Mr. BOUCK. That is the total file that we looked into.
Mr. STERN. On a national basis?
Mr. BOUCK. The total two or three files we looked into would encompass
about that many people.
Mr. DULLES. All right. That gives me just what I was asking for.
Mr. STERN. In point of fact, Mr. Bouck, when you looked at the checkup
control file and the trip-index file before the Dallas trip how many
names were reported for the areas in the Dallas field office territory
where the President was to visit?
Mr. BOUCK. We found no uncontrolled people in the trip file for Dallas.
All of the cases in Dallas were controlled to our satisfaction. We
found also in the checkup file no uncontrolled individuals that we
thought warranted an alert for Dallas.
Mr. DULLES. Did you ask the FBI or any other local agency for any cases
they might have?
Mr. BOUCK. Yes, sir.
Mr. DULLES. In connection with the trip?
Mr. BOUCK. In fact, they referred several cases to us in connection
with the trip, right prior to the trip on the local level.
Mr. DULLES. On the local level?
Mr. BOUCK. On the local level.
Mr. McCLOY. Being as objective as you can be under the circumstances,
what would you have done if the FBI had told you there was a man named
Oswald in Dallas, who was a defector, had been a defector?
Mr. BOUCK. I think if they had told us only that, we probably would not
have taken action. If I might qualify it further, if we had known what
all of the Government agencies knew together, and knew that he had that
vantage point on the route, then we certainly would have taken very
drastic action.
Mr. McCLOY. If they had told you that there was a man named Oswald in
Dallas, who had been a defector, who was employed at the Texas School
Book Depository?
Mr. BOUCK. Yes, sir; we would have looked at that.
Mr. McCLOY. You would have looked at that?
Mr. BOUCK. Yes, sir.
Mr. McCLOY. Knowing that the Texas School Book Depository was on the
President's route?
Mr. BOUCK. On the President's route.
Mr. STERN. Would it have made a difference to you if he was a
legitimate employee of that institution?
Mr. BOUCK. Well, not from our standpoint of having us look at it. I
can't predict too well what the field office would have done after they
looked. It would depend on what they found out, but the field office
would have checked that. We would has asked them to check it and they
would in fact have checked it not knowing what conclusions they would
have arrived at, I don't quite--I am not quite able to predict just
what measures they would have taken.
Senator COOPER. May I ask a question on this point? Have you examined
your records since the assassination of President Kennedy to determine
if the name Lee Oswald appears in your files?
Mr. BOUCK. We have never had it prior in any connection, never in our
records.
Senator COOPER. I gathered from what you said in response to Mr.
McCloy's question you do not keep any special file relating to
defectors?
Mr. BOUCK. No, sir.
Senator COOPER. In this country?
Mr. BOUCK. Not unless there is something much more to it than the fact
they defected.
Senator COOPER. Then in the case of Lee Oswald from your statement
that you do not keep any file on defectors, if you had known about his
presence there, what would have been the cause then for you to have
taken special notice of him?
Mr. BOUCK. The key there would have been a defection plus a knowledge
that he had a vantage point on the route. Those two together would have
required action.
Senator COOPER. The point I make is, and this again is arguing after
the fact, if the fact he was a defector, plus a vantage point would
make you take notice of him it would seem to me it would be very
substantial evidence to have in your file that he was a defector,
wouldn't you think so?
Mr. BOUCK. Well, again, this is part of this big study that we are in.
We never before knew, I think, of a defector who did anything like
this so we are not quite sure that defection in itself is a key to an
assassin. However, that combined with certain things, knowing that he
had a vantage point would have caused us to look.
Mr. STERN. Were there any other characteristics of Oswald that you
believe to have been known to other Federal agencies before November 22
that would have been important to you in deciding whether or not he was
a potential threat?
Mr. BOUCK. Yes. I think I have supplied you with a list of about 18
things that were known to the Federal agencies, but these, I believe,
were spread from Moscow to Mexico City in at least four agencies, so I
am not aware of how much any one agency or any one person might have
known.
But there was quite a little bit of derogatory information known about
Oswald in this broad expanse of agencies.
Mr. STERN. Without respect to any such list, what other
characteristics, trying as much as possible to avoid hindsight, do you
think were germane to determine his potential danger?
Mr. BOUCK. I would think his continued association with the Russian
Embassy after his return, his association with the Castro groups would
have been of concern to us, a knowledge that he had, I believe, been
court-martialed for illegal possession of a gun, of a hand gun in the
Marines, that he had owned a weapon and did a good deal of hunting
or use of it, perhaps in Russia, plus a number of items about his
disposition and unreliability of character, I think all of those,
if we had had them altogether, would have added up to pointing out a
pretty bad individual, and I think that, together, had we known that
he had a vantage point would have seemed somewhat serious to us, even
though I must admit that none of these in themselves would be--would
meet our specific criteria, none of them alone.
But it is when you begin adding them up to some degree that you begin
to get criteria that are meaningful.
Senator COOPER. I am sure you have answered what I am going to ask but
I will ask it anyway. Then it is correct prior to the assassination the
Secret Service had no information from any agency or any source----
Mr. BOUCK. That is correct.
Senator COOPER. Relating to Lee Oswald?
Mr. BOUCK. That is correct.
Mr. STERN. I believe you said earlier, Mr. Bouck, that before Dallas
you thought the liaison arrangements were satisfactory and that other
Federal agencies, in particular, had full awareness of the kind of
information that the Secret Service was looking for under the general
criteria that you articulated?
Mr. BOUCK. Yes, sir.
Mr. STERN. Why then, do you think you were not notified of Oswald? Was
there perhaps something wrong with the system?
Mr. BOUCK. This, of course, is opinion. In my opinion, there was
no lack of knowledge of what we should have. Insofar as I know no
individual knew enough about Oswald to judge him to meet our criteria
of presenting a danger to the President. I know of no individual who
knew all about Oswald, including the fact that he had a vantage point
on the route.
If that is so, I don't know. I didn't know.
Mr. McCLOY. Somebody in the FBI knew it, didn't they?
Mr. BOUCK. I have no record to know that. They knew certain
information. I have no record that would indicate they knew all of the
derogatory information.
Mr. McCLOY. I don't know I would say they knew all the derogatory
information but they certainly knew the vantage point and they
certainly knew the defection elements.
Mr. BOUCK. I know they knew he was in Dallas. Whether they recognized
that as being on the route, I don't know that.
Mr. McCLOY. I think the record shows he was employed there, or the
deposition shows.
Mr. BOUCK. I don't know that.
Mr. STERN. Is it of key importance to what you say now regarding the
information on Oswald before the assassination to identify his vantage
point? If you would take that away from the other characteristics does
he then not become a threat?
Mr. BOUCK. He would not meet the criteria of a threat as we had it at
that time, if you take that away.