Francesco/who-killed-jfk huggingface dataset:
[180-10131-10329.pdf — page 26]
SECRET 1-261 mean that all calls, ingoing or outgoing, on that phone would2 be picked up, so long as the tap is in effect?3 Mr. Shaw. So long as it is in effect, yes. Whether those4 would appear in the transcripts is another matter. If it5 was like a wrong number, or somebody saying pick up three rolls6 and bring them home for lunch, probably it would not appear on7 the transcript.8 Mr. Goldsmith. Who would make that decision?9 Mr. Shaw. Whoever transcribed the tapes.10 Mr. Goldsmith. How much time would pass from the moment11 that a call came in until the transcription passed across your12 desk?13 Mr. Shaw. I cannot answer your question with any preci-14 sion. There was a system in the Embassy whereby if you had15 a fast-breaking situation, or something like that, you could16 I sure would like to get the transcripts of such and such a17 line fast, and that information would be processed and funneled18 back in to the Embassy or into the station on a priority19 basis.20 I would guess, offhand, that it ran -- again, this is a21 guess -- five, six, seven days.22 Mr. Goldsmith. What about the high priority cases?23 Mr. Shaw. Sometimes you can get that pretty fast.24 Mr. Goldsmith. Within a day?25 Mr. Shaw. Yes. We could have somebody looking for aSECRET
[180-10131-10329.pdf — page 27]
1-27certain call, and I do not recall ever doing that. But it was my understanding that if you expected some situation, that you could levy a requirement -- for example, let me give you a for instance here.Let us suppose that we, the station, someone in the station was going to make a recruitment pitch to a Soviet officer. It would have been possible for the station to have organized things so that there was a live body and not just a machine hanging over phone calls coming in to the Soviet Embassy in case the guy called up and said, let me tell you the discussion I just had, or something like that.This would be a little far-fetched, because a Soviet would not be likely to handle it by phone. But in a case where you are looking for something fast-breaking to protect yourself, being on top of the situation -- it would not apply much to Mexico, but if you had a revolutionary situation breaking out someplace, surely there is a possibility of getting information very quickly off any given line.Mr. Goldsmith. Would the transcripts be reviewed by you in chronological order?Mr. Shaw. I got them in batches and I would review them just in the order in which they came. I might have shuffled them in chronological order, yes. Quite often they came in four or five or six pages stapled together.Mr. Goldsmith. Would they tend to come in chrolological
[180-10131-10329.pdf — page 28]
1-28order so you read a transcript from the 15th before the 16th?Mr. Shaw. Generally yes, right.Mr. Goldsmith. What happened to the transcripts after they were reviewed by you?Mr. Shaw. They were usually routed. They had a routing sheet on it, and they would go on to somewhere else. Where they went, I do not know. Sometimes we would mark them for files. Of course, if there were a transcript in there that had specific information on somebody that we were interested in, we would mark a copy for the files and it would go into that person's -- either their P-file, which was their personnel file, or into any operational self-file that would we make, building up background information on a person, the little things like whether an officer's wife was unhappy with the maid or with living conditions or the cost or what have you of the drugstore. These little bits and pieces were built up and those came from transcripts.Mr. Goldsmith. Would these transcripts eventually get sent to headquarters?Mr. Shaw. I do not know. I will say that it was unlikely! that Winn Scott ever threw anything away. It was somewhere, probably, in the file room.Mr. Goldsmith. What about the tapes? What would happen with the tapes after a conversation had been transcribed?Mr. Shaw. Again, you are getting into an area where I
[180-10131-10329.pdf — page 29]
SECRET1-29never had any personal experience. It is my understanding that tapes were erased and reused, and they were used over and over again. Otherwise, we would have ended up with a room full of tapes and there really was no reason to keep them.Now, I would also assume that if there was something important on a tape that they might have held it. I do not know. I do not recall ever saying, hold that tape for me. The transcript usually sufficed as the record.Mr. Goldsmith. Do you know if, at the time of the assassination, that the station had a tape recording of Lee Harvey Oswald's voice?Mr. Shaw. No, I do not know if they did. I think they did not. It was my understanding that what they had was a transcript of some guy calling, again, it is my understanding. I believe he called the Soviet Embassy from the Cuban Embassy, or the Cubans called the Soviet Embassy, I am not sure. But as far as having the tape with Oswald's voice on it, I seriously doubt it.(Discussion off the record.)Mr. Goldsmith. I would like to show you now what was marked here as CIA No. 197 and, for purposes of the record and for your information, the Agency has provided us with its documents. Each page has been assigned a number. The reason it has been assigned a number is so that the Agency can make sure that everything given to the Committee is returned. For
[180-10131-10329.pdf — page 30]
# SECRET1-30reference purposes, we simply use those numbers for a witness when we are going through this pile of materials.Now I would like you to take a look at CIA No. 197, the second paragraph.(Pause)Mr. Shaw. Okay.Mr. Goldsmith. The second paragraph indicates that the station is unable to compare the voices, as the first tape was erased prior to the receipt of the second call.Mr. Shaw. Yes.Mr. Goldsmith. Does that suggest to you that at least one tape was still in existence on November 23rd, the date that this cable was sent? Otherwise, the second paragraph would have said the tapes had been erased, routinely, whatever.Mr. Shaw. It could indicate that. It does not definitely state that. That is an interpretation, certainly.Mr. Goldsmith. Does that refresh your memory as to whether or not there was a taping system?Mr. Shaw. I do not have anything in writing. This did not refresh my memory at all. This probably would have been considered. Was this after the assassination?Mr. Goldsmith. Yes.Mr. Shaw. No, I do not think it necessarily indicates, but I am surprised that it does not say that they were both destroyed, or both erased.
[180-10131-10329.pdf — page 31]
SECRET 1-31Mr. Goldsmith. Please take a look at CIA 208.Mr. Shaw. 208.Mr. Goldsmith. And read paragraph number four. Read it to yourself, please.(Pause)Mr. Shaw. Yes.Mr. Goldsmith. According to paragraph number four, it indicates that it seems a voice comparison of some kind was made.Mr. Shaw. Yes, or it could well be that this guy, Fine-glass --Mr. Goldsmith. Mr. Tarasoff?Mr. Shaw. Remembered the poor Russian of the first tape and the poor Russian of the second tape and figured that it was the same guy.Mr. Goldsmith. How long were tapes normally retained prior to being erased?Mr. Shaw. I have no idea. It would seem to me if you had a very productive tape, you probably would not keep it very long, once you transcribed it.(Pause)Mr. Goldsmith. I would like you to read the CS comment on CIA 239.Mr. Shaw. I have read it.Mr. Goldsmith. According to that, it indicates that the
[180-10131-10329.pdf — page 32]
SECRET 1-32normal time lag would be two weeks. In other words, the tapes would normally be retained for a two-week period.Mr. Shaw. That is what it seems to say, yes.Mr. Goldsmith. Is that consistent with your memory now, at the time?Mr. Shaw. No, I do not have any idea. I was not involved in tape pick-ups or tape erasures.Mr. Goldsmith. The Oswald telephone calls, as we will see later on, came in within approximately four days of each other, if, las CIA 239 indicates, the tapes were normally retained for two weeks prior to being routinely erased. Does that suggest to you that the Oswald tape was, for some reason, treated in an unusual manner, because either the first call came in, let's say September 27th. By the time the second call came in, the first tape had already been erased.Mr. Shaw. No, it does not suggest that to me. - what is this number here -- because thismessage came out 9 December 63. What it suggests to me is that, subsequent to the assassination, is that the station was to hold tapes for a minimum of two weeks.Mr. Goldsmith. Please read into the record what 239 says.Mr. Shaw. CS comment: station to erase routine tapes, Soviet Embassy, keeping normal two week lag.Mr. Goldsmith. Does that suggest to you that the normal lag would not be two weeks?Mr. Shaw. This was not addressed to me.
[180-10131-10329.pdf — page 33]
SECRET1-33Mr. Goldsmith. I understand that.Mr. Shaw. There is no reason for me to read this anymore than there is reason for you to read that. The words stand by themselves.Mr. Goldsmith. That is right, and you have just given an interpretation of those words, suggesting that that the mean- ing is prospective in intent. In other words, after December 9, 1963, the timelag for retention of tapes prior to erasure would be two weeks.Mr. Shaw. I think it could read that, yes. I do not know what went on between Winn and the station as far as periods for keeping these, but I think what you are trying to do is lead me into a situation of pointing out that the station was remiss in destroying tapes, and I do not believe that is the case.Mr. Goldsmith. I would like to indicate to you, and also for the record, that what I am trying to do here is go over questions that are raised by the documents and the Committee has no predisposition, one way or the other, to reach any particular conclusions.The truth is that unless these questions are asked of you, both the Agency and the Committee will be criticized by people in the future who review these documents and say, why were not these questions asked of you.Mr. Shaw. I can understand why you are asking the ques- tions. I am simply not in a position to tell you, from memory
[180-10131-10329.pdf — page 34]
SECRET 1-34or anything else what the normal station procedure was regard-ing retention of tapes, although, as I did indicate earlier,that the tapes were routinely erased and used over again. Asfar as the time lag, you know as much about it, and probablymore than I do, by now.Mr. Goldsmith. What responsibility, if any, did you havewith regard to the photo-surveillance operation against theCuban Embassy and consulate?Mr. Shaw. I had no responsibility for that operationuntil after I reassumed the Cuban Ops section which would havebeen the day Phillips left for Mexico, probably a year ortwo down the road. I do know, however, that the operation --there was a Cuban photo, or a photo operation against theCuban Embassy.I do not remember why, but I think that observation wasnot active in the period when Oswald was in Mexico. If Iremember correctly, the man, to the best of my knowledge whohandled that, who was actually the inside case officer, ifyou will, was the little guy who was snapping the pictures,was a fellow by the name of Robert Zambarnadi, and I believehe is retired and living in Mexico. I do not know.Mr. Goldsmith. Who was the station case officer responsiblefor running the photo-surveillance operation against theCubans?Mr. Shaw. As far as I know, it was Robert Zambarnardi,
[180-10131-10329.pdf — page 35]
SECRET1-35who was the technical officer of the station. He was a technically qualified man.Mr. Goldsmith. There was no one overseeing him?Mr. Shaw. I do not believe so, but maybe Dave was. I do not know. We used to get batches of pictures. One of the things that I would do with the agent that I mentioned earlier was that I handled was take batches of these pictures to him and sit down with him and say, did you ever see this guy, or who was that? And he'd say, that's a courier, or that's the new officer who just arrived, or I do not know who this guy was, but he came in and talked to so and so, that sort of thing.We used to try to identify people with those pictures.Mr. Goldsmith. How many photo bases were there taking pictures of the Cuban consulate and Embassy?Mr. Shaw. To the best of my knowledge, there was only one photo base. At times, the consulate was not covered and the Embassy was. If I may draw you a picture, this would be the block, the compound block. The Cuban Embassy was the big building up here, and there was a little gatehouse down here. I do not remember whether it was in or out.This was the consulate, on the corner. People who would want to get visas would routinely appear here and they would send them down the street and they would go into the consulate. Sometimes they knew where they were going and they came in here,
[180-10131-10329.pdf — page 36]
# SECRET1-36or they asked a cab, take me to the Cuban consulate, theywould probably be delivered here.This is a block, a city block. The house from which thephotographs were taken is over here on this corner. Thephotographs were taken long distance down here and here. Thiswas not always covered. This was considered more important,because it was routine -- either there was a lot of routinevisa stuff here.Later on, subsequent -- gosh, it must have been a yearlater. I do not remember just when -- we developed a system,or somebody up here in the states who developed a systemwhereby the camera would be triggered automatically. That ismovement -- sort of like a photo-electric cell or something --movement up here in the picture that the camera was to coverwould cause a series of photos to be taken, maybe four orfive, zap, zap, zap, something like that.But I believe that, at the time Oswald was in Mexico City,not only was this down for some reason and not functioning,but I believe, had it been functioning, that it would havebeen individual picture snapping. I do not think that auto=matic equipment was in Mexico at that time. I could bewrong.Mr. Goldsmith. I am not going to be able to introducethis diagram into the record, so I am just going to describeit as best as I can.# SECRET
[180-10131-10329.pdf — page 37]
SECRET 1-37You indicated that on one block, one one corner of that block was a consulate building for the Cubans. The other side of the block was the Embassy building.Across the street was the photo base.Mr. Shaw. This was all wall. This was a compound.Excuse me, if I may interject. There was another building back here that had a theatre downstairs and had offices upstairs.Mr. Goldsmith. Was that within the compound also?Mr. Shaw. Yes.Mr. Goldsmith. Three buildings within the Cuban compound?Mr. Shaw. Yes.Mr. Goldsmith. The photo base was located across the street. It was closer to the consulate than it was to the entrance of the Embassy?Mr. Shaw. That is correct.Mr. Goldsmith. From the diagram that you drew, it would seem that the location of the camera was closer to the consulate than it was to the Embassy entrance, yet you also indicated that most of the people of interest would have been entering the Embassy, not the consulate?Mr. Shaw. That is correctMr. Goldsmith. Was not the placement of that camera in an inappropriate position?Mr. Shaw. I imagine that camera was placed wherever we could get it. Getting real straight across from one of thoseSECRET
[180-10131-10329.pdf — page 38]
SECRET 1-38embassies was very difficult.I know, had we had our druthers, we would have placed that camera closer up here and the Soviet Embassy had a similar sort of situation, a camera over here and one down here. I believe the closer the better, yes.Mr. Goldsmith. How many photo bases were there operating against the Soviet compound, without drawing a diagram?Mr. Shaw. I do not know, but I think there must have been two or three.Mr. Goldsmith. Are you sure you were not the case officer overseeing the surveillance operation against the Cubans?Mr. Shaw. I certainly am.Mr. Goldsmith. So Mr. Zambernardi was not working under you?Mr. Shaw. I did not consider him working under me, at that time. Later on, when he was replaced and I am not sure whether Dave Phillips was there or not, I did move into this operation. I am trying to think of the cryptonym for the operation. I cannot recall.And the chap who then handled it was Zambernardi's replacement, I think his name was Humphrey. That was the surname. Lou Humphrey, I think. I am not sure.Mr. Goldsmith. What was the purpose of the photo-surveillance operation?Mr. Shaw. Primarily to identify people in touch with theSECRET
[180-10131-10329.pdf — page 39]
i foreign embassy.Mr. Goldsmith. Would everyone's picture be taken?Mr. Shaw. No, no way.Mr. Goldsmith. Whose picture would be taken?Mr. Shaw. For example, that you would normally in an operation like this be limited by time available for the photographer. You would be limited by daylight. You would not photograph a milkman, or a mailman or somebody who would be there repeatedly. You would not photograph a staffer of the Embassy if once you knew who he was, unless he was walking with somebody.You would not photograph a regular visitor to the Embassy, if you knew who he was.Mr. Goldsmith. Would you photograph all foreigners?Mr. Shaw. I do not know. I would have to say the answer is no. I never photographed any of them. Do you mean would all foreigners be photographed? I would say, given the limitations that I have enumerated, namely how long a person can sit there and watch, and they have to take a break now and then, daylight, Sundays they probably did not photograph because there is little activity. I am sure there were considerable down periods in this sort of operation.No, I would say all foreigners were not photographed.Ideally, you would like to have a picture of anybody who went in and out of there, surely.