Report of the President's Commission on the Assassination of President John F. Kennedy

Polygraph Examination Arrangements and Opposition

Following Ruby’s persistence, the Commission arranged for the FBI to conduct the polygraph examination, scheduling it for July 16, 1964, and preparing a detailed set of questions. A few days before the test, the Commission learned that Ruby’s sister Eva Grant and his attorney Joe Tonahill opposed the polygraph on the ground that psychiatric examinations indicated Ruby’s mental state would render the test meaningless. Detroit attorney Sol Dann, representing the Ruby family, informed the Dallas FBI office on July 15, 1964, that the examination would harm Ruby’s health and was of questionable value according to Detroit psychiatrist Dr. Emanuel Tanay. On the same date, Assistant Counsel Arlen Specter discussed the matter with Tonahill, who personally favored administering the test. Dallas District Attorney Henry Wade requested by letter that the polygraph cover both premeditation and the defensive theories in the case.

Preliminary Polygraph Test Proceedings

Because of opposition to the polygraph and Ruby’s frequent changes in attorneys, a Commission representative traveled to Dallas to determine whether Ruby still wished to take the test. On July 18, Assistant Counsel Arlen Specter informed Chief Defense Counsel Clayton Fowler, co-Counsel Tonahill, and Assistant District Attorney William F. Alexander at the Dallas jail that the Commission was not insisting on or even requesting the test, but was merely fulfilling its commitment to make it available. After conferring with Ruby in his cell, Fowler reported that Ruby insisted on taking the examination. Fowler requested that Dr. Tanay be present, that the results not be disclosed outside the Commission, that the questions not be shared with the District Attorney’s office, and that the results be made available to defense counsel. Sheriff William Decker announced that his chief criminal deputy and polygraph operator Allan L. Sweatt would be present to maintain custody of Ruby. Assistant District Attorney Alexander requested the questions, a recording of the test, and the interpreter’s report. The procedure adopted provided that questions would be discussed in a preliminary session with defense counsel, the assistant district attorney, and Chief Jailer E. L. Holman; the assistant district attorney would not be present when Ruby answered, but Holman would remain to maintain custody. The Commission made no commitment regarding disclosure of the results. Because Dr. Tanay was not in Dallas, Dr. William R. Beavers, a psychiatrist who had previously examined Ruby, was arranged to be present.