AFFIDAVIT:LOUIS J. DUBE. U.S. DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
Agency: CIA
Originator: CIA
From: DUBE, LOUIS J.
Document date: 6/5/81
Document type: PAPER-TEXTUAL DOCUMENT

## Page 1

(104-10320-10098

SECRET

Subj

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

MARK ALLEN,

Plaintiff,

v.

CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY

Defendant.

Civil Action No. 78-1743

AFFIDAVIT

LOUIS J. DUBE, being first duly sworn, deposes and says:

1. I am the Information Review Officer of the

Directorate of Operations (DO) of the Central Intelligence

Agency (CIA). My responsibilities include the review of DO

documents which are the object of the Freedom of Informatior

Act (FOIA) requests to CIA to ensure that FOIA determinations

made regarding

the disposition of such documents are proper.

The statements made herein are based upon my knowledge, upon

information made available to me in my official capacity, upon

advice and counsel from the Office of General Counsel and upon

conclusions reached in accordance therewith. (U)

2. By classified affidavit of ay prudecessor, Gerald I.

Ilebenau, executed on 9 February 1981, the CIA advised the

Court of the detailed reasons for CIA's continued withholding

of portions of Document No. 509-803, the subject of this

particular litigation. The Agency has consistently stated

with regard to Document No. 509-803 that "most of the

substantive information in the document is contained in other

documents that have been released to the public." See,

Liebenau Affidavit, 119. The Agency has further asserted that

the information in Document No. 509-803 is so Intermixed with

WARNING NOTICE-SENSITIVE

INTELLIGENCE SOURCES

AND METHODS INVOLVED SECRET

009530

DERIVATIVE CL BY -

•I DECL A REVW ON 05 JUN 00

DERIVED FROM DOC. 1

---

## Page 2

13-00000

SECRET

operational details which could lead to the disclosure of

intelligence sources and methods

that it is impossible to

remove those operational details while leaving a coherent

remainder. Thus to avoid the possibility of unauthorized

disclosures, much of the substance of the document has had to

be withheld. A sampling of previously released documents

containing the same information was provided with the Liebenau

Affidavit for the Court's convenience and for purposes of

comparison. In Discovery, plaintiff has now requested copies

of the documents provided the Court with the Liebenau

Affidavit. (U)

3. Ironically, I must note that plaintiff already has

copies of

all

the documents submitted with the Liebenau

Affidavit as

a result of previous FOIA releases the Agency

made of documents concerning the record of CIA's involvement

in the investigation of the assassination of President

Kennedy. To indicate to the plaintiff, however, which of

those documents were submitted with the Liebenau Affidavit or

what substantive categories are contained in Document No. 509-

803 would move the Agency perilously close to disclosing

information which must se protected from disclosure. See.

Liebenau Affidavit. That hazard is compounded by the many now

publicly available documents which

discuss portions of the

same substance as is found in Document No. 509-803. Some of

them

actually making reference to the document itself. The

specific problem focuses on the section of the document

concerned with Silvia Duran. The problem posed by the

possiblity of disclosing the fact that Silvia Duran is the

subject of a significant portion of Document No. 509-803 is

discussed in detail in paragraph 15 of the Liebenau

2

SECRET

---

## Page 3

13-00000

SECRET

Affidavit. The damage the Agency seeks to avoid could be

triggered by the date of Document No. 509-803. Public

acknowledgment of the official passage of information

concerning Ms. Duran by the Government of Mexico to the

Government of the United States, for the Warren Commission,

did not occur until 21 February 1964. To disclose CIA's

detailed awareness of these facts as early as 31 January 1964,

combined with other circumstances also visible on the public

record, will provide a very creditable basis for a conclusion

that the CIA was closely involved in liaison activities with

Mexican Security Services, a fact which is true, but which has

not been officially acknowledged. The Agency obviously cannot

assert that the damage is a certain consequence of disclosing

this information. It is, however, my judgement that this

information, if disclcsed, would, in combination with other

publicly available information, increase the likelihood of the

damage to such

an extent that the Agency must continue to

withhold such

information to avoid the probable damage. (S)

4. The

possibility of releasing the documents on the

four other subjects listed in paragraph 19 of the Ljebenau

Affidavit was considered and also judged to be imprudent.

Plaintiff himself has demonstrated an almost encyclopedic

knowledge of the various disclosures that have been made from

Government records on the general subject of the

assassination. He, in fact, has made some astute guesses

concerning the likely subjects contained in Document No. 509-

803. I believe to narrow the field of probable subjects by

disclosing all but one of the subjects contained in Document

No. 509-803 will increase the likelihood of the disclosure of

the one subject the Government cannot acknowledge, 1.e..

3

SE CRET

---

## Page 4

13-00000.

SECRET

Silvia Duran. For this reason, I believe the Coverment must

continue to withhold any further information which would disclose

the unacknowledged subjects of Document No. 509-803. (S)

1i:11.11;

LOUIS

COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA )

COUNTY OF FAIRFAX

I ss.

Subscribed and sworn to before me this 5

June 1981.

day of

My commission expires:

Linda C Deral

Notary Public

My term of office expires on the 27th day of Morembes, 1988.

I mas Commissioned A Notary Public as linda C Colors.

OGC/LMZ/mpm

Distribution:

original - IMZe gnith

IMZ Signer

1 - OGC Chrono

2 - DDO

1 - IPD

1 - OGC Subj: 9999: Allen v. CIA, CA#78-1743

SEC P

E T

---