13-00000 © ! Oona nvareogat ‘the. first’ four “anya, . ee ate wa resume ee is : _ KGB. operat. eee, convey to HOSEN che dnpeanston that wo . know more ‘thai before, that.wa possess. irrefutable ‘Proof - of his: quilt: and: tha’ pasino prospects. for. xe: refrained €xom’ eevee this ew 4 earlier cS hittie of. the. interro- " - - ‘the first j four tay ave’ ‘shown. that’ the method. 4s 7 useful. NOSENKO. again proved a good reactor on. polygraph, — he seemed ‘disturbed by our knowledge and the: ‘apéedial . areas OE | Snterest.. we: moventeds._ and - we were able.to a sndigetio dm~ fae dots : tion for other topics. volyoraph Rrmineeicn
erry debHicl mS oy HighItants to Date . S. OSWALD Case: The opening session was a. polygraph examination conducted by Nicholas Stoiaken, whom NOSENKO recognized as his earlier polygraph operator... The question- ing was devoted entirely to.Leé Harvey OSWALD and NOSENKO's role in the OSWALD case. We hit this point before any other in order (a), to permit clean polygraph testing on this key matter without: having disturbad him with other questions, and (b), to get. over to NOSENKO the gravity of, our concern on thia matter of’ highest state Anterest. , The operator’ 8 conclusions weres . ‘Be Subj ect Was not | personally or ectually in- -wolved in the OSWALD case from 1959 while OSWALD was in the Soviet Union, be Subject received special instructions (from ‘the KGB) about the OSWALD case and what to tell An~ erican authorities about it. Ge Subj ect's allegea association with the OSWALD ease both “before and after" the Kennedy assassination Was. partly for the purpose of supporting and sub- stantiating Subject 's cover story "legend". 4d. Subject heard Of OSWALD (as a case) only after Kennedy's assassination, however he was not an active participant in 1963 as he indicates, but was probably . Belefed on the case > by a KGB officer. . 6. Geneva Mee ingss. We. devoted. ‘several hours of inter- rogation ‘and. Ko testing: ‘to. the ‘Geneva periods, June 1962: and ‘SJenuary-February : 1964.". We hit ‘this pointsecond in - order because there“are clear.sighs of important deception” behind {t.and it offers us special opportunities ‘€o- suggest : inside: information which in fact derive from. observation and a deduction. mg th ie nigh. points. were ‘the. following: Cage . “Ravel sHneovs. NOSENKO" s story of his. “investi - 7 gation” Of SHAKHOV, a@ Sdéviet delegation member whom he said: was suspected in 1962 to bé an, American agent, was govered again ‘in detail. - fhe new data we obtained tend _to confirm thet this ga serious part of HOSENKO's
13-00000 ; “geported to us at’ ‘the time Open the ‘whole, question f how access to.
13-00000 ps a OnLy and various years. of. Ampedaonments ‘He seenied con~ - eiatently sensitive to. correctional labor: cemps - asthe type of ‘prison, ‘and td séveral possible _ Gauses of imprisonment: particularly homosexuality, . @esertion and felony... intere -jugly enough he was _ ‘not sensitive. to- qiestions | Sarid ing. impré : = €6r selg-inflicted-wounds despite his story that he . had shot -himself£*in. the hand “during the war. He seemed ‘more consistently sensitive:to Siberia as. _. “the area of ‘imprisonment but ‘thé’ results were:not «8 ‘Clear as..on.other aspect story. He séems particularly sensitive to the years 1954-1956, which - dmmediately preceed the period-from_ 1956 onward, - a when he ‘began to appear in: ‘RGB operations. me