Navigation
Volumes
|
(Testimony of C. Ray Hall)
Mr. Hubert.
purports to be a report of an interview by you, Mr. Hall, of Jack Ruby taken on November 24, 1963, appearing in the Clements' report of November 30, 1963, at pages 160, 161, 162, and 163.
We are identifying that document on the first page as follows: I have written into the right-hand margin the words, "Dallas, Texas, May 28, 1964, Exhibit, No. 1 of the deposition of C. Ray Hall," and I have signed it "Leon D. Hubert, Jr.," and I have marked the next page of that document, being page 161, with my initials in the lower right-hand corner and the same with pages 162 and 163.
The other document also purports to be a report of an interview by you of Jack Ruby, dated, on the face of it, November 25, 1963. I have marked that document on the first page with the following: "Dallas, Texas, May 28, 1964, Exhibit No. 2 of the deposition of C. Ray Hall, Leon D. Hubert." This document with the successive pages also appears in the Clements' report of November 30, 1963, pages 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, and 18, and as to each, of those pages, I have identified them for the purpose of this deposition by marking my initials in the lower right-hand corner.
Now, there has already been clarification, as you know, concerning the date on this Exhibit No. 2, that this was really an interview of November 24 rather than November 25.
Mr. Hall.
Yes, sir.
Mr. Hubert.
That is to say, they are both November 24?
Mr. Hall.
Yes; that was a typographical error.
Mr. Hubert.
Yes; that was a typographical error and that has been clarified. What I would like to have clarified now was whether or not these two documents, and which actually appear in different places in the Clements' report, and to which I have given two exhibit numbers, really are a composite of the same interview, or does one of them refer to the first half, such as you have described it, and another to the other half? In other words, your interview was interrupted, you see, and I don't know whether this is a composite of all of it or whether one of them deals with that first half, which went from 12:40 or 12:44 to 3:15 p.m. and the other part from 4:30 to 5:30 p.m., just how it came to be that there were two separate documents?
Mr. Hall.
These two documents are a composite of the entire interview. The reason they were divided is for reporting purposes. By that, I mean, that the first document relates to the events that happened.
Mr. Hubert.
And by that "the first document" would you use by identification the exhibit numbers I have given them--which one do you mean by "the first"? The first one in Clements, of course, is Exhibit No. 2, as far as physical position is concerned, because it runs from page 13 to page 18 of the first volume of the Clements' report of November 30.
Mr. Hall.
Your exhibit number here is wrong.
Mr. Hubert.
That's Commission Document No. 4, you see?
Mr. Hall.
And this is what [indicating]?
Mr. Hubert.
Well, this is Commission Document No. 4 too, but different volumes.
Mr. Hall.
Commission Document No. 4, vol. 1, relates primarily to the event that happened involving Jack Ruby.
Mr. Hubert.
That has been identified by us as Exhibit No. 2 for this deposition.
Mr. Hall.
Yes; Exhibit No. 1, which is Commission Document No. 4, vol. 2, relates to background information. In this report we tried to set up a section of the report dealing with the background of Ruby.
Another section dealing with the event surrounding the murder of Lee Harvey Oswald was set up, and it was for that reason that there were two separate reports of an interview here set out, but it was actually a composite of the information obtained during this time between 12:40 p.m. and 5:30 p.m. on November 24, 1963.
Mr. Hubert.
Now, I notice from your report and principally, for example, at the bottom of page 15 on Exhibit No. 2 that Ruby refused to answer certain things and would not say, for instance, how he got into the basement and why he brought his revolver and so forth. Do you recall, or is there any way you can tell us whether that denial on his part came before or after he was interviewed by his attorney, Mr. Howard?
|
Found a Typo?
Click here
|
