Document date: 00/00/0000

# DOCID-32175170

## Page 1

Date: 08/01/94

Page: 1

JFK ASSASSINATION SYSTEM

IDENTIFICATION FORM

AGENCY INFORMATION

AGENCY : FBI

RECORD NUMBER : 124-10181-10266

RECORDS SERIES :

SF

AGENCY FILE NUMBER : 62-6887-1 THRU 51

DOCUMENT INFORMATION

ORIGINATOR

FROM

тО :

TITLE :

Heleased under the John F. Kennedy

Assassination Records Collection Act of

992 (44 U5C 2107 Note]. Caseff:NW

5994 Date: 11-01.202

PAGES

SUBJECTS :

NAR

DOCUMENT TYPE

CLASSIFICATION

:

:

RESTRICTIONS

CURRENT STATUS

DATE OF LAST REVIEW

:

:

OPENING CRITERIA :

INDEFINITE

U

P

NOT ASSASSINATION RELATED

08/01/94

COMMENTS :

[R] - ITEM IS RESTRICTED

NW 65994 Docld:32175170 Page 1

---

## Page 2

Date: August 2, 2021

From: National Archives and Records Administration

Subject: Reconstructed FBI File SF 62-6887, Serials 1-51

To: The File

This memorandum briefly summarizes the status of missing original Federal Bureau of

Investigation (FBI) case files or portions of case files in the President John F. Kennedy

Assassination Records Collection (JFK Collection) and documents the National Archives and

Records Administration's (NARA) efforts to reconstruct these records, where possible, from

duplicate copies of documents located in other FBI files.

As the JFK Collection was first compiled and reviewed in the 1990s, the Assassination Records

Review Board and the FBI designated some records as "not believed relevant" (NBR) or "not

assassination related" (NAR). The FBI retained custody of the NBR/NAR records and

postponed their transfer to NARA until a later date. Every document or group of documents

("serials"), however, received an indexed Record Identification Form (RIF) and FBI inventory

sheet for insertion into the JFK Collection.

In September 2011, several years prior to the 2017 re-review and transfer of the NBR/NAR

material to the National Archives, a flood severely damaged thousands of feet of records at the

FBI's Alexandria Records Center in Alexandria, Virginia. In June 2012, NARA approved the

FBI's request for emergency destruction of 10,000 cubic feet of records that posed significant

airborne health hazards. Among the damaged records were FBI field office files that contained

postponed JFK Collection material designated as "pertaining to a matter unrelated to the JFK

Assassination Investigation" or "not assassination related.":

This compilation represents NARA's efforts to reconstruct the original file or portions of the file,

as completely as possible, with duplicate copies of documents located in the FBI field office and

headquarters files within the JFK Collection. Each reconstructed file or compilation contains a

Record Identification Form, an explanatory cover memo, existing administrative documents

available within the JFK Collection, and copies of identified duplicate documents. The table

below summarizes the status of FBI file SF 62-6887, Serials 1 through 51.

RIF Number

FBI File

Number

List of Serials

From Inventory

Sheet

List of Identified

Serials at NARA

Reconstructed

Status (None,

Partial,

Complete)

124-10181-10266

SF 62-6887

1-51

1-3, 5-15, 17-41,

43-46

Partial

NW 65994 Docld:32175170 Page 2

---

## Page 3

FEDERAL BURBAU OF INVESTIGATION

POSTPONEMENT INPORMATION SHKET (JFK MATERIALS)

23 Page e mithheld entired at this deration en the plated

One or more of the following statements, where indicated,

explain this deletion (these deletions).

[) Deletions were made pursuant to the postponement

• rationale indicated below with no segregable material

available for disclosure. All references relate to

Section 6 of the "president John F. Kennedy Assassination

Records Collection Act of 1992."

[] Subsection lA (intelligence agent's identity)

[] Subsection 1B (intelligence source or method)

[] Subsection 1C (other matter relating to miiitary

defense, intelligence operations or

the conduct of foreign relations)

[] Subsection 2 (living person who provided

confidential information)

[] Subsection 3 (unwarranted invasion of privacy)

[] Subsection 4 (cooperating individual or foreign

government, currently requiring

protection)

[] Subsection 5

(security or protective procedure,

currently or expected to be utilized)

[]

Information pertained to a matter unrelated to the JFK

Assassination investigation.

[]

For your information:-

[]

The following number is to be used for reference

regarding this page (these pages):

SF

62-68871-1 1h51

XXXXXXXXDO

XXXXXXXXXXXX

XXXXXXXXXX

XXXXXXXXXXX

0X0XXXXOXX0

XXXXXXXXO

NW 65994 Docld:32175170 Page 3

---

## Page 4

NW 65994

Page 4

File #: SE

Serial

Number

=

12

13

14

15

Document

Date

05/02/75

05/14/75

TT

, 05/16/75 TT

Page:

05/20/75

MEMO

05/20/75 TT

05/19/75

LET

05/28/75

LET

06/03/75

AT

06/03/75

LET

06/09/75

TT

06/16/75. TT

06/16/75 TT

06/11/75

LET

06/03/75

AT

06/03/75

LET

06/11/75

TT

62-6887

Document

Type

Document

From

Document

To

ALL SACS

SF

на

SF

HQ

BATES

ALL EMPLOY

HQ

ALL SACS

THIRD PART

CHURCH COM

CONGRESSMA SF

SF

HQ

SF

CONGRESSMA

HQ

SF

SF

HQ

SC

HQ

THIRD PART

HQ

SF

HQ

SF

CONGRESSMA

3rd

Agy

JFK Inventory Sheet

(COMMITTEE FILES)

Section #: 1

Other

Direct

Dupes

ACTUAL PERT.

Re: CHURCH COMM.

Rev.

Rel.

With- FBI Ref

held

Duplicate

3rd Agy

Location

Postponements

NAR

NAR

NAR

NAR

NAR

NAR

NAR

NAR

NAR

NAR

NAR

NAR

NAR

NAR

NAR

NAR

---

## Page 5

NW 65994

Pag

le

serial

Number

16

18

20

21.

22

28

29

30

31

32

Page:

Document

Date

06/11/75

06/18/75

06/24/75

07/02/75

07/02/75

07/09/75

07/14/75

07/17/75

07/18/75

07/30/75

07/31/75

08/14/75

08/14/75

08/13/75

08/13/75

08/15/75

08/15/75

07/31/75

Document

Type

MEMO

TT

TT

LET

AT

TT

TT

Document

From

DRUKEN

HQ

SF

HQ

HQ

HQ

SF

Document

To

BATES

NY

HQ

THIRD PART

SF

LA

HQ

• SD

3rd

Agy

Other

Direct

Dupes

ACTUAL PERT.

Rev.

Rel.

With-

held

FBI Ref

3rd Agy

Duplicate

Location

11

11

22

M

LHM

LKM

LHM

LHM

AT

SF

SF

SF

SF

SF

SF

Postponements

NAR

NAR

NAR

NAR

NAR

NAR

NAR

NAR

NAR

NAR

NAR

NAR

NAR

NAR

NAR

NAR

NAR

NAR

---

## Page 6

NW 65994

Docld:32175170

Pag

le

6

Serial

Number

Document

Date

Document

Type

Document

From

34

36

37

• 38

39.

40

41

42

43

44

44

45

46

47

48

49

50

07/30/75 TT

HQ

09/03/75

AT

SF

09/04/75

'на

09/05/75

TT

HQ

09/09/75

TT

SF

09/10/75

TT

SF

: 10/09/75

TT

HQ

10/15/75

TT

SF

10/09/75

МЕМО

DEJEAN

12/10/75

TT

HQ

12/10/75

RS

HQ

• 12/02/75

TRANSCRIPT

CHURCH COM

07/12/76 AT

SF

10/19/76 AT

HQ

01/13/78

NEWS ARTIC

SF

04/24/78

NEWS ARTIC

SF

09/05/80

NEWS ARTIC

SF

09/05/80

NEWS ARTIC

SF

Page: 3

Document

To

LA

• HQ

ALL SACS

HQ

HQ

SF

HQ

SF

ALL SACS

SF

HQ

AL

3rd

Agy

Other

Direct

Dupes

ACTUAL PERT.

Rev.

Rel.

with-

held

FBI

Ref

3rd Agy

Duplicate

Location

14

10

61

Postponements

NAR

NAR

NAR

NAR

NAR

NAR

NAR

NAR

NAR

NAR

NAR

NAR

NAR

• NAR

NAR

NAR

' NAR

NAR

---

## Page 7

NW 65994 Docld:32175170

Page 7

Serial

Number

51

11/21/80

Page:

Grand Totals.....

End of Report....

NEWS ARTIC

SF

0 1

185

49

234 |

Postponements

NAR

---

## Page 8

NRO74 WA CODE

1938888888888888880CCPM NITEL. 5-2-75 MSE

TO ALL SACS

FROM DIRECIOR (62-115395)

PERSONAL ATTENTION

SENSTUDY 75

GAPTIONED MATTER PERIAINS IO BUREAU'S HANDLING

OF REQUESTS

FROM SEMATE AND HOUSE SELECI COMMITTEES TO STUDY GOVERNMENIAL

OPERATIONS. WITH RESPECI TO INTELLIGENCE ACTIVITIES. IN CONNEC-

TION WITH WORK OF THESE COMMITTEES, STAFF MEMBERS MAY SEEK

TO INTERVIEW SURRENT AND FORMER FBI EMPLOYEES.

RECENTLY, THE SENATE SELECT COMMITTEE (SSC) STAFF HAS

INTERVIEVED SEVERAL FORMER EMPLOYEES AND IT IS ANTICIPATED

THAT MANY MORE SUCH PERSONNEL WILL BE CONTACTED.

THE FBI HAS PLEDGED FULL COOPERATION WITH THE COMMITTEE

AND WE WISH TO ASSIST AND FACILITATE ANY INVESTIGATIONS UNDER-

TAKEN BY THE COMMIITEE WITH RESPECT IO THE FBI. HOWEVER, WE

DO HAVE AN OBLIGATION TO INSURE INAI SENSITIVE SOURCES AND

METHODS AND ONGOING SENSITIVE INVESTIGATIONS ARE FULLY

destroyed

62- DEAD

62 - 2368-1

SEARCHER INDEXER

SERIALIZED

MAY - 11975

FBI - ALBANY

Stoops

ADVISE ALL EMPLOYEES,

Hd 54955 DocId: 32989494

NW 65994 Docld:32175170 Page 8

Page 5

---

## Page 9

PAGE TWO

PROTECTED.

SHOULD ANY FORMER EMPLOYEE CONTACT YOUR OFFICE AND

HAVE ANY QUESTION REGARDING HIS OBLIGATION NOI TO DIVULGE INFOR-

MATION OBTAINED BY VIRTUE OF HIS PAST-FBI EMPLOYMENT, HE SHOULD

BE INSTRUCIED TO CONTACI LEGAL COUNSEL, FBIHQ, BY COLLECT CALL.

YOUR CONVERSATIONS WITH FORMER EMPLOYEES MUST BE IN KEEPING WITH

OUR PLEDGE. IT IS BELIEVED SUCH A PROCEDURE WOULD INSURE PROPER

PROTECTION AND ALSO FACILITATE THE WORK OF THE SSC.

THE ABOVE PROCEDURE ALSO APPLIES TO CURRENT EMPLOYEES

OF YOUR OFFICE. • HOWEVER, CONTACT WIIH THE LEGAL COUNSEL SHOULD

BE HANDLED IHROUGH THE SAC.

END. .

HOLD

21Y

54955

DocId: 32989494

NW 65994 Docld:32175170 Page 9

Page

---

## Page 10

NR 007 SF CODE

FERDIA FAN OF EN BECAB

COMMUNIOATIONS SECTION

MAY 14

1970

TELETYPE

Assoc. Dir.

Dep.-A.D.-Adm

Dep.-A.D.-Inv.

Asst. Dir.:

Admin. ...

Comp. Syst

Ext. Affairs

Files & Com

Gen. Inv. -*

5:13 PM NITEL: 5/14/75

MCC

TO

DIRECTOR (62-11883951

FROM SAN FRANCISCO

JATTN

LEGAL COUNSEL

SENSTUDY 75

CAPTION.

nspection

intell.

Laudratory

Plan, & Eval. -

Spec. Inv. -

Training

Telephone Ru -

Director Sec'y

RE BUREAU TELETYPE TO ALL OFFICES DATED MAY 2, 1975, ABOVE

ON MAY 14, 1975, LESTER BO SEIDEL, INVESTIGATOR, SENATE

SELECT COMMITTEE ON INTELLIGENCE ACEIVITIES, WASHINGION, D.C.,

TELEPHONICALLY CONTACTED THE SAN FRANCISCO OFFICE AND REQUESTED

THE IDENTITY OF THE SPECIAL AGENT IN CHARGE OF THE SAN FRANCISCO

OFFICE IN 1970. HE WAS ADVISED THAT SPECIAL AGENT IN CHARGE

CHARLES W

BATES SERVED IN THAI CAPACITY FROM JANUARY, 197D,

THROUGH APRIL, 1970; THAT FORMER SPECIAL AGENT IN CHARGE HARRY J..

MORGAN (NOW RETIRED) SERVED FROM APRIL, 1970,

* THROUGH SEPIEMBER,

1970; AND THAT ASSISTANT DIRECTOR ROBERT

GEBHARDT SERVED AS !

SPECIAL AGENT IN CHARGE FROM SEPTEMBER,

1970, THROUGH NOVEMBER,

1972°

OL-1

SEIDEL DID NOT INDICATE THE SPECIFIC NATURE OF HIS INQUIRY

-219

OTHER THAI IT WAS CONNECTED WITH THE COMMITTEE WIIH WHICH HE IS 2

AFFILIATED.

ABOVE BEING FURNISHED FOR INFORMATION OF BUREAU.

END

ALLI FORMATION CONTANEO

HOLD

32989588 PaGe 79

NW 65994 Docld:32175170 Page 10

---

## Page 11

FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION

COMMUNICATIONS SECTION

AR 019 SF PLAIN

N'AY 164975

7: 09PM NITEL MAY

16, 1975 KEK

TO :

FROM :

DIRECTOR (62-116395) CATIN: OFFICE OF LEGAL COUNSEL)

SAN FRANCISCO (62-6887)

ENSTUDY, 1975

RE BUREAU NITEL TO ALL OFFICES MAY 2, 1975•

IssOC. Dir, 'cytim

Jep.-A.D.- Admi_

Dep.-A.D.-Iny..

Asst. Dir.:

Admin...

Comp.

Syst,

Ext. Affairs

Files & Com.

Gen. Inv.

Ident.

Inspection

Intell.

Laonratory

Plan. & Eval.

Spec. Inv.

Training

Legal Coun

Telephone Rm.

mas

Director Sec'y

Horizent

ON MAY 16, 1975, FORMER SAN FRANCISCO SUPERVISOR DAVID E. TODD

CALLED AND ADVISED HE HAD RECEIVED CALL FROM LESTER SEIDEL, SENATE

SELECI COMMITTEE, WANTING TO INTERVIEW TODD RE DOMESTIC COUNTERINTEL-

LIGENCE OPERATIONS, SPECIFICALLY, BLACK PANTHER PARTY. TODD SAID HE

WANTED TO BE COOPERATIVE BUI WAS APPREHENSIVE REGARDING DIVULGING

INFORMATION AS A RESULT OF HIS FBI EMPLOYMENT. HE WAS INSTRUCIED TO

IMMEDIATELY CALL COLLECT THE OFFICE OF THE LEGAL COUNSEL AI FBIHQ..

FE SAID HE WOULD DO THIS.

TODD ALSO ADVISED THAT SEIDEL HAD TOLD HIM THE COMMITTEE ALSO

WANTED TO INTERVIEW FORMER SAN FRANCISCO SUPERVISOR ALBERI P. CLARK.

END

EX 105

62-116-395-1860

RES 67

97 MAY 29 1975

AILYWORVATON GORVANCO

BEC

порй

"17%

10%

MW •55168

DocId: 32989588

Page 152

NW 65994 Docld:32175170 Page 11

---

## Page 12

• NRG36 WA CODE

4:53PM NITEL 5-22-75. PAW

TO ALL SACS

FROM DIRECTOR

(62-116395)

PERSONAL

ATIENTION

SENSTUDY - 75.

REBUTEL MAY 2, 1975.

IN CONNECTION WITH WORK OF THE SENATE AND HOUSE SELECT.

COMMITTEES, ITS REPRESENTATIVES MAY CONTACI YOUR OFFICE FOR

INFORMATION.

IN ONE RECENI INSIANCE, A REPRESENTATIVE OF THE SENATE

SELECI COMMITTEE TELEPHONICALLY INQUIRED AS TO IDENTITY OF. SAC

IN A PARTICULAR OFFICE DURING 1970.

IN HANDLING SUCH INQUIRIES INSURE ESTABLISHING BONA FIDES

OF REPRESENTATIVE BY SHOW OF CREDENTIALSION PERSONAL CONTAGI OR,

I IELEPHONIC CONTACI, BY TELEPHONING BACK TO COMMITTEE.

WLESS INFORMATION IS OF A, PUBLIC NATURE, AS IN THE INSTANCE

CITED ABOVE, OBTAIN FBIHQ CLEARANCE PRIOR TO SUPPLYING ANY

INFORMATION. FBIHQ MUST BE EXPEDITIOUSLY ADVISED OF ALL

INFORMATION FURNISHED.

IND

42-3437-4.

SEARCHED. A

SERIALIZED

-INDEXED.

FILEDA

MAY 2 0.1975

EBI-OMAHA

NW 65994 Docld:32175170 -Page 12 -

mon

Kristerisen

Qget

Kanton

---

## Page 13

May I9, 1975

20 Cozzolino Drive

Millbrae, CA 91030

Mr. Lester B. Seidel.

Investigator

Select Committee to Study

Government Operations with

Respect to Intolligence Activities

Room 2308

Building 302 - Dirkson Building

Washington, DC 20510

12501 SPRALIN

Dear Mr. Seidel:

Reforence is made to your telephone call to me on May 16,

Fact, In which you advised that the Committed was gathering

concerning the FBI's various CoIntelPros and in

particular, you were looking into the CoIntelPIo having

to do with the Black Panthers.

Letter, which had been made public, dated May 11, 1970, from

" had boon na

You inguired if I recalled a

the Director, FBI, to the SAC, San Francisco, which suggested

aisruptive techniques against

the Black Panthers and which

mentioned spurious police or FBI reports.

I advised you I

had no first hand recollection of having seen such a document

at that time, but that I had read a recent neus iten describ

ing such a document.

You also indicated an interest in the theoretical question as

to whothor intolligence functions should be divorced from

enforcoment functions in order to avoid the dilemma of dis

closure versus dismissal, and you suggested that my views on

this might be helpful in educating the Committee.

1971.

I sarved as supervisor of a squad of agents which investigated,

among other matters, violations and alleged violations of law

by the Black Panthers.

The only information I have concerning

the Black Panthers was learned as a direct result of my official

duties. I have made no independent study of them, nor do I

have any personal files or written material, either official

or othorwise, relating to them.

Since speaking with you, I have reviewed Ixecutive Order #501-73

(28 C.F.R.$S 16.21, 16.22 and 16.23) which specifies that no

employee or former employee of the Department of Justice shall

produce any material contained in the files of the Dapartment

161

NW 65994 Bodia351:379878ge Bane 223

---

## Page 14

Mr. Lester B. Seidel

May 19, 1975

Page -2-

nor shall he disclose any information acquired in the performance

of his official duties without prior approval of the Attorney

General or appropriate Departmental official.

From this, I must conclude that I am prohibited from furnishing

you or the

Committee any information along the lines requested

by you unless appropriate authority to do so has first been

given by an authorized representative of the Department of

Justice.

very truly yours,

DAVID E. TODD

CC:

Director,

Federal Bureau of Investigation

Sth and Pennsylvania Avenue

Washington, DC 20535

SAC

Federal Bureau of Investigation

450 Golden Gate Avenue

San Francisco, CA 94102

NW 65994 -Docld:32175170-Page 14

---

## Page 15

"S"

Congress of the United States

House of Representatives

RONALD V. DELLUMS, 8TH DISTRICT, CALIFORNIA

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COMMITTEE

CHAIRMAN, SUBCOMMITTEE ON EDUCATION

ARMED'SERVICES COMMITTEE

WASHINGTON OFFICE:

1417 LONGWORTH BUILDING

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20515

(202) 225-2661

DISTRICT OFFICES:

2490 CHANNING WAY, ROOM 202

BERKELEY, CALIFORNIA 94704

(415) 548-7767

201 13TH STREET, ROOM 105

OAKLAND, CALIFORNIA

94604

(415) 763-0370

DONALD R. HOPKINS

DISTRICT ADMINISTRATOR

May 28, 1975

Mr. Don Jones, Senior Resident Agent

Federal Bureau of Investigation

P. 0. Box 1033

Berkeley, California 94704

Dear Mr. Jones:

As you

are aware, I have been concerned for some time about the nature of the

Bureau's involvement in local law enforcement affairs.

This concern has been

heightened by my appointment to the House Select Committee to Investigate the

U. S. Intelligence Community. In this light, I am requesting answers to the

following questions concerning FBI activity in Berkeley:

1. What is the size of the contingent of agents in the Berkeley field office?

2. What are the functional responsibilities in the field office, and what are

the percentages of agents involved in each, i.e., political, drug abuse,.

criminal, etc.?

3.

What are the titles of the agents, and how do these relate to their

involvement

in category two?

4. What is the ethnic and sexual breakdown of the staff and agents in the

Berkeley field office?,

What are the interactions and working relationships between the field

office, the Berkeley Police Department, the University of California

Police Department, private security agencies and informers? How many

informers are utilized by the field office?

6.

Recent disclosures have raised serious questions regarding the Bureau's

involvement in political surveillance activities of organizations and

individuals over the past several years. What actions has the local

field office taken to correct the abuses of these actions, and what

political surveillance is being undertaken?

ALL INFORMATION CONTAINED

HEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED

protection 2: 114-545-2303)

MDR-I6

NW 65994^ Dôcld:32175170 Page 15 " :

---

## Page 16

Mr. Don Jones

May 28, 1975

Page 2

7. I have read with interest of the Special Weapons and Tactics

course given under Bureau auspices at the Santa Rita Rehabili-

tation Facility in Alameda County. I would appreciate your

forwarding to me a description of the activities undertaken in

this course,

and the relationship of UCPD and BPD to the course.

In addition, I would appreciate being provided any relevant

information on SWAT that you have available.

Thank you for your cooperation in this matter. I will look forward

to your reply.

rely,

And tell

Member of Congress

RVD/djc

NW 65994-Docld:32175170-Page 16 -

т. .

---

## Page 17

FD-36 (Rev. 5=22-64)

...

Transmit the following in

Via

AIRTEL

F B1

Date: 6/3/75

(Type in plaintext or code)

AIR MAIL

(Priority)

As50c.1.

Dire

Dep. AD Aom. -

Dep.AD.inv.c

Asst. Dir.:

Admia. -

Comp. Syste

Ext. Affairs

Files & Com. -

Gen. Inv. -

Ident. ÷

Inspection

Intell.-

Laboratory

_Plan. & Eval. -

Spec. Iny.-

Training

Legal Coun

Telephone Rm. -

Director Sec'y

TO :

DIRECTOR, FBI (62-116395)

ATTENTION: OFFICE OF LEGAL COUNSEL

FROM:

SAC, SAN FRANCISCO (62-6887)

SUBJECT:

-SENSTUDY, 1975

Remytel call this date to Assistant to the Director

JAMES B. ADAMS.

There is enclosed for the Bureau a letter dated

5/29/75 from Congressman RONALD V. DELLUMS, 8th District of

caLitornia, to Hit. DON JONES, Senior Resident Agent, FBI,

Berkeley, California. There

is also enclosed a copy of my

reply to Congressman DELLUMS.

San Francisco Office is obtaining pertinent infor

mation to Congressman DELLUM's request and this will be sub

mitted to the Bureau in the immediate future.

- Bureau (Encis. 2)

1 - San Francisco

CWB/ стр

(3)

REG- 102

<236%

114 JUN 1975

'AIL, INFORMATION CONTAINTO

HEREIN IS UNCLUSSINIED

DATE LO/19/2000 8YPdAm/Im/

Sent

Approved:

Special Agent in Charge

65994 Docld:32175170~Page 17

-. M

Per

U.S. Government PrInting Office: 1972 - 455-574

---

## Page 18

In Reply, Please Refer to

File No.

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION

450 Golden Gate Avenue

Box 36015

San Francisco, California 94102

June 3, 1975

The Honorable Ronald V. Dellums

Congress of the United States

House of Representatives.

Washington, D.C. 20515

Dear Congressman Dellums,

Mr von jones, the senion kesident Agert ob the

California, has referred

to me your letter of may 2s, 1975 asking certaun information

concerning the FBI's operation in Berkeley, calisarnia..

Your letter has been referred to FBI Headquarters

in Washington, D.C. for appropriate action.

Sincerely,

Charles W. Bates

Special Agent in Charge

ALI ITFORIIATION CONTAINED

DETO 4/200 /200/557572220m m

236 X

NW-65994-Docld 32175170- Page-18

n----

---

## Page 19

. CODE

TELCTIPE

URGENT

6-9-75

1 - Mr. Wannall

TO SAC SAN FRANCISCO

Attn: Cregar

FRUM DIRECTOR FBI (62-115395) -7821

• - MI. Gebhardt

- Mr. Mintz

- Mr. Hotis

SENSTODY 75 REC- 102

1 - Mr. Daly

THIS IS TO ADVISE YOU THAT PURSUANT TO REQUEST FROM THE

SENATE SELICI COMMITTEE ON INTELLIGENCE ACTIVIIIES (SSC) I HAVE

RELBASED YOU AND FORMER SA DAVID E. TOLD FROM APPLICABLE

EMPLOYTE SECRECY AGREEMENTS FOR THE PURPOSE OF A STAFF INTERVIEW

3Y SSC CONCERNING COINTELPRO AND THE INVESTIGATION AT

SAN FRANCISCO OF THE BEP. LESTER 3. SUIDEL, STAFF MEMBER OF SIC

VILE TRAVEL TO SAN FRANCISCO TO CONDUCT THE INTERVIEWS IN

APPROXIMATELY TWO WEEKS.

AN AGENT WILL BE AVAILABLE DURING INTERVIEW TO ASSIST IN

MAKTIG A DETERMINATION AS TO WHETHER OR NOF A PARIICULAR

ROSSTION GROULD BE RESPONDED TO. THIS AGENT IS NOT TO BE

CONSILAPED PRIVATE COUNSEL AND HILL NOI BE PRESENT DURING INTERE

Misse. Dir.

Dea. AD A1m,..

Dep. AD inx.

4551. Dir.:

Admin.

Ceap. Syst.

Exr. Affairs

Files 3 Com.

Ger. Ins.

Ident.

tasiaction

intali.

Lataratory

Plon. 3 Evoi. ...

Spos. Inu. -

Training

YOU. AN ASAC, OR SENIOR SUPERVISOR CONTACI FORMER SA DAVID

3. IODD TO ADVISS HIM OF THE WAIVER OF THE APPLICABLE SECRACY

IGREDIENT AND LATERHINE WASTHER HE IS DESIROUS OF HAVING AN

PVD:eek

ALL INFORMATION CONTAINER

(7)

FEDERAL/BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION

HEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED

COMMUNICATIONS SECTION

BATIRA

veng

JUN O'9 1975.1

Tatari

4645

07R

170 Page I9TELETYPE UNITIE

---

## Page 20

PAGE THO 62-116395

AGENT AVAILABLE DURING INTERVIEW. FOR YOUR BACKGROUND INYORMATION

TODD HAS PREVIOUSLY BBEN IN CONTACT WITH LEGAL COUNSEL

DIVISION CONCERNING ISIS INTERVIEN AND HAS BEEN BRESTED

CONCERNING HIS RIGHT TO COUNSEL, ETC.

SUTEL RESULTS DE CONTACI WITH TODD. YOU SHOULD CONTACT

LBGAL COUNSEL DIVISION FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION CONCERNING

KOUR INTERVIEN.

NOTE S

BY mene 6-2-75 captioned as above it was recommended

and approved that sue anarles 1. Bates, tommer sA Lavia a 1000e

and Assistnat Director Robert I. Gebbardt be released from

applicate secracy agreements for purposes of interview by ssc.

We are separately advising Assistant Director Robert E. Gebharat

of this decdsion.

NW 65994 Doc|d:32175170-Page 20- ann

---

## Page 21

r11.",1

THATON

KUMA WHORE COCHON

Mangour

TER TIRE

Aggoe Dir.

Dep.-A.D.-Adie

Dep-A.D.-InTon

Asst Dir.:

Admin.

Como. Syst.

Ext. Affairo

Files & Com, -

Gen. 1nV, s--

Ident.

Inspection

Initell.

Laboratory

Plan. & Eval,

Spee. Inv. --

Training

Legal Coun.

Telephone Kna.

Director Sec'y

NR 801 SE CODE

10:56 AM URGENT 6/16/75 MCC

TO

DIRECTOR 662-116395)

FROM SAN VRANCISCO (62-6887)

ATTN

CREGAR, INT

SENS TUDY 75

RE SACRAMENTO TELETYPE INSTANT DATE.

• =1

REVIEW OF SAN FRANCISCO ELSUR INDICES SHOWS NO OVERHEARS

2326:

ON MARTIN LUTHER KING, JR.

END

VLJ FBIHQ CLR

=...

62-11-37

.. 1255

1A WHE 29 1975

10/2/00 5P-2:ALM/STE

2018

$ 4A4G 10 18752989624

Page 244

NW 65994 Docld:32175170 Page 21

---

## Page 22

Assoc Dir. -

Dep-A.D:-In8

Asst. Dir.:

Admin.

IVESTIGATION

Comp. Syst.

Ext Affairs

Files & Com. -

AWN 2 0175

Gen. Inv. --

Ident.

10:30 AM URGENT 6/16175 VLS

18 Spe

Inspection

Intoll.

Laborat ry

Plan.

& Eval.

TO

• DIRECTOR (62-116395)

Spec. In%. am.

Training

Lesal Coun...

SAN FRANGISCO

Telephone Ro.

Director: Sec'y

FROM

SAGRAMENTO (62-489)

ATIN: INID SU. O• CREGARY

SENSTUDY 75.

G900 Wace

41237211

RE BUREAU TEL TO DETROIT, JUNE 13, 1975.

REVIEW OF SACRAMENTO INDICES REFLECTS NO INFO RE ELECTRONIC

SURVEILLANCE, APRIL 23-24, 1964, SENATOR HOTEL, SACRAMENTO, CALIF

SACRAMENTO DIVISION ESTABLISHED 1967.

FOR INFO SAN FRANCISCO, RETEL STATED IN CONNECTION WITH SENATE

SELECT COMMITTEE REQUEST, FOLLOWING DATA REQUESTED BY RETURN TELETYPE

ATIN: INTD - W. O. CREGAR:

ELECTRONIC

SURVEILLANCE INDICES AT FBIHQ DO NOT INDICATE OVER-

HEARS ON KNOWN TECHNICAL INSTALLATIONS ON MARTIN LUTHER RING, JR.

FOR ABOVE DATE AND LOCATION.

SAN FRANCISCO REVIEW ELSURE INDICES AND FURNISH FBINQ

FIRST DATE

KING OVERHEARD ON ABOVE TECHNICAL INSTALLATION. IF HE WAS NOT

460

HEARD, SO ADVISE.

62-116:343

END

VLA FBIHQ CLR

* JUL-B'O 1975

MuR W1y04

NT.)

10/2/00

3P2 AMHE

84 AUG 4 1975

MH 55108

DocId: 32989624

NW 65994 Docld:32175170 Page 22

Page 246

---

## Page 23

20 Cozzolino Drive

'Millbrae, California 94030

June 11, 1975

AiL INFORMATION CONTA

HEREIN

LABSIT

DATE

MI. Clarence M. Kelley

Director, Federal Bureau of Investigation

Washington, D. C.

Dear Mr. Kelley:

On this date Supervisor Berryman of the San Fran-

cisco Office read to me a teletype to the effect the Bureau

approved a

secrecy release for me to respond to questions

Senate Investigator Lester B. Seidel in connection with

& Senate Select Committee on Internal Security Investigation

of the CoIntelpro as it related to the Black Panther Party.

¿ copy of a letter from me to Mr. Seidel has been furnished

to the Bureau previously.

At the time I was designated supervisor of the squad

handling internal security investigations of the Black Panther

Party (BPP), the BPP was international In scope; Eldridge

Cleaver and

others had been granted asylum in Algeria; the

BPP had support and/or branches in France, Germany, Scandinavia

Aspects of the counter intelligence program

approved by the Bureau of which I am aware were directed against

Bone BPP foreign operations.

thus, interrogation by the Senate

investigator may Involve Information disseminated to other

government agencies

under security classification and may

touch on foreign policy as well.

Therefore, prior to furnishing information obtained

In an official capacity to Mr. Seidel, who according to the

Bureau's teletype will be in San Francisco In about two weeks,

I would like written confirmation of the release which was

furnished me orally, preferably an official document covering

any secrecy agreement made with the Bureau as well as releasing

me fron the provisions of any applicable executive orders which

oreclude disclosure of official information without approval of

the Attorney General or an authorized Departmental officer.

I would also appreciate being advised 1f there 1s any limitation

on the scope of the material which I may release.

Since the Bureau's teletype also approved a secrecy

release for current SAC Charles Bates,

this presupposes he

authorized to furnich Mr. Seidel with the contents of

files 1f Mr. Seidel so requests.

Therefore, I would also

appreciate advice as to whether I will be permitted to refresh

my recollection by reviewing official files prior to or during

the Interview with Mr. Seidel.

Sincerely yours,

оги

cavia &. Todd

etired Speclal Agent

CC :

SAO San Francisco

THREE

NW 65994

84 JUL 2 1 1975

icld:32175170 Page 23

---

## Page 24

5

62-116395-325

3

Ill 9 9075

FO

WON

RECEIVED

dum 18 5 18 8M 1975

iFun. gOONSEL

NW 65994 Docld:32175170 "Page 24

---

## Page 25

NASANON

DAVID

E TODD

20 COZZOLINO DR

MILLBRAE

CA

94030°

curma

NW 55029

DocId: 32989611 Page 80

ILL INFORMATION CONTAINED.

CAt7510203

DATE 1/30/83 BOP-2TAPIRES

MERLIN

Mr. Clarence M. Kelley,

Director

Federal Bureau of Investigation

U. S. Department of Justice

Washington, D. C. 20535

NW 65994 Docld:32175170 Page 25

---

## Page 26

FD-36 (Rev. 5-22-64)

Transmit the following in

Via

AIRTEL

FBI

Date: 6/3/75

('Type in plaintext or code)

AIR MAII

(Priority)

-Asaoc. Dir.

Dep, AD Adm. -

Dep. AD Inv. -

Asst. Dir.:

Admia..

Comp. Syst.=

Ext. Affairs.

Files & Com. -

Gen. Inv.

Ident.

• Inspection

Intell.

L'aboratory -

Plan. & Eval. -

Spec. Inv.

Training -

Legal Coun..

Telephone Rm. -

Director Sec'y

TO:

DIRECTOR, FBI (62-116395)

ATTENTION: OFFICE OF LEGAL COUNSEL

FROM:

SAC, SAN FRANCISCO (62-6887)

SUBJECTI

SENSTUDY, 1975

Remytel call this date to Assistant to the Director

JATES B. ADAMS.

There is enclosed for the Bureau a letter dated

5/28/75 from Congressman RONALD V. DELLUMS, 8th District of

California, to Mx. DON JONES, Senior Resident Agent, FBI,

Berkeley, California.

is also enclosed a copy of my

reply to Congressman DELLUMS.

San Francisco Office is obtaining pertinent infor-

mation to Congressman DELLUM's request and this vill be swe

mitted to the Bureau in the immediate future.

2 - Bureau (Encis. 2)

1 - San Francisco

CWB/ стр

(3)

REC- 102

236*

1-1119670

i& JUt & 1975

'ALI, INFORMATION CONTAININ

HEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIAD

DATS LO/19/2000 BYS/dAm /Imf

MDR-I4

Sent

Approved:

Special Agent in Charge

NW 65994 Docld:32175170 Page 26

. M

Per

U.S. Government Printing Office: 1972 - 455-574

---

## Page 27

In Reply, Please Refer to

File No.

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION

450 Golden Gate Avenue

BoX

36015

San Francisco, California 94102

June 3, 1975

The Honorable Ronald V. Dellums

Congress of the united States

House of Representatives.

washington, D.C. 20515

Dear Congressman Dellums,

un. von jones, the senion Resident Agert of the

-BI Resident Agenay in berkeLey,

california,

has referred

to me your letter of May 28, 1975 asking certain information

concerning the FBI's operation in Berkeley, calsornia.

Your letter has been referred to FBI Headquarters

in Washington, D.C. for appropriate action.

sincerely,

Charles W. Bates

Special Agent in

Charge

ALL ITFORILATION CONTINEN

FIRET IN UNCLASSUIND

DATELO BYSPSAm/ BYSPSAm/U/

'!!;

236X

NW 65994 Docld:32175170 Page 27

---

## Page 28

IIVESTIGATION

COMNANCCATONS SECTION

DOS SP CUDE

JU: 1 2 1975

9:10 PM NITEL 6/11/75 CUC

DIRECTOR (62-116395)

TELETYPE

FRUM: SAN FRANCISCO (62-6887)

AÏTENTIUN: UFFICE OF LEGAL CUUNSEL AND INTD.

UsENorior 75.

REBUIEL JUNE Y, 1975.

UN JUNE 11S 1975, FORMEN SA DAVID E. TODD ADVISED OF THE

WAIVER UF EMPLOYEE SECRECY AGREEMENTS FOR THE PURPOSE OF A

STAFF INTERVIEW BY SSC WITH HIM. TODD REQUESTED AGENT BE AVAIL-

ADLE DUKING INTERVIEW TO ASSIST HIM. TODD INDICATED HE WOULD

IMMEDIATELY ADVISE THIS UFFICE IF IN RECEIPT OF INFORMATION RE

DATE UF INTERVIEW.

SAC, SAN FRANCISCU, WILL CUNTACI LEGAL COUNSEL DIVISION FOR

AUDITIUNAL INFURMATION CONCERNING HIS INTERVIEW.

Assoc. Dir.

Dep.-A.D.-Admi

Dep.-A.D.-Inva

Asst, Dir.:

Admin. -

Comp. Syst.

Ext. Affairs

Files & Com. =

Gen. Inv. -

Ident.

inspection

Laboratory

Plan. & Eval. -

Training

fat Coun..

elephone Rm

irector Sec'y

it

IND

HULD PLS

ELTWORIITION COITALI

DAT: 10-12-2000 Bx SPLAm/Pi

MDR-H

5- 1168/12:

RE628 62-116395=336

114 JUL 2 1975

5 0 JUL 1 7 1975

aw 65029г Docíd: 32989611 Page 11

NW 65994-Docld:32175170 Page 20

---

## Page 29

SPECIAL

GP 0 909-767

NRO48 WA CODE

4:38PM IMMEDIATE 6/18/75 GHS

TO NEW YORK

MIAM!

BOSTON

SAN FRANCISCO

DETROIT

SEATTLE

LOS ANGELES

WFO

FROM DIRECTOR

100-5457507 66

I OP

sout

RET

SENSTUDY 1975; BUDED: JUNE 24, 1975.

THE FOLLOWING REQUEST FOR INFORMATION HAS BEEN ADDRESSED

TO THE ATTORNEY GENERAL AND FROM THE ATTORNEY GENERAL TO FBIKQ

FROM THE SENATE SELECT COMMITTEE TO STUDY GOVERNMENTAL

OPERATIONS WITH RESPECT TO INTELLIGENCE ACTIVITIES: " .

THE FOLLOWING REQUESTS PERTAINING TO THE TECHNIQUE. REFERRED TO

AS "MAIL SURVEILLANCE, INCLUDING MAIL COVERS AND OPENING MAIL'

AND. THE UTILIZATION OF THIS TECHNIQUE 'IN INTERNAL SECURITY,

INTELLIGENCE COLLECTION, UND/OR COUNTER INTELLIGENCE MATTERS,

OPERATIONS, OR ACIIVITIES:' (1) FOR ALL INCIDENTS OF MAIL.

OPENING OR MAIL INTERCEPT BY OR ON BEHALF OF THE FEDERAL BUREAU

DE MUELATION FROM JANUARY 1, 1960, LIE TO 23210

SEARCHED TELL INDEXED..

SERIALIZED

_FILED.

JUN 181975

FBI LOS ANGEL

NW 65994- Docld:32175170 Page 29

---

## Page 30

PAGE TWO TOP SECREI

STATE THE PHYSICAL LOCATION WHERE THE OPENING OR INTERCEPT WAS

CONDUCTED, THE NAMES OF THE INDIVIDUALS WHO PARTICIPATED IN THE

OPENING OR INTERCEPT, THE TYPE OF MAIL OPENED OR INTERCEPTED,

AND THE PURPOSE OF THE OPENING OR INTERCEPT. (2) POR ALL

INCIDENTS OF MAIL COVERS THAI WERE PHYSICALLY_CONDUCTED BY FBI

EMPLOYEES, WHETHER ALONE OR IN COOPERAIIÓN ULIN POSTAL SERVICE.

EMPLOYEES, FROM JANUARY 1, 1960; UNTIL THE PRESENT, PLEASE STATE

• THE PHYSICAL LOCATION WHERE THE COVER WAS CONDUCTED, THE NAMES

OF THE INDIVIDUALS WHO PARTICIPATED IN THE COVER, THE TYPE OF

• MAIL COVERED, AND THE PURPOSE OF THE COVER. 13%

PLEASE PROVIDE

ALL DOCUMENTS AND MEMORANDA WHICH DISCUSS, REFER, OR RELATE TO

THE ORIGINS, AUTHORIZATIONS, CONDUCT AND TERMINATION OF, END

POLICIES AND PROCEDURES FOR, HE MAIL OPENINGS, INTERCEPIS, AND

COVERS IDENTIFIED ABOVE."

EACH OFFICE SHOULD IMMEDIATELY REVIEW ITS FILES FOR ALL

INFORMATION REQUESTED BY THE SENATE COMMITTEE:, NEW YORK, BOSTON,

DETROIT, LOS ANGELES, SEATTLE, AND WO SHOULD FURNISH INFOR-

MATION CONCERNING SAM SURVEY

., NEW YORK, DETROIT, AND SAN

FRANCISCO SHOULD FURNISH INFORMATION CONCERNING GUS SURVEY.

NEW YORK AND WFO SHOULD FURNISH INFORMATION CONCERNING Z COVERAGE.

NW 65994 -Docld:32175170~Pàge 30-

---

## Page 31

PAGE THREE TOP. SECRET

SAN FRANCISCO SHOULD FURNISH INFORMATION CONCERNING CHIPROP

AND CHICLET. MIAMI SHOULD ADVISE IF THE INFORMATION RECEIVED

FROM MM 89D-S RESULIED FROM INTERCEPT OF MAIL AND IF SO

APPROPRIATE INFORMATION SHOULD BE FURNISHED. RESULTS SHOULD. BE

SUBMITTED BY TELETYPE, ATTENIION OF SAW. O. CREGAR, UND SHOULD

REACH THE BUREAU BY JUNE 24, 1975.

• CLASSIFIED BY 3676, XGDS 2 AND 3, INDEFINITE •

END

NW 65994- Docld:32175170 Page 3T-

---

## Page 32

AsSoC. Dir.

Dep.-A.D.-Adm

Dep.-A.D.-InVa

870N

Asst. Dir.:

DOS SF. CODED

32N6)

,,NR

4:20 PM URGENT 6/24/75 CUC

ALL RRODUCTION CONT

Admin......

IO :

DIRECIOR, FBI

LACTAT WHERE SHOWN

HEREN IS UNCLASSIFIER

Comp. Syst.

Ext. Affairs

FUSRIVASE

Files & Com.

Gen. Inv. -

Ident.

Inspection

Intell. V1Nm

MDR 16

#Laboratory

FROM:

SAG, SAN FRANGISCO 662-605 BOREO BY SPALM/CHIC

Plan. & Eval.

Spec. Inv."

Training -

SECR

Legal Coun

DECLASSIFY ON: X. le

Telephone Rm.

ATTENTION: SAW. O. GREGAR

Director Sec'y

11/15/00

SENSTUDY 1975, BUDED JUNE 24, 1975.

RE BUREAU TELETYPE CAPTIONED AS ABOVE DATED JUNE 18, 1975.

FOR THE INFORMATION OF FBI HEADQUARTERS IT HAS NOT BEEN THE

PRACTICE TO UTILIZE A CONIROL FILE FOR

MAIL COVERS. RATHER, THEX

ARE WORKED FROM THE SUBSTANTIVE FILE. THEREFORE, THERE IS NO

PRACTICAL METHOD TO DETERMINE THE NUMBER OF MAIL COVERS THAT MAY

HAVE BEEN PLACED IN YEARS PAST. HOWEVER, BECAUSE THEY WERE NOT

AVAILABLE AS AN INVESTIGATIVE TECHNIQUE BETWEEN 1964 AND 1973, THE

JOTAL NUMBER SINCE 1960 WOULD NOT BE LARGE. THERE FOLLOWS SPECIFIC

RESPONSE FROM SAN FRANCISCO FILES TO REQUESTS IN REFERENCED

TELETYPE.

GUS SURVEX (BUTTLE 65-6706: 102

105-1158131

THE GUS SURVEY WAS INSTITUTED BY THE

SAN FRANCISCO OFFICE OF

FBI UN OCTOBER 30, 1961, AND WAS DISCONTINUED ON FEBRUARY 9, 1962.

IHE SURVEY TOOK PLACE AT THE RINCON ANNEX POST OFFICE IN SAN

PRANCISCO.

18Z JUL 25.1975

423

5°

•B? BOUTE IN ENVELOPE

NW 65994 Docld:32175170 Page 32

---

## Page 33

PAGE IWO SF 62-6887

THE PRIMARY OBJECTIVE OF THE GUS SURVEY WAS TO ATTEMPT TO

LOCATE AND UNCOVER SOVIET ILLEGAL AGENTS. THE SURVEY INVOLVED

THE EXAMINATION OF ALL FIRSI CLASS MAIL ENVELOPES ARRIVING AT THE

RINCON ANNEX POST OFFICE WHICH ORIGINATED FROM WASHINGTON, D.C.,

OR NEW YORK CITY. THE ENVELOPES ONLY WERE SCANNED FOR CHARACTER-

ISTICS WHICH WOULD INDICATE THAT THEY COULD HAVE ORIGINATED FROM A

SUVIET ILLEGAL SUPPORI AGENT AND POSSIBLY BE DIRECTED TO AN ILLEGAL

SOVIET AGENT IN THE SAN FRANCISCO AREA.

THE SURVEY WAS BASED ON INFORMATION DEVELOPED CONCERNING

COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTED FROM KNOWN ILLEGAL SUPPORT AGENTS ATTACHED

TO SOVIET ESTABLISHMENTS IN NEW YORK AND WASHINGION, D.G., TO

SOVIET ILLEGAL AGENTS RESIDING IN THE UNITED STATES. PREVIOUS

ANALYSIS OF MAIL COMMUNICATIONS FROM SOVIET ILLEGAL SUPPORT AGENTS

TO SOVIET ILLEGALS OPERATIONG IN THE UNITED STATES IN THE 1960°S

REVEALED THAT PRIMARY CHARACTERISTICS ON SUSPECT ENVELOPES WERE:

1. LACK OF RETURN ADDRESS.

2• TYPEWRITTEN ADDRESS IN BLOCK FORM.

3. USE OF LINCOLN S. D4 STAMPS.

4. USE OF "BUSINESS SIZE" WHITE OR BROWN ENVELOPES.

S• ADDRESS OCCASIONALLY TYPEWRITTEN ON A "STICKER" GLUED

SECRET

NW 55089 DocId: 32989618 Page 115

NW 65994 Docld:32175170 Page 33

---

## Page 34

PAGE THREE SF 62- 6887

TO ENVELOPE.

WHEN AN ENVELOPE WITH MANY OR ALL. OF THE ABOVE CHARACTERISTICS

WAS OBSERVED, AN INVESTIGATION WAS INSTITUTED FOR THE PURPOSE OF

DETERMINING IF THE ADDRESSEE COULD POSSIBLY BE A SOVIET ILLEGAL

AGENI.

THIS SURVEY WAS AUTHORIZED FOR A GO DAY PERIOD AND WAS

TERMINATED AT ONE POINT DURING 1961 CHRISIMAS RUSH ONLY TO BE

RE- INSTITUTED IN ORDER TO COMPLETE THE 6U DAY AUTHORIZATION PERIOD.

SINCE ALL FIRST CLASS MAIL ENVELOPES WERE SCANNED, IT WAS

ESTIMATED THAT APPROXIMATELY 130, ODD ENVELOPES A DAY

WOULD BE

SCANNED FOR THE ABOVE CHARACTERISTIC.

DURING THE SURVEY PERIOD, MORE THAN 1,101,88D ENVELOPES WERE

SCANNED AND 83 INVESTIGATIONS WERE INITIATED. / ALL 83 INVESTIGATIONS

WERE EVENTUALLY CLOSED INASMUCH

AS NO INTELLIGENCE OPERATIONS OR

ILLEGAL AGENTS APPEARED TO BE INVOLVED IN ANY OF THE SUSPECT MAIL.

PERTINENT COMMUNICATIONS CONCERNING THE GUS SURVEY AND.

INCLUDED IN BOTH SAN FRANCISCO AND BUREAU FILES ARE AS FOLLOWS:

SAN FRANCISCO LETTER TO THE BUREAU DATED SEPTEMBER 26, 1961,

CAPTIONED "SAM SURVEY," BUREAU FILE 65-658840

in 341

NW 55089 DocId: 32989618 Page 116

NW 65994 Docld:32175170 Page 34

---

## Page 35

PAGE FOUR SF 62-6887

SECRET

ADDITIONAL PERTINENT COMMUNICATIONS CONCERNING THE GUS

SURVEY AND LOCATED IN BUREAU FILE 65-67003 AND SAN FRANGISCO

FILE 105 - 11581, ARE AS FOLLOWS:

BUREAU LETTER TO SAN FRANCISCO DATED OCTOBER 4, 1961..

SAN FRANCISCO AIRTEL TO THE BUREAU DATED OCTOBER 13, 1961.

'BUREAU LETIER TO SAN FRANCISCO DATED OCTOBER 18, 1961.

SAN FRANCISCO LETTER TO BUREAU DATED NOVEMBER L, 1961,

CUNFIRMING THAT THE GUS SURVEY WAS INSTITUTED AT 12801 AM,

OCTOBER 30, 1961, AND THAT SYMBOL NUMBER OSSF 2536-S WAS ASSIGNED.

SAN FRANGISCO LETTER TO BUREAU DATED NOVEMBER 21, 1961.

SAN FRANCISCO LETIER TO BUREAU DATED JANUARY 11, 1962.

SAN FRANCISCO LETTER TO BUREAU DATED MARCH 21, 1962,

CONFIRMING THAT THE GUS SURVEY WAS DISCONTINUED ON FEBRUARY 9, 1962.

IN VIEW OF THE AMOUNT OF ENVELOPES WHICH HAD TO BE SCANNED

NUMEROUS AGENTS OF THE SAN FRANCISCO OFFICE OF THE FBI WERE

WILIZED INCLUDING THE FOLLOWING:

RICHARD E. STEPHENS

JOHN T. KERLER

DOUGLAS G. ALLEN

STANLEY J. EAGER

NW 55089 DocId:32989618 Page 117

NW 65994 Docld:32175170. Page 35

---

## Page 36

PAGE FIVE

SF 62-6887

RECIT

WILLIAM F. MC LAUGHLIN

FRED ELLEDGE

WILLIAM A. COHENDET

DONALD L. COFFIN

JOSEPH M. WUSLICH

HARRY L. MC NEILL

KEITH G. TEETER

WAYNE K. WELCH

DAVID C. SPENCER

STANLEY F. FEWSTER

DANIEL AO GROVE

JOHN P. MC HUGH

JAMES E. SHERRIFF

CLIFFORD J. CARMODY

JAMES WEIL

CHIPROP (BUFILE 105-121706, SF 105-2563)

CHIPROP WAS OPENED AT SAN FRANCISCO BY SAN FRANCISCO LETTER

TO BUREAU DATED SEPTEMBER 17, 1954, AND WAS OPERATED AS A MAIL

COVER UNTIL JULY, 1956, WHEN CONTENTS OF A LETTER RECEIVED FROM

CHINA BY COMMUNIST PARTY FUNCTIONARY, ELIZABETH GURLEY FLYNN, WERE

SEORET

WN 55089 DocId: 32989618 Page 118

NW 65994 Docld:32175170 Page 36

---

## Page 37

PAGE SIX SF 62-6887

SHRIEN

SET OUI IN SAN FRANCISCO LETTER TO BUREAU DATED JULY 25, 1956.

THERLAFTER CONTENTS OF LETTERS FROM CHINA WERE REGULARLY EXAMINED,

ITEMS IN CHINESE WERE REGULARLY FURNISHED TO THE BUREAU FOR TRANS-

LATION ON A SELECTIVE BASIS. APPROXIMATELY, APPROXIMATELY, 4D,D00 ITEMS OF

CORRESPONDENCE APPEAR TO HAVE BEEN EXAMINED UNDER THE CHIPROP

PROGRAM. THE CASE WAS ORIGINALLY OPENED IN CONNECTION WITH THE

UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT POLICY OF INTERCEPTING COMMUNIST

PROPAGANDA FROM ABROAD, AND EXAMINATION OF MAIL WAS HANDLED IHROUGH

THE RESTRICIED MERCHANDISE SECTION OF THE UNITED STATES CUSTOMS

OFFICE AI SAN FRANCISCO. SAN FRANCISCO AIRTEL DATED APRIL 6, 1961,

DIRECTED TO BUREAU FILE 134-5108, INDICATED COVERAGE DISCONTINUED

SINCE INTERCEPTION OF COMMUNIST PROPAGANDA DISCONTINUED BY

PRESIDENTIAL ORDER ON MARCH 87, 19610 BUREAU RADIOGRAM DATED

APRIL 11, 1961, REQUESTED COMMENTS REGARDING RESUMPTION OF COVERAGE

AND SAME WAS REINSTITUTED JULY 14, 19610 WITH SAN FRANCISCO AIRTEL

THAT DATE. BY SAN FRANCISCO AIRTEL DATED APRIL 23, 1962, CHIPROP

DO VERAGE WAS DISCONTINUED SINCE RESTRICTED MERCHANDISE UNIT MOVED

FROM CUSTOMS HOUSE TO RINCON ANNEX OF UNITED STATES POST OFFICE.

BUREAU LETTER DATED SEPTEMBER 14, 1963, REQUESTED SAN FRANCISCO

DETERMINE IF CHIPROP COVERAGE COULD BE RESUMED. SAN FRANCISCO

N 55089 DocId: 32989618 Page 119

NW 65994 Docld:32175170 Page 37

---

## Page 38

PAGE SEVEN SF 62-6887

LETTER

DATED SEPTEMBER 21, 1962, ADVISED CSSF 2279-S COULD NOT

BE RE-ACTIVATED BUT POSSIBILITY OF RESUMPTION OF CHIPROP COVERAGE

THROUGH THAT SOURCE WOULD BE FOLLOWED. SAN FRANCISCO AIRTEL DATED

JUNE 12, 1963, ADVISED THAT CHIPROP COVERAGE WAS BEING RE-INSTITUTED

THROUGH THE FOREIGN PROPAGANDA UNIT AT THE UNITED STATES CUSTOMS

HOUSE, THAT SOURCE BEING DESIGNATED AS CSSF 2641-S. WHEN THE

FOREIGN PROPAGANDA UNIT MOVED TO RINCON ANNEX, MAIL COVERAGE

CONTINUED TO BE SECURED THROUGH IS AND STILL LATER, COVERAGE WAS

SECURED THROUGH THE HEAD OF THE AIR MAIL FACILITY OF THE UNITED

STATES POSI OFFICE. IN ALL CASES, MAIL SELECTED FOR EXAMINATION

WAS OPENED ONLY IN THE SAN FRANCISCO OFFICE OF THE FBI DURING

EARLY MORNING HOURS JUST AFTER MIDNIGHT AND WAS RETURNED

TO THE

PUSTAL FACILITY SAME DATE.

CHICLET (BUFILE 105-121706, SF 105-14767)

CHICLET WAS INITIATED IN COMPLIANCE WITH BUREAU LETTER DATED

SEPTEMBER 9, 1963. SAN FRANCISCO LETTER DATED OCTOBER 28, 1963,

INDICATED CHICLET COVERAGE WOULD BE COVERED THROUGH THE SUPER-

INTENDANT OF THE AIR MAIL FACILITY OF THE UNITED SIATES POST OFFICE

AND INITIAL EXAMINATION WOULD BE MADE IN HIS OFFICE. HOWEVER, AS

IN THE CASE OF CHIPROP, ALL ITEMS SELECTED FOR INTERNAL EXAMINATION

AND 0

SW 55089 DocId: 32989618

NW 65994 Docld:32175170 Page 38

Page 120

---

## Page 39

PAGE EIGHT SF 62-6887

WERE TAKEN TO THE FBI OFFICE TO BE OPENED AND XEROXED.

CHIPROP COVERAGE WAS DESIGNATED AS FURNISHED BY CSSF 2670-S.

MORE THAN 4, ODD ITEMS WERE EXAMINED UNDER THE CHICLET PROGRAM.

CHICLET AND CHIPROP COVERAGE BOTH WERE DISCONIINUED IN 1966

AFTER LIMP. LEE WAS APPOINTED AS POSIMASTER OF SAN FRANCISCO,

JANUARY 24, 1966, IT BEING POINTED OUT TO THE BUREAU THAT LEE

HAD BEEN ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT OF CONGRESSMAN PHILLIP BURTON

AND THAT IT WAS FELT NO CHANCE SHOULD BE TAKEN THAT BURTON MIGHT

BECOME AWARE OF THE COVERAGE BY THE FBI.:

CHIPROP AND CHICLET COVERAGE WERE CARRIED OUT UNDER THE

SUPERVISION OF FORMER SUPERVISOR RICHARD G. FLETCHER, WHO IS NOW

RETIRED AND RESIDING IN SAN MATEO, CALIFORNIA. THE CHIPROP CASE

WAS FIRST ASSIGNED TO SA PATRICK J. HAGGERTY AND WAS HANDLED

DURING 1964 BY FORMER SA PAUL JO ISCHIDA. THE CHIPROP CASE AWAS

REASSIGNED ON JANUARY 15, 1965, TO SA BERTRAM WORTHINGTON, WHO

CONTINUED TO HANDLE THE CASE UNTIL IT WAS CLOSED IN 1966. THE

CHICLET CASE WAS ASSIGNED TO SA PATRICK J. HAGGERTY AT ITS

INCEPTION AND WAS REASSIGNED ON JANUARY 27, 1964, TO SA BERIRAM

WORTHINGTON, WHO CONTINUED TO HANDLE IT UNTIL IT WAS CLOSED IN

1966. NO EXACT RECORD IS AVAILABLE OF THE IDENTITIES OF THE

MAS/

55089 DocId: 32989618 Page 121

NW 65994 Docld:32175170-Page 39-

---

## Page 40

PAGE NINE SF 62-6887

S200

SPECIAL AGENTS WHO ACTUALLY OPENED THE MAIL UNDER THE CHIPROP AND

CHICLET PROGRAMS. HOWEVER, SAN FRANCISCO FILE 105-2563, SERIAL

99 IS A MEMORANDUM DATED DECEMBER 20, 1963, WHICH LISTS SPECIAL

AGENIS WHO SHOULD RECEIVE SMALLPOX VACCINATIONS BECAUSE OF THE

VOLUME UF MAIL FROM CHINA AND HONG KONG WHICH THEY WERE HANDLING.

THE SPECIAL AGENIS LISTED WERE THE FOLLOWING:

DOUGLAS G. ALLEN

THOMAS D. MC GOLDRICK

WILLIAM A. COHENDET (SINCE RETIRED)

DAVID N. NUNN

DANIEL AO GROVE

WILLIAM F. MC LAUGHLIN

PAUL J. ISCHIDA (SINCE RESIGNED)

JOSEPH M. WUSHLICH

ALBERT GO HIGGINS

BERTRAM WORTHINGTON

RICHARD E. STEPHENS (SINCE RETIRED)

STANLEY F. FEWSTER (SINCE RETIRED)

VAJA KULOMBATOVIC

Go STEWART THATFORD (SINCE RETIRED)

NW 55089 DocId: 32989618 Page 122

NW 65994 Docld:32175170- Page 40-

---

## Page 41

PAGE TEN

SF 62-6887

PATRICK J. HAGGERTY, JR.

HARRY L MC NEILL (SINCE RETIRED)

[55 5592-5 | 45)

SINCE AUGUST 15, 1972, SAN FRANCISCO HAS MAINTAINED A MAIL

OVER ON THE SOVIET CONSULATE, 2790 GREEN SIREET, SAN FRANCISCO,

CALIFORNEAR FOR THE PURPOSE OF ASSISTING THE BUREAU IN FULFILLING

ITS INVESTIGATIVE RESPONSIBILITIES PERTAINING TO THE INTERNAL

SECURITY OF THE UNITED STATES. THE MATTER IS ENTITLED SOVIET

DUNSUL GENERAL, SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA, IS - R, BUREAU FILE

105-2108320757

THIS MAIL COVER WHICH OCCURS AT THE MARINA STATION, UNITED

STATES POST OFFICE, LOCATED AT 3225 FILLMORE STREET, SAN FRANGISCO,

CALIFORNIA, IS PRESENTLY HANDLED STRICILY BY UNITED STATES POSI

OFFICE EMPLOYEES THROUGH THE COOPERATION OF POSTAL INSPECTOR J.W.

WINEGAR FOR FIRSI CLASS MAIL/IN EFFORTS TO DETERMINE THE IDENTITY

UF PERSONS IN CORRESPONDENCE WITH THE CONSULATE. BUREAU, EMPLOYEES

DO NOT ACTIVELY PARTICIPATE IN THE PHYSICAL REVIEW OF MAIL: MAIL

IS NOT OPENED OR INTERCEPTED AND FBI IS ONLY PROVIDED WITH RETURN

ADDRESS ON ENVELOPES ADDRESSED TO SAN FRANCISCO SOVIET CONSULATE.

IHE MAIL COVER OF THE SOVIET CONSULATE WAS INITIATED BY A LETTER +5J

INW#: 65360

NW 65994 Docld:32175170 Page 41

Docid: 32989618

---

## Page 42

PAGE ELEVEN

SF 62-6887

FROM ACTING DIRECTOR L. PATRICK GRAY, III, TO THE ASSISTANT POST-

MASTER GENERAL, INSPECTION SERVICE, UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE,

WASHINGTON, DO CO, DATED JULY 13, 1972, FOR A PERIOD OF 120 DAYS.

THE JUSTIFICATION FOR SAME COVER HAS BEEN RENEWED AT 120 DAY

INTERVALS SINCE THAI DATE AND IS CURRENTLY JUSTIFIED UNTIL

JULY 13, 1975.

CLASSIFIED BY 5478

XGDS 2 AND 3, INDEFINITE.

END .

TOLD PLS

NW 63994 Bocld:82175770 Page 42 Page 124

---

## Page 43

1 - Mr.

Adams

- Mr.

Wannall

- Mr. Cregar

- Mx. Mintz

- Mr. Hotis

1 - Mr. Daly

July 2. 1975

i - Personnel File Special Agent

David: E. Todd

I - Mr. Miller

MI. Dated E. Tood

20 CORIOlINO DIIVE

Millbrae, California

94030

DARE MI. PROCEE!

Thank you for your letter of June 11, 1975.

You are released fma the FBI Employmant Agrecmant

'for the purpose of a stuff interview by the semate select

committne on Intelligence Activliles ConceIRing COnVELPRO

and the samstigation at san Frescisco, Callfornta, of the

Black Panther party.

I am not aware of any other release you may require.

Pursuant to pour request of Jane 11, 1975, a

spocial Agent w111 be avallable sustag the laterview to

asslot you in maldog a detesalaaston vether on not a

resposas should ba made to a particular question.

this

agent ln not so be cosalderod private cousal sa be will

aot he present duriny the doteries.

F87 files w11l nor ba made mallable for the

Intervier.

(9775-60203

ALL INFORMATION CONTAINED

sIncoraly J0u15.

ENCLOSURE

HEREIN

IS UNCLASSIFIED

DATE 11/30/83 BYSP-J TAP/RBE

REC- 107

Clarence M. Rolley

Director

3 JUI. 9

1975

324

Assor. Dir. -

Dep. AD Adm. -

Dep. AD Inv.

Asst. Dir.:

Admin.

Comp. Syst. -

JDM: PVD:eek

(13)

Ext, Affaira

Files & Com. _

Gan. Ino. -

Ident.

Inspection

Intell. -

Laboratory...

Plon. & Eval. ¿

Spec. Inv. m

etin

Training

Logal Coun.

Telephone Rm.

Director Sec'y

MAIL ROOM

TELETYPE UNIT [

NW 65994- Docid: 32175170-Page 43 --

Former SA Todd signed a secrecy agreement with the Bureau on

12-3-62.

10

no sainte

---

## Page 44

July 2, 1975

J1F:0]

10:

SAC, San Francisco (62-6837)

From: Dircotor, IBI (62-116395)

и ет может.

subject:,

SENSTUDY 75

CA# 15-4283

ALL INFORMATION CONTAINED

HEREIN

ATE 1/30/83B\5P-J TAP/ RIE

Rebutel June 9, 1975.

inclosed is a letter from the Diroctor to formor

Spacial Agent David I. Todd.

YOu, an ASAC, Or Senior Supervisor

please hand deliver onclosed lotcer to ur.

Todd immediately.

• You are rominded of a memorandum to all employees,

"INDERVIENS OF FBI EMPLOYEES, " in which the Director

advised this bureau has pledged its cooperation with the Congress.

Enclosure

I-Mr. Adams

I-Mr. Wannall

1-Mx. Cregar.

I-Mr. Mintz

I-Mr. Hotis

I-MI.

Daly

1-Personal File Special Agent David E. Toda

1-Mr. Miller

62-116395-324

PVD: 1gP

(12)

/ ENCLOSURE

MAILED 6

To 111 1232 - 324-

Assoc. Dir,

Dep. AD Adm. -

Dep. AD Inv. -

Asst. Dir.:

Admin,.

JUL 3 1975

-FBI

Comp. Syst.

Ext. Affairs

Files & Com. a.

Gen. Inv.-

Ident. _.

Inspection

Intell.

Laboratory fi.

Plan. & Eval. =

Spec.Inv.c

Training -

Legal Sena

elephone Rm. w

N 65994-Sord:32175172861

3 JUL 9 1975

TELETYPE UNIT CORT I

GPO 954515

---

## Page 45

SPECIAL

GP 0 909.767

NR055 WA CODE

11:42PM NITEL 7/9/75 PLD

TO L05 ANGELES

SAN DIEGO

SAN FRANCISCO

FROM DIRECTOR (82-116395)

SENSTUDY 75 56-1700-4124

BUDED COB JULY 14, 1975

UNITED STATES SELECI COMMITTEE TO STUDY GOVERNMENTAL

OPERATIONS WIH RESPECT TO INTELLIGENCE ACIIVITIES IS

EXAMINING "MEASURES DIRECED AGAINST THE BLACK PANTHER PARTY

(BPP) IN THE LATE 1960S AND EARLY I970S IN SAN FRANCISCO -

OAKLAND, LOS ANGELES AND SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA, BY THE FIELD .

OFFICES OF THE FBI." AS A PARI OF THIS REQUEST FBIHQ HAS BEEN

REQUESTED TO FURNISH "A LIST OF ALL LOCAL POLICE DEPARIMENIS

AND PERSONNEL CONTACTED RELATIVE TO THIS COINTELPRO; A LIST OF

ALL MEDIA PERSONS CONTACTED IN RELATION TO THIS COINTELPRO AND

THE MEDIA AFFILIATION; AND A LIST OF ALL FBI PERSONNEL

CONNECTED WITH THIS COINTELPRO, THEIR SPECIFIC CONNECIION, AND

THEIR PRESENT LOCAION." IN ADDITION IO ABOVE, THE COMMITTEE

1111

66-6243-111

SEARCHED.

E21201/4194/1

SERIALLED

JUU? 1975

FBI L LOS ANGELES

NW 65994*Docld:32175170 -Page 45 *

---

## Page 46

'PAGE IWO

REQUESTS INFORMATION AS TO THE WHEREABOUIS AND CURRENT

RELATIONSHIP TO THE FBI OF "PRIMARY CASE AGENTS RESPONSIBLE

FOR THIS COINTELPRO IN THE FIELD. "

IT IS FELT BY FBIHQ THAT THE ABOVE INFORMATION SHOULD

BE EXCLUDED FROM DATA BEING FURNISHED COMMITTEE; HOWEVER,

SHOULD NEGOTIATIONS FAIL IN OBTAINING AND EXEMPTION, THIS

DATA IS BEING COMPILED AT FBIHQ. IT IS REALIZED THAT A

PARTIAL ANSWER TO THESE QUESTIONS MAY BÈ AVAILABLE IN BUREAU.

FILES; HOWEVER, COMPLETE DATA NECESSARY IS NOT AVAIABLE AT

FBIHQ: ALL OFFICES SHOULD FURNISH BY TELETYPE NO LATER

THAN CLOSE OF BUSINESS JULY 14, 1975, ATTENTION INTELLIGENCE

DIVISION - MR: W: O: CREGAR, DATA REQUESTED BY THE COMMITTÉE

SE OUT ABOVE®

END 9

HOLD

NW 65994-Docld:32175170 Page 46

---

## Page 47

MUNICATIONS SECTIOW

Dep.-A.D.-Adm.

Den.-A.D.-Inv.

Asst. Dir.:

NR 004 SF CODE

Alains.

Coin. Syst.

1246

TO

PM URGENT 7/14/75 MCC-

Ext. Affairs

Fil: & Com.

G21. Inv. -

DIRECTOR

Ident.

I intin

FROM SAN FRANCISCO (62-6887)

4P

Int "

Plea. & Lal.

ATTA INTELLIGENCE DIVISION - MR.

CREGAR

Spr: Inv. --

UNITED STATES SELECT COMMITTEE TO STUDY GOVERNMENTAL OPERATEd one.

WITH RESPECT TO INTELLIGENCE ACTIVITIES IS EXAMINING

MEASURES

Director Sec'y

DIRECTED AGAINST THE BLACK PANTHER PARTY (BPP) IN THE LATE

1960S AND EARLY 1970S IN SAN FRANCISCO - OAKLAND, LOS ANGELES

AND SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA, BY THE FIELD OFFICES OF THE FEI"

RE BUREAU NITEL JULY 9, 1975.

Signi

FOLLOWING IS A LIST OF ALL LOCAL POLICE DEPARTMENTS AND

PERSONNEL CONTACTED BY THE SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION RELATIVE TO

THIS COINTELPRO:

IN NOVEMBER 1968, UNKNOWN OFFICERS OF THE SAN FRANCISCO

POLICE DEPARTMENT WERE CONTACTED IN ORDER TO GIVE WILFRED

5.

HOLIDAY, ALSO KNOWN AS CAPTAIN CRUTCH, SPECIAL PRIVILEGES AT

CITY PRISON. SEE SAN FRANCISCO LETTER DECEMBER 2, 1968,

ENTITLED "COUNTERINTELLIGENCE PROGRAM, BLACK NATIONALISF - HATE

GROUP, RACIAL INTELLIGENCE (BLACK PANTHER PARTY), BUFILE 100-448006.

WIn/

, EX-106

CAH: 15-4203

ALL INFORMATION CONTAINED

HEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED

DATE/2/1/83 BY5P2 TAPIRBE

REG53 62 1.5/=

3

JUL 21 1975

man so te

& AUs b

1975

35108

DocId: 32989624

NW 65994 Docld:32175170 Page 47

Page 231

---

## Page 48

PAGE TWO

SF 62-6887

IN JANUARY 1969, UNKNOWN POLICE, OFFICERS, BERKELEY POLICE

DEPARIMENT, WERE ADVISED THAT RICHARD AND SAM NAPIER WERE

MEMBERS OF THE BPP. THIS INFORMATION WAS FURNISHED TO THE

BERKELEY POLICE DEPARTMENI AFTER AN ARMORED CAR WAS HELD UP AND

A GUARD MURDERED AND THE GETAWAY CAR WAS FOUND TO BE REGISTERED

TO RICHARD NAPIER. SEE SAN FRANCISCO LETTER TO THE BUREAU

JANUARY 13, 1969, ENTITLED "COINTELPRO, BLACK NATIONALIST - HATE

GROUPS (BLACK PANTHER PARTY).

IN EARLY 1969, AN UNKNOWN OFFICER, SHERIFF'S OFFICE,

ALAMEDA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA,. AT OAKLAND, WAS ADVISED OF THE USE

BY A FILM COMPANY (MGM) OF BLACK PANTHERS AS "PROPS" IN THEIR

FILMING OF BERKELEY RIOT SCENES. THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE IN TURN

FURNISHED THIS INFORMATION TO THE BERKELEY PRESS. SEE SAN

FRANCISCO LETTER TO THE BUREAU MARCH 1D, 1969, ENTITLED

"COUNTERINTELLIGENCE PROGRAM, BLACK NATIONALISI - HATE GROUP,

RACIAL INTELLIGENCE, BLACK PANTHER PARTY."

IN APRIL 1969, INFORMATION WAS RECEIVED THAT THE BPP WAS

PLANNING A MEETING BETWEEN SOME OF THEIR LEADERS AND SOME OF THE

PEOPLE WHO HAD LEFI THE PARTY IN AN EFFORT TO GET THEM BACK

TOGETHER, THIS INFORMATION WAS FURNISHED IO RICHARD VAGNER,

HW 55108 DocId: 32989624 Page 232

NW 65994 Docld:32175170* Page 48

---

## Page 49

PAGE THREE

SF 62-6887

OAKLAND POLICE DEPARIMENT, ON APRIL 18, 1969, WHO, IN TURN,

APPARENTLY FED THE INFORMATION TO THE BLACK PANTHER RENEGADES

WHO CONSTRUED THIS APPARENTLY AS A "SET UP" AND DID NOI ATTEND.

THIS INCIDENT IS RECORDED IN SAN FRANCISCO SERIAL 157-601-201.

ON) SEPTEMBER 26, 1969, SERGEANI STAN WHITE, OAKLAND POLICE

DEPARTMENT, INTELLIGENCE UNIT, VAS ADVISED TRAT INFORMATION

HAS BEEN RECEIVED THAT THOMAS JOLLY, A BPP MEMBER, WAS PLANNING

TO CONTACT PROBATION OFFICER IN OAKLAND, CALIFORNIA, 'TO

REPRESENT HIMSELF AS THE UNCLE OF BELVA NEWSON, ANOTHER BPP

MEMBER WHO HAD BEEN ARRESTED. JOLLY, WHO IS NOT NEWSON'S UNCLE,

PLANNED TO ARRANGE FOR HER RELEASE TO THEM. THIS MATTER IS

RECORDED IN SAN FRANCISCO FILE 157-601-3560

SAN FRANCISCO FILE DOES NOT REFLECT MEDIA PERSONNEL

WERE CONTACTED IN RÉLÁTION TO THIS PROGRAM.

LSA RAYMOND N.

BYERS, LAST KNOWN BY SAN FRANCISCO TO BE

ASSISTANT LEGAT, JONKYO, WAS NAMED COORDINATOR OF THE COINTELPRO -

BPP ON APRIL 3, 1268.

Z.THE CASE WAS REASSIGNED APRIL 18, 1968,

TO FORMER LSA WILLIAM

YEOMENDET WHO PRESENTLY RESIDES AT 1557 BALBOA

SNEAKIN

WAY, BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA 9401D. THIS MATTER WAS REASSIGNED

TO SA LEO SOU BRENNELSEN MAY 16, 1969. THE MATTER WAS CLOSED ON

MAY 1, 19710

PLS MAKE READ-LAST PARAGRAPH-2ND LINE IRD WORD READ TOKYO REPT TOKYO

MH 55108 DocId:32989624 Page 233

NW 65994 Dold:32175170 Page 49

---

## Page 50

PAGE FOUR

SP 62-6887

THIS MATTER WAS SUPERVISED BY FORMER SA ALBERT P

/CLARK

FROM APRIL 3, 1968 TO MAY 9, 1970. CLARK PRESENTLY RESIDES

66 ELM AVENUE, LARKSPUR, CALIFORNIA 94939. COINTELPRO - BPP

WAS SUPERVISED BY FORMER SA DAVID ED TODD FROM FEBRUARY 9, 1978

TO MAY 1, 1971, TODD RESIDES AI 20 COZZOLINO DRIVE, MILLBRATE,

CALIFORNIA 94030.

END

LER FWAUTXX WAIT A MINUTE ON 3RD-PAGE-2, DXX-2, 2-ND-TOL

LASI-LINE-LASIZOA

-VORD-READ MILLBRAE REPT MILLBRAE

AH 55108 DocId: 32989624

NW 65994 Docld:32175170 Page 50

Page 234

---

## Page 51

COPY RETAINED

PERSONNEL RECORDS

UNIT

CODE

TELETYPE

TO SACS SAN DIEGO

SAN FRANCISCO

SEATTLE

2

J. A. Mintz

-

Mc. J. B. Hotis)'

-/Mr. W. R. Wannall

NITEL

1-

W. 0. Cregar

JULY 17, 1975

1 - Mr. S. F. Phillips ,

PERSONAL ATTENTION

FROM DIRECTOR FBI (62-116395)

SENSTUDY 75/

ALL INFORMATION CONTAINED

DATE 10/12,00

REBUTEL MAY 2, 1975!

ENTER

INQUIRIES MADE OF BUREAU BY SENATE SELECT COMMITTEE (SSC)

CONCERNING BELOW-LISTED FORMER FBI EMPLOYEES SUGGESTS THAT THEY

MAY BE INTERVIEWED BY SSC STAFF. INTERVIEWS WILL CONCERN

COINTELPRO ACTIVITIES DIRECTED AGAINST THE BLACK PANTHER PARTY

IN THE LATE 1960'S AND EARLY 1970'S BY THE SAN DIEGO,

SAN FRANCISCO AND SEATTLE OFFICES. SET OUT BELOW ARE LAST

KNOWN ADDRESSES OF THESE FORMER BUREAU EMPLOYEES.

EACH OF IEESE FORMER EMPLOYEES IS IO BE IMMEDIATELY

CONTACTED AND ALERTED THAT HE MIGHT BE APPROACHED BY THE SSC

STAFF. THEY SHOULD BE TOLD THAT IN THE EVENT THEY ARE INTER-

VIEWED AND DURING THE COURSE OF SAME, QUESTIONS ARE ASKED WHICH

RELATE TO SENSITIVE BUREAU OPERATIONS (SOURCES, METHODS,

SFP: 1hb |hb

(7)

SEE NOTE PAGE 3

Assoe. Dir.

Dep. AD Adm. -

Dep. AD inv. -

Asst, Dir.:

Admin.

Comp. Syst.

Ext. Affairs

Files & Com,

Gon. Inv. -.

MAUNICATIONS SECTION

Ident. -

Inspection -

Intell.

JUD 1 7 1975

Laboratory.c

Plan. & Eval. -

Spec. inv.-

Training -

TELEMPE

Legal Coun. -

Telephone Rm. -

gregor Still 2 2 197

75 ROOM

NW 65994-Docld:32175170-Page 51 -

TELETYPE UNIT

382

-3. JUL 21 1975':

---

## Page 52

PAGE INO

62-116395

TECHNIQUIS, THIRD AGENCY RULE AND ONGOING INVESTIGATIONS),

THEY MAY REQUEST AN FBI AGENT BE PRESENT. BUREAU WILL PROVIDE -

AGENT ON REQUEST OF INTERVIEVEE. AGENT WILL NOT BE PRESENT AT

INTERVIEW ITSELF BUT MERELY AVAILABLE NEARBY FOR CONSULTATION

PURPOSES, AS A PRELUDI TO INTERVIEW, THE FORMER EMPLOYEE MAY,

AFTER BEING CONTACTED BY SSC SIAFE, CONTACI BUREAU'S LIGAL

COUNSEL DIVISION BY COLLECT CALL FOR FULL INFORMATION TO ASSIST

HIM, INCLUDING OBIIGATIONS AS IO CONFIDENTIALITY OF INFORMATION

ACQUIRED AS FBI EMPLOYEE. IT IS EMPHASIZED THAT BUREAU'S OFFER

OF ASSISTANCE IS NOT INTENDED TO IMPEDE SSC WORK BUT IS DONE

AS COOPERATIVE GESTURE AND TO SAFEGUARD SENSITIVE BUREAU

INFORMATION. CONTACTS WITH THESE FORMER EMPLOYEES TO BE

HANDLED PARSONALLY BY SAC OR ASAC. IN EVENT THIS NOT FEASIBLE

FOR JUST CAUSE, TO BE HANDLED BY A SENIOR SUPERVISOR.

BUREAU SHOULD BE ADVISED BY TELETYPE AFTER THE FORMER

EMPLOYEES HAVE BEEN CONTACTED IN LINE WITH THE ABOVE INSTRUCTIONS.

IF A FORMER EMPLOYEE NO LONGER IN YOUR TERRITORY OR TEMPORARILY

AWAY, SET OUT LEAD TO OTHER OFFICE INMEDIATELY WITH COPY TO

FBI HEADQUARTERS.

SAN DIEGO: ROBERT S. BAKER, 4268 HORTENSIA, SAN DIEGO,

CALIFORNIA 92103.

NW 65994- Docld:32175170-Page 52 -

---

## Page 53

PAGE THREE

62-116395

SAN FRANCISCO: ALBERI P. CLARK, 66 EL AVENUE, LARKSPUR,

CALIFORNIA 94939. WILLIAM COHENDET, 1557 BALBOA WAY,

BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA 94010.

SEATTLE: LEROY W. SHEETS,..

5725 72ND STREET,

N.E.,

MARYSVILLE, WASHINGTON 98270.

NOTE:

The referenced Bureau teletype 5/2/75 vas a general

instruction to all SAls concerning the SSC and Bureau's

cooperation with same.

We are currently processing a request

from the SSC concerning COINTELPRO-BPP in West Coast offices,

and among the items of information ve are supplying are the

current whereabouts of Agents who worked on COINTELPRO as

Coordinators and Supervisors in the indicated offices. This

teletype to alert the former Agents is in accordance with the

procedure we have been following.

NW 65994- Docld:32175170-Page 53

---

## Page 54

Assoc. Dir. -

Dep.-A.D.-Adm.-

Asst. Dir.:

Admin.

NR

KiDS SF CODE

Comp. Syst. -

Ext. Affairs

Files & Com.

:27 PM NITEL 7/18/75 CUC

Gen. Inv. -

ALK 1 8 1975

Ident.

Inspection

10 :

PRUM:

DIRECTOR (62-116395)

SAN FRANCISCO (62-6887)

Intell. -

TELEN PE

Laboratory

Plan. & Eval. -

Spec. Inv. -

SENSUUY 73

Training

Legal Coun

Telephone In. -

REDUTEL, JULY 17, 1975.

Director Sec'y

FURMER SA WILLIA COHENDET ADVISED OF CONTENES OF RETEL @FRE

¿HIS DATE. FORMER SA ALBERT P. CLARK IN TRAVEL STATUS ON

VACATIUN UNTIL MONDAY, JULY 21, AT WHICH TIME HE WILL ALSO BE

AUVI SEU.

LIND

HULU PLS

ALL INFORMATION CONTAMES

CUPY RETAINED IN

ERSORIZEL RECORDS

• COHENDET)

121 116-373-390

cc- 67-

3 JUL 22 1975

84 JUL 2 2 1975

MW 55037

DocId: 32989617

NW 65994 Docld:32175170 Page 54

Page 223

---

## Page 55

NR 053 WA CODE

8:35PM NITEL 7-30-75 FLC

10 LOS ANGELES

SAN DIEGO

SAN FRANCISCO

FROM DIRECTOR (62-11.6395) -

SENSTUDY 75

REBUTEL MAY 2, 1975.

SENATE SELECT COMMITTEE (SSC) STAFF MEMBER LESTER SEIDEL

HAS FURNISHED THE FOLLOWING TENTATIVE SCHEDULE FOR INTERVIEWS

IN YOUR OFFICE: SAN DIEGO JULY 3D, 1975 SAS EARL. Mo PETERSEN,

LAWRENCE FO WIRICK; LOS ANGELES AUGUST 5, 1975 WALLACE E. WARD,

RICHARD A. BLOESER, AUGUST 7, 1975 ASSISTANI DIRECIOR ROBERT E.

GEBHARDE; SAN FRANCISCO AUGUST 11, 1975 LEO S. BRENNEISEN, AUGUST

11-12, 1975. SAC CHARLES W. BATES. PURPOSE OF INTERVIEW IS TO BE

COINTELPRO AND BUREAU INVESTIGATION OF THE BLACK PANTHER: PARTY.

ADDITIONALLY SAC BATES WILL BE INTERVIEWED CONCERNING KNOWLEDGE OF

"HOUSTON PLAN BY SSC STAFF MEMBER LOCK JOHNSON:

I HAVE WAIVED YOUR EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENIS FOR PURPOSES OF

THESE, INTERVIEWS. EACH SHOULD NOTE THAT HE HAS THE RIGHT TO

COUNSEL; HOWEVER, THE FBI IS UNABLE. TO PROVIDE PRIVATE COUNSEL.

THERE ARE CERTAIN PRIVILEGED AREAS CONCERNING WHICH SAS WOULD

Bloeser

ICa.

Wird

66-6243-13

SEARCHED.

_INSEE

FILED

SERIALIZED.

JUK & 01975

LS ANCE ES

NW-65994-Docld:32175170 Page 55

---

## Page 56

PAGE TWO

NOT BE REQUIRED TO ANSWER QUESTIONS. AREAS CONCERN INFORMATION

WHICH MIGHT DIVULGE IDENTITIES OF FBI SOURCES; INFORMATION

RELATING TO SENSITIVE METHODS AND TECHNIQUES; INFORMATION WHICH

MIGHT ADVERSELY AFFECI ONGOING FBI INVESTIGATIONS; AND INFORMATION

WHICH ORIGINATED WITH OTHER AGENCIES, INCLUDING FOREIGN

INTELLIGENCE AGENCIES.

SAN FRANCISCO NOTE RELEASE ALSO APPLIES TO FORMER SAS

ALBERI P. CLARK AND WILLIAM A. COHENDET WHO, ALONG WITH OTHER

EX-SAS ON WEST COAST, MAY ALSO BE INTERVIEWED. CLARK AND COHENDEL

HAVE ALREADY RECEIVED FOREGOING ADVICE REGARDING PRIVATE COUNSEL

AND PRIVILEGED AREAS AND HAVE ASKED FOR CONSULTATION ASSISTANCE '

WHICH BUREAU IS APPROVING AS BELOW.

NORMALLY, FBIHQ WOULD SUPPLY REPRESENTATIVE TO BE ON-THE-

SCENE FOR CONSULTATION PURPOSES. HOWEVER, DISTANCE AND TIME

SCOPE MAKES THIS NOT FEASIBLE IN THIS INSTANCE.

THE RANKING FBI OFFICIAL IN EACH OFFICE WILL SERVE FOR

CONSULTATION PURPOSES. IN HIS ABSENCE, AN SAC IN LOS ANGELES OR

ASAC IN SAN DIEGO AND SAN FRANCISCO MAY SO SERVE. PURPOSE OF

CONSULTANT, WHO WILL NOI BE PRESENT AT INTERVIEW BUT AVAILABLE

NEARBY, WILL BE TO SUPPLY ASSISTANCE IN THE EVENT PERSON BEING

NW 65994-Docld:32175170-Page 56

---

## Page 57

PAGE THREE

INTERVIEWED IS ASKED QUESTIONS IN ONE OF THE PRIVILEGED AREAS

OR QUESTIONS: OUISIDE THE SPECIFIED PARAMETERS OF THE INTERVIEW

(COINTELPRO/BLACK PANTHER PARTY) • SHOULD QUESTIONS ARI'SE WHICH

CONSULTANT REPRESENTATIVE CANNOT HANDLE, SUGGEST IMMEDIATE

TELEPHONE CALL TO LEGAL COUNSEL DIVISION.

SHOULD ADDITIONAL. FORMER SAS CONTACI YOUR OFFICE FOR ASSISTANCE,

COORDINATE WITH THEM WAIVER FROM EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT THROUGH

LEGAL COUNSEL DIVISION AND FURNISH CONSULTATION SERVICES AS

REQUESTED.

NOTE THAT RANKING OFFICIAL SERVING IN CONSULTANT

POSITION DOES NOT REPRESENT THE PARTICULAR EMPLOYEE AS PRIVATE

COUNSEL:

END

HOLD

NW 65994 -Docld:32175170-Page 57--

---

## Page 58

NRB5O WA CODE

9: 01PM NITEL 7-31-75 FLC

TO LOS ANGELES

SAN DIEGO

SAN FRANCISCO

FROM DIRECTOR (62-116395)

SENSTUDY 75

REBUTEL JULY 3D, 1975.

REPORTING PROCEDURES TO FOLLOW RELATIVE TO SENATE SELECT

COMMITTEE (SSC) STAFF INTERVIEWS OF PRESENT AND FORMER SAS:

FOR INCUMBENTS: IMMEDIATELY AFTER INTERVIEW PREPARE LHM

REPORTING AS DETAILED AS POSSIBLE QUESTIONS ASKED AND REPLIES

GIVEN. INCLUDE WHETHER OR NOT INTERVIEWEE'S RIGHTS WERE

EXPLAINED TO HIM; DURATION OF INTERVIEW; AND IF. IT WAS NECESSARY

FOR INTERVIEWEE TO CONSULT WITH BUREAU REPRESENTATIVE, SO STATE.

ALSO INCLUDE ADVICE GIVEN TO INTERVIEVEE BY BUREAU REPRESENIATIVE

AS TO RIGHT TO COUNSEL, PRIVILEGED AREAS, CONSULIATION PRIVILEGES,

AND PARAMETERS OF INTERVIEW, ALL AS DISCUSSED IN REFERENCED

TELETYPE, LHM SHOULD BEAR DUAL CAPTION: "U.S. SENATE SELECT

COMMITTEE ON INTELLIGENCE ACTIVITES (SSC)"; "INTERVIEW OF SA

(INSERT NAME) BY SSC SIAFF MEMBER." SUBMIT ORIGINAL AND SEVEN

COPIES OF EACH LHM TO BUREAU BY COVER AIRIEL, ATTENTION END 43-14

W.O. CREGAR.

Ward

Bless

NW 659947 Docld:32175170 Page 58

---

## Page 59

PAGE TWO

FOR FORMER SAS: ANY FORMER SA WHO HAS BEEN INTERVIEWED

AND VOLUNTEERS TO FURNISH RESULTS (NOTE THAT SUCH INFORMATION SHOULD

NOI BE SOLICITED BY FBI BUT MERELY ACCEPTED WHEN OFFERED) SHOULD

BE THOROUGHLY DEBRIEFED AS SOON AS POSSIBLE AFTER INTERVIEW AND.

LHM PREPARED AND SUBMITTED IN LINE WITH INSTRUCTIONS FOR

INCUMBENIS. SECOND HEADING OF LHM SHOULD USE TERM "FORMER SA."

END

MAH OF FBI LOS ANGELES FOR ONE PLUS TWO OTHERS LA GLR

NW 65994-Docld:32175170- Page*59 ---=-

---

## Page 60

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION

In Reply, Please Refer to

File No.

San Francisco, California

August 14, 1975

ALL INFORMATION CONTAINED.

HEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED

U.S. SENATE SELECT COMMITTEE ON DATE/1/30/83 BYSP-2TAP/KBG

INTELLIGENCE ACTIVITIES (SSC)

INTERVIEW OF FORMER

SA

• WILLIAM A. COHENDET

BY SSC STAFF MEMBER

William A. Cohendet

On August 14.nterviewed from 9:30.A.M: to

191s, retired. former Special Agent

11:15 A.M. by lester B. Seidel, Investigator for sso..

Senate Select Committee on Intelligence Activites

The interview took place at the Holiday Inn on Van Ness

Avenue, San Francisco.

Mr. Seidel mentioned that he was serving as a

counsel for the SSC, investigating

• all phases of the United

States

intelligence

community, and he had chosen the Black

Panther Party and the Counterintelligence Program (COINTEL)

as his field. He stated that he was hoping for full

cooperation on the part of the former Special Agent.

He was advised, that former Special Agent Conendet

was willing to cooperate

with the committee and he trusted

that something constructive would come out of the effort

being put forward.

Former Special Agent Cohendet also

pointed out that in his opinion the Black Panther Party (BPP)

nad. been a group devoted to violence, thievery, and fraud,

and the committee should realize the type of Subjects with

whom they are dealing in order to place the investigation

In Its proper framework.

The first

question concerned the former Special

Agent's background and Bureau service. This was

briefly

furnished.

Seidel then asked when and how the technical

surveillances had been installed, who initiated them, and

who approved them.

This document contains neither recommendations nor conclusions

of the FBI. It is the property of the FBI and is loaned to

your agency; it and its contents are not to be distributed

outside your agency.

NW-65994-Đocld:32175170-Page-60 =

---

## Page 61

U.S. SENATE SELECT COMMITTEE ON

INTELIIGENCE ACTIVITIES (SSC)

INTERVIEW OF FORMER SA WILLIAM A. COHENDET BY

SSC STAFF MEMBER

The former Special Agent replied that he was

not party to any of these arrangements and did not know

any of the details.

Seidel then asked if former Special Agent

Cohendet knew the origin and purposes of the COINTEL

Program. He was informed that the former Agent did not

know the origin of the program, and said he believed its

purposes were those as set forth in the instructions which

Seidel had and which spoke for themselves.

Agent admitted that said program at one time had been

assigned to him but due to the press of other functions,

he had been unable to give it a great deal of time and

felt that during the period that it had been assigned to

him, it

had been largely ineffective.

Seidel then asked if there was any connection

between

ELSUR and COINTEL and the reply was given that

obviously there would be if the ELSUR material being

reviewed could be considered as having any

pertinence to

a COINTEL operation.

However, former Special Agent Cohendet

could not recall having used this material while the case

was assigned to him, at least to any significant degree.

Not having the files available made it impossible to

state positively if there had been any specific instance of use

of this material.

Seidel asked as to the possible effectiveness of

anonymous letters and he was informed that in the opinion

of the former Agent,

such letters, particularly having to

do with personal infidelity or thievery, which were the

usual

suggested avenues, would have little effect on the

recipients who were active in such fields themselves much

of the time.

In the more serious areas of perhaps trying

to falsely show that an individual was

an FBI or police

informant,

the former Special Agent said that the use of

this technique would not be used for fear of causing bodily

harm or death to an innocent person due to the well-known

propensity of the BPP of dealing harshly with any suspected

deviator let alone informant.

2

NW 65994- Docld:32175170 Page-61 ..

---

## Page 62

U.S. SENATE SELECT COMMITTEE ON

INTELIIGENCE ACTIVITIES (SSC)

INTERVIEW OF FORMER SA WILLIAM A. COHENDET BY

SSC STAFF MEMBER

Seidel then asked as to the value of ELSUR to

the BPP investigation and the former Special Agent stated

that in his belief it was extremely valuable in many ways.

For instance, it assisted and gauged the true Huey Newton,

his plans, and weaknesses. It was also valuable in esti-

mating the possible effect of a certain COINTEL program

as possibly suggested by some other office.

As a result:

of their information,

the San Francisco Office usually

rejected most

suggestions as being unlikely to be successful.

Seidel wondered if ELSUR was not the most

valuable, single investigative aid that the Bureau had had

in this investigation, and the former Special Agent agreed

that he was probably correct.

Seidel then wondered if the COINTEL proposalsi

should be part of some legislation proposed by Congress

and the former Special Agent replied that the Bureau

officials, in his opinion, should be allowed to comment

on this because the fact that the program would be ineffective

against the BPP might not be a valid argument that it would

not work to better advantage in other circumstances.

Former Special Agent Cohendet declined to

comment on the effectiveness of COINTEL as used against

the Socialist Workers Party, not having had any experience

with its use in that field.

Seidel then asked about informants and asked if

there had been any pressure from the Bureau in the develop-

ment of such sources.

Former Special Agent Cohendet

acknowledged that there certainly had been great pressure

in this direction,

as it was well known that informants were

a necessary part of any investigation and a police organi-

zation

can never give up on this phase of its work no matter

how difficult the circumstances were in their development.

In the case of the BPP, the development of informants was

particularly difficult because of the fear that many persons

in the black community felt concerning the BPP as well as

the lack of desire to cooperate against another black

person.

3

NW Đocld:32175170 Page-62 T.--

---

## Page 63

U.S. SENATE SELECT COMMITTEE ON

INTELLIGENCE ACTIVITIES (SSC)

INTERVIEW OF FORMER SA WILLIAM A. COHENDET BY

SSC STAFF MEMBER

Seidel asked about foreign funds being raised

and given to the BPP, and former Special Agent Cohendet

recalled that "Masai" Hewitt and others went to Sweden

and other countries where the BPP raised money on speech

making tours.

Seidel then asked about any investigation

BPP funds and former Special Agent Cohendet said that it

was his recollection that investigation of BPP funds had

been undertaken through legal channels but he had no

personal knowledge of the investigation and declined to

go further into this field.

Seidel asked about referrals of Bureau information

to the Internal Revenue Service and former Special Agent

Cohendet said that he had no personal knowledge of what

had been done in this direction.

Seidel then asked about the affair between

Actress Jean Seberg and "Masai" Hewitt, which had appeared

in a Hollywood gossip column and had alleged that Seberg

had become pregnant by Hewitt.

Seidel said that the Los

Angeles Office of the Federal Bureau of Investigation had

admitted leaking this information to someone in the press.

Former Special Agent Cohendet knew that this

couple had been lovers. for a brief period but denied any

knowledge of any leak to the press by either San Francisco

or Los Angeles.

Seidel asked if the former Agent thought that

leaking this type of information was appropriate. No

comment was offered as to this question.

Seidel, at the conclusion of the interview, said

that he had noted that the "faking" of police records as

suggested had never been undertaken and he observed that he

believed the COINTEL abuses were being overplayed by the

From what he

learned in interviews in San Francisco,

it seemed to him that the program had been mostly played

down and indeed, an independent judgment had been exercised

in the implementation of the program.

4

NW 65994-Docld:32175170-Page 63~---

---

## Page 64

U.S. SENATE SELECT COMMITTEE ON

INTELLIGENCE ACTIVITIES (SSC)

INTERVIEW OF FORMER SA WILLIAM A. COHENDET BX

SSC STAFF MEMBER

A general discussion of the BPP ensued in which

former Special Agent Cohendet reiterated the criminal

background and threatening attitude of many of the BPP

members, their mendacious ways, and their lack of credi-

bility in their public statements.

The former Special

Agent credited the news media with helping to build up

the BPP beyond its actual strength and influence.

Seidel asked about the former Agent's knowledge of

for the removai of former SAC Harry Morgan

"from San-

Francisco. He said the only reason he was asking

this

question was in order to avoid embarrassing former SAC

Morgan when he interviews him concerning his possible.

knowledge of Bpp activities sometime in the future.

Former

Special Agent Cohendet had no knowledge as to why

Mr. Morgan was transferred.

In summation, Seidel ventured the opinion that he

thought the ELSUR technique was far more valuable in the

carrying out of the investigation of the BPP than the

COINTEL. Former Special Agent Cohendet had to agree

to the

above observation.

Former Special Agent Cohendet was not advised

of any rights that he might have in declining to answer

any questions and Seidel said he was actually seeking

witnesses for

a possible hearing in Washington, D.C.

He

stated that no names would be mentioned in any write-up

he would make concerning his interviews.

121250

5*

NW 65994* Döcld:32175170 Page' 64

---

## Page 65

In Reply, Please Refer 10

File No.

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION

San Francisco, California

August 14, 1975

ALL INFORMATION CONTAINED.

HEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED

DATE//30/33_BYSP-2TAP/RBG

U.S. SENATE SELECT COMMITTEE ON

INTELLIGENCE ACTIVITIES (SSC)

INTERVIEW OF FORMER SA ALBERT P. CLARK

BY SSC STAFF MEMBER

On August 13, 1975, former Special Agent Albert P.

Clark, who was a supervisor in the San Francisco FBI Office

and who retired in December of 1969, advised as follows:

He was interviewed in his home at 66 Elm,

Larkspur, California, by SSC Member Lester B. Seidel from

5:40 P.M. to 6:55 P.M., August 12, 1975.

Clark was not placed under oath and no mention

was made of his rights. However, Seidel was pleasant and

in no way antagonistic. The interview was general, not

penetrative, not in depth, and very few specific questions were

asked.

There appeared to

be no discernible criticism of

either the Counterintelligence Program (COINTEL) or the

Bureau's investigation of

the Black Panther Party (BPP) by

Seidel.

Seidel was compelled on more than one occasion

to declare that he was pro-FBI, that the object of his

inquiries was to assist the United States Senate in under-

standing the problem in order that

they could consider

possible legislation that may eliminate any abuses in the

Future.

Seidel did mention the fact several times that

information had been leaked to the press that Jane Seberg,

the movie actress, had become pregnant by a BPP official.

This document contains neither recommendations nor conclusions

of the FBI. It is the property of the FBI and is loaned to

your agency; it and its contents are not to be distributed

outside your agency.

NW 65994-Docld:32175170-Page 65

---

## Page 66

U.S. SENATE SELECT COMMITTEE ON

INTELLIGENCE ACTIVITIES (SSC)

INTERVIEW OF FORMER SA ALBERT P. CLARK

SSC STAFF MEMBER

Seidel finally asked Clark if he would have okayed

a COINTEL proposal like this and he answered that he would

have if he felt that it would have sufficiently hindered

the BPP, stating that possibly in some of these occasions

someone might get hurt but on the other hand, investigation

of the BPP by the FBI might be made easier and it might

also cut down on the number of BpP supporters.

Clark was asked to whom the main BPP case was

assigned and to whom COINTEL had been assigned in the San

Francisco Division. Clark replied that he did not remember

but possibly during the time of his supervision, more than

one Agent. had handled the matters.

Seidel asked how many BPP informants the San

Francisco Division had.

Clark replied he did not recall

because he did not believe that Seidel had a right to know.

am

Seidel inquired about the BPP wire tap, asking

who had requested the tap, the Bureau or the San

Francisco

Division.

Again, Clark replied that he did not recall but

the San

Francisco Division would not have necessarily

waited for the Bureau to initiate the matter but might have

requested the Bureau rather than the Bureau having initiated

the matter:

Seidel wanted to have an example of a COINTEL

proposal.

He was not given a specific example but general

conversation was had to the effect that any move that might

be suggested

that would aid the San Francisco Division

in

their investigation of the BPP in determining their

supporters and financiers and possibly disenchanting those

individuals might be an example.

Seidel did not ask Clark whether he had done a

particular

thing.

Questioned concerning whether he felt COINTEL had

been effective, Clark replied he did not believe the matter

was susceptible to proof but the BPP had sure gone into a

steep decline.

2

NW 65994 Docld:32175170-Pagé 66

---

## Page 67

U.S. SENATE SELECT COMMITTEE ON

INTELLIGENCE ACTIVITIES (SSC)

INTERVIEW OF FORMER SA ALBERT P. CLARK

SSC STAFF MEMBER

Seidel again brought up the Seberg matter and

asked if it had done any good. Clark stated he replied,

"Maybe."

During this conversation, Clark got the general

impression that perhaps Seidel did not feel that COINTEL

had been necessary but Clark had argued that it had made

the BPP more difficult to operate and possibly easier

for the FBI to investigate.

Seidel then

wanted to know what there was about

the BPP that caused such a concentration of FBI investi-

gative attention.

Clark pointed out that this woûld have

to be answered in the context of time, that at the time the

program was initiated, there was no doubt that the BPP

a violent, racist organization opposing all law enforce-

ment, attacking officers and generally disturbing the

tranquility of the community.

Seidel then went on to discuss the business of

pressure.

Had Special Agent in Charge Charles W. Bates

and the Bureau put too much pressure on the matter? Clark

stated there was undoubtedly pressure because everyone

was interested in doing the best type job possible and

finding out everything possible concerning the BPP. There

Bureau, in a case like this, could never be satisfied.

Clark stated that he related that perhaps too much

pressure had come from the Bureau because he had felt at

the time he was a supervisor that San Francisco Division

knew more about the BPP than the Bureau.

On the other

hand, he related that Bureau officials were probably

under pressure because of the national interest and the

demands on them in Washington.

Seidel related that he was interested in ascer-

taining what Agent would make the best witness to appear

in Washington to explain and testify concerning COINTEL.

He specifically requested Clark's recommendation and mentioned

the names of Special Agents Leo S. Brenneisen of San

Francisco and Bob Baker of Los Angeles.

Clark stated that

he had countered by suggesting that somebody in Washington

who directed the program and approved all proposals might

be a better witness.

3

NW 65994-Docld:32175170 Page 67 - --

---

## Page 68

U.S. SENATE SELECT COMMITTEE ON

INTELLIGENCE ACTIVITIES (SSC)

INTERVIEW OF FORMER SA ALBERT P. CLARK

SSC STAFF MEMBER

Clark

recalled that near the first of the inter

view, Seidel probably, more to make conversation than to

obtain information, asked a few questions concerning US

and the Republic of North Africa (RNA) .

He was advised

that US had not been active in this division and there

had

been no pertinent RNA activity brought to his attention.

attentionisco

Seidel asked if Ron Karenga of US had visited San Francisco

and Clark replied he had no exact recollection of this.

Seidel talked and asked Clark's opinion on the

separation into different agencies of the Bureau's criminal

and security investigations.

Clark stated that he told

Seidel that in the past he had considered this and felt that

frankly it might have advantages, and at the same time,

might have disadvantages.

He pointed out that the

disadvantages were that you could not be sure that it, in

fact, would work and that if you remove the security

investigations from the Bureau, you would undoubtedly

lose a

great deal, including public support.

seidel asked if Clark had worked under former

SAC Harry- Morgan.

He advised that he had retired prior to - -

the time Morgan was assigned tö the San Erancisco Division...

Clark pointed out that during the interview, a

recorder appeared prominently on his desk, and Seidel.

coula, of course, not be sure that it was not in operation,

although as the duration of the interview lengthened, it

must have been obvious to Seidel that it was not operating.

4*

NW 65994- Docld:32175170 -Page 68 ~

---

## Page 69

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION

In Reply, Please Refer to

File No.

San Francisco, California

August 13, 1975

ALL INFORMATION CONTAINED.

HEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED

DATE /1/30/83 BY 5P-2 TAP./ RBG

U.S. SENATE SELECT COMMITTEE ON

INTELLIGENCE ACTIVITIES (SSC)

INTERVIEW OF FORMER

BY SSC STAFF MEMBER

SA DAVID E. TODD

On August 12l 1975 retired former SA David E. Todd

was interviewed from 1:00 p.m. to 2:30 p.M. by Lester B. Seidel,

Investigator for the SSC.

The interview took place at the

Holiday Inn,

San Francisco.

By way of background,

in'all contacts with Seidel

previously, former SA Todd has indicated to him great reluctance

to discuss

these matters without clearance from the Bureau,

and pointed out to Seidel that the Bureau had released former

SA Todd from the Employment Secrecy Agreement for the purpose

of a staff interview, but Seidel was told that former sA Toda

did not think it was either his

responsibility or his prerogative

to provide information or make information public; that while

employed he was acting as an Agent of the Federal Government

and felt it was the responsibility of the Federal Government to

provide the information, and that if the Senate Committee

desired information from former SA Todd, the questions should

have been submitted to him in writing, and his answers should

have been made in writing and first forwarded to the FBI, and

then after the FBI determined it advisable to make these answers

available to the Committee, that would have been the proper

channel.

Seidel pointed out the Committee and the Bureau had

made an agreement whereby the Bureau would make Agents available

to the Committee for interview. Former SA Todd pointed out to

Seidel that he is not in the category of an Agent, being a

retired Agent, and at this point there was no additional discussion

on this matter.

This document contains

neither recommendations nor conclusions of

the FBI. It is the property of the FBI and is loaned to your

agency; it and its contents are not to be distributed outside

your agency.

NW 65994 - Docld:32175170-Page 69 -

---

## Page 70

SSC;

INTERVIEW OF, FORMER

SA DAVID E. TODD BY

SSC STAFF MEMBER

Seidel was also told that nothing that was said by

former SA Todd should be interpreted as being critical of

the Counterintelligence Program' (COINTEL) itself, and that if

the Bureau felt that such a Program was necessary in the interest

of national defense, he had carried it out in the best way he

saw fit, and that in recommending against specific proposals

as being impractical or inadvisable, these recommendations were

against the specific incidents recommended and not against the

Program as a whole.

Seidel's first questions dealt with former SA Todd's

background and the extent of his Bureau service, and whether

he had worked security or criminal matters.

Former SA Todd

gave him chronologically the offices in which he had served

in the Bureau, and stated he had been

associated from 1952 to

1956 with the

• Domestic Intelligence Division, Washington, D.C.,

and had become Supervisor in San Francisco in December, 1969,

of the Black Panther Party (BPP), and that during his Bureau

he had

worked both criminal and security matters.

Seidel asked the name of the squad which was originally

the Racial Squad, and subsequently changed to Extremist Matters,

and he asked whether the work was strictly intelligence, or

whether it combined

intelligence or criminal work.

It was

pointed

out Bombing Matters were originally being handled on

this squad for a period of time, and that both the criminal

activities of the Panthers, as well as intelligence activities,

were combined

ed in the thatement.

Seidel then asked when the technical surveillances on

the Panthers were installed. Former SA Todd replied that they

were functioning at the time he was appointed Supervisor.

Seidel

then asked how was

the technical surveillance

related to the

COINTEL, if at all, and specifically whether information coming

from the technical

surveillance was used in carrying. out the

COINTEL. Former SA Todd advised that he could not recall

specifically what was done in either Program without reviewing

the files and comparing the information therein with the source.

Seidel seemed very interested in this, but actually the question

could not be answered on the basis of

recollection alone, and

was

not.

2

NW 65994* Dôcld:32175170 Page 70

T...

---

## Page 71

SSC :

INTERVIEW OF FORMER

SA DAVID E. TODD BY

SSC STAFF MEMBER

Seidel then asked how would the Panther COINTEL

be defined with regard to aims, techniques and results.

The

answer to this was that the aims were to counter generally the

revolutionary objectives and activities of the Panthers.

The

question concerning techniques was left unanswered, and as

far as results go, former SA Todd told Seidel that he did not

reed there had been any great results from the Program as it was

pursued in the San Francisco Office, but he could not speak

for the rest of the Program as far as the Bureau is concerned.

Seidel asked whether the Agents working the criminal

aspects of the BPP received information that was received from

a technical

source, and he was told procedures by which

information had been routed to them in their cases, and that at

the time we operated these technical surveillances, we felt they

had been installed lawfully, and that the information received

could be used.

Seidel asked whether there was a great deal of pressure

put on the San Francisco Office for the development of informants.

He was told yes, that informants were the backbone

of good law

enforcement

the Bureau constantly urged better informant

coverage.

Seidel asked if there had been similar pressure placed

on the office in the COINTEL, and former SA Todd replied that

. he did not feel that any great pressure had been put on the

office to carry out this Program, but that the Bureau had recom-

mended the Program, however, had left it up to the office

pretty much as to how it should be carried out.

Seidel asked whether the Program had been successful

in causing dissention within the Party. Former SA Todd told

him that he did not feel this had been particularly effective

way, and that causing dissention had not been a primary

objective of the Program in the San Francisco Office, and that

the policy had been to use the Program for primarily two

purposes:

1) for the purpose of developing informants by

attempting to dissuade them from their loyalties to the Party;

and 2) to make representations to Panthers for whom outstanding

arrest warrants had been issued in order to flush them out so

they could be apprehended.

3

NW 65994 Docld:32175170 Pâge 71

---

## Page 72

SSC;

INTERVIEW OF FORMER

SA DAVID E. TODD BY

SSC STAFF MEMBER

Seidel asked specifically about the COINTEL involving

the Breakfast Program, and was told a recommendation had been

made for putting some

kind of contamination in the Breakfast

Program food, and that this office had felt this extremely

inadvisable and recommended against it, and it was not carried

out here.

Former SA Todd was also asked about a COINTEL

proposal relating to "The Black Panther" newspapers, and was

told that such a proposal had been made involving saturating

the papers with a foul smelling fish oil or some substance,

however, we recommended against this as it would serve no purpose.

Seidel was advised that the San Francisco policy had

been to recommend against harassment, per se, and also recommended

against leaking information to the press. Seidel then raised

the question about the incident where Huey P. Newton's high

standard of living was given to the press, and he was told

that this fell into the category of informant development on.

the basis it was felt that if those Panthers who

were living

practically in poverty could realize what Newton's standards

of living were, it might change their allegience to him and

they could be contacted for informant purposes.

Seidel was also told that in this phase of the

COINTEL, it was former SA Todd's recollection that this infor-

mation

regarding Newton's high standard of living had been

disseminated by informants, and that the press was well aware

of Newton's standards of living without having to make this

information available to them.

Seidel asked what the instructions had been from the

Bureau in carring out the COINTEL. Former SA Todd told Seidel

that he had reviewed this file after being appointed supervisor,

but could not recall specifically what the Bureau instructions

were.

The only other instructions received were at a two day

conference in Washington,

D.C., on BPP matters conducted by

former Assistant to the Director William Sullivan, and Section

Chief George Moore, at which time it was pointed out that the

Bureau desired the

COINTEL to be coordinated with the Bureau,

but that former SA todd did not recall any firm prohibition against

4

NW 65994 - Docld:32175170-Page 72 *

---

## Page 73

SSC;

INTERVIEW OF FORMER

SA DAVID E. TODD BY

SSC STAFF MEMBER

taking certain actions without Bureau authority, and that the

field had some leeway in what they did, but, in general, offices

made proposals to the Bureau with copies to San Francisco

prior to taking any action. Seidel asked why San Francisco

got copies of all proposals, and was told this was because

San Francisco was office of origin in the BPP case and other

offices were required to furnish a copy of all correspondence.

Seidel then asked to what extent Special Agent in

Charge Charles W. Bates had knowledge of the COINTEL as it

related to the

BPP, and he was told that former SA Todd could

not speak for Bates

and his knowledge would be dependent upon

how carefully he read incoming mail and reviewed files, and

former SA Todd had no knowledge as to

what extent Bates did this.

Seidel was told that under the

supervisory setup in the

office at the time, former SA Todd felt it was his responsibility

to direct this Program in San Francisco and not Bates.

Seidel indicated that out of his investigation in the

hearings, undoubtedly there would be some legislation coming

out of congress that would either enable or prohibit such

things as the COINTEL,

and he stated that was one reason he

was asking concerning its effectiveness, and wondered what former

SA Todd would recommend.

Seidel was told that

former SA Todd

felt it essential that the Government should have the right to

defend itself against individuals and groups who advocate

violent revolution or who are aligned with foreign powers,

and that there was a need for some sort of legislation within

the framework of constitutional government which would enable

the Sovernment to do this; but, of course, it should be done

under. proper control.

sort of control, and was told that this was a matter for

Congress to decide, but perhaps Congress should look. into some

legislation similar to wiretap legislation, where the responsi-

bility is upon a Federal judge to issue a warrant.

Former SA Todd had prepared a brief summary of what

he recalled of the activities of the BPP, and he made a copy of

this available to Seidel.

Former SA Todd also had made a

chronology to assist him in answering questions, together with

5

NW 65994 Docld:32175170 -Page 73 -

---

## Page 74

SSC;

INTERVIEW OF FORMER

SA DAVID E. TODD BY,

SSC STAFF MEMBER

some notes concerning COINTEL policy, former SA Todd's general

recollection of

matters, questions of law regarding agent -

principle, privileged information problems, ongoing litigation

and national defense, and informants and sources.

Seidel asked

for a copy of this chronology and this, too, was given to him.

Seidel expressed great interest in receiving the one

page summary of the Panthers' activities, and stated that he

had chosen the Panthers, for a case study, and he seemed more

interested in this than in the COINTEL.

He also indicated that

there might be future interviews and that former SA Todd might

be called as a witness before the Committee at a later date.

At the outset of the interview, Seidel

asked whether

former SA Todd desired his rights be read to him. Former

SA Todd told him that since he did not interpret this as a

custodial interview, and it was his understanding Seidel had no

police power, that he could forego reading the rights.

Former SA Toda did not feel it was necessary to

consult with a Bureau representative at this time.

The above information was furnished by former SA lodd

voluntarily and was not solicited.

NW 65994- Docld:32175170 Page 74 -

---

## Page 75

CHRONOLOGY

Approxinate

Dates

Deco. 1969

Feb. 197.0

May 1970

Aug

1970

AUg

1970

Jan 1971

Feb 1971

March 1971.

April 1971

April 1971

Hay 1971

August 1971

August

1971

August 1971

DECO

1971

Designated supervisor. Reviewed Cointelpro file.

No recollection of any actions by s. F. in file.

Conference in iashington, D._C. Briefed on Baltimore

Bläck Panther murder. Cointelpro discussed.

Cointelpro letter.

Suggestion rejected by S. I.

Marin Court shootout (Jonathan Jackson-Judge Haley)

Cleaver released from prison.

Letters to Algeria to provoke Cleaver to return to

U.S. so arrest could be effected.

Newton becomes Supreme Commander, Cleaver expelled.

Robert Hebb murder.

Sam Napier murder.

Two

New York police officers wounded.

Four lew tock police officers murdered.

George Jackson killed in prison break attempt.

Officer Kowalski murder attempt - Washington & Botton arzes!

S. I. Ingleside Station attack - Offlcer Young murdered.

Retired.

COINTELPRO:

RECOLLECTION:

Recommended against many proposals.

Approved recommendation to try to induce Cleaver

to return to U.S.

•Hould have approved actions to persuade Panthers

¿to change loyalty from Party and become informants, but

cannot recall any specific ones.

would not have approved any proposals solely for

harrassment or for leaking information to press; there

must have been some bona fide investigative purpose

behind proposal before considering 1t.

Recall only generalities.

Requested 1f could review

Bureau files prior to interview.

This was denied.

Cannot testify with any specificity without review

of files.

AGENT-PRINCIPAL PRIVILEGED INFORMATION: Sensitive techniques

Informants & Sources

Ongoing Investigations

•Foreign Intelligence

7

•NW 65994 Docld:32175170 Page 75

---

## Page 76

Ongoing Iltigation: Panthers t. EBI & IRS, USDO, S. E.

National Defense: Documents reviewed were classified.

Does executive branch have right to defend

nation against

advocates of revolution (public

Interest 1ssue).

Informants & sources:

Cannot reveal.

(Includes information

that might reveal identity.)

01vil rights.

provide or

Neither my responsibility nor my prerogative to/make this information

public.

1 was acting as an agent of the federal government, and 1t.

1s responsibility of government to provide the

information

Any questions should be submitted In writing and my answers in

writing should be formarded to FBI and 1f FBI deems it advisable

to make these answers avallable to Committee, that should be

proper channel.

NW 65994-Docld:32175170- Page 76

---

## Page 77

Ibe 'inves

National Defense matter.

gatlon of the Black Panthes

Party was &

Information on file points to colla-

boration with foreign powers by leaders of the Party.

Throughout the two-year period in which I supervised

the investigation there were strong liaisons between Black Panthers

and dissident groups abroad as well as with the governnents of

foreign nations.

The Black Panthers had support and/or branches

1n France, Germany and Scandinavia, and were International 1n

Eldridge Cleaver, wanted on felony warrants, had been

granted asylum in Algeria and with his entourage was residing

In a villa provided by the algerian government.

During this

period he made at least one trip to Moscow, Russia.

Several

Black Panthers travelled to Cuba.

Huey Newton, In

1971, travelled

Red China by way of Canada and Hong Kong at

the Invitation

5

of the chinese government at a time when the United States had

no diopyaatic relations with them.

At the time I began serving as supervisor in late 1969,

the Black Panther Party was under co-leadershio of huey newton.

then contined to prison in California, and Eldridge Cleaver, living.

1n exile in algeria.

The Black Panther Party, both in the ners-

paper it published weekly at San francisco, and In public statements

by 1ts officers and leaders, advocated violent revolution; 1t

published instructions on guerrilla warfare, directions for the

use

of weasons, and printed detailed drawings and Instructions on

the manufacture of bombs and explosive devices, and it agitated

term "off the

pigs,

which neans

"k1ll the police.

a Black Panther catch.

onrase. The nistory of the Black Panther Party during the verlod

1 acted as supervisor is replete mun incidents of murder, violence

and Inciting to revolution. The revolutionary quotation of lao.

Ise-Tung, "Polltical power grows out of the barrel of a gun,"

became a Black Panther motto.

Sometime in early 1971 a sollt occurred in the Black

Panther. Party.

Huey Newton, following his release from prison

1n 1970, gained control of one faction headquartered In Berkeley,

Callfornia, and he broke openly with alariage cleaver, publicly

expelling Cleaver and Cleaver's lieutenants from the Party. The

Nerton faction thereafter gradually took a more moderate approach,

advocating social change through community service in place of its

prior profile oi violence.

No change was noted in the policies of

the cleaver faction directed from algiers, and lt continued to

savocate violent revolution; it began dublication In New York

of its own newspader proclaiming itsrevolutionary policies; ana

followers belonging to this faction continued to commit crimes of

violence.

The following crimes of violence attributed to the Cleaver

faction of the Black Panthers have been documented in the book "Target

Blue," by former Deputy Police Commissioner Robert. Daley of New York

01ty (DelI PublIshing CO., Inc., 1973):

Ambush attacks against police officers which resulted in

T officers murdered, 3 wounded, and one attempted murder thwarted, which

led to. the

solution of the other cases and established these attacks

to be a nationwide conspiracy; and the murder of two lewtor-factiou

slack Panthers

9*

VW 65994~ Docld:32175170 -Page 77

---

## Page 78

In Reply, Please Refer 10

File No.

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

FEDERAL, BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION

San Francisco, California

August 13, 1975

ALL INFORMATION CONTAINED.

HEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED

DATE/1/30/83 BYSP-2 TAP) U.S. SENATE SELECT COMMITTEE ON

ROCINTELLIGENCE ACTIVITIES (SSC)

INTERVIEW OF SA LEOS: BRENNEISEN

SSC STAFF MEMBER

BY

Prior to interview by SSC Staff Member, SA LEO S.

BRENNEISEN

telephonically contacted SA DENNIS MILLER at

FBI Headquarters making four inquiries on zugust 6, 1975;

on the same date, the following answers were receivea?

Is it permissible for agent to give general

answers

concerning the Black Panther Party (BPP) as to

membership numoer and Chapter numbers at various dates?

Answer: Yes.

Local media has previously set forth a memorandum

purportedly from the FBI, San Francisco Office, suggesting

consideration should be

given to furnishing fabricated

documents originating with the Oakland Police Department

and the FBI, San Francisco, when, in fact, the memorandum

came from the Bureau.

'I questioned concerning this memorandum,

may agent point out that this document originated with the

Bureau rather than

San Francisco?

Answer: Yes.

In contemplation of possible questioning concerning

false correspondence directed to ELDRIDGE CLEAVER and others

abroad, can agent refer SSC Staff to Bureau when questioned

concerning identity of agents preparing correspondence?

Answer: Yes.

This document contains neither recommendations nor conclusions

of the FBI. It is the property of the FBI and is loaned to •

your agency; it and its contents are not to be distributed

outside your agency.

NW-65994 -Docld:32175170-Page 78

---

## Page 79

U.S. SENATE SELECT COMMITTEE ON

INTELLIGENCE ACTIVITIES (SSC) ;

INTERVIEW OF SA LEO S. BRENNEISEN

Is it necessary for agent to express an opinion

as to morality, regality of said Counterintelligence

Program (COINTEL) ?

Answer: You are not obliged to answer those

questions you do not desire to answer, but if you wish you

may comment on the legality or morality of the plan.

SA DENNIS MILLER related that he desired that it

be borne

in mind that the Bureau in no way wished to impede

the SSC investigation.

LESTER B. SEIDEL, SSC Staff Member, appeared at the

Sari Francisco Office of the FBI On August 11, 1975, and

interviewed :SA LEO BRENNEISEN from 1:03 PM to 2:30

SEIDEL prefaced the interview by explaining that he had

been advised that BRENNEISEN was the Coordinator for the

COINTEL in San Francisco from May 16, 1969 to May 1, 1970.

It was pointed out to him that the case was assigned to

agent from May 16, 1969 to May 1, 1971.

SEIDEL asked if agent had, in fact, approved all

proposals coming from the San Francisco Office. He was

advised that not necessarily because if another agent made

a proposal the person approving it in San Francisco would

be the person signing the outgoing mail, namely, the Supervisor

or

Relief

Supervasor.

SEIDEL asked what Squad agent had been assigned

to during this Program, and he was advised s-6.

He inquired

if there was any COINTEL in San Francisco against US; he

was advised to the contrary.

He inquired as to the usual

number of cases assigned agent, and was advised that to

agent's best recollection probably 30 at any one time. He

asked if agent's work was exclusively security during the

handling of the COINTEL Program and he was advised agent

did have some criminal assignments.

He inquired if there

any relationship between COINTEL and criminal assignments,

and he was

advised no and that agent desired to limit the

scope of his questioning to the COINTEL Program.

SEIDEL then asked how many suggestions the agent

had submitted in COINTEL. . He was advised that an estimate

would be difficult but probably the nearest figure would be

some two suggestions a month with possibly six months in

two years when no suggestions were made.

He inquired as

to agent's knowledge of what percentage of total proposals

from all sources submitted to the Bureau had been approved,

and he was advised only a small percentage.

2

NW•65994-Docld+3217517Q-Page-79

+ +=

---

## Page 80

U.S. SENATE SELECT COMMITTEE ON

INTELLIGENCE ACTIVITIES (SSC) ;

INTERVIEW OF SA LEO S. BRENNEISEN

At this point, SEIDEL requested agent to outline the

types of COINTEL proposals submitted by San Francisco.

He

was

answered that anonymous letters, letters with pseudonyms,

and letters signed with the name of an existing person had

been used.

It was pointed out that the program had included

the use of anonymous letters, including those directed to

landlords advising that the Black Panther Party was occupying

their property; letters to people supporting Bel programs,

including the Breakfast Program and enclosing copies of the

BPP color book for children encouraging the shooting of

police officers and/or articles from the

"Black Panther

Party", the official BPP newspaper, showing their propensity

advocacy of violence; letters

to organizations containing

articles that showed the

BPP in

direct opposition to their

aims, such as a letter to a Jewish organization showing BPP

support of Palestine guerrillas.

It was pointed out that letters had been directed

to ELDRIDGE CLEAVER in Algeria in the names of BPP members.

At this point, SEIDEL interrupted to explain that he was

enlisting

the

complete cooperation of the interviewee, that

there had been some Congressional criticism of the COINTEL,

that there were some segments of the population that were

anti-FBI and that he desired to present the FBI in a proper

light, and that he

had good friends in the Bureau.

SEIDEL asked, was it necessary to have utilized

COINTEL. Agent advised that it was difficult to correctly.

judge the effect of the program but it was felt it was not

without some effect because the Black Panther Party had not'

only awindled from a membership of approximately 1,000 in

1969 to perhaps 200 in 1973, but that the organization became

split with dissension and had dropped much of its former

advocacy for violence.

SEIDEL then requested that the agent give his

recommendation on what COINTEL in the future should be;

whether there should be a division between

security and

criminal investigations to different agencies in order that

a possible intrusion on the rights

of an individual in

intelligence matters might not necessarily preclude his

being prosecuted by the Bureau, in a criminal matter. Agent

3

NW•65994-Docld:32175170-Page 80 ...

a 1m

---

## Page 81

"')

"U.S. SENATE SELECT COMMITTEE

ON

INTELLIGENCE ACTIVITIES (SSC) ;

INTERVIEW OF SA LEO S. BRENNEISEN

refused to furnish his "off-thacuff" opinion, pointing

out that he felt that it was without the scope of his

release.

Without further questioning agent concerning the

types of COINTEL proposals, SEIDEL next asked if the

Electronic Surveillance (ELSUR) on the BPP was in operation

at the time COINTEL was initiated, and what proposals were

submitted in COINTEL based on information from ELSUR.

SEIDEL was advised agent's release would not allow

him to discuss ELSUR.

SEIDEL asked if the San Francisco Division had made

any

"snitch" proposals. When asked to clarify

the question,

he stated that this was a suggestion to the effect that

Black Panther Party member be accused of being an FBI

Agent replied that to the best of his recollection

no such recommendations had been made to the Bureau by San

Francisco, and on the contrary, agent knew that it had been

that any such allegation. should

be most carefully considered inasmuch as BPP history has

indicated that they had dealt severely with suspected infor-

mants, even to the

point of killing them.

SEIDEL then asked if the San Francisco Division

had received a great deal of "flak" from the Bureau on this

program.

He was advised that the Bureau operates a "tickler

system"

for following investigations and that the program

had received some priority from the FBI but agent had never

considered correspondence from the Bureau as being "flak".

SEIDEL at this point instead of questioning made

the statement that the Bureau gave this matter "high priority"

No comment was made to this statement.

SEIDEL next questioned agent if he had read any

publicity concerning a May 11, 1970 letter from the Bureau

- to San Francisco entitled, "Special Operations Research", in

which it was suggested that some consideration be given to

furnishing the BPP spurious documents that supposedly

originated with the Oakland Police Department and the FBI.

He explained

that some newspaper had received a copy of the

document under the Freedom of Information Act and thereafter

published it. He inquired if a response to the letter

4

NW 65994 •Docld:32175170-Pag€ 81

---

## Page 82

U.S. SENATE SELECT COMMITTEE ON

INTELLIGENCE ACTIVITIES (SSC) ;

INTERVIEW OF SA LEO S. BRENNEISEN

had been made by San

Francisco.

Agent

advised that it was

his recollection that San Francisco had responded recommending

against both proposals, pointing out that the Bep had in the

short past published contingency plans of the Berkeley Police

Department for a said on National Headquarters to the

embarrassment of that agency.

San Francisco was of the

opinion that if spurious documents were furnished to the

BPp they would innediately publish them, rather than attempt

to develop an informant and the operation presented a great

deal of possible embarrassment and publicity for the Bureau.

SEIDEL asked for agent's knowledge of why the letter

had been captioned as previously described

rather than

Counterintelligence Program, Black Panther Party. Agent

stated he had no recollection of exact caption of the letter.

SEIDEL then went on to explain that he had been advised

that

the Bureau

had several

COINTELS and the one covering Special

Operations Research was a COINTEL COvering foreign operations.

Agent made no comment.

SEIDEL requested what proposals had been made to

disrupt the BPP newspaper; how did the proposals originate,

and what offices

submitted them. He was advised that it was

agent's

recollection that the Bureau may have requested

suggestions from several offices but that to agent's knowledge

When SEIDEL continued to questionthe

specific proposals and why their approval

was not recommended by San Francisco, he was advised that one

proposal was the use of a foul-smelling chemical to put on

the paper. San Francisco was of the opinion it would not

be practical inasmuch as it would contaminate an airplane

and would subject the airline of the printing company to

damages. SEIDEL was further advised that it was believed

the suggestion may have been made for the changing of a first

page of an issue at the printing company to embarrass the BPP,

but it was

pointed out that this would also merely result in

a claim being filed against the printer.

SEIDEL was advised that there may have been a

suggestion that some thought should be given to the possible

delay of the plates for the paper,

that suggestion coming

at the time when the paper was being printed in New York

with the master copy being filmed. in San Francisco.

Francisco did not suggest approval because a mere delay would

have been of little benefit because the paper was not timely.

5

NW -Dôcld:32175170- Page 82

---

## Page 83

U.S. SENATE SELECT COMMITTEE ON

INTELLIGENCE ACTIVITIES (SSC) ;

INTERVIEW OF SA LEO S. BRENNEISEN

SEIDEL asked about the disruption of the BPP

Breakfast Program.

The answer was given that agent had

no recollection of this, and SEIDEL was asked did he have

any information from the Bureau that we had attempted a

aisruption of the program in San Francisco.

He related

that he believed not and that it probably happened in

San Diego.

SEIDEL asked about a suggestion that informants

set up a possible confrontation between the BPP 'and the

Republic of New Africa (RNA): Agent stated he had no

recollection of such a proposal and dia not believe it had

been submitted by San Francisco because the membership and

activity in RNA had been minimal in this area.

SEIDEL then asked

if we had suggested that landlords

in the San Francisco area be encouraged

to insist on their

rent from the BPP. Agent advised he had no recollection

of this, but could see nothing wrong in

it.

, SEIDEL Inquired as to the amount of knowledge.

that SAC CHARLES BATES WOUld have had concerning COINTEL.

He was advised that agent had no information, that he, himself,

had never discussed the program with Mr. BATES while it was

In operation SEIDEL then inquired If former SAC HARRY

MORGAN had been ill during the time ne was assignea to san

Francisco-and-the reason-for his transfer.

Agent replied

he"had noinformation-concerning-this-matter.

SEIDEL was asked if he felt that anyof the actions

agent described as being taken by the San Francisco Division

were illegal. SEIDEL stated that he did not believe that

these were matters that were in violation of any existing

criminal statutes, but there might be some question as

to

whether the FBI had the specific authority to do these things.

SEIDEL ended the interview by again reiterating

that he was a friend of the Bureau, that he was making an

inquiry and desired to obtain the opinions of both Headquarters

and agents in the field, and that he may make a request to the

Bureau to widen the scope of agent's release.

6

NW• 65994-Docld:32175170-Page 83

---

## Page 84

U.S. SENATE SELECT COMMITTEE ON

« INTELLIGENCE' ACTIVITIES (SSC) ;

BEING ISEN

INTERVIEW OF SA LEO S. BRENNEISEN

Agent was not placed under oath and when'

agent

refused to furnish opinions in those cases noted above or

to discuss ELSUR, SEIDEI suggested that he, SEIDEL, put

away his pencil and pad.

Agent replied that that was not.

necessary. The only right explained to agent was the

fact

that all information furnished by him was at his own

volition and was entirely voluntary.

No mention was made

that any part of the interview might be utilized in a

possible court proceeding against

the agent.

Agent did not consult with Bureau representative

during course of the interview.

7*

NW 65994-Docld:32175170-Page 84-

---

## Page 85

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

In Reply, Please Refer to

File No.

FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION

San Francisco, California

August 15, 1975

U.S. SENATE SELECT COMMITTEE ON

INTELLIGENCE ACTIVITIES (SSC)

ALL INFORMATION CONTAINED

TERVIEW OF SAC CHARLES W. BATES

DATEL 1/30/33BYSP-2 TAP

2 BY SSC STAFF MEMBERS

CA7775-6203

and Mr. Log Johnson, Staff Members of the Senate Select

„the evening of August 11, 1975, Mr. Lester Seidel

Committee, met with Special Agent in Charge Charles W. Bates

of the San Francisco Office.

This meeting occurred over dinner.

No statements were made by either of these individuals as to

any rights that SAC Bates might have in connection with the

interview.

During the dinner, MI. Seidel referred to COINTELPRO

involving the FBI's investigation of the Black Panther Party

in San Francisco. Bates advised him that he was in charge of

the San Francisco Office from July, 1967 until the end of

April, 1970, when he was transferred to Chicago. Bates stated

that he was

aware of the investigation being conducted on the

Black Panther Party but was not personally conversant with

all the details of this investigation as such details were

all contained in the FBI's file.

On at least two occasions

MI. Seidel referred to specific facts occurring in other parts

of the country involving anonymous letters sent to individuals

under COINTELPRO. He asked if Bates agreed that these actions

were proper.

Mr. Seidel was told that Bates had no way of

knowing the facts as he related were true or any other of

the circumstances

involved and that, therefore, he was unable

to comment at all.

Seidel asked if Bates had any recommendations

for legislatión

which the Committee could propose that would

assist the FBI in the domestic counterintelligence field.

Bates informed

him that he was not fully conversant with this

entire tlela and that it was the perogative of FBI officials

•at Washington and Department of Justice officials

to recommend

such legislation.

This document contains neither recommendations nor conclusions

of the FBI. It is the property of the FBI and is loaned to your

your and die dontants are not to be a ge outside.

your agency•

162-111390=

NW 65994-Docld:32175170- Page 85

---

## Page 86

SSC;

INTERVIEW OF SAC

CHARLES W. BATES

BY SSC STAFF MEMBERS

Mr. Seidel also inquired as to whether Bates felt

that an extension of electronic surveillances into the domestic

intelligence field would be of assistance. Bates informed

him that the fßl was operating according to current court

decisions as involve electronic surveillances and that the

courts had recently precluded this action in strictly domestic

intelligence matters.

Mr. Seidel was informed that this was

a decision for FBI officials in Washington.

asked Bates if he was aware of the

occasion Bates informed him that he was

not aware of the

"Houston Plan" and his only knowledge of it is what he has

seen in the public press.

At one time Mr. Johnson asked if

Bates thought that Mr.

Hoover had turned down the "Houston

Plan" because he was afraid for his job. Bates again replied

that he had no firsthand knowledge having anything to do with

the

"Houston Plan" but he was certainly aware that Mr. Hoover

was not afraid of anything or anyone.

' Both Mr. Johnson and Mr. Seidel asked if Bates felt

that the use of "black bag jobs" would be of advantage in

conducting domestic counterintelligence operations.

Bates

replied

that he had no personal direct knowledge of such matters

and had never been involved in such matters.

OVERSIGHT

During the evening, Mr. Seidel asked if Bates felt

that a congressional oversite committee of the FBI was sound

and proper.

and not destructive.

Mr. Seidel

asked if Bates felt that the

FBI's security operation should be completely divorced from

its criminal responsibilities and handled as a separate agency

or a separate part of the FBI. Bates informed him that it

appeared that the FBI's efforts in both the criminal and the

security field had been effective and appeared to be proper

in its present context.

Mr. Seidel inquired if Bates was

personally acquainted

with Mr. William C. Sullivan, former

FBI official.

Mr. Seidel was informed that Bates worked in

the same division

with Mr. Sullivan in the 1950's and knew

another supervisor at FBI Headquarters.

Seidel then asked if Bates was aware of the dis-

agreements that Mr. Sullivan had had with Mr. Hoover and he

was informed that

he had no details concerning this matter.

- 2.

NW 65994 -Docld:32175170-Page 86

T..

---

## Page 87

SSC;

INTERVIEW OF SAC

CHARLES W. BATES

BY SSC STAFF MEMBERS

Mr. Seidel asked if Bates knew former SAC Harry

MOrgan.

Bates told him that he knew him as he had replaced

him as SAC in San Francisco at the end of April, 1970. He

then asked if Bates was aware of why Mr. Morgan was transferred

from San Francisco,

Bates told him that some problem had

Quit them to personal are tee spectric decaffs

but that they woula be available at FBI Headquarters: Seidel

said the only reason he"was asking was that he was thinking

about interviewing Mr. Morgan but he did not want to embarrass

him and

then asked if Morgan's transfer from San Francisco

had anything to do with a drinking problem.

Bates said again

that he was not aware of the speci

fics."

On the afternoon of August 13, 1975, Mr. Lock Johnson

came into the San Francisco FBI Office saying

he had just a

few more questions he wanted to ask Bates.

He then asked if

the San Francisco Office was involved in foreighncounter-

intelligence work, and he was informed that we were as were

many other FBI offices.

He then asked if we surveilled every-

one who went into or came out of the soviet Consulate in San

Francisco.

He was informed that Bates did not intend to dis-

cuss with him any investigative techniques or anything having

to do with pending investigations.

Mr. Johnson said he was

attempting to find some individual who was an expert in foreign

counterintelligence, particularly the Soviet threat to the

United States. Bates informed him that there were probably

robably n

a number of people in the United States who would qualify in

this category but Bates did not consider himself as an expert

The above represents specific matters brought up

during these discussions.

- 3 -

NW 65994-Docld:32175170-Page 87 ~

---

## Page 88

FD-36.1Rev$ 5-22-861..1,

Transmit the following in

Via

AIRIEL

FBI

Date:

8/15/75

(Type in plaintext or code):

AIRMAIL

(Priority)

Assoc. Dir.

Dep.-A.D.-Adm.

Dep.-A.D.-Inv..

Asst. Dir.:

Admin..

Comp. Syst.

Ext.

Affairs

Files & Com.

Gen. Inv.

Ident.

Inspectio

Plan.

Spec. Inv.

Training -

Legal Coun

Telephone Rm.

Director Sec'y

TO :

DIRECTOR, FBI (62-116395)

(ATTN. INTD

-W.0.

PROM SAC, SAN FRANCISCO (62-6887)

SENSTUDY '75

CREGAR)

Mist

Rebutels 7/30 and 31/75.

Enclosed for the Bureau are eight copies each of

LHMs covering interviews by the U.S. Senate Select Committee

on Intelligence Activities covering interviews of SAC CHARLES W.

/BATES, SA LEO S. BRENNEISEN, and former SAS DAVID E. TODD, ALBERT P

ECLARK, and WILLIAM A. COHENDET.

D

It is noted that accompanying the thiM concerning

interview of former SA DAVID E. TODD is a three-page Xerox of

• to Mr. SEIDEL.

It is noted that the chronology under the date

of 8/19/70 bears a notation, "CLEAVER released from prison."

TODD obviously meant HUEY NEWTON, instead of CLEAVER

ALL INFORMATION CONTAINED

CA# 15-6283

SACOSURE

2) Bureau (Encis.

40)

San Francisco

(AER REG)

(1-

62-6887)

11258

+1-157-6014311

REC- T6 V:

ISB : LMR

(4)

tie picass

Si SEP 161975

636

102-116395

Approved:

• SEP 1 8 1975 Special Agent in Charge

NW 66994- Docid 32175170 Page 88

Sent -

- M

Per

# U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1969 0 - 346-090 (11)

---

## Page 89

NR950 WA CODE

9: DIPM NITEL 7-31-75 FLC

TO LOS ANGELES

SAN DIEGO

SAN FRANCISCO

FROM DIRECTOR (62-116395)

SENSTUDY 75

REBUTEL JULY 3D, 1975.

REPORTING PROCEDURES IO FOLLOW RELATIVE IO SENATE SELECT

COMMITTEE (SSC) STAFF INTERVIEWS OF PRESENT AND FORMER SAS: .

FOR INCUMBENTS: IMMEDIATELY AFTER INTERVIEW PREPARE LHM

REPORTING AS DETAILED AS POSSIBLE QUESTIONS ASKED AND REPLIES

GIVEN. INCLUDE WHETHER OR NOT INTERVIEWEE'S RIGHTS WERE

EXPLAINED TO HIM; DURATION OF INTERVIEW; AND IF IT WAS NECESSARY

FOR INTERVIEVEE IO CONSULI WITH BUREAU REPRESENTATIVE, SO STATE.

ALSO INCLUDE ADVICE GIVEN TO INTERVIEVEE BY BUREAU REPRESENTATIVE

AS IO RIGHT TO

COUNSEL, PRIVILEGED AREAS, CONSULTATION PRIVILEGES,

AND PARAMETERS OF INTERVIEW, ALL AS DISCUSSED IN REFERENCED

TELETYPE, LM SHOULD BEAR DUAL CAPIION: "U.S. SENATE SELECT

COMMITTEE ON INTELLIGENCE ACTIVITES (SSC)"; "INTERVIEW OF SA

(INSERT NAME) BY SSC STAFF MEMBER." SUBMIT ORIGINAL AND SEVEN

COPIES OF EACH LIM TO BUREAU BY COVER AIRTEL, ATTENTION EN2IS-1Y

W.O. CREGAR.

0: 20

Ward.

ENDERED

SEALER.

-PLED.

Bloes

tan.

NW 65994 Docld:32175170 Page 89

---

## Page 90

PAGE TWO

FOR FORMER SAS: ANY FORMER SA WHO HAS BEEN INTERVIEWED

AND VOLUNTEERS IO FURNISH RESULTS (NOTE THAI SUCH INFORMATION SHOULD

NOT BE SOLICITED BY FBI BUT MERELY ACCEPTED WHEN OFFERED SHOULD

BE THOROUGHLY DEBRIEFED AS SOON AS POSSIBLE AFTER INTERVIEW AND

LHM PREPARED AND SUBMITTED IN LINE WITH INSTRUCTIONS FOR

INCUMBENIS. SECOND HEADING OF LHM SHOULD USE TERM "FORMER SA."

END

MAH OF FBI LOS ANGELES FOR ONE PLUS TWO OTHERS LA GLR

NW 65994 Docld:32175170 Page 90

---

## Page 91

NR 053 WA CODE

8:35PM NITEL 7-3D-75 FLC

TO LOS ANGELES

SAN DIEGO

SAN FRANCISCO

FROM DIRECTOR (62- 116395) -

SENSTUDY 75

REBUTEL MAY 2, 1975.

SENATE SELECT COMMITTEE (SSC) STAFF MEMBER LESTER SEIDEL

HAS FURNISHED, THE FOLLOWING TENTATIVE SCHEDULE FOR INTERVIEWS

IN YOUR OFFICE: SAN DIEGO JULY 3D, 1975 SAS EARL M. PETERSEN,

LAWRENCE F. WIRICK; LOS ANGELES AUGUST 5, 1975 WALLACE E. WARD,

RICHARD A. BLOESER, AUGUST 7, 1975 ASSISTANI DIRECIOR ROBERI E.

GEBHARDT; SAN FRANGISCO AUGUST I1, 1975 LEO S. BRENNEISEN, AUGUST

11-12, 1975. SAC CHARLES W. BATES. PURPOSE OF INTERVIEW IS TO BE

COINTELPRO AND BUREAU INVESTIGATION OF THE BLACK PANTHER: PARTY:

ADDITIONALLY SAC BATES WILL BE INTERVIEWED CONCERNING KNOWLEDGE OF

"HOUSTON PLAN" BY SSC STAFF MEMBER LOCK JOHNSON.

I HAVE WAIVED YOUR EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENTS FOR PURPOSES OF

THESE INTERVIEWS. EACH SHOULD NOTE THAT HE HAS THE RIGHT TO

COUNSEL; HOWEVER, THE FBI IS UNABLE. TO PROVIDE PRIVATE COUNSEL.

THERE ARE CERTAIN PRIVILEGED AREAS CONCERNING WHICH SAS WOULD

66-6243-13

SEARCHED..

_INDEXEDI

FILal.

SERIALIZED.

JUL & 01975

Bloeser

to.

cc.

Wind

NW 65994 Docld:32175170 Page 91

---

## Page 92

PAGE TWO

NOT BE REQUIRED TO ANSWER QUESTIONS. AREAS CONCERN INFORMATION

WRICH MIGHT DIVULGE IDENTITIES OF FBI SOURCES; INFORMATION

RELATING TO SENSITIVE METHODS AND TECHNIQUES; INFORMATION WHICH

MIGHT ADVERSELY AFFECI ONGOING FBI INVESTIGATIONS; AND INFORMATION

WHICH ORIGINATED WITH OTHER AGENCIES, INCLUDING FOREIGN

INTELLIGENCE AGENCIES.

SAN FRANCISCO NOTE RELEASE ALSO APPLIES TO FORMER SAS

ALBERI P. CLARK AND WILLIAM A. COHENDET WHO, ALONG WITH OTHER

EX-SAS ON WEST COAST,, MAY ALSO BE INTERVIEWED. CLARK AND COHENDET

HAVE ALREADY RECEIVED FOREGOING ADVICE REGARDING PRIVATE COUNSEL

AND PRIVILEGED AREAS AND HAVE ASKED FOR CONSULTATION ASSISTANCE

WHICH BUREAU IS APPROVING AS BELOW•

NORMALLY, FBIHQ WOULD SUPPLY REPRESENTATIVE TO BE ON-THE-

SCENE FOR CONSULTATION PURPOSES. HOWEVER, DISTANCE AND TIME

SCOPE MAKES THIS NOT FEASIBLE IN THIS INSTANCE.

THE RANKING FBI OFFICIAL IN EACH OFFICE WILL SERVE FOR

CONSULTATION PURPOSES. IN HIS ABSENCE, AN SAC IN LOS ANGELES OR

ASAC IN SAN DIEGO AND SAN FRANCISCO MAY SO SERVE. PURPOSE OF

CONSULTANT, WHO WILL NOI BE PRESENI AT INTERVIEW BUT AVAILABLE

NEARBY, WILL BE TO SUPPLY ASSISTANCE IN THE EVENT PERSON BEING

NW 65994 Docld:32175170 Page 92

---

## Page 93

PAGE THREE

INTERVIEWED IS ASKED QUESTIONS. IN ONE OF THE PRIVILEGED AREAS

OR QUESTIONS OUTSIDE THE SPECIFIED PARAMETERS OF THE INTERVIEW

(COINTELPRO/BLACK PANTHER PARTY). SHOULD QUESTIONS ARI'SE WHICH

CONSULTANT REPRESENTATIVE CANNOT HANDLE, SUGGEST IMMEDIATE

TELEPHONE CALL TO LEGAL COUNSEL DIVISION.

SHOULD ADDITIONAL. FORMER SAS CONTACI YOUR OFFICE FOR ASSISTANCE,

COORDINATE WITH THEM WAIVER FROM EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT THROUGH

LEGAL COUNSEL DIVISION AND FURNISH CONSULTATION SERVICES AS

REQUESTED.

NOTE THAT RANKING OFFICIAL SERVING IN CONSULTANI

POSITION DOES NOT REPRESENT THE PARTICULAR EMPLOYEE AS PRIVATE

COUNSEL.

END

HOLD

NW 65994 Docld:32175170 Page 93

---

## Page 94

FD-36 (Rev.5-22-64)

Transmit the following in

Via

AIRTEL

TO:

FROM:

SUBJECT:

FBI

Date:

9/3/75

(Type in plaintext or code)

AIR MAIL

(Priority)

DIRECTOR, FBI (62-116395)

ATTN: INTD - W.O. KREGAR

I SAC, SAN FRANCISCO (82-6887)

U.S. SENATE SELECT COMMITTEE

ON INTELLIGENCE ACTIVITIES (SSC);

INTERVIEW OF FORMER ASSISTANT

DIRECTOR AL BELMONT

Assoc. Dir.

Dep. AD Adi

Dep. AD Ing

Asst. Dir.:

Admin. -

Comp. Syst.

Ext. Affairs

Files & Com..-

• Gen. Inv.

Ident.

Laboratory

Plan. & Eval. _

Spec. Inv.

Trgining

Egal coun. l

Telephone Rm. -

Director Sec'y -

ALL INFORMATIGH CONTANED

HEREIN IS UNCLASSIRIED

ARUSONN

On the morning of 9/2/75, Mr. AL BELMONT,

former+

Assistant to the Director of FBI, called SAC, San Francisco.

SHe said that early last week Mr. MIKE EPSTEIN from the Staff ^

of the Church Committee called him and said he wanted to come

to California and talk with Mr. BELMONT on Saturday, 8/30/75.

ANY. BETYONT Said that EPSTEIN appeared and talked to him for

about 30 minutes.

His main topic of discussion was the MARTIN

LUTHER KING case.

EPSTEIN told BELMONT that he was attempting

• to tie the FBI investigation of the KING case into the "March

Ion Washington." BELMONT told him that the TBI's investigation-

whad nothing to do with the March on Washington. He further

• told EPSTEIN that the KING case was open because of information

of definite efforts by the Communist Party to influence KING.

EPSTEIN referred to some monograph and then to some

memorandum with BELMONT's initials on it concerning the KING

case and BELMONT told him he had no personal knowledge of that.

MY. BELMONT stated he merely wantato i make this known to the

- 8460

For the Bureau's information,

condition

Mr. BELMONT'S

physical

has deteriorated in the past

few

months and

most difficult to understand his speech as

the illness whick

se has has aftected the control of most

of his muscles. I SEP 5

1975

_ Bureau

7."

-

San Francisco

CWB/cmp

(3)

pis that in Erne

toagreemen

Approved:

Special Agent in Charge

NW 65994-Docid:32175170

0 1975 age-94 - :

Sent

Per -

-ido

---

## Page 95

NRE33 WA CORE

6:16PM 9/4/75 NITEL AJ"I

TO ALL SACS

FROM DIRECTOS

(62-116395)

PERSO"AL

SINSTUDY 75

REBUTEL MAY 2, 1975.

PURPOSES OF INSTANT TELETYPE ARE TO (IS REITEPATE THAT

PRI WAS PLEDGED FULL COOPTRATION WITH THE SEATE SOLECT

COMMITTET (SSC) AND MISHES TO ASSIST A!'D FACILIIATE ANY

INVISTIGATIONS UNDERTAKEN BY THE SSC WITH RESPECT TO THE FRI:

AND (?) SIT FORTH NEM PROCEDURE RELATING TO SSC STAFF •

INTERVISWS OF CURRTNT AND FOPMER FBI EMPLOYEES.

FOP INFORMATIDY OF THOSE DEFICES WHICH HAVE NOT PREVIDUSLY

• HAD CURRENT OF FOPMER EMPLOYEES IN IIS TERRITOY INTERVIENED

DY THE SSC, THE BUREAU FREQUENTLY LEARNS FROM THE SSE OR

OTHERVISE THAT FORMER EMPLOYTES ARE REING CONSIDERED FOR

INTERVIEW BY THE SSO STAFF. INSTRUCTIONS ARE ISSUED FOR THE

FIELE OFFICE TO CONTACI THE FORMER EMPLOYTE TO ALTRI HIM AS IO

POSSIBLE INTERVIEW, REMIND HIM DF HIS CONFIDENTIALITY AGREEMENT

WITH THE BUREAU AND SUGGEST THAT IF HE IS CONTACTEN FOR

ASAC

62-2368.9

GILBER

ICC

dist.

SEARCHED

INDERED

SERIALIZED BB FLED @D

KEEFE

LONERGAN

SEP 4 1975

FBI-ALBANY

HW 54955 DOCId: 32989494 Page 34

Nw 05994Doeld2175170Cage-95

---

## Page 96

PAGE TWO

INTEPVIEU, HE MAY CONTACI THE LEGAL COUNSEL DIVISION BY

COLLICI CALL FOR FURTHER INFORMATION. I!' THE USUAL CASE,

AS CIRCUMSTANCES UNFOLD, THE FORMER EMPLOYEE IS IOLN(I)

THAT HI HAS A RIGHT TO LEGAL COUNSEL, PUI THAI THE BURRAU

CANNOT PROVIDE SAME; (2) THAT THE BUREAU HAS WAIVED THE

CONFIDENTIALITY AGREEMENT FOR THE INTERVIEW WITHIN SPECIFIED

PARAMETERS; AMD (3) THAT THERE ARE FOUR PRIVILEGED ARTAS I!

WHICH HE IS NOT REQUIRED TO ANSWER QUESTION. THESE AREAS

ARE RELATING TO INFORMATION WHICH MAY CAS IDENTIFY PUREAU

SOURCES; (B) REVEAL SENSITIVE METHODS/ TECHNIQUES; (C) REVEAL

IDENTITITS OF THIRD AGENCIES, INCLUDING FOREICN INTELLIGENCT

AGENCIES, OR INFORMATION FROM SUCH AGENCIES; AND (D) ADVERSELY

AFFECT ONGOING BUREAU INVESTIGATIONS.

HERETOFORE, BUREAU HAS OFFERED INTERVIFWEES CONSULIATION

PRIVILEGES WHEREBY A BUREAU SUPERVISOR WOULD RE AVAILAPLE

NEARBY, ALTHOUGH NOT ACTUALLY AI INTERVIEW, SO INTERVIFNEE

MIGHT CONSULT WITH HIM SHOULD QUESTIONS ARISE AS TO PARAMETERS

OF INTERVIEM OR PRIVILEGED AREAS. THE CONSULIANI DID. NOI ACT

AS A LIGAL ADVISOR.

EFFECIIVE IMMEDIATELY, BUREAU WILL NO LONGER PROVIDE

#H 54955 DocId: 32989494 Page 35

NW-65994-Đoeld:32175170-Page-96---

---

## Page 97

PAGE THREE

ON-THE-SCENE PERSONNEL FOR CONSULTATION PURPOSES TO ASSIST

EITHER CURRENI OF FORMER EMPLOYEES. PROSPECIIVE INTERVIENEES

SHOULD BE TOLD THAI, IF THEY DESIRE ASSISTANCE OF THIS NATURE

DURING AN INTERVIEW, THEY MAY CONTACT EITHER PERSONALLY (IF

INTERVIEW IS IN MASHINGION, D. C.) OR 3Y COLLECI CALL, THE

ASSISTANI DIRECIOR OF THE INTELLIGENCE DIVISION, MR. '. R.

WANNALL, OR, IN HIS ABSENCE, SECIION CHIEF I. O. GREGAR.

THIS CHANGE IN PROCEDURE SHOULD NOT BE CONSTRUEN AS

LESSENING THE ASSISTANCE WE ARE FURNISHING TO CURRENT AND

FORMER EMPLOYEES.

FOR YOUR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, I AM WORKING WITH THE

DEPARTMENT IN EXPLORING AVENUES IO ARRANGE LEGAL REPRESENTATION,

WHEN NECESSARY, FOR CURRENT AND FORMER EMPLOYEES WITHOUT

EXPENSE TO THEM. YOU WILL BE KEPT ADVISED OF DEVELOPMENTS

IN THIS REGARD.

END

LVV FBI ALBANY

CLR

1W 54955 DocId: 32989491 Page 36

NW 65994 Docld:32175170 Page 97

---

## Page 98

NR D3 D WA CODE

615PM NITEL 9/5/75 PMJ

IO-ALEXANDRIA

BALIIMORE

BIRMINGHAM

BOSTON

CHICAGO

CINCINNATI

DALLAS

JACKSON

LOS ANGELES

EL PASO

INDIA NAPOLIS

NEW YORK

PHILADELPHIA

SAN DIEGO

JACKSONVILLE

MEMPHIS

OKLAHOMA CITY

PHOENIX

SAN FRANCISCO

LOUISVILLE

MIAMI

OMAHA

ST. LOUIS

SAVANNAH

SEATILE

FROM DIRECTOR (62-116395)

PERSONAL AITENTION

SENSTUDY 75

REBUTELS MAY, 2, 1975, AND SEPTEMBER 4, 19,75.

SENATE SELECT COMMITTEE (SSC) HAS REQUESTED WHEREABOUIS

OF A NUMBER OF FORMER FBI EMPLOYEES INDICATING THEY MAY BE

INTERVIEWED BY THE SSC STAFF. : LISIED BELOW, BY FIELD OFFICE

TERRITORY, ARE THESE FORMER EMPLOYEES AND THEIR LAST KNOWN

ADDRESSES AS CONTAINED IN BUREAU FILES.

9/5/55

6oket=28

ANDE.

SEARCHED. AT FILED

SERIALIZED.

SEP 05419

NW-65994 Docld:32175170-Rage 98

---

## Page 99

PAGE TwO

INFORMATION FROM SSC INDICATES NAMES OF FORMER SA'S

• LITRENTO AND STEWART DEVELOPED AS HAVING BEEN RESPONSIBLE FOR

SUPERVISING COMMUNICATIONS BETWEEN THE FBI AND CIA CONCERNING

MAIL OPENING ACIVITIES. ALL OTHERS IN LIST BELOW WERE EITHER

SAC, ASAC, OR BOTH, DURING PERIOD 1959 - 1966 IN ONE OR MORE

OF THE FOLLOWING OFFICES: BOSTON, DETROIT, LOS ANGELES, MIAMI;

NEW YORK; SAN FRANCISCO, SEATTLE, AND WASHINGION FIELD. THEY

PRESUMABLY ARE ALSO KNOWLEDGEABLE CONCERNING MAIL OPENINGS.

EACH OF THESE FORMER EMPLOYEES IS TO BE IMMEDIATELY

CONTACIED AND ALERTED THAT HE MIGHT BE APPROACHED BY THE SSC

STAFF FOR INTERVIEW. THE FORMER EMPLOYEE MAY, AFTER BEING

CONTACTED BY SSC STAFF, CONTACI BUREAU'S LEGAL COUNSEL DIVISION

.. BY COLLECT CALL FOR FULL INFORMATION TO ASSIST HIM INCLUDING

•OBLIGATIONS AS TO CONFIDENTIALITY OF INFORMATION ACQUIRED AS

FBI EMPLOYEE. IT IS EMPHASIZED THAT BUREAU'S OFFER OF

ASSISTANCE IS NOT INTENDED TO IMPEDE SSC WORK, BUT IS DONE

AS COOPERATIVE GESTURE AND TO SAFEGUARD SENSITIVE BUREAU

INFORMATION

: NW 65994-Docld:32175170-Page-99

---

## Page 100

PAGE THREE

CONTACTS WITH

1 THESE FORMER EMPLOYEES TO BE HANDLED

PERSONALLY BY. SAC OR ASAC. IN EVENT THIS IS NOT FEASIBLE

FOR JUST CAUSE, IO BE HANDLED BY A SENIOR SUPERVISOR:

IMMEDIATELY AFTER CONTACT, RESULTS SHOULD BE FURNISHED

BUREAU BY NITEL IN ABOVE CAPTION, BRIEFLY INCLUDING REACTION

OF FORMER EMPLOYEES CONTACTED: IF A FORMER EMPLOYEE NO

LONGER IN YOUR TERRITORY OR TEMPORARILY AWAY, SET OUT LEAD TO .

OTHER OFFICE IMMEDIATELY WITH COPY TO FBIHQ.

ALEXANDRIA:

W. DONALD STEWARI, CRYSTAL HOUSE I, APARIMENT 202, ARLINGTON;

VIRGINIA.

JAMES H. GALE; 3307 ROCKY MOUNT ROAD, FAIRFAX, VIRGINIA

TROMAS E BISHOP, 8820 STARK ROAD, ANNANDALE, VIRGINIA

BALTIMORE:

ANTHONY P: LITRENTO, 2810 STONYBROOK DRIVE, BOWIE, MARYLAND

PAUL O'CONNELL, JR., 2417 STRAITON DRIVE; POTOMAC, MARYLAND

DONALD E: RONEY, 131 CAMBRIDGE DRIVE, WINDSOR HILLS,

WILMINGTON, DELAWARE

VICTOR TURYN, 264 TURF VALLEY ROAD, ELLICOTI CITY,

MARYLAND

DONALD W. MORLEY, BOX 222, NEW MARKET, MARYLAND

NW 65994-Docld:32175170 Page 100

---

## Page 101

ST

PAGE

FOUR

BIRMINGHAM:

JOHN DAVID POPE, JR., 221 REMINGION ROAD, BIRMINGHAM, ALABAMA

BOSTON:

LEO L. LAUGHLIN, 9 EVERETT AVENUE, WINCHESTER, MASSACHUSETIS

EDWARD J. POWERS, ID COLONIAL DRIVE, BEDFORD, NEW HAMPSHIRE

JoF • DESMOND, 185 FRANKLIN STREET, BOSTON, MASSACHUSEITS

CHICAGO:

MARLIN #. JOHNSON, CANTEEN CORPORATION, THE MERCHANDISE

MARI; CHICAGO, ILLINOIS •

HARVEY G. FOSER, 1012 SOUTH HAMLIN, PARK RIDGE,: ILLINOIS

CINCINNATI:

PAUL FIELDS, 2677 CYCLORAMA DRIVE, CINCINNATI, OHIO

• HARRY J. MORGAN, 5314 ELMCREST LANE, CINCINNATI, OHIO

DALLAS:

PAUL HO STODDARD, 3014 CHATTERION DRIVE, SAN ANGELO, TEXAS

KENNETH E. COMMONS, 2458 DOUGLAS DRIVE, SAN ANGELO, TEXAS

EL PASO:

KARL W. DISSLY, POST OFFICE BOX 9762, EL PASO, TEXAS

INDIANAPOLIS:

DILLARD W. HOWELL, 6413 CARDINAL LANE, INDIANAPOLIS,

INDIANA

ALLAN GILLIES, 8228 HOOVER LANE, INDIANAPOLIS., INDIANA

JACKSON:

WILLIAMS W.. BURKE, JR.g 1847 AZTEC DRIVE, JACKSON,

MISSISSIPPI

NW-65994-Đocld:32175170 Page 101 -

---

## Page 102

PAGE FIVE

JACKSONVILLE:

DONÁLD K. BROWN, 826 BROOKMONI AVENUE, EAST JACKSONVILLE,

FLORIDA

WILLIAM MÖ ALEXANDER, 4857 WATER OAK LANE, JACKSONVILLE,

FLORIDA

LOUISVILLE:

BERNARD C. BROWN, 2301 NEWMARKET DRIVE, N.E.og LOUISVILLE,

KENTUCKY

LOS ANGELES:

/ WILLIAM G. SIMON, 2075- LOMBARDY ROAD, SAN MARINO,

20300

9: 388-3330

h: 681-2129

• CALIFORNIA

WESLEY G. GRAPP, 424D BON HOMME ROAD, WOODLAND HILLS,

CALIFORNIA

0: 646-3722

646-5921

4: 340-6308

CALIFORNIA

ARNOLD C. LARSON, 4232 ABBINGTON COURT, WESTLAKE VILLAGE, O: 646-8314

h: 889-4290

/ JOSEPH K. PONDER, 3719 CARRIAGE HOUSE COURI, ALEXANDRIA, 0: 272-93.57

VIRGINIA. BUSINESS ADDRESS: 3038 SOUTH RED HILL AVENUE,

h:

SANTA ANA, CALIFORNIA

TRE 9460 Wilshire Blud, Beverly do Caly

90212

MEMPHIS:

E. HUGO WINTERROWD, 155D NORTH PARKWAY, MEMPHIS, TENNESSEE

MIAMI:

THOMAS MC ANDREWS, 324 NEAPOLITAN WAY, NAPLES, FLORIDA

• FREDERICK F. FOX, 1145D. W. BISCAYNE CANAL ROAD, MIAMI,

FLORIDA

NW 65994 Docld:32175170 Page 102--

---

## Page 103

PAGE SIX

NEW. YORK :

JOSEPH L. SCHMIT, 656 HUNT LANE, MANHASSET, NEW YORK

HENRY A. FITZGIBBON, 76 EASION ROAD, BRONXVILLE, NEW. YORK

OKLAHOMA CITY:

JAMES T. MORELAND, 108 FERN DRIVE, POTEAU, OKLAHOMA

LEE O. TEAGUE, 2501 Nollo: 121SI STREET, OKLAHOMA CITY,

OKLAHOMA

OMAHA:

JOHN F. CALLAGHAN., IOWA LAW ENFORCEMENT ACADEMY,

CAMP DODGE, POSI OFFICE BOX 13D, JOHNSTON, IOWA

PHILADELPHIA:

RICHARD JO 'BÄKER., 219 JEFFREY LANE, NEWTON SQUARE,

PENNSYLVANIA

•JOHN: F. MALONE, 25 GARFIELD AVENUE, CARBONDALE, PENNSYLVANIA

PHOENIX:

PALMER M. BAKEN, JR, 3832 EASI YUCCA STREET, PHOENIX,

ARIZONA

ST• LOUIS:

THOMAS J. GEARTY, 663D CLAYTON ROAD NR. 105, RICHMOND HEIGHTS,

MISSOURI

WESLEY T. WHALEY, 286 GREEN TRAILS DRIVE, CHESTERFIELD,

MISSOURI

NW 65994 -Docld:32175170 -Page 103 n-

---

## Page 104

PAGE SEVEN:

SAN DIEGO:

FRANK L. PRICE, 2785 TOKALON STREET, SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA

SAN FRANCISCO:

CURTIS 0. LYNUM, 644 EAST HILLSDALE BOULEVARD, SAN MATEO,

CALIFORNIA

HAROLD E. WELBORN, 13067 LA VISTA COURT, SARATOGA,

CALIFORNIA

SAVANNAH:

TROY COLEMAN, 36 CROMWELL ROAD, WILMINGION PARK, SAVANNAH,

"GEORGIA

JOSEPH D. PURVIS, 721 DANCY AVENUE, SAVANNAH, GEORGIA

SEATTLE:

LELAND V. BOARDMAN, ROUTE 3, BOX 268, SEQUIM, WASHINGTON

RICHARD D. AUERBACH, P.O. BOX. 1768; SEATTLE, WASHINGION

JAMES E. MILNES, 4317. = 50TH AVENUE, NE.; SEATTLE,

WASHINGTON

PAUL R. BIBLER, 15.134 - 38TH AVENUE, N.Eo, SEATTLE,

WASHINGTON.

END

NW 65994- Docld:32175170 Page 104 ~

144.

---

## Page 105

Assoc. Dir.

FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION

COMMUNICATIONS SECTION

SEP 0 9 1875,

Dep.-A.D.-Acm.

Dep-A.D.-Inv.

Asst. Dir.:

Admin. -

Comp. Syst.

Ext. Affairs

NR

DES SF CODE

8:20PM NIIEL 9/9/75 CJC

TO :

DIRECTOR

(62-116395)

Files & Com, wa

TELETYPE

Gen. Inv, -

Ident. --

spectio

mAlu

Laboratory

FROM :

SAN

ALLINFORMATION CONTAINED

Plan. & Eval. fi

Spec, Inv.

FRANCISCO

SE NSTUDY/ 75

ATE 0-100 BY

EREIN ISINGLASS TRIAL/R

Training

Legal Coun

Telephone Km.

Director Sec'y

RE BUREAU NITEL SEPTEMBER 5, 1975.

SAG, SAN FRANCISCO, CONTACTED HAROLD E • WELBORN ON

SEPTEMBER 8, 1975, AND ACQUAINIED HIM WITH INFORMATION IN

REFERENCED NITEL. WELBORN'S IMMEDIATE REACTION WAS THAT HE

DID NOT DESIRE IO DISCUSS WITH ANY OUISIDER ANY INFORMATION

FAT HE HAD OBTAINED THROUGH HIS FBI EMPLOYMENT. HE DID STATE

GAT SHOULD HE BE CONTACTED BY SSC STAFF REGARDING INTERVIEW,

THE WOULD IMMEDIATELY TELEPHONE THE BUREAU'S LEGAL COUNSEL

VISIONA FOR INTORMATION, WELLORN NOW RESIES AI 19422 VINEYARD

LANE, SARATOGA, CALIFORNIA •

SAC CONTACTED CURTIS O. LYNUM ON SEPTEMBER 9, 1975.

LYNUM'S REACI ION WAS THAT HE COULD NOT SEE THE BASIS FOR THEIR

DESIRE TO CONTACT HIM. HOWEVER, SHOULD THEY DO SO, HE WOULD

IMMEDIATELY ADVISE THIS OFFICE X-BE

ALSO TELEGRATE 116383-701

BUREAU!

LEGAL COUNSEL DIVISION. FOR INFORMATION, LYNUM'S CORRECTa

„SEP 19 1975

ADDRESS IS WEST HILL SALE INSTEAD OF EAST AS IN REFERENCED

No state

END

5'%

lips Last

HOLD

61

NW

84 SEP 2 3 1975

55171 DocId: 32989644

NW 65994- Docld:32175170 Page 105

Page 92

---

## Page 106

018 SF CODE

FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION

COMMUNICATIONS SECTION

SEP 10j5

ADD.

TELETYPE

SPER AUM RW

Assoc. Dir.

Dep:-Ab-Adro

Dep-A.D.-Inv

Asst. Dir.:

Aem.

Comp. Svst.

Pxt. Affaira

Files & Com,

Gen. Int -

Ident.

8:48 PM NITEL 9/ 10/75 CJC

10:

D, IRE CIOR (62-113395)

FROM:

I FRANCISCO

(62- 6887)

ONFIDENTIAL

SENST UDY 75

166-61.

01700s bia vare meltine

Hlan. & Eval: -

Spec. Inv.

Draining.

opense

regal Cous

Telephone km.

DECLASSIA QN: 25X

Director Sec'y

RE SAN FRANCISCO NITEL, JANUARY 17, 1975, CAPTIONED

"CURRENT INQUIRY INTO CIA DOMESTIC OPERATIONS - INFORMATION

CONCER NING."

1201

ON SEPTEMBER 10, 1975, JOHN H

VAN

METER, 1333 JONES

SIREET, SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA, FORMER REGIONAL CHIEF

POSIAL INSPECTOR, CALIFORNIA, WHO RETIRED DECEMBER 3D, 1966,

ADVISED THAT HE HAS RECEIVED TELEPHONE INQUIRIES FROM SSC

STAFF MEMBERS PAUL WALLACH AND JOSEPH DECK IN WASHINGTON,

D.C. (WDC) FOR THE PURPOSE OF MAKING A DEPOSITION.

VAN METER HAS AGREED TO FLY TO WDC SEPTEMBER 17, 1975

AND MAKE THE DEPOSITION THE FOLLOWING DAY.

VAN METER FURIHER ADVISED THAT THE STAFF MEMBERS MEN-

TIONED DOCUMENTS IN THEIR POSSESSION THAT THEY WOULD LIKE

HIM TO REVIEW PRIOR TO FILING LEX LOGOSITIO

THEY DID NOT

511057560đ

ELABORATE THE TYPE OR NATURE OF THESE DO CUMENI SO.

SEP 17 1975

VAN METER HAS TOLD SSC STAFF IHAI HE HAS NO KNOWLEDGE

•OF FURNISHING ANY MAIL TO CIA.

BECAUSE OF THIS HE FEELS

ALl.

Ne

WHENS

TED EXCEPT

101}

84 SEP 1 8 1975

Nie a RacId: 32999544

Page 123

NW 65994 Docld:32175170 Page 106

SECRET

---

## Page 107

PAGE TWO.

SF 62- 6887

VIIAL

THE DOCUMENIS REFERRED TO ABOVE RELATE TO FBI INVESTIGATIONS.

FOR BUREAU'S INFORMATION VAN METER WAS ASSIGNED IN

REGIONAL POSTAL INSPECTOR'S OFFICE, SAN FRANCISCO, FROM 195D

1O 1966. INITIALLY HE WAS DEPUTY CHIEF INSPECTOR AND FROM

1961 UNTIL RETIREMENI HE WAS CHIEF POSTAL INSPECTOR. HE

CONSISTE NILY EXHIBITED A DISCREET MANNER 5 rube do strica

DURING IHIS PERIOD VAN METER COOPERATED WITH THIS OFFICE

AND PROVIDED ACCESS TO CERTAIN TYPE MAIL IN CONNECTION WITH

MAIL INTERCEPT PROGRAMS, IN PARTICULAR THE GUS SURVEY, CHIPROP

AND

CHICLET

(0)

THIS IS BEING, FURNISHED FOR INFORMATION OF THE BUREAU.

GLASSIFIED BY 2340, XEDS CATEGORY 2, INDEFINITE.

END

HOLD PLS

NW 5517.1

DocId: 32989644

Page 124

NW 05997Doeld.92179170-Page-107

---

## Page 108

ALL INFORATATON CONTAIN

HERON. IB

UNCLASSIFIRD

DATE

1-83-01

_BX

бони

mpR-16

I - M

1-

W. R. Wannall

Mr. W. O. Cregar

CODE

TELETYPE

TO SAC SAN FRANCISCO

FROM DIRECTOR FBI (62-116395)

SENSTUDY 75

NITEL

, 1 - Mr. J. W. Redfield

OCTOBER 9, 1975

PERSONAL ATTENTION

1 - Mr. L. L. Anderson

REBUTEL MAY 2, 1975, SETTING FORTH PERTINENT BACKGROUND

DATA CONCERNING CAPTIONED MATTER.

REFERENCE IS MADE TO SAN FRANCISCO LETTER DATED MARCH 11,

1960, CAPTIONED "CSSI 2279-S*; CONFIDENTIAL SOURCE - CHINESE,"

SAN FRANCISCO FILE 134-1132, A COPY OF WHICH WAS FURNISHED TO

SENATE SELECT COMMITTEE (SSC) TO STUDY GOVERNMENTAL OPERATIONS

WITH RESPECT TO INTELLIGENCE ACTIVITIES.

BY LETTER OCTOBER 8, 1975, THE ABOVE COMMITTEE REQUESTED

"ACCESS TO THE LISTS OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES AND SAN FRANCISCO

SECURITY AND SECURITY INDEX SUBJECTS WHOSE NAMES WERE ON THE

WATCH LISTS EMPLOYED IN THE CHIPROP SURVEY AND THE CHICLET

SURVEY. THESE CATEGORIES ARE DESCRIBED IN A MEMORANDUM FROM

SAC, SAN FRANCISCO, TO DIRECTOR, FBI, DATED MARCH 11, 1960."

IT IS NOTED A REVIEW OF REFERENCED LETTER INDICATES THE

PORTIONS OF REFERENCED LETTER PROMPTING THIS REQUEST APPEAR TO

BE THE LAST PARAGRAPH ON PAGE TWO AND PARAGRAPH ONE ON PAGE

LLA: kjg

(6)

EX-115

REC-30

1ET!144

Mit?

SEE NOTE PAGE 2

12-114515-913

Assoc, Dir.

Dep. AD Adm. -

Dep. AD Inv. co

Asst. Dir.:

Admin.

Comp. Syst.-

Ext. Affairs

Files & Com.

Gen. Inv. com

dent.

Inspectian

Intell.

Laboratory

Plan.

& Eval. an

014.80

SiP

Spec. Inv.-

Training

Legal Coun. -

Telephone Rm. _

NW 95994 Docld:324751780#age 108 IBLETYRE UNIT D

---

## Page 109

PAGE TWO 62-116395

THREE. SAN FRANCISCO SHOULD FURNISE IDENTITIES OF

INDIVIDUALS ON ANY WATCH LISTS MAINTAINED IN CONNECTION

WITH CHIPROP AND CHICLET AND/OR FURNISH SUFFICIENT INFORMATION

TO BUREAU SO THAT AN APPROPRIATE RESPONSE MAY BE MADE IN

ACCORDANCE WITH THE ABOVE REQUEST.

THIS REQUEST SHOULD BE TREATED WITH THE HIGHEST PRIORITY

INASMUCH AS PUBLIC HEARINGS ON THIS MATTER ARI SCHEDULED FOR

THE WEEK OF OCTOBER 20.

SUTEL REPLY TO REACH BUREAU BY CLOSE OF BUSINESS ON

OCTOBER 15, 1975.

NOTE:

Referenced 5/2/75 teletype previously informed

of our cooperation with the SSC and of our obligation to

insure that sensitive sources, methods and ongoing investi-

Above request from SSC cannot

be handled based on review of Bureau files, therefore,

San Francisco being instructed as alove.

NW-65994 Đocld:32175170-Page-109 m

---

## Page 110

FEDERAL DUACHU UF INVESTiUNIUM

MMUNICATIONS SECTION

NR D24 SF CODE

OCT 16 1975,;

9: 15PM NITEL OCTOBER 15, 197 ELETYPE

DIRECTOR (62-116395)

FROM: SAN FRANCISCO (62-6887)

SECRET

SENSTUDY 75.

Assoc. Dir..

Dep.-A:D: 4079_

Dep.-A.D:-In7=

Asst. Dir.: i

Admin.

Comp. Syst.

Ext. Affairs

Files'& Com.

Gen. Inv. -

Ident.

inspection

BAPEREL

Taroratory

Flam. & Eval. =

Theiming ti

Legall Can --

Telephone Best -

Director. SEndy

RE BUTEL, OCTOBER 9, 1975.

REFERENCE IS MADE TO SAN FRANCISCO LETTER DATED MARCH 11,9

1960, CAPTIONED "CSSF 2279-S, CONFIDENTIAL SOURCE - CHINESE, "

SAN FRANCISCO FILE 134-1132.

FOR INFORMATION OF BUREAU, SAN FRANCISCO FILE 134-1132

ADMINISTRATIVE) WAS LOCATED AFTER A THOROUGH SEARCH OF SAN

FRANCISCO FILES AI 4:45 PM PST, OCTOBER 15, 1975. REVIEW OF

THIS FILE DISCLOSED NO "WAICH LISTS" UTILIZED UNTIL JUNE 26, 1963

WHEN CSSF. 2279-S WAS REPLACED BY OSSF 2641-S AND SF FILE 134-1132

WAS CLOSED.

SAN FRANCISCO HAS INTERVIEWED AGENT PERSONNEL WHO PARTICIPATED

IN THE CHICLET AND CHIPROP SURVEYS IN ORDER TO RECONSTRUCI CRITERIA

USED FOR THESE PROGRAMS.

ST, 104,

AGENT PERSONNEL INTERVIEVED HAVE ADVISED THAT

"WATCHLIST"

WAS MAINTAINED FOR THESE PROGRAMS PILOTTO "REEC,30

MATONS 75-185

REVIEWING OVER 13, 000 LETTERS A DAY CIN LESS THAN A MAXIMUM

15 NOV 7 1975

TWO HOURS DID NOT ALLOW SUFFICIENT TIME TO COMPARE THESE LETTERS

WITH A LIST OF NAMES. IN PLACE OF A LIST, AGENT PERSONNEL.

REVIEWING THIS BULK OF LETTERS, USED GENERAL CATEGORIES OF REFERENCE.

THESE AGENTS ALSO HAD THEIR OUN "MENTAL LIST" OF NAMES OF INDIVIDUALS:

8 4 NOV 1 0 1975

NW 65994 Docld:32175170 Page 110

---

## Page 111

PAGE TWO

SF 62-6887

SECRET

WHO WERE OF INTEREST TO THE BUREAU. THIS "MENTAL LIST" INCLUDED

INDIVIDUALS WHO IN THE PAST HAD QUALIFIED UNDER GENERAL CATEGORIES.

AS PERSONS OF INTERESI TO THE BUREAU.

THE GENERAL CATEGORIES OR CRITERION USED BY AGENT PERSONNEL

REVIEWING LETTERS UNDER THE CHICLET AND CHIPROP SURVEYS

INCLUDED: (1) LETTERS WITH A RETURN ADDRESS OF INDIVIDUALS WHO

WERE BEING HELD AS PRISONERS OF WAR AND WHO WERE KNOWN TO

BE "TURNCOÄIS" FROM THE KOREAN CONFLICI. (2) LETTERS WITH A

RETURN ADDRESS OF A DOCTOR OR UNIVERSITY ON THE MAINLAND.

(3) ANY MAIL EMANATING FROM CHICOM INTELLIGENCE SERVICES OR

COVERS THAI WE WERE AWARE OF. (4) MAIL ADDRESSED IN ENGLISH

WITH INFORMATION THAT IDENTIFIED IT WITH A SOURCE OF A SCIENTIFIC

OR TECHNICAL NATURE. (5) MAIL WITH A RETURN ADDRESS OF A

PARTICULAR PROVINCE IN CHINA WHERE THE ATOMIC BOMB WAS BELIEVED

TO HAVE BEEN MANUFACTURED. (6) MAIL ADDRESSED TO WELL KNOWN

SECURITY SUBJECTS OF THE BUREAU RESIDING WITHIN THE UNITED

STATES. (7) MAIL THAT INDICATED ILLEGAL TRAVEL OF AMERICAN

CITIZENS TO MAINLAND CHINA.

WITH SPECIFIC REFERENCE TO REFERENCED BUREAU TELETYPE OF

OCTOBER 9, 1975, WHEREIN THE SENATE SELECT COMMITTEE (SSC) HAD

NW 65994 Docld:32175170 Page 111

---

## Page 112

PAGE THREE

SF 62-6887

SECRET

REQUESTED ACCESS TO "LISTS OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES AND SAN

FRANCISCO SECURITY AND SECURITY INDEX SUBJECTS WHOSE NAMES

WERE ON WAICH LISTS", SAN FRANCISCO REPEATS THAI NO LISIS WERE

MAINTAINED AND/OR UTILIZED PRIOR TO THE MARCH 11, 196D SAN

FRANCISCO LETTER REFERRED TO ABOVE.

WITH REGARD TO THE 14D CLASSIFICATION, SGE CASES, OPENED

AS A RESULT OF THE SURVEYS REFERRED TO IN REFERENCED SAN

FRANCISCO LETTER, NO LIST OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES WAS MAINTAINED.

THESE CASES WERE OPENED AS A RESULT OF AN INDICES SEARCH OF

THE DIVISION WHERE AN INDIVIDUAL RESIDED OR AN INDICES SEARCH

AT THE BUREAU WHICH WAS INITIATED BECAUSE THAT INDIVIDUAL CAME

TO OUR ATTENTION AS A RESULT OF THE SURVEYS. FOR EXAMPLE, IF

A PARTICULAR LETTER WAS OPENED BECAUSE IT WAS ADDRESSED TO A

SCIENTIST, AND THIS LETTER CONTAINED INFORMATION THAI WARRANTED

OPENING A CASE BECAUSE IT CONTAINED INFORMATION OF INTELLIGENCE

VALUE, AN INDICES SEARCH IN THE DIVISION WHERE THAT PERSON

RESIDED WAS CONDUCTED. IF THE INDIÇES SEARCH REVEALED THAT

NW 65994 Docld:32175170 Page 112

---

## Page 113

PAGE FOUR

SF 62-6887 SECRET

THIS PERSON WAS A GOVERNMENI EMPLOYEE, A NEW SGE CASE WAS

OPENED. SOMETIMES WHEN AN INDICES SEARCH DID NOT REVEAL

GOVERNMENT EMPLOYMENT, SUBSEQUENT BACKGROUND INVESTIGATION

DID, AND A NEW SGE CASE WAS OPENED.

WITH REGARD TO SAN FRANCISCO SECURITY AND SECURITY INDEX

SUBJECTS, NO WAICHLISTS WERE UTILIZED PRIOR TO MARCH 11, 196D IN THE

CHIPROP /CHICLET SURVEYS. AGENT PERSONNEL WHO

WERE ENGAGED IN REVIEWING LETTERS IN THESE SURVEYS WERE

EXPERIENCED INVESTIGATORS IN SECURITY MATTERS IN THE SAN

FRANCISCO BAY AREA. THESE AGENTS WERE WELL ACQUAINTED WITH

THE NAMES OF SAN FRANCISCO AREA SECURITY AND SECURITY INDEX

SUBJECTS AND HAD THEIR OWN PERSONAL "MENTAL LIST" OF NAMES OF

THESE, INDIVIDUALS TO DRAW ON WHILE REVIEWING LETTERS. ON

OCCASION, MAIL THAT WAS ADDRESSED TO SECURITY SUBJECTS WAS

OPENED BASED ON OTHER CRITERIA AND AN INDICES SEARCH REVEALED

THAT THAT INDIVIDUAL WAS, IN FACI, OF INTEREST TO THE BUREAU

FOR REASONS UNRELATED TO THE MAIL SURVEYS. IN SUCH INSTANCES

NW 65994 Docld:32175170 Page 113

---

## Page 114

PAGE FIVE

SF 62-6887

SECRET

THE MAIL SURVEY HELPED CORROBORAIE CURRENT INFORMATION REGARDING

THESE SUBJECTS.

IT IS RECALLED BY SF SGENTS WORKING THE CHIPROP CHICLET SURVEYS

SUBSEQUENT TO 1964 THAT CERTAIN "WATCHLISTS" WERE UTILIZED IN THESE

SURVEYS DUE TO THE NUMBER AND TURNOVER OF AGENIS INVOLVED, HOWEVER,

THESE LISTS WERE A "WITHIN HOUSE" LIST WHICH IN ALL PROBABILITY

DID NOT BECOME AN INTREGAL PART OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE FILE IN

QUESTION. SAN FRANCISCO IS CONTINUING TO LOOK FOR THE 134 FILE

COVERING CSSF 2641-S AND WILL SUTEL RESULTS IMMEDIATELY, UPON

LOCATION AND REVIEW.

CLASSIFIED BY 7356. XGDS, CATEGORY 2. INDEFINITE.

END

HOLD PLS

55285

DocId: 32989677

Page 90

NW-65994-Đoeld:32175170 Page 114-

---

## Page 115

Pen an

N885G WA PLAIN

10:34PM NITEL 12/10/75 GHS

TO ALL SACS

FROM DIRECTOR

DIRECTOR'S APPEARANCE BEFORE SENATE SELECT COMMITTEE

ON INTELLIGENCE ACTIVITIES, DECEMBER 1A, 1975

A COPY OF THE SIATEMENT I DELIVERED BEFORE THE SENATE

SELECT COMMITTEE ON INTELLIGENCE ACTIVITIES TODAY HAS BEEN

SENT ALL OFFICES• FOR YOUR INFORMATION, THERE FOLLOWS A

SYNOPSIZED ACCOUNT OF THE MAJOR AREAS OF THE COMMITTEE'S

QUESTIONS TO ME, TOGETHER WITH MY RESPONSES:

(1) REGARDING FBI INFORMANTS, QUESTIONS WERE ASKED

WHETHER COURT APPROVAL SHOULD BE REQUIRED FOR FBI USE OF

INFORMANTS IN INVESTIGATIONS OF ORGANIZATIONS (MY RESPONSE

WAS THAI THE CONTROLS WHICH EXIST TODAY OVER USE OF INFORMANTS

ARE SATISFACTORY); HOW CAN FBI KEEP INFORMANIS OPERATING

WITHIN PROPER LIMITS SO THEY DO NOT INVADE RIGHTS OF OTHER

PERSONS MY RESPONSE WAS THAT RELIANCE MUST BE PLACED ON THE

INDIVIDUAL AGENTS HANDLING INFORMANIS AND THOSE SUPERVISING

THE AGENIS WORK, THAI INFORMANTS WHO VIOLATE THE LAW CAN BE

62-2368-12

SERICKED

SERIALIZEN RES

INDEXED.

19.0

DECL O 1975

FBI- ALBANY

NW 54955. DocId: 32989494 Page 46

NW 65994-Đoeld:32175170-Page 115.

---

## Page 116

PAGE TWO

PROSECUTED -- AS CAN ANY AGENT WHO COUNSELS AN INFORMANT TO

COMMIT VIOLATIONS); AND DID FORMER KLAN INFORMANI GARY ROWE

TESTIFY ACCURATELY WHEN HE TOLD THE COMMITTEE ON DECEMBER 2

THAT HE INFORMED FBI OF PLANNED ACTS OF VIOLENCE BUT FBI

DID NOT ACT IO PREVENT THEM (MY RESPONSE WAS

THAT ROWE'S

TESTIMONY WAS NOT ACCURATE.

(2) IN RESPONSE TO QUESTIONS REGARDING IMPROPER

CONDUCT BY FBI EMPLOYEES, I STATED THAT ALLEGED VIOLATIONS OF

LAW BY FBI PERSONNEL SHOULD BE INVESTIGATED BY THE FBI OR

OTHER APPROPRIATE AGENCY; THAT THE INSPECTION DIVISION HAS

CONDUCTED INQUIRIES REGARDING ALLEGATIONS OF MISCONDUCT;

THAT AN OFFICE OF PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY HAS JUST

BEEN ESTABLISHED IN THE JUSTICE DEPARIMENT, AND WE WILL ADVISE

THAT OFFICE ÖF OUR MAJOR INVESTIGATIONS OF DEPARIMENTAL PERSONNEL,

INCLUDING FBI EMPLOYEES, FOR ALLEGED VIOLATIONS OF LAW, REGULATIONS,

OR STANDARDS OF CONDUCT; THAT I WOULD RESERVE. COMMENT

REGARDING POSSIBLE CREATION OF A NATIONAL INSPECTOR GENERAL

¡ TO CONSIDER MATTERS OF MISCONDUCT BY EMPLOYEES OF ANY FEDERAL

AGENCY.

NW 54955

DocId: 32989494 Page 47

NW 65994- Docld:32175170-Page 116

---

## Page 117

PAGE THREE

(3) IN RESPONSE TO QUESTIONS CONCERNING HARASSMENT OF

MARTIN LUTHER KING, JR., I STATED THAI THE PERSONS WHO ISSUED

THE ORDERS WHICH RESULTED IN SUCH HARASSMENT SHOULD FACE THE

RESPONSIBILITY FOR IT, RATHER THAN THOSE UNDER THEM WHO CARRIED

OUT SUCH ORDERS IN GOOD FAITH; THAT THE FBI STILL HAS RECORDINGS

RESULTING FROM ELECIRONIC SURVEILLANCES OF KING; THAT WE RETAIN

RECORDINGS FOR TEN YEARS BUT WE ALSO HAVE AGREED TO A REQUEST

FROM THE SENATE NOT TO DESTROY INFORMATION IN OUR FILES WHILE

CONGRESSIONAL INQUIRIES ARE BEING CONDUCTED; THAI I HAVE NOT

REVIEWED THE KING TAPES; THAT IF THE COMMITTEE REQUESTED TO

REVIEW THE KING TAPES, THE, REQUEST WOULD BE REFERRED TO THE

ATTORNEY GENERAL•

(4) IN RESPONSE TO QUESTIONS REGARDING WHETHER IT WOULD

BE ADVANTAGEOUS TO SEPARATE THE FBI CRIMINAL INVESTIGATIVE

RESPONSIBILITIES AND OUR INTELLIGENCE FUNCTIONS, I STATED

THAT WE HAVE FOUND THE TWO AREAS TO BE COMPATIBLE; AND I

FEEL THE FBI IS DOING A SPLENDID JOB IN BOTH AREAS.

(5) IN RESPONSE TO QUESTIONS CONCERNING THE ADEQUACY

OF CONTROLS ON REQUESTS FROM THE WHITE HOUSE AND FROM OTHER

GOVERNMENI AGENCIES FOR FBI INVESTIGATIONS OR FOR INFORMATION

NW 54955 DocId: 32989494

Page 48

NW 65994 Docld:32175170 Page 117

in

---

## Page 118

PAGE FOUR

FROM OUR FILES, I STATED THAI WHEN SUCH REQUESIS ARE MADE

ORALLY, THEY SHOULD BE CONFIRMED IN WRITING; THAT WE WOULD

WELCOME ANY LEGISLATIVE GUIDELINES THE CONGRESS FEELS WOULD

PROTECT THE FBI FROM THE POSSIBILITY OF PARTISAN MISUSE.

A FULL TRANSCRIPI OF THE QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS WILL BE

FURNISHED TO EACH OFFICE

AS SOON AS IT IS AVAILABLE.

ALL. LEGATS ADVISED SEPARATELY.

END

PLS ACK FOR 2 TELS

LVV FBI ALBANY

ACK FOR TWO CR

T KS

MW 54955. DocId: 32989494

Page 49

NW-65994-Đocld:32175170-Page-118-

---

## Page 119

Vol. 15

Oh Muited Statra Sruate

• Report of Proceedinge

Hearing held before

Saleci Committed to Study Governmantal. Operations

Wich Respect to Intelligence Activities

INTELLIGENCE INVESTIGATION

UNEDITED TRANSCRiPT

Mesday, Dacember 2, 1975

Washington, D. C.

800-00

SENStuDY

HANDLE

дАС

NW 65994 Docld:32175170 Page 119-

WARD & PAUL

410 FIRST STREET, S. E.

WASHINGTON, D. C. 20003

(202) 541-6000

dead

68-2368-160

66-2885

JAKCHED_

INDEXED_

SERIÄLIZED _BLE. FILED _

DEO:1: 1975

LET BANY

---

## Page 120

WARD &

PAUL

410 First

Streat,

S.E., WashIngton, D.C. 20003

11

12°

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

: 22

23

24

25

Senator Tower.. The next witnesses to appear before the

Committee are Mr. James Adams, Assistant to the Director-

Deputy Associate Director, Investigation, responsible for all

investigative operations; Mr. W.

Raymond Wannall, Assistant

Director, Intélligence Division, responsible for internal

security and foreign counterintelligence investigations; Mr.

John A. Mintz, Assistant Director, Legal Counsel Division;

Joseph G. Deegan, Section Chief, extremist investigations;

Mr. Robert I. Schackelford, Section Chief, subversive

investigations; Mr. Homer A. Newman, Jr., Assistant to Section

Chief, supervises extremist informants; Mr. Edward P. Grigal"-

Unit Chief, supervises subversive informants; Joseph G. 171121,

Assistant Section Chief, Civil Rights Section, Gener.: Int.i"l...-

gative Division.

Gentlemen, will you all rise and be sworn.

NW BE 5048.575170 Pale gId: 32989494

---

## Page 121

16

1901

Phone (Area 202) 544-6000

]

3

4

5

6

410 First Street, S.E., Washington, D.C. 20003

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

• Do you solemnly swear the testimony you are about to give

before this Committee is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing

but the truth, so help you God?

Mr. Adams. I do.

Mr. Wannall. I do.

Mr. Mintz. I do.

Mr. Deegan. I do.

Mr. Schackelford. I do.

Mr. Newman.

I do.

Mr. Grigalus. I do.

Mr. Kelley.

I do.

Senator Tower. It is intended that. Mr. Wannall will be

the principal witness, and we will call on others as guestioning

might require, and I would direct each of you when you do

respond, to identify yourselves, please, for the record.

I think that we will spend just a few more minutes to allow

the members of the Committee to return from the floor.

(A brief recess was taken'.)

Senator Tower.

The Committee will come to order.

Mx. Wannall, according to data, informants provide '83

percent of your intelligence information.

Now, will you provide the Committee with some information

on the critoria for the selection of informants?

NW 54 5648.555170 Pale9fId: 32989494

---

## Page 122

• 1902

Phone (Arca 202) 544-6000

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

9

10

11

.12

: 13

14

15

16

410 First Street, S.E., Washington,

D.C. 20003

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

TESTIMONY OF W. RAYMOND WANNALL, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR,

INTELLIGENCE DIVISION, FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION •

ACCOMPANIED BY: JAMES B. ADAMS,. ASSISTANT TO THE

DIRECTOR-DEPUTY ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR (INVESTIGATION) :

• JOHN A. MINIZ, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR, LEGAL COUNSEL

DIVISION; JOSEPH G. DEEGAN, SECTION CHIEF; ROBERT I.

SCHACKELFORD, SECTION CHIEF; HOMER A. NEWMAN, JR.,

ASSISTANT TO SECTION CHIEF; EDWARD P. GRIGALUS, UNIT

CHIEF; AND JOSEPH G. KELLEY, ASSISTANT SECTION CHIEE,

CIVIL RIGHTS SECTION, GENERAL INVESTIGATIVE DIVISION

• Mr. Wannall. Mr. Chairman, that is not FBI data that you

have quoted. That was prepared by the General Accounting

Office.

Senator

Iower. That is GAO.

MI. Wannall. Based on a sampling of about 93 cases.

Senator Tower. Would that appear to be a fairly accurate

figure.

Mr. Wannall. I have not seen any survey which the FBI

itself has conducted that would confirm that, but I think that

we do get the principal portion of our information from live

sources.

Senator lover.

It would be a relatively high percert...

then?

Mr. Wannall.

I would say yes.

And your ques!

criteria?

NW 65994. Docld;321/5172 Page 122 -

---

## Page 123

smn 18

Phone (Arca 202) 544-6000

190.3

1

2

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14.

15

16

17

18

410 First Street, S.E., Washington, D.C. 20003

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

NW.65994_Docld:32175170-Page 123 -

Senator Tower. What criteria do you use in the selection

of informants?

Mr. Wannall. Well, the criteria vary with the needs. In

oux cases relating to extremist matters, surely in order to get

an informant who can meld into

a group which is engaged in a

criminal type activity, you're going tò have a different set

of criteria. If you're talking about our internal security

matters, I think we set rather high standards. We do require

that a preliminary inquiry be conducted which would consist

principally of checks of our headquarters indices, our field

office indices, checks with other informants who are operating

in the same area, and in various established sources such

as

local police departments.

Following this, if it appears that the person is the type

who has credibility, can be depended upon to be reliable, we

would interview the individual in order to make a determination

as to whether or not he will be willing to assist the FBI

in discharging its responsibilities in that. field.

Following that, assuming that the. answer is positive, we

would conduct a rather in depth investigation for the purpose

of. further attempting to establish credibility and. reliability.

Senator. Tower. .How. does the. Bureau. distinguish between

the use of informants for law enforcement as opposed to

intelligence. collection?

Is the guidance different, or is it the same, or what?

---

## Page 124

emn 19

1904

phone (Arca 202) 544-6000

1

2

4

5

6

7

410 First Street, S.E., Washington, D.C. 20003

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

Mr. Wannall. Well, Mr. Adams can probably best address

the use of informants on criminal matters since he is over

the operational division on that.

MI. Adams. You do have somewhat of a difference in the fact

that a criminal informant in a law enforcement function, you

are trying to develop evidence which will be admissible in

court for prosecution, whereas with intelligence, the informant

alone, your purpose could either be prosecution or it coula be

just for purposes of pure intelligence.

The difficulty in both is retaining the confidentiality

of the individual and protecting the individual, and trying to,

through use of the informant, obtain evidence which could be

used independently of the testimony of the informant so that

he

can continue operating as a criminal informant.

Senator Tower. Are these informants ever authorized to

function as provocateurs?

MT. Adams :

No, sir,, they're not. We have strict regula-

tions against using informants as provocateurs. This gets

into that delicate area of entrapment which has been addressed

by the courts on many occasions and

has been concluded by the

courts that providing an individual has a willingness to engage

in an activity, the government has the right to provide him the

opportunity. This does not mean, of course: that mistakes don't

occur in this area, but we take whatever steps we can.to

avoid this. Even the law has recognized that informants

can

NW 65994 Docld:32175170 Page 124 -

---

## Page 125

smn

20

Phone (Aroa 202) 544-5000

1905

410 First Street, S.E., Washington, D.C. 20003

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

•13

• 14

1.5

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

engage in criminal activity, and the courts have held that,

especially the Supreme Court in the Newark County Case, that

the very difficulty of penetrating an ongoing operation, that

an informant himself can engage in criminal activity, but

because there is lacking this criminal intent to violate a

law, we stay away from that. Our regulations fall short of that.

If we

have a situation where we felt that an informant

has to become involved in some activity in order to protect

or conceal his use as an informant, we go right to the United

States Attorney or to the Attorney

General to try to make sure

we are not stepping out of bounds insofar as the use of our

informants.

Senator Tower. But you do use these informants and do

instruct them to spread dissension among certain groups that

they are informing on, do you not?

MI. Adams. We did when we had the COINTELPRO programs,

which were discontinued in 1971, and I think the klan is probably

one of the best examples of a situation where the law was

in effect at the time. We heard the term States Rights used

much more then than we hear it today. We saw in the Little

Rock situation the President of the United States, in sending

in the troops, pointing out the necessity to use local law

enforcement. We must have local law enforcement, to use the

troops only as a last resort.

And then you have a situation like this where you do try

NW 65994-Docid:32175170-Page-125 -

---

## Page 126

F...

1.906

smn

•21

Phonc (Arca 202) 544-60,00.

410 First Street, S.E., Washington, D.C. 20003

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12.

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

to preserve the respective roles in law enforcement. You have

historical problems with the klan coming along.

We had

situations where the FBI and the Federal Government was almost

powerless to act. We had local law enforcement officers in

some areas participating in Klan violence.

The instances mentioned by MI. Rowe, every one of those,

he saw them from the lowest level of the informant. He didn't

see what action was taken with that information, as he pointed

out in his testimony. Our files show that this information was

reported to the police departments in every instance. We

also

knew that in certain instances the information, upon being

received, was not being acted upon. We also disseminated

simultaneously through letterhead memoranda to the Department

of Justice the problem, and here, here we were, the FBI, in a

position where we had no authority in the absence of instruction

from the Department of Justice, to make an arrest.

Sections 241 and 242 don't cover it because you don't have

evidence of a conspiracy, and it ultimately resulted in

situation where the Department called in United States

Marshals who do have authority similar to local law enforcement

officials.

•So, historically, in those days, we were just as frus-

trated as anyone else was, and when we got information from

24

someone like Mr. Rowe, good information, reliable information,

25

and it was passed on to those who had the responsibility to

NW. 65994_ Docid:32175170 Page, 126

---

## Page 127

r, 4

smn 22

190.7

Phona (Arca 202) 544-6000

2

.. .

do something about it, it was not always acted upon, as he

indicated.

Senator Tower. None of these cases, then, there was

adequate evidence. of conspiracy to give you jurisdiction to

4

5

6

act?

8

9

.10

11

WARD & PAUL

410 First Street, S.E., Washington, D.C. 20003

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

Mí: Adams. The Departmental rules at that time, and still

require Departmental approval where you have a conspiracy.

under 241, It takes two or more persons acting together.. You

can have a mob scene, and you can have blacks and whites

belting each other, but unless you can show that those that

initiated the action acted in concert in a conspiracy, you have.

no violation.

Congress

recognized this, and it wasn't until 1968

that they came along and added Section 245 to the civil rights

statute, which added punitive measures against an individual

that didn't have to be a conspiracy. But this was a problem

that the whole country was grappling with: the President of

the United States, Attorney General. We were in a situation

where we had rank lawlessness taking place, as you know from

a memorandum we sent you that we sent to the Attorney General.

The accomplishments we were able to obtain in preventing

violence,.

and in neutralizing the Klan -- and that was

one.

of the reasons.

Senator Tower. What was the Bureau's purpose in con-

tinuing or urging the continued surveillance of the Vietnam

NWV.65994.Docld:32175170: Page.127 -

---

## Page 128

?

1908

shin

23

РполС (Area 202) 544-6000

1

2

3

4

5

6

8

9

10

11.

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

2.2

.23

24

25

Veterans Against the War?

Was there a legitimate law enforcement purpose, or was the

intent to halter political expression?

Mr. Adams. We had information on the Vietnam Veterans

Against the War that indicated that there were subversive

groups involved.

They were going to North Vietnam and meeting.

with the Communist forces. They were going to Paris, attending

meetings paid for and sponsored by the

Communist Party, the

International Comnunist Party. We feel that we had a very valid

basis to direct our attention to the VAW.

It started out, of course, with Gus Hall in 1967, who was

head of the Communist Party, USA, and the conments he made,

and what it finally boiled down to was a situation where it

split off into the Revolutionary Union, which was a Maost

group, and the hard-line Communist group, and at that point

factionalism developed in many of the chapters, and they closed

those chapters because there was no longer any intent to follow

the national organization.

But we had a valid basis for investigating it,

and we

investigated chapters to determine if there was affiliation

and subserviance to the national office.

Senator Tower. Mr. Hart?

Senator llart of Michigan. But in the process of chasing

after the Veterans Against the War, you got a lot of information

that clearly has no Iclationship to any Federal criminal

NW 65994_ Docld:32175170 Page 128

on

---

## Page 129

smn .24

. 1909

phone (Ares 202) 544-6000

1

2

WARD &

410 First Street, S.E., Washington,

D.C. 20003

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

statute..

Mr. Adams.

I agree, Senator.

Senator Hart of Michigan. Why don't you try to shut that

stuff

off by simply telling the agent, or your informant?

MI. Adams. Here is the problem that you have with that.

When you're looking at an organization, do you report only the

violent statements made by the group or do you also show that

you may have one or two violent individuals, but you have

some of these church groups that were mentioned, and others,

that the whole intent of the group is not in violation of the

statutes.

you have to report the good, the favorable along

with the

unfavorable, and this is a problem. We wind up with

information in our files. We are

accused of being vacuum

cleaners, and you are a vacuum cleaner. If you want to know the

real purpose of an organization, do you only report the

violent statements made and the fact that it is by a small

minority, or do you also show the broad base of the organization

and what it really is?

And within that is where we have to have the guidelines

we have talked about before.

We have to narrow down, because

we recognize that we do wind up with too much information in

our files.

• Senator Hart of Michigan. But in that vacuuming process:

you are feeding into. Departmental files the names of people

who are, who have been engaged in basic First Amendment

NW.65994_ Docld;32175170 Page 129

---

## Page 130

sinn

25

1910

Phone (Area 202) 544-6000

2

WARD

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

•13

14

15

16

17

18

•• 19

20

21

• 22

23

exercises, and this is what hangs some of us up.

Mr. Adams. It hangs me up. But in the same files I

imagine every one of you has been interviewed by the FBI, either

asking you about the qualifications of some other Senator

being considered for a Presidential appointment, being inter-

vieved concerning some friend who is applying for a job.

Were you embarrassed to have that in the files of the

ГВІ?

Now, someone can say, as reported at our last session, that

this is an indication, the mere fact that we have a name in our

files has an onerous impression, a chilling effect.. I agree.

It can have, if someone wants to distort what we have in our

files, but if they recognize that we interviewed you because

of considering a man for the Supreme Court of the United

States,

and that isn't distorted or improperly used, I don't

see. where any harm is served by having that in our

files.

Senator Hart. of Michigan. But if.I am Reverend. Smith

and. the. vacuum. cleaner. picked up the fact.that.I.was.helping

the veterans,. Vietnam Veterans Against. the War, and two years

later a name check. is. asked. on Reverend Smith and. all. your

file shows. is that he was. associated. two years ago. with a group

that was

sufficient enough, held sufficient doubtful. patriotism

to justify turning loose a lot of your energy in pursuit on

them

--

25

Mr. Adams. This is a problem.

NW.65994_Docld;321751l20 Page Page 130

---

## Page 131

smn 26

Phone (Arca 202) 544-6000

410 First Strect, S.E., WashIngton, D.C. 20003

2

3

4

5

6

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

.1911

Senator lart of Michigan. This is what should require

us to rethink this whole business.

Mr. Adams. Absolutely.

And this is what I hope the guidelines committees as well

as the Congressional input are going to address themselves to.

Senator Hart of Michigan. We've talked about a wide range

of groups which the Bureau can and has had informant penetration

and report on. Your manual, the Bureau manual's definition

of when an extremist or security investigation may be under-

taken refers to groups whose activity either involves violation

of certain specified laws, or which may result in the violation

of such

law, and when such an investigation is opened, then

informants may be used.

Another guideline says that domestic intelligence

investigations now must be predicated on criminal violations.

The agent need only cite a statute suggesting an investigation

relevant to a potential violation. Even now, with an improved,

upgraded effort to avoid some of these problems, we are back

again in a world of possible violations or activities which

may result in illegal acts.

Now, any constitutionally protected exercise of the

right to demonstrate, to assemble, to protest, to petition,

conceivably may rasult in violence or disruption of a local

town meeting, when a controversial social issue might result

in disruption. It might be by hecklers rather than those holding

NW 65994_Docld:32175170. Page.131

---

## Page 132

smi

27

19.12

2

3

4

5

6

WARD &

20003

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

• 18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

the meeting.

Does this mean that the Bureau should investigate all

groups organizing or participating in such a meeting because

they may result in violence, disruption?:.

Mr. Adams.

No, sir.

Senator Hart of Michigan. Isn't that how you justify

spying on almost every aspect of the peace movement?

Mr. Adams.

No, sir. When we monitor demonstrations,

monitor demonstrations where we have an indication that the

we

demonstration itself is sponsored by a group that we have an

investigative interest in, a valid investigative interest in,

of where members of one of these groups are participating where

there is a potential that they might change the peaceful

nature of the demonstration.

But this is oux closest question of trying to draw

guidelines to avoid getting into an area of infringing on the

First Amendment rights of people, yet at the same time being

aware of groups such as we have had in greater numbers in the

past than we do at the present time, But we have had periods

where the demonstrations have been rather severe, and the

courts have said that the FBI has a right, and indeed a duty,

to keep itself informed with respect to the possible commission

of crime. It is not obliged to wear blinders until it may be

too late for prevention.

And that's a good statement if applied in a clearcut

NW 65994 Docld:32175170 Page 132

-annan

---

## Page 133

•'.",

?,"

28

smn

phone (Arca. 202) 544-5000

end 5

..1913

2

case. Our problem is where we have à demonstration and we have

to make a judgment call as to whether it is one that clearly

fits the criteria of enabling us to monitor the activities, and

that's where I think most of our disagreements fail.

5

7

00

WARO & PAUL

6

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

NW 65994_Docld:32175170 Page 133

---

## Page 134

HARRIS: GSII

Sen.

Sel. CIA

12/2/85

Tape

phona (Arca 202) 54

1

2

.1914

WARD

PAUL.

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

Sonator Hart of Michigan. Let's assume that the rule

for opening an investigation on a group is narrowly drawn. The

Bureau manual states that 'informants investigating a subversive

organization should not only report on what that group is

doing but should look at and report on activities in which

the group is participating.

There is a Section 87B3 dealing with reporting. on

connections with other groups. That section says that the

field office shall "determine and report on any significant

connection or cooperation with non-subversive groups." Any

significant connection or cooperation with non-subversive

groups.

Now let's look at this in practice. In the spring of

1969 there was a rather heated national debate over the

installation of the anti-ballistic missile system. Some of us

remember that. An I'BI informant and to FBI confidential

sources reported on the plan's participants and activities

of the Washington Area Citizens Coalition Against the ABM,

particularly in open public debate in a high school auditorium,

which included speakers from the Defense Department for the

ABM

and a scientist and defense analyst against the ABM.

The informants reported on the planning fox the meeting,

the distribution of materials to churches and schools,

participation by local.

clergy, plans to seek resolution on i:

ABM from nearby town councils. There was also informat:.

NW.65994_Docld:3217517Q Page-134.

---

## Page 135

1915

phona (Area 202) 544-6000

WARD

410 First Strect, S.E., Washington, D.C. 20003

]

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

plans for a

subseuucht town meeting in Washington with the

names of local political leaders who vould attend.

Now the information, the informant information came as

part of an investigation of an allegedly subversive group:

participating in that coalition. Yet the infornation dealt

with all aspects and all participants. The reports on the

plans for the meeting and on the meeting itself were disseminatca

to the Statc Department, to military intelligence, and to. the

White llouse.

Ilow do we get into all of that?

Mr. Adams. Well -

Senator Hart, of Michigan. Or if you were to rerun it,

would you do it again?

Mr. Adams.

Well, not in 1975, compared to what 1969

was.

The problem we had at the time was where we had an

informant who had reported that this group, this meeting was

going to take place and it was going to bethe Daily World,

which was the east coast communist newspaper that made comments

about it. They formed an organizational meeting. We took

a quick look at it. The cage apparently was opened in May .28,

1969 and closed June 5 saying there was no problem with this

organization.

Now the problem we get into is if ve take a quick look

and get out, fine. We've had

cases, though, where we have

stayed in too long.

When you're dealing with security i is li!

NW-65994-Docld:32175170-Page-135 -

---

## Page 136

•gsh

19;6

Phone (Arca 202) 544-6000

WARD

410 First Street, S.E., Washington, D.C. 20003

2.

3.

4

5

6

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

soviet espionage where they can put one

person in this country

and they supported him with total resources: of the Soviet

Union, false identification, all the money he needs, connuni-

cations networks, satellite assistance, and everything, and

you're working with a paucity of information.

The same problem exists to a certain extent in domestic

security, You don't have a lot of black and white situations.

So someone reports something to you which you feel; you take

a quick l00k at

and there's nothing to it, and I think that's

what they did.

Senator: Hart of Michigan. You said that was '69. Let

me bring you up to date, closer. to current, a current place

on the calendar.

This one is the fall of last year, 1975. President •

Ford announced his new program with respect to amnesty, as

he described it, for draft resistors. Following that there

were several national conferences involving all the groups

and individuals interested in unconditional amnesty.

Now parenthetically, while unconditional amnesty is

not against -- while unconditional amnesty is not yet the law,

we afreed that advocating it is not against the law either.

MI. Adams.

That's right.

Scnator llart of Michigan. Some of the sponsors vers

umbrella organizations involving about 50 diverse imp:

the country.

FbI informants provided advance it.....!in

:il

NW.65994. Docld:32176170 Page 136

---

## Page 137

gsh

1917

Phone (Arca 202) 544-6000

WARD

410 First Street, S.E., WashIngton, D.C. 20003

2

3

5

6

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

plans for the meeting and apparently attended and reported on

the conference. The Bureau's own reports described the

participants as having represented diverse peispectives on

the issue of amnesty, including civil liberties and human

rights groups, G.I. rights spokesmen, parents of men killed

in Vietnam, wives of ex-patriates in Canada, experts on draft

counselling, religious groups interested in peace issues,

delegates from student organizations, and aides of House

and

Senate members, drafting legislation on amnesty.

The informant apparently was attending in his role

a member of a group under investigation as allegedly subversive

and it described the topics of the workshop.

Ironically, the Bureau office report before

them noted

that in view of the location of the conference at a theological

seminary, the FBí would use restraint and limit its coverage.

to informant reports.

Now this isn't five or ten years ago. This is last

fall. ' And this is a conference of people who have the point

Of view that I share, that the sooner we have unconditional

amnesty, the better for the soul of the country:

Now what reason is it for a vacuum cleaner approach on

a thing like that? Don't these instances illustrate how broad

informant intelligence really is, that would cause these groups

in that setting having contact witli other groups, all and

25

NW 65994_ Docld:32175170 Page 137

everybody is drawn into the vacuum and many names go into the

---

## Page 138

gsh

5

phono (Area 202) 544-6000

19.18

2

3

4

5

6

WARD & PAUL

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

Bureau files.

Is this what we want?

Mr. Adams. I'll let Mr. Wannall address himself to this.

He is particular knowledgeable as to this operation.

Mr. Wannall. Senator llart, that was a case that was

opened on Novenber 14 and closed November 20, and the information

which caused us to be interested in it were really two particular

items. One was that a member of the steering committee there,

was a three man stecring committee, and oné of

those members

of the national conference was in fact a national officer

of the VAl in whom we had suggested bafore we did have a

legitimate investigative interest.

Senator lart of Michigan. Nell, I would almost say so what

at that point.

Mr. Hannall. The second report ve had was that the

VAW would actively participate in an attempt to pack the

conference to take it over. And the third report we had -

Senator. Hart of Michigan. And incidentally, all of the

information that your Buffalo informant had given you with

respect to the goals and aims of the VAW gave you a list of

goals which were completely within Constitutionally protected

objectives.

There wasn't a single

item out of that VAN that

jeopardizes the security of this country at all.

Mr. Wannall. Well, of course, ve did not rely entirely

On

the Buffalo informant, but even there ve did

recei..

NW 65994 Docld:32175170 Page 138

---

## Page 139

gsh

G

Phone (Arca 202) 544-6000

1919

5

6

WARD

&PAUL

A10 First Street, S.E., Washington, D.C. 20003

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

1.8

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

from that informant information which I considered to be

significant.

The Buffalo chapter of the WAw was the regional office.

covering New York and northern New Jersey. It was one of the

five most active VAlY chapters in the country and at a

national conference, or at the regional conference, this

informant reported information back to us that an attendee

at the conference announced that he had run guns into Cuba

prior to the Castro take-over. He himself said that he during

the Cuban crisis had been inder 24 hour suveillance. There

was

also discussion at the conference of subjugating the

VAW to the revolutionary union. There vere some individuals

in the chapter or the regional conference who were not in

agreenent with us, but Mr. Adams has addressed himself to the

interest of the revolutionary union.

So all of the infornation that we had on the VA dia

not come froin that source but even that particular source did

givé us

infornation which we considered to be of some

significance in our appraisal of the need for continuing the

investigation of that particular chapter of the VAW.

Senator Hart of Michigan. But does it give you the

right or does it create the need to go to a conference, even

if it is a conference that night be taken over by the VAW

when the subject matter is how and by what means shall we

seek to achieve unconditional amnesty? What threat?

NW 65994 Docld:32175170 Page 139

---

## Page 140

gsh

Phone (Area 202) 540-6000

19:20

2

PAUL

WARD

20003

410 Flrst Street, S.E., Washington, D.C.

4

5

6

7

8

9

• 10

11

12

1'3

1:4:

15

16

17

18

19

20.

21

- 22

23

24

• 25

NW 65994_ Docld:32173170 Page 140

Mr. Wannall. Our interest, of course, was the VAll

influence on a particular meeting, if you ever happened to be

holding a meeting, or whatever subject it was.

Senator lart of Michigan.

What if it was a meeting to

seek to make more effective the food stamp system in this

country?

Mr.

Wannalt.

Well, of course there had been some

organizations.

Senator Hart of Michigan. Would the same logic follow?

Mr. Mannail. I think that if we found that if the

Comnunist Party USA was going to take over the meeting and

use it as

a front for it's own purposes, there would be a logic

in doing that. You have a whole scope here and it's a matter.

of where you do and where

you don't, and hopefully, as wo've

said before, we will have some guidance, not only from this

committce but from the guidelines that are being developed.

But within the rationale of what we're doing today, I vas

explaining

to you our interest not in going to this thing and

not gathering everything there was about it.

In fact, only one individual attended and reported to us,

and that was the person who had, who was not developed for

this reason; an informant who had been reporting on other

matters for some period of time.

And as soon as we got the report of the outrore ‹!

meeting and the fact that in the period of some ... i

---

## Page 141

LYLL

Phono (Aroa 202) 544-6000

2

410 First Street, S.E., WashIngton, D.C. 20003

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

1?

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

discontinued any further interest.

Senator Hart of Michigan. Heli, my time has expired

but even this brief exchange, I think, indicates that if we

really want to control the dangers to our society of using

informants to gather domestic political intelligence, we have

to restrict sharply domestic

intelligence investigations. And

that gets us into what I would like to raise with you when

my turn comes around again, and that's the use of warrants,

obliging the Bureau to obtain a warrant before a full-fledged

informant can be directed by the Bureau against a group or

individuals.

I know you have objections to. that and I would like to

review that with you.

Sénator Mondale, Pursue that question.

Senator Hart of Michigan. I am talking now about an

obligation to obtain a warrant before you turn joose a full-

fledged informant. I'm not talking about tipsters that run

into you or you run into, or who walk in as information sources,

The Bureau has raised some objections in this memorandum to the

Committee. The Bureau argues that such a warrant requirement

might be unconstitutional because it would violate the First

Amendment rights of fBI informants to communicate with their

government.

Now that's a concern for first Amendment rights that

ought to

• hearten all the civil libertarians.

NW. 65994-Docid:32175170-Rage-141

---

## Page 142

-

Phone (Aroa 202) 544-6000

g'sn'9

1922

WARD & PAUL

410 First Streat, S.E., Washington, D.C. 20003

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

1.2

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

But why would that vary, why would a warrant requirement

raise a

serious constitutional question?

MI. Adams: Well, for one thing it's the practicability

it or the impacticability of'getting a warrant which;

ordinarily involves probable cause to show that a crime has

been or is about to be committed.

In the intelligence field we are not dealing necessarily

with an imminent criminal action. We're dealing with activities

such as with the Socialist Workers Party, which we have

discussed before, where they say publicly we're not. to engage

in any violent activity today, but we guarantee you we still

subscribe to the tenets of communism and that when the time

is ripe, we're going to rise up and help overthrow the United

States.

Well, now, you can't show probable cause if they're about

to do it because they're telling you they're not

going to do it

and you know they're not going to do it at this particular

moment.

It's just the mixture somewhat of trying to mix in a

criminal procedure with an intelligence gathering function,

and

we can't find any practical way of doing it. He have a particulat

organization.

We may have an informant that not only belongs

to the conmunist party, but belongs to several other organization

and as part of his function he may be sent out by the Communist

Party to try to infiltrate one of these clean organizations.

NW.65994. Docld:321751Z0. Page 142 -

---

## Page 143

a'st 10

phone (Arca 202) 544-6000

2

WARD & PAUL

410 First Street, S.E., Washington, D.C. 20003

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

We don't have probable cause for him to target against

that organization, but yet we should be able to receive informa-

tion from him that he as

a Communist Party member, even

though in an informant status, is going to that organization:

and don't worry about it. We're making no headway on it.

It's just from our standpoint the possibility of informants,

the Supreme Court has held that informants per se do not

violate the First, Fourth, or Fifth Amendments. They have

recognized the necessity that the government has to have

individuals who will assist them in carrying out their

governmental duties.

Senator Hart of Michigan. I'm not sure I've heard anything

yet in response to the constitutional question, the very

practical question that you addressed.

Quickly, you are right that the court has said that the

use of the informant per se is not a violation of constitutional

rights of the subject under investigation. But Congress

can prescribe sone safeguards, some rules and some standards,

just as we have with respect to your use of electronic

surveillance, and could do it with respect to informants.

That's quite different from saying that the warrant

procedure itself would be unconstitutional.

But with respect to the fact that you couldn't show

probable cause,

and therefore; you couldn't get a warrant,

therefore you oppose the proposal to require you to get a

NW 65994 Docld:32175170 Page 143-

---

## Page 144

gsh

11.

Phona (Aroa 202) 544-6000

1

2

3

4

5

6

8

9

10

11

PAUL

12

• 13

End Tape 614

Begin Tape

16

17

18

410 First Street, S.E., Washington, D.C. 20003

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

1924

warrant.

It seems to beg the question.

Assuming that you say that since we use informants and

investigate groups which may only engage in lawful activities

but which might engage in activities that can result in

violence of illegal acts, and you can't use the warrant, but

Congress could say that the use of informants is subject to

such abuse and poses such a threat to legitimate activity,

including the willingness of people to assemble and discuss

the anti-ballistic missilé system; and we don't want you to

use them unless you have indication of criminal activity or

unless you present your request to a magistrate, in the same.

fashion as you are required to do with respect to, in most

cases, to wiretap.

This is an option available to Congress.

Senator Tower.

Senator Schweiker.

Senator Schweiker. Thank you very much.

Mr. Wannall, what's the difference between a potential

security informant and a security informant?

Mr. Wannall. I mentioned earlier, Senator Schweiker,

that in developing an informant we do a preliminary check on

him before talking with him and then we do a further in-depth

background check.

A potential security informant is someone who is under

consideration before

he is approved by headquärters for use as

an informant. He is someone who is under current consideration.

NW.65994_Docld:32175120.Page-144 -

---

## Page 145

gsh 12

Phono (Area 202) 544-6000

WARD

410 First Streat, S.E., Washington, D.C. 20003

2

5

6

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

.17

18

20

21

22

23

24

1925.

On some occasions that person will have been developed to a

point where he is in fact furnishing information and we are

engaged in checking upon his reliability.

In some instances he may be paid for information furnished,

but it has not gotten to the point yet where we have satisfied

ourselves that he meets all of our criteria. When he does,

the field must submit its recommendations to headquarters, and

headquarters will pass upon whether that individual is an

approved FBI informant.

Senator Schweiker. So it's really the first step of

being an informant, I guess.

Mr. Wannall. It is a preliminary step, one of the

preliminary steps.

Senator Schweiker. In the Rowe case, in :the Rowe

testimony that we just heard, what was the rationale again

for not intervening when violence was known?

I know we asked you several times but I'm still having

trouble understanding what the rationale, Mr. Wannall, was

in not intervening in

the Rove situation when violence was

known.

Mr. Wannall.

Senator Schiveiker, Mr. Adams did address

himself to that. If you have no objection, I'll ask him to

answer that.

Senator Schweiker. All. right.

Mr. Adams.

The problem we had at the time, and it's the

NW 65994-Docid32175170-Page-145 -

arin

---

## Page 146

gsh 13

Phone (Arca 202) 544-6000

1926

1

3

4

.5

6

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

410 First Street, S.E., Washington, D.C.

20003

21

•22

23

24

25

problem today.

we are an investigative agency. We do not

have police powers like the United States marshalls do.

About 1795, I guess, or some period like that, marshalls have

had the authority that almost, borders on what a sheriff. has

We are the invéstigative agency of the Department of Justice

and during these times the Department of Justice had us maintair

the role of an investigative agency. We were to report on

activities to furnish the information to the local police,

who had an obligation to act. We furnished it to the Department

of Justice.

In those areas where the local police did not act, it

resulted finally in the Attorney General sending 500

United

States

marshalls down to guarantee the safety of people who

were trying to march in protest of their civil rights.

This was an extraordinary measure because it came at a

time of civil righs versus federal rights, and yet there was

a breakdown in law enforcement in certain areas of the country.

, This doesn't mean to indict all law enforcement agencies

in itself at the time either because many of them did act

upon the information that was furnished to them. But we

have no authority to make an arrest on the spot because we

would not have had evidence that there was a.conspiracy

available.

We can do absolutely nothing in that regara.

In Little Rock, the decision was made, for instance, that

if any arrests need to be made, the Army should make them and

NW 65994 Docld:321751.70.Page 146

---

## Page 147

g5h

14

Phone (Arda 202) 544-5000

WARD

•.

20003

1

5

6

8

9

10

12

13

14

15

• 16

17

18

19

20

21

• 22

23

24

25

1927

next to the Army, "the United

States marshalls should make them,

not the FBI, even though we developed the violations.

And over the years, as you know, at, the time there were many

questions raised." Why doesn't the FBI stop this? Why don't

you do something about it?.

Well, we took the other route and effectively destroyed

the klan as far as committing acts of violence, and of course

we exceeded statutory guidelines in that area.

Senator Schweiker. What would be wrong, just following

up your poiht there, Mr. Adams, with setting up a program

sincé it's obvious to me that a lot of informers are going to:

have pre-knowledge of violence of using U.S. marshalls on some

kind of a long-range basis to prevent violence?

Mx. Adams. We do. We have them in Boston in connection

with the busing incident. We are investigating the violations

under the Civil Rights Act. But the marshalls are in Boston,

they are in Louisville, I believe at the same time, and this

is the approach, that the rederal government finally recognized,

was the solution to the problem where you had to have added

Federal import.

Senator Schweiker. But instead of waiting until it

gets to a Boston state, which is obviously a pretty advanced

confrontation, shouldn't we have some

ere a coordinated program

that when you go up the ladder of co wand in the FBI, that

on an innediate and faiily contemporary basis, that kind of

NW.65994_Docld:32175170 Page.147 •-

---

## Page 148

g'sh

Phono (Aroa 202) 544-6000

15

1928

1

2

WARD & PAUL

410 First Street, S.E., Washington, D.C.

20003

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

.22

23

24

25

help can be sought instantly as opposed to waiting until it

gets to a Boston state?

I realize it's a departture from the past. I'm not .

saying it isn't. But it seems to me we need a better remedy

than we have.

Mr. Adams.

Well, fortunatelyr.we're at a time where

conditions have subsided in the country, even from the '60s

and the '70s and periods - or '50s and '60s.. We report to the

Department of Justice on potential troublespots around the

country as we learn of them

so that the Department will be

aware of them. The planning for Boston, for instance, took

place

a year in advance with state officials, city officials,

the Department of Justice and the FBI sitting down together!

saying, how are we going to protect the situation in Boston?

I think we've learned a lot from the days back in the

early '60s. But the government had no mechanics which protected

people at that time.

Senator Schweiker. I'd like to go, if I may, to the

Robert Hardy case. I know he

is not a witness, but he

was

a witness before the llouse. But since this affects my

state, I'd like to ask M. Wannall. Mr. Hardy, of course, was

the FBI informer who ultimately led and planned and organized

a raid on the Camden draft board. An according to Mr. Hardy's

testimony before our Committee, he sa.: that in advance of the

raid someone in the Department had cron acknowledged the fact

NW.65994_Docid:32175170. Page.148 -

...

---

## Page 149

1929

gsh 16

phona (Araa 202) 548-6000

WARD & PAUL-.

20003

410 First Street, S:E., Washington, D.C.

2

3

4

5

6

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

•1?

18

19

20

21

.. 22

that they had all the information they needed to clamp down

on the conspiracy and could arrest people at that point in time,

and yet no arrests were made.

Why, Mr.

Wannall, was

this true?

Mr. Wannall. Well, I can answer that based only on the

material that I have reviewed, Senator Schweiker. It was not

a case handled in my division but I think I can answer your.

question.

There was, in fact, a representative of the Department

of Justice on the spot counselling and advising continuously

as that case progressed as to what point the arrest should be

made and we were being guided by those to our mentors, the

ones who are responsible for making decisions of that sort.

So I. think that Mr. Hardy's statement to the effect that

there was someone in the Department there is perfectly true.

Senator Schweiker. That responsibility rests with whio

under your procedures?

I1x. Wannall. We investigate decisions on making arrests,

when they should be made, and decisions with regard to

prosecutions are inade either. by the United States attorneys

or by Federals in the Department.

Mr. Adams. At this time that particular case did have

23

a departmental attorney on the scene :M:ause there are questions

24

bf

conspiracy.

conspiracy is a tough iiolation to prove and

25

sometimes

a question of do you have the added value of catching

NW 65994

-Docld:32175170 Page 149

---

## Page 150

igsh 17

phona (Aros 202) 544-6000

19:30

WARD

&PAUL

410 First Streat, S.E., Washington, D.C. 20003

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

2.4

25

someone in the commission of the crime as further proof,

rather than relying on. one informant and some circumstantial

evidence to prove the violation.

Senator Schweiker. Well, in this case, though, they

even had a dry run.: They could have arrested them on the

dry run.

That's getting pretty close to conspiracy, it seems to

me.

They had a dry run and they could have arrested them on

the dry run.

I'd like to know why they didn't arrest them on the dry

run. Who was this Department of Justice official who made

that decision?

Mx. Adams. Guy Goodwin was the Department official.

Senator Schweiker. Next I'd like to ask back in 1965,

during the height of the effort to destroy the Klan, as you

put it a few moments ago, I believe the FBí has released

figures that we had something like 2,000 informers of some

kind or another infiltrating the Klan out of roughly 10, 000

estimated membership.

I believe these are either FBI figures or estimates.

That would nean that one out of every five members of the Klan

at that point was

an informant paid by the government.

And I believe the figure goes or

so indicate that 70

percent of the new members of the Kla: that year were FBI

informants.

NW 65994_ Dockd=32175170. Page 150

---

## Page 151

Phono (Area 202) 544-6000

2

3

4

5

WARD & PAUL

410 First Street, S.E., Washington, D.C. 20003

7

8

9

10

• 11

12

1,3

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

Isn't this an awfully overwhelming quantity of people

to put in an effort such as that? I'm not criticizing that

you shouldn't have informants in the klan and know what's

going on for violence, but it seems to me that this is the

tail wagging the dog.

For example, today we supposedly have only 1594 total

informants for both domestic informants and potential informants

and that here we had 2,000 just in the klan alone.

Mr. Adams. Well, this number 2,000 did include all

racial matters, informants at that particular time, and I

think the figures we tried to reconstruct as to the actual

number of Klan informants in relation to klan members was around

6 percent, I think, after we had read

some of the testimony.

Now the problem we had on the Klan is the Klan had a

group called the Action Group. This was the group that you

remember from Mr. Rowe's testimony, that he was left af-

ter the meeting.

He attended the open meetings and heard

all of the hurrahs and this type of thing from information,

but he never knew what was going on because each one had an

action group that went out and considered themselves in the

missionary field.

Theirs was the

violence.

In order to penetrate those, it takes, you have to direct

as many informants as you possibly can against it. Bear in

mind that I think the newspapers, the President and Congress

and

NW 65994 Docld:32175170 Page 151

---

## Page 152

gsh

• 19

Phona (Aroa 202) 544-6000

WARD & PAUL

410 First Street, S.E., Washington, D.C. 20003

1

2

4

5

6

7

8

.9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

20

21

• 22

23

24

25

1932

everyone is concerned about the murder of the civil rights

workers, the Linio Kent sase, the Viola Liuzzo case, the

bombings of the church in Birmingham. We were faced with one,

tremendous problem at that time.

Senator Schweiker. I acknowledge that.

Mr. Adams. Our only approach was through informants

and through the use of informants we solved these cases, the

ones that were solved. Some of the bombing cases we have

never solved. They are extremely difficult.

These informants, as we told the Attorney General, and

as we told the President, that we had moved informants like

MI. Rove up to the top leadership. He was the bodyguard to the

head

man. He was in a position where he could forewarn

us

of violence, could help us on cases that had transpired, and

yet we knew and conceived that this could continue forever

unless we can create enough disruption that these members will

realize that if I go out and murder three civil rights workers,

even though the sheriff and other law enforcement officers are

in on it, if that were

the case and with some of them it was

the case, that I would be caught. And that's what we did and

that's why violence stopped, was because the Klan was insecure

and just like you say, 20

percent, they thought 50 percent of

their menbers ultimately were Klan members and they didn't

dare engaje in these acts of violence because they knew they

couldn't control the conspiracy any longer.

NW 65994 Docld:32175179 Page 152

---

## Page 153

gsh 20

1933

Phono (Aroa 202)

PA

D.C. 20003

410 First Streat, S.E., Washington,

3.

4

5

6

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

Senator Schweiker. My time is expired. I just have

one quick question.

Is it correct that in 1971 we're using around 6500

informers for black ghetto situations?

Mr. Adams. I'm not sure if that's the year. We did

have one year where we had a number like that which probably

had been around 6000, and that was the time when the cities

were being burned, Detroit, Washington, areas like this.. We

were given a mandate to know what the situation is, where is

violence going to break out, what next?

They weren't informants like an individual penctrating

an organization. They were listening posts in the comnunity

that would help tell us that we have a group here that's getting

ready to start another fire-fight or something.

Senator Tower. At this point, there are three more

Senators remaining for questioning. If we can try to get

everything in in the first round, we will not have a second

round

and I think we can finish around 1:00, and we can. go

on and terminate the proceedings.

However, If anyone feels that they have another question

that they want

to return to, we can come back here by 2:00.

Senator Mondale?

Senator Mondale. Mr. Adams, it seems to me that the

record is now fairly clear that when the fBI operates in the

NW-65994-Đo2:3217570-page sime investigating, it may be the best professional

---

## Page 154

gsh

• 2.1

Phona (Araa 202) 544-6000

2

3.

5

6

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

1934

organization of its kind in the world.

And when the FBI acts

in the field of political ideas, it has bungled its job, it

has interfered with the civil liberties, and finally, in the

last month or two, through its public disclosures, heaped

shame upon itself and really led toward an undermining of

the crucial public confidence in an essential. law enforcement

agency of this country.

In a real sense, history has repeated itself because it

was precisely that problem that led to the creation of the FBI

in 19.21.

In World war I, the Bureau of Investigation strayed from

its law enforcement functions and became an arbiter and

protector of political ideas. And through the interference

of civil liberties and Palmer Raids and the rest, the public

became so offended that later through Mi. Justice Stone and •

Mr. Hoover, the FBI was created.. And the first statement

by Mr. Stone was that never again will this Justice Department

get involved in political ideas.

And yet here we are again looking at a record where with

Martin Luther king, with anti-war resistors, with - we even

had testimony this morning of meetings with the Council of

Churches.

secretly we are investigating this vague, ill-defined

impossible to define idea of investigating dangerous ideas.

It seems to be the basis of the strategy that people

can't protect themselves, that you somehow need to use the

NW.65994~Docld:32175170-Page-154 -

---

## Page 155

29sk '22

Phono (Aros 202) 544-6000

1935

WARD & PAUL

410 First Street, S.E., Washington, D.C. 20003

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

tools of law enforcement to protect people from subversive

or dangerous: Ideas, which I find strange and quite profoundly

at odds with the philosophy of American government.

I started

in politics years ago and the first thing we

had to do was to get the communists out of our parts and out.

of the union.

Vie did a very fine job. As far as I know, and

I'm beginning to wonder, but as far as I know, we had no help

from the FBI or the CIA. We just ramned them out of the meetings

on the grounds that they weren't Democrats and they weren't

good union leaders when we didn't want anything to do with them

And yet, we see

time and time again that we're going .to

protect the blacks from

Martin Luther King because he's

dangerous, that we've going to protect véterans from whatever

it is, and we're going to protect the Council of Churches

from the veterans, and so on, and

it just gets so gummy

and

confused and ill-defined and dangerous, that don't you agree.

with me that we have to control this, to restrain it, so that

precisely what is expected of the fbI is known by you, by the

public, and that you can justify your actions when we ask

yOU?

Mr. Adams.

I agree with that, Senator, and I would like

to point out that when the Attorney General made his statement

Mr. Hoover subscribes to it, we follied that policy for about

ten years until the President of the ited States said that.

we should investigate the Nazi Party.

NW-65994. Docid:32175170. Page 155

---

## Page 156

17.

gsh 23

Phono. (Arca 202) 544:60,00

1936

2

3

4

5

6

8

9

'10

11

12°

14

15

16

17

18

410 First Street, S.E., Washington, D.C. 20003

1.9

20

21

22

23

24

25

NW 65994-Docld;32175140 Page 156

I for one feel that we should investigate the Nazi Party.

I feel that our investigation of the Nazi Party resulted in

the fact that in World War II, as contrasted with World War I,

there wasn't one single incident of foreign directed sabotage

which took place in the United States.

Senator Monclale. And under the criminal law you could

have investigated these issues of sabotage.

Isn't sabotage a crime?•

Mr. Adams.

sabotage is a crime.

Senator Mondale. Could you have investigated that?

Mr. Adams. After it happened.

Senator Mondale. You see, every, time we get involved

in political ideas, you defend yourself on the basis of

crimes. that could have been comnitted. It's very interesting.

In my opinion, you have to stand here if you're going to

continue what you're now doing and as. I understand it, you

still insist that you did the right thing with the Vietnam

Veterans Against the War, and investigating the Council of

Churches, and this can still go on: This can still go on under

your interpretation of your present powers, what you try to

justify on the grounds of your law enforcement activitics

in terms of criminal matters.

Mr. Adams. The law does not say we have to wait. until

we have been murdered before we can --

Senator Mondale. Absolutely, but that's the field of

---

## Page 157

gsh 24

Phono (Aras 202) 544-6000

: WARO & PAUL

410 First Strect, S.E., Washington, D.C. 20003

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8•

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

1937

law again. You're trying to defend apples with oranges.

That,' s

the law.

You can do that.

Mr. Adams. That's right, but how do you find out which

of the 20,000 Bund members might have been a saboteur. You

don't have probable cause to investigate anyone, but you can

direct an intelligence operation against the German-American

Bund, the same thing we did after Congress said -

Senator Mondale. Couldn't you get a warrant for that?

Why did you object to going to court for authority for that?

Mr. Adams. Because we don't have probable cause to

go against an individual and the law doesn't provide for

probable cause to investigate an organization.

There were activities which did take place, like one time

they outlined the Communist Party -

Senator Mondale. What I don't understand is why it

wouldn't be better for the FBI for us to define authority

that you could use in the kind of Bonn situation where under

court authority you can investigate where there is probable

cause or reasonable cause to suspect sabotage and the rest.

Wouldn't that make a lot more sense than just naking these

decisions on your own?

Mr. Adams. We have expressed complete concurrence in

that. We feel that we're going to giljeat to death in the

24

next 100 years, you're danned if you i, and damned if you

25

don't

if va-don't have a delineation of our responsibility

NW 65994 Dockd:32175170 Page 157

---

## Page 158

÷ gsh"25

phono (Area 202) 544-6000

1938

2

4

5

6

8

9

10

11

& PAUL

WARD

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

.22

23

24

25

NW. 65994_Decld:321751t0_Page 158

in this area. But I won't agree with you, Senator, that we

have bungled

the intelligence operations in the United States.

I agree with you that we have made

some mistakes. Mr. Kelley-

has set a pattern of being as forthright as any Director of the

FBI in acknowledging mistakes that. had been made, but I think

that as you said, and I believe Senator Tower said, and

Senator Church, that we have to watch these hearings because

of the necessity that we

must

concentrate on these areas of

abuse.

We must not lose sight of the

overall law enforcement and intelligence community, and I

still foel that this is the freest country in the world.

I've travelled much, as I'm sure you have, and I know we have

made some mistakes, but I feel that the people in the United

States are less chilled by the mistakes we have made than they

are'by the fact that there are 20,000 murders a year in the

United States and they can't walk out of their

houses at night

and feel safe.

Senator Mondale. That's correct, and isn't that an

argument then, Mr. Adams, for strengthening our powers to go

after those who commit crimes rather than strengthening or

continuing a policy which we now see undermines the public

confidence you need to do your job.

Mr. Adans. Absolutely. The mistakes we have made are

what have brought on this embarrassment to us.

I'm not blaming the Committee. I'm saying we made

---

## Page 159

" gsh" 26

Phona (Area 202) 544-6000

193,9

Ind Tape 78

WARD & PAUL

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

mistakes and in doing so this is what has hurt the FBI. But

at the same time I don't feel that a balanced picture comes

out!

as you have

said yourselves, because of the necessity

of zercing in on abuses.

I think that we have done one tremendous job. I think

the accomplishments in the klan was the finest hour of the

FBI and yet, I'm sure in dealing with the klan that ve made

some mistakes. But I just don't agree with bungling.

410 First Street, S.E., Washington, D.C. 20003

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

NW 65994_ Docld:32175170

Page 159

---

## Page 160

SHARRIS/ smnl

t.

8

1940

1

2

3

4

5

6

& PAUL

•WARD

410 First Street, S.E., Washington, D.C. 20003

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

NW. 65994-Decid:3217&170-Page_160

Senator Mondale. I don't want to argue over terms, but

I think I sense an agreement that the FBI has gotten into trouble

over it in the political idea

trouble, and that that's where we

need to have new legal standards.

Mr. Adams. Yes, I agree with that.

Senator Tower. Senator Huddleston.

Senator Huddleston. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Adams, these two instances we have studied at: some

length seems to have been an inclination on the part of

the Bureau to establish, a notion about an individual or a group

which seems to be very hard to ever change or dislodge. In

the case of Di. King, where the supposition was that he was

being influenced by Communist individuals, extensive investi-

gation was made, surveillance, reports came back indicating that

this in fact was untrue, and directions continued to go out

to intensify the investigation. There never seemed to be a

willingness on the part of the Bureau to accept its own facts.

Ms. Cook testified this morning that something similar

to that happened with the Vietnam Veterans Against the War, that

every piece of information that she supplied to the Bureau

seemed to indicate that the Bureau was, not correct in its

assumption that this organization planned to commit violence,

of that it was being manipulated, and yet you seemed to insist

that this investigation go on, and ti-s information was

used

against the individuals.

---

## Page 161

Smn

Phono (Arca 202) 544-6000

2

1941

WARD

& PAUL

410 First Street, S:E., Washlrigton,

D.C. 20003

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

•13

1.4

15

Í6

17

18

19

20

21

. 22

23

24

'25

Now, are there instances where the Bureau has admitted that

its first assumptions were wrong and they have changed their

course?

MI. Adams. We have admitted that. We have also shown

from one of the cases that Senator Hart brought up, that after

five days we closed the case.

We were told something by an

individual that there was a concern of an adverse influence

in it, and we looked into it. On the Martin Luther King

situation there was no testimony to the effect that we just

dragged on and on, or admitted that we dragged on and on and

on, ad infinitum. The wiretaps on Martin Luther King were

all approved by the Attorney General. Microphones on Martin

Luther king were approved by another Attorney General. This

wasn't the FBI, and the reason they were approved was that

there was a basis to continue the investigation up to a point.

What I testified to was that we were improper in discreditir

DI. King, but it's just like --

Senator Huddleston. The Committee has before it memoranda

written by high officials of the Bureau indicating that the

information they were receiving from the field, from these

surveillance methods, did not confirm what their supposition

was.

Mr. Adams.

That memorandum was rot on Dr. King.

That

was on another

individual that I thi:. somehow got mixed up

in the discussion, one where the isows was can we make people

NW.65994 Docld:32175170 Rage 161-

---

## Page 162

smn 3

phono (Aroa 202) 544-6000

1

2

3

4

•5

6

8

10

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

410 First Street, S.E., WashIngton, D.C. 20003

23

24

25

prove they aren't a Communist before we will agree not to

investigate them.

But the young lady appearing this morning making the:

comment that she never knew of anything she told us that

she considers herself a true member of the VVAW-WSO inasmuch

she feels in general agreement of the principles of it, and

agreed to cooperate with the FBI in providing information regard-

ing the organization to aid in preventing violent individuals

from associating themselves with the VAW-WSO. She is most

concerned

about efforts.by the Revolutionary Union to take over

the VVAW-wsO, and she is working actively to prevent this..

I think that we have a basis for investigating the VAW~

WSO in certain areas today. In other areas we have stopped

the investigation. They don't agree with these principles

laid down by the --

Senator Huddleston. That report was the basis of your

continuing to pay informants and continuing to utilize that

information against members who certainly had not been involved

in violence, and apparently to get them fired from their job

or whatever?

Mr. Adams. It all gets back to the fact that even in the

criminal law field, you have to detect crime, and you have to

prevent crime, and you can't wait unt:!

something happens.. The

Attorney General has clearly spoken

i that area, and even out

statutory jurisdiction provides that we don't --

NW.65994_Docld:32176170.Page.162 ~

---

## Page 163

1943

smn 4

Phona (Arca 202) 544-6000

410 First Streat, S.E., Washington, D.C. 20003

1

2

3

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

18

19

20

21

.22

• 23

24

25

Senator Huddleston.. Well, of course

we've had considerable

evidence this morning where no attempt was made to prevent

crime, when you had information that it was going to occur.

But I'm sure there are instances where you have.

Mr. Adams. We disseminated every single item which he

reported to us.

Senator Huddleston.

To a police department which you

knew was an accomplice to the crime.

Mr. Adams. Not necessarily.

Senator Huddleston. Your informant had told you that,

hadn't he?

Mr. Adams. Well, the informant is on one level.. We have

other informants, and we have other information.

Senator Huddleston. Yes, but you were aware that he

had worked with certain members of the Birmingham police in

order to -

Mr. Adams. Yes. He furnished many other instances also.

Senator Huddleston. So you weren't really doing a whole

lot to prevent that incident by telling the people who were

already part of it.

MI. Adams. We were doing everything we could lawfully

do at the time, and finally the situation was corrected,

so that

when the department, agreeing that we had no further juris-

diction, could sent the United States Marshal down to perform.

certain law enforcement functions.

NW-65994-Docid:32175170. Page-163

---

## Page 164

1941

Phono (Aroa 202) 544-6000

]

3

4

5

6

PAUL

8

9

10

11

12

113

14

15

16

D.C. 20003

Senator Huddleston. Now,

the Committee has received

documents which indicated that in one situation the FBI assisted

an informant who had been established in a white hate group

to establish a rival white hate group, and that the Bureau paid

his expenses in setting uf this rival organization.

Now, does this not put the Bureau in a position of being

responsible for what actions the rival white hate group might

have undertaken?

Mr. Adams. I'd like to see if one of the other gentlemen

knows that specific case,

because I don't think we set up a

specific group.

This is Joe Deegan.

MI. Deegan.

Senator, it's my understanding that the

informant we're talking about decided to break off from the

group he was with. He was with the Macon Klan group of

the United Klans of America, and he decided to break off.

This

was in compliance with our regulations.

His breaking off,

we did not pay him to set up the organization. He did it

on his own.. We paid him for the information he furnished

us concerning the operation.

We did not sponsor the organiza-

tion.

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

Senator Huddleston. Concerning the new organization

• that

he set up, he continued to advise you of the activities of that

organization?

Mr. Deegan..

He continued to advi:: us of that organization

NW.65994. Docld:32175170.Page 164

---

## Page 165

smn 6

1Y43

WARD & PAUL

410 First Stroot, 5.E., Washington, D.C. 20003

1

5

4

is

6

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

and other organizations. He would advise us of planned

activities.

Senator Huddleston:

The new organization that he formed,

did it operate in a very similar manner to the previous one?

Mr. Deegan. No, it did not, and it did not last that

1ong..

Senator Huddleston. ' There's also evidence of an FBI

informant in the Black Panther

Party who had a position of

responsibility within the Party with the knowledge of his

FBI contact of supplying members with weapons and instructing

them in how to use those weapons. Presumably this was in the

knowledge of the Bureau, and

he later became - came in contact

with the group that was contracting for murder, and hè partici-

pated in this group with the knowledge of the FBI agent, and

this group did in fact stalk a victim who was later killed with

the weapon supplied by this individual, presumably all in the

knowledge of the FBI.

How does this square with your enforcement and crime

prevention responsibilities.

MI. Deegan.. Senator, I'm not familiar with that particular

case.. It does not square with our policy in all respects, and

I would have to look at that particular case you're

talking

about to give you an answer.

Senator Huddleston, I don't have the documentation on that

particular case, but it brings up the point as to what kind of

NW.65994-Docld:3217511Q. Page 165 -

---

## Page 166

SMn

7

1946

Phone (Area 202) 544-6000

WARD

• 20003

5. E., Washington, D.C.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

.11

12

13

".

14

15

16

•17

• 18

19

20

21

22

23

24

control you exercised over this kind of informant in this kind

of an organization and to what extent an effort is made to

prevent these informants from engaging in the kind of thing

that you are supposedly trying to prevent.

Mr. Adams. A good example of this was Mr. Rowe, who became

active in an action group, and we told him to get out or

we would no longer use him as an informant, in spite of the.

information he had furnished in the past.

We have had cases, Senator, where we have had --

Senator Hudaleston. But you also tola him to participaté

in violent activities.

MI. Adams. We, did not tell him to participate in violent

activities.

Senator Huddleston. That's what he said..

Mr. Adams. I know that's what he said. But that's what

lawsuits are. all about, is that there. are. two sides to the

issue, and our agents. handling. this have. advised. us, and I

believe have advised. your staff, that at no time

did they

advise him to engage. in violence.

Senator. Huddleston. Just to do what was. necessary to

get the information, I believe maybe might have been his

instructions.

Mr. Adams. I don't think they made any such statement

to him along that line, and we have informants, we have

informants who have gotten involved in the violation of the law,

25

NW 65994_Docld 3217$170 Page 166

---

## Page 167

1947

smn

8

Phono (Aros 202) 544-6000

20003

5.E., Washington, D.C.

1

2

4

- 5

6

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

• 16

17

18

•19

•20

21

22

23

24

25

and we have immediately converted their status from an informant

to the subject, and have prosecuted I would say, offhand, I

can think of around 20 informants that we have prosecuted for

violating the laws, once it came to our attention, and even

to show you our policy of disseminating information on violence

in this case, during the review of the matter, the agents told

me that they found one case where their agent had been working

24 hours a day, and he was a little late in disseminating the

information to the police department. No violence. occurred,..

but it showed up in a file review, and he was censured for

his delay in properly notifying local authorities.

So we not only have a policy, I feel that we do follow

reasonable

safeguards..In order to carry it out, including periodis

review of all informant. files.

Senator Huddleston. Well, Mr. Rowe's statement is

substantiated to some extent with the acknowledgement by the

agent in charge that if you're going to be a Klansman and you

happen to be with someone

and they decide to do something, that

he couldn't be an angel. These were the words of the agent,.

and be a good informant.. He wouldn't take the lead; but the

implication is that he would have to go along and would have

to be involved if he was going to maintain his credibility.

Mr. Adams.. There's no question but that an informant at

times. will have to be present. during demonstrations, riots,

fistfights that take place, but I believe his statement was

NW-65994~Đocld:32175170 Page-167 -

---

## Page 168

. t

1948

10

2

4

5

6

. 8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

• 20003

Stroet, S.E., Washington, D.C.

19

20

21

22.

23

24

. 25

NW 65994. Docld:3217517Q Page 168 _

to the effect that - and I was sitting in the back of the

room and I don't recall it exactly, but some of them were

beat with chains, and I didn't hear whether he said he beat

someone with a chain or not, but I rather doubt that he did

because it's one thing being present, and it's

another thing

taking an active part in criminal actions.

Senator Huddleston.. He was close enough to get his

throat cut.

How does the gathering of information -

Senator Tower. Senator Mathias is here, and I think that

we probably should recess a few minutes.

Could we have Senator Mathias' questions and then should

we convene this afternoon?

Senator Huddleston.

I'm finished. I just had one more

question.

Senator Tower. Go ahead.

Senator Huddleston, I wanted to ask how the selection of

information about an individual's personal life, social, sex

life and becoming involved in that sex life or social life

is a requirement for law enforcement or crime prevention.

Mr. Adams. Our agent handlers have advised us on Mr.

Rowe, that they gave him no such instriction, they had no

such knowledge concerning it, and I can't see where it would

be.of any value whatsoever.

Senator Huddleston. You aren't drure of any case where

---

## Page 169

smn

1'o

Phono (Area 202) 544-6000

1949

WARD

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

1]

12

13

14

. 15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22.

23

these instructions were given to an agent or an informant?

Mr. Adams. To get involved in sexual activity? No, sir.

Senator Huddleston. Thank you, Mr. Chairman:

Senator Tower. Senator Mathias.

Senator Mathias. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I would like to come back very briefly to the Fourth

Amendment considerations in connection with the use of informants

and in posing these questions we're not thinking of the one

time volunteer who walks in to an FBI office and says I have

story I want to tell you and that's the only time that you

may see him. I'm thinking of the kind of situations in which

there is a more extended relationship which could be of varying

degrees. It might be in one case that the same individual.

will' have some usefulness in a number of situations. But when

the FBI orders a regular agent to engage in a search, the

first

test is a judicial warrant, and what I would like

to explore

with you is the difference between a one time search which

requires a warrant, and which you get when you make that

search, and a continuous search which uses an informant, or

the case of a continuous search which uses a regular undercover

agent,

someone who is totally under your control; and is in a

slightly different category than an informant.

Mr. Adams. Well, we get there into the fact that

the

Supreme Court has still held that the use of informants does

not invade any of these constitutionally protected areas, ,and

25

NW. 65994-Docld:32146170_ Page_169 -

...

---

## Page 170

• 11

1950

Prono (Area 202) 544-6000

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

- 13

14

15

16

17

'18

19

20

21

22.

23

24

25

if a person wants

to tell an informant something. that isn't

protected by the Supreme Court.

An actual search for legal evidence, that is a protected

item, but information and the use of informants have been

consistently held as not posing any constitutional problems.

Senator Mathias.

I would agree, if you're talking about

the fellow who walks in off the street, as I said earlier,

but is it true that under existing procedures informants are

given background checks?

MI. Adams. Yes, sir.

Senator Mathias. And they are subject to a testing period

Mr. Adams. That's right, to verify and make sure they

are providing to us reliable information.

Senator Mathias. And during the period that the relation-

ship continues, they are rather closely controlled by the

handling agents.

• Mr. Adams. That's true.

Senator Mathias. So in effect they can come in a very

practical way agents themselves to the FBI.•

MI. Adams.. They can do nothing --

Senator Mathias. Certainly agents in the common law

of the word:

MI. Adams.

That's right, they can do nothing, and we

instruct our agents that an informant can do nothing that the

agent himself cannot do, and if the agent can work himself into

NW-65994-Docld:32175170-Rage 170

== m

---

## Page 171

smn

12

1951

]

2

3

4

5.

6

WARD

and

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

.15.

16

17

.18

19

•20

21

22.

23

24

25

NW 65994-Docid:32175170-Page-171

an organization in an undercover capacity, he can sit there and

glean all the information that he wants, and that is not in the

Constitution as a protected area. But we do have this problem.

Senator Mathias. But if a regular agent who is a inember

of the FBI attempted to enter these premises, he would require

a warrant?

Mr. Adams.

No, sir, if a regular. -- it depends on the

purpose for which he is entering. If a regular agent by

concealing his identity, by - was admitted as a member of the

Communist Party, he can attend Communist Party meetings, and he

can enter the premises,

he can enter the building, and there's

no constitutionally invaded area there.

Senator Mathias. And so you feel that anyone who has

a less formal relationship with the Bureau than a regular

agent, who can undertake a continuous surveillance operation

as an undercover.agent.or as an informant.-

Mr. Adams.

As long as he commits no illegal acts.

Senator Mathias.

Let me ask you why you feel that it is

impractical to require a warrant since,.as I understand it,

headquarters must approve the use of an informant. Is that

degree of formal action required?

---

## Page 172

HARRIS: GSII

Sen. Sel. CIA

22/2/875

Tape:

9

Phona (Arca 202)

1952

1

2

3

4

5

6

Mr. Adams. The main difficulty is the particularity

which has to be shown in obtaining a search warrant. You

have to go after particular evidence.

You have to specify

what you're going after, and an informant operates in an •

area that you just cannot specify. He doesn't know what's

going, to be discussed at that meeting. It may be a plot to

blow up the capitol again or it may be a plot to blow up the

State Department building.:

Senator Mathias. If it were a crininal investigation,

you would have little difficulty with probable cause, wouldn't

you?

8

9

10

11.

12

13

14

15

16

• 17

18

19

20

21

22

410 FIrsi

23

24

25

NW-65994-Đeclds32175170-Page-172 - -

Mx. Adams. We would have difficulty in a warrant to

use someone as an informant in that area because the same

afficulty of particularity exists. We can't specify.

Senator Mathias. I understand the problem because it's

very similar to one that we

discussed earlier in connection

say wiretaps on a national security problem.

Mr. Adams. That's it, and there we face the problem of

where the Soviet, an individual identified as a Soviet spy

in a friendly country and they tell us he's been a Soviet spy

there and now he's coming to the United States, and if we can't

show under a probable cause warrant, if we couldn't show that

he was actually engaging in espionage in the United States,

we couldn't get a wiretap under the probable cause requirements

which have been discussed. If the good fairy didn't arop the

---

## Page 173

gsh

1953

1

2

3

4

5

6

8

9

10

evidence in our hands that this individual is here conducting

espionage, we again would fall short of this, and that's

why we're still groping with it:

Senator Mathias. When you say fall short, you really,

you would be falling short of the requirements of the Fourth

Amendment.

Mr. Adams.

That's right, except. for the fact that the

• President, under this Constitutional powers, to protect this

nation and make sure that it survives first, first of all

national survival, and these are the areas that not only the

President but the Attorney General are concerned in and we're

all hoping that somehow we can reach a legislative middle

ground in here.

Senator Mathias. Which we discussed in the other national

security area as to curtailling a warrant to that particular

need.

PAUL

12

WARD

13

14

15

16

17

Mr. Adams. And if you could get away from probable

•18

cause and get some degree of reasonable cause and get some

19

method of sealing indefinitely your interest, say, in an

20

ongoing espionage case and can work out those difficulties,

21

we may get their yet.

22

Senator Mathias. And you don't despair of finding that

23

middle ground?

24

Mr. Adams. I don't because I think that today there's

25

moxe of an open mind between' Congress and the Executive Branch

NW-65994-Đecld:32175170-Page-173 - :-

---

## Page 174

9sh

3

Phona (Area 202) 544-6000

2

3

4.

5

6

7

9

10

• 11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

1954

and the fBI and everyone concerning the need to get these

areas resolved.

Senator Mathias.

And you believe that the Department,

if we could come together, would support, would agree to that

kind of a warrant requirement if we could agree on the language?

MI. Adams. If we can work out problems and the Attorney

General is personally interested in that also.

Senator Mathias. Do you think that this agreement night

extend to some of those other areas. that we talked about?

Mr. Adams. I think that that would be a nuch greater

difficulty in an area of domestic intelligence informant who

reports on many different operations and different types of

activities that might come up rather than say in a Soviet

espionage or a foreign espionage case where you do have a little

more degree of specificity to

deal with.

Senator Mathias. I suggest that we arrange to get

tosether and try out some drafts with each other, but in the

meantime, of course, there's another alternative and that

would be the use of wiretap procedure by which the Attorney

General must approve a wiretap before it is placed, and the

same general process could be used for informants, since

you come to headquarters any way. :

Mr. Adams. That could be an alte sitive. I think it

24

would be a very burdensome alternative id I think at some

25

point after we attack the major abuses, or what are considered

NW-65994-Đocld:32175170-Page-174 -

...

---

## Page 175

4

gsh

202) 544-5000

Phona (Arca

S.E., Washington, D.C. 20003

1

2

5

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11.

12

13

14

16

17

18

19

20

21

22.

23

24

25

1955

major abuses of Congress and get over this hurdle, I think

we're still going to have to recognize that heads of agencies

have to accept the responsibility for managing that agency

and we can't just keep pushing every operational problem up

to the top because there just aren't enough hours in the day.

Senator Mathias. But the reason that parallel suggests

itself is of course the fact that the wiretap deals generally

with one level of information in one sense of gathering

information.

You hear what you hear from the tap.

Mr. Adams. But you're dealing in a much smaller number

also.

• .

Senator Mathias. Smaller nunber, but that's all the

more reaSon.

When an informant goes in, he has all of his

senses.

He's gathering

all of the information a human being

can

acquire from a situation and has access to more information

than the average wiretap.

And it would seem to me that for that reason a parallel

process might be useful

and in order.

Mr. Adams. Mr. Mintz pointed out one other main

distinction. to me which I had overlooked fron our prior

discussions, which is the fact that with an informant he is

more in the position of being a concentral monitor in that one

of the two parties to the conversation agrees, such as like

concentral monitoring of telephones and microphones and

anything else versus the wiretap itself where the individual

NW-65994~Docld:32175170.Page.175 ~ -

---

## Page 176

• gsh

5

Prono (Area 202) 544-6000

S.E.,

1

2

3

4

5

6

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

1956

whose telephone is being tapped is not aware and there is,

and neither of the two parties talking had agreed that their

conversation could be monitored.

Senator Mathias. I find that one difficult to accept.

If I'm the third party overhearing a conversation that is taking

place in a room where I am, and my true character isn't perceived

by the two people who are talking, in effect they haven't

consented to my overhearing my conversation. Then they consent

if they believe that I am their friend or their, a partisan

of theirs.

But if they knew in fact that I was an informant for

someone else,

they wouldn't be consenting.

MI. Adams. Well, that's like I believe Senator llart

raised earlier, that the courts thus far have made this.

distinction with no difficulty. but that doesn't mean that

there may not be some legislative compromise which might be

addressed.

Senator Mathias. Well, I particularly appreciate your

attitude in being willing to work on these problems because

I think that's the most important thing that can evolve from

these hearings, so that we can actually look at the lourth

Amendment as the standard that we have to achieve. But the

way we get there is obviously going to i"

• lot casier if we

can work toward them together.

I just have one final question, 'is. Chairman, and that

NW 65994-Dõcld:32175170-Page 176 -

...

---

## Page 177

gsh

6

1957

, S.E., Washington, O.C. 20003

2

3

5

6

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

deals with whether we shouldn't impose a standard of probable

cause that a crime has been committed as a means of controlling

the use of informants and the kind of information that they

collect.

Do you feel that this would be too restrictive?

MI. Adans. Yes, sir, I do.

When I look at informants and I see that each year

informants provide us, locate 5000 dangerous fugitives, they

provide subjects in 2000 more cases, they recover $86 million

in stolen property and contraband, and that's irrespective

of what we give the local law enforcement and other rederal

agencies, which is almost a comparable figure, we have almost

reached a point in the criminal law where we don't have much

left. And in the intelligence field we still, I think when

we carve all of the problems away, we still have to make sure

that we have the means to gather information which will permit

us to be aware of the identity of individuals and organizations

that are acting to overthrow the government of the United

States. And I think we still have some areas to look hard

at as we have discussed, but I think informants are here to.

stay. They are absolutely essential to law enforcement.

22.

Everyone uses informants. The press has informants, Congress

23

has informants, you have individuals in your comnunity that

24

you rely on, not for ulteriox purposes, but to let you know

25

what's the feel of the people, am I serving them properly,

NW-65994-Đocld:32175170-Page-177 ----

-===

---

## Page 178

gSA

phono (Aros 202) 544-6000

7

1958

2

4

5

6

7

8

WARD & PAUL

D.C. 20003

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

"17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

am I carrying out this?

It's here to say. It's been

here throughout history

and there will always be informants. And the thing we want to

avoid is abuses. like provocateurs, criminal activities, and

to ensure that we have safeguards that will prevent that.

But we do need informants.

Senator l'ower.

Senator Hart, do you have any further

questions?

Senator llart of Michigan. Yes. I ask unanimous request

perhaps with a view to giving balance to the record, the

groups that we have discussed this morning into which the

Bureau has put informants, in popular language, our liberal

groups -- I would ask unanimous consent that. be printed in

the record, the summary of the opening of the headquarters

file by the Bureau of DI. Carl McIntyre when he announced

that he was organizing a group to counter the American Civil

Liberties Union and other "liberal and comnunist groups,"

is not a left only pre-occupation. •

Senator Tower. Without objection, so ordered.

(The material referred to follows:)

NW-65994-Docld 32175170-Page 178

---

## Page 179

phone (Area

20X) 544-6000

gst?

1959

WARD

PAUL

410 First Street, S.E., Washington, D.C. 20003

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

Senator Tower. Any more questions?

Then the Committee will have an Executive Session this.

afternoon in room 3110 in the Dirksen Building

at 3:00, and

I hope everyone will be in attendance.

Tomorrow morning we will hear from Courtney Evans,

Cartha DeLoach.

Tomorrow afternoon, former Attorneys General

Ramsey Clark and Edward Katzenbach.

The Conmittee, the hearings are recessed until 10:00

a.m.

tomorrow morning.

(Whereupon, at 1:10 o'clock p.m., the hearing in the

above mentioned matter was concluded, to reconvene on Wednesday

December 3rd, 1975, at 10:00 o'clock a.in.)

ad

NW-65994-Đocld:32175170-Page-179

---

## Page 180

•2-14-74)

Transmit the following in

Via

AIRTEL

FBI

Date:

7/12/76

(Type in plaintext or code)

AIR MAIL

(Precedence)

REGIOT

FROM :

SUBJECT:

DIRECTOR, FBI (62-116395)

SAC, SAN FRANCISCO (62-6887)

SENSTUDY 75

ALL INFORMATION CONTAINED

On Friday, 7/9/76, -E

ED MONTGOMERY, retired reporter,

"San Francisco Examiner," called me.

mule said he had just

received

a telephone call from a ROBERT ERIEDMAN-Of "Time

Magazine" in New York.

FRIEDMAN toid MONTGOMERY that he

had been going over some of the Church Committee Reports

MONTGOMERY a considerable amount of information. MONTGOMERY

said FRIEDMAN indicated that the FBI had given MONTGOMERY

MONTGOMERY tOld FRIEDMAN that this was not true, that he

received his information from the Sheriff's Office in Alameda

County.

FRIEDMAN also indicated that MONTGOMERY had received

information concerning ANGELA DAVIS and the guns used in

the Marin County shootout in which several people were :

killed. MONTGOMERY told FRIEDMAN that this was not true,

that he had received this information from the Marin County

Sheriff's Office and

that the FBI was not involved in this

case at that point but did later have an unlawful flight

warrant on DAVIS, which resulted in her eventual arrest in

New York!

FRIEDMAN referred to several

the Church

Committee Report and indicated

REG 1010X

1633:-1688

incidents in

was obvious to

him that the FBI had furnished the information to MONTGOMERy.

MONTGOMERY told him this was "a lot of garbage."

MONTGOMERY

then asked FRIEDMAN if MONTGOMERY's name was mentioned in

the report as having received the information and FRIEDMAN

said it was not although fRIEdMaN drew the conclusion that

•it was MONTGOMERY.

TON

- Bureau (RM)

I - San Francisco

da 13o)

* JUL-74 1976

CWB/ cmp'

(3)

Approved:

Special Agent in Charge

RAY GOld 97%170- Page 180.....

Sent

Per

1

---

## Page 181

robe, pine

SF 62-6887

CWB /стр

MONTGOMERY again told FRIEDMAN that he had many,

many sources and that he was not the recipient of information

volunteered to him by the FBI.

MONTGOMERY commented that

FRIEDMAN obviously did not want to believe this.

MONTGOMERY furnished this for information.

NW 65994 Docld:32175170 Page 181 * - --

---

## Page 182

0-9 (Rev. 2-14-74)

Transmit in

--==

(Type in plaintext or codel

Via

To:

SAC,

Albany

F. BI

AIRTEL

-

i Director, FBI

DOMESTIC SECURITY INVESTIGATIONS

(Precedence)

-

10/19/76

(Date)

PERSONAL ATTENTION

MARGIN.)

For your information, in connection with

Congressional oversight, FBIHQ has been receiving requests from

the

Senate Select Committee on Intelligence relating to our

handling of domestic security matters including the question

as to the number of organizations and individuals currently

under investigation.

In order to insure prompt response to all such

requests, you are reminded that upon initiation of a domestic

security investigation of an individual or organization.

FBIho should be promptly notilled, as set forth in Sections

87 ánd 122, Manual of Instructions.

In addition,

FBIHQ

should also be promptly advised of the closing of any such

investigations.

2 - All Offices (PERSONAL ATTENTION)

(Do not type

BEYOND

THIS MARGIN.

Do not type below this Tine.)

Tur

4(4125)

SEARCHED

2 INDEXED__

SERIALIZED.

.. FILED.

OCT 2 11976

FBI - SAN FRANCISSO

Senstudy

62-6815-18

F 91/DO.1

NW 65994. Docld:32175170 Page 182

---