One other thing that occurred to me before we go on here. We have
obtained various birth records and so forth, and in trying to
identify which record pertains to which child, I noticed that your
parents—actually your given names were Hebrew names.
Mr. RUBY. Yes.
Mr. GRIFFIN. Is my understanding correct that your given Hebrew name
was Isadore?
Mr. RUBY. No; actually I was, the name listed was, Izzy, on my birth
record. Is that what you are referring to?
Mr. GRIFFIN. Yes.
Mr. RUBY. Izzy, I-z-z-y, that is me.
Mr. GRIFFIN. Do you recall what the given names of your various sisters
are? Could you relate those to us?
Mr. RUBY. No; I couldn’t. Eileen I think was Ida, I think. The others I
don’t know. You have to talk to one of the older members of the family.
Mr. GRIFFIN. Incidentally, also in Exhibit No. 3, I noticed that you
had, somebody has put some penciled mark numbers, were those your marks
and did you wish to comment on those?
Mr. RUBY. Yes, it is just an error there—that should be scrap iron and
junk handlers.
Mr. GRIFFIN. All right, it is corrected for the record, you just state
it for the record.
Mr. RUBY. Here is a repetition of that other one where it says I stated
he was doing every one a great service. I don’t remember saying that
and I am just not sure.
Mr. GRIFFIN. All right.
Let me hand you what has been marked as Exhibit No. 5 and has been
further marked “Washington, D.C., June 3, 1964, deposition of Earl
Ruby” which purports to be a copy of an interview with you also at
South Field, Mich., on November 26, 1963, with special agents Robichau
and Wilson.
The exhibit consists of six pages, numbered in sequence 11 through 16.
I will hand it to you and ask you if you have any corrections that you
want to make in that?
Mr. RUBY. Here again on page 5 it states I worked at the building—the
barracks at Great Lakes from 1942. It was only during 1942. Shall I
change it?
Mr. GRIFFIN. Yes; if you wish.
Do you want to sign Exhibit No. 5?
Mr. RUBY. Yes.
Mr. GRIFFIN. I am going to hand you what has been marked for
identification as “Washington, D.C., June 3, 1964, deposition of
Earl Ruby Exhibit No. 6.” This is a copy of an interview which Agent
Robichau purports to have had with you on November 27 in Detroit, Mich.
Would you want to look at that and tell us if there are any changes or
corrections that you would make?
Mr. RUBY. No; no corrections. Shall I sign it?
Mr. GRIFFIN. All right, fine.
I will hand you what has been marked for identification as “Exhibit
No. 7, Washington, D.C., June 3, 1964, deposition of Earl Ruby.” This
purports to be a copy of an interview report prepared by Special Agent
George Parfet of the FBI. The interview took place with you on November
28 in Chicago. It consists of two pages and it is numbered at the
bottom pages 15 and 16.
Would you want to look at that and tell us if there are any changes or
corrections that you would care to make?
Mr. RUBY. Here on page 2 it mentioned that I had never heard of Jack
being mentally ill or depressed. However, I know he was depressed
several years ago.
Mr. GRIFFIN. Did you know that at the time you gave that interview
report, gave that interview?
Mr. RUBY. Yes; I knew he was depressed but I didn’t understand it
completely. I didn’t know that it was called depression at that time.
Mr. GRIFFIN. How did it appear, how would you have described it at that
time?
Mr. RUBY. Well, that he wouldn’t shave and he wouldn’t bathe, and he
wouldn’t go out, but at that time I didn’t know what it was called.
But after thinking it over, when he came up to Chicago once, he was
terribly depressed, as I stated before.
Mr. GRIFFIN. How would you have described him at the time you saw him—
what would you have said was the matter with him?
Mr. RUBY. Well, I was just—let me see what words I can use to describe
it—I would have said he was disgusted, not knowing that actually he was
depressed until I really learned what the word “depressed” means.
Mr. GRIFFIN. Was his attitude one more of hostility or belligerence
toward what had happened rather than one of submission?
Mr. RUBY. No; it was one of submission. He wouldn’t go any places as I
stated. He didn’t want to wash or clean himself up and I had to more or
less force him to get in the shower and things of that sort.
Mr. GRIFFIN. What about the things he said, though. Were these—you
used the term “disgust”—did he speak in the manner of someone who was
disgusted would speak?
Mr. RUBY. Well, he didn’t even have much to say, if I recall. He didn’t
even have much to say. He tried to keep to himself.
Mr. GRIFFIN. Where did he live at that time?
Mr. RUBY. I mean in my presence. In other words, he would go in another
room or sit in a chair and just sit there without making—just thinking
to himself about whatever was going through his mind. He was listless.
Mr. GRIFFIN. Were you married at that time?
Mr. RUBY. Yes, I was married.
Mr. GRIFFIN. Did Jack come and live with you?
Mr. RUBY. No, no.
Mr. GRIFFIN. Where did he live at the time?
Mr. RUBY. He came to the family and that is where I came to see him.
In fact, he was so depressed that I took him to try to cheer him up, I
had to go to New York for a business trip, a show that was taking place
there and I took him for a ride, we were driving anyhow, and I thought
it would pep him up a little bit, you know, to go on a trip. But it
didn’t help much.
Mr. GRIFFIN. Was your attitude toward him this time one of sympathy or
couldn’t you figure out what was eating this guy?
Mr. RUBY. No; I would say he was. I just thought he was disgusted with
things, little realizing that he was in a state of depression.
Mr. GRIFFIN. But were you sympathetic toward him at the time?
Mr. RUBY. Oh, yes; as I said, that is why I took him on the trip. I
tried to encourage him. I told him “Maybe we can find something for
you to get into,” as I mentioned before, “Some business we can get you
started in or something.”
However, he decided, as I stated before, to go back to Dallas.
Mr. GRIFFIN. Did he ever tell you why he decided to go back to Dallas?
Mr. RUBY. I don’t recall, he may have, but I can’t recall just now.
I see another, the last paragraph on page 2. I didn’t even remember
that conversation with the agent.
Mr. GRIFFIN. Would you read the paragraph?
Mr. RUBY. It states here, “Earl Ruby was specifically asked regarding
his residence in New Haven, Conn., in 1940. He has stated that he had
never been in New Haven, Conn., in his life and in that period was
engaged in the drycleaning business on Cicero Avenue in Chicago.”
Mr. GRIFFIN. Is that statement a correct statement?
Mr. RUBY. When we were selling we used to travel the east coast but I
would have only been there—I don’t remember being there, but if I had
been there, I would have been there only for a day. I think he asked
me if I lived there for any length of time, if I recall, but I am not
sure. I don’t recall this——
Mr. GRIFFIN. Were you in the drycleaning business on Cicero Avenue at
that time?
Mr. RUBY. As far as I know, yes; I had an independent cleaning route
at that time. I used to call on friends and pick up their cleaning and
deliver it right to their home.
Mr. GRIFFIN. You didn’t operate a cleaning plant?
Mr. RUBY. No, no; but this is where I worked out of. Maybe he just cut
it short. I brought my cleaning to this plant in Chicago, on Cicero
Avenue, in Chicago, they cleaned it and charged me a wholesale price
and I added on a profit, of course.
Mr. GRIFFIN. I am going to hand you what has been marked as “Exhibit 8,
Washington, D.C., June 3, 1964, deposition of Earl Ruby.” It consists
of two pages numbered 210 and 211 and purports to be a copy of a report
which Agent George Parfet prepared with respect to that interview he
had with you on November 28 at South Field, Mich.
Mr. RUBY. I didn’t sign the other one.
(Earl Ruby Exhibits Nos. 5, 6, 7, and 8 were marked for identification.)
Mr. GRIFFIN. I will state for the record then, you have just signed
Exhibit No. 7, and if you will look at Exhibit No. 8, tell us if there
are any changes or corrections you would make in that.
Mr. RUBY. Here again it is almost a duplicate of the previous, what do
you call it again, number?
Mr. GRIFFIN. Interview report.
Mr. RUBY. What is this?
Mr. GRIFFIN. That is Exhibit No. 8, and this is Exhibit No. 7 that I
have here.
Mr. RUBY. The last paragraph again as stated in the previous one. They
are almost identical.
Mr. GRIFFIN. Yes; it looks like they are identical copies and they were
just included in different places in our materials.
Let me hand it to you then and let me ask you to sign it.
Mr. RUBY. Sign it anyhow?
Mr. GRIFFIN. Yes; Exhibit No. 8.
Mr. RUBY. Yes.
Mr. GRIFFIN. Yes; Exhibit No. 8.
I finally hand you what has been marked for identification as “Exhibit
No. 9, Washington, D.C., June 3, 1964, deposition of Earl Ruby.”
This is a copy of a report which Agent Robichau made with you of an
interview he had on December 2, 1963, at Detroit, Mich.
Would you tell us if you have any additions or corrections or changes
to make in that?
Mr. RUBY. No; this is correct. That she is not related in any way to
our family.
Mr. GRIFFIN. All right.
Now, that concludes all the questions that I have, and I presume that
Mr. Hubert has or he would have come back in.
Are there any topics that we haven’t covered that you feel that we
ought to—is there anything further that you would like to say? You have
got the floor.
Mr. RUBY. Yes; I think, and this took place at the trial, and after
the first policeman had testified as to statements made by my brother
Jack, that evening when I saw Jack, he told me that he is going to the
electric chair.
He said because he never made any of those statements, and now he knows
what Wade has in mind, because if Wade wants to send you to the chair
he can, and he always does, and that is why he has the record that he
has.
Mr. GRIFFIN. Do you remember who the first policeman was who testified?
Mr. RUBY. No; I don’t. And he told me on several occasions that he
never made the statements the police testified that he did make, and in
fact, if the record will be checked, it is proved that the statement
that Dean made couldn’t have been true—Officer Dean.
Mr. GRIFFIN. Why do you say that?
Mr. RUBY. Because at the time when he said he had been talking—that
Jack made a statement, Jack, he is the one who said Jack told him 2
days before at 4 o’clock, I think the time was, that he stated, that
Jack told him that he was going to get Oswald.
At that time Jack was at home with Eva, so Jack couldn’t have made that
statement to him, and, of course, this has been brought out in the
petition or motion for a new trial, so it is in the official record, so
to say.
Mr. GRIFFIN. Now, when Jack talked to you the first night after, or
after the first police officer testified, was that first police officer
Sergeant Dean, or was that another police officer?
Mr. RUBY. No; that was another police officer. Dean was the last police
officer, if I recall correctly.
Mr. GRIFFIN. Did Jack tell you what he did say?
Mr. RUBY. No; but he said he never made those statements.