were not to station themselves across the Main Street ramp from the
railing to the wall?
Mr. MCCULLOUGH. I heard no such instructions.
Mr. GRIFFIN. Were you able to observe what efforts were being made
on Friday, Saturday, and Sunday to check identification of newspaper
people?
Mr. MCCULLOUGH. I myself thought that the security in the garage area
on Sunday was fairly strong. In other words, I was asked at least
four or five times for credentials. And when I moved to this position
here----
Mr. GRIFFIN. The one on the railing?
Mr. MCCULLOUGH. Indicated by the “X” on the railing--a police officer
came over and told me first to get down until I showed him credentials,
and then he let me stand. There was some--both Friday night and
Saturday there were also occasional checks made. I would say that at
least twice on Friday night, and probably twice on Saturday, when I
was in and out of the municipal building, that I was asked for press
credentials.
Mr. GRIFFIN. Was this as you were entering or leaving the building?
Mr. MCCULLOUGH. On Friday night it was as we left the elevator to the
third floor, which is located at the police offices, the departmental
offices. On Saturday we were asked for credentials before we were
permitted into the elevators, leading up to that floor. And, again, as
we got off the elevator--they were designated by colored patches on
their shoulders--there were a number of auxiliary police officers on
duty Saturday.
Mr. GRIFFIN. Mr. Pollak, do you have any questions that you would like
to ask?
Mr. POLLAK. I would just ask whether the witness saw anybody other than
the man he thought was Ruby who did not appear to be authorized as a
newsman in the third floor corridor on Friday or Saturday?
Mr. MCCULLOUGH. No. Well, the other robbery units and auto theft were
still trying to function Friday night, and moved their people into this
crowd along the corridor. So there were what would be civilians and, I
suppose, people having business with the police department moving in
and out of there constantly.
Mr. POLLAK. Did these people you just referred to--were they normally
escorted by a police officer?
Mr. MCCULLOUGH. Yes; they were always with an officer, and went into
one of the other offices. As I say, I remember specifically there were
some sailors in uniform, and a man reporting a stolen automobile--these
things you remember because when anybody came along the corridor, none
of us had any idea who it might be coming, and everyone watched to see
who it was. Incidentally, while I saw the shooting of Oswald, I was not
at that time able to identify the man who did the shooting as the same
man I had seen in the corridor, because as he moved out of the crowd of
people along the ramp toward Oswald, all that I could see was a side
view and the back of the head. It was a different type of hat, too.
Mr. GRIFFIN. The hat was different?
Mr. MCCULLOUGH. Yes; it was a gray felt hat, or a dark gray felt hat,
on Sunday--not the sporty type porkpie that I had seen Friday night.
It wasn’t actually until I saw a full face photograph of the man on
television and in the newspapers that I was sure who he was.
Mr. GRIFFIN. Have you ever seen Jack Ruby in person?
Mr. MCCULLOUGH. No.
Mr. GRIFFIN. You used the term that you were sure who it was. Is there
any hesitancy or doubt in your mind?
Mr. MCCULLOUGH. No; not in my own mind. In other words, I would say my
own personal identification would be that the man I saw in the corridor
outside the police headquarters on Friday is the same man who was later
arrested for the shooting of Oswald.
Mr. GRIFFIN. I have marked for the purposes of identification the
diagram that you have drawn here as John G. McCullough Deposition, July
29, 1964, Exhibit No. 1.
(The document referred to was marked John G. McCullough Deposition
Exhibit No. 1 for identification.)
Mr. GRIFFIN. For the purpose of our record, I would like you to sign
that below where I have marked it.
Mr. MCCULLOUGH. With the qualification that I make no pretext of being
an engineer or architect. As a matter of fact, the ramp that I have
indicated is not--is slightly closer to----
Mr. GRIFFIN. The garage entrance?
Mr. MCCULLOUGH. The garage entrance; yes. The ramp leading to the
garage entrance is closer to Commerce Street than it would indicate on
this sketch.
Mr. GRIFFIN. Well, if it is reassuring to you, we already have a
diagram, a chart that has been previously made up of the basement. I
think the diagram you have drawn for us indicates with a fair degree of
accuracy.
Mr. MCCULLOUGH. The other thing that would help me to see what happened
in there, was the fact that it was so well lighted by the television
cameras. Stark lighting, it almost seemed.
Mr. GRIFFIN. I am going to hand you a second exhibit which I have
marked as John G. McCullough Deposition, July 29, 1964, Exhibit No. 2.
(The document referred to was marked John G. McCullough Deposition
Exhibit No. 2 for identification.)
Mr. GRIFFIN. That is an interview report prepared by two FBI Agents,
John R. Wienberg, and Stanley S. Czarnecki. They prepared this report
as a result of interviewing you in Philadelphia on December 1, 1963.
The report consists of four pages numbered consecutively at the bottom,
for the purpose of our records as 448, 449--five pages--450, 451, 452.
Having read the document that we have marked as Exhibit No. 2, would
you tell us whether or not that is an accurate report of the interview
that these FBI agents had with you on December 1?
Mr. MCCULLOUGH. This would be an accurate report. And in addition I
would say that the times that I gave to the FBI agents would be better
than the times I have given here because it was taken so close to the
time of the actual incidents in Dallas.
Mr. GRIFFIN. I want to go back once again to the identification of the
man you think was Ruby. Were you continuously on the third floor from
the time that you arrived on Friday night at the police station until
you saw this man with the Alpacuna box?
Mr. MCCULLOUGH. If I was not, it was just briefly to leave and reach
a telephone, to try to reach some other member of the Bulletin staff
moving around Dallas. In other words, any absence would not be more
than 5 or 10 minutes. Because all of the action I was covering was
confined to that one floor.
Mr. GRIFFIN. Do you recall a man on the third floor who was standing
near the homicide office and was identifying members of the police
department, most particularly Captain Fritz and Chief Curry, to members
of the press?
Mr. MCCULLOUGH. There were several persons doing this. The persons who
were making these identifications for me, actually, however, were local
Dallas reporters, two men and a woman. All carrying press credentials.
Mr. GRIFFIN. Did any of those persons--obviously not the woman--but did
either of the two men bear any resemblance that you recall to Jack Ruby?
Mr. MCCULLOUGH. No; none at all. The man that I believed to be Ruby
was quite stocky. The two reporters were slight, one wore glasses. I
believe they were both light-haired.
Mr. GRIFFIN. If I were to tell you that so far as we have been able to
determine Jack Ruby did not own an overcoat such as you have described,
and in fact was not wearing an overcoat on Friday night, would that in
any way affect the positiveness of the identification?
Mr. MCCULLOUGH. Not the overcoat: no. Because, as I say, the only time
I looked at this clothing really is as I was coming down, and from the
top--what I saw actually was a dark outer coat which I assumed was a
topcoat. If I said overcoat, I meant a topcoat.
Mr. GRIFFIN. Are you certain in your mind that this man did have a
topcoat or outer coat on?
Mr. MCCULLOUGH. Yes. I paid it no particular heed at the time, though.
Mr. GRIFFIN. Well, again, bearing in mind what I have said, that Ruby
is not known by anybody else who believes they saw him on Friday night
to have been wearing any sort of an outer coat, would that alter the
certainty with which you have identified him here today?
Mr. MCCULLOUGH. No. Actually, because the identification--what makes me
believe that the man I bumped into and talked to at least for a moment
was Ruby was his face, not the clothing.
Mr. POLLAK. I wonder if we could get a fuller description of the hat he
was wearing.
Mr. MCCULLOUGH. The hat that I have called a porkpie hat is a hat with
a flat top rather than with the crease that you usually find in a felt
hat. It was made of--well, for want of a better word I will use--a
hairy material, rather than the soft felt material.
Mr. GRIFFIN. Is that a characteristic of this man’s clothing that is
firmly impressed on your mind as his face?
Mr. MCCULLOUGH. Yes; yes. Because there, again, as I say, I took a look
at him as I was coming down, and the fact that there was no crease, and
it was not the usual type of felt hat did stick in my mind, even before
I saw his face.
Mr. GRIFFIN. You indicated earlier that the hat that you believed Ruby
was wearing when he shot Oswald was a different kind of hat from the
one you saw on Friday night.
Mr. MCCULLOUGH. Yes.
Mr. GRIFFIN. Have you ever actually seen the hat that Ruby was wearing
on Sunday?
Mr. MCCULLOUGH. No; just from my view, there again, that I had in the
garage at the time of the shooting. I have never actually seen the hat
to examine it as such.
Mr. POLLAK. Could we ask Mr. McCullough about the movements the man
actually made who did shoot Oswald?
Mr. GRIFFIN. I wasn’t going to ask him the question, because we have
the films. But if you have a question, Mr. Pollak, go ahead and ask him.
Mr. POLLAK. You did observe Ruby step forward and shoot Oswald?
Mr. MCCULLOUGH. Yes; I saw a man in effect move out of the line of
people along the ramp, and, frankly, at first I thought he was a
photographer who was disobeying the instructions against any movement.
And then I saw his arm come up, and I momentarily wondered whether he
was going to try to shake hands with someone there. Then I saw the
flash of metal in his hand--there, again, under these tremendously
bright lights. And I saw, or heard the shot, heard a shot, saw a
flash of flame against Oswald’s sweater. And then there was complete
confusion in the garage area. There were policemen actually throwing
themselves, sliding along the tops of the parked automobiles to get at
the scene of this melee that was underway there.
Mr. POLLAK. Could you tell us, Mr. McCullough, where this man, Ruby,
was in the garage when he first came to your attention?
Mr. MCCULLOUGH. Well, the first time I noticed him at all is when he
detached himself from the crowd, in other words when he walked forward
from the crowd along the ramp.
Mr. POLLAK. You did not see him, observe him moving into that crowd at
any time?
Mr. MCCULLOUGH. Not, not at all. The first time I noticed him was when
he moved toward the two police officers and Oswald, who was between the
two officers. And I did hear someone call out--the exact words were,
“Jack, Jack, you son-of-a-bitch.” And some other reporters said that
they thought it came from--that some of the phrase came from the man
who did the shooting. But it seemed to me it came from a policeman who
was standing in the corridor opposite the entrance to the booking room.
And I got a look at this officer when he moved into the group around
Ruby, and found him later on the third floor, and he did say it was he
who shouted out, and that his assignment was the vice squad in Dallas,
and that he recognized Ruby as Ruby moved toward Oswald. The officer’s
name is in that statement, but what it is--I forget it, myself, now.
Mr. GRIFFIN. We have it in the statement, and this is going to be a
part of the statement.
Mr. MCCULLOUGH. And the officer told me and told other reporters this
at the same time--that he knew Ruby from his regular patrol work as a
vice squad officer.
Mr. GRIFFIN. Is there anything that you can think of that might be
pertinent to our investigation that you have observed that we have not
talked about here today, or which you did not mention in the interview
on December 1?
Mr. MCCULLOUGH. The only thing that might be worthy of mention is the
fact that when Wade, the police chief, and the homicide squad Captain
Fritz talked to reporters, they were under constant pressure to produce
Oswald. As a matter of fact, on many occasions, late Friday night,
early Saturday morning, they were told by various reporters that they
owed an obligation to this country and the whole world to let them see
the man who shot the President. And this, I think, is why they did
produce----
Mr. GRIFFIN. Did you actually hear some reporters say that?
Mr. MCCULLOUGH. Yes.
Mr. POLLAK. In that vein, did you hear any insinuations being made that
the Dallas Police Department might have been mistreating Oswald?
Mr. MCCULLOUGH. Only from Oswald. He at one time, when he was walking
along the corridor--and here I don’t know whether he was on his way
to this press conference, for want of a better word, or whether he
was leaving. He said something about his sanitary rights were being
violated. One of the policemen said he wants to take a shower. Oswald
himself, the first time I saw him, in the lineup room--there, again,
at the basement level--he held his hands high so that the handcuffs he
was wearing would be seen on camera. And this struck me as a little
unusual, because having had many, many years as a police reporter, I
have seen people who were charged with crimes try to cover their face.
He made no such movement. He was just trying to display the handcuffs,
which struck me as odd.
Mr. GRIFFIN. Do you feel that it would have been proper or improper for
the police department not to have permitted news media representatives
on the third floor on Friday, Saturday, and Sunday?
Mr. MCCULLOUGH. Well, my own personal opinion--I feel that it would
have been perfectly proper for them to have not permitted news media
representatives on that particular floor. But there, again, having
said this, I would like also to say I don’t think there is any police
department in the country that is set up to handle an investigation
following the assassination of a President. I think they were extremely
sensitive to public opinion, and were trying to do their best to show
that they were doing a good job.
Mr. GRIFFIN. How many other police departments have you had experience
with in your years as a reporter?
Mr. MCCULLOUGH. Well, as a police reporter it was pretty much in
Philadelphia. But as far as security around a President--I have
traveled with several Presidents, in political campaigns and tours, and
so that I have seen the police operate in New York and Chicago.
Mr. GRIFFIN. How many years experience have you had in Philadelphia as
a police reporter?
Mr. MCCULLOUGH. Ten.
Mr. GRIFFIN. I am asking here now for a personal opinion. In your
estimation, do the police have an affirmative obligation to render
affirmative assistance to newspaper reporters in covering matters?
Mr. MCCULLOUGH. I think they do. Yes; so long as it does not hinder the
investigation, as such. Actually, I think that in most cases this can
be done without any hindrance to the investigation. Of course, while
I say it would have been proper for the Dallas police to have not
permitted the reporters in the immediate vicinity of the area where
Oswald was being questioned, I think--I cannot think of any city where
I could have expected the thing to be handled in a different way than
from what it was handled in Dallas. I think the thing was a crime of
such magnitude that the police themselves wanted--having had an arrest,
I think that they were then anxious to show that they had solved the
shooting, and that they were trying to erase what they considered to be
a stigma on the name of Dallas.
Mr. GRIFFIN. Looking back over your experiences on those 3 days, do you
have any suggestions as to how the police could have handled the press
consistent with what you consider to be their obligation to render
assistance to the press in the performance of the press duties?
Mr. MCCULLOUGH. Nothing, beyond the fact that they might have, and
there would have been a tremendous yell of censorship and violation of
freedom of the press--they could have kept the media, the news media,
in one area, and established some sort of a liaison, appointing an
officer to bring information to them. This I have never seen done. But
it could be done. It is entirely a personal opinion. I think that the
Dallas police performed pretty well. As I say, I was asked constantly
for credentials. And most of the reporters near me were also asked for
credentials. Especially on the morning--Sunday morning, in which it was
planned to move Oswald, they were very strict.
Mr. GRIFFIN. Do you think it would have been proper or improper for the
police to have barred the press from the basement area at the time that
Oswald was being transferred?
Mr. MCCULLOUGH. I think what they did was proper. In other words, I
feel that they felt that they had the situation under complete control.
That had everyone stayed in the positions, with no movement, that there
was sufficient space in there to guard the prisoner and to move him out
without anything going wrong in the basement.
Mr. GRIFFIN. You say that on the assumption that there was nobody in
there bent upon shooting him.
Mr. MCCULLOUGH. That is right. There, again, you don’t want to get too
much personal opinion there, but I think it is possible at any time for
anyone who really wants to kill somebody to do it--a public official or
anyone else.
Mr. GRIFFIN. So that our record may be complete here, how many years
experience have you had as a newspaper reporter?
Mr. MCCULLOUGH. Twenty-six years.
Mr. GRIFFIN. Prior to your giving your testimony here this morning,
have I or any other member of the staff of this Commission discussed
your testimony with you?
Mr. MCCULLOUGH. No; not at all.
Mr. GRIFFIN. Mr. Pollak, do you have any further questions?
Mr. POLLAK. No; I don’t think so.
Mr. GRIFFIN. Do you have anything, Mr. McCullough?
Mr. MCCULLOUGH. No; that is all.
Mr. GRIFFIN. Let me thank you for coming here. Your assistance has been
considerable to us, and we appreciate it very much.
Mr. MCCULLOUGH. I don’t know whether it has been of any value. But I am
delighted to fulfill the request.
Mr. GRIFFIN. We are happy that you could come. And, again, I thank you.
TESTIMONY OF ABRAHAM KLEINMAN
The testimony of Abraham Kleinman was taken at 11:35 a.m., on July 24,
1964, in the office of the U.S. attorney, 301 Post Office Building,
Bryan and Ervay Streets, Dallas, Tex., by Mr. Burt W. Griffin,
assistant counsel of the President’s Commission.
Mr. GRIFFIN. Let me introduce myself again. I am Burt Griffin.
Mr. KLEINMAN. I am Abe Kleinman.
Mr. GRIFFIN. I am a member of the general counsel staff of the
President’s Commission on the Assassination of President Kennedy.
It is our normal procedure to explain a little bit about what we are
doing here before we ask you to testify.
The Commission was set up pursuant to an Executive order of President
Johnson and the joint resolution of Congress, and it has been directed
to investigate, evaluate, and report back to President Johnson upon all
the facts surrounding the assassination of President Kennedy and the
death of Lee Harvey Oswald.
We have asked you to come here today particularly because you were
acquainted with Jack Ruby, and we would like to find out what light you
can shed upon Jack Ruby and his involvement in the events of November
22, 23, and 24.
Under the rules and regulations of the Commission, I have been
designated to take your deposition today. Also, under these rules, the
witness is entitled to have a written notice 3 days before he appears
to testify. I might ask you if you have received such a notice.
Mr. KLEINMAN. Yes; I received that Sunday. I wasn’t there but it was
signed for in my sister’s hand.
Mr. GRIFFIN. When did you actually see it?
Mr. KLEINMAN. The notice here?
Mr. GRIFFIN. Yes.
Mr. KLEINMAN. Sunday.
Mr. GRIFFIN. Then you have had 3 days?
Mr. KLEINMAN. Yes; I called Monday to find out about it.
Mr. GRIFFIN. Let me ask you first of all, do you have any questions
about what is taking place here? And if so, I will try to answer them
for you.
Mr. KLEINMAN. Well, I really don’t know what, except what I read. That
is, that you wanted me to come up here and answer some questions.
Mr. GRIFFIN. Why don’t we proceed with the testimony, and if you have
any questions, you may ask them.
Mr. KLEINMAN. I wouldn’t have any questions, because I don’t know just
what you want or what I could tell you.
Mr. GRIFFIN. We will try to ask you some questions and we will see what
answers we can get. If you have any questions, feel free to ask me.
Mr. KLEINMAN. I don’t have any, because I don’t know very much about
it, except I knew Jack Ruby.
Mr. GRIFFIN. All right, let me ask you then if you will raise your
right hand and I will administer the oath to you.
Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you are about to give will be
the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?
Mr. KLEINMAN. Sure.
Mr. GRIFFIN. Would you state for the court reporter what your full name
is?
Mr. KLEINMAN. Abraham Kleinman.
Mr. GRIFFIN. Would you spell it?
Mr. KLEINMAN. K-l-e-i-n-m-a-n.
Mr. GRIFFIN. Where do you live, Mr. Kleinman?
Mr. KLEINMAN. 1189B Timplemore Drive.
Mr. GRIFFIN. Is that here in Dallas?
Mr. KLEINMAN. That is near White Rock Lake.
Mr. GRIFFIN. When were you born?
Mr. KLEINMAN. December 16, 1902.
Mr. GRIFFIN. Do you have a trade or profession?
Mr. KLEINMAN. I am a public accountant.
Mr. GRIFFIN. How long have you been a public accountant?
Mr. KLEINMAN. Well, I started practicing after I got out of the service
in 1943.
Mr. GRIFFIN. How long have you lived in the Dallas area?
Mr. KLEINMAN. I have lived here in Dallas about 58 years.
Mr. GRIFFIN. Pretty close to a native.
Mr. KLEINMAN. Pretty close.
Mr. GRIFFIN. Do you recall when it was that you first met Jack Ruby?
Mr. KLEINMAN. Well, I really don’t recall when or how I met him, but I
guess it’s been maybe 12 or 13 or maybe less, somewhere in there.
Mr. GRIFFIN. Did there come a time when you began to do accounting work
for him?
Mr. KLEINMAN. Well, I have. I did accounting work for him. He wanted me
to work out his corporation returns for the State and the Federal, but
I have never been able to complete it for him.
Mr. GRIFFIN. When was it that he asked you to do that?
Mr. KLEINMAN. It was sometime in 1962, the latter part of 1962.
Mr. GRIFFIN. Did you ever do any work for him before that?
Mr. KLEINMAN. Yes. I checked some records for him with the Internal
Revenue. I don’t recall when.
Mr. GRIFFIN. Did you know him on a social basis between the time you
first met him?
Mr. KLEINMAN. Not socially. I would know him like you meet anyone and
know him, as an acquaintance.
Mr. GRIFFIN. Where would you meet him?
Mr. KLEINMAN. Oh, sometimes I would run into him downtown. And while I
was doing work for him, he would come by the office, and I would have
to go by his place of business on Commerce Street to the Carousel.
Mr. GRIFFIN. Did you visit the Carousel Club from time to time?
Mr. KLEINMAN. Well, I had visited there a number of times maybe around
the latter part of the month to bring him some reports to sign, or get
the social security withheld, or get his tax reports out.
Mr. GRIFFIN. Did Jack bring any records to you on a monthly basis?
Mr. KLEINMAN. He was supposed to. He brought quite a few records. There
was a lot of records missing that he brought up later. We were trying
to accumulate all the records to work up his report.
Mr. GRIFFIN. Were you able to tell from an examination of the records
that he did bring you whether or not the Carousel Club was a profitable
operation?
Mr. KLEINMAN. Well, from the looks of it, it didn’t look like it was
too profitable, as far as I could tell. Of course, I never did get the
final, get to make a final.
Mr. GRIFFIN. Did you have any indication that he was actually losing
money?
Mr. KLEINMAN. Well, at times he said it was losing money.
Mr. GRIFFIN. Did the records substantiate that?
Mr. KLEINMAN. Well, that I couldn’t say because I didn’t have all the
records, all of his paid receipts. And over a period of 6 or 8 months,
why he would find additional receipts and bring to me.
Mr. GRIFFIN. Receipts meaning?
Mr. KLEINMAN. Paid bills such as for merchandise.
Mr. GRIFFIN. If there were any missing, that would only reduce his
profit?