Francesco/who-killed-jfk huggingface dataset:
[124-10273-10007_multirif.pdf — page 60]
# UNITED STATES GOVERNMENTMemorandumTO: Mr. W.R. WannallFROM: H.C. Flemister, Jr.SUBJECT: MAIL COVERSDATE: 5/15/751 - Mr. Adams1 - Mr. Cleveland1 - Mr. Mintz1 - Mr. Gebhardt1 - Mr. Wannall1 - Mr. Cregar1 - Mr. Flemister1 - Mr. CrescioliThis is to advise of recent request by Senate Select Committee (SSC) that U. S. Postal Service (USPS) furnish to the SSC the identities of all mail covers placed by the FBI since 1960.On 5/14/75 Mr. Ron L. Jackson, Assistant Chief Inspector, Office of Security Investigations, USPS, adised Liaison Officer L.A. Crescioli that Mr. Paul Wallach, staff member of the SSC, has requested USPS to furnish the identities of all FBI mail covers placed with the USPS since 1960. According to Jackson, Chief Postal Inspector William J. Cotter has informed Wallach that the FBI is the custodian of such detailed information and that the SSC should therefore make this request directly to the Bureau. Mr. Jackson requested that the FBI consider directing a communication to Chief Cotter, pointing out that the Bureau does interpose an objection to the USPS complying with above request and that the SSC should proceed directly to the FBI in this regard.OBSERVATIONS:The request for the idemities of all FBI mail covers since 1960 in effect provides the SSC with the identities of the subjects of FBI investigations, which includes some extremely sensitive cases. The intelligence community in attempting to work out guidelines with the SSC as to sensitive areas of inquiry have indicated that specific targets of ongoing intelligence operations should be subject to negotiation between the SSC staff and the appropriate agency. The Intelligence Division believes that we should take a strong stand in this instance and attempt to negotiate an accommodation which would allow the SSC to carry out its mission but yet not compromise ongoing FBI sensitive investigations.LAC: tdp (9)Enclosure
[124-10273-10007_multirif.pdf — page 61]
Memorandum to Mr. W.R. WannallRE: MAIL COVERSRECOMMENDATION:That the attached letter to Chief Postal Inspector Cotter be sent via Liaison, advising him of the proprietary interest of FBI concerning specifics of its requests to USPS for mail covers and that under the third agency requirement the SSC should make its request for such data to the FBI through the Office of the Attorney General.![signatures]- 2 -NW 88296. Docld:32989532 Page 62
[124-10273-10007_multirif.pdf — page 62]
# MemorandumTO: Mr. J. B. AdamsFROM: Legal CounselDATE: 5/15/75SUBJECT: REQUEST OF HARRY H. WACHTEL ON BEHALF OF ESTATE OF MARTIN LUTHER KING, JR., CONGRESSMAN ANDREW YOUNG, AND DELEGATE WALTER E. FAUNTROYMy memorandum of March 19, 1975, reported discussions with the attorney for the estate of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., who also represents Mrs. Coretta King and her children. It was clearly indicated that Mrs. King and her children were concerned about invasion of personal privacy that might occur should there be disclosure of inquiries concerning the FBI investigation of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. At the conclusion of our conference with the King representatives, Assistant Attorney General Scalia asked me whether I would be willing to agree to have Mr. Wachtel notified in the event a congressional committee requested access to such material in Bureau files. I told him that I saw no difficulty in the Department advising Mr. Wachtel in the event such a request is made by a committee of the Congress. The Senate Select Committee on Intelligence Activities has initiated inquiries concerning the Bureau's investigation of Dr. King and though they have not as yet requested material from our files which may contain tapes of electronic surveillance of Dr. King, it is likely that their inquiry will reach the stage where such demands will be made.Therefore, in response to the requests made by Mr. Wachtel representing Mrs. King and in response to inquiry by Assistant Attorney General Scalia, it is my view that we should advise the Department of the nature of the inquiry currently being made by the Senate Select Committee and to suggest that they may wish to notify the representatives of the King estate and Mrs. King for whatever action they may deem appropriate.Enc.1 - Mr. Wannall1 - Mr. Moore1 - Mr. McDermott1 - Mrs. Metcalf1 - Mr. Hotis1 - Mr. MintzJAM:mfd (8)
[124-10273-10007_multirif.pdf — page 63]
Memorandum to Mr. AdamsRe: Request of Harry H. Wachtel, etc.RECOMMENDATION:That attached memorandum to the Attorney General advisinghim of the concern of the King family and of the request that they beadvised of congressional inquiries be approved and sent.![signature]![scribbled text]- 2 -NW 88296--Docld: 32989532 Page 64
[124-10273-10007_multirif.pdf — page 64]
# The Attorney GeneralDirector, FBIREQUEST OF HARRY H. WACHTEL ONBEHALF OF ESTATE OF MARTIN LUTHERKING, JR., CONGRENMAN ANDREW YOUNG,AND DELEGATE WALTER S. FAUNIROYMay 18, 19751 - Mr. Wannall1 - Mr. Moore1 - Mr. McDermott1 - Mrs. Metcalf1 - Mr. Hotis1 - Mr. MintzAt a conicrence on March 19, 1975, Harry H. Wachtel,attorney representing the estate of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.,Mrs. Coretta King, and her children, sccompanied by CongressmanAndrew Young and District of Columbia Delegate Walter E. Fauntroy,advised roprosentatives of the Attorney General and the FBI of theirgreat concern for the privacy of Mrs. King and her children. Theywere concerned that inquiries into an investigation conducted by theFBI of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., could reveal information of aderogatory nature concerning Dr. King. They indicated an interestin undertaking appropriate measures to limit the possibility of publicdisclosure of derogatory information that may be produced as a resultof inquiries such as those that might be made by the Senate SelectCommittee on Intelligence Activities and requested that they would beadvised sboxald such inquiries be made by a committee of Congress.Subsequent to that meeting, the FBI has learned that theSenate Select Committee on Intelligence Activities is conducting interviewsin an effort to develop information concerning an FBI investigation ofDr. Martin Luther King, Jr. In view of this fact, this matter is beingbrought to your attention in order that you may determine what action youfeel is appropriate in response to the requests made by Mr. Wachtel onbehalf of Mrs. King, her children, and the estate of Dr. Martin LutherKing, Jr., which requests were joined in by Congressman Andrew YoungSEE NOTE PAGE 2JAM:mfd(12)
[124-10273-10007_multirif.pdf — page 65]
# The Attorney Generaland Delegate Walter E. Fauntroy. The FH would have no objection should you decide to advise Mr. Wachtel that the current inquiry by the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence Activities concerns the FEI investigation of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.1 - The Deputy Attorney General1 - Assistant Attorney GeneralOffice of Legal CounselNOTE: Based on memorandum Legal Counsel to Mr. Adams, .5/15/75, captioned as above, JAM:mfd.
[124-10273-10007_multirif.pdf — page 66]
# UNITED STATES GOVERNMENTMemorandumTO : MR. W. R. WANNALLFROM : MR. W. CREGARSUBJECT: SENSTUDY 751 - Mr. N. P. Callahan1 - Mr. J. B. Adams1 - Mr. T. J. JenkinsDATE: May 12, 19751 - Mr. J. A. Mintz1 - Mr.J. B. Hotis1 - Mr. W. R. Wannall1 - Mr. W. O. CregarThis memorandum reports the telephonic contact between former Assistant to the Director John P. Mohr and Mr. Jenkins at which time Mr. Mohr furnished additional information regarding his meeting with representatives of the Senate Select Committee (SSC) Staff on the morning of 5/9/75.In reconstructing his interview on the morning of 5/9/75 by Staff Members Mark Gitenstein, Thomas Dawson and Lester B. Seidel, Mr. Mohr recalled them asking if he knew who prepared the "surreptitious letters" the Bureau sent in the Socialist Workers Party case. Mr. Mohr advised the Staff Members that he did not know but he presumed somebody in the Document Section of the Laboratory probably prepared these letters.As reported in my memorandum of 5/9/75, members of the Staff Committee are hoping that Mr. Mohr will be able to arrange an interview of Miss Gandy by members of the SSC providing Mr. Mohr is present. In this regard, Mr. Mohr desired some guidance as to what he could tell Miss Gandy if Staff Members asked her for the names of individuals appearing in the official and confidential files of Mr. Hoover. Mr. Mohr was telephonically advised on the afternoon of 5/12/75 by Cregar that the Bureau could not give him any advice as to what he could tell Miss Gandy recognizing that whatever he told Miss Gandy was strictly between the two of them and not of concern or interest to the FBI. It was further pointed out to Mr. Mohr that neither he nor Miss Gandy should feel under any obligation to report to the Bureau what Miss Gandy decided in this regard as well as what she might tell the Staff of the SSC during her forthcoming interview by them on 5/15/75.On the occasion of Cregar's call to Mr. Mohr on the afternoon of 5/12/75 Mohr recalled that he had told Staff Members of the SSC Miss Gandy had turned over to Mr. Felt the official and confidential files amounting to one-half a file drawer. Mr. Mohr in speaking with Miss Gandy subsequent to his interview on 5/9/75 learned the official and confidential files turned over to Mr. Felt
[124-10273-10007_multirif.pdf — page 67]
Memorandum to Mr. W. R. WannallRE: SENSTUDY 7562-116395by Miss Gandy amounted to one and one-half file drawers. Mohrsubsequently advised Mr. Gitenstein of this correction.Additionally, Gitenstein desired to know whether an itemizedlist of the official and confidential files was made and if so,where the list was. Mohr told Gitenstein that he was sure alist was made (subsequently confirmed by Miss Gandy) and thatthe list accompanied the official and confidential files.In addition to the above, Mohr advised that Gitensteinasked about a requirement of all Bureau employees to turn overany confidential files in their possession ordered by Mr. Hooverfollowing the revelation that former Assistant to the DirectorSullivan had turned over certain confidential files to formerAttorney General Mardian. Mohr advised Gitenstein that Mr. Hooverhad in fact levied such a requirement on Bureau employees andthat all confidential files were to be turned over to Mr. Feltalong with a memorandum explaining the nature of these files.Gitenstein asked Mr. Mohr where these memoranda would be filed.Mohr responded by saying he presumed they were confidentialmemoranda and would have gone with the confidential files turnedover to Mr. Felt by any Bureau employee maintaining such files.ACTION:For information and record purposes.![signature]![handwritten notes]- 2 -NW 88296 Docld:32989532 Page 68
[124-10273-10007_multirif.pdf — page 68]
# UNITED STATES GOVERNMENTMemorandumTO : MR. W. R. WANNALLFROM : MR. W. O. CREGARSUBJECT SENSTUDY 751 - Mr. N. P. Callahan1 - Mr. J. B. Adams1 - Mr. T. J. JenkinsDATE: May 9, 19751 - Mr. J. A. Mintz1 - Mr. J. B. Hotis1 - Mr. W. R. Wannall1 - Mr. W. O. CregarThis memorandum reports the results of a meeting between former Assistant to the Director John P. Mohr and representatives of the Staff of the Senate Select Committee (SSC) on the morning of 5/9/75.Memorandum Legal Counsel to Mr. J. B. Adams dated 5/5/75 recommended that a Bureau representative be available for consultation by Mr. Mohr during the time Mr. Mohr is being interviewed by Staff Members of the SSC 5/9/75.REC-100 62-116395-137Prior to Mr. Mohr's interview by the Staff of the SSC, Section Chief William O. Cregar met with him. Mr. Mohr was advised that should representatives of the Staff pose any questions to him which could lead to the identification of sensitive sources, sensitive methods of FBI operations or material derived from other U. S. agencies or foreign governments, he could decline to answer such questions until he had an opportunity to consult with a Bureau representative. Mr. Mohr understood the purpose of Mr. Cregar presence and assured him that should the inquiry by Staff Members of the SSC get into these areas of inquiry, he would consult with Cregar prior to responding.Following our arrival at the New Senate Office Building, Mr. Mohr and Cregar were met by Staff Members Mark Gitenstein, Thomas Dawson, and Lester B. Seide 1. As we proceeded to the office where the interview was to be conducted, Mr. Gitenstein referred to a previous conference he had with Assistant Director Wannall at Quantico on 5/5/75 at which Mr. Cregar was present. Gitenstein observed that this meeting had proved very, very beneficial and that he believed that future personal contacts between members of the Senate Select Committee Staff and the FBI could prove useful and allow the SSC Staff to better understand how the FBI was administered at Headquarters.62-116395WOC:ekw(8)CONTINUED - OVER
[124-10273-10007_multirif.pdf — page 69]
Memorandum to Mr. W. R. WannallRE: SENSTUDY 7562-116395The interview of Mr. Mohr began at approximately 10:20 and was concluded at 12:30 p.m. 5/9/75. Mr. Cregar, who was available in an adjacent room, was not called and following the interview, Mr. Mohr assured Mr. Cregar that no sensitive areas were addressed by the Staff Members. Mr. Mohr did indicate that the Staff Members were in possession of FBI documents dealing with the Socialist Workers Party as well as documents obtained by Mr. Carl Stern under the Freedom of Information Act (these are our COINTELPRO documents which we were obliged to provide Stern under the FOI). No substantive questions were directed to Mr. Mohr regarding these documents but apparently were used to permit Mr. Mohr to identify who might be the final authority in approving these documents. As an example, Mr. Mohr noted that in reviewing a sample of these documents, he voiced the opinion Document A probably would have been approved by an Assistant Director whereas Document B might have received the approval of the Director. Mr. Mohr was unable to identify precisely what documents he was shown.It was quite apparent from the interview that the Staff of the SSC was trying to understand how the flow of mail proceeded in the FBI under Mr. Hoover's directorship. A classic example of the Staff Members' confusion was their inability to distinguish between an SAC letter from a letter to all SACs. Mr. Mohr attempted to clarify this confusion on behalf of the Staff Members. With regard to SAC letters, the Staff Members asked if there was a file on all SAC letters. Mr. Mohr advised he was not quite sure whether there was a single file containing all SAC letters.Members of the Staff also asked Mr. Mohr about his securing of Mr. Hoover's office after Mr. Hoover's death. Mr. Mohr told the Committee that the articles which appeared in "The Washington Star" by columnist Jeremiah O'Leary was an accurate recording of his securing of Mr. Hoover's office. Nevertheless the Staff Members desired that Mr. Mohr go over in considerable detail exactly how he did secure Mr. Hoover's office following his death.- 2 -NW 88296 DocId:32989532 Page 70
[124-10273-10007_multirif.pdf — page 70]
Memorandum to Mr. W. R. WannallRE: SENSTUDY 7562-116395The question of Mr. Tolson's will did arise. Mr. Mohr advised that Hillory Tolson had not decided whether he was going to contest the will. According to Mr. Mohr, he recently had lunch with Hillory Tolson at Mr. Tolson's request at which time Hillory Tolson suggested he was not going to contest the will. However, Mr. Mohr had not seen any documentary evidence of Hillory's decision in this regard.Finally, the Staff Members asked if Mr. Mohr knew the whereabouts of Miss Gandy or at least her telephone number. He told themhhe did know herewhereabouts and telephone number but promised her he would not reveal them. Mr. Mohr was asked whether Miss Gandy would be available for interview. Mr. Mohr advised the Committee that he would attempt to persuade her to be interviewed providing he, Mr. Mohr, was allowed to be present during the entire interview. The Staff Members inter- posed no objection to that arrangement and Mr. Mohr indicated to Mr. Gitenstein that he would advise him of Miss Gandy's desires regarding an interview under the conditions stipulated above.Prior to the onset of the interview with Mr. Mohr, Cregar asked Gitenstein whether a decision would be forthcoming from the SSC regarding the interviews of former employees of the intelligence community by Staff Members of the SSC. Gitenstein stated the the Committee had no problem with the FBI and that if The White House would not interfere he felt satisfactory arrange- ments between the FBI and the Select Committee could be worked out regarding future interviews of former FBI, employees. The thrust of Mr. Gitenstein's comment as well as his general demeanor during the meeting suggested the Staff felt they could work closely with the FBI to the satisfaction of both parties.ACTION: For information and record purposes.NW 88296 Docld:32989532 Page 71- 3 -
[124-10273-10007_multirif.pdf — page 71]
OPTIONAL FORM NO. 10MAY 1962 EDITIONGSA GEN. REG. NO. 275010-106UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT# MemorandumTO: Mr. J. A. MintFROM: Mr. W. R. WannallSUBJECT: CONGRESSIONAL TESTIMONYDATE: 4/14/75Reference Mr. Heim memorandum to Mr. Moore dated 4/10/75, enclosing edited version of paper entitled "Dissertation on Procedures for Opening, Closing and Maintaining Domestic Security Cases in Pending Status."INTD has no objection to the edited version.ACTION:Legal Counsel Division review edited version for legal considerations.ALL: vb(6)1 - Mr. J. A. Mintz1 - Mr. D. W. Moore, Jr.1 - Mr. W. R. Wannall1 - Mr. A. B. Fulton1 - Mr. A. L. Lacey, Jr.Assoc. Dir.Dep. AD Adm.Dep. AD Inv.Asst. Dir.:Admin.Comp. Syst.Ext. AffairsFiles & Com.Gen. Inv.Ident.InspectionIntell.LaboratoryPlan. & Eval.Spec. Inv.TrainingLegal Coun.Telephone Rm.Director Sec'yNW 88296 Docld:32989532 Page 72
[124-10273-10007_multirif.pdf — page 72]
# UNITED STATES GOVERNMENTMemorandumTO: Mr. MooreFROM: Mr. HeimDATE: 4/10/75SUBJECT: CONGRESSIONAL TESTIMONY "House Select Committee on Intelligence"Ser 134 Reference W. R. Wannall to Adams memorandum dated 4/1/75, and captioned as above which submitted a proposed statement for congressional testimony concerning the opening, closing, and maintenance of domestic security cases in pending status. This Division was to review the statement from a stylistic standpoint.The statement has been reviewed along these lines and edited.RECOMMENDATION:That attached edited version of the aforementioned statement be forwarded to Intelligence Division for review and approval and then submitted to Legal Counsel Division for its review and approval.Enclosure1 - Mr. Mintz - Enclosure1 - Mr. Wannall - Enclosure![photo of signature] ![photo of stamp] ![photo of stamp]
[124-10273-10007_multirif.pdf — page 73]
# DISSERTATION ON PROCEDURES FOROPENING, CLOSING AND MAINTAININGDOMESTIC SECURITY CASES IN PENDING STATUSFBI authority to investigate domestic securitycases is derived from numerous criminal statutes andPresidential Directives and Executive Orders concerninginternal security and employee loyalty matters. Procedurally,the Bureau opens, continues, and closes such cases onthe basis of these legal considerations.Upon receipt of a fact situation from anyof a myriad of sources, an Agent must necessarily makea judgment as to whether this situation appears to fallwithin the scope of FBI jurisdiction.More specifically, domestic security investigationsare initiatod when allegations clearly indicate a person,either as an individual or as a member of a group, actsto unlawfully alter the Government in violation of theSmith Act, the Rebellion or Insurrection Statute, theSeditious Conspiracy Statute, or other related enactments.Special emphasis is placed on those engaged in violentfurtherance of such illegal acts. A full investigationcontinues so long as these indications of illegal activitycxist.When allegations do not clearly indicatethat activities on the part of an individual fall withinthis jurisdictional area, self-imposed regulations requirethat a "preliminary investigation" be conducted. Thisinquiry consists of obtaining information from establishedsources (such as records maintained by police departments,local governments, and private agencies); informants;public source information; and FBI records. These invosti-gations are limited to 90 days during which an honesteffort is made to distinguish as soon as possible betweenlegitimate political activity and illegal acts. Ifmore than 90 days are required to resolve this question,authority to exceed this period must be obtained fromFBI Headquarters. In seeking this extension, a fullstatement must be made of the allegation, the jurisdictionalauthority involved, and facts that appear to justifythe continuance.TDH/JAH:djm (8)MAIL ROOM TELETYPE UNIT ENCLOSURENW 88296 Docld:32989532 Page 74
[124-10273-10007_multirif.pdf — page 74]
When an allegation is received that a groupmay fall within existing jurisdictional criteria, FBIHeadquarters is immediately notified and a "preliminaryinvestigation" along the lines already indicated isundertaken. Again, approval from FBI Headquarters mustbe obtained to continue this "preliminary investigation"beyond 90 days to resolve whether jurisdictional standardsare met. If met, a full investigation is conductedupon approval by FBI Headquarters.Internal security investigations are alsoconducted on the basis of specific instructions fromthe Attorney General (pursuant to Presidential Directives)to the Director of the FBI. Until the instruction iscomplied with, these matters remain pending.Every effort is made to maintain properadministrative control over domestic security investigationsand to insure full compliance with the law. In thisregard, Bureau rules require Agents to limit investigationsto relevant matters. Supervisory personnel in the Fieldand at FBI Headquarters review the progress and relevancyof these investigations, and reports are forwarded tothe Department of Justice. Agents also receive legalinstruction on a continuing basis in order that theymay be fully able to recognize relevance and safeguardindividual rights.These Bureau procedures have been devisedin an honest effort to carry out with maximum effectivenessand propriety our vital domestic security responsibilities.Over the years, the FBI has handled these responsibilitiesand protected the domestic security of our Nation withgreat dedication and, I believe, with great distinction.We will continue to vigorously carry out these dutieswith all due regard for individual rights and liberties.I believe the procedures I have outlined are in fullaccord with this purpose.