PERRY RAYMOND RUSSO, after being recalled to the witness stand, testified as follows:
EXAMINATION BY MR. DYMOND:
Q. Did you hear the recording played in the Court just a few minutes ago?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Did you listen to it carefully?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Is it your testimony that that is a true and faithful recording of a television interview between one John Kerbell of Channel 12, WVUE, and you here, in the front entrance of the Criminal District Court Building on Tulane Avenue, on March 1st, 1967?
A. Well, I do not, I cannot attest who talked to me. It was in front of the Court Building and there are some exceptions I have to the transcription, one exception I saw.
Q. Where is the interview, where did the interview take place?
A. On Broad Street, the Broad Street entrance.
Q. Of the Criminal Court Building?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Now, in view of the request of counsel of the State, I will not get into the discrepancy at this time which you made reference to; you say that you don't know the name of the representative of the television station by whom you were introduced, is that right?
A. I was never introduced.
Q. Is it not a fact that only one such interview was conducted with you at, at the Broad Street entrance or near the Broad Street entrance of this building; the television interview?
A. I did not consider it an interview. I was walking out of the building, and he tried to question me, and you know, was doing his job.
Q. Have you ever conducted any other conversation over television at the Broad Street entrance of this building on or about March 1st of this year?
A. Not that I remember. No, sir.
Q. How about on any other date; have you had any television interview at that location?
A. No, sir.
Q. Now, the conversation to which you refer with the television station representative, would you say that that did take place on March 1st of this year?
A. I would probably agree with that, yes.
Q. As a matter of fact, you had just come out of the District Attorney's office, had you not?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Mr. Russo, did you ever attend Colton Junior High School?
A. Colton Junior High -- yes, sir.
Q. During what year was that approximately?
A. I would say around 1955.
Q. Did you ever attempt to jump out a window at Colton High School?
MR. ALCOCK:
Your Honors, I object at this time. It is irrelevant. This whole area of his life has been covered. I don't see the relevancy.
MR. DYMOND:
If the Court please, the relevancy is just this; if we can show somebody jumping out of a window at a high school in an apparent attempted suicide, that certainly has a reflection on the mental stability on that person. I think the mental stability is a vital issue here.
JUDGE BAGERT:
Objection overruled.
EXAMINATION BY MR. DYMOND:
Q. Did you or did you not attempt to jump out a window at Colton High School?
A. Absolutely not.
Q. Absolutely not, is that your testimony?
A. Absolutely.
Q. Have you at any other time attempted suicide or attempted to take your own life?
A. Absolutely not.
Q. Yesterday afternoon before Court adjourned you testified that when you were shown a photograph of Lee Harvey Oswald, that you could not identify that photograph as the Leon Oswald you knew, whom you have testified you knew in New Orleans --
MR. WARD:
Which photograph, the one on the left, or which one?
MR. DYMOND:
I will mark it.
EXAMINATION BY MR. DYMOND:
Q -- until the photographs had been touched up by placing a beard on the photograph and causing the hair on the photograph to appear to be in a disheveled condition, is that correct?
A. Not exactly.
Q. Please see fit to make whatever corrections you see fit to make?
A. Could I have the photograph, please?
MR. DYMOND:
Yes. I would like the record to show that I am exhibiting the witness two photographs, one marked for identification as D-24, and the other one as D-23.
THE WITNESS:
D-23 --
MR. DYMOND:
Letting the record show that D-23 is the untouched-up photograph.
THE WITNESS:
-- was shown to me, among maybe fifteen or twenty others, in Baton Rouge. I recognized him at that time. I said that it looks like Ferrie's roommate because that is what the members of the District Attorney's office had been questioning about. I did not recognize that as Lee Harvey, and I said, "Oh, that is the roommate," and then I looked at it and said that that looks like Oswald, is it? He said, "Yes, why do you say it was his roommate." I said that except for the fact that this picture, D-23, does not have a light growth of, maybe four, five days, or a week, or three days, beard, hair messed up, this would be his roommate. Mr. Sciambra of the District Attorney's office asked me if I would be willing to come to New Orleans and allowing an artist or a member of their staff to help and see if this was the roommate, that they could draw a picture in, and by adding to the picture in this instance. As soon as they got this picture, D-24, and added light whiskers here, and they messed up his hair here, it is unmistakably the same man to me in this picture, but I said that this is positively my idea this was the roommate, and that is all.
Q. Is it your testimony you were shown other photographs in Baton Rouge?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Other photographs purporting to be photographs of Lee Harvey Oswald?
A. No, sir, it was other people.
Q. Were you shown any photographs purporting to be photographs of Lee Harvey Oswald?
A. I don't recall, unless there may have been others in there.
Q. You do testify, however, that in Baton Rouge you were shown an unaltered photograph, D-23?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Upon looking at this photograph, you were not able to state that this was Leon Oswald, as you knew him here in New Orleans?
A. I asked the man after. First I recognized him as the roommate, he was clean. The roommate was dirty.
Q. You say when you saw D-23 in Baton Rouge that you did recognize this as a photograph of the roommate?
A. That is the way Ferrie had introduced me. I considered him a vagabond that dropped in, but that is the way Ferrie had introduced him.
Q. But you did recognize D-23 as the roommate of Ferrie, is that right?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. When did that interview to which you made that recognition take place in Baton Rouge?
A. It was Saturday after -- the same Saturday following my interview on television. I think the interview on television was on the 24th. I am not sure of that, and it was the day after that, and Mr. Sciambra knocked at the house, and he came in and he asked me questions.
Q. Prior to the time that you recognized this photograph, D-23, the photograph of the roommate, meaning Leon Oswald, had you not seen either identical or similar pictures in the newspapers, labeled Lee Harvey Oswald?
A. Never.
Q. Had you not seen pictures on television or any other news media similar to this, labeled Lee Harvey Oswald?
A. I had seen maybe three or four different pictures of Oswald in my life, and maybe one hundred times or maybe more than that. It was not many different photographs, but the same photographs over and over. That was not one of them that I ever saw.
Q. Russo, is it not a fact that after the assassination of President Kennedy, and after the killing of Lee Harvey Oswald by Jack Ruby, that photographs of Lee Harvey Oswald were extremely widely circulated in New Orleans, Baton Rouge, and any place that you might have been, by television, newspaper, and other media?
A. I am sure they were.
Q. Now, is it your testimony that the photographs which you saw prior to having identified D-23 differed so materially from D-23 that you were not able to recognize them as the roommate?
A. Can I have a clarification of the question, please?
Q. Is it your testimony that the publicized photographs of Lee Harvey Oswald which you saw after the assassination of President Kennedy differed so materially from D-23 as to render you unable to recognize them as photographs of the roommate, meaning Leon Oswald?
A. Can I elaborate on this. It is very important. I can recall the photographs I saw of Oswald, perhaps, three or four, I know, and I, at that time, I was not willing to say that was the same man, because these photographs, and you be the judge of this, I saw one in the paper or TV, I don't remember where, standing up holding some gun, pistol, something in the center, and somebody had taken it. I saw that picture. I saw one of him being a child, not a child, it was a baby picture of
[Page 229 is missing.]
A. I made remarks to my friends that I think I might have known that guy. The guy I knew was a beatnik.
Q. Were you telling your friends the truth when you said that?
A. I think I might know that man.
Q. It was during that period of time, when you were telling your friends that you think you might know that man, were you referring to having known him, in your own mind, as Leon Oswald?
A. I did not think about the name, but I was thinking about the face at the time, because they had different names to me.
Q. If you thought maybe you knew that man, could you tell us why in the television interview in Baton Rouge on February 24th, you made the dogmatic statement, "No, I never heard of Oswald until the television of the assassination"?
A. Yes, sir, for several reasons; one is, I knew the District Attorney's office was at that time in the process of trying to contact me or coming up with something. They were working out the arrangements on that. Two is, I did not want just to say that someone, that was not sort of legal, that that was the same man, and three is, I knew different names. So, I got off the hook by saying I did not know Lee Harvey Oswald. Before this discussion, and which I am sure Mr. Kemp will agree, we discussed some idea so he would have some areas he could talk about. He said he could not go cold turkey, and I guess, last, and maybe a big factor, maybe I was scared because this thing was blown out of proportion when I made one remark. All of a sudden everybody was knocking my house down to get in. I did not want to be harassed. I was worried of my job and things like that.
Q. Russo, you are an intelligent man; you knew how to get in touch with the Secret Service, you knew how to get in touch with the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and the Warren Commission, if you wanted to, didn't you?
A. Yes, sir. I do not know about the Warren Commission, but the other two I could have probably gotten hold of.
Q. Would you mind explaining to me why has that doubt in your mind, and that suggestion in your mind, that these were one and the same man, why between 1963, November of 1963 and March 24th or later, March 1st, 1967, you did not see fit to divulge the fact that there was a possibility that this was one and the same man?
A. Well, very frankly, I was trying to get through school. I was no authority on anything, and I am still not. The FBI and people on television said that was the man, he did it, and he was all alone, and at that time I was not, I was twenty-two, twenty-three, I don't know, at that time just to sit down and going to fight the Federal Government about anything. I was just not going to do it. I was just a voice in the wilderness, I thought.
Q. Do you know how long it took the Warren Commission to arrive at its conclusion?
A. No, sir.
Q. You are aware of the fact that that didn't take place in a couple of days or a week, don't you?
A. Yes, sir, I am aware of that.
Q. How can you consider it fighting the Federal Government, give them information before they even arrived at their conclusion, if that information was available to you?
A. Because on television and radio, I guess, and maybe in the papers, FBI agents or someone had arrested Oswald, and he was the only man. I cannot make it any clearer than that. That is the way I felt at that time. If they said it, then it is true. I had no reason to disagree with these people. They are professionals.
Q. What made you change your mind about this?
A. When it got a little closer to home. I knew Dave Ferrie.
Q. The fact you knew Dave Ferrie made you change your mind, is that right?
A. If Garrison was saying that Ferrie was involved, I might be able to help him and just say I knew Ferrie and many of his friends.
Q. Mr. Russo, were you aware of the fact that Dave Ferrie was arrested very shortly after the assassination, and that a newspaper article was published to that effect?
A. No, sir.
Q. You did not know that?
A. No, sir.
Q. When did you move away from New Orleans?
A. September of 1965.
Q. So, you lived here in New Orleans between the date of the assassination and September of 1965, is that right?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Did you ever have an occasion to see David Ferrie after the assassination of President Kennedy?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Did you talk to him about it?
A. Nothing.
Q. No mention whatsoever was made about it?
A. No, sir.
Q. After the assassination of President Kennedy, for approximately how long did your acquaintance with David Ferrie continue?
A. Well, after the assassination there was a blank space. I did not see him for a while.
Q. About how long?
A. I saw him maybe four or five other times after that, maybe seven or eight months later, and he saw me.
Q. It is your testimony that about seven or eight months after the assassination, you did not have an occasion to see David Ferrie, is that right?
A. No, sir.
Q. Is that your testimony or not?
A. Sir?
Q. You say, "No, sir"; is that your testimony?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. And do I understand correctly that he contacted you after seven or eight months?
A. No, sir. It was by accident. I drove into a service station, and I saw this man, the same man I had seen before with Dave. Dave said hello to me, and I never said anything to him. We were in different cars. I talked to Dave, maybe two minutes, three minutes.
Q. Now, after the filling station incident on Veterans Highway, did you have an occasion any further time to see him again?
A. I don't recall, but I am sure I did.
Q. Were you and he still visiting back and forth?
A. Generally when I had vacation.
Q. Would you visit his apartment, or would he visit your home?
A. After that, I don't recall if I went up there. I am sure I possibly did.
Q. Could you tell us approximately how many times you saw Dave Ferrie between the time of the assassination and the time of his death?
A. I have already stated that. I just told you.
Q. The total number of times, the best you can testify?
A. Maybe four or five, six times.
Q. Do you remember any other specific incidents?
A. No, sir.
Q. You could not tell us why or approximately when, is that right?
A. It would have been during the summer months. But now where -- he seemed to me broken after that. I don't know why. I cannot say why. He seemed to me to be broken. Now, he talked about the District Attorney's office a couple of times.
Q. He did talk about the District Attorney's office?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. What did he say about the District Attorney's office?
A. Just general remarks.
Q. Like what?
A. Well, he did not like what was going on, and he did not like -- he was starting to build up an antagonism that seemed to me a resentment to authority or to police or something. He never got more specific than that. He had been broken. That is the way I looked at it. He was a broken man. Why, I don't know. He was no longer a party-goer, so to speak, a spectacular, so to speak.
Q. This resentment he voiced towards the District Attorney's office, would you be more specific about that?
A. He was not specific, no, sir.
Q. What gave you the impression he had that resentment towards the District Attorney's office?
A. Because I had asked him on a couple of occasions what was wrong, Dave, and some profanity he would use, he would say something about the FBI or Garrison's office or the New Orleans Police or authority. To me, I always felt he was an anarchist.
Q. As a matter of fact, didn't he tell you he was being haunted by the District Attorney's office?
A. No, sir.
Q. Or harassed by them, or words to that effect?
A. No, sir. Not that I recall.
Q. And in spite of this resentment that he voiced to you personally, it is your testimony you did not even know he had been picked up by the District Attorney's office?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. And you were not curious enough to find out why he was antagonistic towards the District Attorney's office?
A. No, and I would like to amplify on that, please. Dave Ferrie was the type that talked about so many things. He cited chapter and verse to me on so many occasions, because in the very beginning, when I first met him, I would argue and say I knew something different, what I know it is different, and he would say to go down to the library and pick up the 1947 edition of Rositer's Human Relations. I don't remember the name, I am just making it up. For example, Rositer's Human Relations, second edition, make sure it is the second edition, and he would say to turn to page 365 and read that. He said that if you don't believe that, you can look into an earlier edition or I can get some other people, and when a man does that, you don't challenge him. I didn't.
Q. When a man does that, would that keep you from being intellectual, curious, or otherwise curious as to why he was antagonistic towards the District Attorney's office?
A. That to me was a small matter, in my eyes, and he talked all during the summer months, last year, of the assassination. He talked before that of curing --
MR. DYMOND:
I cannot hear you, Mr. Russo.
THE WITNESS:
He talked in the summer months of the assassination, which I told you about. He talked about curing cancer. He talked about, you name it, he talked about it. He knew what there was to know. I felt, I tried in the beginning to argue with him, and I was not successful. So I said, well, he was probably right.
EXAMINATION BY MR. DYMOND:
Q. You name it, he talked about it?
A. I said you name it, he talked about it.
Q. Still he did not talk about why he was antagonistic towards the District Attorney's office?
A. No, sir. Could I elaborate one other remark? The other remark is, which I am sure people would say, you know, other people would say this, it was typical Dave. That to me he was a walking encyclopedia and he strangled the conversation. You did not need to ask questions because he filled in all the details. You did not need to say things. He knew it all. And although he was willing to help and interested in other people's affairs, he knew all the answers, so why question him, and that was the attitude I took. And getting back a little bit, back to even some of the other meetings I had or had seen Dave, or dropped in, he would do all the talking and that was the way he was.
Q. Would you say Dave Ferrie was inclined to brag?
A. At first I thought that, but I subsequently changed my mind.
Q. To what opinion did you change your mind?
A. Because he cited chapter and verse, and most things he could support, most of his contentions.
Q. I am talking about personal deeds and accomplishments as such; was he inclined to brag?
A. Never did put it in that context. No, sir.
Q. Did David Ferrie ever make any statement to you to the effect that his plan to kill President Kennedy had succeeded?
A. Had succeeded?
Q. That is right?
A. No, sir.
Q. After the assassination of President Kennedy, did David Ferrie ever at any time mention to you his plan, if one existed, to kill President Kennedy?
A. No. Never did.
Q. Did you ever ask him any questions about that?
A. No, sir.
Q. Could you tell us why?
A. I think I explained it in my last question. Because of the fact that after being around Dave sometime you knew never to ask questions. He knew the answers. He had already given you the answers once before.
Q. He did not give you an answer to whether or not his plan had succeeded, did he?
A. I did not ask him the question.
Q. Are you telling me it was impossible to ask him questions.
A. No, sir. But you got out of the habit of doing it.
Q. By way of summation, Russo, is it your testimony that you were present when Dave Ferrie entered into a plan to kill Kennedy?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. That Kennedy was subsequently killed by one of the people who was a party to that plan, that you saw Dave Ferrie after the assassination, and never saw fit to even mention it to him?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Now, in the March 1st, 1967, television interview here on Broad Street, you were asked by the reporters, or reporter I should say, whether you had submitted to any tests in the District Attorney's office, is that right?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Had you submitted to any tests?
A. At that time?
Q. Yes.
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Had you been hypnotized?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. By whom?
A. Dr. Fatter.
Q. Were you hypnotized on March 1st, 1967?
A. I don't recall the dates.
Q. Were you hypnotized on the same date as you had the television interview on Broad Street?
A. I am sure I wasn't, but perhaps he could tell you. I don't remember the exact dates.
Q. Are you telling us now, Russo, that you cannot remember the date you were first hypnotized in the District Attorney's office here in New Orleans?
MR. OSER:
I object. There is no evidence in this Court where he was hypnotized.
JUDGE BAGERT:
Objection is sustained.
EXAMINATION BY MR. DYMOND:
Q. Where were you first hypnotized?
A. In Dr. Nicholas Chetta's office.
Q. Was that hypnotism by Dr. Fatter?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. And you don't remember the date of that?
A. It would be sometime after the 24th, the next week, during the next week, or week after that. He could verify that.
Q. When did you come here to New Orleans from Baton Rouge?
A. I came here the Monday after the interview, the Monday after I talked to a member of the District Attorney's staff.
Q. Russo, I am showing you a 1967 calendar indicating March, the present month on it, and with the help of this calendar, tell us when you came down to New Orleans from Baton Rouge?
A. Is the 24th the interview?
Q. Yes.
A. The District Attorney's office contacted me on the 25th, and I came down Monday morning, which would have been the 27th.
Q. When you came down here on Monday morning, the 27th, were you interviewed by the District Attorney here in New Orleans or by any of his representatives?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. At that time were you hypnotized?
A. I don't recall if it was the first day, no, sir. No, the first time I do, I remember what happened. The composite photograph was made up the first day.
Q. Now, it is your testimony that you were not hypnotized that first day, is that right?
A. Yes, sir. I remember that composite photograph.
Q. Did you come back to this building on the 28th of March [sic]?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Where did you go in the building on the 28th?
A. Into the District Attorney's office.
Q. Did you have an occasion on the 28th to go into the Coroner's office?
A. I am not willing to specifically say what date. Dr. Fatter could tell you. Dr. Chetta could tell you.
Q. I want to know whether you can tell me; can you tell me whether you went to the Coroner's office on the 28th of February?
A. I don't recall.
Q. Did you go into the Coroner's office on the 28th of February, 1967?
A. I may have and I might not have.
Q. Were you hypnotized on the 28th of February?
A. I don't recall.
Q. Did you come here to the District Attorney's office in this building on March 1st, 1967?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Were you hypnotized on March 1st, 1967?
A. I cannot say.
Q. Now, perhaps you may relate March 1st, 1967, to the television interview --
A. Yes, sir.
Q. At the time you gave that television interview on March 1st, had you been hypnotized?
A. The reason I am trying to shy away from the exact date, because I do not know because I've been climbing out of fire escapes, things like that, to avoid publicity, and I don't want that much publicity. Everything is a long trend of confusion.
Q. You say you don't want any publicity?
A. No, sir.
MR. OSER:
I object to the question and the smirk on Mr. Dymond's face, Your Honor.
MR. DYMOND:
I don't know how you are going to remove that from the record.
JUDGE BAGERT:
Order in the Court.
EXAMINATION BY MR. DYMOND:
Particularly, what fire escapes have you been climbing out of?
MR. ALCOCK:
I object. Completely and totally irrelevant,
JUDGE BAGERT:
Objection is sustained.
EXAMINATION BY MR. DYMOND:
Q. Are you telling us now that you don't know yet whether you had been hypnotized when you gave the television interview?
A. I do not want to be -- the exact date, I don't know. If I would say one thing it might be wrong.
Q. How many times have you been hypnotized by the, by Dr. Fatter?
A. My recollection is three times.
Q. When was the last time that you were hypnotized?
A. I am not sure of the exact date.
Q. Were you hypnotized before you came into Court here on March 14th?
A. The same day?
Q. That is right.
A. Absolutely not.
Q. Were you hypnotized yesterday?
A. The day before?
Q. Yesterday I said.
A. Absolutely not.
Q. Are you under hypnosis right now or not?
A. Absolutely not.
Q. Referring to March 13th, which is the day before this preliminary hearing commenced, were you hypnotized on that day?
A. I don't think I was.
Q. Now, you say you have been hypnotized three times by Dr. Fatter, is that correct?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. And you cannot tell us when any of this hypnosis took place?
A. It occurred between the 24th [of February] and between the 13th [of March].
Q. Between the 24th and the 13th?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Well, you were in Baton Rouge on the 24th, is that right?
A. You are absolutely right.
Q. Were you ever hypnotized in Baton Rouge?
A. Absolutely not.
Q. On what day did you arrive in New Orleans?
A. From the 24th to the 13th has been a trying ordeal to me, and I am not willing to say what date it was.
Q. What date did you arrive in New Orleans?
A. I arrived on a Monday.
Q. That would be the 27th, is that right?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Then why did you say the hypnosis took place between the 24th and the 13th if you did not get here to New Orleans until the 27th?
A. From the 24th, I considered that when I got involved. That is the only time I ever talked to anyone from the District Attorney's -- the day after the interview was the 25th, is that right? Would someone check a calendar, please?
Q. If you know that you weren't hypnotized in Baton Rouge, why couldn't you state positively this took place between the 27th and the 13th, if you did not arrive in New Orleans until the 27th?
MR. ALCOCK:
He is arguing with this witness. He has shown him a calendar as to the date he came to New Orleans.
JUDGE BAGERT:
The question is good.
THE WITNESS:
Could I amplify on that; I try and connect things with events going on, and that is the way I try to remember things, and since I been down in New Orleans, I haven't been at work and I haven't tried to -- since the 24th was my first involvement, and I consider that the beginning. And I was hoping it would end Tuesday, at least for a while, until the trial or what, and then it went to Wednesday, and then now it is Thursday, and I have lost track of numbers, days. I am extremely tired.
EXAMINATION BY MR. DYMOND:
Q. You have not lost track of the fact that you were in Baton Rouge the 24th, 25th, 26th of February, have you?
A. I have been reminded of that. Yes, sir.
Q. And still you are not willing to pinpoint the dates of this hypnosis any closer to the present date than February 24th, 1967, when you were in Baton Rouge?
A. I am not willing to say any dates because I might be wrong about it. I am only telling what I am absolutely sure about.
Q. So, in view of the dates given by you, you would say that you may have been hypnotized as late as the 13th of March, is that correct?
A. Highly improbable, but possibly right.
Q. That would be by Dr. Fatter?
A. In the presence of Dr. Chetta, yes, sir.
Q. In the presence of who?
A. Dr. Chetta.
Q. Did all three of these instances of hypnosis take place in the office of the Coroner for the Parish of Orleans?
A. As I recollect, they did.
Q. Do you have any doubt about that?
A. No, but I am trying to remember exactly.
Q. What did Dr. Fatter do to hypnotize you, what was the procedure?
A. I would prefer you ask him. It is his procedure and I just could not say what exactly.
Q. You don't remember what he did at all?
A. I remember a lot of things that was done, but what procedure --
Q. The question is, what do you remember he did?
A. He asked me questions.
Q. What else?
A. He asked me to try to remember things, try and recall, try and visualize things, things like that.
Q. That is how he hypnotized you?
A. No, sir. His technique I am not qualified to even talk about. I would prefer he talk about that.
Q. I want to know what you saw Dr. Fatter do in the process of hypnotizing you, what you saw with your own eyes?
A. I relaxed. I relaxed. Yes, sir.
Q. Were you standing up, sitting down, lying down?
A. Sitting down.
Q. You say you relaxed, what did Dr. Fatter do?
A. He questioned me, he talked to me.
Q. About what?
A. About just general idea things, things I had done in the past, and he relaxed me first, and then he talked some more and he asked me -- evidently he had --
Q. Not evidently, just what do you remember?
A. All I remember is being asked questions.
Q. Now, what instructions did Dr. Fatter give you, if any, in connection with this hypnotism?
A. What do you mean, by instructions?
Q. You said he told you to relax; did he give you any other instructions?
A. He talked. No specific instructions that I can recall.
Q. None at all?
A. No specific instructions that I can recall.
Q. How about general instructions?
A. He talked.
Q. What did he say?
A. It is not an instruction thing. He did not order me. That is what I am trying to clear up. He did not order me.
Q. What did he tell you?
A. He talked. Can I be any clearer than that. I don't understand.
Q. Do you remember what he said?
A. He questioned me.
Q. In order to make myself clear, do you mean he questioned you after you were under hypnosis, or in the process of putting you under hypnosis?
A. I had been questioned by the District Attorney's office over and over and over, and then this came about, and evidently he asked me the same questions.
Q. While under hypnosis or in the process of putting you under hypnosis?
A. While under hypnosis.
Q. Now, what did he tell you and ask you in the process of putting you under hypnosis?
A. We talked. He talked.
Q. What did he say?
A. Nice, soothing, relaxing things.
Q. Like what?
A. I don't recall. I just felt relaxed. I felt like relaxing.
Q. When is the last time that you saw Dr. Fatter, other than just seeing him walk into the Courtroom, if you did?
A. Perhaps four or five or six days ago. I don't recall exactly.
Q. It could not have been more recently than that?
A. I saw him in Court.
Q. Other than in the Courtroom?
A. No, I don't think.
Q. And is it still your testimony you might have been hypnotized by him as late as March 13th?
A. My testimony is that I consider the 24th to the 13th one long stream.
JUDGE BAGERT:
Answer the question.
THE WITNESS:
May I have a calendar, please?
MR. DYMOND:
Yes.
THE WITNESS:
I said before the probability that I wasn't. I don't think so now. I feel that I was hypnotized perhaps in the middle of the week. I am not sure, not willing to say.
EXAMINATION BY MR. DYMOND:
Q. How did Dr. Fatter bring you out of this hypnosis?
A. When I hit a number I opened my eyes.
Q. Did he tell you that while under hypnosis or while putting you under hypnosis?
A. Evidently while under hypnosis.
Q. Do you recall, do you presently recall his telling you that?
A. No, not really.
Q. How do you know he told you that?
A. I woke up to the number five.
Q. Did you hear number one, number two, three and four?
A. I heard number five. That is all. I did not hear the first four numbers.
Q. Have you ever heard of post-hypnotic suggestion?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. What did Dr. Fatter tell you to do after you came out from under the spell of hypnosis?
A. He told me to be very relaxed and to feel, not to feel tired, and to come out with a smile on my face.
Q. Did he tell you that before hypnosis or while under hypnosis?
A. While under hypnosis.
Q. You remember him telling you that?
A. Yes.
Q. Can you account for your remembering that and not remembering any numbers before?
A. No, I cannot.
Q. When you first came down here to New Orleans from Baton Rouge, which according to your testimony was on the 27th of February, 1967, what time did you arrive here?
A. I recall nine o'clock in the morning.
Q. About nine in the morning?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Did you have a prearranged appointment with the District Attorney or any of his representatives?
A. They asked me if I would be willing to come down, and I said yes.
Q. Did you call them or did they call you?
A. This was arranged in Baton Rouge.
Q. Did they tell you what time to be in the District Attorney's office?
A. He asked me what time I could. I asked what time they wanted me. I said would nine o'clock be all right. I remember nine.
Q. To whom did you speak?
A. I talked to Mr. Sciambra, who is on the staff.
Q. So you came down to New Orleans in accordance with this agreement, is that right?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Now, when you got to New Orleans, did you go directly to the District Attorney's office, or any place else?
A. I don't recall the first day. I think I came directly to the office.
Q. You can't be sure of that?
A. I think I came directly to the office, but not sure.
Q. Did you come by yourself to the District Attorney's office, or with somebody else?
A. By myself.
Q. When you came here to the District Attorney's office, to whom did you report and where?
A. I reported to Mr. Sciambra, in his office.
Q. In his private office?
A. Well, in all the offices. I was in Mr. Sciambra's office at first.
Q. After you went in and reported to Mr. Sciambra, what happened then?
A. He asked me more questions and --
Q. Was anyone else present in the office at that time?
A. Some of his assistants were.
Q. Do you know who they are?
A. Specifically, that particular time, no.
Q. How about now?
A. Most of the men in the office questioned me.
Q. How many men were there?
A. I have been questioned by at least six or seven.
Q. I am talking about on the occasion of your first visit?
A. Two at times, sometimes three.
Q. Can you name any of the other gentlemen who were there in the office and questioning you?
A. Mr. Oser.
Q. Was there a man by the name of Lynn Loisel, an investigator for the District Attorney's office, present?
A. At the first meeting?
Q. Right.
A. I don't recall him being there.
Q. Was he present at any subsequent meeting?
A. I had met him in the office.
Q. Now, after you went into Mr. Sciambra's office on the occasion of this first meeting, did the interrogation of you continue there in Mr. Sciambra's office, or did you go to another office for the purpose of interrogation?
A. We went to all the offices. I think it began in Mr. Sciambra's office, and we ended in several offices.
Q. Were you shown any photographs at that time?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. How many?
A. Maybe fifty.
Q. At that time were you shown a photograph of Lee Harvey Oswald?
A. I am sure I was.
JUDGE BAGERT:
I think we will take a recess at this time for about five minutes. Step down, Russo.
(Court in recess.)