Document text
-. _ Q _ _- _ < ' _§_~;-,_'-;-':1__1_'-._- f_.|__-__.' ._~ '_ A_-- ___ . _92_. . - _ _ _ -,..__1:.;_.~ ".'n'._r:::-O:§_-I_ I -- - - ._.. r:'_-'.-'.92-I ...,"-j.'»_-;'.< .'.'r!;_ , _ _ _ A ,__ __ _ _,__-,..;_.,.L¢- W- '_-1' . __:_:_ as _.. _ __ L J» -.+ u-.-a:',~:-;...:. .-v.~,,-:.r-.»4-1|:.-1..-Ha. V________ .. .. _~ . , ___»»JJ __.._..__...ii.-.,........f.r. .._ _f __
92
FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION
SURREPTITIOUS ENTRIES
JUNE MAIL-SERIALS X90!
PART 12 OF 23
FILE NUMBER = 62-11"/-166 .
___ _ ___ ,' _'_ , _ , ' _ _1-J1_-$-:j_-_'_- _7 J __i__A_____7___7_1_ __._________ :___ L_,___,_ W ._ _- ---==1~:-_1_92|._-92-..*._-=--.._._..-..
I Q 1 .
I-M--I-:..'..'-.-1.--¢--0-__..__"___, ,¢ , - -_' _ ' '_ - . - .' " ' 4"':""'L':" "" ' *--' 'B ¢_h**n - '- ' _ L !__ _ ; . - Q -
; FILE DESORIPQON -
eunsau meq Q:-
-
S.~ .
q
. SU BJ EOTF74§#/'// '7nf/
FILE NO._ZZ§f 6/2*//7;/5'?
SECTION NO._L__ W4¢"5
sER|A|_s_L__._m__>< 1 921"¢//W /A
i - /I/5'0/L E770/v 11/1 77+ D 0/= J7/$772
_ Qjce OF Mo l
'.92
_1..
.':_:.
au-
1.; I.-w
3
B
§
.-J:
---.'
1»-§'
3";
Q.
%
,,.__'_ ._ ,. _.:_.~_ |_4 - ._. ~ .. 1
-. ,;_
I '-
..I'_n
TO :
IRON! :
D.
$QmECT:
.
J
F
I/1|
M
633
a
Q
-
O
5Uhmtli ._u I
'um:ri:n srxrns c;ov1-mm:-:1~rr __.4...-,-g,-w__,~,¢.__-_;-,;-u4,;=_:-*i-a-a.-.-_u.wa_-_-: - _ 7 it _ _|, I _ _ _ _ -RL IN ENVEU -
' 1 - Ir. 1'01 on ;Memorandum ~ 1 - *=- "=1-:*=*#
1 Ir. Bishop M
' onIn-. I. c. suinqn - -ml-re .5... 23, 1969 _ s
. w P JUNE g -_ e "'_g;::5u__
~ : l - Ir. Sullivan , miC. D. Brenna Awe byS° - Ir. G.C. Moore """'-
. C.D. B naT3-¢!!m£AL. 3 u _ ...l3I..EClRONl SURVEILLANCES ,4@,92
_ ax-x. rm». :=:*:.~1.:-'12:: cc-:~n.=.mrnSYNOPSIS: 1: zr-r: .~ IQ->T?I r:::1.~. zzcr ré
9": -"1 1-92'92-qw-P'-"1 1,-"ll.|.¢.£a.92-4 an ¢'~la92 92.'J.i-..~92...a-Jo __ Cpl '
TED H
7 1 I92J.IlllIl3.l'qlOI
the Bureau's policy on wiretaps and microphonersurveillances.Pursuant to the Director's
Concerning wiretaps, the Director, since 192d, opposed -_
the use oi wiretapping as a general practice and has openly A
etressedior years that wiretaps, where necessary, should be .
limited and tightly restricted, In 1940 President Roosevelt
authorized wiretaps when the national securitywas affected.
Since that date, every Bureau request tor e wiretap heebeen
presented to the Attorney General in writing tor approval.
This polio? continuftsutic: date. REC-18 - 6__.<If£_:-4;
Attorneys General Kennedy, Katzenbach, and Clark
clearly informed of the Bureau policy concerning wiretaps
atihetime --- -. - - -i.---=-- 1--
QSGIH!
51$ . ' gr ' urthermore, s urg e ephone surve llance wa a
placed on Martin Luther King. In addition, he personally ..
approved request for telephone surveillance on a case involvi
racial violence. Katzenbach, while Deputy Attorney Generalfi
requested the I-BI to consider placing telephone surveillance?
on the parents of a Mississippi civil rights worker. The _ 4?
n4__@a__ _-1",a__a1 _____A ah an1- U:-_a__ 4- ua__ _d"HIhu=§Lnnuuaicuuua acauuuauuay ngaccu bu yuan waacuay an vacw ua yvuwu-a
tial embarrassment. On 3/30/65, . the Director advised Katzenbach
that back under the administration or Attorney General* T-Bil! 29
¢1=rk. he. the D1reret9rs_nes.Qznn.en_d.e§._$.£=&_?.r&1._1....G9_!e1:nment '
azen¢1es_.r¬¥.ra3 ;1.-1j.1.'§>==1 .!¥?§*E42P.1!.!E..,!!!%3!-,§.¥_Eh??? -:e§__.=1>e@'1?:<="-_- :7
a'I$'p?6v'a'l' in "eaic In's"t'a'nc'e_'by__1l;_he_'jAt_torne{_'_Gegeral __and this 51¢had"been 'repeate'd"'t'6' suhsequengt _n_;;q;ngy§_ General. ' The ' """"
Director added he was the only _head 6'! an investigativeagency who dicimrgelave the authority to authorize a wiretap. On 1
Attorney Genera- _=__.r1e wee interned by the Direeter thaterdere -.».
ha h ' 1 h e l s d been given to reduce t e number o tel p ne su c ing operated by the Bureau in view of _%§i '
uteelings concerning use oi electronic de as e 1 5'.
Clark's question as to the actual value oi the same. TheDirector pointed " ' t ' "" ' ' ' ' "
he ve tout IBII D18 I38 DQIHQ orougnt IO U1BrK'5 Isuzu-
- e received iE11!-k§l-E9 1- ---' 1 :
_ 1 om 1 92tion in t
State De
_ _|
fr;
#3
s
:-
T»
92
-v.
.k ,1;
"i
. 1.~-*1
.___. - _4
3" .1.- _ -~' :-.7- '-
J
5?
,.
1.
-'-!-
- -1.
- .
.;_,~
.-»..- - 1.,, a
{IF '.-.g'!".§,'. . ".'
, " .~.1'
rr<"i:= §' . -
~Iemorandum C. D. Bennan to Ir. I. C. Sullivan T*"' * " H
~ BE: -ELECTRONIC BURVEILLANCES _ i ' -
66-8160 . . »
. 7., __ .. , _ . - -
respond to Bureau's inquiry oi July 2, 1968, concerning effects
the Omnibus Crime Bill would have on the Bureau's electronic *
surveillances in the internal security iield. . _
Since 1938, Bureau authority has been required tor ¥,
|microphone surveillances. Over the years, the Bureau sought
legal advice from the Department concerning microphone surveillanm
and admissibility of evidence obtained from them.. In 1952, Attorn
General Mcranery authorized their use in security cases even
though trespass may be committed. Attorney General Brownell alsopermitted their use in internal security cases and advised that
relative to criminal cases, they should be used in only the . '
important investigations. G O . -
The Bureau's policy regarding microphones in criminal'
cases was furnished to Attorney General Kennedy's Deputy Attorney
General Ihite. Kennedy attempted to deny knowledge of microphones
in criminal cases. The facts repudiated his claimed lack oi'
knowledge. On 3/30/65 Attorney General Katzenbach informed the
Director that he desired that authority for microphone surveillanc
be obtained from him in similar manner as in wiretap cases. On _
7/12/65 he requested that all microphones be discontinued in vies
oi hearings by long Committee. Commencing 1965, microphone "
surveillances were again used and under authority of the Attorney
General. When Clark became Acting Attorney General on l0/3/66,
- the Bureau was operating one microphone surveillance. On 2/29/68
he gave written approval tor another microphone surveillance,
which involved penetration oi communications equipment at a
diplomatic establishment.
_A review of policy concerning wiretaps and microphones
discloses that Director's policy has been on a sound basis.
ACTION: . _ ' '
.
This memorandum be referred to the Director for his
information. e - -F39 1/ G k
. . ///V75 S ~//7/Qé»/waif
- -1- __,__ U :- la.-l nsruts - G 'lI2§. _ . 1 . _%_7,__é,_U_:F__ ._ .- . . ' fllp n '0 .43 -' f.'.i"""" shit ' ' ~ ' -*92. .3.-ry-=_,g:~ _ 3 7 5r _ _ _-- _ _ ¢,..5;.-'§'r»'i§:-?i* ;.'¬|4.?:==1~"'¬Er-?=r-H-es" 1 .- 2». -F-"'¬',T-'-¬*'s"' - .-V-W. '.-.~:"92.1"-5'-"'=*1!-"'.:.-.-T. =-L =17"-.-TY-'7-e -.+--_-. .: ' ,-
_.a
ac.
-so
.-TI
. If.
J-
3*
I
1
J
I,
.. _
94¢-
..,.
,,
Q
?-92_1I7
J:
--4.
- '_ *3 v a
Memorandum C. D. Brennan to Ir. I. C. Sullivan
BE: ELECTRONIC SURVEILLARCES _ _66-8160
- 4 _
' @
DETAILS: I -, I
F13 =pn1ns_?<>,1.isv,_ '!=lepjwnae _8=Ir~;e1115=<=é=! - ' I '1
The Director, since he was appointed head oi the FBI *
in 1924, has consistently opposed the use of wiretapping as a
general practice. He stressed that wiretaps, where necessary,
should be used under the most limited and tightly restricted
conditions. His views, openly expressed over the years, were
made known to Congress, to Government oiiicials, and to the
various Attorneys General. _ e -
g On December 2, 1929, the Director presented the Bureau's
policy to Congress'betore the House Appropriations Committee.
He testified, "...We have a very definite rule in the bureau
that any employee engaging ih wire tapping will be dismissed
from the service of the bureau." Be also testified, "while
it ay not beillegal, I think it is unethical...." As early p _l
as 1931 the Director informed the then Attorney General
Iilliam D. Mitchell that as a matter of policy any request for
a wiretap will be forwarded to the Department for their approval.
In l§40 President Roosevelt by an historic memorandum authorized
and directed the then Attorney General Robert H. Jackson,
in such cases as he approved, to utilize wiretaps on "persons
suspected of subversive activities against the Government of the
United States, including suspected spies." From the time oi the
Presidential Directive of 1940 to this very date, each request for
a wiretap has been presented to the Attorney General in writing
for his specific authorization. In 1946 President Truman reaffirm:
Roosevelt's policies and procedures involving wiretapping in
security cases. It is noted that the then Attorney General Tom C.
Clark prevailed upon President Truman to modify the rules to incluc
criminal cases where human lite was in Jeopardy,such as kidnapping
and extortion. As a result, President Truman modified the existini
directive to include certain criminal cases. - g "
Policy Under Pobert P. Kennedy hp G 7 " 'a;.
Robert F. Kennedy took otiice as Attorney General on
January 21, 1961, and resigned on September 3, 1964. Prior to
taking oiiice, the Director furnished him with an outline of the
PBI's policy and procedure on wiretapping. This outline set forth
the basic authority contained in President Roosevelt: Directive
. 92 - .
f- -_2 CONTINUED - OVER
. . I .A. I 92 -
. l '. _' Al- _ .2 _ r I -.: _ . 7._ - - ' 2:" -,-.- 7
"' Iemorandum C. D. Brennan to Ir. I} G. Bullivan A
IE: ELECTRONIC SURVEILLAHCESA es-a1so ' "1 " ~ '
i of-lay 21, 1940, and traced the development of policy through ;_
1960. Included in this outline was the fol1oIing:_ _j_- »
Under our present policy we request specific _ '
authorization in writing and in advance from the ~§? I
Attorney General before any technical surveillance g%r
is utilized. This is the policy followed by the ?¢ V
' Federal Bureau of Investization under the Qigegtigg
of each Attorney General for over twenty years, since f»,
" President Roosevelt's memorandum of lay 21, l940.".,;;.
- . " J J 'ii
er
On January 3, 1962, Attorney General Kennedy mentioned,
. in s conversation with assistant Director Evans, that the Director
- End passed it on to President Jenn i. 1 A
had commented on its great value to him. Because' ?¢
of this, the Attorney General wanted to be certain that any .;
information of this type which might be of_interest to the
President would be given to him to bring to the attention of the
President. The Director, by memorandum dated January 8, 1962,
assured hr. Kennedy that this had heen the practice is the past .
and that it would be the practice in the future. .
him by memorandum dated January 26, , 5:
Ithe extent of the FB
. determine 'w51¢B might produce useful -A
nte ligence. If the Attorney General approved these proposals,
'the Director stated, the FBI would obtain clearance from the" I .
°°P"*'"°' = °* s***°~ E "*' "*'
By memorandum dated January 31, 1962, the Department' '
informed_the Director that the Attorney gneral had agngoggd the
ease ' a
; -. - Iith regard to Martin Luther King, leader of the ' -': "
' Southern Christian Iamdnrehin nniereace In rn__QAq -+_+"v'**-' *--'- *"1I @@@"I-I i*II"I_OIIl"I'IQr YYIIQ I-I Q RTIJIJGKJ Bb-U 92-
'.- _ g-a-1. corrmwz-:n-ovm
.__~
.92'92
_1l ,1.
-a
.9
-it
1»
II ,___.
-
qr
'r '-P. E;. ii
..
ad
,,t,.__
, ,.:,_._.
.-#52:,
,~n
-:-.. .,_-a.' .
. . - . - ' . .___., .
Iemorandum C. D. Brennan to Ir. I; C. Sullivan = r
IE: _ELECTROHIC SURVEILLAHCES . -
66-8160 . ;
_ .'-.»
- . _"_1_, .
that he desired to see Assistant Director Courtney Evans.' On'?5.
July l6, 1963, Kennedy told Evans that he was considering the' ¢
possibility of a telephone surveillance of King because of KingYs'
communist associations. >He was advised by Evans that since King was
in travel status practically all the time, the productivity oi such
a surveillance was doubtful and he was asked to consider the reper-
cussions if it ever became known that such surveillance had been
|instituted on King. Ir. Kennedy said he was not concerned about
|possible repercussions and that he thought it advisable to have as
complete coverage as possible in view of the possible communist
influence in the racial situation. He was told that the feasibility
of such coverage would be determined and an appropriate recommendati
would be submitted to him. On July 25, 1963, Mr. Kennedy informed
Evans he had changed his mind concerning his request and thought it
ill-advised at that time, but on October 7,'l963, a request for
authority to place a telephone surveillance on King's residence was
sent to Hr. Kennedy. On October 10, 1963, he authorized this
surveillance and a surveillance on any future residence of King by
his written signature. This telephone surveillance was installed on
November 8, 1963, and was discontinued on April 30, 1965. '
- a
Four small Negro children were killed on Sunday morning,
September 15, 1963, when the Sixteenth Street Baptist Church in
Birmingham, Alabama, was bombed. Attorney General Kennedy personall
approved the FBls request for technical surveillances on seven
suspects, and an attorney known to have knowledge of acts of racial
violence. These wiretaps were requested because the FBI "believed
that additional activity on the part of those who are responsible
for the bombings could easily lead to more rioting, bloodshed and lo
of life, materially affecting the security of the United States."
Civil rights workers Michael Henry Schwerner, Andrew s
Goodman, and James Earl Chaney disappeared on June 21, 1964, at
Philadelphia, Mississippi. Prior to the time their mutilated bodies
were discovered buried beneath an earthen dam, Deputy Attorney Gener
Hichelas deB= Katnenhach, in the absence or attorney Ceneral Kennedy
requested the FBI to consider placing a technical surveillance on
the parents of Schwerner. er. Katzenbach was concerned that the
disappearance of the three civil rights workers might be a hoax adds
that Schwerner's parents, who had a Communist Party background,
might attempt to exploit the disappearance. On June 30, 1964, ,
Ir. Katzenbach personally approved this technical surveillance.
92 " The Director reluctantly agreed to this wiretap, becausethe Bureau might be embarrassed if the disappearance were not a ,
v w - l'- ' CONTINUED - OVER
.2 . '.- . - .
-, v
. Y1; - ' .. ._ __. _ _., elwaiSm§F*smsrsnrwwqrwswwqggrgq - .t ~92~-. *"*WF¥FEF?7?W?wDF33-1,} '-$3=i;;;*»*r- "_..,=-»fa~">,'.4i',.r>I.~"§*1ea»¢<f:,§:<1,,. .. §§;:»§§-$4,.-¢;-n §£$?~*§5';;r§J¢ =,.;»,-;j-_...=z-;-,-.-= -,~:_ ,.ui-.*_.-'?-7»-3:--.,_*._;~:r-,<'3-;-.7-=3, .- ;_=- ;- . D ;*."" "'-3-- .--. .'/I-' " I~ ..*u - _' ' .-2- - ,._92- '.-. ~ " - -. '-" '1" --1 V}-'.-.-1.7".--+.:.,? ..92»'¢'- _- ~'-:_- . '- " _ .. < - * --it"-.-..+1:,?-.37f72e<1=:<=*!%f'-i'=._.a==':c?t;r+§§i¬»;:T'i=_.;:..@:m§i,..;e- Y"r£5-':2.:¢?E>?§ere.J.rsf<%E*§§~::sgiwgrwsrtiz.-5. -=-.- 1 - - <92-- -- - --- --. -.-- fl I -.4; -,-¢_ -h: , -sv._~'~_'.' , .1 - '---.- .. _-. v -. 1 -._ -7- -. - .-. --_ __ _. - '-' - *1 - -H-= '~? --if-'--'55-.5¬f{'?!-7--I-'2f'}»-1?:-.;5r?55.?..E'n-#r"§?:!5t3=, 3i ¥.*5=?§_7~"T-,'a*I.':¬!»T':'-?:~ ,3-?='~.". ~;'§s-*~~§*?'.=" .i::*"-<3.-2 =I~'- -#-.'"- .- ?~-- s
92
1
n
.11"nv
1'
E-
Ii
.
.
I
§
_.
<-§'
92..
7 :o
an
. .92._ -;
Y
.»c:,,.., _ _ . ' I ,¬5 es: ug {gig . _. - i
lemorandum C. D. Brennan to Ir. IQ D. 8uiiivan92 5 *?¥*5?~~BE: -ELECTRONIC sURVEILLNCE$ e o M '66-8160 a 1-
92
hoak and the wiretap became publicly known. The Director noted .,1 urveillancei that he was requesting approval tor this technica a _ _"only because Katzenbach has torced the issue." D» D
Policy gnder §icho1as*deB.}Katzenbach 9/3/64 to 10/3/66! _ke .
In a discussion between the Director and the AttorneyGeneral on March 30, 1965, Hr. Katzenbach stated that he would 'like to set up a procedure, simar to that in effect concerning otechnical surveillances, whereby he vouid be advised by the _
I _
e
->-.-4;.
I f
.".
' O .
., _ S My
' - 4a - CONTINUED - OVER
r}. ._--92 3 -_ _ Q5 ~g_ '- Q ..- - .._ - i"i-1."-""'r"-'IIIIIII|II""' g?*5* ~r?3 ;'~**'U ¬¬i .:'~j,l§'i*-gu **r-£--E:-:~~v"<£*}*"'-'*¢=--o--.;. ~ "1- - e.*:- "e.., ,r-Est-". ~'-.-.-;-.'-.~i' ~' =.-_;.;.4 -11- . ~37, -.- 'g;_-.= 9292_-I? -Q--n -.",'._; ;'..~.-- __:».-.,.>F:a>f'.-:;w ::..:-v..,, ..';._.';_f '1 -.' _"" ' * .92 ' -i£.~;:""~.-.-1-l-5'-i~C-i-1"r2'5'-"T-i.I-*3»-'§}§$:--an I - *' '9-' 3? ->'-f. *3-:t?';<i'-_= ° .25-"-;.P .~"='7.-*-"1?"-"-»' 7*3.'te'-'.----.~1 =:'-I" '~lT<.":_'~':' 3-.:.»._; ' »'. ' ~ ' :1 ==»*.!+¢*=1*r'r?i3**~;1'§=::-%-*¥?$£§E-1é~':7T:=% %-==§~ *'r<~:*I@1?1"*~*,:=1 - a e. >- '- - -- --
92
J
IF;
as
n-
.-
-1-
-v
f- -
_?-5-LéT.
',-G fit.
GER.-. ,.2%;
. F.--nu-a--q WW Q- . _ ~'=;§- ..=.1¢<1~'!*3=*-7.. . ,1» -ti"? +1 - = -= ~1- '.>">-'." .=.¢-f-_.+.-i".*.'¬-. -.-3? - ""~'? =. -IIv<'92"-::~$i¬?' e--1 -92" .,.1,g-.~£=¢.1--92";¢-*T=='*l- -.-.1 "->;'=- '-"..'.='-'..-'-_"--?'._-|:-i-'-.;.- 3; . i--.1--Hf-Z192.'*5-w"-'51-i:?*7~¢~--'-1-: -">"-iv" "+7--1$*-'7-1|$9!Y"*: $":"%"~> .'."492.'1-e.--1' -1:2'i1'*'-$T-l-T92*~-".-;un--¢¬+-- .-T~-:- .- -1-Ir-.<-.~. -1- - '. ,- -""';-.~."r:-92_-"- _- ".--";r'.,: "- "7"-.§'S 3- '1'."-.1 7f':;.%-' 1*".-.-,92.""1|*'-_*';_§. _ -J. ' "II-""1" - '-_-'.7 "17? - '-'1 ' .. -'-Q 117"-3_92.?-' §"f"~_' _-. 1.7%; _.'.-.' -15.1. -..' - - . -=l5'*'-5-*3?-§*51?.¬-*-*u"%e*i'=-5%-ea?-**J=@T:¬>=£r~sw?35 r--s=-.'=-'+s=7a.*-¢-.r-?5§-.<-.1.- -;-<-?<-v-¢~.-:?."-."?*-_-- i. »:.--e -e -'---.= .:- -..-- ;.v¢..Q ' . .
" r1' ~, ti:
. _ * .. -.1 ,~;~.'-
- r-' -- _ '- ~ . -.
Iemorandum C. D. Brennan to Ir. I. C. Sullivan _ 4
ma: snscvraozuc sunvnxuaucss . - - , -
as-s1eo p ,.
- ' _ . ' .. ' --1"-fl.
|Bureau of nicrephone surveillance installations. On the same";
day, the Director sent a confirming memorandum_to the Attorney '
General which contained the following comments concerning ,_ >
wiretapping: _
" With reference to the proper controls over wire G
tapping and the installation of microphones,.you ;__
will recall that I advised you that back under the if?
administration of Attorney General Tbm! Clark I
reeonnended tnat_all Government agencies refraI§: "<21
from wiretapping_unl§S.$hEie was*sp§c;i1p_gpproval
fEeach"In§tance by orney General who i§" the A1;J;__ " '
eer_e_rp 41;; ;Gp_ver_nn1e_nt_. I repeated
£ne sama'isaossaaai¥16n to'each'succe§§ive Attorney
General
General
"I have
trol infollowing the administration of attorney "f
always felt that there was a very lax con-
the handling of wiretapping by Government
agencies. I am the only head of a Government investi-
¢ gative agency who does not have the authority to
authorize a wiretap, but under the system which I
personally set up. Therefore, requests for wiretaps
are sent by me to the Attorney General for his
pproval or disapproval.- I know that no such system
s followed in other branches of the Government >~
nd, in fact, in many instances subordinates quite
ar down the line of authority tap telephones
ithout the specific approval of the head of the
gency and certainly without specific approval of 7
the cabinet officer in charge of the department. ' -
I_still feel quite strongly that no Government p
=Is2!lsx._sh6v._1? WE. =Lt¬1éPh=§n;@; "I1f!I1.@3$*if§j_1i_=_Te1>=¢1J_f-1¢= 1.x__annr.e.nén..in easK1ns.'¢an<.=e_.!_>y tie terns?
energl, This would certainly circumscribe promiscuous
wiretapping onthe part of Government agencies and ;
would centralize in one place, the Attorney Generalisoffice,a record of any phone taps which have been -H
placed by a Government agency.,ii,,,_ , ,="-
-
I_ _.-r-_ .
'-.-s- cowrxnrunn-ovnn
1
7:
, A
a
Ii:,'92._'16"! .
e
- 1--:_-:r-
-1'1. mi>'==_-I-".5"
Q -i
r
F-
w
F:
~3.='-*"r
. 1:: __.._-, .._ -._ _ _-._-__,_.,-.1-_.-- -_~ - .47 ---V, __ 7 entejm 7 7? 7
_ 92a .s, ~
sr a
- L - - _ . ' ._ ._r -7
u _ 92 - e . . " - -2: ",5_ A _ . r_ _ __ t
lemorandum C, D. Brennan to Ir. I. C.-Sullivan _ f=.
BE: ELECTRONIC SURVEILLANCES 'e _ I YV 66-8160 D .. _ l
tie you are eeare, in the eeee ei the FBI ee de**
not request phone taps except in cases involving ~- .
kidnaping and espionage. This has been predicated _.
upon my theory that when the lite oi an individual -:
or the lite oi the Nation is in peril a phone tap1 is Justified for intelligence purposes asany infor-
Ination obtained over a phone tap cannot be used e
in the trial oi a criminal case." _.. eta. »
representatives and Departmental .
Presidential memorandum,dated ea
June 30, 1965, which dealt with technical and microphone sur- "
ve111w=es- 'I:.1n§__nee.21;en¢92m. eiislrsssed te_e1tl....1.@_=.<1§ 9! = ' -
33,=e9t1vs_J1e.pe;.te1@e$a.e.nd.=Bs;1s=iea...§s1=a1>_iie1eed =*£.1s1=.-£!i§s:.lines ior,ths,useeni_techni§El_§§?eill§pees,_pri§i§lii_ih§_ '
obtaining oi apQ§OYgl@;;Qp the Attdihey General. It also _ f
requireEthe'sbmission o£'i*c6mpIeté1h?Eh¬3ry oi all mechanical
and electronic equipment capable of intercepting telephone 7 -
conversations.. Qn July 39, ieee, !Blattorneys conferred regarding a
q Because the Bureau obtained authority irom the ' g
Attorney General and consulted with the Department regarding
the use of these surveillance techniques, the Departmental '
representatives stated that the Bureau sas already complying
with the Presidential memorandum and that it would not be-
necessary to submit an inventory of equipment. ' ' -
In early 1965, the Senate Subcommittee on Administra-
tive Practice and Frocedure, headed by Senator Fdward V. Zong '
of Missouri and popularly known as the Long Committee, began
inquiries into Federal encroachments on citizens privacy.-
ln view oi these inquiries, it was necessary to severely
restrict and, in many instances, eliminate the Bureau's use w
oi these techniques. " ,' _ ' _ - -
Since the Bureau's heavy responsibilities tor
investigative results continued, the Director, in a nemo+_i,
randum dated September 14, 1965, expressed to the attorney _
General concernth undue limitations on special investigative 4.-92
techniques would make it tar more difficult to combat sub- ¢ '*
version and organized crime. The Attorney General, in a - I
memorandum dated September 27, 1965, agreed vith the Director '
and authorized the resumption oi several special investigative 1techniques. In this memorisdum the Attorney , - -_q
e :.92-¥ -sd"- gconrmusn-oven .
. . .92 .. ._ ,... ' ' --I--0ew 12+?-freezers-r" >wnn~?"¬n#ns":r'v@I"1é¥r1rs"rrtrvt¢ww#@'PF¥?*?"3ere-»- *?% ='i'*-r"e-<»'-»i='¥i?=4li5; ?;g**é=%:§%§e~e1¢,--an."'- . ea?-*.:-;~ .;-D.---7:: -- - --. -.__ -_-~ ._._=- .- -1 -1.. -_--.,~ _-..- - -y-.. _ --- -- - - -- --~._' 5,», . »-.~-,7 ;- .w *+P ~~-e*"e*~ ~~t* H **»**=!mF%t=:? F~+¢"*¥e1r*#rK5t-rveévzte"<:c>$a *»" an i t - ..:- '_._92-! _-.,~_92 _92_,_~~_. _ ___-' . '__» ,__.;-.> ._'.__f 5- .~ 1.'1' "~'-"92--'»'- ?-'--"X-'92:.l' -."-1-:"3|!":.l--"»:Fi*" '_ P-' fi-"3'-.*¬" K". ' "V J ' _ __ , _ x J .__V' .,.;:._ _, - ;_V_._'92__.»J.'i:;.@u:.~.-1'.-i 3i'~:e-&"5-191? 1 -¢-»-__1_-_-_-,-=_-@-,-_-_-e-=-».§=-'=_- ; . '- .-=-_-'-i!-_~,-_'-;,-;v"T-*.;*-_',*;-n"; Z"-_='§.'.*
F
2
'_.'92
- cu.3-___.,-
J-
.5?»
E.DD
QI1|- - F
~' -a i
. _ _. - _,'' », , a ; V_ - , i
. _ '_ Y, .' I _92_ ._ _ 1, a. _ - - - .,- _- . _._,._~.... v. ' ' * - J ; -" - _
»Iemorandum C. D. Brennan to Ir. I. C. Sullivan J _ ~- ?1Q?1
IE2 ELECTRONIC BURVEILLQHCES ,3 ' -' =l;oy_
es-also g _ _ , V - ._,,. - §_,».; * r
.- . _ V .:_ - , .-,1 ,,_'i_-r-0 I _ .. _,_ _ - at fr-q I.
General commented, "...I am aware that such techniques have been g7
judiciously used in the past, and while they may have been :F»»3;='
abused by other agencies, I do not believe they have been abused 6'
by the Bureau in any instance." - " 9 _
r0119; anger Ramsey c1=;-5 0/3/as 1:9 1/20/69! 7 "
Acting Attorney General Ramsey Clark by memorandum 1».
to the Director dated October 10, 1966, returned approvals kc
for nine telephone surveillances. _The memorandum contained a *3
request that Hr. Clark be advised oi all existing telephone 3;
and microphone surveillances. -
On October 13, 1966, Ir. Clark was briefed by Assistant
to the Director C. D. DeLoach with the Director's approval. ~,,*'
Ir. Clark indicated he telt all the surveillances were entirely
justified. ' ...__ .1
By memorandum 493 dated November 3, 1966, Acting ii ,
Attorney General Ramsey Clark transmitted to all United_8tate5 re
Attorneys instructions that they be alert as to each prosecutive~*»
case tor evidence that might be tainted because of the use of _
electronic devices during the investigation." v»_ -
A letter to all Special Agents in Charge dated November 1
1966, Number 66-72, quoted Hr. Clark's memorandum of November 3,._
1966, and instructed that if any inquiries were received from -'
United States Attorneys, the Bureau should be immediately advised.
-By memorandum dated November 28, 1966, the Ddrector
informed Ramsey Clark that the Director had given orders to reduce
the number oi telephone surveillances being operated by the Bureau
in92dew of the President's feelings concerning the use oi electronic
devices as well as Clark's question as to the actual value of the
same. The Director pointed out that this was being brought to qw
Clark's attention in the eventreceived from State Department |
lemorandum oi Hay 26 1967, from the Director pointed
are
stated that in view of the fact that the
is not in a position to evaluate the substantive merits of OaGh
case, it was being recommended that in the iuture the interested
_ _ if CONTINUED ovsa _ -.
T "*
'1-- r--v w~
92-
_]
£92,
i?**
I
4!
2?
1
-
_,.
_ @
:-
4. -r~
92|@'.1 I:92- 1- _-- ._ ~ y .- . '
Iemorandun C. D. Brennan to Ir. I. C. Sullivan " * _ '§
BE: _ELBCTRONlC SURVEILLANCES - _ ' "
66-8160 -
agencies should submit their requests directly to the Attorncy'h
General. - ~ *1
,~_ ._ .
By memorandum dated June 1, 1967, Clark replied that
although the Director was correct in his observatbn, he, Clark, 1
did not believe that the requesting agencies should bypass the '
Bureau and communicate directly with him. __ e Q,
!enerandnn ef July 2,l968, frem the Director requested
the Attorney General's views and statement of policy concerning
the effect the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act or 1968
would have on our past, present, and future_electronic surveillance
in the internal security field. No reply was received from Clark
in spite cf fellow-ups having been sent on four eccasions prior te
his leaving office. : - -
!icrop_hone Surve_illanc_e§ PoliJc£_ 1 J D -_ ._
The early use of microphones by the FBI is not recorded
in any detail. It appears that they were used in the late 1920's '
and early 1930's to obtain intelligence in criminal cases. Prior
Bureau authorization of microphone installations was first required
1- IQQD _-A -1--,-t vl-L-+ J-8-an D ¢¢¢¢¢ II 92l92n!IwI92nIl+.QiiE lane -92a'In'Pq~Iw-nailH I-30, I-|92l 1u%¢ BBB!» ~ll ¢ JULIA Z I-I¬Q9292|{92l§-I VG 1 ll1§ I 1§llUZlll92II¥
tight control over the field in the use of these devices. Over
the years, the FBI continually sought legal advice from the
Department concerning micrdphone installations and the admissabilit
of evidence obtained from them. In the early 1940's the Department
relied on a Supreme Court decision in Goldman v. U.S. which held th
a microphone surveillance was not equivalent to an illegal search
and seizure prohibited by the Fourth Amendment. On this basis, the
Department advised that evidence from a microphone surveillance
eeuld be admissable. In 1946, the Depnrtnent, reeegnizing the un-
settled state of the law in this area, continued to maintain their
position even though Bureau officials continued to be concerned
about the admissability of evidence obtained from microphones -
involving trespass. ' ." . -H -- 7 _ ' ' -_
In 1951, the overall issue of microphones involved in
trespasswas presented directly to the Department. The Department
ruled that they would not approve any installation of microphones
involving trespass, an illegal activity. This presented a problem
because under the then existing law it was difficult to determine
what actually constituted trespass. Faced with this situation, the
Executive Conference of May 5, 1952, unanimously recommended that e
nicrophcnes be installed without trespass and that if this is not
=pessihle and the intelligence to he gathered is e necessary !dJ"¢t
to the investigation in select cases, consideration be given to-
authorizing a microphone. In.1952 Att°rni? GQRQTQI u°Gr§nery5 D
v.-;..' "' corm ovra"53-id "-
{n
F-1"~'=92. r ..*==n*.. - 1 .*'~:3}-. , - . .- _- . . y . ,- - » rev. . =~r~1. ':.»-£15:-: 1;-» -1 -."- L4"-Q-E §-3-I-- 3"I3-..».--.'.--.-.~-=: '.- P - ~ -
-we fr _;,_._,_=_ aw. ,1»11- - '1 er-w,fi'a 3-': -v..- ». -. 1 " 1 ~- '~ - --= P?-'-Z ' h-' 13-~- ' -~17"-'.'-A '-= '7'-'~ ':¢?--'I- "..."-Q -. F1. _'I_1 ' -'1 '.,q;_ , _,__.. _ __. -L.-R4 * . ., 0, _ . -._ -J 1 '1 J _. .,-1. -~,_-.-u-Y.-92". _. . ._.._ .. _ ». _;- e._ .4 __ |- _¢. _'.:-s- , 7.:-"r-'~_ 92_ -..=, 1=~_' -. -;:' ' -. .. _ r -'-fv¢5I-.'::'-?-'92",."":1-5:§§T!J""2';-;;Ei$=f'; --aw '.-1",. J:.;¢~.;.--,1»-_ _r-¬'}921f-g§'.-L,-f,._2-"173-_,92. ,;__,-1",: .3; .,-".92.-¢;:=.:,-,-,_;.";'-;.;,,- >",;,;-'Ifg.~.!
-.'92
1
V-9-',
1'
' .
3 .,_,
Q1
L!
1
0
1
_
1
I
F
1
_-,1.sis
. r'
' 1. s. - _ _ e
- _ . D .
Iemorandum C. D. Brennan to Ir. I. C. Sullivan f*v _
RE: -ELECTRONIC SURVEILLANCES f _ _ ',
66-8160 9. . '
" '--..~'r -
, . . .
authorized microphone installations in security cases even though '
trespass may be committed. Attorney General Brownell in a T» - 6
memorandum dated Hay 20, 1954, allowed the use of microphones
in internal security cases. Relative to criminal cases, it was
noted that he was "not as strong but he takes cognizance of the .
need for microphone surveillances in cases affecting the national
safety and indicates they should be used in only the more impoant
investigations." - . . _ _ y g
* _ .. 7
The Executive Conference on June 20, 1959, considered
whether the Bureau should seek approval from the Attorney General -
before instituting microphone surveillances in specific criminal
cases. The Executive Conference lnazimously agreed, and the Director
approved, that the Bureau should continue as in the past to rely
upon the authority contained in Attorney General Brownell's Hay 20,
1954, memorandum. Ts policy was still being followed on January 21
1951, when Robert F. Kennedy became Attorney General and launched
an intensified Federal drive against organized crime.
Policy _"e<!¢_1:B9l>=r$ F-c Fenneei . - G
Early in 1961, Attorney General ennedy had agreed to
testify concerning proposed wiretap legislation being considered
by the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee. ' ' e V D y
To assist the Attorney General in this regard, the Bureau
delivered a memorandum to Deputy Attorney General Ihite dated
Hay 4, 1961. This memorandum stated that the Bureau's views on ~
the use of microphone surveillances in FBI cases were being - .
furnished in connection with the Attorney Genera1's contemplated
appearance hefore the Benate Buhcommittee on Constitutional Rights.
Horeover, it spelled out that the Bureau had interpreted Attorney
General Brownell's letter of Hay 20, 1954, to give it authorization
for use of microphone surveillances in criminal cases. " 6
In a memorandum dated July 6, 1961, Ir. Evans noted
that there was serious question as the result of a conference held
on that date as to whether the Attorney General was aware of the
difference between a technical and a microphone surveillance, and
asked for permission to discuss this subject with the Attorney
General. The Director approved, and Ir. Evanssaw Ir. Kennedy in
regard to this matter on July 7, 1961. Hr. Evans recorded this ggiscugsiggsgith the Attorney General in a memorandum dated . "
u Y I I ' '- ' - . -
' - _ -8-, aecorrrmusn-ovsa
. 92 ? . I .4? . 92a'.1 - A , p ' m
?"T¢1? lls-1-0-IMF-f"'l""*"'-'1" v-'*"-*""'" _L ",__ _,_." _,,_ > ..F¢92S="X_"_.;-3| , .__ -v,
92-
-
..s
.:-ta
"'
J.
~"
£537'.-I
1..._
Q:v_:'1 '
V.I
2-"'.
~af_
3' .
Ii!-1'
F __
F .
Q3KY-I111 '
:5. .K Y
""'L'l.'1£1
3* - -i
1"
ix
=s;'3"'>7~'i'°1:"-7'74-?';*:%$-:EF"',-'i.!P['.-if-,. ,.-. -ms.» -.'-' -" - -, ~ 1 ;1:----'-ii---...~.-..¢:»~~:.- .>-.1 ,- - .. - --_92 *1 "-¢
I_ mu; _" /._ _- -... L it; _ ii . P
' Q
. ~ , 2 a _ ' ' , - ' I Va
' l ' . f. "-- ___ 1"-
Iemorandum C. D. Brennan to Ir. I. C. Sullivan H
BB: ELECTRONIC BURVEILLANCES '1 - 4 _
Q P as-aiso ~ r -y
' ' A memorandum on FBI stationery, classified "Top Secret,
dated August 17, 1961, enclosed a p o the elephone
company in New York City requesti as !
d li e d t Hr Kenned on Au ust 1961 by Assistant Director e v re o . y g , ,
Courtney Evans. This memor neral requestedhis approval for the use c an adjunct to the Bureau's microphone surveillances in security and major /
criminal cases in New York City. ' - _ .,- . . 1,
On larch 30, 1962, Ir. Kennedy sumoned Ir. Evans to his
office and told him that Joseph Volpe, formerly Chief Counsel for
the Atomic Energy Commission, had informed the Attorney General
that he had learned on the "highest authority" that Volpe's office
had been covered with a microphone surveillance during 1953 and '
1954. Hr. Kennedy asked Hr. Evans if this had been an FBI it
microphone surveillance. Ir. Evans later reported to the attorney
General that this was not an FBI microphone surveillance. ' 11
- On larch l9, 1963, Ir. Kennedy was briefed on organized
crime investigations in the FBI's Chicago Office. This briefing,. I
was attended by other Departmental officials, including Iilliam;,
Hundley, Chief of the Organized Crime and Racketeering Section.
After Special Agents of the FBI told them about the corruption of
local law enforcement officers by Chicago hoodlums, a tape recording
from an FBI microphone surveillance was played for them.
On another occasion, Ir. Kennedy visited-the New York
Office of the FBI for a briefing on organized crime. Participants
in this conference, held.November 4, 1963, were Mr. Kennedy, _
Ir. Ed Guthman of Ir. Kennedy's staff, Assistant Directors Q
Courtney Evans and John F. Malone, and approximately 25 FBI Special
Agents assigned to the New York Office. At this conference, a tape
recording taken from an FBI microphone surveillance was played
for Br. Kennedy _ , i - "
Subsequently, on lay 24, 1966, United States Solicitor
General Thurgood Marshall filed a memorandum before the Supreme
Court advising the Court that there was an electronic surveillance
of Fred Black, a Iashington lobbyist, and that conversations '
between Black and his attorneys had.been intercepted. ' Y _7
_ _ 1- V .
'6 On July l3, I966, Solicitor General Thurgood Iarshall
advised the U. B. Supreme Court that under Departmental practice,
in effect for a period/years prior to 1963 and continuing into 2.
1965, the Director of the FBI was given authority to approve the
installation of microphones for intelligence purposes when require
in the interest of internal security or national safety includi
C " r E:-; coarrzzwsn -"oven, -
_ _ _,___,,._ _,__..-.,-_.,..-._ .._-.-R-¢-..-.1...»-:=.-:------ .~ .-;.-r= -. - -
92
~I
-
"IE
.;.
:1.
P ."
._
-.5
._-'92
3'
4_
.34 J
J
923'
*7:
. Q
-
" 92
v--_P-11;,
5}
92
.-;-
J; ._.- _Q-if
. L
.»'.;.
4-A
- _.a '~.1
-'Iemorandum C. D. Brennan to Ir. I. C. Bullivani '*
IE2 ELECTRONIC SURVEILLBHCES
56-8160 ...
-.-.~_ _a; ., V _
Q |-'
- F -
.' I.1, . I
organized crime, kidnapping, and matters wherein human life 5;
night be at stake. c _ ,"~- . -..',- . _'
On July 16, 1964, the Director, in a telephone conversa-
tion with the President, discussed the FBI's investigation of fi.
events surrounding the murder of Negro educator Lemuel Penn on o-
a Georgia highway. During this tdbphone conversation, the Director
told the
building
Georgia. ,;~
Policy Under Nicholas deB. Katzenbach . ix _ _ ;-r;President that the FBI had installed a microphone in a
next to the garage where Klansnen gathered in Athens,
Attorney General Katzenbach, in a conversation with
the Director on larch 30, 1965, stated that he would like to §"~»' -
set up a procedure, similar to that in effect concerning
surveillances, whereby he would be advised by the Bureau
microphone surveillance installations. On the same day,
Director sent a memorandum to the Attorney General which
the following: ' _ _ ~. - ;
"In line with your suggestion this morning, I
' have already set up the procedure similar to
requesting of authority for phone taps to be
utilized in requesting authority for the -
placement of microphones." , o ~' 'technical
of - I
the *
contained
The Attorney General, on July 12, 1965, informed the
Director that he would like to have all microphone surveillances
suspended at that time, because of the pressure being brought to P
bear, particularly on the Internal Revenue Service, by the United '
States Senate Subcommittee on Administrative Practice and Procedure
aicrophone surveillance coverage.~; ~'v__l_ vsheaded by Senator Long of Missouri. The Attorney General said that
he wanted to be in a position to state that the FBI had no gt-;_ .
In response to several requests from the Bureau for guide-
lines in the use of special investigative techniques, attorney
General Katzenbach, by memorandum dated September 27, l965,¢ .*
advised that microphone surveillances should be restricted to the
internal security field. After the Attorney General again granted
the FBI authority to use microphone surveillances to gather -
intelligence in national security matters, the Bureau, following the
procedure established by Ir. Katzenbach to obtain his authorization,
reactivated microphone our eillance in selected cases. ;. G E-il-i oo1~rrmmn-ovm-
92:§ '
I
.92_-
R
K
"l
0".
1
Q-
_-.,'.. --92-.
92
5. *'
V.
-2.
_»-.
i--_. W' '1
1 ":'s _:__-Ii'1
-.1
Q'5"
v -
--r.-. .-knwe
' 11.1!
.r
.,~ "'5' -E _
F5. __J '* .
__ .-5.,-,-I-:92_ E vs... I-, . 0 T 1
._ _ '_ .,--qn -- ..' - j . '-'-._ i
Ienorandum C. D. Brennan to Ir. I. C. Sullivan ' *
RE: ELECTRONIC SURVEILLANCES . ' ,-; F
66-8160 %;g;
In a nenorandum dated January 13, 1966, Attorney General .
latzenbach referred to the relationship between 1ormer-Attorney- '
General Kennedy and the FBI in regard to the use of microphone.
Iurveillances in the investigation of organized crime. e '?Q
Ir. Katzenbach stated that Hr. Kennedy had informed bin that"he.'
Ias unaware that the FBI used microphone surveillances against,
organized crime. Hr. Katzenbach stated, however, he believed, "that
the actions of the ?BI in this area were in any event justified on
the basis oi understandings between the Bureau and prior pre-1961!
Attorneys General. I am prepared to stand behind those actions."92
Policy Under Ramseygglarg '~e_ e=#*eA g bi-
ne General on YY At the time Clark became Acting Attor
October 3, 1966, the Bureau was operating onl
. This was at the request oi t
OBSERVATIONS: . ' . '
A review oi policy concerning wiretaps and microphone
surveillances discloses that the Director's policyhas always .,
been on iirm and sound basis. He has continually publicly
stressed that, where wiretaps are necessary, they should be
-limited and tightly restricted. He has always acted under »
- the rules set down by respective Presidents and Attorneys .-
General. G e .31" * "- ~¥
,,s- I I 7" l92 /
5. -11¢