Ask the Scholar
Document scope · 1 page
Scholar
Ask about this object, its catalog metadata, its source description, or the page inventory.
For page-specific OCR and visual context, open one of the page chats.
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
284842015
label
[Maggie Williams Mail 1995-1996]: T
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
284842015
contentType
document
title
[Maggie Williams Mail 1995-1996]: T
citationUrl
collections
Records of the First Lady's Office (Clinton Administration)
Margaret “Maggie” Williams’ Correspondence Files
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
284842015
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
otherTitles
42-t-282995179-20130359S-Seg1-012-001-2015
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
c33de44780e961e0
ocrText
Withdrawal/Redaction Sheet
Clinton Library
DOCUMENT NO.
SUBJECT/TITLE
DATE
RESTRICTION
AND TYPE
001a. letter
To constituent from Margaret A. Williams re: letter (partial) (1 page)
01/04/96
b(6)
001b. letter
To Margaret A. Williams from constituent re: daughter (partial) (1
11/27/95
b(6)
page)
001c. envelope
To Margaret A. Williams (partial) (1 page)
11/28/95
b(6)
COLLECTION:
Clinton Presidential Records
First Lady's Office
Maggie Williams (Correspondence)
OA/Box Number: 12630
FOLDER TITLE:
[Maggie Williams Mail 1995-1996]: T
2013-0359-S
ry1341
RESTRICTION CODES
Presidential Records Act - [44 U.S.C. 2204(a)]
Freedom of Information Act - 15 U.S.C. 552(b)]
P1 National Security Classified Information [(a)(1) of the PRA|
b(1) National security classified information [(b)(1) of the FOIA]
P2 Relating to the appointment to Federal office [(a)(2) of the PRA]
b(2) Release would disclose internal personnel rules and practices of
P3 Release would violate a Federal statute |(a)(3) of the PRA]
an agency [(b)(2) of the FOIA]
P4 Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or
b(3) Release would violate a Federal statute |(b)(3) of the FOIA]
financial information [(a)(4) of the PRA]
b(4) Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential or financial
P5 Release would disclose confidential advice between the President
information |(b)(4) of the FOIA]
and his advisors, or between such advisors |a)(5) of the PRA|
b(6) Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
P6 Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy [(b)(6) of the FOIA]
personal privacy [(a)(6) of the PRA]
b(7) Release would disclose information compiled for law enforcement
purposes |(b)(7) of the FOIA]
C. Closed in accordance with restrictions contained in donor's deed
b(8) Release would disclose information concerning the regulation of
of gift.
financial institutions |(b)(8) of the FOIA]
PRM. Personal record misfile defined in accordance with 44 U.S.C.
b(9) Release would disclose geological or geophysical information
2201(3).
concerning wells |(b)(9) of the FOIA]
RR. Document will be reviewed upon request.
FiLE
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
November 27, 1995
Ms. Judy B. Thomas
Chairperson
The Jesse Stuart Foundation
P. O. Box 391
Ashland, KY 41114
Dear Ms. Thomas:
Your letter to Hillary Rodham Clinton of October
27, 1995 has been referred to me for a response. Please
excuse our delay in getting back to you.
As you may know, Simon & Schuster is publishing
Mrs. Clinton's book. The initial plans for Mrs. Clinton's
appearances in conjunction with the publication of her book
are being handled by Simon & Schuster. Accordingly, I would
suggest that you get in touch with Victoria Meyer of Simon &
Schuster about any request that you may wish to make for an
appearance by Mrs. Clinton. Ms. Meyer's address is 1230
Avenue of the Americas, New York, New York 10020.
As you might imagine, Mrs. Clinton has received
dozens of requests to make appearances in conjunction with
the publication of her book. It will, of course, not be
possible to honor them all. We hope that you will
understand.
Mrs. Clinton has asked me to thank you for writing
and for your kind words.
Maranadh Margaret Williams
Sincerely,
Assistant to the President and
Chief of Staff for
Hillary Rodham Clinton
Please File
LAW OFFICES
VINCENT J. FULLER
GREGORY B. CRAIG
GERSON A. ZWEIFACH
RAYMOND W. BERGAN
JOHN J BUCKLEY, JR.
PAUL MOGIN
WILLIAMS & CONNOLLY
JEREMIAH C. COLLINS
TERRENCE O'DONNELL
HOWARD W. GUTMAN
ROBERT L. WEINBERG
DOUGLAS R MARVIN
NANCY F. LESSER
DAVID POVICH
JOHN K. VILLA
RICHARD S. HOFFMAN
725 TWELFTH STREET, N.W.
STEVEN M. UMIN
BARRY S. SIMON
STEVEN A. STEINBACH
JOHN W. VARDAMAN
KEVIN T BAINE
MARK S. LEVINSTEIN
PAUL MARTIN WOLFF
STEPHEN L. URBANCZYK
MARY G. CLARK
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005
J. ALAN CALBRAITH
PHILIP J. WARD
DANIEL F. KATZ
JOHN C. KESTER
FREDERICK WHITTEN PETERS
NICOLE K. SELIGMAN
(202) 434-5000
WILLIAM E. MCDANIELS
JAMES A. BRUTON, III
ROBERT M. KRASNE
BRENDAN V. SULLIVAN, JR.
PETER J. KAHN
KATHLEEN L. BEGGS
AUBREY M. DANIEL, III
LON 5. BABBY
WILLIAM R MURRAY, JR.
FAX (202) 434-5029
RICHARD M. COOPER
MICHAEL S. SUNDERMEYER
EVA PETKO ESBER
CERALD A FEFFER
JAMES T. FULLER, III
STEPHEN D RABER
ROBERT P WATKINS
DAVID D AUFHAUSER
JOHN D. CLINE
EDWARD BENNETT WILLIAMS (1920-1988)
JERRY L SHULMAN
BRUCE R. GENDERSON
DAVID C KIERNAN
PAUL R. CONNOLLY (1922-1978)
LAWRENCE LUCCHINO
CAROLYN H. WILLIAMS
LON E. MUSSLEWHITE
LEWIS H FERGUSON, III
F. LANE HEARD III
ROBIN E JACOBSOHN
ROBERT B BARNETT
STEVEN R. KUNEY
CHARLES A SWEET
DAVID E. KENDALL
November 27, 1995
Ms. Margaret Williams
Assistant to the President and
Chief of Staff for Hillary Rodham Clinton
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20510
Dear Maggie:
Enclosed is a draft of a response to the enclosed
letter from Judy B. Thomas. If it meets with your approval,
please have it signed and sent. Then, please return a copy to us
for our files.
Thanks very much.
Sincerely,
David Pin E. Kendall
DEK/spf
The Jesse Stuart Foundation
Preserving the legacy of Jesse Stuart, W-Hollow, and the Appalachian way of life
October 27, 1995
Mrs. Hillary Rodham Clinton
The White House
Washington, DC
Dear Mrs. Clinton:
I am the President of the Ashland Inc. Foundation, and I am also involved
with a number of local educational and cultural organizations. I am writing to you in
my capacity as Chairperson of the Board of Directors of the Jesse Stuart
Foundation, a non-profit educational publishing house.
The Stuart Foundation is a regional press with specific goals: We want to
provide books and materials that will help the people of Appalachia--and
particularly the school children--understand their own history and culture and, thus,
develop a more positive self image. We have published books by Jesse Stuart, Billy
C. Clark, Thomas D. Clark, Loyal Jones, and Harry M. Caudill, to name just a few
of our best known authors.
Although we are a small organization, I am proud of our accomplishments.
Over the last decade, working with civic organizations and individuals, we have
distributed more than $500,000.00 worth of books, free of charge, to schools,
school children, and libraries in Kentucky and Southern Appalachia. In many ways,
the JSF is supplementing our educational system, at all levels, with books and
materials that help to promote and preserve the solid values that make America
great. I enclose some printed materials that will help you develop a better feel for
our work, along with gift copies of some of our books.
I am writing to request your assistance. Let me briefly outline a few areas
where you could help us, and if you find that your busy schedule allows you to be
involved in our good work, then we could iron out the details at your convenience.
THE JESSE STUART FOUNDATION
P.O. BOX 391
ASHLAND, KY 41114
329-5232 or 329-5233
1)
Would you be willing to speak at a fund-raising dinner? If you can
give us an evening, we will put together a fund-raising dinner that you
will truly enjoy.
2)
Would you be willing to donate some signed copies of your
forthcoming book, It Takes A Village?
3)
Based on the quality of our books and our educational mission, would
you consider allowing us to publish a book of yours in the future?
Along with this letter comes my genuine respect for all that you have
accomplished.
Sincerely,
July Judy B. B Thomas Thomas
Chairperson
JBT:bct
Enclosures
35:clinton.wpd
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
June 20, 1995
Carol and Robert Tirrell
25761 Sabina Avenue
Mission Viego, CA 92691
Dear Mr. and Mrs. Tirrell:
I appreciate you sharing with me your concerns about the
issue of mandatory minimum sentencing and how it has affected
your family.
I have forwarded your letter to the White House Office of
Agency Liaison, where your daughter's case will be reviewed.
Please feel free to follow-up with Agency Liaison in the future.
Sincerely,
Margaret A. Williams
Chief of Staff to the First Lady
1
war
form letter
pes do for
Maggies
Signature
Drave
I
CAROL M. TIRRELL
25761 Sabina Avenue - Mission Viejo, CA 92691
714 837-9520
May 23, 1995
Margaret A. Williams
Chief of Staff
Office of the First Lady
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20500
LEGENDARY LOS ANGELES DRUG LORD SENTENCED TO FIVE YEARS: THIRTY-SIX
YEAR OLD WIDOW (HUSBAND RECENTLY DIED FROM CANCER), MOTHER OF THREE
CHILDREN, NO PRIOR CRIMINAL HISTORY OF ANY KIND, RAPIDLY ADVANCED FROM
BANK TELLER TO ASSISTANT VICE-PRESIDENT - BRANCH MANAGER, NO THREAT TO
SOCIETY, SENTENCED TO TWENTY-FOUR YEARS, FOUR MONTHS.
Dear Ms Williams:
My name is Carol Tirrell and my husband's name is Richard. We live in Mission Viejo,
California. As you have probably already guessed, our daughter, Deborah Mendes, is
the one sentenced to twenty-four years four months in a federal prison. I am writing to
ask your help in correcting a terrible wrong. Is there justice in a system that allows drug
lords like Ricky Ross to serve only five years while our daughter has to serve twenty-
four years, four months? I do not think so.
Mandatory minimum sentencing serves only to punish the innocent and/or minor drug
offenders. The real drug conspirators and drug lords either: remain free because they
have the connections and money to buy their freedom; or, if they are apprehended they
have information to trade for a substantial reduction in their sentence.
The unfairness of mandatory minimum sentencing is not just an idea unique to us as
grieving parents. The following is an excerpt from a letter written to Debbie by the
attorney we hired to handle her appeal: "I am convinced that like many people who
come into contact with our overly punitive federal criminal justice system, you have
received an unbelievably harsh sentence which bears no meaningful relationship to your
alleged criminal conduct and which fails to take into consideration your remarkable
record of achievement at the Bank of America, the difficult personal circumstances
which led you to leave the bank and go to work for Edward Arvizu and Richard Ramos,
and the tremendous hardship your conviction and imprisonment has caused for your
parents and children. These critical issues are ignored in a Guideline sentencing
system which, in drug cases, focuses on the quantity of contraband and ignores
Ms Williams
Page 2
May 23, 1995
everything else. Hopefully, Congress and the public will come to realize that this
inhumane system of "sentencing by the numbers" simply does not work. Until then,
people such as yourself will continue to be brutalized."
Debbie made a very serious mistake. Her mistake, because of mandatory minimum
sentencing, resulted in a prison sentence of twenty-four years four months. In all
probability, my husband and I will not live to see Debbie released from prison.
I am afraid our sheltered life in "suburbia" did not prepare any of us for the world of;
drug dealers, unscrupulous federal agents, overzealous federal prosecutors, inept public
defenders, puppet judges, and mandatory minimum sentencing. Unfortunately, we
thought Debbie simply had to turn herself in, tell her story and "liberty and justice for all"
would prevail. How very naive we were.
To give you a brief summary of Debbie's case I have attached the following:
1. Procedural History and Statement of Facts (from a petition for rehearing
her appeal)
2. Our letter to Judge Harry Hupp dated May 13, 1993
3. A letter from Debbie to Judge Harry Hupp dated May 16, 1993
Debbie's record and accomplishments while incarcerated the past three years show the
kind of person she really is. Not only does she continue to excel even while in prison
and under very difficult circumstances; she also continues to help others around her.
In summary, my husband joins me in a plea for any help you can give us. At this point,
even a chance for re-sentencing under fair and just criteria instead of the "guideline
system" would indeed seem like a miracle.
Thank you for your time and careful consideration to this letter.
Yours truly,
baroe m. Firrell
RLTniell
Carol M. Tirrell
Richard L. Tirrell
Enc.
P.S. I have also attached a copy of the Los Angeles Times article about Ricky Ross.
CAROL M. TIRRELL
25761 Sabina Avenue - Mission Viejo, CA 92691
714 837-9520
May 23, 1995
Margaret A. Williams
Chief of Staff
Office of the First Lady
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20500
LEGENDARY LOS ANGELES DRUG LORD SENTENCED TO FIVE YEARS; THIRTY-SIX
YEAR OLD WIDOW (HUSBAND RECENTLY DIED FROM CANCER), MOTHER OF THREE
CHILDREN, NO PRIOR CRIMINAL HISTORY OF ANY KIND, RAPIDLY ADVANCED FROM
BANK TELLER TO ASSISTANT VICE-PRESIDENT - BRANCH MANAGER, NO THREAT TO
SOCIETY, SENTENCED TO TWENTY-FOUR YEARS, FOUR MONTHS.
Dear Ms Williams:
My name is Carol Tirrell and my husband's name is Richard. We live in Mission Viejo,
California. As you have probably already guessed, our daughter, Deborah Mendes, is
the one sentenced to twenty-four years four months in a federal prison. I am writing to
ask your help in correcting a terrible wrong. Is there justice in a system that allows drug
lords like Ricky Ross to serve only five years while our daughter has to serve twenty-
four years, four months? I do not think so.
Mandatory minimum sentencing serves only to punish the innocent and/or minor drug
offenders. The real drug conspirators and drug lords either: remain free because they
have the connections and money to buy their freedom; or, if they are apprehended they
have information to trade for a substantial reduction in their sentence.
The unfairness of mandatory minimum sentencing is not just an idea unique to us as
grieving parents. The following is an excerpt from a letter written to Debbie by the
attorney we hired to handle her appeal: "I am convinced that like many people who
come into contact with our overly punitive federal criminal justice system, you have
received an unbelievably harsh sentence which bears no meaningful relationship to your
alleged criminal conduct and which fails to take into consideration your remarkable
record of achievement at the Bank of America, the difficult personal circumstances
which led you to leave the bank and go to work for Edward Arvizu and Richard Ramos,
and the tremendous hardship your conviction and imprisonment has caused for your
parents and children. These critical issues are ignored in a Guideline sentencing
system which, in drug cases, focuses on the quantity of contraband and ignores
Ms Williams
Page 2
May 23, 1995
everything else. Hopefully, Congress and the public will come to realize that this
inhumane system of "sentencing by the numbers" simply does not work. Until then,
people such as yourself will continue to be brutalized."
Debbie made a very serious mistake. Her mistake, because of mandatory minimum
sentencing, resulted in a prison sentence of twenty-four years four months. In all
probability, my husband and I will not live to see Debbie released from prison.
I am afraid our sheltered life in "suburbia" did not prepare any of us for the world of;
drug dealers, unscrupulous federal agents, overzealous federal prosecutors, inept public
defenders, puppet judges, and mandatory minimum sentencing. Unfortunately, we
thought Debbie simply had to turn herself in, tell her story and "liberty and justice for all"
would prevail. How very naive we were.
To give you a brief summary of Debbie's case I have attached the following:
1. Procedural History and Statement of Facts (from a petition for rehearing
her appeal)
2. Our letter to Judge Harry Hupp dated May 13, 1993
3. A letter from Debbie to Judge Harry Hupp dated May 16, 1993
Debbie's record and accomplishments while incarcerated the past three years show the
kind of person she really is. Not only does she continue to excel even while in prison
and under very difficult circumstances; she also continues to help others around her.
In summary, my husband joins me in a plea for any help you can give us. At this point,
even a chance for re-sentencing under fair and just criteria instead of the "guideline
system" would indeed seem like a miracle.
Thank you for your time and careful consideration to this letter.
Yours truly,
baroe m. Firrell
R.LTuill
Carol M. Tirrell
Richard L. Tirrell
Enc.
P.S. I have also attached a copy of the Los Angeles Times article about Ricky Ross.
Sting Snares
'Reformed'
Drug Lord
By JESSE KATZ
TIMES STATE WRITER
Ricky Donnell Ross. the legend-
ary Los Angeles drug lord who
vowed to pursue a legitimate busi-
ness career after his release from
prison last fall. has been indicted
for allegedly purchasing 100 kilo-
grams of cocaine from an under-
cover agent, authorities said Tues-
day.
Ross, 35-a charismatic, dread-
locked, ex-millionaire better
known as Freeway Rick - could
face a life sentence if convicted. He
has pleaded not guilty and is being
held without bail in a federal
detention facility in San Diego
County,
Ross rose to infamy in the 1980s.
building South-Central Los Angel-
es' first multimillion-dollar crack
ring, then expanding his operation
into a coast-to-coast conglomerate
that sold more than 500,000 nug-
gets of the drug every day.
His enterprise grewso large and
so fast that Los Angeles authorities
eventually formed the Freeway
Rick Task Force. an elite squad of
veteran detectives whose sole mis-
sion was to shut him down.
Instead, the officers became
mired in the worst money-skim-
ming scandal in local law enforce-
ment history, which gave Ross a
bargaining chip when he was final-
ly arrested for interstate traffick
ing in 1989. In exchange for testify-
ing against the officers who had
hunted him, one of America's top
cocaine wholesalers walked out of
prison last September after five
years.
Soon after he was paroled, ac-
cording to law enforcement au-
thorities, Ross began getting in-
volved in the drug trade again. In
documents filed in U.S. District
Court, officials allege that he and
several cohorts met with a federal
informant Feb. 23 in the San Diego
area. where they discussed pur-
chasing 100 kilos of cocaine.
1.
COPY
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
Deborah Lynn Mendes was convicted, following a jury trial, of conspiracy to aid and
abet the distribution of cocaine and related offenses. On July 20, 1993, United States District
Judge Harry L. Hupp sentenced Ms. Mendes to concurrent prison terms of 292 months on each
count of conviction.
Ms. Mendes filed a timely notice of appeal and the case was argued and submitted to this
court on December 6, 1994. On March 2, 1995, the court issued a memorandum decision
affirming Ms. Mendes' convictions on all counts except for conspiracy to structure currency
deposits, which was reversed for instructional error. A copy of the memorandum decision is
attached as Exhibit "A."
II.
STATEMENT OF FACTS
The indictment alleged that Joseph Arvizu and Richard Ramos supervised the distribution
of large quantities of cocaine imported into the United States from Mexico and that Deborah
Mendes assisted Arvizu and Ramos in their drug trafficking activities by managing their funds,
purchasing and leasing residences and commercial warehouses to store cocaine, and depositing
drug proceeds in less than $10,000 increments to avoid federal currency reporting requirements.
Ms. Mendes is a 37 year old widowed mother of three children who has no prior criminal
record. From 1976 until February 1991, she had a successful career at the Bank of America,
where she rose through the ranks from teller to Manager of Branch Operations. In April 1990,
Ms. Mendes met Richard Ramos, a former practicing attorney who had several commercial
accounts at the Bank of America branch where Ms. Mendes worked. Ramos told Ms. Mendes
that he represented a group of foreign investors who were involved in real estate and other
1
business transactions in the United States and overseas. Later in the year, Ramos introduced
Ms. Mendes to Joseph Arvizu and told her that he was a member of the investment group. In
February 1991, Ms. Mendes left the bank and took a position with one of Ramos' companies.
The charges against Ms. Mendes arise out of her employment relationship with Ramos and
Arvizu.
Although the prosecution called 70 witnesses at trial, none of these witnesses provided
first-hand testimony that Deborah Mendes knowingly and willfully participated in a conspiracy
to distribute cocaine. Instead, the prosecution based its case entirely on circumstantial evidence
relating to Ms. Mendes' involvement in financial and real estate transactions on behalf of Arvizu
and Ramos. The memorandum decision concludes that this evidence was sufficient to sustain
Ms. Mendes' convictions.
III.
GROUNDS FOR REHEARING OR REHEARING EN BANC
Ms. Mendes' appeal argued, among other things, that the district court improperly
admitted expert testimony from law enforcement agents regarding the purported modus operandi
of cocaine trafficking organizations. In particular, Ms. Mendes contended that: (1) the expert
testimony related to matters within the common knowledge and experience of the jury and was
therefore inadmissible under Rule 702 of the Federal Rules of Evidence; and (2) the testimony
was unduly prejudicial because it was designed to equate virtually everything that Ms. Mendes
did with the conduct of drug traffickers and to undermine her lack of knowledge defense before
it was presented to the jury.
The memorandum decision summarily rejects this argument, noting that "[t]he testimony
likely helped the jury to understand how the activities of the various defendants advanced the
aims of the conspiracy" and that "the risk of unfair prejudice did not substantially outweigh the
2
COPY
Carol M. And Richard L. Tirrell
25761 Sabina Avenue
Mission Viejo, CA 92691
May 13, 1993
The Honorable Harry Hupp
United States District Judge
312 North Spring Street
Los Angeles, CA 90012
Dear Judge Hupp:
We are writing regarding the sentencing of our daughter Deborah Lynn
Mendes, on June 28, 1993. We are appealing to you to consider the
following in determining her sentence and also in determining where she
is to serve that sentence.
This whole thing is just incredible, like a terrifying nightmare that
keeps reoccurring night, after night, after night, after night, after
Debbie is not a criminal and certainly is not guilty of a
conspiracy to traffic cocaine. If she is guilty of anything, it is
trusting the wrong people and making some bad decisions. However, to
turn an exceptionally productive life into that of a hardened criminal
for having made some bad decisions and for having misplaced her trust
seems an unconscionable miscarriage of justice.
If we had know that the "System" does not protect the innocent as well
as punish the guilty, we would have encouraged Debbie to stay in Mexico
and given her our blessing and support in doing SO.
Debbie has always been bright, ambitious, and a "take charge" person.
As you can see by the numerous congratulatory letters (copies enclosed)
she received while at Bank of America, she is a hard worker and has
always been dedicated to her job, no matter what it is.
Her husband Mike, was always "Mr. Mom" and as such he was a tremendous
help to her. When he suddenly passed away the realization that she
would have all the responsibility of; being the sole provider, running
the household without any help, and more importantly raising the
children as a single parent, was more that she could deal with.
Unfortunately, she tried to escape this new and overwhelming
responsibility by turning to the use of alcohol and drugs. Granted,
this is no excuse for associating with and working for the people she
did. Her out of control behavior contributed to her lack of awareness
The Honorable Harry Hupp
Page 2
May 13, 1993
Re: Deborah L. Mendes
about what was really going on until it was too late. Ultimately, this
led her to where she is today.
Unwarranted trust in others has always been a problem for Debbie. She
gives everyone the benefit of the doubt and will do anything in her
power to help them. She has always been an extremely giving person,
both of herself and all of her resources. As a teenager, while her
sisters worked at Basking Robbins serving ice-cream during the summer;
Debbie worked at Beverly Manor Nursing Home where she could help the
elderly during their confinement.
Consequently, Debbie's unwarranted trust in Richard Ramos and his
associates was misplaced and used against her. The real criminals in
this case found in Debbie, the ideal person to set-up. The prosecution
was just as guilty by using Debbie as a means to justify the two years
of man power and resources they expended on this case. They had their
"Scapegoat" when Debbie came back from Mexico on her own. There was
never any attempt to apprehend and extradite "Eddie", the head of this
narcotic's ring and the person that really belongs behind bars for the
rest of his life. This blatant lack of pursuit by the prosecution and
the complete lack of discrimination on the part of the prosecution as to
the real criminals in this case put them in the same class as Richard
Ramos and Eddie Arvezu. For, it not only shows rampant professional
irresponsibility, but also a gross disregard of the very laws they are
supposed to be enforcing.
Accordingly, the prosecution's witnesses were either paid or were given
immunity for their testimony against Debbie. Why isn't the woman who
sold some property to Richard Ramos and accepted $100,000.00 in a brown
paper bag from him, in jail for money laundering?? Evidently, it did
not seem unusual to this woman that the property remained in her name.
How odd no one thought it suspicious that she did not go to the police
because just maybe this seemed a "little" questionable. Yet, during
the trial the prosecution took this very fact, turned it around and used
it to incriminate Debbie. This is typical of the way the prosecution
and federal agents distorted the facts throughout the whole case and
subsequent trial.
Furthermore, Debbie told them when she first came back from Mexico to
follow Richardo and he would lead them to Eddie. They spent untold
resources to convict an innocent person yet what did they do to try to
apprehend the head of this major narcotic ring? Nothing, Absolutely
Nothing! As a result, Eddie is free to continue one of the most vile
crimes of all, drug trafficking. Has justice prevailed in this case?
We think not!
Debbie has spent ten months caged up like an animal because the
prosecution misrepresented the facts at her bail hearing and later at
The Honorable Harry Hupp
Page 3
May 13, 1993
Re: Deborah L. Mendes
the trial. Now she faces a life time of incarceration simply because
she had the courage and conviction to come back from Mexico to clear her
name. Enclosed are copies of some letters Debbie has written to us
while at MDC. These show the kind of person Debbie really is and will
better explain how she became mixed up in this nightmare.
Debbie honestly and sincerely believed that Morris Trucking and Cromwell
Van Conversions were to be viable companies. She spoke to us often
about how she wanted to be in charge of Morris Trucking so she could
"turn it around". It got to be a family joke because no one else could
get a word in when Debbie was around. She always had so many thoughts
she wanted to share about her new job. Debbie was especially
enthusiastic about getting a larger computer system so they could tie in
the Oakland system and she was told several times she would be going to
Oakland to learn this system. Richard Ramos also promised her that she
could replace Michael Tan so she could "get the business going". She
was tremendously excited at being "in charge" as this is what Debbie
loves most. The promises and stories they used to control her went on
and on.
By the time she began having suspicions, she was so infatuated with
Ricardo she believed whatever he told her. When everyone left her
"holding the bag" she had no fear about the consequences of drug
trafficking because she knew she was not involved. Instead, her biggest
worry was trying to pay all the bills on the many accounts that were in
her name. She borrowed on her credit cards, she borrowed money from us,
and finally took out an 18% second on her house trying to hold on. She
still firmly believed that these people she worked for and trusted would
do the right thing by paying her the money they owed her on the hair
salon and reimburse her for the other expenses she had covered for them.
Of course, this did not happen and she lost everything that she had
worked so hard for all her life. This for Debbie, was the ultimate
punishment. Little did she realize this was only the beginning of a
nightmare that would eventually result in imprisonment, separating her
from her children and her family.
In one of Debbie's letters she quotes part of a letter written by
Letticia Garcia, one of the many given immunity by the prosecution for
saying the "right things" as a government witness. What Ms Garcia wrote
in a letter to Debbie completely contradicts her testimony as a witness
and states quite clearly "you are not quilty" again showing Debbie's
lack of involvement in drug trafficking.
Richard Callahan has the original letter from Ms Garcia and we have no
idea why it was never entered as evidence during the trial. Of course,
there are a good many things we do not understand about Debbie's
defense. Why was she promised by Mr. Callahan, from the beginning, that
The Honorable Harry Hupp
Page 4
May 13, 1993
Re: Deborah L. Mendes
a private investigator would be hired to find witnesses and evidence to
help her; yet, this was not done because of "lack of funds"?? Also, why
the witness in Oklahoma, who could prove Debbie was not at that second
meeting, was not summoned to testify??
We were willing to let our home be used as collateral for Debbie's bail,
which was ultimately refused. Furthermore, we are going to continue
fighting for Debbie because we believe in her and believe in her
innocence. We are willing to put everything we have worked thirty years
to acquire, on the line and are prepared to do whatever it takes to help
her get out of the horrendous situation. Debbie is not guilty of drug
trafficking and justice demands that she be set free so she can be
reunited with her family and once again become a productive member of
society.
Ultimately, the truth lies in the following: Knowing she was innocent,
knowing the seriousness of the charges within the indictment, knowing
the extreme penalties involved if convicted, and knowing that she would
be met at the airport by federal agents and immediately put in jail, she
stepped on the airplane in Mexico and returned voluntarily so she could
clear her name and try to regain a degree of normalcy in her life.
Pretty scary? You bet! That step took more courage that we will ever
have. What about you?
We are asking for your compassion and to analyze the evidence presented
by the prosecution in its attempt to prove her guilty by "association".
Also, that in determining her sentence you do SO with the knowledge that
she did not have to come back from Mexico, something the jury was never
allowed to know. Please take into consideration all the years she has
been a devoted and loving daughter, wife, and mother; her excellent
record as a productive, energetic, and dependable employee; and, her
complete lack of any previous criminal behavior. Finally, we pray she
can be sent to a facility with a less "hardened criminal" environment
until she is finally cleared of all money laundering and drug
trafficking charges.
Sincerely,
Carol M. Tirrell and Richard L. Tirrell
Enc.
Deborah Lynn Mendes #97744-012
COPY
Metropolitan Detention Center
P.O. Box 1500
Los Angeles, CA 90053
May 16, 1993
The Honorable Harry Hupp
United States District Judge
312 North Spring Street
Los Angeles, CA 90012
Dear Judge Hupp:
Your Honor, I am respectfully writing this letter to you regarding my scheduled sentencing
on June 28, 1993. I appreciate your taking the time to read and consider it carefully.
First, Let my say that I am terribly embarrassed and disappointed in myself, in the tragic
circumstances leading up to my incarceration, and in the necessity to have appeared before
you in your courtroom. Additionally, let me thank you for your handling of the trial
proceedings. You did as you saw appropriate given the information presented at the trial by
all concerned. I also feel the necessity of conveying my extreme disappointment in the
outcome of the trial and consider it a terrible miscarriage of justice.
I will be the first to admit that I made some inappropriate decisions and broke the law by
structuring financial transactions, which I admitted to in court. I am very sorry for my
actions and am prepared to be punished for these actions. However, I am quite shocked
and amazed that someone can be convicted of drug trafficking and even conspiracy to drug
trafficking with absolutely no knowledge of such a crime. The prosecution presented
approximately eighty witnesses, not one of which testified that I had any knowledge or was
ever present in a discussion regarding drug trafficking or handling drug money.
Furthermore, I was never at any location where drugs were present. The prosecution's
theory was based solely on assumptions and "how could she have been so ignorant that
she did not know what was going on". Where was their corroborating evidence??
I would like you to consider on my behalf, some indisputable facts. I think first it would be
helpful for you to understand the circumstances more clearly if I start with my background.
I have always been employed in the area of public service. My first job at fourteen years of
age was as a nurse's aide at Beverly Manor convalescent Hospital. I am a real "people
person" and have always put all of my love, effort, and resources into helping others. I
worked for Bank of America for fifteen years and had exemplary work performance
throughout my employment. This is supported by letters my parents have sent to you. Ten
years of my employment was spent in branch and administrative management. My first
position at age eighteen was that of a Teller and I worked my way up to Assistant Vice
President, Branch Manager, which was my last position held. I received employee of the
month and manager of the year awards consistently throughout my career.
The Honorable Harry Hupp
Page 2
May 16, 1993
I have led an extremely productive, stable and honest life for thirty-four years, until 1991.
There is absolutely no criminal history connected to any member of my family or myself.
One of my character traits is that I am a very trusting person and I have always felt people
should be trusted and given a chance. The most difficult part of my job at the bank was
when I discovered a dishonest employee and I had to terminate their employment. I always
took it very personally and shared many emotional moments with departing employees,
offering them my personal forgiveness, love, and support.
My life was very structured during my fifteen years at Bank of America and consisted of
working fifty to sixty hours a week. At the same time I worked equally hard at being a
loving wife and mother of three children. I managed to find time almost every week-end to
pack food and gear for trips to the Colorado River where we could enjoy family activities. I
was unable to maintain personal friendships apart from the bank due to my managerial
obligations, responsibilities, and the conflict of employee and employer relationships. Thus,
my private life consisted only of my family.
After the sudden and tragic death of my husband in 1990, I was faced with having to
support and raise my children alone. I had lived outside my parents home since I was
eighteen years old and was determined to be a survivor and maintain my independence.
There came a time when the stress and depression became too much to handle and I turned
to drugs and alcohol to try to fill the void. I later sought and received professional help for
my addiction. I started friendships outside my family environment that proved to be
inadequate to replace the loss I felt. True to my nature, I was still very loving and giving. I
opened up my home, my heart, and my pocketbook to many people. I was naive to the
fact that people saw this as a weakness and took advantage of my generosity for their
personal gain. Such is the case with Richard Ramos and his friends.
Because Mr. Ramos presented himself as an attorney, I trusted him and did not question his
story about representing "foreign investors" and the companies Cromwell Van Conversions
and Morris Transportation. I was so excited about being able to use my financial and
managerial skills to help make their businesses successful; and, at the same time work
independently and be afforded more time to spend with my children. I was given
responsibilities and the latitude to accomplish the tasks as I saw fit. Whenever I asked
questions, I was given reasonable explanations by Mr. Ramos; thus, I had no reason to
become suspicious of their actions. I allowed them to use my name and my credit because
I trusted them. They in turn used me and set me up to "take the fall" if inquires were ever
made by the police.
At the time I became suspicious, in November of 1991, I trusted my boyfriend, Ricardo
Hernandez who gave me the "right" answers to all my questions. Later, I found out he
actually worked for Eddie and was hired to "keep me in line" so to speak and to cover for
the organization.
When I realized I was being followed in November 1991, I became scared and contacted
Bradley Brunnon, an attorney. I asked him to check with the federal agents to see if they
were following me and if so, why. Also, he was to let them know he was my legal counsel
The Honorable Harry Hupp
Page 3
May 16, 1993
and he would bring me in voluntarily for questioning if they suspected me of being involved
in any wrong doing. Inquires were made to an officer Rick Mallow, who flat out lied to Mr.
Brunnon and said "NO", they were not following me and they did not want to talk to me.
There are comments regarding that conversation in affidavits in the discovery evidence.
Mr. Brunnon made a second inquiry in February 1992 on my behalf, because they were still
following me after my move to Tijuana, Mexico. It was very scary not knowing who was
following me after the police again denied it was their officers. It was also VERY
TRAUMATIC FOR MY CHILDREN. Again, the officers gave the same story, "NO" they did
not want me and were not following me. More lies, as evidenced in a discovery affidavit
that states they followed me to a hotel in Tijuana where I was staying.
I will not even go into the facts behind all the prosecution witnesses who lied at the trial.
Unfortunately for me, my attorney Richard Callahan, was inadequate in properly supplying
evidentiary information that I had supplied to him to impeach their testimonies.
In closing I would like to address some "Common Sense" issues:
1.
In an organization such as the one put together by Eddie Arvizu and Richard Ramos,
a woman would never be entrusted in a critical decision making capacity. The prosecution
presented me as a key member, having extensive authority and responsibility in the
organization and operation of this major drug ring. The fact of the matter is, that in a
Hispanic Culture, women are never allowed anything but subservient positions outside the
family home. To suppose that this group would entrust me with knowledge and authority
of the magnitude proported by the prosecution, as befitting my position in the upper
echelon of this male dominated Hispanic organization, is preposterous!
2.
With my background in banking, I would not have taken illegal monies and put them
through my accounts knowing they could be traced directly to me by the police. On the
contrary, with my knowledge and experience in banking, had I known the funds were
illegal, I could have planned and executed an elaborate scheme to hide the funds without
any possibility of my name ever having been associated with them. Not knowing the funds
were illegal and having no reason to hide anything, I was not afraid to do exactly as I did; I
used accounts with my name on them.
3.
I trusted Mr. Ramos who presented himself as an attorney. Most people I know do
tend to believe what an attorney says. I also trusted the police when they told Mr. Brunnon
I was not involved. Shouldn't everyone be able to trust and believe the officials of our
government?
4.
When I received a call from my parents on July 21, 1991, they informed me of my
pending indictment. They gave me all the details of the case including the fact that I would
be facing thirty years to life if I was found guilty and convicted of these charges. Do you
really think I would have come back to face the rest of my life in prison? NO!!! The
prosecution believed this was a huge organization, one able to cover all of its tracks. If I
was guilty, I would have gotten a new identity in Mexico and lived happily ever after. In
fact, I came back because I knew I was innocent and wanted to clear my name.
5.
The federal agents also used unforgivable tactics by telling my parents that if they
did not talk me into coming back from Mexico immediately, my daughter (their
granddaughter) and I would be dead within a week. The agents convinced my parents that
The Honorable Harry Hupp
Page 4
May 16, 1993
once this group found out I was being indicted, they would have me killed to keep me
quiet. According to the prosecution, I was one of the organizers of this group. Why
wouldn't I have gone into hiding like Eddie and some of the others?? I told my parents not
to worry, that I did not know anything that would get me killed. These were outrageous
scare tactics by the federal agents just to get me to come back. The prosecution brought
up the argument in front of my parents at trial so they were unable to testify on my behalf
regarding our conversation.
6.
I was unwilling to take a plea agreement because I refused to plead guilty to
something I did not do. I offered full cooperation to the government. Unfortunately, I did
not know enough or have any information to put myself in a bargaining position.
I came back voluntarily, believing in a "System" of justice that I thought was fair and
equitable. What I have found out since my return and my incarceration, is that if you are
guilty you can bargain and buy yourself a substantially reduced sentence or even, total
immunity. If you are a big enough criminal and have enough money like Eddie Arvizu, you
can buy yourself freedom, Eddie was never apprehended. Did the prosecution ever file
extradition papers with Mexico for Eddie? If you are innocent as I am and try to do the
right thing, you have no recourse. For, without anything to bargain with, you face the
travesties of justice in this country.
Ultimately, I lost everything I worked so hard for all my life; my home, my belongings, and
my credit (which has been ruined). Of even greater importance, I have been separated from
my family and my children who need their mother desperately since their father is
deceased.
Unfortunately, I am not the only one to suffer. My parents are devastated. They feel guilty
because they helped convince me that coming back from Mexico and turning myself in was
the right thing to do. My sisters and their families have also been seriously affected by all
of this. Most of all, my children are suffering. They lost their father three years ago, their
mother one year ago and at the same time lost each other by having to live in separate
homes. My parents are willing to give up their life savings to assist me in an appeal and to
see that justice prevails. They believe in my innocence knowing I am not quilt of drug
trafficking.
Your Honor, thank you for your careful consideration of all the facts in this case. There is a
saying "When God closes a door, He opens a window". My justice comes for the Lord and
I trust Him to guide me through this. I am aware of the guidelines regarding sentencing and
I pray that you find it in your heart to be compassionate in determining my sentence.
Please return some justice to this otherwise tragic situation.
Sincerely,
Deborah L Mendes
expresentence +
of daughter
un just sentancing
Appealing
Carol M. Tirrell
25761 Sabina Avenue
Mission Viejo, CA 92691
Willki
Statesman 1892-1944
The C'Rate make-upistamp
Margaret A. Williams
Chief of Staff
Office of the First Lady
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20500
Withdrawal/Redaction Marker
Clinton Library
DOCUMENT NO.
SUBJECT/TITLE
DATE
RESTRICTION
AND TYPE
001a. letter
To constituent from Margaret A. Williams re: letter (partial) (1 page)
01/04/96
b(6)
COLLECTION:
Clinton Presidential Records
First Lady's Office
Maggie Williams (Correspondence)
OA/Box Number: 12630
FOLDER TITLE:
[Maggie Williams Mail 1995-1996]: T
2013-0359-S
ry1341
RESTRICTION CODES
Presidential Records Act |44 U.S.C. 2204(a)|
Freedom of Information Act 15 U.S.C. 552(b)]
P1 National Security Classified Information |(a)(1) of the PRAJ
b(1) National security classified information |(b)(1) of the FOIA]
P2 Relating to the appointment to Federal office [(a)(2) of the PRA]
b(2) Release would disclose internal personnel rules and practices of
P3 Release would violate a Federal statute |(a)(3) of the PRA]
an agency |(b)(2) of the FOIA]
P4 Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or
b(3) Release would violate a Federal statute |(b)(3) of the FOIA]
financial information |(a)(4) of the PRA]
b(4) Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential or financial
P5 Release would disclose confidential advice between the President
information |(b)(4) of the FOIA]
and his advisors, or between such advisors [a)(5) of the PRA|
b(6) Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
P6 Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy [(b)(6) of the FOIA]
personal privacy [(a)(6) of the PRA]
h(7) Release would disclose information compiled for law enforcement
purposes |(b)(7) of the FOIA|
C. Closed in accordance with restrictions contained in donor's deed
h(8) Release would disclose information concerning the regulation of
of gift.
financial institutions [(b)(8) of the FOIA]
PRM. Personal record misfile defined in accordance with 44 U.S.C.
b(9) Release would disclose geological or geophysical information
2201(3).
concerning wells [(b)(9) of the FOIA]
RR. Document will be reviewed upon request.
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
January 4, 1996
[001a]
(b)(6)
Dear
(b)(6)
:
Your words of support and
encouragement meant so much to me during
the past weeks. It was very kind of you
to take the time to write as you did and I
am grateful.
Please accept my thanks and best
wishes.
Sincerely
Margaret A. Williams
Chief of Staff
to the First Lady
Evan
4 we to Agnay are -
Withdrawal/Redaction Marker
Clinton Library
DOCUMENT NO.
SUBJECT/TITLE
DATE
RESTRICTION
AND TYPE
001b. letter
To Margaret A. Williams from constituent re: daughter (partial) (1
11/27/95
b(6)
page)
COLLECTION:
Clinton Presidential Records
First Lady's Office
Maggie Williams (Correspondence)
OA/Box Number: 12630
FOLDER TITLE:
[Maggie Williams Mail 1995-1996]: T
2013-0359-S
ry1341
RESTRICTION CODES
Presidential Records Act - |44 U.S.C. 2204(a)]
Freedom of Information Act - |5 U.S.C. 552(b)]
P1 National Security Classified Information [(a)(1) of the PRA]
b(1) National security classified information [(b)(1) of the FOIA]
P2 Relating to the appointment to Federal office |(a)(2) of the PRAJ
b(2) Release would disclose internal personnel rules and practices of
P3 Release would violate a Federal statute [(a)(3) of the PRA]
an agency |(b)(2) of the FOIA]
P4 Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or
h(3) Release would violate a Federal statute [(b)(3) of the FOIA]
financial information [(a)(4) of the PRA]
b(4) Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential or financial
P5 Release would disclose confidential advice between the President
information [(b)(4) of the FOIA]
and his advisors, or between such advisors [a)(5) of the PRA]
b(6) Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
P6 Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy |(b)(6) of the FOIA]
personal privacy |(a)(6) of the PRA
b(7) Release would disclose information compiled for law enforcement
purposes |(b)(7) of the FOIA]
C. Closed in accordance with restrictions contained in donor's deed
b(8) Release would disclose information concerning the regulation of
of gift.
financial institutions |(b)(8) of the FOIA]
PRM. Personal record misfile defined in accordance with 44 U.S.C.
b(9) Release would disclose geological or geophysical information
2201(3).
concerning wells |(b)(9) of the FOIA]
RR. Document will be reviewed upon request.
11/27/95
margard A. Williams
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, D.C. 20500
Dear mangaret williams:
I am writing this letter in an attempt to get
help for my 24 year old daughter April. For
approximately 13 years she has been battling
Anorexia, Nervosa, Bulimia and depression. She
has been in and out of hospitals for the past
8 years. The last one was Acadia Hospital for
6 weeks and has been out for about 2 weeks. The
doctors want her to go back in the hospital.
She feels it won't do any good. She has just
about given up on life and all the rejections
haven't helped, it only reinforces her worth
about her life. Why I am writing this letter
because we have been told she needs a long- term
care facility. There is not one available in
the State of Maine. I have called Ca, Pa, Md,
Ma. Fl, Wy, Ga, Ny, Ill, Id, Tx, and Canada.
I have faxed many more as well. We also sent
a letter to Oprah. It's sad when the only place
that we haven't heard from is Canada and Oprah,
with a rejection no news is good news. The answer
is always the same, No money no Insurance = no
help. April doesn't qualify for our Insurance,
because of her age. She did have a job but now
is to sick to work. She has applied for Medicaid
and with Senator Cohen and Snowe's help she was
able to get it sooner. Now that we have Medicaid
all of the facilities I have contacted, say it
is of no use to them they need Medicare or cash
money. She has applied for SSI but this could
take months. I don't feel she has months to live.
My daughters life hangs in a balance right now.
If my daughter should die because of the lack
of money and insurance. It will be such a tragic
loss of life. I will do any thing to save my
daughters life as it is in great danger now.
Can you tell me where to turn for help. I am
a desperate mother trying to get help for my
daughter. I pray this letter will not be over
looked. I am sending copies to persons on the
attached list.
Sincerely
(b)(6)
[00lb]
(b)(6)
(b)(6)
Patricia Schroeder
2208 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington D.C. 20515-0601
COMMERCE COMMITTEE MEMBERS
Thomas J. Bliley Jr.
John D. Dingall
Chairman, VA
Ranking Member, MI
Carlos J. Moorhead, CA
Henry A. Waxman, CA
Jack Fields, TX
Edwards J. Markey, MA
Michael G. Oxley, OH
W.J. "Billy" Tauzin, LA
Michael Bilirakis, FL
Ron Wyden, OR
Dan Schaefer, CO
Ralph M. Hall, TX
Joe L. Barton, TX
John Bryant, TX
Dennis Hastert, IL
Rick Boucher, VA
Fred Upton, MI
Thomas J. Manton, NY
Cliff Stearns, FL
Edolphus Towns, NY
Bill Paxon, NY
Gerry E. Studds, MA
Paul E. Gillmor, OH
Frank Pallone, Jr., NJ
Scott L. Klug, WI
Sherrod Brown, OH
Gary A. Franks, CT
Blanche Lambert Lincoln, AR
James C. Greenwood, PA
Bart Gordon, TN
Michael D. Crapo, ID
Elizabeth Furse, OR
Christopher Cox, CA
Peter Deutsch, FL
Richard M. Burr, NC
Bobby L. Rush, IL
Brian P. Bilbray, CA
Anna G. Eshoo, CA
Edward Whitfield, KY
Ron Klink, PA
Greg Ganske, IA
Bart Stupak, MI
Daniel Frisa, NY
Charlie Norwood, GA
Rick White, WA
Tom Coburn, OK
2125 Rayburn House Office Building
Independence Avenue and South Capitol St N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20515
Agnes Donahue
Kenneth Thorpe
200 Independence Ave SW.
200 Independence Ave SW.
Washington D.C. 20201
Washington D.C. 20201
Susan J. Blumenthal
Ron Lasker
200 Independence Ave SW.
200 Independence Ave SW.
Washington D.C. 20201
Washington D.C. 20201
Melanie Timberlake
Leon Panetta
200 Independence Ave SW.
1600 Penn Ave NW.
Washington D.C. 20201
Washington D.C. 20500
Donna E. Shalala
Margaret A. Williams
200 Independence Ave SW.
1600 Penn Ave NW.
Washington D.C. 20201
Washington D.C. 20500
page 2
Melanne Verveer
1600 Penn Ave NW.
Washington D.C. 20500
Vice President Albert Gore Jr.
Old Executive Office Building
Washington D.C. 20501
Skila S. Harris
Old Executive Office Building
Washington D.C. 20501
J. Jarrett Clinton
2101 E. Jefferson St.
Rockville Md. 20852
Frderico Pena
400 Seventh St. SW.
Washington D.C. 20590
Withdrawal/Redaction Marker
Clinton Library
DOCUMENT NO.
SUBJECT/TITLE
DATE
RESTRICTION
AND TYPE
001c. envelope
To Margaret A. Williams (partial) (1 page)
11/28/95
b(6)
COLLECTION:
Clinton Presidential Records
First Lady's Office
Maggie Williams (Correspondence)
OA/Box Number: 12630
FOLDER TITLE:
[Maggie Williams Mail 1995-1996]: T
2013-0359-S
ry1341
RESTRICTION CODES
Presidential Records Act [44 U.S.C. 2204(a)]
Freedom of Information Act - 15 U.S.C. 552(b)]
P1 National Security Classified Information [(a)(1) of the PRA|
b(1) National security classified information [(b)(1) of the FOIA]
P2 Relating to the appointment to Federal office [(a)(2) of the PRA|
b(2) Release would disclose internal personnel rules and practices of
P3 Release would violate a Federal statute [(a)(3) of the PRA]
an agency |(b)(2) of the FOIA]
P4 Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or
b(3) Release would violate a Federal statute [(b)(3) of the FOIA|
financial information |(a)(4) of the PRA]
b(4) Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential or financial
P5 Release would disclose confidential advice between the President
information [(b)(4) of the FOIA]
and his advisors, or between such advisors [a)(5) of the PRA]
b(6) Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
P6 Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy |(b)(6) of the FOIA]
personal privacy |(a)(6) of the PRA]
b(7) Release would disclose information compiled for law enforcement
purposes |(b)(7) of the FOIA]
C. Closed in accordance with restrictions contained in donor's deed
b(8) Release would disclose information concerning the regulation of
of gift.
financial institutions [(b)(8) of the FOIA]
PRM. Personal record misfile defined in accordance with 44 U.S.C.
b(9) Release would disclose geological or geophysical information
2201(3).
concerning wells [(b)(9) of the FOIA]
RR. Document will be reviewed upon request.
BANGOR
U.S. POSTAGE
NOY 28'95
III 00 "
MAINE
RB.M
1505161
[001c]
PRESERVATION
PHOTOCOPY
PM ME 044
PLEASE MAIL
(b)(6)
EARLY FOR
28 NOV
CHRISTMAS
1905
ALLINE
I
Margaret A. Williams
1600 Penn. Ave NW.
-
Washing ton DC:
Cheef of staffto FuctLAdy
20500
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
October 7, 1996
Mr. John Tomasin
112A-56th Street
West New York, N.J. 07093
Dear Mr. Tomasin:
Thank you for your recent letter
containing your ideas for the campaign.
We will forward your letter to the
Clinton/Gore Reelect Campaign. Thank you
again for your support.
Sincerely,
Margaret A Miama
Chief of Staff
to the First Lady
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
October 3, 1996
William W. Taylor, III
Chair, Criminal Justice Section
1800 M Street, NW, 2nd Floor, South Lobby
Washington, DC 20036-5886
Dear Mr. Taylor:
We have recieved your kind invitation
to attend the Criminal Justice Section's
Annual Meeting. We have forwarded the
invitation to the scheduling department.
Thank you for the invitation.
Sincerely,
Margaret A. Williams
Chief of Staff
to the First Lady