Mr. Ballen.

No; it is question that to us would be so absurd; that is, the first time I have heard that question raised is today.

Mr. Liebeler.

Yet you did say to your wife, as you have just testified, when you heard that, when you recalled that Oswald was the man that De Mohrenschildt had introduced you to, you said to your wife De Mohrenschildt had better have a good answer as to how he met Oswald; is that correct?

Mr. Ballen.

That is correct.

Mr. Liebeler.

In your letters with De Mohrenschildt or through the contact that you had with De Mohrenschildt through Rags and Chris, did you learn what the last contact was that De Mohrenschildt had with Oswald prior to the assassination?

Mr. Ballen.

No; this was not discussed with any of them. I have the feeling that the contacts would have been fairly continuous up to their leaving Dallas for Haiti 9 months ago.

Mr. Liebeler.

You don't know that Oswald and De Mohrenschildt corresponded after De Mohrenschildt left for Haiti?

Mr. Ballen.

I do not.

Mr. Liebeler.

Can you think of any other matter about which you might have knowledge, or anything else that you can think of that you think should be brought to the attention of the Commission in connection with this matter?

Mr. Ballen.

I would only add that in my opinion, George is an extremely discerning person, and while right now his emotions are kind of tensed up, not because of politics, but because of his personal life and finances and things concerning prior marriages and his children, and consequently his behavior and conduct right now might not be the best, but despite that, he is an extremely intelligent and fine person and I would think that he should be in a position to contribute as much as anyone on the type of person that Lee Harvey Oswald
George was speaking the language. There was a rapport. They were both familiar with the same geography, and George and his wife were befriending him. I would think George could give a pretty good personality sketch and political sketch on Lee Harvey Oswald.

Mr. Liebeler.

Do you have any reason to believe that there is any truth in the remark that De Mohrenschildt was alleged to have made concerning the FBI's involvement in the assassination and Oswald's being a patsy.

Mr. Ballen.

Do I have any reason to believe that?

Mr. Liebeler.

Yes.

Mr. Ballen.

No, sir; I have no reason to believe that. I would only add that if there is one faint line of skepticism still in my mind about Lee Harvey Oswald, and if I were to draw up alternative possibilities using my wildest imagination and draw up a list of 10,000 other possibilities, I suppose included in that 10,000 might be some unofficial cabal of the FBI, but the answer to your question is "No."

Mr. Liebeler.

Did Rags or Chris indicate to you whether or not either of the De Mohrenschildts had stated any reason for their belief that the FBI was involved?
Let me ask you preliminarily, did Rags or Chris indicate that De Mohrenschildt really believed that fact that he was alleged to have uttered?

Mr. Ballen.

They indicated that in De Mohrenschildt's emotional state, that apparently this was a sentiment they arrived at.

Mr. Liebeler.

Now let's go back to the preceding question. Were there any reasons expressed by De Mohrenschildt for this belief?

Mr. Ballen.

No; because Rags and Chris said this is a madness. That there are no reasons, and this is a madness.

Mr. Liebeler.

Had De Mohrenschildt expressed any reason as to why he believed this?

Mr. Ballen.

None were expressed to me; no, sir.

Mr. Liebeler.

Can you think of anything else that you want to add?

Mr. Ballen.

No; I don't believe so.

Mr. Liebeler.

Thank you very much, Mr. Ballen.

Mrs. Lydia Dymitruk