CONFIDENTIAL 259 these materials on the basis of some kind of preknowledge that it was his intent to go and that he is therefore an ce) unwitting bearer of a version of the case, Or, on the { anticipated my next. question. Mr. Rocca. Oh, I'm sorry. @ = | other hand, it could indicate that he -is a controlled channel E 5 of communication. ! 5 ‘| Mr. Goldsmith. So, your opinion is -- ! g / . Mr. Rocca. And there are shades of in between | 3 these two. ! : 7 Mr. Goldsmith. Your opinion is that that doesn't cut ! z ic either way, then, in terms of the accuracy of his -- ! 2 7 Mr. Rocca. No, it doesn't. It cuts both ways. | = 1 . 12 I mean, this is the point. It doesn't resolve it to the : § S 12 | exclusion of any other hypothesis, which is what I was : i = f = om talking about is the nature of the evidence that you need Ba | : : is | here, and until you get it, you've damn well got to keep it ; z Is | out of the press, it seems to me, because you create problems, 4 "| then, at the human level that are really irresolvable. That | : S is what is, of course, dangerous. : | I thought you were going to ask a totally different | 5 20 | question, which is how would it affect the whole hypothesis | et! of Oswald in the KDB, which would strike me as being a | @ awd 4 \ much more relevant question to ask. *s Mr. Goldsmith. Well, Mr. Rocca, I'm afraid that you 4 GON PIDENTIATL C : ALDSRSON REPCRTING COMPANY, INC. Docld:322763409 Paye 262 ~~
260 CONFIDENTIAL Mr. Goldsmith. Why don't you answer that one now. Mr. Rocca. Well, I would have to do it the same way, iu “Mr. Goldsmith. It would take, in other words -~ it would take very, de z 3 very hard evidence either of an agent character or of a 3 s | cipher breakthrough to convince me that he was a mandated 5 7 | killer to begin with, because the nature of the crime, his $ conduct and association with the deed are such that this G | responds entirely to what I would consider a self+motivated 2 Ie act. 2 I So, even if, in other words, he were in touch with ie = 2 the KGB and an agent+-and that:would be the implication if o = 1g | you drew. the evidence on Nosenko as being a phony agent, : ; on right -- coming back to your question -- I still believe 2 | you would be far from the point of being able to go into the = iS | World Court. or the United Nations or into a diplomatic ” 7 | demarche or indeed into something even. more serious and : . state this to have been the causative act. = = el Is that being fair on the evidence? $ 20 | It seems to me this is what is required in a case of a this seriousness. @ pe = Mr. Goldsmith. I just have one more question to ask 1 you prior to taking a brief recess. rel i Mr. Rocca. Let. me add, however, what I said yesterday, | = way that notwithstanding that question, there is no question in ww kh FF DEN TIAL LAEnSOM ZEPORTING COMPANY. INC. Docld:32263409 Page 263
261 co & FIDENTIAL my mind that there is additional information in both Havana Ww tS) Mr. Goldsmith. Would you please review CIA number ae | | } ; . . and in Moscow that bears on this motivation and conduct. | | 2041, which is a cable dated 6 January, 1964, dealing with { { i} i of Marine Oswald, and he gave the authorities on her background that differed from the story that Marina herself gave. BUTEDING 1 I an wondering if you are familiar with Mr. Reggab's = 54 an individual named Mohammed Reggab. t : i SB | | wos (Pause) ! x = z | SS 7 Mr. Rocca. Let's see. This is a person in Berlin. | <¢ ° I don't know that I have reviewed this. J 9] (Pause) = ic Mr. Goldsmith. Mr. Reggab was an individual who came = | forward and indicated that at one time he had been a boyfriend Soin eo i “Tey Mr. Rocca. No. 7 | -Mr. Eisenstedt, who originated this, is still present... Pa ; = . Mr. Goldsmith. Do you know whether Mr. Reggab ever 7 | = aa worked for the Agency? ° ei Mr. Rocca. I do not know that. : a1 thane er Mr. Goldsmith. The memo suggests the possibility that. eos 34 i @ mf i he was going to start working for the Agency. 47 | ‘ : ~~ 4 Do you know whether that was ever pursued? “3 Mr. Rocca. I do not. know that. i I simply am not cognizant of the facts here. coc ON FIDENTYTIAL LUCERSCN REPORTING COMPANY, INC. DoclId: 322763409 Paiye 264 . ant
CONFIDENTIAL 262 hypothetically? | . Mr. Rocca. Incidentally, are you still talking Mr. Goldsmith. Well, if you would like to discuss something hypothetically, I am open for it. 2 | - Mr. Rocca. I want to revert to the Minktenbaugh a | analogy and the woman and the case, the MO. x 7 I Mr. Goldsmith. Please do. = | Mr. Rocca. These things, identities in time and space, “ it | G | and method, are significant, at least at the laboratory level, la i . ! = ie so that the kind of thing that the Soviets might have had in |. = -'' | mind for Oswald and Marina--if that is her true name, | wt 4 H So | a i | whatever her identify is, and if we do know all about her, @ a | i and my great regret is that she was not polygraphed, as Ruby | - om was -- I think this is very definitely a portion -- because | = nae she certainly to Patricia Blake said things that I had not : aan heard on the record before about her past. ~ _ | “ ca “The Walker thing fits better into the pattern of a = “| special kind of operational thing, if you, indeed, can believe = Fy that Walker was a part of Oswald's interest, as she claims | nS | So, you have, in other words, coming back to the whet 22 | | | it was. | hypothesis, that element of taint with Oswald on the part | of the KGB. But I do feel that however you press it on the | basis of the present "evidence" -- in quotes -- it still ; | falls short. of suggesting that he was a mandated killer in eC CR PFIDENTIAL ALDERSOM REPORTING COMPANY, INC. Docld:32263409 Page 265 i
CONFIDENTIAL 263 this instance, I want to make that perfectly clear. is Mr. Goldsmith. Fine. te n> Let's take a brief recess at this time. a = a (A brief recess was taken.) : ‘ 4 | Mr. Goldsmith. I would like to inform you, Mr. -~ | 5 | Rocca, having just taken this brief recess, that I havevhad- - 4 : 7 occasion to review some additional documents that were : y - 7 | provided to me by the Agency. z 7 Yesterday you made reference to a second memorandum : 7 that you had prepared with regard to the work of the ; a Rockefeller Commission and that document has now been made @ a 13 available to us. z i , a Mr. Rocca. In its entirety? : - Mr. Goldsmith. So far as I know, in its entirety, = ae so that many of the points that were raised yesterday, where ~ i : "| you made reference to the memorandum, will be pursued by 2 ie “INY Staff and myself. But I just wanted to clarify that = 9 because there was some suggestion that: there was a memorandum S e = that was missing and, in fact, it has turned: up. Doe Mr. Rocca. Good. \ yi fs neg and ey ed raed i Mr. Goldsmith. I have a few questions to address to you. Basically they are of a wrap-up nature, followup First, dealing with Luisa Calderon, the suspected | | | questions based upon our review of yesterday's discussion. | COUN FIDENTIALS t ALDEASOM REZSORTING COMEFANY, INC. DoclId: 322763409 Paige 266
CONFIDENTIAL 264 DCI agent who may have had contact with Mr. Oswald, I would | like you to refer to CIA number 1843, which is a cover no page to a transcript. The transcript is the one that contains the conversation in which Luisa Calderon makes in her cryptic reference to the Kennedy assassination and sucyests that she may have had foreknowledge. te ~a I am not going to go into any detail with regard to 20024 (202) 45-2345 an I the transcript itself as you and I have already discussed Oo the substance, pec, | | I. would simply ask you to read 1843 and tell me if i | . { you can identify whose handwriting appears on that page. VAS HIRYEON , Mr. Rocca. Oh, you are not asking me to read this. We talked about this yesterday. HULEDING , I'm afraid I cannot recognize it, I'm sorry to say. : is It just makes no impression. It looks like a woman's : 1 handwriting, but these are just guesses. ‘4 7 ' -Mr. Goldsmith. The handwriting indicates that a | : : transcript is to be sent to someone named Galbond-- : a te =e : G-A-L#B-0-N-D -- via Kingman. | : ! o| Do you know who those individuals were? | cee | Mr. Rocca. I do not. My guess would be that | SESS | | r pee *- \ this has to do with the Warren Commission and their receipt. of ot the material. | | Mr. Goldsmith. The notation, the handwritten notation, ‘t 2s | also indicates the following comment: "Nothing to Buro" -- SNPIDENTIAL ALRPERSOM REPORTING COMPANY, INC. DocId: 32263409 Page 267
CONFIDENTIAL 265 and Buro is spelled B-U-R-O-- "yet." 2 : Do you know whether this transcript was ever given cee to the FBI? : be Mr. Rocca. No. Whether that transcript was or not, traffic -that made specific reference to Luisa Calderon and this conversation? | ed = * | I cannot say. They already knew the substance of it, of : i vs 7 course, from the earlier transmissions. My guess is that | ! < an : : : x ‘| this was the translation from Spanish that was done for the S Z Commission by the Agency. | JF i Mr. Goldsmith. Do you know whether the FBI was = '9 | specifically informed about the conversation that Luisa 5 uM i Calderon had in which she made the reference to the Kennedy | ~ 12 1 assassination? % | @ a "3 f Mr. Rocca. I'm certain of it -- that is, I can't = i i Eo | oo | prove it by the papers that were shown to me yesterday. But | & i = 1s I would be certain of it in my own mind. = Ie | (Pause) ; ° 7 ‘Mr. Rocca. As I say, it is my recollection that z | these things were translated for the Commission by the Agency. at i : = ey They would be done by people in WH Division who had the : : i e H : H aa] = an competence in the language, and therefore there would be ; ! i et aan different components involved and different routings, E27 | . @ oN i obviously. 49 i ; on Mr. Goldsmith. Do you recall ever seeing any cable i i 4 4 it DoclId: 322763409 Page 266
; CONFIDENTIAL 266 Mr. Rocca. No. I would not exclude that there had been such, though. But I don’t remember any. to ea | | Mr. Goldsmith. Can you indicate that the Bureau i | wvreceived via transmission this conversation? { | Mr. Rocca. There is no reference. There is no > 3 nn ' Mr. Rocca. Oh, I am certain of it. _ ; Mr. Scott would have taken it up directly with his ~ | Bureau colleague at a certain point, when it was indicated < | that there should be lateral transmission. | 33 i . ; - Mr. Goldsmith. I would like you to refer now to € | CIA number 2206, which is a summary of events that took place: = )» during the visit by Warren Commission staff to the Agency sy. Co : station in Mexico City in 1963. Paragraph seven of this = il qe i3 | @ = document. specifically indicates the information that was Zorg 3 unavailable for review by the Warren Commission staff. Ee | iw : € Would you please review paragraph seven of this document. = i (Pause) 2 ‘Mr. Rocca. I have reviewed this. a Mr. Goldsmith. Fine. = if) = | Is there any reference in that document, specifically ce ' : = 720 | | in paragraph seven, to the Warren Commission staff being given Oa | access to a transcript of Luisa Calderon's conversation? ees -- | PS oe hw 3} i specification that among the items listed is that piece. i a | Mr. Goldsmith. Now yesterday we discussed this issue {i i : and I asked you whether you would be willing to assist the | CONFIDENTIAL ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC. DoclId: 322763409 Page 269
e Docld:32263409 Page 270 +t | THeary Lo , nie ) 4a 77H STRELL, S.W. REPORTERS BULEDING, UACHTNGTON, D.C. 20924 (202) S5h-25n5 ie 4 N Na On ta te cn oo ey nm ¥ day | CONFIDENTIAL in trying to resolve it. I recall your response as affirmative. Mr. Rocca. I will always volunteer for anything. Mr. Goldsmith. We will attempt to make arrangements with the Agency to give you access to some of these materials; so that we can determine conclusively whether or not this information was given to the Warren Commission staff. Mr. Rocca. At what point or -- Mr. Goldsmith. We are interested in whether the information was given to the Warren: Commission: and: when. Mr. Rocca. Ever -- ah, This memorandum is Win Scott's summary memorandum. Again, things can be omitted from memoranda, and I would assume that that"s the case in this instance. He was so firmly committed -- Win was, personally -- to the fact of Cuban involvement. In fact, he went far _ beyond what I would regard as publicly discussible, inferential judgments in that regard, in his discussions with me that I can't believe absolutely that he would ever withhold it. Mr. Goldsmith. Would you give us a summary now of what Mr. Scott's theories were with regard to the possibility | of Cuban involvement. Mr. Rocca. He felt that there was very definitely the possibility of Cuban involvement with Oswald, but he could not arrive at any definite information. And frankly, I don't remember getting down to details that would be of CON FIDENTI.I AT ALDERSS* REPORTING COMPANY, INC. i i }
. 268 CONFIDENTIAL really significant use to you in your own investigation rey heres beyond the statement that he also had this conviction, ta & Mr.. Goldsmith. Now, yesterday we also discussed the { i i | t | { | He also. felt. that way about the Soviets, of course,. | { Mr. Goldsmith. Do you know when.the Warren Commission as j / 2 3 was given the full. story on the photographic surveillance operation in Mexico City, and specifically the relationship ; 7 photograph that had been taken of the individual who has been | : °| referred to by the press as "The Mexico Mystery Man," and | ‘» | : S | I showed you a document labeled CIA number 2138, which is ; : a memo dated 12 May, '64, from Mr. Angleton to you, in which | ~ | a statement is made to the effect that the Agency might | 5 “| consider waiting out the Commission with regard to this | : a issue, ; F a I'm sorry, I referred to the incorrect document. | @ = a In fact, it is number 2139, and the date is 5 March, '64. The Boca | 7 ; | memo is from you, Mr. Rocca, to Richard Helms, and you indicate E F that Mr. Angleton does not desire to respond directly to | 5S 4k i : “| the request from Mr. Rankin for some materials. : i In.the second paragraph you indicate that Mr. Angleton : A a would prefer to wait out the Commission in the matter covered | : ° by paragraph 2. | _- | S i) Would you please review this at this time. a1 if : SER | (Pause) i i iH A between that operation and the Mexico mystery man? , CONFIDENTIAL . ALDSERSON REPORTING COMPANY. INC. = =: DoclId: 322763409 Pag 271
> 3 | i | i ~> - if L 4 “ Q \ ~ H ~ f = 7 | h = ~ it = ; i : il oS 5 il ! - 7a il = ‘wu Pe i = * if = fii = il “2 ii x 4 = ts 4 te | ¢ = ut - a t ¢ - i3 ) = 3 = i = | = is 4 = | S A = 13 i ; - il => i “7 i = f an | = is i = ar ~ Me { < | c : = 20 i it it arn coe ON Te esl : ub ii iY z] ‘ i HH Docld: 322763409 Page gotten into the:hands of the Secret Service since the 23rd CONFIDENTIA t! 269 Mr. Rocca. Could I ask a question here as a matter of information? Mr. Goldsmith. Certainly, please do, Mr. Rocca. "This is responsive to paragraph three > of Rankin's letter, see reference tab" -- is that here? Mr. Goldsmith. No. In fact, the letter was not attached to the document, although it is indicated that it was. Mr. Rocca. "J does not desire to respond directly to paragraph two of that letter which made a levy for our , material which had gotten into the hands of the Secret Service Since 23rd of November. We found that except for three : telegrams all that the Secret Service had was material we | had sent to McGeorge Bundy at the White House. Apparently he had simply passed it to the Secret Service as a matter of internal information. Unless you feel otherwise, Jim would prefer. to wait out the Commission on the matter covered by paragraph two, which is a levy for our material which had of November and which. has previously been described. If they come back on the point, he feels that you or someone from here should be prepared to go over to show the Commission the materials rather than pass them to them in copy.” Incidentally none of these items"-- is --"of new substantive interest. We have either passed the material in substance con fr FI DENTIAL ALDEREOM REPORTING COMPANY, INC. 272
e CONFIDENTIAL 270 to i | to the Commission in response to earlier (levies) or the | items refer to aborted leads -- for example, the famous six res) - photographs which were not of Oswald (and).:the: passenger ive manifest of an airline which also did not pertain to Oswald. | Mr. Rocca. Well, in other words, if he could show coNPIDENTIAZL 5 7 If you desire. to take note of the levy in paragraph two, 3 $ | we would recommend that you indicate on the attached" and ~ i 7 so forth. ! 5 2 | Well, we don't have the Rankin thing. But my : ~ H | 3 Y “recollection is that very shortly thereafter this -- : E ie | ‘Mr. Goldsmith. Incidentally, for the record, I just | : Hl want to indicate that we've reviewed the Rankin letter and v2 if ~ 2 it is unclear specifically what it is referring to. That's | = ‘3 why I haven't bothered to show it to you. | = a Mr. Rocca. Well, it's. very clear that this is unclear, : I too, because it refers to something unclear, it seems to me. ! : 1s | In other words, it sounds like something that had been | = ; i ° 7) gotten: to Rankin in a kind of vague and hazy way, that. was 2 Z 7 really not substantively new, that he made an issue of, and | a FS iF | that this refers to simply avoiding duplicating needlessly | = * a paper that had already been disposed of, or taken care of, 7 bier 1 | or was in the process of being taken care of.. : and oy Mr. Goldsmith. Now nevertheless, there is language * ! to the effect there that Mr. Angleton was concerned with #6 waiting out the Commission. LOERSON REPORTING COMPANY. INC.
Ww dn re 7) ?e) on ( Jan 7TH STREET, S.A. REPORTERS AULTEDTMG, WASHTUGTON, DLC. 20024 0202) 95"-2405 Pm ™ , x ge Jee ~ ‘ “SO > + an — cs / » ’ DoclId: 322763409 Page 274 CONFIDENTIAL 271 that this material was not of any new substantive interest and that it was already being taken care of, it would avoid a needless stage of reproduction and of discussion -- I think | is the intent behind this. “Mr. Goldsmith. Do you when the Warren Commission staff was told about the Mexico City * photograph? Mr, Rocca. I cannot recall the date of it, but they came over and received the photograph and looked at it from my very hands. I had in my hand an envelope containing the entire run of the photographs that had been submitted to me by the desk, the WH desk, Mr. Whitten, as of that time. What date that was -- it could be May, it could be April, it could be March. I think it was later -- it was sooner rather than later. Mr. Goldsmith. Let me show you a document labeled i | ( ‘ t 24 March, 1964. The subject is Mexico City, CIA dissemination of information on Lee Harvey Oswald. The document, rather, | is labeled March 26, 1964, and it is an internal memo, Warren Commission staff, CIA number 2221 and 2222, In 2222, the author of the memo indicates as follows: "As you know, we are still trying to get. an explanation of the photograph which the FBI showed Marguerita Oswald soon after the assassination. I hope that paragraph four of the memo of March 24, 1964, sent Mr. Rankin by the CIA is not the answer which the CIA intends to give us to this inquiry." caNMP IDEN TIAL ALEERSON EESCRTING COMPANY, INC.
CONFIDENTIAL 272 Would you please review that. 2 Mr. Rocca. Could I ask you again what paper this is? tw Is it from the Commission? i | i ae Mr. Goldsmith. It's a Commission internal memorandum -- | 2 : | | «= ~ | Slawson - Coleman, to Rankin. 1 } . } 3 | | eS | (Pause) | ~ - | c > | i co ¢ | Mr. Rocca. Do we have paragraph four of the memorandum - HI } = “i of March 24? ‘ : 3 i ; : : ~. i Mr. Goldsmith. That letter, unfortunately, is not ; - mA 3 { = ‘* | available. The Agency did not send that to us. = } lh . : = | Mr. Rocca. My recollection is that whatever this : “3 i Ses ti . ‘* | confabulation implies, that at some particular point -~ and | = i i Tu . . { J qe I don't remember the date, it was either at the end of March ; 2 & or April -- they came over and I showed them personally-- me 4 : qe 7 4 Mr. Goldsmith. Youwould certainly agree that by the x ai : _ an end of March, that on this day, the -- o1 - vi ‘Mr. Rocca. As of this day it sounds as if they don't Sas ™3 ' . \ = : have it. a i = 3 i i = i Mr. Goldsmith. --the explanation given was not = 79 ; ° | satisfactory? a1 | . aS Mr. Rocca. Well, I mean, they may have -- one thing . @ NO | that came out of my reflections on our talks yesterday and 230 | also today is the fact that these are all bricks assembled ae | , i in a particular fashion. | What appears to be lacking is a sense of the operational ' fo) (3 ~-N FIDENTIAL ALEERSONM REPORTING COMPANY, INC. Docld: 32263409 Page 275
273 CONFIDENTIAL 1 I relationship with which these bricks were handled at the time. ‘ In this particular case, while they may not have had i “the final explanation or even an explanation that we ourselves be were satisfied with inasmuch as we were dependent on reports tn nN from Mexico City, they certainly were aware of the fact that the thing was being worked on and that the issue existed, “i In other words, there was no question of withholding -- and 2NH24 (202) SoN-2445 this took place at the conversational level and was obviously | ref) o) a On “unrecorded in any way. I find myself impossible here’ to fill | in the proper cement on the operational level that would make » some of these bricks more plausible than they would seem, VASTTUGTON , as they are taken out and just held up. But I have an absolute recollection of giving them these photographs, and in the memorandum that you've gotten today, you will see that it turned out that there were even REPORTERS BUEEDOHG , more photographs in the file -- not of the particular eight | JM: $ ' wm men, but of others in the coverage which they provided in '75. Now this comes out of the desk. Mr. Goldsmith. Would you agree, nevertheless, that the 3N0 PTH STREET, 1 author of this memo was not satisfied with the explanation that the Agency had provided with regard to the photographs as of that day? € / , ' 2 3 Mr. Rocca. Yes,yes. He was certainly reflecting that in his internal memorandum --memoranda,. Docld: 322763409 Paie 276
CONFIDENTIAL 274 Mr. Goldsmith. Was there ever any effort on the part 2 of the CIA to coordinate testimony given to the Warren a Commission with the FBI? de Mr. Rocca. None that I know of. in “ Mr. Goldsmith. Off the record... :- (Discussion off the record) :: ™! Mr. Goldsmith. What efforts, if any, were made to wa wie ee oe a estes ee _ ay prep Mr. McCone prior to any briefings that Mr. McCone CC. 2nO26 (202) $5u-2445 a gave to the Warren Commission? n Mr. Rocca. I'm afraid I have to refer to whatever is in the record, if any, on that, because I did not deal personally with Mr. McCone on these matters. Mr. Goldsmith. Was there ever a concern evinced by Mr. Angleton or yourself or Mr. Helms that Mr. McCone give dan consistent testimony, either testimony or statements, to the REFORTERS BUTLDING, (ACHTHOTON, ‘3 ~ Os | = | Warren Commission? aos | a : “Mr. Rocca. The thought would never have crossed my S18 | = I mind and, therefore, speaking for myself, the answer is = ois | = ; negative. I have never -- I have not heard of anything Cc 4 . H 5 | . | involving either Mr. Helms or Mr. Angleton in that respect, | pee . SS to the best of my knowledge or recollection. Os rT / A Mr. Goldsmith. Reading from CIA number 2138, which ’ > 3 i} is a memo for Mr. Rocca from Mr. Angleton dated 12 May, 1964, nN am it indicates as follows: "The DDP wishes to have from you a short but comprehensive memorandum which highlights the a CONFIDENTIAL By ALDERSO*! SZPORTNG COMPANY, INC. Docld: 322763409 Page 277
COWNPFI DENTIAL 275 { | ‘ | basic issues or positions entered into by the Agency in its i) dealings with the Commission. For example, Rankin indicated | that the Commission would wish to hear the Director's views | @ ve as to how improvements might be made in protecting the an President's life. Further, they will probably ask questions (02) S$S-2395 ‘ | regarding the possibilities that a conspiracy existed. | | Such general questioning certainly necessitates that the DCI | t 20024 ¢ ree) } | be made aware of the positions taken during previous 4 interviews.". ec, Dp That language suggests that there was some concern for i-- HLHOTON, was Mr. Rocca. Well, this was a concern for a briefing th is a perfectly normal and regular procedure, followed in | j | | { | paper, as to what the main lines of response should be. This | | the Agency before and since and in other agencies, and I think ! we saw yesterday the briefing paper that went up, that was REPORTERS BUPLDING, sj the product of, a combined product. But how the paper was S.A. | used by Mr. Helms is something that I can't respond to. You asked me whether or not -- t | | Mr. Goldsmith. Either Mr. Helms or Mr. McCone JINN TH STREET, \ | ‘ Mr. Rocca. You asked me about Mr. McCone. 4 y) s y eee i Mr. Goldsmith. Yes, and apparently the briefing -- ret / 2 3 | | apparently-- i ! | | Mr. Rocca. So, I have no way of knowing what Mr. Helms did with the paper, with Mr. McCone, or whether it was used at all. It would seem to me that as you read their 2 Us PIDENTIAL BLOEZSONM REPORTING COMPANY, INC. DoclId: 322763409 Page 275
276 CONFIDENTIAL depositions before the Commission, they had obviously read the paper or it had been reviewed. However, what they said was far less substantial than what was indicated there. So & I can't say anything on the basis of a simple analysis at ij = ° ij all at that point. : : 2 | But. this is a routine request for preparing material : n . 4 5S i for the boss. 5 a Mr. Goldsmith. Was there any concern that the boss | ™ i 8 el “would start making inconsistent statements? | Fo ' : = 7 Mr. Rocca. Why, I can't believe it. That wasn't : Z what prompted it. It was that he would have a formal basis | 42 i i . 6 for saying whatever he had to say that would be responsive ! f = i3 to the. Commission's needs. . | = a Mr. Goldsmith. During its review of the Agency's ! : rae Oswald file and related files, the staff of this committee has = | come across transcripts of telephone conversations involving, | = : : ” V7 | for example, Mr. McCone, Mr. Whitten. My question to you is : 2 . whether as a matter of routine telephone conversations were i z aa either taped or transcribed by the use of a stenographer | 5 0 listening to the conversations? - we | Do you have any knowledge of this taking place in | 1963 and 1964? Vi Mr. Rocca. I have no Knowledge that this took place r oe as far as CI is concerned at any time, which is what I can Wa tan ' seak to. That it was a practice of the Director to have these ” COHPIDBENTIALRB i , : ALOERSON REPORTING COMPSNY, INC. Docld:322763409 Page 279 ALCERSSON REPOR S e
F CON FPFPTIDENTIAL 277 conversations recorded is something I think that came out we £ i . . ! of the Watergate matter and is therefore a matter of record | | ; i for his own use. . @ But whether any of that was done in 1963, now, is indicating that the informant has informed the Bureau as to | 3 7 simply -- this is the first I've heard of it. 2 | 2 : | Mr. Goldsmith. I would like to show you a transcript | z | : | & | of a telephone conversation between Mr. McCone and Mr. Hoover | : 3 dated 26 November, 1963. It is CIA document number 2134, : : : ‘Does that appear to the a transcript of a telephone | = ie conversation? | 3 : Wo Mr. Rocca. Yes, it does. ' 2 i | = ‘2 Mr. Goldsmith . Would you read the middle paragraph, | é : 'S | which makes reference to an FBI informant. : = ‘+ (Pause) | eu Mr. Rocca, That's LIENVOY. That's their material | = ie | with the Mexican authorities, because we ran that whole “ 7 | operation with the Mexicans. | : a Mr. Goldsmith. So, how would. -- | E e Mr. Rocca. I would interpret it that way. I have : 5 0 | never read this piece of paper that I recall. That would be tL ' en my reaction. : @ ad “2 Mr. Goldsmith. For the record, let's get this clear. ’ 3 The Director of the FBI, Mr. Hoover, is making reference ue | to an informant that the FBI had in Mexico City, and he is 2 | - se 0 my hd re] we ta ea 4 tH ps ; ALDEREON SESORTING COMPANY. INC. H Docld: 322763409 Pate 260 ;
278 the contents of Oswald's conversations in Mexico City. oe) From your answer, I take it that you assume that Mr. Hoover is referring to the LIENVOY operation. Mr. Rocca. And he is subtly letting Mr. McCone know ta that Mr. McCone's resources down there were not unique, that | tr they, too, had access to the Mexican operation. si Mr. Goldsmith. LIENVOY was an operation that was run rez) by the CIA and the Mexican Government? C. 20024 €202) S5¥~2345 MO Mr. Rocca. It was a joint operation with the n. Mexicans, is my impression, yes. YON, ~ a Mr. Goldsmith. It was a liaison operation with the Mexicans and the CIA? Mr. Rocca. Yes, Mr. Goldsmith. So, how would Hoover have had access to this information? REPORTERS BUTLDTHG, VAST rh rin) Mr. Rocca. By the 26th, or by after the event, he informant, do you think, that might have:jgiven him this information? | = i | a YT | ; o | would have been able to get from the Mexicans I think —_ ta : i = 3 | aA | everything. I think they just rushed to give him everything. | — = | i . Mr. Goldsmith. So, he would have had a Mexican S 20) f Mr. Rocca. I think that that terminology is sort of us standard terminology that he would have used to cover and nd we sort of mythologize their coverage down there, and that what @ Not / he is referring to are Mexican resources that the Bureau would i CONFIDENTIAL 1 i ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC. Docld:32263409 Page 281
CONFIDENTIAL 279 have independently developed on the case by that time, I ioe) would defer, obviously, to a Bureau man in reading it. But ree) I think that this is the correct line of interpretation. Mr. Goldsmith. Do you know Anne Gocdpasture? ~ = Mr. Rocca, The name is familiar and I must have met BS. | eS her. gor S 7 < Mr. Goldsmith. She was a case officer in Mexico City € “| working with Win Scott. a , = | Mr. Rocca. She wrote that wonderful summary -- = it | : . (og = | Mr. Goldsmith. Which summary are you referring to? el Mr. Rocca. -~ of the case, of all the file. It's ae | a thick collection which summarizes every document in the = i Mexican file. = il a ad i] 2 | Mr. Goldsmith. In the Mexican Oswald file? = Mr. Rocca. Yes, in the Mexican Oswald file. I = don't knows I mean, it may well be, but I certainly have : ao | not dealt with her -- well, I hesitate to use the word 5 "intimately," but in the sense of this case. = 7! - | Mr. Goldsmith. Fine. = 39 | , ° | Do.you know Mr. Scott Breckenridge? ee 2 : . e OSes Mr. Rocca. Only in terms of the formality of concern 2 22 ‘of the Inspector General. ea / | \ et) as Mr. Goldsmith. Do you know whether he was ever involved in the investigation.of the Kennedy assassination? Wo ta Mr. Rocca. I don't know at all. CON PIODENTIALTL i i Docld: 32263409 Page 282 ean; aon renee MRA : ALOSASOM SSZSORTING COMPANY. INC.
280 . CONFIDENTIAL i The individual over there who was involved was Lieder, wm - John Lieder at the time I left. Mr. Goldsmith. Mr. Rocca, I have no further questions | : i ® to ask you. H j | = 7 | - I would like to thank you for making yourself available 2 8 | to the committee staff for the past day and a half. You've | a i SS a been very patient and you've been very generous with your | - i - | = & | time. | 3 : I would like to ask for your assurance that you will =z '% | not disclose your testimony nor the questions that were ; g i | = in| asked of you to anyone else. | x i : ~ 2 | Mr.. Rocca. I give you that assurance. g i | @ e i Mr. Goldsmith. Thank you. D a We will be in contact with you in an effort to resolve. = is | some of the questions that arose by virtue of this deposition. : S| Thank you very much, sir. ~ il ma ‘Mr. Rocca. Not at all. i S | 2 8! Thank you. = F Thank you, Mr. Berk. . = 20 | Mr.. Berk. Thank you very much. ' : art : en (Whereupon, at 1:27 o'clock, p.m., the taking of the @ 7 ** | deposition of Raymond G. Rocca concluded.) =z | . | a4 | az CONFIDENTIAL Docld:322763409 Page 233 ALS 0 wn “th us ¢) ” tf] wt woaget i REPORTING COMPANY. ONO.