Francesco/who-killed-jfk huggingface dataset:
[180-10131-10325.pdf — page 37]
1 Directorate would include or would turn up anything that wasin the ISR. I am just not sure how it works.Mr. Goldsmith. If someone were an agent of anotherintelligence organization would that be indicated in the 201file?Mr. Tovar. If it were an agent, agent of another service,that would be in the ISR only if it had been of interest toanother agency which said "Put Joh Doe's name in the ISR andindicate he is a US Army intelligence source," at the veryleast a person of interest to the US Army Intelligence Agency.It would not be there if the Army had not put it in. So youmight not know.Again, I think almost any agent of the military would relyupon the ISr, I would think: almost certainly would be enteredin the ISr, because they want to maintain control of it, tomake sure nobody else gets in the way arnd interferes with theiroperations.Mr. Goldsmith. So if someone were an agent it would inall likelihood be indicated in the ISR and assuming the ISRis checked by a CI person prior to opening up the file, he wouldtake note of that fact?Mr. Tovar. Say that again. Some of this is pretty fuzzyto me. I don't want to mislead you by extrapolating from myown ignorance.Mr. Goldsmith. If someone is an agent of another ::
[180-10131-10325.pdf — page 38]
# TOP SECRET1 intelligence service, that fact would be noted in the ISR?2 Mr. Tovar. Another US intelligence service?3 Mr. Goldsmith. Yes.4 Mr. Tovar. A US military intelligence service only, yes,5 the military intelligence service would normally be registered6 in the ISR. Other than the military, the FBI intelligence7 assets would not be registered in the ISr to my knowledge.8 Mr. Goldsmith. But the military tends to make that list-9 ing?10 Mr. Tovar. In my experience the miltiary has been the11 primary element involved in the use and the exploitation of the12 ISR. Let me interpose another point here. I am not an expert13 in these procedures and I am way out of touch. You live most14 of your life overseas, you don't do these things back at15 headquarters. These procedures may be quite different in16 actuality. I am groping through my memory to see how they were17 dealt with on an active basis.18 A fellow like Bill Donnelly might enlighten you much morethan I could about the ISR.19 Mr. Goldsmith. I understand that. I think you can tell20 I am not pressing you for detail on it.21 Mr. Tovar. I would like to help you. I am prepared to22 specualte as I have been doing on things that are somewhat:23 beyond my direct experience and direct responsibility. There24 is a limit.25 Mr. Goldsmith. Now, if someone checking ISR notes that
[180-10131-10325.pdf — page 39]
TOP SECRET1 an individual is a military intelligence agent would the fact2 of that agency status be noted and a 201 file opened on that3 individual?4 Mr. Tovar. I am not sure. I would think it would be.5 Again, I am speculating. [ think almost certainly if I were6 doing a file check on a person whose name came from one of the7 field stations and it turned up the fact he was already8 registered in the ISR, if a person is of interest let us say,9 to the US Army Intelligence, that would automatically sort of10 proscribe further attempts on my part to go in and get involved.11 I think a notation would be made in the 201 file.12 Mr. Goldsmith. As a practical matter that would be a good13 reason for making the notacion?14 Mr. Tovar. Yes.15 Mr. Goldsmith. Does the CIA regularly use the ISR?16 Mr. Tovar. We maintain it as I understand it.17 Mr. Goldsmith. So if someone is an agent of the CIA,18 would that fact be noted in the ISR?19 Mr. Tovar. No, I don't believe it would. Again, you20 can check on that to make certain. Donelly I think can help21 much better on it. I cannot visualize all our sensitive source's22 being registered there.23 Mr. Goldsmith. Do you know how internal memoranda prepared24 by James Angleton when he was head of the CI Staff, how internal25NW 48331 DocId: 32277210 Page 40TOP SECRET
[180-10131-10325.pdf — page 40]
TOP SECRET39paperwork relating to the JFK assassination was prepared and subsequently stored?Mr. Tovar. No, I really don't. I have no idea. I have seen no documents on that subject. I have seen nothing either originated or approved or signed by him. You realize that any files on this subject are dead files. I am just doing my current job. Until you poeple became interested, we were not dealing with them on a daily basis.Mr. Goldsmith. What happens to the personal files of an individual such as Angletons or even yourself after leaving the CI STaff?Mr. Tovar. After leaving the staff or leaving the Agency?Mr. Goldsmith. Let us take the first after leaving the CI Staff, what would happen to your personal papers?Mr. Tovar. The personal file, official file on the person in the Agency is retained by the Office of Personnel.Mr. Goldsmith. That would givern your personal file, your personal papers. Wha: about internal memos, soft copy type files, what would happen to them?Mr. Tovar. Having been only one element of the organization during my career, it is hard to say.Mr. Goldsmith. I am not talking now about personnel file. I am talking about soft copy, working files that an individual may maintain.Mr. Tovar. You mean the files he himself as an individualNW 48331 DocId: 32277210 Page 41TOP SECRET
[180-10131-10325.pdf — page 41]
1 maintained?## Mr. Goldsmith. Yes.## Mr. Tovar. Most individuals don't maintain personal files,.I don't think. I would say, for example, anything I write,I dictate a memorandum and I send it to anybody you want to name, in a sense that is my work, I have done it but I don't keep a personal file on that. That goes into my office file. It is part of the office chronological file which is maintained by my secretary. Let us say multiply that by 500,000 over, a period of years the foles grow. At the time I leave I am incidental in a sense. I just happen to be the person in the job at the time. The files will still be there.There is a normal retirement and destruction under normal conditions, retirement and destruction program which eliminates the accumulation of excessive useless material.## Mr. Goldsmith. Most paperwork would go in this office chrono file?## Mr. Tovar. Yes, anything of significance would go in the office chrono file. Anything I write to the Directorate of Operations, DDO, CI, it is normally part of the chrono files. If I want it, it is there. It is my own file in the sense that when I am on the job I have total access to it. If I left the job and wanted to look at it six months later, it is still in the fole and I would asl: somebody who took my place could I see what I wrote. I would not take it with me.
[180-10131-10325.pdf — page 42]
41Mr. Goldsmith. If it is an office chrono file does that meant that everything is filed in a chronological order?Mr. Tovar. Not necessarily. Here you ought to consult my secretary. There might be a subject breakdown. Ordinarily hte front office, we don't main-ain a lot of files. There is no point in it. Let us say something I signed off on, here is a case in point, memos that are signed on my behalf or that I might have signed, if I were there that day, I would not maintain that in my front office as a rule. That would probably be maintained by the office of origination. I think if I signed it my secretary would certainly maintain a log of things that had gone through me for signature. But I don't think, I could be wrong on this, I don't think as a rule she would maintain a routine memorandum just because I happened to sign it because I sign so many things on that staff. I sign off on a host of things which are not really my creation. I am representing the staff as a whole.Mr. Goldsmith. Do you know when Mr. Angleton left the CI Staff?Mr. Tovar. Yes. I an not certain of the precise date. I think it was either December '74 or January '75. That is the position of Chief, Counterintelligence?Mr. Goldsmith. Yes.Mr. Tovar. I believe he may have retmained in the office for several months after that before he finally retired.
[180-10131-10325.pdf — page 43]
42Mr. Goldsmith. Do you know whether, after Mr. Angletonleft the CI Staff, any type of followup was done by that staffon the Nosenko issue?Mr. Tovar. Followup work?Mr. Goldsmith. Yes. For example, one of the issues, thekey issue with regard to M. Nosenko was his bona fides.Mr. Tovar. Yes, indeed.Mr. Goldmsith. After Mr. Angleton left was any additionalanalytical work done on that issue?Mr. Tovar. A very detailed study was done by my predecessorGeorge Kalaris. A very thorough analysis was made of the wholeNosenko question.Mr. Goldsmith. Are you referring to the Hart Report?Mr. Tovar. Yes.Mr. Goldsmith. Other than the Hart report was any type offollowup work or analytica.. work done after Mr. Angleton'sdeparture?Mr. Tovar. I don't know for certain. The Hart Report isa thick piece of paper. In the preparation of that reportthere were probably all kinds of drafts, scratchings and sortof preliminary jobs. All that I know would be in the contextof that report. All I know would be some representations inresponse to the Director's inquiry or your inquiry or someoneelse's inquiry as to what happened, what did it say, what doesit mean, that type of thing, but really correlary efforts.
[180-10131-10325.pdf — page 44]
43Mr. Goldsmith. Think for a moment on the Nosenko issue.As Chief of the CI Staff, if it were demonstrated to you very clearly that the story given by Mr. Nosenko on Lee Harvey Oswald was full of contradictions and in addition to contradictions, it was in many ways simply incredible, what impact would that have on the Agency's assessment of Mr. Nosenko as being a bona fide rather than a dispatched defector?Mr. Tovar. Well, it is difficult to answer. You are posing a question in a narrow sense. You are focusing on one point, Nosenko vis-a-vis Oswald and contradictions that may emerge there. I would answer by saying that again I am not an expert on Nosenko. I don': profess to have a full grasp of his bona fides or anything related to it.I would say that question alone would not be enough to satisfy me that the inquiry had been made carefully. There is much more to it than what Nosenko had to say about Oswald. There are more aspects about the bona fides issue, more than I could give you today.Mr. Goldsmith. I have read the Hart Report.Mr. Tovar. He tried to deal with the whole consideration, the whole Oswald, the handling, the methodology. He did not go into every jot and tittle of the issue.Mr. Goldsmith. In fact, the Hart Report did not mention the word "Oswald" even one time. Even so, the question I have, if it were demonstrated to you that Nosenko's story on the
[180-10131-10325.pdf — page 45]
44Oswald issue is untrue, cannot be believed, would that have any impact on the Agency's assessment of him as a bona fied?Mr. Tovar. The first reaction would be I would be deeply distressed and concerned, I would want to know more about it.You have to exptrapolate from me to the Agency. Other people have views on this other than myself. If you carried this thing further and convinced everythody, the point you made is valid, then you would have --Mr. Goldsmith. We are talking hypothetically now. Let us go beyond you. If it were demonstrated to the Director of the Central intelligence Agency that the story given by Nosenko on Oswald -- I am not talking about any of the other information he gave, but on Oswald -- simply cannot be believed because, A, part of it is incredible, B, it is full of contradictions, what effect do you think that would have on the Agency's assessment of him as a bona fide defector?Mr. Tovar. I literally don't know. I am not sure what the comparative weight of chat point would be when considered against the backdrop of the full Nosenko question.Mr. Goldsmith. As Chief of the CI Staff, you would personally be troubled by that?Mr. Tovar. Yes, I think I would be troubled by it. I would be troubled. I would be troubled that our current assessment is wrong. That would trouble me.Again, I would say, 100, if this is a serious proposition
[180-10131-10325.pdf — page 46]
TOP DEGRET45you are making, let us say you adduced a number of analysts who examined this thing thoroughly and were in a position of making that kind of judgment, I would say, "I want to have these analysts talk to my analysts because I am not in a posi- tion to make that kind of judgment."Mr. Goldsmith. First of all, I am not making the statement that Nosenko's story on Oswald is inaccurate in any way.Secondly, even if the story is inaccurate, I don't want to suggest that because of that anyone on this Committee has any feeling that that means Nosenko is not bona fide. My question is really very limited. A, if it were demonstrated that the story on Oswald is inaccurate, what impact would that have on your overall assessment?Mr. Tovar. You mean demonstrably inaccurate?Mr. Goldsmith. Yes.Mr. Tovar. It would have to be examined. It would have to be examined the full panoply of the whole Oswald issue. I would say we will get this team of analysts and we will fight it out. We are talking about hypothesis.Mr. Goldsmith. Yes. I would prefer to stay away from the term "fighting it out" because there is no one here who is in the posture of making a fighting issue out of it.I no longer have any questions. I will have questions to ask whoever on your staff participated in the preparation of the memo that we discused earlier.NW 48331 DocId: 32277210 Page 47TOP SECRET
[180-10131-10325.pdf — page 47]
Normally whenever a witness has an opportunity to testify before the Committee at a hearing, the Committee gives him five minutes at the end to make a statement. This is not a hearing. However, if you would like to make a statement for the record, feel free to do so. If no, you will be given a chance to verify the record for accuracy.Mr. Tovar. Since I have no position to present and no point to make it is probably improper to make a statement. The only think I would reiterate is that I have been sort of speculating here in many respects. Bear in mind there is an area here where I have a purview that is perhaps valid. We are talking about a lot of things which are way beyond my immediate experience and certainly my current responsibility.I would say, take some of my speculation with a grain of salt, because I don't mean to be dogmatic on these things. The procedure for handling the 201 file, there are some GS-7 girls down the line who could tell you much more about the 201 files than I would ever be able to compile for you. They are the ones you really should talk to.Things like the ISR, know the ISR in a limited framework from the standpoint of a guy overseas who is dealing frequently with the military and registers military sources in the ISR and checks the ISR either on behalf of the military or to see if they have already registered prior interest and so on. There may be other aspects of the thing that you should ge more
[180-10131-10325.pdf — page 48]
TUT CURLI                                                                                                                                            471 professional advice on.2 I think your questions have been reasonable. I have found3 no objection to try to meet you more than halfway on it.4 Mr. Goldsmith. Fine. Thank you very much.5 (Whereupon, at 3:20 p m., the deposition was concluded.)67891011121314IS171819202122232425NW 48331 DocId:32277210 Page 49                                                                                                                   TOP SECRET
[180-10131-10325.pdf — page 49]
48CERTIFICATE OF NOTARY PUBLICI, Alfred Joseph LaFrance, the officer before whom the foregoing deposition was taken, do hereby certify that the witness whose testimony appears in the foregoing deposition was duly sworn by me; that the testimony of said witness was taken by me in stenotype to the best of my ability and there- after reduced to typewriting under my direction, that said deposition is a true record of the testimony given by said witness; that I am neither counsel for, related to, nor employed by any of the parties to the action in which this deposition was taken; and further that: I am not a relative or employee of any attorney or counsel employed by the parties thereto, nor financially or otherwise interested in the outcome of the action.Notary Public in and for the District of ColumbiaMy Commission expires November 14, 1980.
[180-10131-10329.pdf — page 0]
# 2025 RELEASE UNDER THE PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY ASSASSINATION RECORDS ACT OF 1992JFK Assassination SystemIdentification FormDate: 10/19/20Agency InformationAGENCY: HSCARECORD NUMBER: 180-10131-10329RECORD SERIES : SECURITY CLASSIFIED TESTIMONYAGENCY FILE NUMBER: 014727Document InformationORIGINATOR: HSCAFROM: SHAW, ROBERT T.TO :TITLE:DATE: 05/16/1978PAGES: 78SUBJECTS: CIA, FILESCIA, METHODOLOGYSHAW, ROBERT T., TESTIMONY BEFORE THE COMMITTEEOSWALD, LEE, POST RUSSIAN PERIOD, TRAVEL, TRIPT TOMEXICODURAN, SYLVIADOCUMENT TYPE: TRANSCRIPTCLASSIFICATION: SecretRESTRICTIONS: 1BCURRENT STATUS: RedactDATE OF LAST REVIEW: 02/01/2003OPENING CRITERIA:COMMENTS: Box 5v9.1NW 50955 DocId: 32277214 Page 1
[180-10131-10329.pdf — page 1]
PASCIONE: amtSECRETEXECUTIVE SESSIONTUESDAY, MAY 16, 1978:U.S. House of Representatives,Subcommittee on the Assassina-tion of John F. Kennedy ofthe Select Committee onAssassinations,Washington, D.C.The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 4:40 p.m.in room 3370, House Annex No. 2, 2nd and D Streets, S.W.Present: Michael Goldsmith and Dan Hardway.Mr. Goldsmith. Miss Reporter, would you please swearin the witness?The Reporter. Do you solemnly swear that the testimonywhich you are about to give will be the truth, the wholetruth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?Mr. Shaw. I do.NW 50955 DocId: 32277214 Page 2SECRETALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY
[180-10131-10329.pdf — page 2]
1-2# TESTIMONY OF ROBERT T. SHAWMr. Goldsmith. Would you state your name and address for the record?Mr. Shaw. Robert T. Shaw, 3715 Acosta Road, Fairfax, Virginia, 22031.Mr. Goldsmith. What is your present occupation, Mr. Shaw?Mr. Shaw. I am undercover with the Department of State, but my actual occupation is Inspector, Office of the Inspector General, Central Intelligence Agency.Mr. Goldsmith. Mr. Shaw, I handed you earlier a copy of a letter from the Acting Director of the Central Intelligence, Mr. Carlucci, to the Chairman of this Committee. It corresponds to JFK Exhibit No. 94 in the Committee's hearing record.Have you had a chance to read that letter?Mr. Shaw. I read it just now.Mr. Goldsmith. Do you understand it?Mr. Shaw. I understand it.Mr. Goldsmith. I also would like to hand you the Committee's rules and resolutions and ask you at this time to read Rule No. 4 to yourself.(Pause)Mr. Shaw. I read it over.Mr. Goldsmith. Do you understand that?
[180-10131-10329.pdf — page 3]
Mr. Shaw. I understand it.Mr. Goldsmith. Do you understand that you have a right to counsel?Mr. Shaw. Yes.Mr. Goldsmith. Do you waive that right to counsel?Mr. Shaw. I do not need counsel.Mr. Goldsmith. Do you understand that, under the Committee rules, that you have a right to receive a copy of the statement you are going to give us at this deposition?Mr. Shaw. I should hope so, to check it for accuracy.Mr. Goldsmith. However, by virtue of the arrangement that the Committee has worked out with the Central Intelligence Agency, we have been asked to request of Agency employees that they waive their right to receive a copy of the deposition for their own retention. By that, I mean we would certainly be willing to grant you access to the deposition, to correct it in any way necessary, but the Agency has requested that we ask you to waive your right to receive an actualy copy of the deposition.Mr. Shaw. I have no problem with that.Mr. Goldsmith. Thank you..For the record, I would like to say that the Committee's mandate is to investigate the assassination of the President. The scope of the mandate includes who killed the President, was there a conspiracy? We are also required to evaluate
[180-10131-10329.pdf — page 4]
SECRET 1-4the performance of the investigative agencies, specificallythe FBI and the CIA and to evaluate the work of the WarrenCommission.Do you understand that as well?Mr. Shaw. Yes.Mr. Goldmsith. Prior to coming here today, have youdiscussed what your tesimony is going to be with any CIAemployee?Mr. Shaw. I have not, except to tell them that I wasgoing to tell the truth when I got over here.Mr. Goldsmith. In terms of discussing the substance ofyour testimony?Mr. Shaw. None whatever.Mr. Goldsmith. Have you discussed with any CIA employee,past or present, who either has been interviewed by theCommittee or has given a statement under oath to the Committee,what questions were asked of him or her?Mr. Shaw. I have not.Mr. Goldsmith. Are you here today voluntarily andwithout subpoena?Mr. Shaw. Yes.Mr. Goldsmith. Mr. Shaw, how long have you been workingunder State Department cover?Mr. Shaw. Since approximately the date I came aboard,because I was promptly sent to the Department of State for
[180-10131-10329.pdf — page 5]
SECRET                                                                                                              1-51   training. That would be March, 1948.2   Mr. Goldsmith. Would your State Department file, if3   reviewed by a member of this Committee, indicate that you were4   actually a CIA employee?5   Mr. Shaw. I have no idea.6   Mr. Goldsmith. You do not understand how the cover7   arrangement would work between the Agency and the Department8   of State?9   Mr. Shaw. I have never had anything to do with the10  setting up of such cover. It would well be that there might11  be some sort of an indicator or flag, or something in that12  file that would indicate to a person who knew the ropes that13  I was not bona fide.14  Mr. Goldsmith. Would there be a personnel file on you15  at the Central Intelligence Agency?16  Mr. Shaw. Yes.17  Mr. Goldsmith. As a matter of procedure, in terms of18  how you get paid, do you get paid by the Department of State?19  Mr.Shaw. No. I am under, at the present time, nominal20  state cover. I actually, as far as the Department of State21  is concerned, resigned over there in 1973, I believe. At22  the present time, I am paid by the Agency.23  Mr.Goldsmith. When you were working under cover, were24  you being paid by State at that time?25  Mr. Shaw. Yes, I was.
[180-10131-10329.pdf — page 6]
SECRET 1-6Mr. Goldsmith. Are you familiar at all with the literature that has been generated by the assassination of the President and the work done by the Warren Commission?Mr. Shaw. Very little. I just noticed that green book there a minute ago. I have never read that thing..Mr. Goldsmith. Book 5, for the record, of the Senate Committee Report.Mr. Shaw. I have seen copies of the Warren Commission Report in various places around the government, but I never read it.Mr. Goldsmith. When you were working with the State Department in other than a nominal capacity, what was your title?Mr. Shaw. My last title was Special Assistant to the Ambassador and First Secretary of Embassy, Honduras.Mr. Goldsmith. Did you ever work as a consular officer?Mr. Shaw. Yes, I did.Mr. Goldsmith. When you worked as a consular officer, were you required to fulfill both responsibilities as a consular officer and as a CIA employee?Mr. Shaw. To a certain extent.For example, I have never issued a visa. I have issued a passport for another consular officer who accepted the application and I would be on the road in northwestern Mexico and issued the passport to the American citizen concerned.