(Testimony of W. W. Semingsen)
Mr. Semingsen.
That is correct.
Mr. Liebeler.
As I understand it, Mr. Wilcox at that point concluded that the story must have gotten to the press through Mr. Hamblen, and after that time, Mr. Hamblen was questioned by Mr. Wilcox and also by yourself, and gave to Mr. Wilcox certain statements relating to his alleged recollection having been in the office; is that correct?
Mr. Liebeler.
You have given me copies of two statements by Mr. Hamblen, dated December 2, 1963, and December 5, 1963, respectively. Did you have any personal involvement in the preparation of these statements to which I have referred?
Mr. Semingsen.
No; I did not. At a meeting in Mr. Wilcox's office following my receipt of copies of these statements, I personally interrogated Mr. Hamblen and other employees whom Hamblen had thought had handled the transactions in question.
Mr. Liebeler.
Specifically, that would have been a Mrs. D. that correct?
Mr. Semingsen.
That's correct.
Mr. Liebeler.
Mrs. McClure is an employee of the company who Mr. Hamblen said had had trouble with Oswald and had requested him, Hamblen, to assist in handling Oswald; is that correct?
Mr. Semingsen.
That is correct.
Mr. Liebeler.
Did you make any written report to the file, or for any other officer of the company, of your interrogation of Mr. Hamblen or Mrs. McClure?
Mr. Semingsen.
No; I did not.
Mr. Liebeler.
Can you state for us at this time the general nature of the interrogation and the conclusions to which you came as a result of your questioning of Mr. Hamblen and Mrs. McClure?
We will note at this time for the record that while Mr. Semingsen is referring to copies of the two statements made by Mr. Hamblen, dated December 2 and December 5, .1963, they will not be marked at this time, since Mr. Semingsen had no direct involvement in the preparation of these statements. They will be marked subsequently upon the examination of Mr. Wilcox. You may refer to those statements, if you wish.
Perhaps the record should also note that a statement was given to Mr. Wilcox, apparently by Mrs. McClure, on December 4, 1963. Mr. Semingsen, you indicated that you had questioned both of those employees. I assume that when you did question them, you had these statements before you; is that correct?
Mr. Semingsen.
That is correct.
Mr. Liebeler.
Please state the general nature of your questioning and the conclusions to which you came as a result of your questioning.
Mr. Semingsen.
As previously indicated, I questioned both of the employees separately, individually, and together in the presence of Mr. Wilcox, my purpose being to reconcile the differences in their statements.
After having informed Mr. Hamblen of the extensive search that had been made for the telegram which he so vividly recalled having been filed by someone who looked like Oswald, and calling to his attention that all of the cash messages that had been handled by Mrs. McClure had been accounted for and no such message located, I asked for a further explanation from him. After questioning him, he would give no further explanation in the presence of Mrs. McClure.
Mr. Liebeler.
Did he still stick to the proposition that to the best of his recollection Oswald or someone that he thought looked like Oswald, had, fact, been in the office and had these difficulties with Mrs. McClure?
Mr. Semingsen.
I similarly questioned Mrs. McClure, and I am satisfied from the answers that she gave that her story is the. correct one. Particularly in the absence of any such message in our files.
Mr. Liebeler.
Mrs. McClure's version is that no such person as Oswald ever came in the office, and she had no difficulty with anyone as a result of which she requested assistance from Mr. Hamblen; is that correct?
Mr. Semingsen.
That is correct.
Mr. Liebeler.
Are you satisfied that is a correct story?
|
