle reinforce the belief that the rifle in the photograph is the rifle which Oswald bought from Klein’s. The rifle was shipped from Klein’s in Chicago on March 20, 1963, at a time when the Oswalds were living on Neely Street.[C4-96] From an examination of one of the photographs, the Commission determined the dates of the issues of the Militant and the Worker which Oswald was holding in his hand. By checking the actual mailing dates of these issues and the time it usually takes to effect delivery to Dallas, it was established that the photographs must have been taken sometime after March 27.[C4-97] Marina Oswald testified that the photographs were taken on a Sunday about 2 weeks before the attempted shooting of Maj. Gen. Edwin A. Walker on April 10, 1963.[C4-98] By Sunday, March 31, 1963, 10 days prior to the Walker attempt, Oswald had undoubtedly received the rifle shipped from Chicago on March 20, the revolver shipped from Los Angeles on the same date,[C4-99] and the two newspapers which he was holding in the picture.

Rifle Among Oswald’s Possessions

Marina Oswald testified that the rifle found on the sixth floor of the Depository Building was the “fateful rifle of Lee Oswald.”[C4-100] Moreover, it was the only rifle owned by her husband following his return from the Soviet Union in June 1962.[C4-101] It had been purchased in March 1963, and taken to New Orleans where Marina Oswald saw it in their rented apartment during the summer of 1963.[C4-102] It appears from his wife’s testimony that Oswald may have sat on the screened-in porch at night practicing with the rifle by looking through the telescopic sight and operating the bolt.[C4-103] In September 1963, Oswald loaded their possessions into a station wagon owned by Ruth Paine, who had invited Marina Oswald and the baby to live at her home in Irving,[C4-104] Tex. Marina Oswald has stated that the rifle was among these possessions,[C4-105] although Ruth Paine testified that she was not aware of it.[C4-106]

From September 24, 1963, when Marina Oswald arrived in Irving from New Orleans, until the morning of the assassination, the rifle was, according to the evidence, stored in a green and brown blanket in the Paines’ garage among the Oswalds’ other possessions.[C4-107] About 1 week after the return from New Orleans, Marina Oswald was looking in the garage for parts to the baby’s crib and thought that the parts might be in the blanket. When she started to open the blanket, she saw the stock of the rifle.[C4-108] Ruth and Michael Paine both noticed the rolled-up blanket in the garage during the time that Marina Oswald was living in their home.[C4-109] On several occasions, Michael Paine moved the blanket in the garage.[C4-110] He thought it contained tent poles, or possibly other camping equipment such as a folding shovel.[C4-111] When he appeared before the Commission, Michael Paine lifted the blanket with the rifle wrapped inside and testified that it appeared to be the same approximate weight and shape as the package in his garage.[C4-112]

About 3 hours after the assassination, a detective and deputy sheriff saw the blanket-roll, tied with a string, lying on the floor of the Paines’ garage. Each man testified that he thought he could detect the outline of a rifle in the blanket, even though the blanket was empty.[C4-113] Paul M. Stombaugh, of the FBI Laboratory, examined the blanket and discovered a bulge approximately 10 inches long midway in the blanket. This bulge was apparently caused by a hard protruding object which had stretched the blanket’s fibers. It could have been caused by the telescopic sight of the rifle which was approximately 11 inches long.[C4-114] (See Commission Exhibit No. 1304, p. 132.)

Conclusion

Having reviewed the evidence that (1) Lee Harvey Oswald purchased the rifle used in the assassination, (2) Oswald’s palmprint was on the rifle in a position which shows that he had handled it while it was disassembled, (3) fibers found on the rifle most probably came from the shirt Oswald was wearing on the day of the assassination, (4) a photograph taken in the yard of Oswald’s apartment showed him holding this rifle, and (5) the rifle was kept among Oswald’s possessions from the time of its purchase until the day of the assassination, the Commission concluded that the rifle used to assassinate President Kennedy and wound Governor Connally was owned and possessed by Lee Harvey Oswald.

THE RIFLE IN THE BUILDING

The Commission has evaluated the evidence tending to show how Lee Harvey Oswald’s Mannlicher-Carcano rifle, serial number C2766, was brought into the Depository Building, where it was found on the sixth floor shortly after the assassination. In this connection the Commission considered (1) the circumstances surrounding Oswald’s return to Irving, Tex., on Thursday, November 21, 1963, (2) the disappearance of the rifle from its normal place of storage, (3) Oswald’s arrival at the Depository Building on November 22, carrying a long and bulky brown paper package, (4) the presence of a long handmade brown paper bag near the point from which the shots were fired, and (5) the palmprint, fiber, and paper analyses linking Oswald and the assassination weapon to this bag.

The Curtain Rod Story

During October and November of 1963, Lee Harvey Oswald lived in a roominghouse in Dallas while his wife and children lived in Irving, at the home of Ruth Paine,[C4-115] approximately 15 miles from Oswald’s place of work at the Texas School Book Depository. Oswald traveled between Dallas and Irving on weekends in a car driven by a neighbor of the Paines, Buell Wesley Frazier, who also worked at the Depository.[C4-116] Oswald generally would go to Irving on Friday afternoon and return to Dallas Monday morning. According to the testimony of Frazier, Marina Oswald, and Ruth Paine, it appears that Oswald never returned to Irving in midweek prior to November 21, 1963, except on Monday, October 21, when he visited his wife in the hospital after the birth of their second child.[C4-117]

During the morning of November 21, Oswald asked Frazier whether he could ride home with him that afternoon. Frazier, surprised, asked him why he was going to Irving on Thursday night rather than Friday. Oswald replied, “I’m going home to get some curtain rods * * * [to] put in an apartment.”[C4-118] The two men left work at 4:40 p.m. and drove to Irving. There was little conversation between them on the way home.[C4-119] Mrs. Linnie Mae Randle, Frazier’s sister, commented to her brother about Oswald’s unusual midweek return to Irving. Frazier told her that Oswald had come home to get curtain rods.[C4-120]

It would appear, however, that obtaining curtain rods was not the purpose of Oswald’s trip to Irving on November 21. Mrs. A. C. Johnson, his landlady, testified that Oswald’s room at 1026 North Beckley Avenue had curtains and curtain rods,[C4-121] and that Oswald had never discussed the subject with her.[C4-122] In the Paines’ garage, along with many other objects of a household character, there were two flat lightweight curtain rods belonging to Ruth Paine but they were still there on Friday afternoon after Oswald’s arrest.[C4-123] Oswald never asked Mrs. Paine about the use of curtain rods,[C4-124] and Marina Oswald testified that Oswald did not say anything about curtain rods on the day before the assassination.[C4-125] No curtain rods were known to have been discovered in the Depository Building after the assassination.[C4-126] In deciding whether Oswald carried a rifle to work in a long paper bag on November 22, the Commission gave weight to the fact that Oswald gave a false reason for returning home on November 21, and one which provided an excuse for the carrying of a bulky package the following morning.

The Missing Rifle

Before dinner on November 21, Oswald played on the lawn of the Paines’ home with his daughter June.[C4-127] After dinner Ruth Paine and Marina Oswald were busy cleaning house and preparing their children for bed.[C4-128] Between the hours of 8 and 9 p.m. they were occupied with the children in the bedrooms located at the extreme east end of the house.[C4-129] On the west end of the house is the attached garage, which can be reached from the kitchen or from the outside.[C4-130] In the garage were the personal belongings of the Oswald family including, as the evidence has shown, the rifle wrapped in the old brown and green blanket.[C4-131]

At approximately 9 p.m., after the children had been put to bed, Mrs. Paine, according to her testimony before the Commission, “went out to the garage to paint some children’s blocks, and worked in the garage for half an hour or so. I noticed when I went out that the light was on.”[C4-132] Mrs. Paine was certain that she had not left the light on in the garage after dinner.[C4-133] According to Mrs. Paine, Oswald had gone to bed by 9 p.m.;[C4-134] Marina Oswald testified that it was between 9 and 10 p.m.[C4-135] Neither Marina Oswald nor Ruth Paine saw Oswald in the garage.[C4-136] The period between 8 and 9 p.m., however, provided ample opportunity for Oswald to prepare the rifle for his departure the next morning. Only if disassembled could the rifle fit into the paper bag found near the window[C4-137] from which the shots were fired. A firearms expert with the FBI assembled the rifle in 6 minutes using a 10-cent coin as a tool, and he could disassemble it more rapidly.[C4-138] While the rifle may have already been disassembled when Oswald arrived home on Thursday, he had ample time that evening to disassemble the rifle and insert it into the paper bag.

On the day of the assassination, Marina Oswald was watching television when she learned of the shooting. A short time later Mrs. Paine told her that someone had shot the President “from the building in which Lee is working.” Marina Oswald testified that at that time “My heart dropped. I then went to the garage to see whether the rifle was there and I saw that the blanket was still there and I said ‘Thank God.’” She did not unroll the blanket. She saw that it was in its usual position and it appeared to her to have something inside.[C4-139]

Soon afterward, at about 3 p.m., police officers arrived and searched the house. Mrs. Paine pointed out that most of the Oswalds’ possessions were in the garage.[C4-140] With Ruth Paine acting as an interpreter, Detective Rose asked Marina whether her husband had a rifle. Mrs. Paine, who had no knowledge of the rifle, first said “No,” but when the question was translated, Marina Oswald replied “Yes.”[C4-141] She pointed to the blanket which was on the floor very close to where Ruth Paine was standing. Mrs. Paine testified:

As she [Marina] told me about it I stepped onto the blanket roll. * * * And she indicated to me that she had peered into this roll and saw a portion of what she took to be a gun she knew her husband to have, a rifle. And I then translated this to the officers that she knew that her husband had a gun that he had stored in here. * * * I then stepped off of it and the officer picked it up in the middle and it bent so. * * *[C4-142]

Mrs. Paine had the actual blanket before her as she testified and she indicated that the blanket hung limp in the officer’s hand.[C4-143] Marina Oswald testified that this was her first knowledge that the rifle was not in its accustomed place.[C4-144]

The Long and Bulky Package

On the morning of November 22, 1963, Lee Harvey Oswald left the Paine house in Irving at approximately 7:15 a.m., while Marina Oswald was still in bed.[C4-145] Neither she nor Mrs. Paine saw him leave the house.[C4-146] About half-a-block away from the Paine house was the residence of Mrs. Linnie Mae Randle, the sister of the man with whom Oswald drove to work--Buell Wesley Frazier. Mrs. Randle stated that on the morning of November 22, while her brother was eating breakfast, she looked out the breakfast-room window and saw Oswald cross the street and walk toward the driveway where her brother parked his car near the carport. He carried a “heavy brown bag.”[C4-147] Oswald gripped the bag in his right hand near the top. “It tapered like this as he hugged it in his hand. It was * * * more bulky toward the bottom” than toward the top.[C4-148] She then opened the kitchen door and saw Oswald open the right rear door of her brother’s car and place the package in the back of the car.[C4-149] Mrs. Randle estimated that the package was approximately 28 inches long and about 8 inches wide.[C4-150] She thought that its color was similar to that of the bag found on the sixth floor of the School Book Depository after the assassination.[C4-151]

Frazier met Oswald at the kitchen door and together they walked to the car.[C4-152] After entering the car, Frazier glanced over his shoulder and noticed a brown paper package on the back seat. He asked, “What’s the package, Lee?” Oswald replied, “curtain rods.”[C4-153] Frazier told the Commission “* * * the main reason he was going over there that Thursday afternoon when he was to bring back some curtain rods, so I didn’t think any more about it when he told me that.”[C4-154] Frazier estimated that the bag was 2 feet long “give and take a few inches,” and about 5 or 6 inches wide.[C4-155] As they sat in the car, Frazier asked Oswald where his lunch was, and Oswald replied that he was going to buy his lunch that day.[C4-156] Frazier testified that Oswald carried no lunch bag that day. “When he rode with me, I say he always brought lunch except that one day on November 22 he didn’t bring his lunch that day.”[C4-157]

Frazier parked the car in the company parking lot about 2 blocks north of the Depository Building. Oswald left the car first, picked up the brown paper bag, and proceeded toward the building ahead of Frazier. Frazier walked behind and as they crossed the railroad tracks he watched the switching of the cars. Frazier recalled that one end of the package was under Oswald’s armpit and the lower part was held with his right hand so that it was carried straight and parallel to his body. When Oswald entered the rear door of the Depository Building, he was about 50 feet ahead of Frazier. It was the first time that Oswald had not walked with Frazier from the parking lot to the building entrance.[C4-158] When Frazier entered the building, he did not see Oswald.[C4-159] One employee, Jack Dougherty, believed that he saw Oswald coming to work, but he does not remember that Oswald had anything in his hands as he entered the door.[C4-160] No other employee has been found who saw Oswald enter that morning.[C4-161]

In deciding whether Oswald carried the assassination weapon in the bag which Frazier and Mrs. Randle saw, the Commission has carefully considered the testimony of these two witnesses with regard to the length of the bag. Frazier and Mrs. Randle testified that the bag which Oswald was carrying was approximately 27 or 28 inches long,[C4-162] whereas the wooden stock of the rifle, which is its largest component, measured 34.8 inches.[C4-163] The bag found on the sixth floor was 38 inches long.[C4-164] (See Commission Exhibit No. 1304, p. 132.) When Frazier appeared before the Commission and was asked to demonstrate how Oswald carried the package, he said, “Like I said, I remember that I didn’t look at the package very much * * * but when I did look at it he did have his hands on the package like that,”[C4-165] and at this point Frazier placed the upper part of the package under his armpit and attempted to cup his right hand beneath the bottom of the bag. The disassembled rifle was too long to be carried in this manner. Similarly, when the butt of the rifle was placed in Frazier’s hand, it extended above his shoulder to ear level.[C4-166] Moreover, in an interview on December 1, 1963, with agents of the FBI, Frazier had marked the point on the back seat of his car which he believed was where the bag reached when it was laid on the seat with one edge against the door. The distance between the point on the seat and the door was 27 inches.[C4-167]

Mrs. Randle said, when shown the paper bag, that the bag she saw Oswald carrying “wasn’t that long, I mean it was folded down at the top as I told you. It definitely wasn’t that long.”[C4-168] And she folded the bag to a length of about 28½ inches. Frazier doubted whether the bag that Oswald carried was as wide as the bag found on the sixth floor,[C4-169] although Mrs. Randle testified that the width was approximately the same.[C4-170]

The Commission has weighed the visual recollection of Frazier and Mrs. Randle against the evidence here presented that the bag Oswald carried contained the assassination weapon and has concluded that Frazier and Randle are mistaken as to the length of the bag. Mrs. Randle saw the bag fleetingly and her first remembrance is that it was held in Oswald’s right hand “and it almost touched the ground as he carried it.”[C4-171] Frazier’s view of the bag was from the rear. He continually advised that he was not paying close attention.[C4-172] For example, he said,

* * * I didn’t pay too much attention the way he was walking because I was walking along there looking at the railroad cars and watching the men on the diesel switch them cars and I didn’t pay too much attention on how he carried the package at all.[C4-173]

Frazier could easily have been mistaken when he stated that Oswald held the bottom of the bag cupped in his hand with the upper end tucked into his armpit.

Location of Bag

A handmade bag of wrapping paper and tape[C4-174] was found in the southeast corner of the sixth floor alongside the window from which the shots were fired.[C4-175] (See Commission Exhibit No. 2707, p. 142.) It was not a standard type bag which could be obtained in a store and it was presumably made for a particular purpose. It was the appropriate size to contain, in disassembled form, Oswald’s Mannlicher-Carcano rifle, serial No. C2766, which was also found on the sixth floor.[C4-176] Three cartons had been placed at the window apparently to act as a gun rest and a fourth carton was placed behind those at the window.[C4-177] (See Commission Exhibit No. 1301, p. 138.) A person seated on the fourth carton could assemble the rifle without being seen from the rest of the sixth floor because the cartons stacked around the southeast corner would shield him.[C4-178] (See Commission Exhibit No. 723, p. 80.) The presence of the bag in this corner is cogent evidence that it was used as the container for the rifle. At the time the bag was found, Lieutenant Day of the Dallas police wrote on it, “Found next to the sixth floor window gun fired from. May have been used to carry gun. Lt. J. C. Day.”[C4-179]

Scientific Evidence Linking Rifle and Oswald to Paper Bag

_Oswald’s fingerprint and palmprint found on bag._--Using a standard chemical method involving silver nitrates[C4-180] the FBI Laboratory developed a latent palmprint and latent fingerprint on the bag. (See app. X, p. 565.) Sebastian F. Latona, supervisor of the FBI’s Latent Fingerprint Section, identified these prints as the left index fingerprint and right palmprint of Lee Harvey Oswald.[C4-181] The portion of the palm which was identified was the heel of the right palm, i.e., the area near the wrist, on the little finger side.[C4-182] These prints were examined independently by Ronald G. Wittmus of the FBI,[C4-183] and by Arthur Mandella, a fingerprint expert with the New York City Police Department.[C4-184] Both concluded that the prints were the right palm and left index finger of Lee Oswald. No other identifiable prints were found on the bag.[C4-185]

Oswald’s palmprint on the bottom of the paper bag indicated, of course, that he had handled the bag. Furthermore, it was consistent with the bag having contained a heavy or bulky object when he handled it since a light object is usually held by the fingers.[C4-186] The palmprint was found on the closed end of the bag. It was from Oswald’s right hand, in which he carried the long package as he walked from Frazier’s car to the building.[C4-187]

_Materials used to make bag._--On the day of the assassination, the Dallas police obtained a sample of wrapping paper and tape from the shipping room of the Depository and forwarded it to the FBI Laboratory in Washington.[C4-188] James C. Cadigan, a questioned-documents expert with the Bureau, compared the samples with the paper and tape in the actual bag. He testified, “In all of the observations and physical tests that I made I found * * * the bag * * * and the paper sample * * * were the same.”[C4-189]

Among other tests, the paper and tape were submitted to fiber analysis and spectrographic examination.[C4-190] In addition the tape was compared to determine whether the sample tape and the tape on the bag had been taken from the tape dispensing machine at the Depository. When asked to explain the similarity of characteristics, Cadigan stated:[C4-191]

Well, briefly, it would be the thickness of both the paper and the tape, the color under various lighting conditions of both the paper and the tape, the width of the tape, the knurled markings on the surface of the fiber, the texture of the fiber, the felting pattern * * *

* * * * *

I found that the paper sack found on the sixth floor * * * and the sample * * * had the same observable characteristics both under the microscope and all the visual tests that I could conduct.

* * * * *

The papers I also found were similar in fiber composition, therefore, in addition to the visual characteristics, microscopic and UV [ultra violet] characteristics.

Mr. Cadigan concluded that the paper and tape from the bag were identical in all respects to the sample paper and tape taken from the Texas School Book Depository shipping room on November 22, 1963.[C4-192]

On December 1, 1963, a replica bag was made from materials found on that date in the shipping room. This was done as an investigatory aid since the original bag had been discolored during various laboratory examinations and could not be used for valid identification by witnesses.[C4-193] Cadigan found that the paper used to make this replica sack had different characteristics from the paper in the original bag.[C4-194] The science of paper analysis enabled him to distinguish between different rolls of paper even though they were produced by the same manufacturer.[C4-195]

Since the Depository normally used approximately one roll of paper every 3 working days,[C4-196] it was not surprising that the replica sack made on December 1, 1963, had different characteristics from both the actual bag and the sample taken on November 22. On the other hand, since two rolls could be made from the same batch of paper, one cannot estimate when, prior to November 22, Oswald made the paper bag. However, the complete identity of characteristics between the paper and tape in the bag found on the sixth floor and the paper and tape found in the shipping room of the Depository on November 22 enabled the Commission to conclude that the bag was made from these materials. The Depository shipping department was on the first floor to which Oswald had access in the normal performance of his duties filling orders.[C4-197]

_Fibers in paper bag matched fibers in blanket._--When Paul M. Stombaugh of the FBI Laboratory examined the paper bag, he found, on the inside, a single brown delustered viscose fiber and several light green cotton fibers.[C4-198] The blanket in which the rifle was stored was composed of brown and green cotton, viscose and woolen fibers.[C4-199]

The single brown viscose fiber found in the bag matched some of the brown viscose fibers from the blanket in all observable characteristics.[C4-200] The green cotton fibers found in the paper bag matched some of the green cotton fibers in the blanket “in all observable microscopic characteristics.”[C4-201] Despite these matches, however, Stombaugh was unable to render an opinion that the fibers which he found in the bag had probably come from the blanket, because other types of fibers present in the blanket were not found in the bag. He concluded:

All I would say here is that it is possible that these fibers could have come from this blanket, because this blanket is composed of brown and green woolen fibers, brown and green delustered viscose fibers, and brown and green cotton fibers. * * * We found no brown cotton fibers, no green viscose fibers, and no woolen fibers.

So if I found all of these then I would have been able to say these fibers probably had come from this blanket. But since I found so few, then I would say the possibility exists, these fibers could have come from this blanket.[C4-202]

Stombaugh confirmed that the rifle could have picked up fibers from the blanket and transferred them to the paper bag.[C4-203] In light of the other evidence linking Lee Harvey Oswald, the blanket, and the rifle to the paper bag found on the sixth floor, the Commission considered Stombaugh’s testimony of probative value in deciding whether Oswald carried the rifle into the building in the paper bag.

Conclusion

The preponderance of the evidence supports the conclusion that Lee Harvey Oswald (1) told the curtain rod story to Frazier to explain both the return to Irving on a Thursday and the obvious bulk of the package which he intended to bring to work the next day; (2) took paper and tape from the wrapping bench of the Depository and fashioned a bag large enough to carry the disassembled rifle; (3) removed the rifle from the blanket in the Paines’ garage on Thursday evening; (4) carried the rifle into the Depository Building, concealed in the bag; and, (5) left the bag alongside the window from which the shots were fired.

OSWALD AT WINDOW

Lee Harvey Oswald was hired on October 15, 1963, by the Texas School Book Depository as an “order filler.”[C4-204] He worked principally on the first and sixth floors of the building, gathering books listed on orders and delivering them to the shipping room on the first floor.[C4-205] He had ready access to the sixth floor,[C4-206] from the southeast corner window of which the shots were fired.[C4-207] The Commission evaluated the physical evidence found near the window after the assassination and the testimony of eyewitnesses in deciding whether Lee Harvey Oswald was present at this window at the time of the assassination.

Palmprints and Fingerprints on Cartons and Paper Bag

Below the southeast corner window on the sixth floor was a large carton of books measuring approximately 18 by 12 by 14 inches which had been moved from a stack along the south wall.[C4-208] Atop this carton was a small carton marked “Rolling Readers,” measuring approximately 13 by 9 by 8 inches.[C4-209] In front of this small carton and resting partially on the windowsill was another small “Rolling Readers” carton.[C4-210] These two small cartons had been moved from a stack about three aisles away.[C4-211] The boxes in the window appeared to have been arranged as a convenient gun rest.[C4-212] (See Commission Exhibit No. 1301, p. 138.) Behind these boxes was another carton placed on the floor on which a man sitting could look southwesterly down Elm Street over the top of the “Rolling Readers” cartons.[C4-213] Next to these cartons was the handmade paper bag, previously discussed, on which appeared the print of the left index finger and right palm of Lee Harvey Oswald.[C4-214] (See Commission Exhibit No. 1302, p. 139.)

The cartons were forwarded to the FBI in Washington. Sebastian F. Latona, supervisor of the Latent Fingerprint Section, testified that 20 identifiable fingerprints and 8 palmprints were developed on these cartons.[C4-215] The carton on the windowsill and the large carton below the window contained no prints which could be identified as being those of Lee Harvey Oswald.[C4-216] The other “Rolling Readers” carton, however, contained a palmprint and a fingerprint which were identified by Latona as being the left palmprint and right index fingerprint of Lee Harvey Oswald.[C4-217] (See app. X, p. 566.)

The Commission has considered the possibility that the cartons might have been moved in connection with the work that was being performed on the sixth floor on November 22. Depository employees were laying a new floor at the west end and transferring books from the west to the east end of the building.[C4-218] The “Rolling Readers” cartons, however, had not been moved by the floor layers and had apparently been taken to the window from their regular position for some particular purpose.[C4-219] The “Rolling Readers” boxes contained, instead of books, light blocks used as reading aids.[C4-220] They could be easily adjusted and were still solid enough to serve as a gun rest.

The box on the floor, behind the three near the window, had been one of these moved by the floor layers from the west wall to near the east side of the building in preparation for the laying of the floor.[C4-221] During the afternoon of November 22, Lieutenant Day of the Dallas police dusted this carton with powder and developed a palmprint on the top edge of the carton on the side nearest the window.[C4-222] The position of this palmprint on the carton was parallel with the long axis of the box, and at right angles with the short axis; the bottom of the palm rested on the box.[C4-223] Someone sitting on the box facing the window would have his palm in this position if he placed his hand alongside his right hip. (See Commission Exhibit No. 1302, p. 139.) This print which had been cut out of the box was also forwarded to the FBI and Latona identified it as Oswald’s right palmprint.[C4-224] In Latona’s opinion “not too long” a time had elapsed between the time that the print was placed on the carton and the time that it had been developed by the Dallas police.[C4-225] Although Bureau experiments had shown that 24 hours was a likely maximum time, Latona stated that he could only testify with certainty that the print was less than 3 days old.[C4-226]

The print, therefore, could have been placed on the carton at any time within this period. The freshness of this print could be estimated only because the Dallas police developed it through the use of powder. Since cartons absorb perspiration, powder can successfully develop a print on such material[C4-227] only within a limited time. When the FBI in Washington received the cartons, the remaining prints, including Oswald’s on the Rolling Readers carton, were developed by chemical processes. The freshness of prints developed in this manner[C4-228] cannot be estimated, so no conclusions can be drawn as to whether these remaining prints preceded or followed the print developed in Dallas by powder. Most of the prints were found to have been placed on the cartons by an FBI clerk and a Dallas police officer after the cartons had been processed with powder by the Dallas Police.[C4-229] (See ch. VI, p. 249; app. X, p. 566.)

In his independent investigation, Arthur Mandella of the New York City Police Department reached the same conclusion as Latona that the prints found on the cartons were those of Lee Harvey Oswald.[C4-229] In addition, Mandella was of the opinion that the print taken from the carton on the floor was probably made within a day or a day and a half of the examination on November 22.[C4-230] Moreover, another expert with the FBI, Ronald G. Wittmus, conducted a separate examination and also agreed with Latona that the prints were Oswald’s.[C4-231]

In evaluating the significance of these fingerprint and palmprint identifications, the Commission considered the possibility that Oswald handled these cartons as part of his normal duties. Since other identifiable prints were developed on the cartons, the Commission requested that they be compared with the prints of the 12 warehouse employees who, like Oswald, might have handled the cartons. They were also compared with the prints of those law enforcement officials who might have handled the cartons. The results of this investigation are fully discussed in chapter VI, page 249. Although a person could handle a carton and not leave identifiable prints, none of these employees except Oswald left identifiable prints on the cartons.[C4-232] This finding, in addition to the freshness of one of the prints and the presence of Oswald’s prints on two of the four cartons and the paper bag led the Commission to attach some probative value to the fingerprint and palmprint identifications in reaching the conclusion that Oswald was at the window from which the shots were fired, although the prints do not establish the exact time he was there.

Oswald’s Presence on Sixth Floor Approximately 35 Minutes Before the Assassination

Additional testimony linking Oswald with the point from which the shots were fired was provided by the testimony of Charles Givens, who was the last known employee to see Oswald inside the building prior to the assassination. During the morning of November 22, Givens was working with the floor-laying crew in the southwest section of the sixth floor.[C4-233] At about 11:45 a.m. the floor-laying crew used both elevators to come down from the sixth floor. The employees raced the elevators to the first floor.[C4-234] Givens saw Oswald standing at the gate on the fifth floor as the elevator went by.[C4-235] Givens testified that after reaching the first floor, “I discovered I left my cigarettes in my jacket pocket upstairs, and I took the elevator back upstairs to get my jacket with my cigarettes in it.”[C4-236] He saw Oswald, a clipboard in hand, walking from the southeast corner of the sixth floor toward the elevator.[C4-237] (See Commission Exhibit No. 2707, p. 142.) Givens said to Oswald, “Boy are you going downstairs? * * * It’s near lunch time.” Oswald said, “No, sir. When you get downstairs, close the gate to the elevator.”[C4-238] Oswald was referring to the west elevator which operates by pushbutton and only with the gate closed.[C4-239] Givens said, “Okay,” and rode down in the east elevator. When he reached the first floor, the west elevator--the one with the gate--was not there. Givens thought this was about 11:55 a.m.[C4-240] None of the Depository employees is known to have seen Oswald again until after the shooting.[C4-241]

The significance of Givens’ observation that Oswald was carrying his clipboard became apparent on December 2, 1963, when an employee, Frankie Kaiser, found a clipboard hidden by book cartons in the northwest corner of the sixth floor at the west wall a few feet from where the rifle had been found.[C4-242] This clipboard had been made by Kaiser and had his name on it.[C4-243] Kaiser identified it as the clipboard which Oswald had appropriated from him when Oswald came to work at the Depository.[C4-244] Three invoices on this clipboard, each dated November 22, were for Scott-Foresman books, located on the first and sixth floors.[C4-245] Oswald had not filled any of the three orders.[C4-246]

Eyewitness Identification of Assassin

Howard L. Brennan was an eyewitness to the shooting. As indicated previously the Commission considered his testimony as probative in reaching the conclusion that the shots came from the sixth floor, southeast corner window of the Depository Building.[C4-247] (See ch. III, pp. 61-68.) Brennan also testified that Lee Harvey Oswald, whom he viewed in a police lineup on the night of the assassination, was the man he saw fire the shots from the sixth-floor window of the Depository Building.[C4-248] When the shots were fired, Brennan was in an excellent position to observe anyone in the window. He was sitting on a concrete wall on the southwest corner of Elm and Houston Streets, looking north at the Depository Building which was directly in front of him.[C4-249] The window was approximately 120 feet away.[C4-250](See Commission Exhibit No. 477, p. 62.)

In the 6- to 8-minute period before the motorcade arrived,[C4-251] Brennan saw a man leave and return to the window “a couple of times.”[C4-252] After hearing the first shot, which he thought was a motorcycle backfire, Brennan glanced up at the window. He testified that “this man I saw previously was aiming for his last shot * * * as it appeared to me he was standing up and resting against the left window sill * * *.”[C4-253]

Brennan saw the man fire the last shot and disappear from the window. Within minutes of the assassination, Brennan described the man to the police.[C4-254] This description most probably led to the radio alert sent to police cars at approximately 12:45 p.m., which described the suspect as white, slender, weighing about 165 pounds, about 5’10” tall, and in his early thirties.[C4-255] In his sworn statement to the police later that day, Brennan described the man in similar terms, except that he gave the weight as between 165 and 175 pounds and the height was omitted.[C4-256] In his testimony before the Commission, Brennan described the person he saw as “* * * a man in his early thirties, fair complexion, slender, but neat, neat slender, possible 5 foot 10 * * * 160 to 170 pounds.”[C4-257] Oswald was 5’9”, slender and 24 years old. When arrested, he gave his weight as 140 pounds.[C4-258] On other occasions he gave weights of both 140 and 150 pounds.[C4-259] The New Orleans police records of his arrest in August of 1963 show a weight of 136 pounds.[C4-260] The autopsy report indicated an estimated weight of 150 pounds.[C4-261]

Brennan’s description should also be compared with the eyewitness description broadcast over the Dallas police radio at 1:22 p.m. of the man who shot Patrolman J. D. Tippit. The suspect was described as “a white male about 30, 5’8”, black hair, slender. * * *”[C4-262] At 1:29 p.m. the police radio reported that the description of the suspect in the Tippit shooting was similar to the description which had been given by Brennan in connection with the assassination.[C4-263] Approximately 7 or 8 minutes later the police radio reported that “an eyeball witness” described the suspect in the Tippit shooting as “a white male, 27, 5’11”, 165 pounds, black wavy hair.”[C4-264] As will be discussed fully below, the Commission has concluded that this suspect was Lee Harvey Oswald.

Although Brennan testified that the man in the window was standing when he fired the shots,[C4-265] most probably he was either sitting or kneeling. The half-open window,[C4-266] the arrangement of the boxes,[C4-267] and the angle of the shots virtually preclude a standing position.[C4-268] It is understandable, however, for Brennan to have believed that the man with the rifle was standing. A photograph of the building taken seconds after the assassination shows three employees looking out of the fifth-floor window directly below the window from which the shots were fired. Brennan testified that they were standing,[C4-269] which is their apparent position in the photograph.[C4-270] (See Dillard Exhibits Nos. C and D. pp. 66-67.) But the testimony of these employees,[C4-271] together with photographs subsequently taken of them at the scene of the assassination,[C4-272] establishes that they were either squatting or kneeling. (See Commission Exhibit No. 485, p. 69.) Since the window ledges in the Depository Building are lower than in most buildings,[C4-273] a person squatting or kneeling exposes more of his body than would normally be the case. From the street, this creates the impression that the person is standing. Brennan could have seen enough of the body of a kneeling or squatting person to estimate his height.

Shortly after the assassination Brennan noticed two of these employees leaving the building and immediately identified them as having been in the fifth-floor windows.[C4-274] When the three employees appeared before the Commission, Brennan identified the two whom he saw leave the building.[C4-275] The two men, Harold Norman and James Jarman, Jr., each confirmed that when they came out of the building, they saw and heard Brennan describing what he had seen.[C4-276] Norman stated, “* * * I remember him talking and I believe I remember seeing him saying that he saw us when we first went up to the fifth-floor window, he saw us then.”[C4-277] Jarman heard Brennan “talking to this officer about that he had heard these shots and he had seen the barrel of the gun sticking out the window, and he said that the shots came from inside the building.”[C4-278]

During the evening of November 22, Brennan identified Oswald as the person in the lineup who bore the closest resemblance to the man in the window but he said he was unable to make a positive identification.[C4-279] Prior to the lineup, Brennan had seen Oswald’s picture on television and he told the Commission that whether this affected his identification “is something I do not know.”[C4-280] In an interview with FBI agents on December 17, 1963, Brennan stated that he was sure that the person firing the rifle was Oswald.[C4-281] In another interview with FBI agents on January 7, 1964, Brennan appeared to revert to his earlier inability to make a positive identification,[C4-282] but, in his testimony before the Commission, Brennan stated that his remarks of January 7 were intended by him merely as an accurate report of what he said on November 22.[C4-283]

Brennan told the Commission that he could have made a positive identification in the lineup on November 22 but did not do so because he felt that the assassination was “a Communist activity, and I felt like there hadn’t been more than one eyewitness, and if it got to be a known fact that I was an eyewitness, my family or I, either one, might not be safe.”[C4-284] When specifically asked before the Commission whether or not he could positively identify the man he saw in the sixth-floor window as the same man he saw in the police station, Brennan stated, “I could at that time--I could, with all sincerity, identify him as being the same man.”[C4-285]

Although the record indicates that Brennan was an accurate observer, he declined to make a positive identification of Oswald when he first saw him in the police lineup.[C4-286] The Commission, therefore, does not base its conclusion concerning the identity of the assassin on Brennan’s subsequent certain identification of Lee Harvey Oswald as the man he saw fire the rifle. Immediately after the assassination, however, Brennan described to the police the man he saw in the window and then identified Oswald as the person who most nearly resembled the man he saw. The Commission is satisfied that, at the least, Brennan saw a man in the window who closely resembled Lee Harvey Oswald, and that Brennan believes the man he saw was in fact Lee Harvey Oswald.

Two other witnesses were able to offer partial descriptions of a man they saw in the southeast corner window of the sixth floor approximately 1 minute before the assassination, although neither witness saw the shots being fired.[C4-287] Ronald Fischer and Robert Edwards were standing on the curb at the southwest corner of Elm and Houston Streets,[C4-288] the same corner where Brennan was sitting on a concrete wall.[C4-289] Fischer testified that about 10 or 15 seconds before the motorcade turned onto Houston Street from Main Street, Edwards said, “Look at that guy there in that window.”[C4-290]

Fischer looked up and watched the man in the window for 10 or 15 seconds and then started watching the motorcade, which came into view on Houston Street.[C4-291] He said that the man held his attention until the motorcade came because the man:

* * * appeared uncomfortable for one, and secondly, he wasn’t watching * * * he didn’t look like he was watching for the parade. He looked like he was looking down toward the Trinity River and the Triple Underpass down at the end--toward the end of Elm Street. And * * * all the time I watched him, he never moved his head, he never--he never moved anything. Just was there transfixed.[C4-292]

Fischer placed the man in the easternmost window on the south side of the Depository Building on either the fifth or the sixth floor.[C4-293] He said that he could see the man from the middle of his chest to the top of his head, and that as he was facing the window the man was in the lower right-hand portion of the window and “seemed to be sitting a little forward.”[C4-294] The man was dressed in a light-colored, open-neck shirt which could have been either a sports shirt or a T-shirt, and he had brown hair, a slender face and neck with light complexion, and looked to be 22 or 24 years old.[C4-295] The person in the window was a white man and “looked to me like he was looking straight at the Triple Underpass” down Elm Street.[C4-296] Boxes and cases were stacked behind him.[C4-297]

Approximately 1 week after the assassination, according to Fischer, policemen showed him a picture of Oswald.[C4-298] In his testimony he said, “I told them that that could have been the man. * * * That that could have been the man that I saw in the window in the School Book Depository Building, but that I was not sure.”[C4-299] Fischer described the man’s hair as some shade of brown--“it wasn’t dark and it wasn’t light.”[C4-300] On November 22, Fischer had apparently described the man as “light-headed.”[C4-301] Fischer explained that he did not mean by the earlier statement that the man was blond, but rather that his hair was not black.[C4-302]

Robert Edwards said that, while looking at the south side of the Depository Building shortly before the motorcade, he saw nothing of importance “except maybe one individual who was up there in the corner room of the sixth floor which was crowded in among boxes.”[C4-303] He said that this was a white man about average in size, “possibly thin,” and that he thought the man had light-brown hair.[C4-304] Fischer and Edwards did not see the man clearly enough or long enough to identify him. Their testimony is of probative value, however, because their limited description is consistent with that of the man who has been found by the Commission, based on other evidence, to have fired the shots from the window.

Another person who saw the assassin as the shots were fired was Amos L. Euins, age 15, who was one of the first witnesses to alert the police to the Depository as the source of the shots, as has been discussed in