wa Ske ans It says “station unable to confirm first tape erased prior to | second call." The second call was 28 September. No, it does not necessarily mean that they had the second tape in. hand on 23 November. They were only saying that before 28 Sepetmber da | telephone call they had erased the tape from the first call. 6 Mr, Goldsmith. The sequence of the calls was one on September 22, one on September 28 and one on October l. | Mrs. Scaletti. The first tape was erased before the 9 | second tape came in. That is why they didn't compare those | two voices. It does not say they had a tape in hand. Mr. Goldsmith. Really it does not say that but a person sending a cable -- | | “Mrs. Scaletti. I would not interpret it that way. { . . i | i | 1 | | | | | | | i | | Mr. Goldsmith. I am not suggesting we: are necessarily | | , . : ' 1s | giving it that interpretation. It gives rise to the possi- | bility of that interpretation because the person sending the , j | cable did not say all tapes are erased.. It. says "Unable to make | voice comparison as first tape erased prior to receipt of 9 | second call.” Mr. Goldsmith. Could you look at CIA number 208? | 20 |. Mrs. Scaletti. I was taking at face value the person | 1 | as saying that we did not compare the voices because when we @ : . 19 got the call on the second one we didn te. have the first one to a, "3 | compare it or the transcriber did not have the first one. | j i | t | i \ | 1 | | ' | i zs { Would you read the fourth paragraph? 4 . : 001761. i J 34 aS 2! may .¥ wer HW 50955 Docld:38977223 Page 55 | Loieyt Panazene
. i oo : i RA 4 AS ae fs - . i -Mrs. Scaletti. That indicates that the transcriber believed that the two people were identical. &) Mr. Goldsmith. Does that suggest to you that after the da ont | assassination the transcriber made a voice comparison? 5 ! Mrs. ‘Sealetti. No. | 6 | ‘Me. Goldsmith. ‘How could he make that determination? ra Mrs. scaletti. When you work with these transcribers, | . 3 | a no matter what language, to get this they replay and replay | 5 some of these= conversations. They know the people who talk all, 10 the time, they can tell by their voice. They have an exceed- ingly good ear. This happens quite frequently, this is not - infrequent, where a transcriber will say “look, the person I heard today I. know is the same person who called in last week" won te | | | ox. something like that. This is what they do. They train theit | | ears and they live by their ability to identify voices, accents arn ! } ! tS | Mr. Goldsmith. After the assassination would all the | . i ‘Mexico City files pertaining to Oswald have been sent to head- ; _4 ~ (18 | suarters? | Mrs. Scaletti. No. \ 1g as a routine have requested all that information? Mrs. Scaletti. I don't know what they did. You don't | { | | | | 20 41: Mr. Goldsmith. Headquarters would not as a matter of | | | | | | ask for the entire file. They were working with the file there, — i | @ 24 They would have been doing the investigation. What would be | | i normal..I would think would be for the station to review its ul | —— \ i 001762 TAR Gragrr. HW 50955 Docld:32297729293 Page 56 i | 4 4 ‘3 Pie Fs 5
> a) da aa a. HW 509545 Docld: them to send the file. This is my own impression and this is -the files because the files were voluminous, and I believe we Pade aa fag PH a files to see if there was anything pertinent that had not been sent to headquarters but I do not think it would be logical for| what I would feel would be the case. But if. they sent the file they would have nothing left on which to base further investigation. | Mr. Goldsmith. Well, after the investigation had been completed would the file have been sent to headquarters? Mrs. Scaletti. Probably not. They probably would have just -- as things occurred the pertinent matters would have com looahomea |) Seine crt ene nents cer neem mentees sae eames ame by cable or dispatch to Washington. I’ believe it was sent subsequently because’ I was in the field, we did a purging of | sent Oswald's file to Washington. Mr..Goldsmith.. This is when you were in Mexico City?> | Mrs. Scaletti. Yes. | Mr. Goldsmith. During what years were you in Mexico City? , - . ! Mrs. Scaletti. ‘'67 to '72. Tf could be. wrong but I believe it was atcthat time we sent the file up. Mr. Goldsmith. Turning back for a moment to the surveil-! lance operations in Mexico City, do vou know how many telephones were underz-eléctronic! strvetllance at the Cuban compound in 1963? Mrs. Scaletti.” I would have known”in 1963. I can give | or gy rm 001763 32977223 Page 57 A tw 4 Ad? bg Sed tee A:
HW 509455 ie) Ba. an Bocld: 55 (ate | you a ball park guess like three to five. . | Mr. Goldsmith. Do you know specifically whether the | : Cuban Conulate's phone was tapped? | | Mrs. Scaletti. I would: say in all likelihood. : Mr. Goldsmith, “A moment ago you mentioned the purging of files. I certainly do not mean to take that out of context. | | I understand what you are saying, they are voluminous files in | | Mexico City, particularly I imagine in Mr. Win Scott's station, | and you were cleaning out the files as a matter of routine pro-. cedure. .Do you know whether in. your experience with the.CIA : | files were ever purged, removed or doctored out of the ordinary | course:of business? | Mrs. Scaletti. No, I do not. : | Mr. Goldsmith. In other words, for deception purposes? | . ..Mrs..Scaletti. As a matter of fact, we were extremely | | : careful to make sure that every document was looked at and cross references were made or abstracts were made. We did not ! | throws away complete things without processing every papger to | | make Sure it was of value or not. : | Mr. Goldsmith. To your knowledge there was never any | incidents of purging of files in the ordinary course of : | business? ! Mrs. Scaletti. No. 3 Mr. Goldsmith. Do you know what the term CI/SIG stands for? | i 001764 32977523 Page 58 | { 5E ag i. : | ge es) aS ae 8
e se HW 50955 a AD 4a SES a 56 ‘ i Mrs. Scaletti. Ti-is a -special office within the CI ; a | Mr. Goldsmith. Do you know what function of the group. ‘ | is? 3 | _ Mrs. Scaletti.. Was.that Mrs. Egeter? 6 Mr. Goldsmith. Yes, it was. ; Mrs. Scaletti. It is a secret group. We never knew what é | went on down there. 9 | Mr. Goldsmith. How many units were there in the CI JU | . -Mrs. Scaletti. I don't remember how many there were. I f 12 can tell you the ones I knew were there. | 13 |. .Mr. Goldsmith. Can you tell me which ones were there? | i4 7 “Mrs. Scaletti. CI OA, the place where we got our 1s | ¢Glearances. “We had CI R&A. which did some research. | . 7 ef Goldsmith. That was- research and ‘analysis? ! 7 : : Mrs. Scaletti. Yes. | 13 Mr. Goldsmith. Can you tell me what each one was involved 9 | in doing? 29 “Mrs. Scaletti. CI R&A. CI/SIG, CI liaison. . a Mr. Goldsmith. What about CI'-- did you say I0? 2 | Mrs. Scaletti. “No. | | 5 | Mr. Golsmith. What was the first one you mentioned with | i 4 | regard to getting your clearance? | it 1 zs Mrs. Scaletti. CI OA. ' a3 001765. f To ae Docld:32277223 Page 59 u 4 fete ante eee are ea ae aa eee end ote nt ae parma cet
Bow 2 Wd ds av ad fy 2. 57 Mr. Goldsmith. What does the OA stand for?  @ 7 Mrs. Scaletti. Operational Approval I believe. But this 3 is what I remember because the names change and the number of 4 | offices changed. 7 Mr. Goldsmith. - Did. you ever work for CI/SIG? | ; i | 7 Mrs. Scaletti. Never. Mr. Goldsmith. Do you know whether CI/SIG would ever i . | have been involved in opening up the 201 files? 9 | Mrs. Scaletti. They could have. Probably did. Mr. Goldsmith. Would you say that CI/SIG was a parti- | | oy | cularly secretive unit. of the CI Staff? | | t Mrs. Scaletti. I don't know. All I know is that they had special: files down there. If you would go down there a- | ast lot of times they would not want to give them to you, they would i 5 | let you read certain things. We never asked that many questions i 14 of them. We didn't have much contact at all. : i | Mr..Goldsmith. I would Like to show you CIA Number 788. ! | 13 | will you please examine that document? | 19 Mrs. Scaletti. I see it. 788 is a normal routine file : 1 | opening form. ! a} Mr. Goldsmith. ~ Whos is the subject of this particular | & _ 23 opening? | a 2 Mrs. Scaletti. The subject of the opening is Lee Henry ; ~ za | Oswald. | i a5 Mr. Goldsmith. On the upper left hand corner of the page | : oo sy ad ~ HW 50955 Docld: 32277223 Page 60 ‘bed Bes AG ag Be dl