I hope the Commission will give consideration to my request, which the
Commission has answered, but which again I would like at this time to
renew. That is, that I be permitted, at the request of Mrs. Oswald,
the mother of the accused defendant, really, before this Commission's
hearing, to represent his interests here, to have access to the
material which you have access to, and the right to present witnesses.
It is not usual for an attorney representing a party to be given an
opportunity to testify, which is quite unusual--but rather to be given
the opportunity to present witnesses and to cross-examine them. It has
generally been my role in criminal cases. Never before have I testified
in behalf of a client.
If it is the Commission's position that this is not a trial in any
respect, and therefore Oswald is not entitled to counsel, that is the
position with which I would like to respectfully offer a dissent.
The fact that Oswald is not going to have a real trial flows only from
his death, and he is not responsible with that having taken place.
Every right belonging to an American citizen charged with a crime was
taken from him up to and including his life.
I think now that that episode is completed, hopefully never to reappear
ever again in our history, or anything close to it--I think it would
be proper to permit him to have counsel before the Commission, counsel
who can function on his behalf in terms of cross-examining evidence and
presenting witnesses. If it is the Commission's position now that he is
entitled to counsel, and the Commission will appoint counsel, then I
ask the Commission to consider that the Constitutional right to counsel
involves the right to counsel of one's choice, or in the event of the
death of a party, to counsel of the choice of the surviving members of
the family.
If Marina Oswald, the widow, sought to have counsel represent her
husband I would think--here--I would think that would cause a conflict
and a problem, if the widow and also the mother made the same request.
But as I understand it no request has been made by the widow, who
has indicated to the press that she believes her husband is guilty,
and through her former business agent, Mr. Martin, who I am told
was secured for her by the Secret Service as a business agent, she
indicated that even a trial which might prove he was innocent, she
would still be sure he was guilty, and has indicated since that time
no desire to my knowledge to secure counsel for her husband, her late
husband, before the Commission.
I think, then, the mother would, in almost any jurisdiction, be the
next person to make a decision in this area, and the mother has made a
decision, as you know. She has retained me to represent the rights and
interests of her son.
I think under those circumstances it would be proper for the Commission
to permit me to participate.
This, of course, is not a jury trial. With all due respect to the
integrity and background of each of the members of the Commission,
I suggest that it is not the function of the trying body to appoint
counsel, or the jury to appoint counsel, but in our society it is just
the reverse; it is the function of defense counsel to participate in
determining who the jury should be.
Many criminal lawyers, very noted counsel, would probably seek to
excuse certain--and again no disrespect at all is meant to the
background of members of this Commission--but defense counsel generally
seeks to excuse as jurors those who are in any way associated with
the Government in a criminal case. And here we have the Government
appointing the jury, and then the jury picking counsel, who also is
Government connected at this time. I in no way wish to raise the
question of the integrity of any of the members of the Commission
or counsel or anyone else, or their ability. But that truism about
equality has some meaning in terms of impartiality--everyone is
impartial to some people, and more impartial to other people. And
counsel, in order to function, I believe, must be totally independent
and totally committed to the responsibility of representing his client.
But above all, he must be secured by someone who has the ability to
speak for the deceased, in this case his mother and his wife. And under
those circumstances, I renew my request that I be permitted to, at the
request of Lee Oswald's mother, who survives him--to function before
this Commission as counsel on his behalf.
The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Lane, I must advise you that the Commission, as you
already know, has considered your request and has denied it. It does
not consider you as the attorney for Lee Oswald. Now, this is not for
any discussion. We are not going to argue it. You have had your say,
and I will just answer.
Lee Oswald left a widow. She is his legal representative. She is
represented by counsel. This Commission is cooperating with her in
any way she may request. If anyone else wants to present any evidence
to this Commission, they may do so. But it is the view and the
wish--the will of the Commission--that no one else shall be entitled to
participate in the work and the deliberations of the Commission.
We asked you to come here today because we understood that you did have
evidence. We are happy to receive it. We want every bit of evidence
that you have. You may present anything that you wish to us. But you
are not to be a participant in the work of the Commission. I assume you
have some questions you would like to ask Mr. Lane, Mr. Rankin?
Mr. RANKIN. Yes, sir. Do you have any affidavits that you would like
to submit to the Commission? I understood at one time you had some
affidavits.
Mr. LANE. Well, I do have some affidavits. They are not originals--they
are photostatic copies of affidavits taken by the Dallas police and
on file in the Dallas district attorney's office. Now--including the
paraffin test which I made reference to.
Now, if the Commission does not have copies of those, I would like to
be so informed and I will see what I can do. I assume the Commission
has copies of all those documents.
Mr. RANKIN. Yes. Do you have anything beyond that that you care to
submit?
Mr. LANE. I have the various statements which I have made reference to
from Mrs. Hill and Mrs. Markham, Mr. Klein, Mr. Ryder. But I have given
you the essence of those statements. If you are interested in pursuing
that, I think it might be best to call them.
Mr. RANKIN. I am interested if there was anything beyond what you have
given us, Mr. Lane. And if you say you have given us the substance,
then I take it that is complete as far as it could be of assistance to
us, except our going directly to the witness. Is that what you have in
mind?
Mr. LANE. Yes.
Mr. RANKIN. Now, do you have any witnesses that you would like to
present for the Commission?
Mr. LANE. Well, I would like--I do not know that I would be able to do
that, frankly.
Mr. RANKIN. Well, would you have any that you suggest that we should
interview, bring before the Commission, that you have not presented up
to this time in your testimony?
Mr. LANE. No; there is no one who I know of other than those names I
have given, and two other persons whose permission I am going to have
to secure in reference to other matters, and hopefully they will be
willing to not only allow their names to be used, but to come forward
and testify, if you wish to hear them.
Mr. RANKIN. Now, is there any documentary evidence beyond which you
have submitted that you would like to submit to the Commission?
Mr. LANE. Not beyond what I have submitted or made reference to.
Mr. RANKIN. In regard to the paraffin that you have referred to, do
you have any particular materials or anything you want to refer the
Commission to?
Mr. LANE. To that particular test taken by Mr. Anderson on November 23d?
Mr. RANKIN. Anything beyond that?
Mr. LANE. No; not at this time.
Mr. RANKIN. Now, I understand at one time you referred to some meeting
in the Carousel Club a week or so before the assassination. Do you have
any material on that or any information?
Mr. LANE. Yes.
Mr. RANKIN. Is there anything you would care to present to the
Commission?
Mr. LANE. Yes. I have been informed--and this is the source I will have
to check with again in order to secure his testimony----
Mr. RANKIN. You will advise us if you are permitted to.
Mr. LANE. Yes. But I can tell you the substance--that a meeting took
place on November 14, 1963, in the Carousel Club between Officer Tippit
and Bernard Weissman, Mr. Weissman being the gentleman who placed a
full-page advertisement in the Dallas Morning News which was printed on
November 22, asking a series of questions of President Kennedy. It was
addressed "Welcome to Dallas, President Kennedy. Why have you traded
the Monroe Doctrine for spirit of Moscow. Why has Gus Hall and the
Communist Party endorsed your 1964 election" and such matter. I think
these two give a rather clear indication of the kind of advertisement
that it was. And I have been informed that Mr. Weissman and Officer
Tippit and a third person were present there. I have been given the
name of the third person. But for matters which I will make plain to
the Commission, I will be pleased to give you the name of the third
person as given to me, but not in the presence of the press. I would
rather do that in executive session--that one piece of testimony.
The CHAIRMAN. That is satisfactory to do that, if you wish.
Mr. LANE. Thank you, sir.
Mr. RANKIN. Is there anything else about that incident that you know
and want to tell the Commission at this time?
Mr. LANE. No.
The CHAIRMAN. That is the entire story, is it?
Mr. LANE. That they were there for more than 2 hours conferring--these
three persons.
The CHAIRMAN. Your information does not--is not to the effect as to
what they were conferring on.
Mr. LANE. No; they did not hear that.
Mr. RANKIN. I am not suggesting, Mr. Lane, that you have been selective
about what you have told the Commission and what you have not told, but
I do wish to make the inquiry as to whether there is any information
you might have that the Commission should be informed of as to other
people that you might have interviewed in regard to this matter.
Mr. LANE. I have given the Commission at this time everything that I
know.
Mr. RANKIN. Is there anything about the palm prints that you can tell
us in addition to what you have given us?
Mr. LANE. Not in addition to what I have said.
Mr. RANKIN. Well, I will ask you generally--is there anything in
addition to what you have said that you would like to tell the
Commission at this time that has any bearing upon this investigation?
Mr. LANE. All I can say in reference to that, Mr. Rankin, is that I
am practically engaged in this project by myself, which means I am
extremely limited. This is not my profession--investigator. I am an
attorney. And there are many leads which I have followed, which have
led me nowhere at all, obviously. Before finding Mrs. Markham or before
finding Mrs. Hill, there were many other persons I talked to who were
not even present, who I have heard were present. But there are still
large numbers, probably at this point hundreds of leads which I have
heard of, and which I have not yet been able to trace or to check
through. I do not think it would be constructive just to tell you all
of the things I have heard, because most of them are patently untrue,
and they just require a great deal of work. But I will continue to do
that, and should I come across any material which might in any way
interest you, I will certainly either write to you for the purpose of
presenting it to you through the mail in affidavit form, if you prefer,
or indicate that I will be available to come and testify again if you
prefer that.
The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Lane, your client, Mrs. Marguerite Oswald, when she
was testifying before us, told us that she had sold some pictures to
the press and she wanted the originals of all the pictures that she
presented to us, because she said they were of great financial value to
her. Do you know what sales she has made concerning pictures such as
you have shown us?
Mr. LANE. In terms of the picture with the rifle, you mean, for example?
The CHAIRMAN. Well, we might start with that.
Mr. LANE. She has never seen such a picture, she has informed me, of
Lee Harvey Oswald with the rifle--except after they had been published.
She never had any knowledge of such pictures, and had never seen them.
I do not really represent Marguerite Oswald. She has retained me to
represent the interests of her son. And so in her business dealings in
terms of her sale of pictures and articles, I have not represented her.
I believe she has a literary agent or perhaps even another lawyer--I
don't know. But she has retained me to represent her son's interests,
not to represent her at all.
The CHAIRMAN. I see.
Mr. LANE. Of course, we have conferred. But I do not have that
information.
The CHAIRMAN. Yes.
Mr. RANKIN. Mr Lane, I have a further question. Have you ever been
prevented by any law enforcement officer from interviewing anyone
concerning this matter when you wished to?
Mr. LANE. Well, I would say that I have been prevented by the
statements made by the law enforcement persons or agents to the
individual, that he should not talk to anyone about this case, that it
is a secret matter. As I have indicated, Mr. Klein----
Mr. RANKIN. You have described those cases, have you?
Mr. LANE. I have also spoken to a reporter who is employed by a Dallas
newspaper, who informed me that he sought to question more than 150 in
the area, and that many of those persons informed him that they were
ordered by the FBI not to talk to anyone about this case, and that
almost none of the witnesses would talk with him about the case, and
that some of them, when he asked the reason that they were not talking
to him, it was "Was this because you have been told by the FBI?"--and
he indicated they were not even allowed to answer that question. But
many of them told him that the FBI or the Secret Service ordered them
not to talk. In no other respect have I been interfered with to my
knowledge.
Mr. RANKIN. Do you have the name of that reporter--can you reveal that
to us?
Mr. LANE. I cannot reveal it at this time, but I am hopeful you will
permit me to. He is one of the reporters I referred to earlier.
Mr. RANKIN. Thank you.
The CHAIRMAN. Senator, do you have any questions?
Senator COOPER. No; I have no questions.
The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Rhyne.
Mr. RHYNE. Mr. Chief Justice--I wanted to ask Mr. Lane, on his inquiry
about what happened to Oswald during the 48 hours he was under
detention--you suggested that the Commission make an inquiry into
whether his civil rights were denied. Do you have any information on
that subject?
Mr. LANE. Yes. I saw what happened--I read in the newspapers and heard
on the radio.
Mr. RHYNE. It looked to me that most of the material presented here
today was really in the newspapers. You are merely repeating what
someone else has said.
Mr. LANE. I don't think that is an accurate characterization of my
testimony at all, sir. For example, I told you before of conversations
that I have had--I know you listened intently--I told you of
conversations that I had with Mr. Klein. I told you of conversations
I had with Miss Hill, who is probably the closest eyewitness to the
assassination, with Miss Woodward, who is perhaps the second or third
closest witness to the assassination, with Dial Ryder, with at least
two or three other persons.
Mr. RHYNE. But on this one point, with respect to denial of any civil
rights or protection of civil rights during this 48-hour period, you
say that is all in the newspaper stories?
Mr. LANE. No. What I meant by that response was that the basic denial
that I was discussing was the development of the case publicly against
him, so that it would be impossible in securing a jury panel to secure
12 jurors probably anywhere in this country who had not reached a
conclusion, first of all. And secondly, obviously the death of the
accused, which I know is a matter for the Commission's inquiry already.
Mr. RHYNE. I notice that you said your investigation was incomplete. So
I just wanted to be sure that I understood what you meant with respect
to this 48-hour detention period.
Mr. LANE. No; I have no knowledge over and above that that I could give
you in that area.
The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Murray, do you have any questions you would like to
ask?
Mr. MURRAY. No; I have none, Mr. Chief Justice, at this time.
The CHAIRMAN. Well, Mr. Lane, if any evidence should come to your
attention in the future, would you be willing to convey the information
to the Commission?
Mr. LANE. Yes; I certainly would, sir.
The CHAIRMAN. We will appreciate it if you would. Thank you for your
attendance.
We will adjourn at this time.
(Whereupon, at 5:35 p.m., the President's Commission adjourned, and
reconvened in executive session.)