[ Main Site Menu ] [ Back to Personality Menu ] [ Back to Morales Menu ] [ Index to Site Documents ]


NOTE: The spelling in the original deposition conflicts with my spell check.  In some cases, the spelling has been corrected.  These corrections are found in brackets following the misspelt word.



CASE NO. 81-17247



State Attorney's Office
9th Floor
Metropolitan Justice Building
1351 Northwest 12th Street
Miami, Florida
April 5, 1982
10:10 o'clock a.m.

Taken before Joycee Wax, Notary Public in and for the State of Florida at Large, pursuant to Notice of Taking Deposition filed in the above cause.


State Attorney
Assistant State Attorney
1351 Northwest 12th Street
Miami, Florida
on behalf of the Plaintiff.

444 Brickell Avenue
Miami, Florida
on behalf of Alfredo Arias, Defendant

717 Ponce de Leon Boulevard
Coral Gables, Florida
on behalf of Rafael Villaverde.

200 Southeast First Street
Miami, Florida
on behalf of Carlos Luis.


PAGE 52 -- LINE 1

called as a witness on behalf of the Defendants having been first duly sworn, was examined and testified on his oath as follows:
Q.  Identify yourself, for the record, please?
A.  My name is Ricardo Morales Navarette.
Q.  Are you the same person whose deposition commenced here on Friday before Ms. Cohan and me with Mr. Carhart present?
A.  Yes.
Q.  Are you the one whom they sometimes call "The Monkey"?
A.  Yes.
Q.  Have you had an opportunity to think about or go over, in your mind, any of the questions that I asked you on Friday, and any of the answers that you gave to the extent that there is anything that you feel you need to change now in the interest of accuracy?
A.  I raise out of my mind whatever I talked to you the other day due to preceding events.
Q.  Is there anything that you now feel you

need to change concerning the testimony you gave on Friday in the interest of accuracy?
A.  I don't believe so.
Q.  Let me remind you at the outset today, that if there is any question that I ask you that you don't understand, tell me that you don't understand it, and I will rephrase it until it is in a form with which we can both work.
A.  I would appreciate that, Douglas, since we've had -- you know, some disagreements about the way you ask your --
Q.  Okay.  If you don't know the answer to a question that I ask you --
A.  Let me finish.  Let me finish, please.
Q.  You said enough.
A.  No.  Why?
MS. COHAN: Objection.  Argumentative.
The witness will be allowed to respond fully.
Q.  Well, Ricky, is there something about what I just told you that needs clarification for the record?
A.  Yes, because when you start asking questions, you know, you go on a question for an extended period

of time by which, at the end of that extended period of time, I really don't know what you are asking.
Q.  Okay.  Then, if that happens today and you don't understand the question because of that, tell me that.
A.  That is what I am telling you.
Q.  If I ask you a question to which you don't know the answer, tell me that you don't know the answer because you are, of course, testifying under oath?
A.  Of course.
Q.  (Continuing)  -- and responsible for any inaccuracy.
A.  Right.
Q.  If it's necessary for you to approximate in giving me an answer either with regard to dates or distances or times or anything similar of a quantative nature like that, tell us, for the record, that you are approximating, so that it doesn't appear on the record that you are making an absolute statement.
A.  On or about would be fair to you?
Q.  If I ask you, for example, a question that requires either to give me an answer that involves distances in feet or in miles or weight of something or time of day and you are approximating, tell us that.

If you are able to give precise, exact testimony, tell us that.
MR. OUTERBRIDGE: Excuse me, could you just indulge me for just one minute for an off the record conversation?  I need to have a brief conversation with Rina.
(Off the record.)
Q.  And finally, Ricky, if I ask you a question that can be answered with a yes or no answer and that requires a yes or no answer, if you can answer the question at all that way, do it that way to start with, and then, if you need to give an explanation, but first, address the question precisely or head on; okay?
A.  I will try to do my best according to your question.
Q.  Do you recall that, on Friday, I had been asking you questions concerning sources of income that you had had or work that you have been doing over the past several years for which you have been receiving pay?  Do you recall that?
A.  Something along those lines.
Q.  Basically?
A.  Basically.

Q.  Do you recall that your answer and my questions took us to the spot where you had told me that you had been paid by the Federal Bureau of  Investigations until July of 1975, at which time, you resigned your position as a paid informant?
A.  That is correct, July the 31st.
Q.  And you had told us that you had worked in addition to working for the United States and the Republic of Venezuela, for the Republic of Cuba in 1959 and 1960, and that those were the only three governmental agencies - - I'm sorry -- the only three sovereign governments for whom you have worked -- United States, Venezuela, and Cuba?  Do you recall that?
A.  That is right.
Q.  You had told us that you were a contract agent for the C.I.A. attached to something called the 5th Mercenary Brigade when you were in the Belgium Congo.  Do you recall that?
A.  Yes.
Q.  You had previously stated that was sometime during 1964?
A.  When I arrived in the Congo?
Q.  That's my next question to you: When did you arrive in the Congo?

A.  In 1964.
Q.  How long were you --
A.  I came back on or about the beginning of 1965.
Q.  You told us that you were a contract agent for the Central Intelligence Agency.
My understanding is that a contract agent is somebody who is, in effect, hired for a particular purpose owing to that person's unique skills or expertise; is that correct, as opposed to being a full-time employee?
A.  Not exactly, Douglas, because I was already in the C.I.A. when I had handpicked to perform that mission over there in the Congo.
Q.  What do you mean when you say you were in the C.I.A.?
A.  Yes, I had already spent some time with them, about a year of training.
Q.  Were you a full-time Central Intelligence Agency employee?
A.  At one point, yes.
Q.  Were you, at the point in time that you went to the Congo, a full-time C.I.A. employee?
A.  I was fired two weeks before.
Q.  Why?

A.  We got a brawl with the C.O.
Q.  I'm sorry?
A.  We had a brawl with the C.O., the Case Office.
Q.  Who was the "we"?
A.  The rest of the team.  The whole team was fired.
Q.  Tell me what it means to be a contract agent?
A.  A contract agent?
Q.  For the C.I.A.?
A.  For the C.I.A. is when you sign up a contract with them for performing duties related to their operation.
Q.  Is it for one particular venture or undertaking or situation as opposed to being just an ongoing employee or employer relationship?
A.  Yes, and you can -- you either sign up for one year, two years.
There might be an exclusionary clause about renewal, renew of your contract or whatever.
Q.  But, it is primarily for one particular venture or campaign or purpose; is that correct?
A.  It could be.
Q.  Is it more commonly that?

A.  I don't know that.
Q.  In your experience given the other people that you have known and have had contacts with the Central Intelligence Agency over the years, is it more likely that a contract agent is hired toward one particular end in connection with one particular case or situation?
A.  Not necessarily.
Q.  But, it could be?
A.  Not necessarily.
Q.  What I am trying to have you do is to tell me the distinctions between a regular agent and a contract agent?
A.  I cannot answer that question, because I have never been a staff agent.
Q.  Is that the term that is used -- "staff agent"?
A.  Yes.
Douglas, just for the record, there is a new law that I don't --when it is going to be, you know, into effect, with regard to the disclosures and things with regard about names and things like that, and I hope that you will not be, you know, push me into, up the wall about disclosing names of C.I.A. agents or anything like that along those lines,

because I will be breaking the law, which I am not intending to do.
I want to point out to you that there is a law going into effect.  I don't know when or where.
It's all over the papers.  You should know that.  Everybody knows that; okay?
Q.  For your own edification, there is no such law presently in effect, and if it is passed by the Congress, it will apply only to public disclosure in any mass medium, which is to say, in the newspaper or a television or in a radio broadcast.  This I not public disclosure, but in any event, there is no such law, and I don't even know if it will become pertinent.
MS. COHAN: In any event, I will object to the privilege if it comes to pass.
MR. CARHART: Privilege of what?
MS. COHAN: National security.
MR. WILLIAMS: Executive privilege.  It doesn't work for the president, but it may work for the State Attorney in Dade County.
Q.  When you signed on as a contract agent for this affair or undertaking in the Belgium Congo, for how long was your contract?
A.  Duration of the war.

I was -- it would have last forever.
Q.  During that period of time, were you being paid directly by the Central Intelligence Agency, or were you being paid through some Conduit or front that they had established?
A.  The money was deposited at a savings account that it was open by the support agents down here in Miami under the name of my first wife.
Q.  Was the money with the deposits being made in the form of checks drawn on the Treasury of the United States --
A.  That, I don't know.  Reflected in her savings account book or whatever it was.
Q.  Let me ask you this: At this time, Mr. Morales, and it's a convenient spot at which to do it -- you have come to be aware; have you not, sir, of certain incidents that have recently taken place involving people who are defendants or who were defendants in this case; specifically, one Rafael Villaverde?  Have you recently come be aware of a situation that occurred involving Rafael Villaverde?
A.  Yes, of course.
Q.  Have you heard that Mr. Villaverde is lost and apparently presumed dead at sea as a result of boating accident?

MR. COHAN: Objection. Hearsay.
You may answer.
Q.  Have you heard that?
A.  It's all over the papers.
Q.  Is that a yes?
MS. COHAN: I believe so.
Q.  Have you spoken directly with any of the defendants in this case or any relatives of any of the defendants in this case or any relatives of people who, up until the time of their death, had been defendants in this case about or concerning Rafael Villaverde and his apparent loss at sea?  Have you spoken to anyone about that?
MS. COHAN: Objection.  Compound question.
Please rephrase as to each individual category.
Q.  Do you understand the question, Ricky?
A.  It's so lengthy that, as I pointed out to you before, you break it down, and I will give you  yes or no.
Q.  Let me break it down.
Have you spoken with any of the defendants

in this case any time since Friday morning, let's say, 9:00 o'clock on April the 2nd about or in any way concerning Rafael Villaverde's disappearance and death?
A.  Negative.
Q.  Have you spoken with any of the defendants in this case at all since the fact of Mr. Villaverde's apparent disappearance and death was first discovered or made know about the fact or anything related to it?
A.  Negative.
Q.  Have you spoken with any of the relatives of any of the defendants in this case, which is to say, the husband or wife, as the case may be, of any defendant, the children of any defendant, the parents of any defendant, the brothers, sisters, any relatives of any defendants?
A.  Negative.
Q.  (Continuing) -- about the fact of Rafael Villaverde's disappearance or anything related to it?
A.  Negative.
Q.  Have you spoken to any such people about anything at all since Wednesday of last week?
A.  To whom?

Q.  Any relative  or any defendant?
A.  Negative.
Q.  Have you spoken to any member of Rafael Villaverde's family at all since Wednesday of last week?
A.  I already answered that question.
Q.  No, I am asking specifically --
MS. COHAN: Wednesday of last week?
THE WITNESS: Negative.
Q.  I am asking you specifically if you spoke to any --
A.  Negative.
Q.  Shush.
A.  Don't shush me, Douglas.  Then, we will start arguing against each other.
I am in a very good mood today, Douglas.
Don't shush me.
Q.  We have to have a full question in the record before you answer, so will you let me finish my question before you answer?
A.  Then, you will let me finish my answers?
Q.  If it's appropriate.
A.  It's appropriate.
Q.  The question is, have you spoken with any

member of Rafael Villaverde's family specifically since Wednesday of last week?
A.  Negative.
Q.  Mr. Morales, how long have you known any of the Villaverde brothers?
A.  The whole family?
Q.  Yes.
A.  We were from the same neighborhood.
Q.  In Cuba, in Havana?
A.  Uh huh, Havana.
Q.  Which members of the Villaverde family have you known personally over the years since living near them in Cuba?
A.  Since when?
Q.  From whenever you began to know them?
MR. CARHART: Let's put a date into that.
When you say you are from the same neighborhood, do you mean you've known them since childhood -- at least some of the members of the Villaverde family?
THE WITNESS: The household, when you grow up in a neighborhood --
MR. WILLIAMS: Since your childhood?

Q.  Whom have you known in that fashion -- which of the members of the family?
A.  Well, the priest.
Q.  What's his name?
A.  Well, Father Villaverde.
At one point, it was my confessor.
Q.  Do you know his first name?
A.  Father Villaverde.
Q.  Well, do you know his Christian name, his given name?
A.  No, sir, Father Villaverde.
Raul, Rafael, Jorge, and I believe that I was aware that there was a sister.
Q.  But, in any event, you have known them all, the ones whom you have mentioned, since your childhood in Havana?
A.  El Vedado.
Q.  So, you've known them all since childhood there?
A.  I was aware, and they were there.
Q.  Here's what I need to know, Ricky, I mean, it's one thing to be aware of the existence of somebody else, and it's another thing to have an ongoing acquaintanceship or friendship with them.

A.  Yes, you say hello to the kids, you know, driving your bicycle by.  I had a normal childhood.  I believe in Santa Claus.
Q.  Were you friendly with any of the Villaverde brothers during childhood, or did you just have an acquaintanceship with them?
A.  Sort of acquaintanceship.
Q.  Has there ever been a time when you would describe your relationship with any one or more of the Villaverde family as being antagonistic or hostile?
A.  Yes and no.  It's the ups and down in life.
Q.  So, there have been sometimes --
A.  After we were grownups.  Not to the point of, you know, cutting throats or anything like that.
Q.  Of the various members of the Villaverde family whom you have known, with whom did you ever have now and again or from time to time, a hostile relationship or an unfriendly relationship?
A.  With none of them.
Q.  I just asked you a minute ago whether there were times when you had an unfriendly relationship, and you said yes or no from time to time?
A.  From time to time, friends, you know, tend

to disagree into something or stop, you know, stop talking to each other for, you know, maybe two, three weeks, you know.
"I don't want to talk to you today.  I disagree on this and that with everybody".
It's not a seriousness that you are trying to convey into my mouth.  It never happened.
Q.  Was there ever a time when you took some affirmative step or purposeful action toward harming or disadvantaging any member of the Villaverde family or trying to do something that will hurt, not necessarily physically, but hurt, in any way, hurt the interests of any member of the Villaverde family?
A.  No.
Q.  At the time of the Castro revolution in Cuba, did you hold any kind of employment either immediately prior to the revolution or immediately after the revolution with the Fidel Castro organization?
A.  I already answered to you that question.
Q.  What was your answer?
MS. COHAN: Objection.
Can you read back the question, Joycee?
(Whereupon, the question referred to was read into the record by the court reporter.)
MR. WILLIAMS: I suppose the record should

reflect that the witness has gotten up and walked out of the room.
MS. COHAN: And will return.
MR. WILLIAMS: I assume that he will.
MS. COHAN: And we will take this opportunity for a brief recess.
MR. CARHART: What is the purpose of the witness leaving the room -- to confer with you?
MS. COHAN: I assume the same as me.  I have to go to the restroom.
(Off the record.)
MS. COHAN: You may answer.
Q.  What was that employment, please?
A.  I was a member of the Military Intelligence, Special Agent.
MR. CARHART: From what date to what date?
MS. COHAN: Objection.
MR. CARHART: If Mr. Williams doesn't cover that, then, I have no objections to you coming in, but I don't want any double double teaming.
MR. CARHART: You don't want him double teamed?  Okay.
Ask the date from what date to what date,

Q.  What were the dates of your employment, please?
A.  September, 1959 until, let's say, that I went underground in the summer of 1960, on or about July.
Q.  Did you go underground by breaking your ties with the Castro government?
A.  Of course.
Q.  How did you do that?
A.  To go underground?
Q.  Yes.  Did you stay in Cuba?
A.  From one place to another.  Safe houses.  They were chasing me all over Havana.
Q. Was the agency or department in which you were employed the one called G2?
A.  It was called the D.I.E.R. first.  Then, they switched names to G2.
Q.  What do the letters D.I.E.R. specify?
A.  Departamento de Inteligencia del Ejercito Rebelde.
Q.  What was the business or the function of D.I.E.R. or G2 -- whichever?  What was the purpose?
A.  It's a political police.

Q.  What specifically was it aimed or targeted at doing?
A.  The opposition.
Q.  To do what to them?
A.  To the opposition to the government.
Q.  What was it supposed to do to the opposition?
Did it find them or exterminate them or what?
A.  My position was to uncover subversive organizations at the beginning, especially the members of the already overthrown dictatorship of General Batista.
Q.  How did you come to first hold the position in whatever the forerunner of D.I.E.R. was before Castro came to power?
A.  There was no information runner to D.I.E.R.  The G2 came afterwards.
Q.  Then, your employment with that agency began after Castro had seized power of Cuba?
A.  That is right.
Q.  There was a court system of some kind set up in Cuba after the revolution; wasn't there?
A.  (No response.)
Q.  Shortly after the revolution?
A.  Sure.
Q.  As I recall, the court system consisted of

what would be called military tribunals?
A.  That is right.
Q.  And the Courts would convene for the purpose of trying such as it was the charges that were lodged against people who were accused of being disloyal to the incoming revolutionary establishment; is that correct?
A.  It's correct about the disloyalty.  It is correct about whoever was opposing them.
Q.  If I substitute the word "opposition" for "disloyalty," would that make it correct, then?
A.  Yes, sir.
Q.  In other words, people who were accused of doing acts or engaging in conduct that was in opposition to the revolution; is that correct?
A.  That is correct.
Q.  Were the courts that were established immediately following the revolution courts that depended upon the testimony of live witnesses in order to present and decide the charges against individuals who were accused?
A.  Yes, sir, because the military tribunals were the ones deciding what kind of charges would be brought up against whoever was being accused or whoever had been caught during the commission of overt acts

or covert acts against the revolution.
Q.  In arriving at that decision or at any other decision that the courts had to make, did they rely, at least in part, upon the presentation of evidence against the people who were accused?
A.  Yes, sir Those were kangaroo trials.
Q.  Did you ever testify in any of those proceedings?
A.  Twice.
Q.  When you gave testimony in those proceedings, was it by virtue of your position or capacity as an agent of the Intelligence Service of the government?
A.  That is correct.
Q.  Did you ever, in the course of those proceedings, give testimony  against any member of the Villaverde family?
A.  Never.  I never arrest any of them.
Q.  I am asking you whether you gave any testimony against any member of the Villaverde family?
A.  No, sir.
Q.  Did you ever participate, in any way, in the evidence gathering procedure with regard to any charges that were ever filed against any member of the Villaverde family?

A.  No, sir
Q.  Did you ever participate, in any way, either directly or indirectly in any phase of a prosecution against any member of the Villaverde family in which that person was charged with any kind of conduct against or contrary to the interest of the Castro organization?
A.  Negative.
Q.  Are you able to remember the two trails or proceedings in which you did testify?
A.  Fairly.
Q.  Are you able to remember the names of the persons who were the accused in those proceedings?
A.  The first proceedings, there was a former sergeant from the Intelligence Department.
Q.  What was his name?
A.  Last name, the best that I can remember, was Tasis.
Q.  What was that person charged with?
A.  Subversive activities, intent to hijacking.
Q.  Was he convicted?
A.  Oh, yes.
Q.  What became of him?
A.  He served his time, and eventually, he came over to the United States.

Q.  What part did you play in his prosecution?
A.  I was a witness to the government.
Q.  Had you also participated in the gathering of evidence against him prior to the convening of the tribunal?
A.  Some of it.
Q.  Who was, or who were the accused in the other proceeding that you can recall if you are able to recall?
A.  In the other proceeding, there was a bunch of employees of Cubana Aviacion.
Q.  Do you remember who they were, particularly?
A.  They were so many.  It was a mass operation that took place at Havana Airport, which where I was stationed at the time, and there was mass defection of pilots and sabotages spread out throughout the aircraft and of the airport facilities, and I participated in the investigation and collection of evidence in the arrests.
Q.  Do you remember the names, specifically, of any people who were charged in connection with this general situation?
A.  Let me jog my memory for a while, so I might come up with a few names.
Not offhand now, Douglas. You know --

Q.  Are you aware of the fact that the Villaverde brother named Jorge eventually was prosecuted and convicted of some offense against the Castro government resulting in his having been imprisoned for approximately eighteen years?
A.  Yes, I do.
Q.  Did you have any part or participation in any aspect of any part of the process as a result of which Jorge Villaverde was investigated, arrested, prosecuted, convicted, or imprisoned -- any part?
A.  No is the answer to the investigation.  No is the answer to the arrest because by the time that he was arrested, I was already in the Brazilian Embassy, and whatever happened afterwards, I wasn't there.
Q.  So, you had no participation in any of that?
A.  Not at all.
I recall something.  I never testified because I mentioned before that I testified twice when there was an Intelligence agent down there, and I want to correct myself because by the time that the airline, the Cuban airline case came up for trial, I was already in the Brazilian Embassy or in the United States by the time that they faced the military


tribunal to -- I want to correct myself.
Q.  So, you did not testify there?
A.  No, I never testified there.
Q.  Some of the people testified -- you know, whoever they were, you know, but I was not there.
Q.  You said you were already in the Brazilian Embassy or already in the United States?
A.  Whatever.
Q.  One of the two?
A.  Whatever comes first.
Best of my ability to jog my memory now, when they come up to trial, I believe that I was already here in the States.
MR. CARHART: Douglas, you asked, but he did not really answer as to how he came to be a member of the D.I.E.R., also known as G2.
MR. WILLIAMS: Yes, I had asked him that, we hadn't covered it completely.
Q.  How did you come to be a member of an agent of the D.I.E.R.?
A.  Based upon a letter of recommendation of a personal friend of mine who was a major and who was the head of the Intelligence Department of the national, Cuban Police, and instead of he

having me working for me, he recommended me for the military.
Q.  What was his name?
A.  Raul Diaz Arguiles.
Q.  Had you had any prior t raining in the intelligence craft at the time that the letter of recommendation was made for you by Mr. Diaz?
A.  Nope.
Q.  Then, this would have been yours first venture into the intelligence business or crafts; is that correct?
A.  That is correct.
Q.  What had you done before that?
A.  I was a student.
Q.  How far did you get in school before you went to work for the government?
A.  I finished my high school at St. George.
There was a war going on, so all the educational facilities were closed down in 1957.
Q.  Is the one called Raul Diaz Arguiles presently in the United States?
A.  General Raul Diaz Arguiles died during the fight in the Angola.
Q.  Obviously, then, he remained part of the Castro Regime as a result of which he went to

Angola to fight; is that correct?
A.  It's obvious.
Q.  I just needed to be stated for the record, anyway.
A.  It's obvious.
Q.  Is that correct, sir?
A.  That is correct.
Q.  Are there any persons whom you know or believe to be relatives of Diaz Arguiles who presently live in the United States?
A.  Not to my knowledge.
Q.  What kind of training did you get, Mr. Morales, when you first signed on with D.I.E.R.?
A.  At the beginning, none.
Q.  Just, "Here's a badge, here's a gun, go out and do it"?
A.  That is right.
Q.  So, you were kind of self-taught from the beginning; is that it?
A.  Street wise.  I learned, you know.
Nobody was really capable of performing that kind of profession in the sense of having received a formal training before getting into that kind of a situation, so I have to learn over the road, on the road.

Q.  What kind of training had you gotten before -- just --
A.  Before what?
Q.  I thought you said that you had gotten some kind of training before?
A.  Before what?
Q.  Joining D.I.E.R.?
A. Never.
No, no, no.  Douglas, Douglas, I answered no, so why you have to go backtrack again with the same question?
Q.  Because I thought you said something contrary.
A.  Oh, you thought?
Q.  Now, here's the question: When you were living in Havana before the revolution during your early, middle teen years, was your family what would be described as affluent or not affluent?
A.  My father was a judge for forty years, and he died on the Bench, and my grandfather was a Chief Justice of the Provence of Havana.
Q.  So, when you joined D.I.E.R., G2, you were just starting from scratch and learning as you went?
A.  That is correct.
Q.  Did the time come when you got any kind of


formal training?
A.  Yes, we were sent to school in the outskirts of Havana where we were taught the basics, you know, of investigation, procedures, and very few things.  Not that many compared with the perspective of the training t hat I got afterwards.
Q.  Did you have any contract with the Villaverde family either immediately prior to the revolution of subsequently to the revolution until you left Havana and came to the United States?
A.  A few occasions saying hello to them in the neighborhood.
Q.  Who of them would you see?
A.  All of them.
I used to hang out at the Woolworth, the 5 and 10 store, that it was a gathering place for all the kids in the neighborhood, and they lived a half block away from there, and e very time that said -- hello, hello, hello, an that's it.
Q.  So, you continued to see them after the revolution?
A.  I saw them on several occasions and the father -- I mean, not the father, the one who is a priest.
I was involved in an accident while I was

riding one of the G2 patrol cars.  You know, it was a complete mess, and I broke my pelvis, you know, and things like that, and when I was transported to a hospital close to the airport, and I came back to my senses again, there was him there, you know, and since I though that I was going to die, he was my confessor, and he kept visiting me after I was in the proceeding.
He was not paying any attention to me.
MR. CARHART: I am listening to you, Mr. Morales.
MR. WILLIAMS: I am listening to everything you are saying.
MR. CARHART: The court reporter is taking it.
THE WITNESS: And afterwards, when I went to the Brazilian Embassy, Father Villaverde visited me there on several occasions, and he was taking my confession.
Q.  Since coming to the United States, have you had any encounters of any sort, whether in person or over the telephone, with any member of the Villaverde family that was a negative or hostile or antagonist sort?

A.  You have to be more specific about it.
Q.  What about it do you not understand?
A.  I don't understand your question.
Q.  Have you, at any time since coming into the United States, engaged in any kind of an argument with any of the Villaverdes?
A.  Oh, with Rafael, 150,000 times -- friendly, not friendly, not so friendly.  He was a character.
Q.  Do you recall t he subjects about which you argued more vehemently or more aggressively than others?
A.  Phone calls in the middle of the night with some raspberries over the telephone.
Q.  Who was doing the calling?
A.  Rafael.
Q.  Did you ever call him in the middle of the night?
A.  Oh, I returned the raspberries to him.
Q.  Have you ever threatened any member of the Villaverde family with any kind of physical harm?
A.  No, sir.
Q.  Have you ever told anybody else that you ha ve threatened any member of the Villaverde family with physical harm?
A.  No, sir.

Q.  Do you know a man by the name to Carlos Lopez Ona?
A.  Of course.
Q.  Who and what is he?
A.  Oh, I used to enjoy him so much for fifteen years, you know.   Several times we have been even roommates.
Q.  Where does he live presently?
A.  In Fountainbleau Boulevard, Fountainbleau Park.
Q.  Oh, here in Miami?
A.  Yes.
Q.  Do you know how old he is approximately, now?
A.  Oh, Carlos is over fifty.
Q.  Do you know what he does for a living?
A.  He has a pest control.
Q.  Have you, in the past, had any arguments or disagreements with Mr. Lopez Ona?
MS. COHAN: Objection as to the relevance and materiality to this case.
You may answer it.
MR. WILLIAMS: Lawyers put legal objections in the record quite frequently that have nothing to do with you.

THE WITNESS: What shall I do now?
MS. COHAN: Answer.
Q. Have you had any fight or argument or disagreement with Carlos Lopez Ona within the past year?
A.  Carlos is my friend.  I am his friend.
Q.  Is that a yes or no, Mr. Morales?
A. That is a no.
Q.  Have you ever had any conversations with Lopez Ona pertaining to any member of the Villaverde family in the course of which you made any statements indicating an intention to do harm to any Villaverde?
A.  Bodily harm?
Q.  Any kind lf harm?
A.  Bodily harm?  That's the only harm that I, you know, can understand from you.
Q.  Well, Mr. Morales --
A.  Because a raspberry is a mental harm.
All depends on how you pick it.
Q.  If somebody blows up your car, even if you aren't the one in it, then, that's a kind of harm; isn't it?  You don't regard that as being harmful?
A.  Having your car broken up?  Yes, that was

harmful to me, but I can never make any kind --
Q.  You are asking me now if I meant bodily harm, and I am saying, any kind of harm whether bodily or not.
Have you ever engaged in conversations with Lopez Ona in the course of which you discussed the doing of any harm to any member of the Villaverde family?
A.  No, sir.
Q.  Earlier, Mr. Williams asked you about whether you had conversations with anyone since Wednesday.
Have you left any phone messages for anyone regarding the Villaverdes regarding this case?
A.  With regard to Carlos Lopez Ona, yes, I called over his, you know, tape recording machine, and I made some sort of a statement with regard that, you know, whatever disagreements, you know, I might have with him, you know, with them, that I really felt, you know, shocked, or you know, disappointment.
You might say that I really have feelings about him not being around, that I --
Q.  Who not being around?


A. Huh?
Q. Who not being around?
A.  Rafael according to, you know, newspapers, and things like that.
Q.  When did you do that?
A.  It was either Saturday or Friday.  It was during the weekend -- that I, you know, feel some sympathy for the family.
Q.  Did you have any contact with Raul Villaverde?
A.  No, sir.
Q.  Specifically, his son?
A.  No, sir.
Q.  What?
A.  His son?  No, I don't know his son.
MS. COHAN: What's his son's name?
MR. CARHART: I don't know.
Q.  Since last Wednesday, have you called anyone and made any threats to them?
A.  Threats?
Q.  Yes, sir.
A.  No, sir.
Q.  Going back to your activities in Cuba with D.I.E.R. did you ever attempt to recruit any members of D.I.E.R. or G2 that you met during the course of duties with that organization for other organizations?
A.  That was not part of my job.
Q.  After you left D.I.E.R. or G2, did you ever try to recruit any persons who you had known in that capacity for any other organizations such as for the Venezuelan government or the United States government?
A.  Yes.
Q.  All right.
Were you successful?
A.  Yes.
Q.  What techniques did you use in an effort to recruit such persons?  By that, I mean, persuasion, coercion, bribery?
A.  Ideological.
Q.  Okay.  Do you mean in terms of persuading someone as to the ideological?
A.  You don't have to persuade anybody about ideology.  Once you detect that that person is not a believer into what he supposed to be believing, you can make a different approach to the individual without using any other kind of techniques, and that was very common, you know, at the beginning while, you know, people getting disenchanted with the communist government.

Q.  While you were working for the Venezuela government, did you attempt to recruit any persons for that government?
A.  For what government?
Q.  The Venezuelan government?
A.  Yes.
Q.  Were you successful?
A.  Yes.
Q.  Did you attempt to recruit any persons you knew had been working for the United States government to go to work for the Venezuelan government?
A.  No, sir.
Q.  Was it for the Venezuelan government that you recruited persons you had known in D.I.E.R.?
A.  Yes, sir.
Q.  Have you ever sought to recruit anyone working for D.I.E.R. to work for the United States government?
A.  Yes.
Q.  Are there any other persons who are presently defendants in this case known as the Tick-Talk Investigation whom you knew in Cuba?
A.  Can I see the list?
MS. COHAN: Sure (handing to the witness).

THE WITNESS: You want a rundown of everyone?  Okay.
Roberto Ortega, the Villaverdes --
Q.  Excuse me.  Let's go one at a time.
You knew Roberto Ortega in Cuba?
A.  We were classmates.
Q.  At what level, what school, for example?
A.  Classmates.
Q.  I understand that, but you went to more than one school; didn't you?
A.  Huh?
Q.  You went to more than one school; didn't you?
A.  Huh?
Q.  You went to more than one school; didn't you?
A.  Of course, in La Salle School.
Q.  At what level are we talking about -- primary school?  Are we talking about high school?
A.  Primary, grammar, and at least one year in high school, I believe.
Q.  So, you've known him most of your life?
A.  Most of my childhood.
Q.  Who else?
A.  As far as I can see here, nobody else besides the Villaverdes and Roberto.
MS. COHAN: For the record, he is currently

looking at the cover sheet on the new Information, which is not inclusive of those defendants who were on the old Information, which I will now get.
Q.  Of the four Villaverde brothers, which one were you closest to, would you say?
A.  In what span of time?
Q.  Well, let's start out in Havana.
A.  No, no.
Well, in Havana, the priest.
Since, you know, I mad my confession to him, you might say that I was closer to him than to the other ones.
Q.  Aside from the fact that he assisted you in the performance of his clerical duties, which brother would you say you were closest to?
A.  To none.
Q.  You were only casually acquainted with all of them?
A.  You might say that.
Q.  Pardon?
A.  Yes.
Q.  After coming to the United States, which one were you closest to?
A.  Rafael.

Q.  Did you see Jorge anytime while he was in the custody of the Cuban government?
A.  No.
Q.  Did you have any communication with him?
A.  No.
MS. COHAN: Ricardo, I have files over here with names.  I don't know where my list is.
MR. CARHART:   Do you want to show him the box?
MS. COHAN : Yes.
Victor Angulo, Juan Abuchaibe, Vernon Appleby, Alfredo Arias, Joseph M. Bernal, Porfirio Bonet, David Butler, Louis Caporaso --
MR. WILLIAMS: Slow Down, Rina.
MS. COHAN: I assume he will stop -- Alejandro Ceballos, Frank Condom-Gil--
THE WITNESS: Oh Frank -- well, not Frank.
I am sorry.  Not Frank.
I was aware of Frank's presence, but I knew Ronnie, his brother.  He worked at the same spot that I was working in Cuba.
Where was that?
A.  Havana International Airport.  He was a Customs agent there at the time that I was a G2

agent there.
Q.  Okay, but --
A.  But his name is not in the first list.
Q.  I understand that.  That's why we are supplementing that list.
MS. COHAN: Julio Cornell, Rene De La Paz, Osvaldo De La Vega, Raul Diaz -- different one -- Eduardo, a/k/a Pedro, Jose A. Fernandez, Juan B. Fernandez, Miguel Fernandez, Nereida Fernandez, Roger Fernandez --
THE WITNESS: Oh Roger Fernandez, yes.
How do you know him?
Rogito?  He was part of the neighborhood.
Q.  So, you knew him from your childhood?
A.  Oh, yes, very well.
Q.  All right.
MS. COHAN: Alberto Garcia, Bernardo Garcia, Carlos Garcia, Eloy Garcia, Lucila Garcia, Walfrido Gill, Esther Hernandez, James Hunter, David Johnson, Carlos Luis, Jairo Londono, Jose Marcos, Manuel Perez, Ramon Puentes -- that's it -- Carlos Quesada.
Q.  So, you have told us all the people you

A.  I believe that I am being very accurate so far.
Q.  Does that mean you have told us all you knew from your days in Cuba?
A.  From the names that I have heard so far, yes, sir.
Q.  Had you participated in any revolutionary activities during that period of time when Castro was in contention with Batista?
A.  You mean, Armstrong?
Q.  Yes, as a saboteur?
A.  No, no saboteur.  I was a kid.  I got enough problems, you know, just to have a book under my shoulder.
Q.  What date did you go to work for D.I.E.R.?
A.  On or about September, 1959.
Q. How old were you, then?
A.  At that time, twenty years old, I believe.
MR. CARHART: Have you taken him to the point where he leaves D.I.E.R.?
Q.  Okay.
You told us you left D.I.E.R. I believe

in June of --
A.  Well, it was not D.I.E.R.  It was G2 by that time.
Q.  Okay.  You left G2 when?
A.  July, on or about July.
Q.  Of what year?
A.  1960.
Q.  Where did you go, then?
A.  Safe houses.
Q.  In Havana?
A.  In Havana, and eventually, in September, I was able to obtain political asylum at the Brazilian Embassy.
Q.  Where did that lead you to?
A.  That lead me to 82 days of nightmare, and eventually, to a flight in Pan American to Miami, Pan American Airlines to Miami.
Q.  What do you mean by "82 days of nightmare"?  Do you mean you spent that time in the Brazilian Embassy?
A.  That is correct, sir.
Q.  Trying to get out of Cuba?
A.  Waiting for a safe conduct.
Q.  What was nightmarish about it other than the stress, perhaps, of waiting to succeed in

removing yourself from the Country?  Were you accused there, for example?
A.  There were the milicia people marching around the embassy compound screaming, you know, "Paredon.  Paredon".  That means, the fighting, traitors, and things like that on a daily basis.
Q.  Were you interrogated or in any way accused in the Brazilian Embassy while you were there?
A.  NO.
Q.  Are you armed at this time?
A.  No, sir (indicating).
MS. COHAN: Sit down, Ricardo.
MS. CARHART: All you have to do is answer the question.
Q.  Have you had any conversations with any member of the State Attorney's Office or the Miami Police Department or any o the police agency since your deposition ended on Friday afternoon?
A.  I have been in touch with Diosdado Diaz.
Q.  Anyone else?
A.  Raul Diaz.
Q.  Is that the gentleman with the Public Safety Department?

A.  Lieutenant Raul Diaz.
Q.  With the Public Safety Department?
A.  Homicide.
Q.  Who else?
A.   Puig, Raul Puig.
Q.  He's Miami Police Officer?
A.  Over there (indicating).
MR. WILLIAMS: The record should reflect, by the way, that investigator Raul Puig is sitting just beyond the next door in the adjacent room.
MR. CARHART: Within earshot.
Q.  Okay.  Anyone else?
A.  After the deposition?
Q.  On Friday, yes, sir.
A.  On Friday, Ms. Cohan.
Q.  Anyone else?
A.  Puig, Diosdado, Raul, Rina. I believe that covers it.
Q.  Did you have any discussions about this case or your testimony or the facts of this case?
A.  The main discussion that it was.
Q.  If you will, if you will answer that yes or no, and then, if you want to explain, I will be

happy to let you.
A.  No, sir.
Q.  Okay.
You had no discussion regarding the case or its facts?
A.  No.
Q.  When did your deposition start?
A.  When did the deposition start?  Two days ago.  You mean --
Q.  Thursday morning?
A.  Thursday morning, I believe it was.
Q.  Since the start of the deposition, have you had any discussions or conversations with any member of the State Attorney's Office or the Miami Police Department or any other law enforcement agency regarding the case, your testimony, or the facts in the case?
A.  No, sir.
Q.  What was the nature of your conversation with Raul Diaz?
A.  Raul Diaz show up, with the nature, the main conversation was about the so-called disappearance of Rafael Villaverde.
That was a big conference, conversation, of course, for the past four days.

Q.  Have you reviewed any documents or papers or photographs since you commenced your deposition?
A.  Yes.
Q.  Where was that done?
A.  Huh?
Q.  Where was that done?
A.  Well, first, I just reviewed one right now.
Q.  You mean, by looking at the Information Face Sheet?
A.  Right, right.
Q.  Anything else?
A.  No, nothing else.
Q.  Do you have any notes or any records containing your own notes or your own statements pertaining to this case?
A.  The one that I made at the last day was legal -- you know, like this one (indicating).
After I walked out of the office, I destroyed it.
Q.  You are referring to a legal pad?
A.  Yes, I am referring to a legal pad?
A.  Notes that you took during questions in the deposition?
A.  Than is right.  The way that I am doing

Q.  All right.
Any other document or notes or reports or records pertaining to the tape that you have in your possession?
A.  Yes.
Q.  Can you describe them for me?
A. Is the -- how you call those forms that pertain to my depositions of my testimony with MS. Cohan and Officer Diaz and --
Q.  Do you have transcriptions or copies of those statements that you gave?
A.  Yes, I have copies.
Q.  Copies of what -- transcripts or tapes or what?
A.  No, No tapes.  I don't have any tapes in my possession.
What I have is the same papers that you guys -- you know, you got.
Q.  Well, I have a lot of papers.
MS. COHAN: Referring to a sworn statement taken on December 16th.
Q.  You have a transcript of your sworn statement that you gave to MS. Cohan?

A.  Yes, I do.
Q.  You were asked to take two polygraphs by the State Attorney's Office; were you not?
A.  Yes.
Q.  The first one was on that date?
Q.  In December, I believe?
Q.  Then, you were asked to come back to the State Attorney's Office and submit to a second polygraph; were you not?
A.  Yes, I was.
Q.  That was in the presence of Sergeant Raul Martinez and Lieutenant Raul Diaz; is that so?
A.  Well, the polygraph was administered not in the presence of any of those police officers than you have mentioned.
Q.  No, my question was you were asked to take a second?
A.  I was asked by the State Attorney's Office to take a second one.
Q.  That was in a meeting that Sergeant Raul Martinez and Lieutenant Raul Diaz were present; is than so?
A.  They were there.
Q.  Right.  Did you take the second polygraph?
A.  Yes, I did.

Q.  What was the nature of the inquiry on that second polygraph?
MS. COHAN: Objection.  You are instructed not to answer on the basis of privilege.
MR. CARHART: Which privilege is that?
MS. COHAN: Not only is it an ongoing investigation, but it is completely irrelevant and immaterial to this and concerns matters which are far beyond the scope of the current matter before the Court.
Q.  The State Attorney's representative has asked you not to answer that question.  Are you going to honor her request?
A.  Yes, I do.
MR. CARHART: All right.  Certify that.
Q.  The matters that you were interrogated on in the second polygraph, was than based upon information you had provided?
A.  Yes.
Q.  Was that information given at approximately the same time you allegedly gave information about Carlos Quesada and Roberto Ortega and other persons?

A.  Yes and no.
Q.  Can you explain that to me?
A.  Yes and no.
Q.  Okay.
A.  Let's say that you stuck me with one subject, and then, you into another subject.  That doesn't mean it's necessarily than has anything to do with the first subject.
Q.  No, I wasn't asking you whether there was an affinity between the subjects.  I was asking you if there was affinity in the time.
Did you give the information upon which you were interrogated in the second polygraph at approximately the same time you gave the information which was the subject of interrogation on the first polygraph?
A.  Well, again, yes and no.  In regards to the space and time, yes, sir, and no.
Q.  My understanding is the information than was the subject of interrogation and the first polygraph was given by you in November and December of 1980 and January of 1981; is that correct?
A.  It's fairly correct.
Q.  The information you were interrogated on in the second polygraph, when did you give that?

A.  In the course of those three months that you already mentioned.
I believe that I answered your question, Mr. Carhart.
Q.  Well, of course, the record will reflect whether you did or not.  I wasn't aware that you had.
Did you give any other information regarding -- well, let me set the question up, so you will understand what I am saying.
It is your contention that the information you were interrogated on in a second polygraph, although given during the same time period, did not relate to the information concerning Ortega, Quesada, the Villaverdes, and whatnot; is that your contention?
A.  As far as I've been instructed by the State Attorney's Office, that is correct.
Q.  I am not interested in their instruction.  I am asking you as to your knowledge.
A.  Yes.
Q.  Did you give them any other information concerning other "unrelated areas" during the same period of time?
A.  Yes.
Q.  Were your polygraphed as to those?
A.  No, I was polygraphed --

Q.  Pieces of information?
A.  No, no, no.  I believe that you've got it wrong.
I was polygraphed to all the information that I provide.  I never provide any other information that I provide.  I never provide any other information then because I was not polygraphed.  I was being polygraphed on everything, you know, that I was telling them.
Q.  Do you agree with Ms. Cohan's contention that apparently the information related to at least two different matters, or was it actually more than two different matters?
MS. COHAN: Objection as to how many matters and relevance.
You may answer, if you can, as to how many matters it was.
THE WITNESS: I cannot pinpoint how many matters or why you come up to the name of matters or --it was one, two, three.
Q.  Was it two or more?
A.  Maybe more than two.  Maybe three.
You know, it's so vague -- your question, Mr. Carhart, that you no make it --
Q.  Well, the problem with that is because you

are withholding information from me.
A.  So, I am no withholding information from you.  I am just telling you that I never count how many matters, or you know, what the matter applies to or what.
MR. WILLIAMS: Ricky as you sit here now --
THE WITNESS: Now, if, you know -- wait, wait, wait.
MS. COHAN: Mr. Williams, I will object.
Mr. Carhart is doing this line of questioning.
Mr. Williams: Let me just see if we can straighten this area out.
As you sit here now, can you think back in your head and segment or separate the different specific episodes or situations that were the subject of that second polygraph examination?
THE WITNESS: I can't, Douglas.  I can't.
Q.  Were you given any other polygraphs at the request of the State Attorney's Office during this period of time -- I'm talking about November of 1980 through, let's say, February of 1981, other than the two we have discussed here this morning?
A.  No, Mr. Carhart.
Q.  Had you ever taken a polygraph examination

before you took one at the request of the State Attorney's Office in this time period?
A.   Oh, yes.
Q.  When is the first time you ever took a polygraph examination?
A.  C.I.A., I believe.
Q.  Pardon me?
A.  The C.I.A.
Q.  When?
A.  Maybe 1963, 1962, 1963.
Q.  Before you gave the or submitted to the two polygraph examinations, what was that -- December of 1980 was the first one?
A.  Whenever it was.  One or about.
Q.  The one with Mr. Dixon?
A.  Yes, Mr. Dixon.
Q.  How many times would you say you've been polygraphed before that?
A.  I would say at least on a couple of occasions.
Q.  When you say a couple, are you meaning two?
A.  Yes, I'm meaning two.
Q.  Had you ever submitted to any polygraph examinations at the request of the representatives of the United States Government?

A.  Yes.
Q.  For example, you're familiar with an investigation in 1978-1979 in which Mr. Quesada started out as the principal of the -- one of the principal targets; is that correct?
A.  That is right.
Q.  Did you submit to any polygraph examinations during the course of than investigation?
A.  No, sir.
Q.  Have you ever received any training in administering polygraph examinations?
A.  Not exactly, but I have been present while polygraph examinations have been administered several occasions.
Q.  In the course of what duties -- duties with the Venezuelan government, duties with the United States government, duties with the Cuban government?
A.  Duties with the Venezuelan government.
Q.  To go back to my question, have you actually received any formal training in the art of polygraph?
A.  Not the formal training.
Q.  Informal training, which somebody outlined for you the principles and techniques used?

A.  Of course.
Q.  When and where did you receive that type of informal training?
A.  It's not informal training.
You cannot -- I'm sorry, Mr. Carhart, you know, don't put words in my mouth.
That was not considered and is not considered an informal training.  It's just that there were persons who are qualified polygraph technicians who were administering polygraph tests to individuals, and I was there, and since I was there, I took the interest in asking questions to the individual how you do this, how you do that, how this works, you know, things like that.
Q.  What individual are you speaking of?
A.  Oh, I am speaking about an Israeli agent, and I am speaking about an American polygraph technician.
Q.  When did you get this information from the Israeli technician?
A.  During the course of the examination of one of the hijackers of an Air France Airliner that belonged to the F.L.P.L. Organization o Dr. George Habash.
MR. WILLIAMS: George Habash?

THE WITNESS: You don't know who George Habash is?
MR. WILLIAMS: Spell it to her, please.
THE WITNESS: I'm sorry.  You should know how to spell.
MR. WILLIAMS: Spell your word for the record.
THE WITNESS: Okay.  H-a-b-a-s-h.
To the best of my recollection, it's H-a-b-a-s-h, Dr. Geroge, so this individual, he was one of a member of that radical group from the P.L.O., and he participated in some sort of a massacre at the Oralee Airport in Paris in 1975, and he was caught in Venezuela by DISIP, and an Israeli agent was sent down there to interrogate this individual, and part of the interrogation was the transmission of a polygraph test.
Q.  Can you name some other occasions where you had the opportunity to witness or participate in polygraph examinations?
A.  Yes. During the course of the Niehaus kidnaping, it was the first time that I actually, I do believe, that kind of technique was employed since the nature of the kidnaping of this

industrialist down there, so, it was administered to the employees of the Owens-Illinois Corporation in Venezuela.
Q.  Would you give me a date on that?
A.  Niehaus was kidnapped in February, so I don't know -- early 1970's. 1976, too.
Q.  Any other occasions?
A.  No, sir.
Q.  Have you done any reading on your own in the literature of polygraph?
A.  No, sir.
Q.  Any of these training schools that you went to in the course of your life where a portion of the training school was devoted to interrogation techniques including polygraph exams?
A.  I have to answer that question in two parts, because I have received training in interrogation techniques, but I never received any kind of a training in polygraph.
Q.  So, the answer is no?
A.  To the polygraph.
Q.  For the polygraph, and on the two occasions that you say you participated in people being interrogated by polygraph, did you find the results to be satisfactory?  Did you find them to be an

effective means of interrogation?
A.  The results of the Israelis -- I was not privileged to that.
Did I say anything funny?  Just to join you?
MR. WILLIAMS: Yes, I was thinking about the way in which the Israeli agent probably conducted his interrogation of this fellow.
THE WITNESS: I join.  I join in that.
Q.  Well, did he use other techniques other than polygraph?
A.  Who?
Q.  The Israeli agent?
A.  No, and the results of the Owens-Illinois employees -- those were privileged of the corporation down there, and the DISIP was informed.  Well, actually, we never got the results because there was a development in the case that cleared up any participation by employees of the corporation in the kidnaping, so what I am trying to explain to you is that at the same time that the polygraph was going on, we picked up, you know, the proper lead to the kidnappers.
Q.  Other developments made it unnecessary for you to rely upon the polygraph examination; is that

A.  Huh?
Q.  Other factors made it unnecessary for you to reply upon the results of the polygraph examination?
A.  That is correct.
Q.  Nevertheless, did you form any opinion as to the efficacies of such an examination?
A.  Oh, I do have made my mind up, my mind about polygraph tests throughout the years.
J.  What is your opinion of them?
A. They are very, very effective.
Q.  Any qualifications on that?
A.  Qualifications on that?
Q.  Yes.
A.  I am not -- what do you mean?  Hold on a second.  What do you mean -- "qualifications"?
Q.  I am asking for your views.
A.  My views?
Q.  Yes, sir.
A.  My opinion is that they are effective.
Q.  Period?
A.  Period.
MR. WILLIAMS: What Mr. Carhart was asking you, when you said qualifications, do you mean to say that all the time, under any circumstances,

polygraph is effective, or do you think they are generally effective, but there are some situations in which they are not quite as good or some cases or some people -- something like that?
THE WITNESS: As far as I am concerned, they are effective.  It is my opinion.
MR. WILLIAMS: Across the board?
THE WITNESS: Right across the board.
Q.  When Mr. Dixon gave you the first polygraph examination, did he indicate to you he thought you were being untruthful in any of your answers?
A.  Say that again, sir, if you don't mind?
Q.  When Mr. Dixon gave you the first polygraph examination that he administered to you, did he tell you that he thought you were being untruthful as to any of the questions you were asked?
A.  The results of the polygraph were never indicated to me by Mr. Dixon on or at any time during the course of his techniques.
You know, he indicated to me anything with regard to your question.
Q.  How about after the test was concluded?  Did he advise you that he thought you had given deceptive answers to any of the questions that you were asked

during the exam?
A.  Not that I recall.
Q.  Did anyone else relate to you that Mr. Dixon was of the opinion that you had given deceptive answers to any of the questions asked during the firs polygraph examination that Dixon administered?
A.  Not until he made his report.
Q.  Then, did someone tell you that Dixon believed you to be untruthful in some of your answers?
A.  That Dixon's reports -- what I was told, it was his conclusions of the polygraph?
Q.  Right.  When you received that report of the contents of that report, was there a statement or an indication by Mr. Dixon that he found you to be untruthful as to some of the questions asked of you?
A.  Not to my knowledge.
Q.  No one has ever told you that Mr. Dixon found you to be untruthful in any area?
A.  Not to my knowledge.
Q.  Who did you speak with regarding Mr. Dixon's report?
A.  It's been common conversation among Rina, D.C. Diaz, Raul Puig, and whatever law enforcement people has been surrounding me in this kind of a situation.

Q.  None of those persons told you that Dixon found you to be untruthful in some of your responses?
A.  Not to my knowledge.
Q.  How about the second exam you were given?
Were you told that any of yours answers there were deceptive in the opinion of Mr. Dixon?
A.  Not to my knowledge.
Q.  Did Mr. Dixon tell you he found yours answers or any of yours answers to be deceptive in the second exam he administered to you?
A.  He never discussed with me the results.
Q.  While Mr. Dixon was administering the exam to you, he never related to you his opinions as to whether or not you were telling the truth?
A.  No, sir.
Q.  Did Mr. Dixon record the exam; that is, his questions asked of you and the answers given on a tape recorder?
A.  Of course.  Yes.
Q.  Did he record the interview you had with him before you administered the exam?
A. I don't know that.
Q.  Well, did you see a tape recorder?
A.  Oh, yes.
Q.  At some point, he turned on the tape

recorder; is that correct?
A.  To change the cassettes and things like that.
Q.  You know for at least a portion of the examination, you were recorded?
A.  I do believe that throughout the whole examination, I was being recorded.
Q.  Did that include the interview prior to the actual administration of the exam?
A.  I will assume, yes.
Q.  Have you ever had the opportunity to listen to those recordings?
A.  Yes, I had.
Q.  When is the last time?
A.  Let me finish.
Q.  Sure.
A.  Yes, I had the opportunity, but I didn't do it.
Q.  Before Mr. Dixon administered the examination to you, let's say, in December of 1980 --
A.  Whatever it was.
Q.  Right, pertaining to the Quesada or Ortega matters, had you ever been asked by any other agency, by any agency, to take a polygraph exam?
A. Prior to --

Q.  Mr. Dixon administering one to you?
A.  A request, official request?
Q. Or informal?
A. Or informal, yes, there was a time when the developing of this information that I was told than certain Mr. Richey would like to polygraph me with regard to the upcoming information.
Q.  Who told you that?
A.  Raul Diaz an Rina Cohan.
Q.  Do you recall the date of that first request?
A.  It was a week before -- actually, I met with Ms. Cohan at the Holiday Inn.
Q.  Did you agree to take the polygraph exam the firs time you were requested to take one?
A.. Well, I agree to take it, but I did not agree with the local polygraph people.
That was basically my disagreement is that I didn't want any of the locals to be part of that examination, and I also made a remark about why they never polygraph, you know, some other witness.  In my case, that they were never polygraphed before, given the information, and I was told that the guidelines now apply that anyone giving up any kind of information will have to be polygraphed.

Q.  So I understand you correctly, are you saying that, initially, when requested by the State Attorney's Office through Raul Diaz, you refused to submit to a polygraph examination?
A.  No, sir, that is not true.  That is incorrect.
Q.  All right.
A.  What I refused was to be polygraphed, as I said before, and it's in the record, to be polygraphed by the local people.
Q.  While you were refusing to be polygraphed by the local people and making those observations about other persons having been witnesses without being polygraphed, did you agree that you would submit to a polygraph examination?
A.  Oh, yes.
Q.  If the operator was the proper person?
A.  Yes.
Q.  So, you never actually refused to submit to a polygraph examination?
A.  No, no, no. Never.
Q.  It was only the terms and conditions that you had some disagreement about?
A.  No, I never -- the only terms that I said it was an outsider from the local polygraph community

down here, and I only make the remarks, as I mentioned it before, that why they never did this to Fausto Villar?
Q.  Do you know a man by the name of Carlos Quesada?
A.  Of course.
Q.  When did you first meet Mr. Quesada?
A.   Mr. Quesada -- the first time?
MS. COHAN: Objection.  Repetitious.
MR. WILLIAMS : No, we haven't done that.
THE WITNESS: Oh, yes we did.
MR. WILLIAMS: I don't recall that we have done it, but in any event, it's absolutely harmless to ask it again to set up the next line of questioning.
MS. COHAN: Go ahead and answer it.
THE WITNESS: Can I take a short break?
MS. COHAN: Sure.  We can all take a short break.
(Whereupon, a short recess was taken after which the following proceedings were had:)
(The witness was sworn.)
Q.  Mr. Morales, I need to ask you a few more questions about some of the things that have occurred

in the past several years to which you have been a party before we get around to Mr. Quesada and Mr. Ortega at this time.
Do you remember all of the suggestions I made to you this morning concerning the way in which you might want to answer questions -- to tell me if there I anything that confuses you, and to tell--
A.  I will in the course of your questioning.
Q.  Have you thought of anything that was taken from you in the way of testimony this morning which, upon reflection, you know think you have been inaccurate?
A.  No, because I have not reflected.
Q.  Well, I specifically invite you, at the beginning of every session, to take the opportunity to tell us I there is anything that you have rethought at any time with regard to which you want to make any corrections, and in default of your doing that, we will just let the record stand in its own condition.
How many times have you been arrested, please, sir?
A.  Four times.
Q.  Would you please tell me the date of each and the place, sir, and then, we will get some more information abut each one?

A.  February 14th, 1969.  August, I believe, 1973.  April the 16th, 1978, and July 25th, 1979.
Q. All right, sir.
A.  Can you tell me --
A.  Excuse me, sir, Mr. Williams, besides the times that I mentioned before when I was arrested by INS on that return raid from Cuba in 1962 or 1963.
Q.  Thank you, sir.
A.  Which has already been reflected in the record.
Q. Can you tell me, please sir, by whom you were arrested in February of 1968 and for what?
A.  February?
Q.  Of 1968.
A.  City of Miami Police Department.
Q.  With what were you charged, please, sir?
A.  Placing an explosive device, a bombing charge.
Q.  By whom were you arrested in 1973, and for what?
A.  City of Miami Police Department.
Q.  With what were you charged?
A.  First degree murder.
Q.  By whom were you arrested in April of 1978?

A.  City of Miami Police Department.
Q.  With what were you charged, please, sir?
A.  Possession of marijuana.
Q.  By whom in 1979, please sir?
A.  City of Miami Police Department.
Q.  With what were you charged?
A.  Carrying a concealed firearm, weapon, or whatever.
Q.  Which?
A.  CCF, I believe, or CCW.
Q.  Tell me, please, sir, in 1968, who was the officer, or who were the officers who arrested you?
A.  Sergeant McCracken
Q.  That was Gene McCracken?
A.  At the time, he was sergeant.  Eugene, I believe, Eugene McCracken.
Q.  In 1973, who was the arresting officer?
A.  Actually, it was Gene McCracken again because I was at his office again at this time.
Q.  Who was the lead investigator in that case, the homicide case?
A.  At the end, it was this fellow Martinez.
Q.  Walter Martinez.
A.  Walter, uh, huh, that is right.

Q.  Who was the arresting officer in April of 1978?
A.  Well, I was arrested by over a dozen P.S.D. Uniform guys.
Q.  Who was the lead investigator.
A.  In that case?
Q.  Yes.
A.  Sergeant Raul Martinez, and Customs Agent Edward Mederos.
Q.  In 1979, please sir?
A.  Officer by the last time, Uniform officer by the name of Parra, P-a-r-r-a.
Q.  From the City of Miami, you said?
A.  Yes.
Q.  What was the factual basis of the 1968 bomb charge?   What factually was the accusation made against you?
A.  A bombing charge as far as I am concerned.
Q.  Yes, sir.
Were you charged with having placed an explosive device someplace?
A.  Yes.
Q.  Where were you charged with having placed the device?
A.  One of those little places that started

doing trade with the enemy, with Cuba, with the Cuban government.
Q.  Which one?
A.  Located at West Flagler Street and 35th Avenue, I believe.  It was either between 35th and 34th -- around that area there.
Q.  Do you remember the name of the establishment?
A.  Has stayed out of my memory.
Q.  Do you remember the name of the owner or owners of the establishment who obviously were the target of the bomb; weren't they? I mean, they were the ones who were trading?
A.  You are wrong in your assumption.  You are putting words in my mouth.
Q.  Okay.  I don't want to put anything in your mouth, Ricky.
A.  Yes, you are, because they were not the targets.  I mean, the target was the office, the space -- you know, the building, or whatever it was.
Q.  The bomb was intended to interfere with the business of humans, I take it, who were trading with Cuba; is that correct?
A.  Yes.
Q.  Who were those humans -- that's what I want

 to know?
A.  I don't know who were those humans.
Q.  Oh, you don't know who the people were who were operating the business?
A.  No.
Q.  Did you do that on your own, or were you acting kind of for hire in that capacity?
MS. COHAN: Objection.  He has not testified that he committed any placement.
MR. WILLIAMS: Well, we are getting to it, so just leave the witness alone until he has a problem.  He does not need to be coached.
MS. COHAN: Mr. Williams, I will state lawful objections as I see fit.
MR. WILLIAMS: I will tell you what.  I will agree with you, Ms. Cohan, that all objections go to relevance and competence and form are reserved; all right?  That way, none of us has to interject so as to taint the witness' ability to recall or testify.
MS. COHAN: Objection.  Assuming facts not in evidence.
MR. WILLIAMS: Are you rejecting my stipulation?
MS. COHAN: You may answer.

MR. WILLIAMS: I didn't hear you.  Are you rejecting my stipulation?
Q.  The question is, were you acting on your own, or were you acting kind of on a mercenary or for hire basis there?
MS. COHAN: Objection.  Assuming facts not in evidence.
MR. WILLIAMS: Yes, I know.  You have already stated your objection, and it's exactly the same question.  Now, if we leave the witness alone, you don't have to look back and forth.
THE WITNESS: You want me blindfold?  That would be --
MR. WILLIAMS: I would rather that you not look anyplace.
THE WITNESS: Then, I will be blindfold.  I will make it easy for everybody.  If I cannot do anyplace, I will not looking for advice.  I am just wandering my eyes because I don't understand a thing about what you are saying, or she is saying about legal procedures.
MR. WILLIAMS: And you're not supposed to.

We are just doing lawyer talk back and forth.
THE WITNESS: Let me look at her face, and her face, and Mr. Carhart's face.
MR. CARHART: It's very benign.
Q.  Do you have the question, Mr. Morales?
A.  You are the one asking the question.
Q.  Do you understand what the question is?
A.  Yes.
Q.  May I have the answer, please, sir?
A.  To what because she's objecting, and you are bickering with her, and at this point, I don't know exactly what is going on.
  Q.  Here's the question, Mr. Morales --
A.  Okay.
Q.  Was the placing of the bomb something that was done as the result of your own feelings or your own determination, or was it something that you did because somebody else asked or paid you to do it?
A.  No, it was my feelings and my convictions against whoever is trading with the enemy.
Q.  What kind of a bomb was it?
A.  Mr. Williams, let me tell you something.
Q.  How about answering my question?
A.  That is the way I am going to answer it to

Q.  Okay.  All right.
A.  That is the way I am going to answer it to you.
That night, I placed an envelope with Composition 4 and a time delay pencil with a J-1 type blasting cap.
Right after I did that , some other group, because at the time there were so many groups bombing the hell out of those places that were trading with the enemy, show up there and place a stick of dynamite, because I threw the envelope through the mail slot of the building.  You know, it was a ground level building, and it happens once in a million, but it happened to me, and then there comes this guy put a bomb, you know, blew the main entrance of the place, ripped apart the envelope.
The C4 was spread all over the place, and the pencil and the black cap was somewhere laying around there.
The envelope was somewhere laying around there.
Then, the police arrived there, and while they were inside the place, of course, the time pencil ignited, the blasting cap, the J-1 and Sergeant

Leesburg from City of Miami Police Department got some schrapnel [SHRAPNEL]; okay, so actually it was not my device that was the one that blew that place.
Q.  Life is a bitch; isn't it, Ricky?
A.   Life is bitchy.
Q.  All you wanted to is go out and put a bomb down someplace, and here somebody has to come down behind you and mess up the whole place?
A.  Mess up the whole thing.
Q.  They have no respect.
A.  No respect at all for the professionals.
Q.  Well, did you ever find out who it was that came it and bombed your bomb?
A.  Oh, yes.
Q.  Who was it?
A.  Omar Soto.
Q.  Was he somebody whom you knew at that time also to be engaged in the bombing business?
A.  No, I found out about him when I started looking for the other bomber.
Q.  Now, was that the first explosive device or bomb or whatever you want to call it that you had ever placed somewhere for purposes of blowing something or somebody up?
A.  Of course not.

Q.  Well, I've heard all the stories, Ricky, but I can't assume any of that, so I have to have you tell me about it.  You know, a chance to meet a living legend, you know, so I am going to ask you to tell me.
Prior to 1968, where else had you placed an explosive device?
Let me ask you this, first, Ricky, just you know, what the lawyers call a technicality.
When you placed the explosive device in the place at Flagler and 34th or 35th back in 1968, you knew at the time that you were violating one of the laws of the State of Florida; didn't you?
A.  That's a matter of semantics.
Q.  Did you know that you were committing an illegal act, Ricky?
A.  That's a matter of semantics.
Q.  Well, given our need to utilize the semantics that are normally employed in the day to day lives of normal humans, if you would indulge us by using those same semantics, didn't you know at the time that you did that you were doing an act that the law prohibited?
A.  That's another matter of semantics.
Q.  Well, just do the best you can.
A.  Douglas, I was not committing a crime.

Q.  Well, let's do it this way: I invited you to state to me any ideological or philosphical [PHILOSOPHICAL] feeling that you have about it because I'm happy to hear that all the time, but first, I'd like you to tell me whether you harbored an awareness at the time that you did the act that you were violating either one of the laws of the State of Florida or one of the laws of the United States or both?  Did you know it?
A.  Of course.
Q.  Now, if you want behind that, to make some philosphical [PHILOSOPHICAL] or ideological expression to me, Mr. Morales, I invite you to, because that is an education for me, too.
A.  You won't get it yet.
Q.  I am trying , Ricky.
A.  You will, you will eventually.
Q.  I am going to be taught something?
A.  Oh, yes, definitely.  I promise you.  I swear my heart.
Q.  I am a very quick study, Ricky.
A.  I am going to please you.
Q.  I have a very quick step.  Sometimes, I surpass the master right on the spot; okay?
Let's go back prior to 1969, and have you tell me the different occasions before that on which

you placed some bomb or explosive device?
A.  Well, Mr. Williams, I went to a full demolition course where hey did a lot of work on that, and that's where I learned my expertise.
Q.  When did you have that course, please?
A.  1963, 1964, I believe.
Q.  Was that the first, if you will pardon the expression, contact that you had with demolitions, or had you kind of dabbled in it as an amateur before then?
A.  No, amateurs usually make mistakes, and you are only allowed one mistake in demolition.
Q.  Just exactly so.
A.  So, I was introduced to the wonderful world of C4 by the means of my demolition training.
Q.  From whom did you receive that training, please, sir?
A.  The Central Intelligence Agency.
Q.  In this country or outside of the United States?
A.  To the best of my knowledge, it was in this country.
Q.  Now --
A.  I don't see anything funny about it.
Q.  Now, I need to know --

A.  You don't know like the C.I.A.?
Q.  It has provided me with some of the most entertaining moments of my life.
A.  Okay, because I don't like people, you know, making jokes about them.
Q.  I need to know this, Mr. Morales: The way in which you answered that last question suggests that you don't possess absolute certainty as to where this demolitions course was given you.  Is that because your awareness was impeded in some way, or is it because the C.I.A. took steps to try and keep you and the others from knowing where you were?
A.  That is right, that is correct, to the last part of your question.
Q.  The C.I.A. tried to keep you from knowing where you were?
A.  Yes, that is correct.
Q.  Let me guess.  You were blindfolded and put in an airplane?
A.  No, actually the airplane was the one that was blindfolded.
Q.  You were put in an airplane with the windows blocked out?
A.  That is correct.
Q.  And flown someplace?

A.  An airplane someplace.
Q.  And you were airborne long enough so that you could be conceivably in another country?
A.  Or we could have been circling around Miami, right, and circle around into the wild blue yonder, or whatever, you know.
Q.  Well, now, let me guess.
When the airplane landed, was the pilot killed, or was his tongue cut out, so he couldn't tell anybody where he had taken you?
A.  No, we were separated from them.  We never saw the pilots, and the pilots never saw us.
By this time, you should be aware of that.  If you want to waste a lot of paper there, you know, we can keep going on, but that's the only answer I can give you.
Q.  Is that a standard intelligence technique?
A.  Yes, that's part of the compartmentalization part.
Q.  How does the principle of compartmentalization --
A.  There are only two kinds of compartmentalization -- horizontal and vertical.
Q.  Please explain them to me?
A.  It's a need to know basis, so I didn't

have the need to know who the pilots were or the pilots' need to know who I was.
Q.  If I understand you correctly, Ricky, what you are telling me is that the theory of compartmentalization is that different people involved in the same operations or series of acts who have different functions to play are kept separately and apart from each other, so that no one person knows what any of the others is doing; is that essentially it?
A.  Essentially.  It is correct.
Q.  Is that a technique that you have utilized over the years during your career as an Intelligence agent or operative?
A.  It is part of daily life.  You know, it's part of the job.
Q.  So, for example, was that a technique that you applied when you were DISIP in Venezuela?
A.  It goes along with the profession.
Q.  Ricky, I need a yes or no, and then, a comment?
A.  Yes.
Q.  See, you and I know, as we sit here and talk by facial expressions what one another means, but two weeks from now, when I go to read this deposition, the record is just going to have black and

white words.  That's why we have to clarify it.
A.  Yes, that is terrible, Douglas.  I understand.
I am going to try to help you out on that because that's terrible.  Yes, of course. The cold of  black and white is terrible.
Q.  So, you were trained by the C.I.A. at the very least someplace on the surface of the earth?
A.  That is right.
Q.  Where there wasn't snow?
A.  Yes and no.
Q.  Okay.  It doesn't matter.
A.  For a time, there was snow and cold, and then, there was warm.
Q.  How long this the course last?
A.  What course?
Q.  The demolition course that you took?
A.  Demolition lasted two separate weeks.
Q.  I gather, then, that the inference to be drawn from what you just said is that you were receiving your demolitions training along with other basic C.I.A. training; is that correct?
A.  Not along.
Q.  As part of ?
A.  As part of.

Q.  So that you weren't taken away just specifically for the purpose of demolitions training, but for all of the training that the C.I.A. was giving its agents, then?
A.  That is correct.
Q.  As long as we're here, Ricky, without going into the kind of details that would be regarded as sensitive or privileged or confidential or anything like that, tell me what the rest of your C.I.A. training was in general terms?
A.  It covered, Williams, everything.  I received the best training available.
Q.  Break it down for me, as neatly as you can, Ricky, and we don't have to spend a lot of time on it.
A.  Mapping, patrol, raids, jump school, communications and demolitions, counter insurgency, insurgency, clandestine movement, inclandestine movement, covert actions, survival.
Q.  Self-defense?
A.  Self-defense.
Q.  Any psychology taught?
A.  Weapons, psychological warfare.
Q.  Can you think of anything else?
A.  There must have been a lot more.

Q.  How long did the training last, Ricky?
A.  For me and my team?
Q.  Yes.
A.  It lasted ten months.
Q.  Now, we talked a while ago about the different between a contract agent and a regular -- what was the term you used -- the other kind of agent?
A.  Staff.
Q.  A staff agent.
I assume the training that you got was the highest level of training that the C.I.A. was giving regardless of what one called their employees at that time; is that correct?
A.  That is correct.
Q.  Is it also fair to assume that as far as you can tell and based upon what you have been able to learn over the rest of your career in intelligence work, that you were getting the best that was available to be given at the time?
A.  That is what they told me.
Q.  Do you have any reason to disbelieve it looking back?
A.  Nope.
Q.  I mean, techniques may have changed, but still, at the time, it was the best there was?

That is right.
Q.  And you completed it?
A.  A fine course.
Q.  After that, when did you perform your first actual piece of demolitions work?  When did you first blow something up or plant a bomb or anything like that?
A.  After the training?
Q.  Yes.
A.  In the Congo.
Q.  As part of its training back then, was the C.I.A. giving different people specialized or concentrated training in some areas to the exclusion of others like, for example, would one person be picked out to get the regular demolitions training, and then, go on to be given more specialized training to become even more expert as a specialist in demolitions, and another one on orthography and another one or cartography?  Was that  being done.
A.  I heard o things along those lines, but I took the whole course.  I never went into, you know, that kind of piecemeal instruction.
Q.  In other words, you were never singled out for any more intensive instruction other than that was given during the regular course?

A.  That was intensive.
Q.  I understand that.  I'm sure it was, but what I want to know is whether you got any demolitions training that went past what the general group of C.I.A.  trainees would get?
A. No, no.  That was I.
There were people who got less, but what I got -- it was the real McCoy.
Q.  So, you went to the Congo, then, and you told us, on Friday, that you went on a Mad Mike Hoare course?
A.  Attack.
Q.  Whey you were in the Congo, Ricky, on how many different occasions, could you tell us now with some degree of accuracy, did you either fabricate or put in place explosive devices?
A.  Douglas, to start with, a hand grenade is an explosive device, you know, and at night, I used to wake up everybody, you know, with a couple of hand grenades, because that was common practical jokes, so you have to understand that.
Q.  Well, I agree with you that it beats the hell of an alarm clock.
A.  And since they were already fabricated in the form that they, you know, whatever they were in

the crates, you know, to be used, and it's a question that I --
Q.  Well, let me make a distinction then between munitions, on the one hand, and demolitions material on the other; okay?
A.  Well, munitions can be detonated, too, and then, it becomes -- were you in the Service by any chance just to try to help you out?  Were you in the Service?
Q.  Listen.  Assume that I have some working familiarity with it.
A.  No, Service.  I mean, did you serve your country?
Q.  Assume that I have some working knowledge of it.
A.  Well, then, I have to reverse to previous situation.
MS. COHAN: I wasn't in the Service.  Start from the beginning.
THE WITNESS: Because I cannot assume, you know.  I am not in an assuming position.
Q.  Let's me assume, then, that neither I nor the prosecutor was and start from point 1.
A.  Scratch?

Q.  Scratch.
A.  So, munitions, you know, ammo, it can be used also as an explosive device.
Q.  Well, let's define "munitions"?
A.  That's ordnance.
Q.  That's ordinance without the "I"   with the understanding than we are talking about something that is made to be used and is used in weapons as opposed to expressly for the purpose of demolition; all right?  Now, apart from the use of munitions in the Congo, did you also have to fabricate and make use of demolition material like C4, or plastic explosive, or with time delay fuses, and that kind of stuff?  Did you do than as well?
A.  It was there.  It was part of the supply.
Q.  So, then, you used both ammunition or ordnance, on the one hand, and demolitions material on the other; is that correct?
A.  Well, all depends if I was fighting with a machine gun, you know, I cannot throw a hand grenade at the same time.
Q.  But, you used them both when you were in the Congo?
A.  Oh, yes.
Q.  On how many occasions, if at all while you

were in the Congo, did you either detonate or put into place for detonation some demolitions material as opposed to shooting off a round of something than would be classified as ordnance?
A.  On several occasions, numerous occasions, on thousands of occasions, every time that there was a fire fight or a practical joke going on.
Q.  Did you actually use and detonate demolitions material in the Congo?
A.  Yes.
Q.  On more than a dozen occasions?
A.  Yes.
Q.  On more than a dozen occasions?
A.  Yes.
Q.  Were they antipersonal devices as well as devices intended to destroy property or buildings or clear land or something else?
A.  Of course.
Q.  On how many occasions would you say you used or assisted in the use of any personal explosive devices?
A.  First of all, there is what you characterize what antipersonal device is?
Q.  How do you understand the term?  What does the term mean -- that's what I should ask you?
A.  Well, that could apply to land mines, that could apply to booby traps, that could apply to

hand grenades.
Q.  All right.  Something that is intended to kill or injure a human as opposed to blow up a building; okay?
A.  I am going to correct my answer according to the words that you are trying to put in my mouth that it was for the purpose of inflicting casualties to the enemy.
Q.  I understand that.
A.  You understand that.
A.  You understand? Right.
Q.  That's the synonym or the euphemism that you showed on Friday?
A.  No, this is a military terminology.
Q.  Well --
A.  Of all the armies in all the world.  That's what war is all about.
MR. WILLIAMS: Prosecutor, do you understand that answer to contemplate the use of synonym or euphemism that the witness chose on Friday?
Q.  Can you tell me on how many occasions you did make use of demolitions or explosives for antipersonal purposes?
A.  I threw about a whole case of hand grenades

on one occasion.
Q.  How many is that?
A.  Twenty-four.
Q.  I assume, certainly, that there were more occasions than one on which you threw hand grenades?
A.  And many occasions that I couldn't even recall, you know, under the pressure.
Q.  Then, it would just be accurate to say that during the period of time that you were in the Belgium Congo, that you made extensive use of demolitions for antipersonal purposes?
A.  No, it is incorrect.
Q.  What would be correct?
A.  Extensive use of an automatic rifle.
Q.  Did you also make extensive use of explosives for antipersonal purposes while you were in the Belgium Congo?  Remember, if you can, yes or no, and then, explain?
A.  Yes.
Q.  Did you ever perceive as a matter of fact, at least within reasonable limits and a reasonable act, to form such perception that your use of any antipersonal explosives had been successful, as you would say, inflicting casualties, and as I would say, killing somebody?  Did you ever perceive that that had

also been accomplished?
A.  I wasn't in the business.
Q.  Without regard to how many there were?
A.  I don't know.
Q.  I'm not asking you how many.  I'm asking you whether --
A.  I don't know.  If you throw a hand grenade, you don't know what's going on on the other side.  You move out from your position, because when a hand grenade goes off from your side, there goes a clink of the spoon.
Then, you are giving up your position.  Then, you roll back -- come on, Douglas.  What kind of question is that?
Q.  Do I understand you to be telling me, then, Mr. Morales, that for so long as you were in the Belgium Congo in the 1960's, you have no idea whether you inflicted even the first casualty on a human being as a result of your use of explosives? You don't know.
A. Oh, I do know.
Q.  Did you?
A.  About casualties?
Q.  Yes, did you inflict casualties?
A.  Oh, I saw a lot of people dead on both

Q.  Under circumstances that would cause you to feel that some of the people whom you regarded as your enemy died as a result of your use of explosives or demolitions?
A.  I never run ballistics on them.
Q.  I said, your demolitions or explosives?
A.  I don't know.  I never ran ballistics on them.
What if there are 150 guys doing the same thing you are doing? Who is going to get the credit?
Q.  Mr. Morales, if you went to a specified location and planted an explosive device and left the area and detonated it or allowed it to detonate, depending upon what it was, and then, you returned to the area and saw bodies lying around, would you reasonably assume that your explosion had been responsible for the results that you saw?
A.  But, that was not the case.
Q.  I am asking you, would you?
A.  Of course.
Q.  Did that ever happen during the entire period of time that you were in the Belgium Congo?
A.  Well, I never placed it myself.  I mean, with regard to booby traps and land mines and things.
PAGE 100

Q.  Any kind of demolition?
A.  The whole team goes there.  Everybody does his little job.
If somebody gets hurt or some casualty, I will inflict it to the enemy.
If you want a piece of an arm for you, or you want the head of the guy for you, or the feet -- whatever you split it.
Q.  However you chose to segment it or apportion responsibility, that is fine with me.  I don't suppose it makes much difference.
A.  The guy who dropped the bomb, he is in Russia, or the guy who built the bomb back there in the Alamo -- wherever they were.  Come on, Douglas.
Q.  Here's my question to you, Ricky: For as long as you were in the Belgium Congo, did you ever become aware that your use of demolitions or explosives or your participation in the preparation of demolitions and explosives resulted in the deaths or the casualties, or whatever you want to call them, of people against whom you were fighting?  Did you ever become aware of that, or did you serve all of you time in the Congo without knowing whether you ever killed the first person with any kind of explosive?
PAGE 101

A.  Actually, you can't tell from explosives because if you fire a mortar; all right, you don't know if there are more mortars going on at the same time.  You don't know if the one that you dropped -- what about if you are holding the tube?  Then, who is responsible -- the guy who dropped the shell, or the one who holds the tube?
In my opinion, the one who is responsible is the one who done run around the place and gets hit.
Q.  Then, your testimony is that, as you sit here now, you don't know whether, during the entire period of time you were in the Belgium Congo working for or with the C.I.A. during the 60's, you were responsible for the first death or casualty of anybody through the use of explosives?  You don't know that?
A.  Explosives -- it's impossible, Douglas.
Q.  You don't know it?
A.  It is impossible.  It is quite impossible to determine it.
There were a lot of them, but I cannot determine, you know, if they were mine or the guy next to me or themself or somebody else.
We were not the only ones there.  I was not the only one there.
Q.  It was clearly your effort and your intention
PAGE 102

to ha ve the demolitions that you placed or fabricated or threw or whatever result in death or casualty, wasn't it your intention?
A.  Inflicting casualties to the enemy and survival.
Q.  Would you give me a yes or no, please, sir?
A.  Yes.
Q.  So that if your particular explosive had the effect that was desired and intended, it would be something that you specifically intended to do; correct?
A.  Say that again?
Q.  If a particular explosive device that you placed or that you fabricated did what it was supposed to do, that would be something that you had intended that it do; isn't that correct?
A.  Yes, because you don't only use demolition to destroy human life or beings.  You use it to demolish a bridge or to cut down a highway, you know, railroads lines and airlines, and things like that; right?
Q.  How long were you in the Congo, by the way?
A.  Over six months.
That's how far the whole war lasted.
We were - we sped up the end.  It had last
PAGE 103

a little longer.
Q.  Have you ever now that you mention it, either fabricated or assisted in the fabrication of an explosive or placed or assisted in the placement of an explosive that blew up an airliner?  Have you ever done that?
A.  Say that again?
Q.  Have you ever --
A.  I'm going o cut it short for you.  Yes.
Q.  Oh how many different occasions?
A.  One.
Q.  When and where?
A.  Barbados.
Q.  When, please, sir?
A.  1976.
Let me correct myself, so I won't have to do it tomorrow.
The craft involved was a communist Air Force plane from the Republic of Cuba.
Q.  How many people were on board?
A.  There were, including North Korean spies, Gwyenas, Cadres, DGI personnel, and Air Force officers of the Cuban Air Force, and assorted members of the Cuban Communist Party.
There is a big discrepancy, which I believe
PAGE 104

that the government of Cuba is the only one who can come up with the exact figure.
Q.  What is the best information you have?
A.  According to the Press, which is, to the best of my knowledge, is wrong, 73.
Q.  Did you place that explosive device on the aircraft, or did you fabricate it?
A.  No, I did not place it, and I did not fabricate it.
Q.  What part did you have in that incident?
A.  In that incident?
Q.  Yes, what did you do?
A.  Oh, I was part of the conspirators.
Q.  What specific part did you play that resulted in the blowing up of that airplane?
A.  Oh, surveillance of the regular flights of that Cuban Air Force plane, providing by a third party the explosives.
Q.  Is that to say that you made available the explosives to the people who actually did the manual work through a third person as intermediary?
A.  Yes.
Q. What was the part in that incident or episode so far as you know played by Dr. Bosch?
A.  None whatsoever.
PAGE 105

You have heard that he has been implicated in it or accused of it; haven't you?
A.  Oh, in fact, I arrested him.
Q.  Is it your testimony -- did you arrest him for that episode?
A.  I was ordered to arrest Dr. Orlando Bosch and produce him to my immediate superior, Deputy Dr. Rafael Rivas Vasquez.
Q.  This is then while you were with DISIP?
A.  That was at the time that I was commissar in charge of Division 54.
Q.  So, did you actually arrest Dr. Bosch and deliver him over?
A.  I went out of the headquarters along with one of my inspectors to the location that was provided to me by my immediate superior, and I went into the house, and since Orlando Bosch has been already informed that I was on my way down there to pick him up, he was waiting for me, and after having lunch, at that house, I proceeded to return Dr. Orlando Bosch to the main building of the DISIP in Caracas.
Q.  Is it your testimony, as you sit here now, Mr. Morales, that to your knowledge, regardless of the source of your knowledge, wherever it came from, Orlando Bosch had no connection either directly or
PAGE 106

indirectly with the demolition of that airplane?
A.  He has no guilty whatsoever.
Q.  Well, let's not confuse ourselves with evaluate concepts.
A.  Let's not confuse myself.
Q.  Let's not get involved -- I'm asking you about the realities of it?
A.  He has nothing to do with it all.
Q.  At the time that you furnished the explosives, did you know that they were going to be used to sabotage or blow up that airplane?
A.  Not at the beginning, and the source of explosive, Mr. Williams, was a result of the search that was executed by agents of my division in a house that suspected of being used by foreign intelligence enemies, and there was a lot of material that was seized there, and there was some explosives that they were found there, which were, of course, turned over to the Explosives end and Disposal Division of the DISIP, and that's where -- that's from where, later on, the explosives found their way into this Cuban Air Force plane.
Q.  Were you responsible either directly or indirectly for the explosives finding their way eventually into the airplane?
PAGE 107

A.  I share.
Q.  Did you know at the time that you --
A.  I share the responsibility.
Q.  I understand.
Did you know at the time that you took whatever steps were necessary in order for the explosives to be put on their path that eventually wound up inside the airplane?
A.  Of course.
Q.  Did you know that they were going to be used to explode the airplane?
A.  Of course.
Q.  Dr. Bosch was specifically charged with either perpetrating that incident, himself, or having assisted in putting it together; wasn't he?  Wasn't he charged with that in Venezuela?
A.  He is still in jail.
Q.  My question to you, sir, is whether he was charged with responsibility for that incident?
A.  That is why he is still in jail.
Q.  May I take that as a yes?
Q.  Did you assist in the prosecution, in any way?
PAGE 108

A.  Nope.
Q.  Did you provide the Venezuelan government with any evidence that was used against him?
A.   No.
Q.  Have you, at any time, attempted to inform any authorities of your knowledge or believe, whatever it is, that Dr. Bosch had no part in the incident?
A.  Yes.
Q.  When?
A.  To the media and to his attorney.
Q.  How recently?
A.  Last year.  December and January.
Q.  What happened to those efforts on your part, Ricky, to let them know that Bosch was innocent?
A.  I have no knowledge, whatsoever, of the situation over there after.
Q.  But, he still is in jail?
A.  Let me finish, Douglas.
Q.  I'm sorry, Ricky.
A.  I'm sorry, Douglas, but let me finish.  I am not finished yet.
Q.  Please go ahead.
A.  I have no knowledge, whatsoever, of what has become of my disclosures to the media there, and my disclosures to Orlando Bosch's attorney, but as far
PAGE 109

as I know, for all I know in this world, which is very uncertain, the future of -- he is still in San Carlos Military Prison in Caracas.
He might have escaped yesterday, you know.  He might have passed away at the same time that we are talking now.
You don't know.  That happens to living people.
Q.  At the time that you told Dr. Bosch's lawyer and the media of his innocence, did you also, in effect, accept responsibility or confess involving to the extend that you had it in that episode?
A.  Don't put the word confess. I didn't confess.  I confess to a priest; okay?
Q.  You know what I am saying, though.
Did you disclose your involvement and say, "I know he wasn't involved in it because I was, and he wasn't there"?
A.  Well, I disclosed the conspiracy.  I disclosed the actual, you know, operation, and I disclosed the facts of the coverup.
Q.  I'm sorry.  Go ahead.  Were you finished?
A.  Go ahead.
Q.  Did you disclose publicly your involvement in the episode?
PAGE 110

A.  Watch my face.
Q.  Is that a yes, sir?
A.  Yes.
Q.  Why wasn't Dr. Bosch let out of jail; do you know?
A.  That answer -- that has to be referred to the Venezuelans.
(Off the record.)
THE WITNESS: Let me get one thing straight in my mind is that supposedly every word that I speak here is being taken down by the court reporter; right?
Q.  Everything that has pertinence to the case, yes.
A.  Okay.  So, you know, I have detected that the court reporter, on the cases that I have been talking or referring to incidents that has been put up by counsel, you know, have not been taken down by her.
Q.  No, that is not correct.
A.  That is correct, and I don't want to get into the procedure to be keeping an eye on her.
Q.  You don't have to worry about that.
A.  Oh, yes, I do.
Q.  Now, let's make sure that the record is
PAGE 111

Number one, if you see the court reporter with her hands not moving at a particular time --
A.  And I'm not talking, and she is not moving her hands, that means than she is not talking down whatever I am saying?
Q.  No, not at all, but I have seen her moving all the time that you talk.
Now, you made your statement, and I am no inviting you to argue with me.  The record speaks for itself, obviously.
MS. COHAN: When it does speak.
Q.  When you see the court reporter's hands not moving from time to time, it's because of her technique and her timing.  I assure you that if the prosecutor ever thought the testimony of yours were being omitted from recordation, and therefore, transcription, the prosecutor would make it known, and do whatever she thought was appropriate about it in matters that are known to us as lawyers.
A.  What do I care is that every time that I talk, I want to see her hands.
Q.  Well, Mr. Morales --
PAGE 112
A.  Banging that machine.
Q.  Well, I really don't much care what you want.  She is going to take the deposition.
A.  But, I do care. I do care. I don't care if you don't care, but I do care.
Q.  She is going to take the deposition in the fashion that she sees fit, and if you think that anything that you have said so far has been omitted from the deposition, then, you go right now with prosecutor, so that the prosecutor can come back and tell us, on the record, the particular areas that you feel some testimony of yours has been omitted, and if the prosecutor makes an appropriate objection, then, we will go down before the Judge right now and have the tapes examined to determine whether they are accurate or not.
Mr. Carhart and Mr. Arias and Mr. Quesada and I are going to leave the room now until you tell us, Ms. Cohan, you are ready for us to resume, so Mr. Morales can tell us all the particulars in which you think the court reporter has omitted the reporting of any of Mr. Morales' testimony.
MS. COHAN: I would indicate prior to your leaving, that there have been occasions throughout the
PAGE 113

past two and a half days when counsel and Mr. Morales have engaged in bickering during which the court
reporter was not taking down the bickering.  I do not consider those matters evidentiary, and those are the only matters that I know of that have not been transcribed.
MR. WILLIAMS: All right, but I don't want this deposition to go forward with there being any doubt appearing of record as to the accuracy of the tapes that are being made, and therefore, the transcripts that they will eventually produce, so I invite the witness, once again, to confer with you out of our hearing, so that when we resume this deposition in five minutes, it appears unequivocally that there have been no omissions of any testimony at all to eliminate the specter of that, and if you are of the feeling that any testimonial statements have been eliminated, Ms. Cohan, then put of record what you think to have been eliminated.
MR. CARHART: She has already made her statement as to her position, and if Mr. Morales has an objection to the procedure, let him state his objection.
Ms. Cohan is a competent lawyer.  She is representing the State.  If something needs correcting,
PAGE 114

I am sure she can do it.
THE WITNESS: I second Mr. Carhart.
MR. CARHART: So, let's go forward.
This is my time, and it's valuable, so let's go forward.
THE WITNESS: Let's go forward.
Q.  Do you want the opportunity, Mr. Morales, to confer privately with the prosecutor?
A.  I already agreed with Mr. Carhart.
Q.  I take that as a no, then.
Now, Ms. Court Reporter, where were we?
(Whereupon, the last question and answer were read into the record.)
Q.  Do you know for a fact, Mr. Morales, that the information that you attempted to impart concerning Dr. Bosch's noninvolvement in that episode was, in fact, received by people in authority in Venezuela?
A.  As far as I am concerned, it was given to Dr. Bosch's attorney, and it was disseminated to the whole Venezuelan citizens through the media.
Q.  Well, then, what, to your knowledge, is or could be the reason or reasons for his still being
PAGE 115

incarcerated for a crime that you say he didn't commit?
A.  I don't know.
Q.  Do you believe that you are presently a person who does not have credibility with the Venezuelan governmental establishment?
A.  I don't know.
Q.  Do you have that feeling?
A.  No.
Q.  Do you feel that your stature in their eyes is such that they would be inclined to believe anything that you tell them?
A.  Yes.
Q.  Is there any other possible explanation that you can venture, then, for the reason that apparently, even though you have proclaimed Dr. Bosch's innocence, he is still being held prisoner for a crime that you say he didn't commit?
A.  To start with , Mr. Williams, Dr. Bosch was acquitted by a lower military court, and there is another court on top of that lower military court that will have to determine if the findings of the lower court are going to stand, because he is not under civilian indictment or judicial assistance -- whatever you want to call it.  He is in the hands of the military.
PAGE 116
There is a lower military court that has exonerated Orlando Bosch of any responsibility with regard to the bombing of the Cuban Air Force plane, and it's up to a superior military tribunal to upheld, or whatever, you know.
Q.  Reverse?
A.  Reverse, you know, the decision of that lower military court.
Q.  Did you ever come to have knowledge of the published passenger manifest indicating the people who, according to the public media, were passengers on that airplane?
A.  Yes.
Q.   Didn't you learn that there were on board several women who ostensibly were traveling as spouses or mates or partners to some of  the men on board?
A.  They fall in the category of assorted communist party members.
Q.  Give me a yes or no?  Yes, you did, but --
A.  That there were women  aboard?
Q.  Yes.
A.  Yes.
Q.  Did you also learn, sir, that there were children under the age of eighteen on board that
PAGE 117

A.  I didn't know that there were any children on board.
  Q.  You haven't learned that?
A.  No, I haven't learned that.
Q.  If, in fact, there were children under the age of eighteen on board that airplane, would you still regard them as being communist sympathizers under any circumstances?
A.  I will consider them -- that is preposterous because I have no knowledge about that, but that is preposterous, but to please you, Williams, I will say that they will belong to the Youth Communist Organization, and in due time, they will become full-fledged communists.
Q.  Not anymore.
A.  Well, not anymore in their cases.
Q.  After the Congo, but before the airline bombing in 1976, the airplane bombing in 1976, would you tell me of any other incidents in which you have participated either directly or indirectly in the use of demolitions?
A.  Training.  I have trained people.
Q.  No, I am talking about the use of demolitions in an offensive way or with the intent that
PAGE 118

they have some real effect on people or things?
A.  Yes, yes.
Q.  You told me one. Please, sir, what are the others?
A.  Rodriguez' Market.  That was the couple of communist , you know, that were running the market.
Q.  When was that, please, sir?
A.  I don't recall the dates, William.
Q.  Well, give me, if you can, approximately?
A.  I don't recall the dates on that now.  You know, it was in the 60's.
Q.  Sometime in the 60's?
A.  Sometime in the 60's.
Q.  Where, please, sir?
A That market was located in Hialeah.
Q.  What did you do with regard to the Rodriguez' Market, Mr. Morales?
A.  I assisted the bomber.
Q.  In what way?
A.  In the confection of the explosive device.
Q.  I didn't hear the word that you used -- in the what of the explosive device?
A.  Confection, manufacture, put it together.
Q.  Who was the bomber?
A.  He is dead.
PAGE 119

Q.  Who was he, please, sir?
A.  Ramon Cubenas Conde.
Q.  Say the last name, please?
A.  Cubenas, C-u-b-e-n-a-s.
Q.  What is the matronimic last name?
A.  Conde, C-o-n-d-e.
Q.  What kind of explosive was used?
A.  Pentolite.
Q.  Was anybody physically injured?
A.  Nope.
Q.  Just property destruction?
A.  Yes.
Q.  Subsequently to your return or departure from the Congo, after the Rodriguez' Market, what was the next incident of your participation in any way at all of any demolition or preparation of explosives?
A.  1966. There were about five or six more bombings.
Q.  Where, please, sir?
A.  In the Miami area.
Q.  What was the nature of your participation in them?
A.  1966, 1967.  Some of them, I put the explosives together, and some of them were placed by me.
PAGE 120

There was a time when they started trading with the enemy, and they became part of a hit list.  Whoever was trading with the Castro government was being bombed.
It's part of, you know, Miami history.
Q.  Can you remember any specific places that were bombed in which you had the participation that you just described?
A.  Bacu -- something like that.
Q.  B-a-c-u?
A.  Something along those lines.
Q.  What was that?
A.  I believe that that was located in Coral Way.
Q.  What kind of a place was it?
A.  Well, you see, I'm wrong on that, because than was  1968, because the day that, you know, that my little job there in Flagler was foiled, you know, by a second group, that night, I believe that we hit about four different places, which don't even ask me the names of the places, because they are forgotten.
Q.  But, they were all places where you placed or detonated explosive devices?
A.  Or drive and somebody will step out of the car, you know, and place it.  Usually, I was the one,
PAGE 121

you know, stripping the -- the Ore Verde freighter.
I built up the bomb, which goes part of the --
Q. I'm sorry -- you did what to the bomb, sir?
A.  I built it up, but I didn't place it.  It was somebody else.  It was given to somebody else.
Q.  To whom was it given?
A.  Huh?
Q.  To whom was it given?
A.  Alanis was the last name of the kid who actually jumped in the water to attach.
Didn't go off, by the way.
Q.  Who had him do it?
A.  Huh?
Q.  Who had him do it?
A.  Huh?
Q. Who had him do it?
A.  We, at that time, I belonged to an organization by the name of ESA, Ejercito Secreto Anticomunista.
We burned down the FORDC.
Q.  What is that?
A.  That was a place on 1st Street between 9th and 8th Avenue that was used by local Castro symphatizers to gather, and that place became a nuisance, so it was burned down to the ground.
Q.  Now, when you use the word, the term, "we," are you talking about the other members of this group,
PAGE 122

A.  That is right.
Q.   Then, insofar as the Ore Verde was concerned --
A.  The Ore Verde was not -- it was a helping hand that we lent to somebody, and I built up the bomb, you know, and gave it to them.
It's part of the museum here.  It was a masterpiece.
Q.  Who was the people to whom you gave it?
A.  To this guy Alanis.
Q.  With whom was he working?
A.  Another group.  There were ninety different groups.
Q.  Do you know the name of the group?
A.  Some kind of anticommunist legion, or something like that.
Groups escape my mind, Williams.
Q.  All right, Mr. Morales.
You told us about the Rodriguez' Market and the five or six during 1966.
A.  Oh, Cab Calloway's house -- what was his name?  The last was -- it was funny, because after, you know, the house was bombed, and the Fire Department got there, they found, I believe, twenty-four pounds of grass.
PAGE 123

There was a big spread in the news next day.
Q.  Not burned, I hope?
A.  No, it was in some other place in the house.
MR. CARHART: It was drying in the back yard.
Q.  Who was the owner of the house at the time?
A.  Cab Calloway.
Q.  Oh, he, himself, was?
A.  Oh, yes, he, himself, was.
I'm trying to recall his last name.
Q.  Why was the house bombed?
A.  Some antagonistic reasons between somebody and somebody.
Q.  Well, I gather that there was some antagonism there because folks just don't go around bombing the house of people for whom they feel enduring love.
Q.  Well, was it for some political reason, Mr. Morales, or was it more to do with business or narcotics or commerce or -
A.  No, no narcotics was 150 miles away from anybody's you know, mind, in those days.
Q.  Back in those days, everybody wasn't --
A.  MS. COHAN: Of narcotics charges.
PAGE 124

Q.  I meant in the kind of more dramatic sense, you know, than the literary sense.
Why was Cab Calloway's house bombed?
A.  He made some derogatory remarks, got into some brawl with another common friend, and we just went by there and put a bomb to the house, and that was the end of it, you know, and it was a surprise to everybody that there was grass inside the house.
Q.  Well, now, I know, for example, if I want to give my friend Carhart a party and really surprise him, I will go out and spend a hundred bucks for one of those big cakes with a pretty lady inside delivered.
I get the impression that somebody must have disliked Cab Calloway an awful lot?
A.  Oh, I did for sure.
Q.  (Continuing) -- to spend that kind of money.
What does something like that cost, or what did it cost back then?
A.  What?
Q.  To have his hose bombed?
A.  What do you mean "cost"?
Q.  To pay the people to do it and buy the materials and that kind of stuff?
A.  No, the material was free around town.  It
PAGE 125

was floating.  There were pounds and pounds and pounds of C4 and dynamite and blasting caps.
Miami was a powder keg.  In terms of money, cost nothing.  I mean, anybody could, you know, give you -- "You've got any C4?"  Yes, I've got fifty pounds."  "Okay.  Let me have ten pounds."
Q.  Kind of like fronting somebody some dope later on?
A.  Huh?
Q.  Kind of like of fronting somebody some dope?
A.  I disagree with you.  There is a misture there that does not apply to whatever you are trying to imply.
Q.  You are right. It's not an accurate analogy.
Did you do it for free, or were you paid for it?
A.  That was for the fun of it.
Q.  Who else did it with you?  Who else was with you?
A.  Oh, Francisco Rodriguez Tamayo, also known as Panchita Jabon Candado.
(Benedict Kuehne, Esq., entered the room.)
(Off the record.)
PAGE 126

Q.  You told me that you bombed Mr. Calloway's house for free?
A.  Yes, that was a free ride.
Actually, I was driving.  Panchita is the one who stepped out of the car for the first time.
MR. CARHART: Where was the bomb placed?
THE WITNESS: By the air conditioner.
Q.  Tell me of any episodes that you recall of either planting a bomb or fabricating one?
A.  Oh, there was so many groups at the time that we reload practice hand grenades, and there were about three or four different bomb factories going on in Miami, and we were giving a helping hand to whatever group, you know, wants to get and assemble bombs and things like that.
In later years, Alpha 66 suffered intensively from a series of attacks with incendiary devices and things like than banging in the night, and they were moving from one place to another.
Q.  Were you involved in any of those attacks?
A.  No, not at all in the attacks, you know.
I was in the neighborhood.
Q.  Doing what?
PAGE 127

A.  Supervising the attacks.
You have to understand, there were about ninety different groups in Miami, and everybody was quarreling among each other.
Q.  At the time, Ricky, were you also maintaining any official or semiofficial contact with any governmental agency?
A.  No. I was parking cars.
The first time that I got into the payroll again was in 1968 when I agreed to cooperate with the Federal Bureau of Investigations, and they placed me in the category of being a paid informant.
Q.  Where were you parking cars?
A.  Oh, I parked cars at the Americana Hotel.
Q.  Were you gathering any Intelligence information while you were working there?
A.  Where?
Q.  At the Americana?
A.  No, I was gathering quarters.  Quarters and quarters and quarters.
I had a wife and three kids at the time.
Q.  Can you remember any more bombings in which you participated between the time you left the Congo and the time of the Cuban Airliner incident?
A.   Do I have to rack my brains now for that, or
PAGE 128

can we do it --
Q.  I really would appreciate it if you would, Ricky.  I absolutely must ask you to rack all of your brains.
A.  To rack all of my brains?  Okay.
Let's say -- the Ore Verde -- well, because the Ore Verde is like a turning point, you know.
Q.  How so?
A.  How so?  Because the alliance that we have with, you know, two to four different groups was broke there because there was no excuse why the time device pencils, you know, there was an acid cap -- they were not crushed, and that's the reason why the bomb was discovered, and the motivation that we found out for attacking that freighter was unreasonable.
The freighter was not going any kind of business with the Cuban government, so, you know, that stirred a lot more bickering, you know, and things like that.
Q.  Wasn't that checked out beforehand?  I mean, why was the Ore Verde taken?
A.  Well, you have to believe sometimes in the word of somebody, you know, and --
Q.  So, you got bad information?
PAGE 129

A.  Yes.
Q.  And the detonating device malfunction, was that the fault of the kid Alanis who put it on the boat?
A.  That's been up into speculation for years.  Either he chickened out, or he did it on purpose, or whatever the things is that he never crushed the capsule.
Q.  Well, now, let me see.
There have been other times when you have given the appearance of being involved with or in league with a bomber when he thought that you were giving him legitimate explosives, but you really weren't isn't that correct?
A.  That is the Orlando Bosch case.
Q.  Okay, so although we will talk about that more later on, what happened with Dr. Bosch here was that you were delivering large quantities of what he thought was legitimate dynamite to him, but it was actually dummy dynamite?
A.  Under orders from the F.B.I.   I was carrying orders from the F.B.I.
Q.  You were giving him dummy explosives?
A.  Yes.
Q.  Did you do that in the Ore Verde case?
PAGE 130

A.  No, the Ore Verde was pentolite.
It's at the bomb museum there.
Q.  My question to you is whether you, yourself, had something to do with the malfunction of the detonator?
A.  No, it was not that.
Q.  You intended the bomb to go off?
A.  No -- of course, when I built it up, that was the intention, of course.
Q.  Can you remember any other incident or episode in which you have participated in bombings or the placing of bombs either directly or indirectly
A.  The Mexican Consulate.
Q.  Recently?
A.  No.
The Mexican Consulate moved at the time out of town.  He was bombed so many times, you know, that it was incredible.
Q.  The guy was just blown up about f our months ago or so, and it blew up a lot of my books and rugs and things.  You better not have had anything to do with that Mexican Consulate bombing.
A.  I wish he could get bombed again.  I am in complete disagreement with the Mexican policies in regard to my country.
PAGE 131

(Off the record.)
Q.  When did you participate in the bombing of the Mexican Consulate, and where was it located at the time?
A. There was the Mexican Consulate, and there was the Mexican Tourist Office, and as far as I can recall, one of the buildings where they were housed was on Biscayne Boulevard.
Q.  Approximately when?
A.  Approximately what?
Q.  Approximately when, please, sir?
A.  During that bombing campaign in 1966-1967, beginning of 1968, could be.
Q.  Again, was there any physical harm done to anybody, any personal injury?
A.  No, no.  Nobody ever got hurt.  There were no human casualties, whatsoever.
Q.  Why was that?
A.  Because of, you know, the time that the devices were being set up, you know, and luck and God was on our side, but we never have to regret in those days that any innocent bystander was getting hit.
Besides that, the amount of explosives that was used was intended only to cause the purpose of ,
PAGE 132

you know, a certain limit of damage.
Q.  Continue to tell me, then, of any other incidents or episodes you can recall in which you were involved either directly or indirectly in a bombing or the fabrication of a bomb?
A.  Douglas, at the time, you were running from one house to another, from one organization to another, was doing their little bombings, yourself, you know, and that doesn't mean necessarily that I ha ve anything to do with them.  Even you have to understand.
Q.  Yes, I agree. I would only want for you to tell me about --
A.  It was a very confusing period, and the best of my recollection right now, to the best of my recollection, racking my brains, that's about it.
Q.  Well, I wouldn't want you to tell me about just kind of, you know, any distance or remote involvement that you had if you have a blasting cap to somebody who gave it to somebody else who came to tell you that they were going to go out three days later and blow up a pig farm.  I don't care about that.
I only care about things in which you were directly involved either by placing a device, fabricating it, knowing specifically when and where it was going to be placed?
PAGE 133

A.  So far, the ones I mentioned to you, and in 1968, I have this disaster, you have to understand that, and the bombs, the bombing campaign was the 8th of January, 1968, and February the 14th, I was arrested.
That was a disaster.  I wound up in jail for an extensive amount of time.
Q.  That's the disaster for which you refer to your having been arrested?
A.  Right.  That was a disaster.
A bombing campaign was going on.  At the same time that I was in the County Jail, bombs were going off all over the City, and if I had been out, people might have been thinking, or actually, might have been aware of them, or been instrumental of them, which I was not.
For instance, two days afterwards, I come out with a bond, Les Violins --
Q.  The restaurant?
A.  That could have been around, I went into the County Jail in February, and I came out, I believe, the 1st of March.
Q.  How high was your bond, by the way?  Do you remember?
A.  Hold it.  Hold it.
PAGE 134

Q.  Four million dollars?
A.  The what?
Q.  Your bond?
A.  [Y bond -- four million dollars?
Q.  How high was it?
A.  No, 25,000.  It amounted to four million to me in 1968.
Q.  So, the disaster you refer to was your being arrested?
A.  Right.
Q.  With what bombing were you specifically charged?
A.  With the one that I mentioned to you before in West Flagler -- the one of the double bombing, so I was $25,000 -- the amount of the bond, and by this time, I think there was so many bombs going off in Miami, I became a suspect for every one of them.
You know, like t here is a rash of burglaries, and they got one guy, he's supposedly  responsible with everything else, so a couple of days or three days after, you know, I was released on bond.
I had previously knowledge that a bomb was going to be placed at the fountain, that is, you know, outside of Les Violins on Biscayne Boulevard, which
PAGE 135

was done by another group.
I have no assistance, but I had knowledge, you know, so you know, the bomb went off, too, but by this time, you know, I had the F.B.I. on top of me, and I agreed with them to infiltrate the Cuban power organization of Dr. Orlando Bosch.
Q.  Well, you really didn't have too much infiltrating to do; did you?  I mean, everybody knew you; it was just a question of walking up and saying, "Hi, it's me, Ricky, and now, I'm going to spend some time with you"; isn't that about it?
A.  More or less.
Q.  I mean, Jesus, Ricky, everybody on the street knew you?
A.  Right.
Q.  I assume that you knew you didn't have to put on a trench coat and a hat and a cape?
A.  No, nothing like that.
Q.  Sneak around and wear disguises?
A.  No, nothing like that.  I was moving freely.
Q.  It was just making yourself available to him; isn't that what it amounts to?
A.  To whom?
Q.  To the folks whom at the F.B.I. wanted you
PAGE 136

A.  Actually, coming down to the point, if I recollect correctly, I made myself visible, available to them, and the doctor just came up to me.
Q.  Sure.  I mean, all you had to do is like putting --
A.  Standing on a street corner, and that's it.
Q.  Putting a piece of bloody meat in front of a shark; right, you know, it's going to come.  Is that about it?
A.  Those are your words.
Q.  All right.  So, you put yourself out there and made it known that you were available if Dr. Bosch wanted to have the benefit of your experience and services, and he came running right on to it; huh?
A.  That's about it.
Q.  Now, we'll come back to that in a while, but I'd like to finish cataloging any other bombing episodes or incidents in which you participated one way or the other, so let's come forward now after the 60's period, and the period of anti-Castro activity that you have described here in Miami, and let's have you tell me whether there are yet other incidents of bombing in which you participated either directly or
PAGE 137

A.  Okay.  Now, we are getting to the 70's?
Q.  Yes.
A.  Let me rack my memory again.  I will rack my memory again, you know, in the course of the rest of the nighttime about the 60's just in case you want to go over again that, you know, whatever.
I am going to try to do my best now racking my head.
In the 70's, I supplied hand grenades to a fellow by the name of Roberto Parsons than he used it against a household of an individual by the name of Leon.  They have a personal bickering, or whatever it was, so --
Q.  What was Mr. Leon's first name?
A.  I don't know.  His nickname is Puyi, so I gave Roberto a hand grenade.
Q.  Where did you the get grenade from?
A.  From the streets.  There were hundreds and thousands of them.  You know, it was not that -- anybody from anybody specifically.
Q.  Were they of American manufacturer origin?
A.  Yes, it was an M26.
Q.  So, what are you telling me, in the early 70's in Miami, anybody who ever began to know the
PAGE 138

right folks could go out and get hand grenades, C4's, anything?
A.  Anything.  That's Miami's life story.  You cannot deny it.  It's been that way since the 50's.
Q.  Was the disaffection between Mr. Parsons and the one called Leon political, or was it just personal?
A.  Personal.
Q.  How did you know t he one called Parsons?
A.  Roberto, since the time that we worked together in the Free Commandos Organization in the early 60's
Q.  What is that?
A.  Another organization.  There were about ninety of them.
Q.  So, as far as Parons was concerned, as I said before, to the extent that anybody who knew the right people could go anyplace in Miami and get anything, to Parsons, you were the right person; huh?
A.  Maybe he talked to somebody else, but finally, he wind up with me.
Q.  Did you have any more active participation in the bombing of the Leon residence than just giving the grenade to Parsons?
A.  That was it.
PAGE 139

Q.  Did you plant it or --
A.  No.
Q.  Or stage it, or anything like that?
A.  No.
Q.  Are there any others?
A.  Alpha 66 again.
Q.  When, this time?
A.  1972.  I believe it was 1972.  There were so many.  There were some other people bombing Alpha.
Q.  It sounds to me, if you didn't have anything better to do, you just go out an bomb Alpha 66 just for the hell of it to keep in practice almost?
MS.  COHAN: He was parking cars.
THE WITNESS: And in 1973 --
Q.  Let me just ask you about the 1972 Alpha 66 bombing.
What was your participation in it?
A.  I told the bomber, "Go and bomb them, so they will have to move from 12th Avenue and 6th Street."
Q.  So, that was one that you, in effect, arranged and staged rather than one that you physically did yourself?
PAGE 140

A.  Well, I ordered it, which is different than to arrange and stage.
Q.  I would say so.  How would your --
A.  No, I wouldn't say so.  It's different.
Q.  I would certainly say it's different.   It certainly is a big deal of difference.
Now, what I need to know is, how had your position or stature in the community changed in the Latin community, so you were then in the position to order a bombing?
A.  Because --
Q.  It's like going from maitre d' to head chef.
How come all of a sudden, were you able to say, "You go out and put a bomb there."  What happened to put you in that position?
A.  Douglas, I don't have, you know, an answer for that.  It's just like, you know, I told this friend of mine, "Go and bomb them," you know.
Q.  Let me see if I can help you out because my guess is than even Ricardo Morales sometimes can be a little bit modest.
Tell me if this is accurate: By the time the early 70's had come around, obviously, you had gotten a reputation on the streets of Miami as somebody
PAGE 141

being very knowledgeable pertaining to explosives; is that correct?
A.  Yes.
Q.  Obviously, you got a reputation as well for being a person who could put his hands on a wide assortment of explosives virtually at will; is that correct?
A.  That is correct.
Q.  You also come to be known as a very zealous anticommunist; is that correct?
A.  Correct.
Q.  And I gather that you had come to be known as somebody who was more or less fearless; I mean, somebody who wasn't afraid to go out and get mixed up in the thick of it; correct?
A. Correct.
Q.  So, you were, by that time, regarded as being somewhat of a leader of certain segments of the Latin community who has interests similar to yours?
A.  That is correct.
Q.  Obviously, to the extent that the time had come when you really didn't have any problem in getting people who shared interests, to yours to participate with you in doing things that they thought were proper or required under the circumstances
PAGE 142

in which you had a common interest; is that it?
A.  That is right.
Q.  And you were looked upon a leader of sorts; huh?
A.  If you want to put it that way.
Q.  So, then, it was something that was kind of natural evolution of things where you got to the spot where you were in a position where now people were looking to you to be told what to do, and when you thought it appropriate, you told them?
A.  Not in that context.
Q.  Well, in the context that we have been discussing?
A.  Than is right.
Q.  Does that make it accurate?
A.  Fairly.
Q.  How would you change it?  I mean, what I am trying to do, Ricky, I'm trying to get an idea of how your posture would have changed during that period of time to kind of get you, say, in a position to walk into the country of Venezuela and say, "Here, I am," and have them hand you a little bit of time?
A.  That's not the way it happened, Mr. Williams, and we discussed that before, and if you want to go into that, you know, I am very willing to do so, but
PAGE 143

it is not that -- "Here's Ricardo Morales and all the doors start opening."  That is not the way.
Q.  No, not quite, but it is correct to say that by that time, you had acquired not only a stature but a kind of a mystique, at least locally, in the Miami community?
A.  Propaganda, you know, starts developing.
Q.  Don't be modest now.  I mean, now is the time for you to tell me the truth, even if your modesty otherwise would keep you from talking about it.
(Off the record.)
MR. CARHART: We are about to discuss how all doors flew open in Venezuela.
MR. WILLIAMS: I know just where I am.
(Off the record.)
Q.  What I am trying to find out, Ricky, is this --
A.  1972?
Q.  Yes, in order for me to get kind of a full awareness of how things were progressing and what you were doing and how it all comes together, I was just trying to find out whether the appearance than has been created is accurate and that had gotten to the spot
PAGE 144

where you could move easily among the community here in the Miami area?
A.  Right, yes.
Q.  For the most part, get about anything done that you wanted to get done?
A.  I had developed quite a bit of informants or sources -- whatever -- which were supplying me the bulk of information.
I have already testified in two drug cases for D.E.A.
Q.  When you say "informants", you mean it in the literal source?
A.  I was an informant, so I have the sources.
Q.  And?
A.  I have --
Q.  Go ahead.
A.  I have established a relationship with D.E.A.
I have made two major drug cases with them, which resulted in a lot of convictions.
I have established again a relationship with the Counterintelligence Office of the C.I.A. down here in Miami, and I was being provided funds which were a rented car and extra -- you know, allowance.
PAGE 145

Q.  By  C.I.A.?
A.  By Gramco.
Q.  Which was in the early 70's as it turned out, the operating front or entity of the C.I.A.?
A.  Well, they were running some sort of multifund whatever operation, but they have a special, you know, to be used for -
Q.  C.I.A. purposes?
A.  C.I.A. purposes, which enabled me to travel down to South American, and that's how I got down to Caracas.
Q.  So, we're still talking about the early 70's?
A.  We're talking about 1972.
Q.  Clearly, in establishing your contacts or sources of information, your C.I.A. training hadn't hurt you; I mean, you were able to use that, obviously; is that correct, in order to know how to set up a network?
A.  I was an experienced operator.
Q.  Now, from than time forward, were there still other incidents of bombing or explosives?
A.  There was one in 1973 that concerned this individual, Humberto Trueba, who was, at the time, a source o information for D.E.A., and has threat
PAGE 146

to kidnap or to assassinate or whatever -- he threat the family of -- what's the name of this -- of Rafael Garcia, who was the top guy in Gramco -- whatever his position there in Gramco, and he is security people, you know, and the security people were very disturbed about what Mr. Trueba was doing, and Mr. Trueba published a letter, you know, uncovering certain use of Gramco facilities by the Central Intelligence Agency.
Q.  Now that you mention that name --
A.  Of course, he explained here to the State Attorney's Office about me -- things like that.
I got a call from Spain -- I believe it was from Spain -- you know, and I was ordered to, you know, throw a hand grenade over his place, which I did.
Q.  Who told you to do that?
A.  The security chief of Rafael Garcia.
Q.  At his home?
A.  Huh?
Q.  At Trueba's home?
A.  Yes.
Q.  Where was that?
A.  I believe it was in May of 1973.
Q.  What part of town was that?
A.  Northwest section.
PAGE 147

Q.  Was anybody hurt there?
A.  No.
Q.  What was it -- just to kind of intimidate or frighten him?
A.  Well, the purpose, I never questioned it.  I just got the order, and I carry out.
Q.  Did it seem to you to be for the purpose of intimidating him to say, in effect, "back off"?
A.  He was the one who was intimidating and threatening the people, you know, which I have no knowledge of -- the problems, you know, whatever they were.
Q.  And you performed the job or the service for the Gramco Security people because of Gramco's connection with the C.I.A.?
A.  Say that again?
Q.  The reason that you went ahead and did what somebody connected with security from Gramco told you to do was because of Gramco's connection with the C.I.A.?
A.  Basically.
Q.  Were there any others?
A.  In 1973?
Q.  Any time coming forward?  Any other incidents in which you participated in a bombing?
PAGE 148

A.  No, not in 1973
Q.  In 1974, actually, you know, they returned the coin to me, and while I was driving one of the rental cars, you know, a bomb blew up, and luckily, you know, I walk away from the wreckage.
A.  Do you know who did it?
A.  Yes.
Q.  Who?
A.  Took me four years to find out, or three years.
Q.  Who?
A.  Gaspar Jimenez.
Q.  Who is he?
A.  He is in Mexico.
Q.  Who was he?
A.  He was a member of the Accion Cubana, Orlando Bosch group.
Q.  Did Dr. Bosch put him up to it?
A.  No.  Dr. Bosch actually was not in the country at the time that incident happened as far as I can tell or through my intelligence gathering.
It was his own idea.  Maybe he disliked me so much for some reason that he tried to kill me.
Q.  Where in 1974, and you're the --
A.  I'm the victim.
PAGE 149

Q.  You are at the getting end?
A.  I am the victim.
Q.  Were there any other episodes that followed that in which you reverted to your more familiar role of the perpetrator --bombings, explosions -- that sort?
A.  Familiar role of what?
Q.  I said, the more familiar role, the one who was doing it, the perpetrator, instead of the recipient?
A.  You know, perpetrator, I will take it as a derogatory remark about my person.
Q.  Not intended as derogatory.
A.  That's the way I take it -- as derogatory.
MR. CARHART: It's a neutral term.  It only means one who does it.
MR. WILLIAMS: I will withdraw it.
THE WITNESS: To me, it matters.  I've got my values, you know.
Let's go.  No, see, 1974 was a very hectic year, and since my traveling has increased you know, to such an extent, you know, to South America, and no, nothing happened.
Q.  By that time, you were in place in DISIP
PAGE 150

in Venezuela?
A.  No, no, not yet.  I was creating my sources, my, you know, relationships there, and I already had recruited Orlando Garcia for the C.I.A., which was the primary objective of my first, very first trips down to Venezuela.
Q.  So, you were still using your own situation for your use rather than having gone into the active service of another government?
A.  Not for my use.  I was just receiving orders and carrying out orders.
Q.  C.I.A.  orders?
A.  C.I.A. orders.
Q.  We will continue to talk about the bombings in a second, but let me ask you this kind of on the side.
Are you presently an agent for the C.I.A.?
A.  No.
Q.  Are you presently and agent for any agency or division or branch or bureau of the United States Government?
A.  No, sir.
MS. COHAN: Objection.  Asked and answered.
Q.  When is the next time, if at all, that you
PAGE 151

did participate in another episode of bombing either by fabricating or placing an explosive device?
A.  The Cuban Air Force plane.
Q.  We've already covered that in depth?
MS. COHAN: Not really, but --
THE WITNESS: Not in depth.
Q.  Where was the aircraft when the bomb was placed on board it?
A.  When was it?
Q.  Where was the aircraft when the bomb was placed on it?
A.  Between -- the exact place?
Q.  No, when the bomb was placed on it to begin with, not when it exploded, but when it first put on board?
A.  Oh, between Trinidad and Barbados.
Q.  A passenger on board placed the bomb?
A.  Yes, apparently.
Q.  Who did that?
A.  According to his own confession, a Venezuelan by the name of Hernan Ricardo.
Q.  Had you known the man before that episode?
A.  Yes.
Q.  Did he actually place the bomb, putting
PAGE 152

aside, what he said, Ricky?  I mean, whatever might have been done for media benefit or whatever?
A.  Yes, I believe so.
Q.  Had you known him before?
A.  He was a source of my division, and he carried an I.D. from DISIP.
Q.  Who was his control in DISIP, Ricky?
A.  Huh?
Q.  Who was his control in DISIP?
A.  I was his control.
Q.  Let's go forward from there.
After that, was there yet another episode in which you were involved in the placing or detonation of an explosive device?
A.  After the Cuban Air Force plane?
Q.  Yes.
A.  (Nodding in the negative.)
Q.  Not from that date to this?
A.  (Nodding in the negative.)
Q.  You have to give me a verbal for the record, Ricky.
A.  Nope.
I had intentions, at one point, but I was not able to carry on with it.
Q.  Who or what was the object of those
PAGE 153

A.  Mr. Julio Faez.
Q.  Why was that?  Why could you not carry it out?
A.  Because I couldn't find explosives.
Q.  Was that something that arose at a time when you and Quesada were spending a lot of time together?
A.  Yes.
Q.  What had taken place that made you want to bomb Julio Faez?
A.  He has taken a lot of money from the proceedings of the drug business, and he ha conned Mr. Quesada into giving him money, and I found out that he was planning to disappear, and I was doing some stationary surveillance of his home, and I detect all the obvious movements about somebody who is planning to take a long vacation.
Q.  Go ahead, sir.
A.  And I got feeling about, you know, demolishing his cars and the front part of his house in the middle of his movements for his deeds.
Q.  Sure would have been a clear message, I guess?
PAGE 154

A.  Not a message.  It would have been some sort of punishment for him.
He will have to have a lot of explanation to do about it when everybody will have to be there asking why you got bombed.
Q.  When the smoke cleared; huh?
A.  Of course.
Q.  We are now in --
A.  No, that happened in 1980.
Q.  In 1980 around the Summer or early Fall?
A.  The Summer, Summer of 1981.
Q.  How had you learned that he had taken money from Quesada or Arias?
A.  From their own statements.
Q.  How much money was involved?
A.  How much money was involved?
Q.  Yes?
A.  Over 50,000. Maybe 80,000.  Maybe 100,000.  All depends who you want to believe, because he ain't took no money from me.
Q.  But, in any event, because of your closeness with Quesada at the time, you decided that Faez both had been stopped and had to be a little bit embarrassed or compromised, and the way to do it was to blow up his car and his hose?
PAGE 155

A.  Say that again?
Q.  Because of your closeness with Quesada at the time, you decided than Faez had to be stopped, and he had to be embarrassed or put in a compromising position, and you assumed that the way to do it was to blow up his car or part of his house or both?
A.  That was my gut feeling at the time.
Q.  Why couldn't you get the materials, Ricky?
A.  Well, you know, I just asked ,you know, a couple of fellows about it, and they said, "We don't have it."
Q.  I mean, talk about the cobbler's children going barefoot.
A.  Unfortunately, Douglas, that is what happened.
Unfortunately or fortunately, or whatever, you know, the way you want to put it.  I was not able to get ahold of blasting caps, time fuses, and explosives.
In fact, the people that I asked for, they denied to me.  They don't want to get involved.
Q.  You mean, so far as you could tell, they had it, but they held it back?
A.  Well, I thought that they had it.  I don't know for sure if they had it or not, but the same
PAGE 156

way that, in the past, people will approach me and say, "Ricky, do you have a hand grenade, " and I will say, "Yes,"and take it.
I thought that maybe so and so will have nothing, and I approach them, and they deny having anything, refusing to give me.
Q.  Sure lets you know who your friends are; doesn't it?
A.  (No response.)
Q.  Well, it really isn't of major importance, but weren't there other sources to whom you could have turned or to which you could have turned had the need been more pressing -- sources out of the country or sources, perhaps even connected with some --
A.  Well, by this time that I couldn't you know, get them from the ones that I chose to ask, Mr. Faez had already gone, so there was no purchase to carry on preposterous thinking.
Q.  Can you remember any more episodes or incidents of bombing or firing, you know, incendiary bombs or anything like that that you have done aside from those that you have related to us?
A.  I am going to rack my brains, you know.  You have to remember, Mr. Williams, that you know, there were hectic years in the community,
PAGE 157

and there was so much involved, you know, and what can I tell you?
MR. CARHART: How about any of the bombings at Replica?
THE WITNESS: No, I never had anything to do with those.
MR. WILLIAMS: Max Lesnick was --
THE WITNESS: He was recently bombed, also.
Q.  Again?
A.  Again, yes.
No, Max and myself, even though we have certain, you know, disagreements in the early 70's you know, I patch up my relationship with him, which are the best nature afterwards, and I have not anything to do with them.
Q.  What about a fellow by the name of De Los Santos?  Did you ever participate --
A.  What's the name?
Q.  De Los Santos?  Did you ever participate in --
A.  De Los What?
Q.  Santos, S-a-n-t-o-s?
A.  Do you have a specific date?
Q.  No, I am asking you if you can respond to that name.  Did you ever participate to putting any
PAGE 158

kind --
A.  Could it be a construction guy?  De Los Santos -- that was not me.  That was Pepe Suarez.
Q.  How did Pepe Suarez figure into it?
A.  What do you mean?
Q.  Well, what was Suarez' connection with De Los Santos?
A.  I don't know.
Q.  How do you know it was Suarez who did it?
A.  Douglas, at that time, every time that a bomb goes off, right at those times, since I know Pepe Suarez quite well -- oh, wait, wait, wait.
I gave him the explosives.
Wait, wait, wait.  I gave him the explosives.
No, no, no.  Oh, yes, I know.  I was confused with another Suarez.
No, no, no.  You are right.  You me off track with a different Suarez.  No, that is Pepe Bombo.
Q.  B.o.m.b.o?
A.  Well, that's the way he called him the day afterwards.
Q.  Pepe the bomb?
A.  Pepe the bomber.
PAGE 159

Q.  What was his real name?
A.  Jose Suarez.
Now that you mention him, I also gave him the explosives to -- they did a number of this guy Pulido, Guiberto [GILBERTO?] Pulido, they did a number on him.  Well, actually, it was not me the one who gave the explosives.  You know, I refer -- I make a referral to -- I made a referral, you know, because I thought that the source was -- you know, the customer, the one asking for it, didn't have too much confidence in him, and also, I told him, you know, go to see somebody else.
Q.  This was on De Los Santos or Pulido?
A.  On Pulido.
Q.  Was Pulido the Venezuelan?
A.  No the Cuban.  Ironside.  He's in a wheelchair.
(Off the record)
Q.  Insofar as the Jose Suarez-De Los Santos incident was concerned, you gave Suarez the explosives?
A.  Yes.
Q.  What was that?
A.  What was that?
PAGE 160

Q.  What kind of explosives?
MS. COHAN: What are we talking about?
MR. WILLIAMS: Let's put a date on it.
Q.  Give me an approximate point in time; can you, Ricky?
A. No.
Q.  In the 70's?
A.  Yes, 70's.
Q.  1977, 1978, 1979?
A.  No, no, no.  That was about the time that I was living by the Yellow Birds in Suarez and living close by, so that was to be after my second divorce, which we could set it around 1973.
Q.  Why was De Los Santos --
A.  No, no, no. I'm not sure about that.  Forget about 1973. It was 1972 because I did move to the Yellow Birds until the end of --
MS. COHAN: Are you saying Jail Birds or Yellow?
THE WITNESS: Yellow Birds.  It's two towers. They are yellow -- they are not yellow now. They are chocolate.
PAGE 161

Q.  Where?  What are you talking about?
A.  7th and 45 Avenue.
Q.  Why was De Los Santos selected for --
A.  Beats me.
Q.  Selected for explosion?
A.  Beats me.
Later on, I met the wife -- many years afterwards, and there was somebody jumping the fence to see the wife, or whatever, you know.  It's not my concern.  That's a problem.
Q.  Were you paid for that, Ricky?
A.  Who?
Q.  Were you paid for the explosives in the De Los Santos thing?
A.  I bought the explosives.
Q.  And donated them to Suarez?
A.  No.  No, I charge for explosives because I have to pay for the explosives.
Q.  Let me ask you about one other quick incident, and then, we will recess for the evening, because it's shortly before 5:00.
There was an episode in which you started to either fabricate or place an explosive device that was to go into a home, and it turned out that, at the
PAGE 162

time that the device was to be detonated or was to have been set for detonation, that there was a woman inside the house or building, as the case may be, who turned out to Raul Diaz' mother.  Do you remember that ?
A.  Say that again?
Q.  Raul Diaz' mother, the policeman Raul Diaz?
A.  Yes.
Q.  Within a place or home or a building of some sort about which you had started or had intended to introduce an explosive device?
A.  Well, I didn't know that it was Raul Diaz' mother was there.
I found out years later was there -- now.
Q.  Which one are you talking about?
A.  The John Clarence Cook bombing.
Actually, was not one bombing.  It was two bombings.
MS. COHAN: Can we quit for the evening on that name?
MR. WILLIAMS: No, we'll just tie this one up.
THE WITNESS: It was two bombings to correct yourself.  It was two bombings.  It was not one bombing.
MR. WILLIAMS: We'll start with this tomorrow because the court reporter has to change paper anyway, so we will start with the John Clarence Cook bombings in the morning; okay?
(Whereupon, the deposition was recessed until Tuesday, April 6th, 1982 at 10:30 o'clock a.m.)
PAGE 164

I, JOYCEE WAX, Shorthand reporter and Notary Public in and for the State of Florida at Large, do hereby certify that the foregoing deposition of RICARDO MORALES NAVARETTE, by me duly sworn, was taken at the time and place herein set forth; that the deposition was recorded stenographically by me and reduced to typewritten form under my personal supervision; that the foregoing is a true and correct record of the deposition, and that I am in no way interested in the event of the cause.
IT WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my had and affixed my official seal in the City of Miami, County of Dade, State of Florida, this 18th day of April, 1982.

Notary Public in and for the
State of Florida at Large

My Commission expires:
March 2, 1985

 Back to 1B of depostion

End of Page

Copyright 1998-2014 Cuban Information Archives. All Rights Reserved.