Mr. GRIFFIN. You don't recall that there was a police car stationed either along Elm Street or Houston near that intersection? Chief BATCHELOR. There was a police car that preceded the two of them, as a matter of fact, that preceded the Presidential convoy. One was a quarter of a mile ahead and one was back of that one. Mr. GRIFFIN. I am referring to a stationary car at the intersection. Chief BATCHELOR. No; there wasn't one, that I know of. Mr. GRIFFIN. Okay, I think that is it. TESTIMONY OF ASSISTANT CHIEF CHARLES BATCHELOR RESUMED The testimony of Assistant Chief Charles Batchelor was taken at 12:30 p.m., on April 1, 1964, in the office of the U.S. attorney, 301 Post Office Building, Bryan and Ervay Streets, Dallas, Tex., by Leon D. Hubert, Jr., assistant counsel of the President's Commission. Mr. HUBERT. Chief Batchelor, I think that you made a deposition before Burt Griffin, a member of the advisory staff of the President's Commission, now on March 23, 1964, is that not a fact, sir? Chief BATCHELOR. That is correct. Mr. HUBERT. I think also that you have now read the transcript of that deposition and that you have made certain corrections of typographical errors in pen and ink and by initialing those. You advise me now that you are willing to sign the deposition except that there are two statements, one on page 199, and one on page 219, that you wish to clarify, or change; is that correct? Chief BATCHELOR. That is correct. Mr. HUBERT. Now chief, are you willing to consider this deposition as a continuation of the deposition taken by Mr. Griffin on the 23d? Chief BATCHELOR. Yes. Mr. HUBERT. Are you willing also to waive any notices that you would be entitled to before we begin this continuation of the deposition? Chief BATCHELOR. That's correct. Mr. HUBERT. Do you consider yourself to be under the same oath that you were at the time you made the deposition before Mr. Griffin? Chief BATCHELOR. I do. Mr. HUBERT. All right, sir. Now, I understand that you wish to comment, or change the following: On page 199, lines 9 and 10 read as follows: "Chief BATCHELOR. You are arguing with me. I had nothing to do with moving the prisoner." Now, Chief, what do you say about what I have just read? Chief BATCHELOR. That statement was inadvertently incorrect. I wished to say that I had nothing to do with changing the plans of moving the prisoner. Mr. HUBERT. Now turning to page 219, we find that lines 11 through 14 read as follows, to wit: "I don't know how you would correct this exactly. 'One of the problems that we experienced was the fact that such, of such a short time to do some of planning that we did'". Do you wish to make a comment about that statement, sir? Chief BATCHELOR. I don't recall the exact language I used in the statement, but the sentence is grammatically incorrect. It should read: