jH bo iy | CONFIDENTIAL on't intend to force any inference upon. you and I purposely t t “Oy tt | F 2 | phrased the question in the sense that is.it a reasonable’ i 2 inference, and you have given vour answer. @ ! + Let's take a look at CIA -- ' : : . | 2.4 Mr. Rocca. Let me look at it acain. I mean, after i oe é all, it’s been a while. ; - . . : : : | yy Again, this goes back to the veoodle on the snot and | | | 3) what they remember, not what I faeli er thing about it, thouch | am 1 « . . 3 . . . y 5 7 | I recognize that if I shoulc have snotted it. I should have. a But basically the veopie encaged at the time can answer, and i | their statement is that these thincs were scratched, were il 42 | rubbed, were removed, and they were not extant. And it was only after the 2ird, after the assassination, vou will } 4 it | mreserve all the material. I think that went out in a cable S04 1 , ‘3 1 that came out cf headquarters. ns a : . . rt. 2 : 1 2 : “ | “In view Oswald in Soviet Union, in fact he claimed on 1% i vd | 1 October, LIENVOY to have visited" -- “station unable to i { | compare voice" --- an . 1 jan 7H STREET, S.V. REPORTERS BULEDTNG, MALCATUMGTON, DLC. 20026 (202) S54u-2545 | Frankly, I think that this is again a verv -- my ; 20 | feelinc is that this is again an examdle of the kind of loose ater language that is written and that you see on other parts of ee an | oN, 4 the recora. ' | | i Mr. Goldsmith. Fine. “ Mr. Rocca. This, while it is vossible that what you | 33 | | . ~ say is so, my feeling is that this, in effect, savs that they | j : | : CONFIDENTIAL LESRSOM REPORTING COMBANY, INC. Docld:32263409 Paye 135 a
Docld:32263409 Page 136 ALSER ICN & (202) 55n~2305 20024 bec, HLNGTON, WAL REPORTERS BUTELDING, JM, S 300 71TH STREET, “} { « ny AGH ta de a nN ae | . On an in t uw hay O- --« m4 wm “a CcCONFICGENTIAL were unable to make any comparison. Mor is a cable from Mexico City to the director, also dated 23 November;: 1963. Would you please read paragraph number four. - (Pause) Mr. Goidsmith. Now paracraph number four indicate W) that the transcriber cf the conversations involved stated nh. as that Oswald was identical wit ct he pnerson whe hac called from the Cuban Embassy to the Soviet Embassy _ Hh Is it reasonable to in i 1 on CIA number 205 that the transcriber made a voice comparison? Mr. Rocca. Out of his head. that he is right. But he cidn't make anv comparison. I don’ know him. I don’t know his talent. But that would be my. statement operationally. Mr. Goldsmith. Now, someone reacinc this paracraph who does not have knowledge of Agency operating orcecedcures ct or the manner in which transcribers onerate or are trained might, reading this in a straightforward manner, think that a voice comparison had been made. CONFIDENTIAL ORTING COMPANY, INC. in - Goldsmith. Let's review now CIA number 205, which praor to October . er from paragraoh number four
2 ' i 2 | 6 i 4 ‘ 4 i ws i o = g. =” ~ i N q ! : 7 j uw a ~ u ~ - il a 7 | ~ i i _ i ~ 24 = zi i 5 | il - a: ~ + _ Jt - a | = {@: = i g i ~_ ! : = il w if = vam | ~ IZ 44 { ! i ! t RUT EDTNSG, a REPORTERS S.M. ao ‘ JON ITH STRENT, , | | nn +e ~ o vd f ] 5 ! { ‘ 1 1 1 t a wry 23 Oil | | | i | | ih i | CONFIDENTIAL 136 t | Is that correct? Are you snaking your head yes? We'll go.ahead and let you verify it. . . | . | Mr. Rocca. If I answer yes, this is a purely hyno- thetical case. ; 4 “Mr. Goldsmith. I understand thai c : Mr. Rocca. As I say, it is like many other things | ! | that occur in the record which can be interpreted hypothetically as indicating intent or knowledge. 2 | Mr; Goldsmith. I am purposely cualifying the cuestion to say that if someone doesn't have any knowledge of Agency | 1 | procedures or the talent and training that goes into the making of a good transcriber, he might thing that a voice comparison has been made from reading maragraph number four. Do you have an explanation for this paragraph? _I think you gave one but I would like to hear it again. i Mr. Rocca. Yes. The explanation is that this represents the typical function of a transcriber in recalling what you would call "eyeballing”, but this is “earballing; what he hears. Mr. Goldsmith. So, effectively, seven weeks after Oswalé had contacted the embassy, the Cuban Embassy and the | Soviet Embassy, without having a chance to listen to the care and compare voices, you are indicating that the transcriber | could still have memory of that and make a valid comparison? Mr. Rocca. Yes, and he would probably be able to do it came IDENTIATL ALOERSON RESORTING COMPANY, INC. Docld:32263409 Paye 137 BLSER
CONFIDE t u i . i today. fo ; | Goldsmith. Fine. | 24 | | Did the Agency station in Mexico City ever obtain a @ | ; | mhotocrann of Oswald as a result of its shotosurveillance a i , = 3 4 ~ | Onerations against the Soviet anc Cuban Embassy anc. Consulate - 4 6 3 | a Mr. .Rocca. To my knowledge, it did not. = i [a] 7 LS. | Mr. Goldsmith. Let’s examine CIA number 248. t R z i = ye oulée you Dlease reac this memo. ™ H a4 . ~ (Pause) = { : * = ine] . nm a + py el tat A . 1 S i Mr. Goldsmith. For the record, this is a memo = i that was tassec to Mr, Papich of the FSI with information on _ -~ } a “| the photo coverage of the embassies in Mexico City. The memo m= 12 4 = i is Gated 27 Movember, 1963. = i . a ; - Is it accurate to say that according to this mem e . | = li 4 = 4 . S * the photographic coverage Guring caylicht hours of the Cuban = i ~ Hi = 164 ; . - ; ; ; ; ; ; H anc Soviet Embassies in Mexico City was continvous in a 7 | | t nature? = Mr. Rocca. No, it is not accurate. = "3 | ra rr . . ~ i Mr. Goldsmith. ‘What.is yo interpretation of the e 39 “ . | AS | memo, Mr. Rocca? t Ae Mr. Rocca. Well, in the first nlace, I have no 2 44 y fe an i ; . . Y “oN |. competence to jucce this memo because 1 have had no service 2 | i in Mexico City and must therefore rely on what has been given 24 | | to me in the course of experience over the years by people 3504 do, i who were. d CONFIDENTIAL i ‘ t ‘ { i u Docld: 32263409 Page 136 NTIAL Fe+ CMPANY, ING. Loe) ~~)
(202) $54-2345 20024 nec, ‘TOU, ~ ’ WASIHTC REPGRTERS BUTEDTNG, S.W. DoclId: 322763409 One of the points that I explored, again in that thina t i 1 | . : that I did for Mr. Belin, was why there was no pnotographic “because of the operational situations that prevailed in th 2 4 , | “| coverage on Fricay. a - . . ag . : . - ' Mx. Phillip told’me that the machine was down on | ~ i. Friday, therefore this is not richt. But I don't know whethex i ot an re . . SH at is or not. You see. I am in a bind here. I am telling | : ! 7 | 74 you wnat I cc know. | Mr. Golcsmith. I understand that. 7 y Nevertheless, according to your answer on the record -- aa My. Rocca. On the recerd it's wrona. md Mr. Goldsmith. =I cdicnit ask you about the accuracy |! ‘* 1 of what the meme says. I only asked you if according to the | : , . 1 4 | . . : _ an memo the ceverace was continuous in nature. I am net asking td i ~ z 1 . + 7 + re ‘™ # you whether the memo was right or wrenc. I am simply asking | '~ | you whether accorcing to the memo.the coveracse was continucus a | in nature. 17 | tf zt ' : , 4 ! Mr. Rocca. That's what the memo says. ts | ia} . 4 : n : Mr. Goldsmith. Fine. to . : : _ : ; i I will aiso indicate for the record that the memo { ! | continues to say, “However, weather concitions and other ay u ; ; . “| factors affecting any chotographic efforts requirec of the a | coverage not be considered as total or complete.” ' C i fr. Rocca. Again, my researches in 1975 showed " i that there were large lapses and very grave aifficulties 3 i 25 5 Page 139
t CONFIDENTIAL 39 various quarters. 4 eA rveillance unit did not ebtain a vhotoadaranh: cc Mr. Goldsmith. What was the reascn that vou Gisccvered ¥ ( ; ; for. why the photos \ of Oswald? Mr. Golésmith. So, the reason that was: CON PIODENTIALB Ww > = it | - Mr. Rocca. Because -- I think the cuestion was Girectly ! 4 ; a : ~ = i t w Zi 1 . . . ; : . Poe “ ‘| rYaisec by Mr. Belin. How come you didn’t get a picture of him? te : ! ~ ij ™ H : 1 = 7 = . . S - s 7. Mr. Goldsmith. “hat was the reason that vou gave | € ~ a Mr. Belin? if i ; $ ! ) yt a . : a i Mr. Rocca. That the machine was cown. Fant i q ; - 1a: aAG ‘ : ; ' i = nan Mr. Goldsmith. For how many Gavs was the machine is | . = on Gown? . lS Mr. Reeca. ~ cannot answer tnat. Tt was down on ce \ @ =< ‘" | Friday, and perhaps on Saturday. = i Sis a nae os ; ws i As I say, this is noted in the memo thet I wrote in # i = > i i 1s: - < . 2 3 AZ 7 ‘ S ‘~ a 475 and it's based on a conversation with Mr. Phiilips and | with his people. : 0 Mr. Golesmith. Do you recail when that memo was Pm | written? i | = 13 | = | (Pause) ” | Mir, Rocca. I don’t know whether I have a note on the | H : ! TH : ea i‘ i Te-Y 22 3 . an 3 + iy a tat th ? i wos “4 Myr, Goldsmith. Did you retain a cony of the memo: 4 ; ; : 73 ~ ‘ e 4 . 2 . 7 ! ° i Mr. Pocca. I did not retain a cory ox the memo. I | Go not have a copy. i 25 3 i i i i DM REPORTING CCMPANY, INC. Docld:32263409 Page 140 ALSERSON AS
Q oO z hy Hi iw] th a | H ve t! a oe Oo given. by Mr. Phillips or Mexico City station was that, at memo; I assure you. The Acency, at this tim for some reason: has not made it available to us. BUTEDING, mY i t § i i] { Hi} ‘least according to your knowledge, the photo mechanism was not @ | working on that dav. { i 7 | H i Is that correct? 2 - 3 2 i . i ~ Mr. Rocca. That's right, and that doesn't assume a 4 { ot . . iy 1 _ i that there might not have been-some other reason for not ~ fot i ~ getting the cove age a Xs | | = 23 . . . «a, 1 S i Mr. Goldsmith. Now, if we were to reconstruct Oswald's il i JF | a i visits te the Cucan anc Russian Embassies -- =z Ny : = ; a ; S ‘ Mr. Recca. That's what I did in that -memo. ~ ‘ i oi. y : = } Mr. Golcsmith. Well, we're going to get a hole of that S124 i - Poy | n i : ; ns sas 3 z i But if we were to reconstruct his visits, we would © “ see that he made visits not only to the Soviet Embassy, Dut jj a =x vs 1 {Ss } to the Cuban Embassy as well. So, Gicé Mr. Phillips or whomever Gave you the explanation indicate that both cameras were ~ \ = o. d « in 1  cown? = iF | ; oe . ~ { Mr. Rocca. I cannot recali that detail. But that, too, | would be taken care of -- and bear in mind that these were different implantments; the se were different, and they hac | | a@ifferent problems in management. As I say; I am telling you | 22 l | ay . - i only what I know by hearsay. The people who were there are 4208 , a= Ff the ones who will have to explain. Mr. Goldsmith. Did it strike vou as unusual that , CONFIDENTIAL ALDERSON SESORTING COMPANY. INC. Docld: 32263409 Page 141
fA ad fa CONFIDENTIAL | r lao a = . ' | Oswald was able to visit the Embassies a total of at least I _ ; 2 | five to six times without ever being ohotocranhedc? 3 1 i NT ae bhi . : @ it Mr. Rocca. No, not one bit. Not one bit. if . ~ ot ~ 4 | : ae ~ . Loe 4 7 I have been in the field -- I was in the fieicd 25 a ~ |. yvears,- and anyone who trusts machines and machine coverag “ ° | is just olacing his reliance on a faise device. =e 4] | ™ 7 | het me say another thino. Saturday coverace was not ¢ * | undertaken. So this was another thing. 3 5 | You see, there are a number of things here, there are | ~ | ° i 1 as 4 : : = oy a number of substantive Cetails that you con't have. i: = HH il Cat Ja e> ad 41 3 woes a + 3 4 $i i | Saturday, now I recali-- and tnis was recorded in the | + : i = 73004 5 ! . oan memo -- Saturday coverace wes not -- the coverage was stopped | ¥ : oat 4 @ = i | , Mune 2 | , S | because the embassy was cles oresumadbiy on that day. : = ois 4 jay acenerally sneak heaneficial to cen nn y wO;, Le as Oe, ceneraeily srea enericiar FEG = '*) a hold of that, because I tried to go over some of these . 'S | points as best as I could. | ~ a7} 2 7 Gontt & na in sti I thought - yo: I must say that I con't Nave the information Lt tnougnrte oy . = } = Gicd. | “ | ! = TF | xv. Goldsmith Dig the Agency ever consider it to be | ~ H My. GOLCSMLeN. 1a tne en Slicer co ) i “ = : 7 ; 0 unusual that Oswale was able to cain admittance te the Cuban jee Embassy on a Saturday when the erbassy was closed? 15 Mr. Recca. No. All you hac to cdo was press a button ~ and there was a guarc, and he let you in. 3ut inasmuch as Lt | “was a closed day, coverace was not extencec tc that period 25 i 4 at that time. They did it afterward. As I recall, that was ar- wan Te ia] -_ i ha ja i- 0 m ad G ra) Al i u a) a i vd Q G QO 3 2 2 2 fe) Docld:32263409 Pak
N FIDE Q NTIIAL NPIDENTIAL ‘started. i / 2 : : . an Mr. Goldsmith. If the Agency's records indicates : 2 : ; ra) o 1 +? @ | that by the entrance tc the Cuban Consulate tnrere was an Jd | impulse camera that was activated automatically and that that ba $ i . . + a 1, 7 a7atoOn ¢ h f3rst nN # Camera was in operation on September 27, whicn was the rarst H i . 2 " 5 i _ | cay that Oswald made a visit te the Cuban Embassy, woule you = } a 7 | . sul . ae 7 | think that a nhotograph of Oswald would have been obtainec? if , & 3 i . = 0 ; thacas. hie 3 — 3 Me. Rocca. There are two Many AypotAeses. This is Ks | at $3 . - . _ ~ a cascace of hypotheses, and I would really, before answering = aa in any way that would affect your questions te others, want = re ; _— = to know very, very clearly what the mechanics were, whicn w I" : = a il ~ bail . : an .. : ' ais something that I con't know now. Ss 7 4 Mr. Goldsmith. I'm not. in a position ov virtue of my = i ~” ‘ if . | 3 ~ | agreement with the Agency to go into cetail with you now on Z "1 the nature of the photo coverage. So, I will withdraw the _ = 14 4 Le ~ i question. = | i. a E A i 3 hat t! e lanses : { Mr. Rocca. Aqain, let me say that these epses & | in coverage are absolutely a built-in part of the nazaras of a i = S ! = i the business. $ 20 | a7 i BN City st i r=) , Mr. Golasmit "Wag the Mexico City station ever it arid _. aoe pa = ae + “1. = © ; > DOr ; criticized for failing to obtain a photocrapn of Oswaic: 2 aa @ lad “* \ ; 5 £ Tr a 4 Mr. Rocca. Not as far as I know. i Mr. Golésmith. Critizec -- was e Mexico City 24 | i station criticized? : Mr. Recca. No. I saw nothing to that effect in any 4 ‘i DoclId: 322763409 Paije 143 - one ALDERSON RESORTING COMPANY, INC.
CONFIDENTIAL 143 { 1 of the outcoing material or in anv of the discussions. Coe r. Golcasmithn. So, even though Oswalé visiteé the da 1 i ! i ! i i { i | { | \ embassies, you are not surprised by the absence of a nhotocrarn? | | PF ‘ Mr. Recca.. I was not. w i = a Mr. Goldsmith. Do you know whether the FBI had anv fio . & . I “ i independent telephonic surveillance of the Soviet and Cub ~ i x 3 7 4 Enbassy and Consulate? i Mr. Rocca. I actually never went over it, except to - | & 2 = wo Mr. Rocca. No, I co net. ~ i i : - | Mr. Golcsmith. Are you familiar with the crvptonym = | AMMUG? = o1; 4 iS Mr. Rocca. i am. >] This is a cryptonym for a Cuban defector, who is & | unknown to me, but who at a certain stage provided material = id ‘ ; os | n i} that was given to .the Warren Commission by the staff, or = | = 4» CGixectly, or both. . _ | Mr. Goldsmith. Did vou ever meet with AMMUG? a IT | | - Mr. Rocca. No, no. = ond ‘ I - Mr. Goldsmith. Is it fair to say that AMMUG provided | “ { ‘ _ tai ; = 19 | ad ' - 2 : . . . i ~ | the CIA with informati on relevant to the. assassination t . { e Sc 36: | a 20} meti in 1964? 7 Sometime in 19647 nS Mx. Rocca. I can't iudce that. I do not know. rae : re ee pated J aa i : Te a ae . . . @ ¥o™N. 4 IT can't really avporeciate the thr ust of his material. t wh -_= i 234 Mx. Goldsmith. When did you have occasion to review | 24: , : the material that AMMUG had vrovided to the CIA? a5 CON PIDENTIAL CERSOM REPORTING COMPANY, INC. Docld:32263409 Paige 144. ALS ERSS RUINS ©
; CON PIDENTIAL 144 ry : . . . : = =: , . H “i the extent that it's in the Oswald file. I am not trying to | | be evasive. I simply cannot rememceer what the thrust of this ; or re - @ ' information was.. | i toh . . . . . . i 7 My impression was that he pnprovided the first really ~ ~' significant, hard informetion on the DGI chief. Now his name,' ! it . ‘ - 4 . | 2 5 il ; ; . ; oe ; | I was struggling for it this moftning, it must have Leen S §' 3 (*Rodriguez.") = jf 2 74 Mr. Goldsmith. R-O-G-E-L-I-O Lopez? ~ i Mr. Rocca. That's the man. 5 ; As a consequence, this was of significance. But it : =o! = came in later, after, 1964 or some time. Is that correct? 5 i Ss lo . Mr. Goldsmith. I will show you some documents KUTLDING, o 4 ay aD Q $e will refresh your memory in a moment. i * a = : ; = i> . = - - tater S ‘ Mr, Rocca. Anvway, this was considered very sensitive = ve i {Co : . . i : i and was being handled by a case officer, appropriately ~ | i an ae oe, ; - | eavuinved with AMMUG.. Tvhad no: direct cognizance of that; = i ae Doses . . 4 iS . . ; - . . . ; - ad = for example, as I had with the Golitzin material on the Russian ! . = 35 = 13, ; ~ i side. ; 7 } Mr. Golésmith. Did you know about AMMUG in 1964? | i = a1 | : oe Mr. Rocca. The name and that he had information I AR <- ; ; @ ~ oN | had heard, yes. 23 | “Mr, Goldsmith. Did vou know that he was a former ! 24 DGI agent or case officer? a3} Mr Rocca. The question is where. Hf DoclId: 32263409 Page 145 ’ ALS
—" “ 2 i 34 ’ ! H @ | «| “I i w : = eo: Pe) ~ 1 ™ t i | = \ Ww 2 wt co] -~ } ~ ot Sc 7 o~ d ~ S | ~ i 1 : ! . i < i i 3 | = } ! w~ a! i = w) | + i a 12 | = | “ = : = 5: ¢ i bend 1 = . = 1S aAT | a h “| wn | = If | = ! ec t Ce = 20 | \ it H ee t 24 We in iy ! | | | | j | i DoclId: 322763409 Page 146 CONFIDENTIAL really expert on in any wav. But I am nerfectly will be usec as a backboard for Mx. Goldsmith. Did Mr. Helms or Mr. Angleton exoress any concern about AMMUG being cisclosed to th Commission? Mr. Rocca. Not as far as I know. As far as him to the Warren Commission. Mr. Goldsmith. AMMUG being a DGI employee? Mr. Rocca. That's my eee I may be t wrong about this. Mr. Goldsmith. Do you. recall what information any, AMMUG provided to the CIA in reference to the Ke assassination? Mr. Rocca. . As I said, I think he provided t CONFIDENTIAL ALDEPSt!! REPORTING COMPANY, ING. Was the Warren Commission told 145 Mr. Goldsmith. Pardon me? Mr. Rocca. “here he was. I mean, ne was not in ‘Mexico, as = recall, was hea? Iotnink he was somewhere else. Yes. The answer to your question is ves. Ee was a DGI defector. But I thought he came out cf Paris or Lendon ox something like that. Mr. Goldsmith. We'll show vou some documents that will refresa your memory on him in a moment. Mr. Rocca. This is, again, a part that I am not ina to i know, ‘about otally , if nnedy he
146 CON FID tC) Por} | Ht hy ti Hl t i ! first inside information on the DGI's aspect of the Rezidentura | 2) ae in Mexico City. But precisely what he said with respect to | "| who was where in Mexico City at the time I cannot say at j 1 © + i this moment because I don't have it in my memory. wn i , | = fi : | ~ f Just a second, now. Let me try to work it out. L t | “ » i : “ ° | Mr. Goldsmith. Mr. Rocca, for your sake and the = | purpose of refreshing your memory somewhat, I would like to ! = iy - . H = | show you some CIA documents pertaining to AMMUG which, I think, ~ 4 after they are reviewed, you may have a somewhat better 7 4 ~ 4 . . . , aes S | recollection of this particular individual. = fl q ‘ . . = H I am going to give you CIA number 1879 and would like |: x fF a : to ask. you to skim that through CIA 1892 --. no, CIA 1894. e = ~ | That would probably take you ten minutes or so.’ 2 ,, 4 “ | : a | (Pause) Sa 4 i ad i Mr. Rocca. Well, I haven't read it in detail, but ~ * | certainly I recall this. The case officer was Swensen and t/ | . : . 2 i we did -provide the questions that he was able to elaborate. Be | & 3 | ; = i What can we talk about? = 19 4 = ! Mr. Goldsmith. Was there another case officer who c . | S&S 20 | aebriefed AMMUG? | | Se " Mr. Rocca. As far as I know, no. I mean, Swensen eos 1 : i — rn , . ®@ a | was the individual who was in charge. t Mr. Goldsmith. Do you know whether a CIA case | 24 | AMMUG? . SO : CON PIDENTIAL } ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY. INC. Docld:327263409 Page 147 ! | officer, whose last name was Langash or Langosh ever debriefed: | | i t |
CONFIDENTIAL 147 - Mr. Rocca. No. "Langash" --.I remember no such name. 2 Mr. Goldsmith. According to a memo dated 5 May, 1964, 2 CIA number 1879, the first paragraph indicates that prior | 7! _to October, 1963, Oswald visited the Cuban Embassy in Mexico : w | = city on two or three occasions. Before, during, and after '. | 4 ; | “ | these visits, Oswald was in contact with DGI, specifically | = | with Luisa Calderon, Manuel (Dega) Perez, and Rogelio | : 7 Rodriguez Lopez. | | 1 - t : - Mr. Rocca. Who was the chief. ! = io | Mr. Goldsmith. Rodriguez was the chief? | 2 = : Mr. Rocca. My recollection is that he was the chief. ; mn That's why AMMUG gave us the first real information on the : @ = 3 organization of this Rezidentura. | = it , 2 a Mr. Goldsmith. What followup was done on Oswald's | 3 B apparent contact with DGI? | * am Mr. Rocca. Well, there was no followup, quite : . my apart from just this information. I mean, these are the | : “| people -- there was nothing to be done. Luisa Calderon | eT was one of the people that we had gotten a telephone tap on. ! e . . . i sS 2 She is one of the persons who made a very peculiar comment ! ae in the course of it, as I recall. These other people are simply & A) s i (t+ As ae no im) on the spot. It is not possible to get any. additional -whether Silvia Duran was a DGI employee or agent? 49 . information if the station doesn't develop the assets. 4 Mr. Goldsmith. Did AMMUG give any information as to :; : | CON PIDENTIAL ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC. Docld: 32263409 Page 1468
t t< i 0 - = 5 oy ~~ wo: “ i t if wn 8 i 1 i S| S | — , ! < i ™ t u -t 3 i Ss i c ‘ s | = i = i x a — 194 + igo « t ; te | - i ~= 4 = | = ols i Hl na i al 13 4 = iy = i ~ | s | “ ivan , | fn i . 1 = 2) x ™ = ' n i = : = \ e i c “a = 2 | | { ay ae | VR Ae © 3 : hy = i 1 i i i | | | { $ \ ' if 1 4 people. that she is. ‘read this paragraph through to here (indicating.) this allegation. CONFIDENTIAL 148 Mr. Rocca. I do not know, unless it's stated here. She was the receptionist, serving a mixed bag, there, of So I don't know that. Mr. Goldsmith. Do you know whether Luisa Calderon was a DGI. agent? Mr. Rocca. No, not except for this, which says -Mr. Goldsmith. Was this information all given to the Warren Commission? Mr. Rocca. As far as I know -- all of the AMMUG » information was given. Mr. Goldsmith. Do vou know whether Luisa Calderon was ever employed in any capacity by the CIA? Mr. Rocca. No. I do not know that. Mr. Goldsmith. Please refer to CIA number 1892 and 1893, starting with this paragraph (indicating). Just (Pause) Mr. Rocca. I have no comment on this. As far as I know, there were no traces that sustain i } { } Mr. Goldsmith. For: the record, the allegation in that: document is that Calderon was or may have been connected to the CIA. CON FPFTIDENTI AT, ALDERSOM REPORTING COMPANY, INC Docld: 322763409 Page 149
CONFIDENTIAL 149 Is that correct? When I say "is that correct," I'm saying is. that th what the allegation is. q@ eOtr 7X} wb ire) CIA agent? | | | + | Mr.. Rocca. Yes, that is the allegation. But this = 7 involves almost three levels of hearsay. t ‘ - 9 sl Mr. Goldsmith. Fine. = i | a S 7 | I don't want you to infer anything as to the committee|'s : ~ i : i = 3 | view on this particular issue. Pa $ It ‘Mr. Rocca. I'm not going to underwrite that at all. | rot } ‘ i ~ o | I just don't believe it. | = i . = Hd Mr. Goldsmith. We're not asking you to underwrite it., a ; 7 = 2 We're simply asking you whether you have any information that : cf = i _ i @ = 13 4 would either rebut or verify that allegation. = 7 Mr. Rocca. I understand that. Ultimately the guestian z is | really ought to go to the. people in WH division, Mexico-Cuban,, = is | who have the records and are in a position to verify this. “ 7 | They forwarded no information bearing on such a thing. I F '8 | assume,.therefore, that the thing is not so. i z (OIF | Mr. Goldsmith. When you read this memo at the time that = = 20 | you were working on this issue for the Rockefeller Commission, ‘ j oe | were you concerned by the allegation that Calderon was a | | Mr. Rocca. No, no, no. It didn't come to my mind n “ow at that time. I don't remember where in that memo I gave it Ww aan any attention, either. CONPIDENTIAL Docld: 32263409 Pate 150 ALDSEMSOM REPORTING COMPANY, ING.
i?) Oo Zz try 4 oO i] NTIAL 150 ‘Mr. Goldsmith. Apart now from that allegation which i | | : 7 I understand to be hearsay -- 3 i ; | @ 4 Mr.. Rocca. Well, Piniero, the head of the CIA, did | | not agree. Piniero is the chief of the service. ” ! i re ‘ Mr. Goldsmith. He is head of the DGI service? = i I wa 4 i ; . ; \ i ° 7 Mr. Rocca. Yes. I mean, he is a very important man. | x <= | You know, this is -- we are reallyv.spinning things out = “| here. If there is‘no factual support for this, then we to } = | shouldn't tarry and try to give it evidential or factual < | | 3 significance. : = , Mr. Goldsmith. Mr. Rocca, no omis attemptingsto = i i oo! | attach evidential significance to these documents. The = il ‘ ™ ¢ | purpose of this session is to address questions to you that = | = id i . i 8 4 would help us shed light on the documents. I don't want you |; =  # to think that we infer from the documents that everything = i ~ ml contained in the documents is accurate. ao In fact, that's the reason we are going over the | i : documents. The record does not speak for itself. ; = is | . = | Mr. Rocca. That's very good. As I said, I don't want 7" | to get into a position of hostility here, because that is not a my purpose. | | | oN y . On the other hand, as you stated yourself, certain 21 7 | i of these paragraphs read in completely legalistic fashion i by individuals who.really have not been exposed to the se fl operational vicissitudes -- let's put it that way -- will draw ‘ CONFIDENTIALS i ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC. Docld: 322763409 Page 151
wm } t ' con Js} @ a - w j > 3 > = ~ . i j = \ wn 2 4 w pe ' t nq i S | o ~ N fy ~ i i i a 2 ec i x“ i . a | a an i c ' — ! . ! = (10; oO i ve i = rs! 7 fi = is ~ igo ‘4 - i Leg : = ,, | t @ aq is | _ Hi = il z | bag - = 34 zg ~ i - ! : += “ if of . i = is an i ~ te | = i? & i ~ 1 ¢ ! 2 an | o 20 | 1 i a1 « i i ft al i i Docld: 322763409 Page 152 CONFIDENTIAL 151 conclusions that simply aren't correct. Mr. Goldsmith. The reason that I am deposing you today and have deposed many other Agency employees is to attempt to clarify questions that are raised by the record. That perhaps gets back to one of the first points that was made earlier in the deposition, where you made reference to the record and I indicated that the record needs to be examined and we can't rely exclusively upon it. Mr. Rocca. She's a mysterious character anyway. As far as I know, that has never been clarified. There are subsequent reports about her, as I recall, travelling around and being set up by the DGI. So, you can just keep that in the back of your head. You are going to have a continual problem with her. H Hl i ! | | Mr. Goldsmith. These memos also mention that as well Mr. Rocca. There is a whole stage of receding mirrors that you can't really ever get to the bottom of, without ever getting her inte this ‘kind of proceeding, settling down and questioning her. | Mr. Goldsmith. “Now, CIA number 1909 is a memo dated 5 May, 1974, which basically consists of the results of the debriefing of AMMUG. It lists a series of questions that were presented to AMMUG and the answers to it. I show you that only for reference purposes now. Mr. Rocca. My recollection is that these questions a CONFIDENTIAL ALDERSOM REPCRTINS COMPANY, INC.
; 9 CONFIDENTIAL 152 t | | { . | were very carefully thought out by members of the staff, i. members of my group, and that we made the thing fully available @ 3 ‘to the Warren Commission, which is really the thing that ; ‘ concerned me more than anything else. | = 74 | Mr. Goldsmith. Fine. | ° i Please listen to the question that I have for you | ~~ } now. 2 7 I sust showed you a cocument that was dated May 5, 19614. . On May é, 1964, according to document number 1898, some | Z a followup questions were presented for the purpose of having = them be addressed to AMMUG. So, we have a second set of x 4 ‘ questions. : @ : 3 Now, the memo dated 8 May, 1964, which is CIA number | : a 1891, was prepared by case officer Harold F. Swensen. That | 7 is the one I would like you to examine now in a bit more detail. - “| It appears that what Mr. Swensen did, unlike his earlier : | report where he specifically mentioned or listed the question | = | that was addressed and gave AMMUG's response, here he simply : a summarized the briefing session. - 2 I am wondering if you noticed that when you examined | sae this document for the first time? G27 22 | a © “SN | Furthermore, why did Mr. Swensen depart from the | ! earlier procedure? : i | Mr. Rocca. Well, it gave us relevant information, t I think that is what probably what we were primarily concerned . CONFIDENTIAL | B ALDERSOM REPORTING COMPSNY, INC. DoclId: 322763409 Page 153
CONFIDENTIAL 153 | | with. oo Frankly, I would not have held to this format. i 3 i : ; . . @ This is the format you were referring to in the earlier question. 2 | Mr. Goldsmith. Yes. | 7 | Mr. Rocca. The sixth of May. | | Coming back on the eighth, he is giving us the results a 7! . really in capsule, I would judge, rather than setting them | S “| gown, and that would anticipate that this thing would simply 3 5 | = be written up more formally somewhere. | = ia) : : “I Is there such a sort of wrap-up report where the | ; | things are? ce 7 Mr. Goldsmith. No. ! = . Mr. Rocca. Well, this may be all he did, then, on : : 7 the thing. | ! = ig 3 e | Mr. Goldsmith. So, you don't have an explanation, | e 18 | = ! then, on the departure from the form that was given to Mr. , mI ' q ‘6 Swensen to address to AMMUG? | : | Mr. Rocca. Here again, it would be a question of | = iv ¢ 40 consulting with Mr. Dooley or Mr. Pratt-- I think that Mr. ; " | Pratt had joined us by this time -- to find out exactly , ONE : what had transpired between them and Swensen -~ one or the : other or both -- to determine whether there was any kind of --! > my Mr. Goldsmith. What was Swenson's position at that ‘time? hoe in CONFIDENTIAL ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY. INC. SLT j* re ro Docld: 32263409 Page 154
CONFIDENTIAL 154 ir. Rocca. He was the case officer for AMMUG. Goldsmith. He was simply a case officer? re) iz ; K Mr. Rocca. Yes. He was handling him. Presumably he was very keen, as the memo reflects, on keeping the man = | safe and out of the public eve. : ' pe 3 si Mr. Goldsmith. Were you satisfied with the completeness Bi 7 of Swenson's report? | 3 | Mr. Rocca. I certainly didn't raise anything at the : < a time. It seemed to me to tell us a lot of new information that = iol bore directly on the question on the Cuban side of it for the | : no first time, which, you remember, as I said this morninad, was | ~ 4 a part of the whole situation there, from the CI point of | e z view, that I know least about. The KGB Rezidentura was clear ! ; . but what we really didn't understand was the Cuban setup. | 3 | For the first time we were beginning to get information. | = i * oa But mind you, this man did not have direct information “ 7 about it. He had heard it from people. | : + Mr. Goldsmith. When you say "this man", you are | ey | referring to AMMUG? = = Mr. Rocca. AMMUG. In other words, he is not a Golitzin or a Dermabin or that kind, that is, who can tell you directly. Mr. Goldsmith. For the record, would you indicate who Golitzin and Derdabin were? “Mr. Rocca. These were Soviet defectors who had come out. CGN PIDENTIALEL i ALRERSOM REPORTING COMPANY, INC. Docld: 322763409 Page 155
ann 7TH STREET, S$. REPORTERS BUTLDTNG. WACHTHOTON, DL. 2602" (202) SSu—2445 \ Oh J Sey’) Ais 7X] DoclId: 322763409 de res) n in ™“t oad nm ee Deriabin is a Soviet defector who defected in Vienna in 1953-1954, and Mr. Golitzin defected in 1961. They are KGB officers. -in the. Warren moment. Mr. Goldsmith. Was all of the information contained AMMUG memos prepared by Mr. Swensen given to the Commission? Mr. Rocca. As far as I know, it was. Mr. Goldsmith. Do you know in what form _- Mr. Rocca. That's what I don't know at the present Mr. Goldsmith. Was it given in memorandum form or in briefing form? Mr. Rocca. I would judge that it should have been -- I have actually -- I have almost the conviction or feeling that we promoted a meeting between members of the staff of the Warren Commission and the case officer. In other words, they were allowed to confabulate. They were encouraged to. ‘between 156 Mr. Goldsmith. So, you think there was a conference the case officer and -- Mr. Rocca. And the Warren Commission staff. Mr. Goldsmith. Which staff members were involved? Mr. Rocca. That I couldn't say. Mr. Goldsmith. Certainly there would have to be a record of that meeting at the Agecy. Mr. Rocca. There would have to be a record at the 7 x = CON FIDENTIOIS LeERSON SEPORTING COMPANY, INC. 155
CONFIDENTIAL 156 Warren Commission, too, if it happened. Now I am not saying | that it did happen. I have the impression, however, that 3 there was certainly no intent to deny the Commission full @ i ~ | access to the information. 2 ! | af Mr. Goldsmith. Do you know whether the Warren Commiss ! i \ “ | was given the information that AMMUG provided with reference | S 7 t . \ a ‘ | to Luisa Calderon? e ~4 Mr. Rocca. I'm almost certain they had to have it ~ i. v 7 | because there was an intercept on it, and this bound down one = ~ aspect of the intercept, which was a very peculiar phrase that! ts a : | = wo . : = | she used -- "He got what he deserved" -- or something like i “ad 4 : { s - @ Ee 3 ; Mr. Goldsmith. We will get to that intercept = i a momentarily. e 3 Mr. Rocca. “So, I must say that this Calderon thing Pa i Z "= must have gone to them. . i aos | . - " ' Is there not a memo by Mr. Dooley there which says : e 8 yf. . . : . = | that the information went to the Warren Commission? a = 7 Mr. Goldsmith. I am going to show you now what the c 1 : t , : Agency has-.indicated to us was made available to the Warren H i wee tO ar 2255 =| Commission. : @ In response to your question, there is no particular || | memo from Mr. Dooley indicating what went to the Warren { Commission. a¢ I ‘ I would like you to examine CIA number 1929 through ‘ fo 7 CONFIDENTIAL i ALZERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC. DoclId: 322763409 Page 1457
CONFIDENTIBL _ 156_, CIA number 1933. Mr. Rocca. I see it -- and I say that they do not. 2 . This is a document that was made available to Mr. @ i Rankin on May 15, 1964 in reference to the information that | an . | ; ad been vrovided to the Agency by AMMUG, pa 2 i a } I would like you to review the document and then = i specifically to review the actual information that was z- 7 : | ~ i made available to the Warren Commission. | x | Mr. Rocca. Do you mean that Mr. Rankin is not a member . os = i of the Warren Commission? = 8 Mr. Goldsmith. I didn't mean to differentiate between: a cok o 3 { Mr. Rankin and the Warren Commission. 7 Soi: | Basically, what I was saying is that the document = number 1929-1930 is the memorandum, the transmittal memorandum, Sota | x | that indicates what information is going to be provided, and the = | source of the information. And then, what you'll see in pages: = 1S = | CIA number 1932 and 1933 is the actual information that was a 7 | ; - a oe | made available. = | a | (Pause) = IF | - Mr. Goldsmith. Have you had a chance to review ! = 20 |} | those materials? a4 ESE i Mr. Rocca. Uh-huh. @ awd 22 . Mr. Goldsmith. Do those materials make any reference | i to Luisa Calderon? Zé i AMMUG provided information on -- i Mr. Goldsmith. Now, it , . | CONFIDENTIAL jh : ALESERSch REPORTING COMPANY, INC. DoclId: 322763409 Page 156
CONFIDENTIAL 157 Mr. Rocca. I don't see it -- here, anyway. Ww Mr. Goldsmith. Now, AMMUG provided information on Manuel (Vega) Perez and Rogelio Rodriguez Lopez and Luisa | { | | | | | Calderon and the memo that you're studying now refers only { . | | i | | { | | 2 - | to (Vega) Perez and Rodriguez Lopez. i 1 ! a | vo 8 | Is that correct? 7 ® | S fy Mr. Rocca. And Duran. = =e 7; Mr. Goldsmith. And Duran, yes. But there is no - og ie . "i reference to Luisa Calderon, is that correct? 2 10) ; z=: Mr. Rocca. There is none. S { = 1 rt i = 4 But, as I say, I cannot explain -- Mr. Hall, who did ' as ‘ : = tat . . ; ; . i - * | this, certainly did not include that on it. But I cannot - you ‘ = 3 ' accept that that material did not get to the Commission 2 somehow in some way. 5 4 Mr. Goldsmith. Let me review another document . ~ with you. ‘i - Mr. Rocca. That is, my impression is that Mr. Dooley | = og & ° | passed all of the information to them. | = i There certainly would have been no reason to omit ar : : aS : Mr. Goldsmith. I would ask you at this point to review: aN 4 i oN | CIA number 1907, which is a brief for presentation to the | President's Commission on the Assassination of President 2 |i : | Kennedy dated May 14, 1964. I would like to ask you to review specifically CIA (o) O “3 ny Hi o td 4 | H ‘a bt Docld:32263409 Page 159 ALDCERSOM RESCRTING COMPANY, INC.
158 CONFI D tt NTIAL | | number 1927 and indicate to me whether there is any reference i : : | to Calderon specifically or any of the other DGI individuals. boo _ ta (Pause) 4a Mr. Rocca. There are no specifics worked out. There in is simply the generalization that a source is being debriefed . oa ~“ on it. ay Mr. Goldsmith. Who actually gave this briefing? 2002" (202) S54-2945 | | | | and the Commission staff is in the course of being briefed | | Mr. Rocca. I have no idea. ? Mr. Goldsmith. Would that have been Mr. Helms or LCHTUGTON, | | Mr. McCone? Mr. Rocca. I judge Mr. Helms, but I can't be certain.: I would rather imagine Mr. Helms. BUTELDING, UA An Mr. Goldsmith. Please review CIA number 1906. i | 5 7 (Pause) | * aan Mr. Goldsmith. My question pertains to this document; “ 7 | right now. Let's identify it first. = aa Would you identify for the'record what this 1s? vw | : : | = 3 ! = ri Mr. Rocca. . It's an internal memorandum from Mr. = 20 | oan i, cee” | scheduled to go before the Commission and he wants a short, e Grind ils VAS red t) but comprehensive, memorandum which highlights the basic ~ issues or positions entered into by the Agency and its dealings 24 : , . . . i with the Commissions. 42 i | Angleton to me indicating that the DDP, Mr. Helms, has been | I | | | a In other words, that's presumably what came out of it.) " CONPIDENTIAL Docld: 327763409 Paye 160 ALDERSON REPCRTING COMPANY, INC.
5 CONFIDENTIAL 159 Mr. Goldsmith. Now, this is dated 12 May, 1964, | . 2 | is that correct? | i a Mr. Rocca. That is correct. , > | Mr. Goldsmith. The memo for you from Mr. Angleton 3 $i is dated 12 May, 1964. | ™ iL \ - " a 3 | ‘Mr. Rocca. Yes. s | a 7) Mr. Goldsmith. Is it fair to say from the text of this H { > M i e ¢ memo that the Agency was extremely concerned about the : aa | | ¢ "I sensitive source, AMMUG? In other words, here was an example | c | | - ! = ie of the Aqency being concerned about a sensitive source? = | Mr. Rocca. Well, there is always this sensitivity. | 2 H . => +5 }! ‘ : L ~ ey Mr. Goldsmith. I'm asking you to look only at CIA 19006. i ! = : @ eq 1s | Mr. Rocca. But you've already shown me the brief. ~ tS | That's what I was looking at. | = is | Mr. Goldsmith. Okay. You'd like to look through * \6 | the brief again? ~ uy aol | | . | - Mr. Rocca. No. = 3 | I was only going to point out that the very first ~ = | ! = aa paragraph of the brief refers to the sensitive source, which io} i . ( * 20 | is AMMUG -- somewhere along here -- it's one of the tabs, ; Bees i Tab E, I guess. | Y aN i So, there was within the limits of the prescription ; 33 | a . . . ~ | comprehensive and at the same time extensive information, “ | Mexican and Cuban phases. In other words, is the point that we weren't mentioning it -- because we did mention it? | 1 t ‘ | . i CON FIDENTIAB dt i ALTERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC. DoclId: 322763409 Page 161
CONFIDENTIAL 160 Mr. Goldsmith. There are a variety of points and I him" -~ that is, Mr. Helms -- “that in your view this would raise a number of new factors with the Commission; that it i 7 really am not able to indicate to you right now what all the © ; : points are, Mr. Rocca. 4 . . . My concern here with document number 1906 simply is = s ; . } s a whether the Agency was concerned about the sensitivity of : | ' a | “ S| AMMUG and therefore wanted to protect him as a sensitive =. ft < | cS ‘ source. | x 2 a “| Mr. Rocca. My recollection is that it wasn't any greater ~ | ~ "il than anything else that was coming along. ra wo Mr. Goldsmith. The AMMUG defection was no greater = ‘| ; i Zou | ! = ° } than anything else that was coming along? ; w) 1 1 . t Mr. Rocca. Than any of the other techniques, sources,: & 3 | and methods that we had been concerned with. an : In other words, I'm trying to -- you were asking me = nan whether this qualitatively was of greater significance than = i _ S| anything else that we were engaged in protecting, and I can't | = i : “ 7 4 ! 2 | remember that it was. pa Mr. Swensen considered it as very important from the | = ! standpoint of his own security and the security of his agent. ; i] i . . i > | But I don't recall any Craconian impositions, "Don't say anything i : : org rane Dose =| about AMMUG." be FF i , 4oN i Mr. Goldsmith. What did Mr. Angleton have in mind | when he said the following to you in the memo: "I informed i i iH CON PIDENTIALSA Docld:32263409 Page 162 ALDERSOM SEPORTING COMPESNY, INC.
CONFIDENTIAL 161 should not go to the Commission prior to the Director's appearance unless we have first had some preliminary reaction | | the question of timing. i i. “Or made sure that the Director is fully aware of its implications a since it could well serve as the basis for detailed questioning." 7 | Mr. Rocca. (Nods negatively) : ~ i i 2 s | I haven't the faintest notion at this time of what _ i ~ : | . . . : ec 7 | was involved in that. } oS 3 | Mr. Goldsmith. You'll have to speak up a bit, Mr. i nl 3 + | Rocca. = 10 4 Mr. Rocca. I mean, it doesn't bring to mind a par- = it | ticular series of considerations unless they would relate > 32 | directly to the handling cf the individual, who he was, what |: i | = | t @ = 43 position he had, and all the rest -- in other words, involve | = it ' al th = i! : = 2 | the actual surfacing of the source. & ig 4 Mr. Goldsmith. According.to this memo, it also : Sc .. ‘ = le | indicates that the DDP, Mr. Helms, stated that he would review = , a 7 this carefully and make a decision as to the question: of ‘timing. = aan Was the Agency concerned. about the question of timing | S i i io] li : i = 13 | in terms of when material would be made available to the | ~ Ho - § 2¢ | Warren Commission? | cae TT Mr. Rocca. I think it refers to timing with respect | @ tee 22 to this particular matter, in view of the fact that AMMUG a had just come out. | 24 | Overall I would say that they were not concerned with © if s2000 . "4 ih 1 ‘| Docld:32263409 Page 163 ALESREIM RESCRTING COMPANY, ING.
CONFIDENTIAL “162 Mr. Goldsmith. Please review CIA number 1950 throuch i 4} . ; . 7 1954. This is an excerpt from a memo that was prepared by t 21 , @ ~ you on 23 May 1975 in response to the letter of April 15, 74 1975, from Mr. Belin. il ! ° Pe a (Pause) ' i i un é | Mr. Goldsmith. Have vou had occasion to review those x | pages now, Mr. Rocca? . | es 3 | = | Mr. Rocca. Yes. . = if - ' < "| This is the memo I wrote for Mr. Belin. : a . - tes . 5 ey Mr. Goldsmith. For purposes of clarification, were = : . | = i | = vy there any other memos that you prepared for the Rockefeller | - * | Commission? S oy I believe, for example, you indicated earlier that 2 | you -- | = i Eis | | S i Mr. Rocca. Yes, there was another memo. There were |! . . | two memos that I prepared. : " | / Mr. Goldsmith. Then there is one other one. ai we 2 | i = Mr. Rocca. There is another one, and it had a i : = total documentary appendix wnich won't tell you anything ¢ 1a | , ; ; : ° | you don't know. But it simply sets it out in what I consider; al Sa to be the necessary way to try to make any sense about anything. { 4 This is not that memo. bSn/), | ‘ AS to > 23 | Now it's very clear here that I have evolved in my 24 views with respect to the importance of Calderon. Mr. Goldsmith. Would you tell us for the record SONFIDENTIALS DoclId: 322763409 Page 164 . ALTERSOMN REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
163 CONFIDENTIAL what the subject matter of CIA number 1950 to 1954 is? ba i | : | In other words, you've just reviewed several pages. | : i @ 3 They've pertained to Luisa Calderon. 4 | What is the nature of the relevance of Luisa Calderon : : | = 5 i to this case? * i a é Mr. Rocca. The relevance is that if she is a DGI zt .O4 | ms 7 | agent, then the intercept becomes important. But this was : ! & a not something that I recognized in 1963. I recognized it rong H i S oy in 1975, because at that time I read the whole case. < ti = ie | Mr. Goldsmith. For purposes of clarification, what |; = aan is the substance of the telephone intercept that you are x i > i244 referring to? @® :, | | | = wa il . a i323 What does Luisa Calderon say? = | Mr. Rocca. She doesn't say a thing. That's why it | = if : z 34, is totally nuance, and I would never go public on a matter = i$ 4) of this kind. ” vi Mr. Goldsmith. What is the nuance to which you are = 3 | referring? n = aa Mr. Rocca. The nuance is that she is -- she phrases | c . : . : ; t 5 20 what possibly had happened to Kennedy as “what barbarians." | — tio I mean, it indicates an emotional setup, an emotional part? @ pe “- attitude toward what had happened. : ; 22 Mr. Goldsmith. More fundamentally, doesn't her 24 | statement suggest the possibility of foreknowledge on her t zs i i i 4 CONFIDENTIAL Docld:32263409 Page 165 ALDSRSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
a * 4 @ é - uw — Py = S > ~ N ' wo PD wi ro) ~«- ~ : = ~ ~ / — ™ 3 = ~ cS ™ . a Pe § pond - ’ = id =~ S ol ts = ‘ ~ if mee w) a = 4 BUTEDING, 3 4 San = = = = 1s “i = te = a ray Ta s 13 = 13 = [mod a S 729 an n> rw ~ a -and say that it does because I have no evidence that that about it. That's why I said this was nuance. it would not necessarily take on any particular significance 164 CONFIDENTIAL Mr. Rocca. I used the word. I used that word and you used it just now. But I'm not going to go into a court indicates foreknowledge. In and of itself it could indicate anything, because we don't know enough from the intercept Mr. Goldsmith. Right. Now, at first glance, on reading that transcription, standing alone. I believe the way you refer to it is possibly boastful se1£-indulgence or hyperbole on the part of an 3 individual. However, does it not to you take on added significance in light of Luisa Calderon's alleged connection with DGI? | Mr. Rocca. If we could prove it. All the evidence 1S against it. Piniero denies it. Mr. Goldsmith. No, no, no. Piniero denies that she was CIA. He does not deny that she was DGI. We can refer back to that memo if you would like to clarify that. Mr. Rocca. No. I think you're right, yes. Mr. Goldsmith. We have AMMUG making a statement that -- CONFIDENTIAL DoclId: 322763409 Page 166 ALSERSON REPORTING COMPANY INC,
CONFIDENTIAL 165 Mr. Rocca. I mean, AMMUG is our source, yes. Mr. Goldsmith. And AMMUG says she is DGI. @ 3 Mn Rocca. I'm obviously going under here. I'm | + beginning to lose the track. : z : | Well, you're at the very point I was, to be vutterly | i i t 3 é | frank with you, in compiling that memo. | & | Mr. Goldsmith. The point I am trying to make is ! : 7 if she were DGI, that statement would take on added : ¢ 5 | significance. , = io | Is that a fair statement? | 7 Mr. Rocca. That was the reason I put it in. But I : 1s would, in any event, make it a cause for state intervention | e é is | or that kind of thing. It's another one of these things -- i = | it's what I call the laboratory level of counter intelligence 3 i | where you consider evidence, really, the way you consider | = i : is | it, say, at a moot court, in a law school, that kind of thing. ° 7 Mr. Goldsmith. Was the Warren Commission ever given E 7 a transcription of the conversation involving Luisa -- : n = 8 | Mr. Rocca. Without question I would say that. : a an Without question. a1 i roe i They had the Calderon followup. They had the Dorticos followup. They had the whole works. Not only did they have | to cy it here, but they had it also when they were down at the Kn. &. station. Mr. Goldsmith. Let me show you CIA number 1928. CONFIDENTIAL Docld: 32263409 Paye 167
20024 (202) S5N-2345 SOHC TON, D.C, WAS REPORTERS BUTELDING, S.W. 300 77TH STREET, rr ta ™ Oo bh on oO CONFIDENTIAL 166 Mr. Rocca. It just becomes incredible to see these formalistic indications that they were not informed about these things because I know they were. Mr. Goldsmith. Please read that document. (Pause) Mr. Goldsmith. It is just one page. Mr. Rocca. The fact that there is no reference to Calderon doesn't mean that there was no transmission. It means that this simply covered other materials. Mr. Goldsmith. Would there be another record of the Calderon transcription having been given to the Warren Commission, and if so, where would it be? Mr. Rocca. It has to be in this very record. This is the first I have heard which even suggested that the Calderon intercept had not been passed on. Mr. Goldsmith. Let me just go back and review this document with you briefly. Mr. Rocca. As I say, this is not an exclusionary document. This simply covers what it covers. Mr. Goldsmith: Okay. This is CIA. document number 1928. This document is dated 10 April, 1964. It has the heading, "Material from P-8593, Station Oswald File Shown to Warren Commission." I take it that's the Mexico City station's Oswald file. Then the document lists the translations of calls CONFIDENTIAL DoclId: 322763409 Page 166 . ALDERSTN SEPORTING COMPANY, INC.
167 QO oO Zz hy re] iw) td z H I hy imal made by Oswald that were given to the Commission. It also | 2 . | refers to two other conversations that were given to the @ | Commission. ° Mr. Rocca. But they already had had it in Washington,. ~ “| This only refers to presumably what happened in Mexico City. | = ot It may not be the full record of what they gave them down | Pe - | = | there. | = C | é 7 Mr. Goldsmith. Did the Mexico City station make - zn the Calderon transcript, at least according to this memo, i : = ' available to the Warren Commission? 7 it t = oii = 4 Mr. Rocca. I can't say that, not from this memo. | a” | It doesn't state that. S nant Mr. Goldsmith. The memo makes no reference at all — 4} : = H = ta if t “ i : 8 F to Calderon, is that correct? a HI = ii ry f Mr. Rocca. It does not. = i : t H : : : ~ * | That does not affect the Commission's knowledge because . - ' . : ww if "| ; _ , i < it simply doesn't make any sense that they wouldn't know of = | the Calderon aspect, in my opinion, at this stage. = H Mr. Goldsmith. Where would we be able to find a | formal record of the transcriptions that had been made era ‘ available to the Warren Commission staff? @ =: ee oe . c : aN ‘ Mr. Rocca. They should be in the formal record of the ; material transmitted to the Warren Commission and in their a4 | | own records and logs. (Pause) Docld: 32263409 Page 169 ALEERSON REBORTING COMPANY. INC.
CONFIDENTIAL 168 Mr. Goldsmith. Mr. Rocca, assuming that the committee t i t Ww would be able to get clearance for you with the Agency, do ces) you think that you might be able to find the record of this transcription having been given to the Warren Commission? i be = - I think you can understand the importance of the ‘ \ H “ ° 7) issue. : SC Mr. Rocca. Of course. B33 . = | Mr. Goldsmith. Thank you. < a We will attempt to arrange that to see if you can So u t i i = “| help us on this point. = ‘i Mr. Rocca. That would include, obviously, going to : ‘- WH area? | ¢ aan Mr. Goldsmith. Whatever is necessary for you to help! = : us verify this particular issue or resolve this particular x is = ‘“* s  dssue. = | A 44 - | Mr. Rocca. The thing that would be of greatest use =. 1 _ | would be if you could get the other memo. e ie) i = ei Mr. Goldsmith. We will also make an effort to obtain: ye) ; : ~ i that memo, I assure you. os | Mr. Rocca. Because, it had, as I say, a selection 2 Phat — ee of documents which represented in a sense the only education 1 / 7) y eS t2-¢ Af TAS bho to that the Inspector General had had on the case, and tney kept it in their file. I had intended it to be used as a basis for the selection of materials to be given to the Rockefeller TONFIODENTIALS J REPORTING COMPANY. INC. Doclda: 32263409 Paye 170 mle