Mr. COLEMAN. Sir, in that memorandum on the second page you have a
P.S., and you state that Priscilla J. told you that Oswald has been
told he will be leaving the hotel at the end of this week.
Did Miss Johnson tell you that?
Mr. McVICKAR. I feel sure I wouldn't have written that if she hadn't.
Mr. COLEMAN. Do you know whether Oswald actually left the hotel the end
of the week?
Mr. McVICKAR. I am not sure of the time that he left the hotel, but
from what I gather from the record, that must have been about the time
that he did leave the hotel and go to Minsk. As reflected in the other
memorandum it was rather unclear exactly how long Oswald spent in
Moscow, but I think that the record is approximately accurate here, and
that this would have been about the time he would have left the hotel.
Mr. COLEMAN. According to other information which the Commission has,
which happens to be Oswald's diary so we don't know how accurate it is,
it is stated that he didn't leave Moscow until January 4, 1960.
Mr. McVICKAR. That is new to me.
Mr. COLEMAN. You had no such information?
Mr. McVICKAR. I had no such--this is the first time I heard that.
Mr. DULLES. He left the hotel, however, for a period, did he not? He
was in the hospital for a period.
Mr. COLEMAN. No, sir; he was in the hospital before he came into the
Embassy.
Mr. DULLES. That is correct.
Mr. COLEMAN. His suicide attempt was before October 31.
Mr. McVICKAR. Now it says leaving the hotel, but it doesn't say--and I
think that would be all the information that would have been available
at the time that I wrote that, I think the implication was that he was
going to leave town as well, but that doesn't necessarily mean that he
wouldn't have spent the ensuing weeks in some other place in the city
of Moscow.
Mr. COLEMAN. In the P.S. you also indicated that "he will be trained in
electronics." Did you get that information from Miss Johnson?
Mr. McVICKAR. Well, yes; I think so, according to this.
Mr. COLEMAN. Did she say any more than just he would be trained in
electronics? Did she say what type of training he would get?
Mr. McVICKAR. I am afraid I have no more memory than what is written
here. In fact, I didn't even remember that I had written this
memorandum until I saw it the other day.
Mr. DULLES. Is the language "he will be trained" or "he had been
trained"?
Mr. McVICKAR. "He will be," that is what I wrote.
Mr. DULLES. Is it possible that could have been a reference to past
training during the Marines when he was trained in electronics?
Mr. McVICKAR. No; I suspect, that what I meant was, that he would be
trained in electronics by the Soviets, but I think that this was a
rather sketchy note of the conversation, and I suspect that what she
would have said, was that he would be trained in or used in the field
of electronics, in such a way probably that they would get the greatest
benefit from his knowledge.
Mr. COLEMAN. Sir, immediately prior to the time that you had the
conversation with Miss Johnson, you had had occasion, hadn't you, on
November 9, 1959, to attempt to deliver a message from Oswald's half
brother to Oswald?
Mr. McVICKAR. Yes; there is a note in the file to that effect, and I
don't really remember that incident very well, just very vaguely. I
think that I was given the assignment to attempt to deliver a message.
I think the idea was that we would try to see what we could do to get
this fellow to change his mind and go back to the United States.
The attitude that we took toward him was, I think, a normal one, as one
might toward a very mixed up young person, probably misinformed, and so
I think this was an effort to put him back in communication with his
family.
Mr. COLEMAN. I would like to show you a note from the Oswald file dated
November 9, 1959, which has been given Commission Exhibit No. 942, and
a copy of a telegram to Oswald from John E. Pic, which has been given
Commission Exhibit No. 943, and ask you, is that the telegram you
attempted to deliver, and is that the note you wrote at the time when
you were unable to deliver the telegram to Oswald?
Mr. McVICKAR. Yes; that is the note, and I don't necessarily recollect
this telegram. It may be that it was in a sealed envelope. I cannot say
that I recollect the telegram, but it certainly looks like the probable
telegram that would have been delivered, that I would have attempted to
deliver at that time.
Mr. COLEMAN. I take it that after October 31 of 1959, until Oswald left
Moscow, that you had no further contact with Oswald?
Mr. McVICKAR. That is my recollection, yes, that I had no further
contact with Oswald. I must say that a great many things did take place
in that 2 years.
I, for example, did not recollect, until just the other day when I
saw the file, that I had interviewed his wife. But to the best of my
recollection I never laid eyes on Oswald again.
Mr. COLEMAN. I think earlier in your testimony you said that you had
prepared a memorandum on November 27, 1963, in which you attempted to
recall what happened when you were in the American Embassy in 1959,
1960, and 1961, is that correct?
Mr. McVICKAR. Yes.
Mr. COLEMAN. A copy of the memorandum has been marked Commission
Exhibit No. 941. I want to ask you whether that is a copy of the
memorandum which you prepared, and sent to Mr. Thomas Ehrlich?
Mr. McVICKAR. Yes; that is a copy of it.
Mr. COLEMAN. Now in that memorandum, on the last page, page 3, the
second paragraph, you say: "In short, it seemed to me that there was a
possibility that he had been in contact with others before or during
his Marine Corps tour who had guided him and encouraged him in his
actions."
Could you indicate to the Commission the basis for making that
statement?
Mr. McVICKAR. Well, I think it is clear here, and if it isn't I should
certainly say, that this last page is in the nature of speculation and
an attempt to be helpful.
Now in answer to your question, he gave me the impression, and this was
supported by the impressions other people seemed to have at the time
through conversation, that he was a very young person to have so many
ideas in his head, and to have done so much about them, in effect, in
such a relatively short time, and so it occurred to some of us that it
may be that he had had some coaching from somebody; but also, I must
say, he was an unusual person and apparently sort of an ingrown person,
and so it may be that he had conceived and carried out all these things
by himself.
But I think that that paragraph in a way sums up that same idea, that
it seemed that there was a possibility that he had had some guidance in
carrying out this line of action.
Mr. COLEMAN. Does that also explain the sentence in the same paragraph
where you say: "On the other hand, there also seemed to me to be the
possibility that he was following a pattern of behavior in which he had
been tutored by person or persons unknown"?
Mr. McVICKAR. Yes; the same applies.
Mr. COLEMAN. You had no independent evidence of this at all, did you?
Mr. McVICKAR. I was asked to explain this attitude I had as best I
could, and I wrote another memorandum dated April 7, 1964, in which I
described to go into this line of thought.
Mr. COLEMAN. Could we have marked as Commission Exhibit No. 958 a
three-page memorandum from Mr. McVickar to Mr. Ehrlich, dated April 7,
1964?
(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 958 for
identification.)
Mr. COLEMAN. Is that the memorandum you just referred to?
Mr. McVICKAR. Yes; that is the same memorandum.
Mr. COLEMAN. You say this memorandum, Commission Exhibit No. 958, was
written in April 7, 1964, after you had been asked to explain your
earlier statement concerning following a pattern of behavior in which
he had been tutored by person or persons unknown?
Mr. McVICKAR. Yes; that is correct. I believe that the Commission asked
for this clarification from the Department of State, and it was relayed
out to me in Bolivia.
Mr. COLEMAN. In that memorandum you first indicated that you felt that
Oswald probably would not know that Helsinki would be a good place to
go to try to get a visa into Russia.
Mr. McVICKAR. Yes; I think so. It is a well enough known fact among
people who are working in the Soviet Union and undoubtedly people who
are associated with Soviet matters.
But I would say that it was not a commonly known fact among the
ordinary run of people in the United States.
Mr. COLEMAN. You also placed some reliance upon the fact that he didn't
come in under a $30 per day individual tour or he didn't join a group,
is that correct?
Mr. McVICKAR. Well, now, when you say that he did not do these things,
I don't know that he did not do these things. I was merely discussing
the fact that the particular type of visa that he obtained might have
some significance, and I went into a little bit maybe not in complete
detail and maybe not knowing all of the factors, but I tried to go into
a little bit of the different kinds of possibilities there might have
been.
Mr. COLEMAN. Well, if it is established that Oswald got a tourist
visa, then I take it that paragraph 2 of your memorandum pretty much
disappears because the assumption is that he didn't get a tourist visa,
is that correct?
Mr. McVICKAR. No; I don't think entirely so. I think you would have
to take a look at the amount of time that it would take him to get a
tourist visa or any kind of a visa.
But as I say, I can't be sure that it would be very significant. But I
think it is a point, however.
Mr. DULLES. How long is the ordinary tourist visa good for?
Mr. McVICKAR. Tourist visas are usually issued for specific periods of
time, specific tours. That might be a week or might be a month, and
they vary in price with the length of time and where they are going,
and also how many people are in the group. If you are going by yourself
it is very expensive. If you are going with larger and larger groups it
becomes less expensive.
Mr. COLEMAN. You also indicated in the memorandum in paragraph No. 4
that according to your experience Oswald's application to remain in the
Soviet Union was relatively quickly accepted by the Soviet authorities?
Mr. McVICKAR. I think item 4 is more or less canceled out by the fact
that my memory was inaccurate as to how long he had stayed in Moscow. I
think that my paragraph 4 is based on my inaccurate memory that he was
there for only about a week, but if he was there for much longer than
that, I think that is vitiated.
Mr. COLEMAN. Assuming that he did stay the longer length of time then,
I take it you don't think there is any particular significance in the
fact that he was able to remain in the Soviet Union?
Mr. McVICKAR. No; I think that the length of time that he apparently
was in Moscow was sufficient for them to make any bureaucratic decision.
Mr. COLEMAN. And in paragraph No. 5 you indicated that he seemed to
be surprisingly competent and determined about what he was doing,
considering his age and experience.
Could you indicate for the Commission just what he did which led you to
that conclusion?
Mr. McVICKAR. Well, that goes back to my comment of a few minutes ago.
I think his bearing and attitude was unusually confident in a very
far away country where the way of doing things is very different from
what it is in the United States, and considering presumably he hadn't
traveled very much before, and he was very young. I think the word
"competent" refers to what seems to be a rather efficiently organized
chain of events which began, as I understand it, when he first applied
for a passport in the United States in Los Angeles, on September 4,
until his apparent appearance in Moscow about October 16, where he
applied for Soviet citizenship. And it seems to me, just offhand I
would say, that is a fairly well organized movement considering also
that apparently he went by ship from New Orleans to Helsinki--that
is what I understand--and was determined, as was very evident in
everything he said when he was in the office, was determined to do what
he was doing.
Mr. COLEMAN. In paragraph No. 8 of the memorandum you place some
significance in the fact that he was permitted to belong to a rifle
club and practice target shooting while in Minsk.
First, from where did you get that information?
Mr. McVICKAR. I apologize for that in a way. That is complete
speculation, and the rifle club was something I read about in the
newspaper. I cannot be very accurate about the rifle club business, and
I point out in that note that it is not related to my contact with him.
Mr. COLEMAN. Do you think it would be unusual from your knowledge of
life in the Soviet Union that people would belong to a rifle club and
that they could practice target shooting?
Mr. McVICKAR. Yes; I would say so; yes.
Representative FORD. In other words, if it was a fact?
Mr. McVICKAR. If it was a fact.
Representative FORD. That he belonged to a rifle club and did shooting
it would be unusual?
Mr. McVICKAR. It would seem to me, yes, particularly for a foreigner,
but unusual in any case, I think.
Mr. DULLES. But you did not hear that either from Oswald or from his
wife whom you saw later, I believe.
Mr. McVICKAR. No; I did not. It is unrelated to anything except what
I heard about the case, and I don't know really about this. I just
remember reading about it in the paper, that is all.
Mr. COLEMAN. After November 17, 1959, you had no more contact with
Oswald until some time in July 1961, is that correct?
Mr. McVICKAR. Yes; that is right, and I believe that I didn't have any
contact with him in July of 1961. I believe I only had contact with his
wife.
Mr. COLEMAN. Do you speak Russian?
Mr. McVICKAR. Yes; or I did.
Mr. COLEMAN. When did his wife come in in July of 1961?
Mr. McVICKAR. Well, as I recall, and as I say, my memory here was
completely refreshed by the record, and I see that I have some notes in
the file that are undated, but that they were used evidently to write a
communication to the Department of State which was dated on August 28,
1961, and so I am confident that this interview must have taken place
in say the week before that.
I departed from the Soviet Union about the 1st of September, and things
were pretty busy, and I can't remember very much more about it than I
can see here in the record.
I do not really remember this interview, and I can only speak about it
on the basis of the record.
Mr. COLEMAN. Isn't it possible that you saw her on July 11, 1961?
Mr. McVICKAR. No; because I think what happened, and I think this is
reflected in the record. I think what happened was that Oswald himself
came into Moscow and was interviewed by Mr. Snyder on July 10, and that
he did not have his wife with him, and that he said that he was going
to try to get his wife to come to Moscow in the next few days, so that
she could be interviewed in connection with the visa, but that in fact
she did not appear until several weeks later, some time in August.
Mr. COLEMAN. Are you certain about this, sir?
Mr. McVICKAR. This is the best of my recollection, and I am pretty sure
that I read something in the record yesterday that indicates that she
was not in Moscow at the time he was interviewed by Mr. Snyder in July
of 1961.
Mr. COLEMAN. Wasn't it possible that Mr. Snyder talked to Mr. Oswald
on July 8, which was a Saturday, and that Mrs. Oswald appeared at the
Embassy with Oswald on July the 10th, or on July 11th, 2 or 3 days
later?
Mr. McVICKAR. I won't say that it is not possible, and as I say,
I don't remember this. But I very much doubt that I would have
interviewed somebody in the middle of July and have not written to
the State Department about it until the end of August, and I say that
honestly. That was not the way we operated.
Mr. COLEMAN. You referred to some handwritten notes you saw in the
file. I would like to show you Commission Exhibit No. 945 and ask you
whether that is the copy of the notes that you were referring to?
Mr. McVICKAR. That is the copy of them. I do not believe they are
dated, and it was with a ballpoint pen. I made this copy for myself
from the copy that is in the file.
Mr. CHAYES. Would it be appropriate to point out that there seems to be
more on your copy than on his copy?
Mr. McVICKAR. No, these are my own notes. This is exactly what it is
here.
Mr. COLEMAN. Sir, I take it that Commission Exhibit No. 945 is some
notes you took at a time when you had an interview with Marina Oswald,
is that correct?
Mr. McVICKAR. Yes.
Mr. COLEMAN. Now you have a notation "was not Komsomol." What does that
mean?
Mr. McVICKAR. That I am confident means that I asked her whether
she was a member of the Komsomol, which is the Communist youth
organization, and this would have been an ordinary question for me to
ask a visa applicant because this had some bearing on her admissibility
to the United States under the immigration law, and I was apparently
satisfied from what she said she was not. There is no other way of
really establishing it under such circumstances.
Mr. DULLES. Did she say whether she had at anytime been a member of the
Komsomol?
Mr. McVICKAR. I would have undoubtedly phrased my question in such a
way as to cover that point, I think.
Mr. COLEMAN. Did you ask her whether she was a member of any particular
Communist organization?
Mr. McVICKAR. Yes; and I believe that, as I stated in this report to
the Department of State, and I think it appears a little bit in here,
that she was a member of a Profcoes, which is probably a combination of
English and Russian, but this would have been a labor union, and she
apparently was a member of the medical workers labor union when she was
in the technical school, and then later in her work since 1957, it says
here.
Mr. COLEMAN. When you had this interview wouldn't she then have to
fill out or you would have to fill out a form or some type of petition
to get her classified as an alien eligible for an immigration visa?
Mr. McVICKAR. This was not the procedure. There is a form of
application for a visa, the number of which I forget. But that, under
the procedure, was filled out by the applicant at a later date.
This initial interview was to obtain in effect the approval of the
Department of State from the security point of view for the issuance of
the visa, and the interview was in connection with preparing a report
covering the points that are of concern to the Department in that
connection, and this report was prepared by me, sent in on August 28,
1961.
Mr. COLEMAN. Sir, I have marked as Commission Exhibit No. 959 a copy
of a petition to classify status of alien for issuance of immigrant
visa, and it shows it was signed by Lee Harvey Oswald, and that
the beneficiary was Marina N. Oswald, and that it was sworn to and
subscribed before you on July 11, 1961. I ask you, have you seen that
before?
Mr. McVICKAR. Well, this is something that I did not recall. But I see
that it was also an enclosure to my document which I sent in on August
28, 1961.
Undoubtedly I must then have taken Mr. Oswald's oath on this document
on the date specified. This would not have required the presence of his
wife, but I am sure then on the basis of what I see here that this must
have occurred, but I did not remember it.
Mr. COLEMAN. Since you have that document before you, could you then
say that there is a possibility that Commission Exhibit No. 945 was
written on July 10 or July 11, 1961, rather than in August as you
earlier testified?
Mr. McVICKAR. I would say there is a possibility, but again I doubt it
because for one thing I do recall this item in the record which said
that she was not present when he came in to the Embassy in July, and I
am confident that there would have been no reason to hold up the type
of report made here unless it was that she wasn't available for an
interview.
But as I say, I couldn't say for sure, but I don't remember, I don't
think of any reason that would have caused a delay of this kind unless
it had been that she didn't come in. I think it is too bad that I
didn't date this note, but I guess I didn't.
Mr. COLEMAN. Can we infer from Commission Exhibit No. 959 that you must
have seen Mr. Oswald on July 11, 1961?
Mr. McVICKAR. Yes; I think this would be a safe assumption, but I don't
remember anything about it, and it could have been a very routine thing
you see, because the way the work was arranged was that Consul Snyder
as the officer in charge handled our matters relating to citizenship,
and I handled matters relating to visas, and this was a visa matter and
he could very well have asked that I take Mr. Oswald's oath on this
petition in behalf of his wife, and it might have a very pro forma
thing. But I honestly don't remember this incident; but this sort of
thing is never done unless the person is present, unless both signing
parties are present.
So it would seem to me that this man must have appeared to me and
signed this thing and said that it was his legal act, and then I
certified to that.
Mr. DULLES. By both signing parties you only mean Oswald and the notary
or whoever certifies to it?
Mr. McVICKAR. I being the notary in this case you see. But the
beneficiary, Mrs. Oswald, did not have to be present for this thing.
Mr. COLEMAN. There is a possibility she was present?
Mr. McVICKAR. Well, I think it is possible; but I rather doubt it
frankly, and I doubt it on the basis of what I have said before, that I
think I recall seeing in the record that she was not present, and that
I don't see why this whole procedure would't have gone through much
more quickly if she had been, that is all.
Mr. COLEMAN. You keep on referring to the fact that you recall seeing
this in the record. Could you tell me where you saw it, please?
Mr. McVICKAR. Well, I can try to find it. I think the best thing would
be if I looked at the Moscow official file. Is that right here? Okay;
well, maybe I can find it. Is that all right if I take a minute to look
through these papers?
Mr. COLEMAN. Yes.
(Discussion off the record.)