[to4-t0226-t0000] Price le e a eee eA earns ON Rel ae ten enema eee entcame he eee eer Bmw pti a aR SUBJECT: ~ Discussicn wii State Department 1 April 1964- MEMORAS QUAL FOR RECORE . Officials on the tlusenku Case i. Mr. Helms and Hr. Murphy met with Ambassador Thoupsua, Me. Thomas Uushes, Mr. Richard Davis. and Mr. Jol Guthrie at the Departmeut to convey to-them vur Cuiclusious just arrived at that Nosenko is not a gentiine defector but more probably an wugent planted on us by the KGB. Mr. Uelas described.the basis for _our belic£ and the means of arriving at it. Mr. Helms: noted that we had discussed the Nusenkoe case with the Warren Commission because they had received a report from the FBI based on the FUl's intevrovetion of Nosenko. which pertained to the Oswald case. The report made a “strong cause for the position that the Seviet Government had nothing whatseever to do with Oswald's assassination of President Kennedy. - The Comission was anxious to know our reaction and.we informed then we were not sure of tho man’s bona fides and therefore could not underwrite the Stutenments he had made, ' 2. Ambassador Thompson. rendarked that he had just heard from Isaac Don Levine and that the latter intended to write a book on the Oswald cause in which he hoped to wake the point that Oswald was mentally unbalanced ard was trying to break up the Kenucdy-Khrushchev. relation- ship. i 4... We wlso relnied the Krotkov case in | io the Nosenko case, explaining the way in which the sovicts could hope, through accusations that forner Ambassador to Moscow Maurice DeJcan was an agent, to "cover" the numcrous 30 sensitive inforaation suffered by and reported to us by ‘the defector Golitsyn. 4, We then described for State Department officials the manner in which Gribanov opérates against the diplo- matic colony, Mr. Nelms went on to say that we had arrived at @ point with Nosenko where we belicved we had to use nore cnerpetic measures to arrive at the truth and determine his mission. After we tried this we would probably wish
14-00000 1S dae espn Oa Baeees aetiw oe paper publicity would serve to make cle of the letters came up and we had ‘received all we could under —, to tur hin back to the Soviets. At the point it was decided to return subject to Soviet control, he would be served. with an iumizracion warrant for deportation . us an undesirable adion, AUterwards, he would be flown to Europe and allowed te seturn -to Soviet custody. .-We would ‘probably wish to accouplish this in Berlin whero Several such turn=backs have been wade in the past ‘and this has been accepted by the Soviets. Aubassador ~~ Thompson asked why we could not indict the nan and try hin for espionage, We explained that it would bo dif- ficulce tu prove this even if he Were to give us a full - confession since the ouly evidence would be his own word, Furthermore, ve would be reluctant to becone involved in the evitable publicity that a trial of this nuture would. _ cause, We arc anxious to tearn the truth but ire not interested in a trial or punishacnt for Nosenke, 5. Ambassador Thonpson then Said that the only aspect of our planing: which gave him pause was the idea of re«_ - turning the man to Soevict custody, le felt that we would inevitubly encounter criticism from the press if they speculated the turn-back was in exchange for the release of the three flyers... This the Government’ would very much wish to avoid, Mr. Murphy showdéd Ambassador Thompson the drelt press. statement we had prepared by which we hoped to wake clear that this was not an exchange of any type but related’ solely to the fraudulent character of the Nosenko deféction, This accompanied by additional news- ar the real -reasons for Noscnako"s return, 6. In va bricf aside with Mr. Davis, the discussion an inconclusive dis- | cussion of them. We asreed that the letter which was to be read. by the wife on the Embassy premises should not be sent tu the Embassy nor should the Embassy become involved in this. We'also discussed the possibility. of sending the other letter; through regular mail channels te the wife's address. ‘Wie did not discuss what the Enbassy was to say if the wife called again and I feel I must co back to Mr, Davis on this question, 7. -Myr. ‘lughes then asked if we-were sure we had ‘the present circumstances, ic was assured we had and this was explained in some }
14-00000 Oe wh Sotto ARES eres, oe nt ane ea nt ferns TRON Pam Renee HS wee we wenoat oe Ne elt ton phate sa present not to discuss this case detail. “We deseribed the cy information received fron Subjecé, noting how some of it Was ined quite clearly we covering leads provided by Gulitsyue At this point, icjals My. Helms describe: For’ the State Depurtuent _the history of our attenpis. to persuade the to take vigorous action’ on these leads aud theit7Faiz ure to dv 50 i icuting there are still active penetrations in the fo Since igenee Services and elscvhere in the poverner 3 : $e The meeting ended with Aubussador Thompson Sup = pestins he’ would Like to. brick the Sccretary on the- problem and also discuss it with the State Popartment legal advisor, Abra Chayes, and then he: would be back - in touch with us. He asked the other Vepartnent officers with other persons, ~ David E. Murphy , Chief, SR Division