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
4520678
label
Nixon - Papers Court Cases - U.S. v. Mitchell
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
4520678
sourceUrl
contentType
document
title
Nixon - Papers Court Cases - U.S. v. Mitchell
citationUrl
collections
Philip W. Buchen Files
Philip Buchen's General Subject Files
subjects
Nixon, Richard M. (Richard Milhous), 1913-1994
Employees
Courts
Watergate Affair, 1972-1974
largeImageUrl
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
4520678
coverageEndDate
logicalDate
1974-12-01
month
12
year
1974
coverageStartDate
logicalDate
1974-08-01
month
8
year
1974
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
5886525bc77b113d
ocrText
The original documents are located in Box 30, folder "Nixon - Papers Court Cases - U.S. V.
Mitchell" of the Philip Buchen Files at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library.
Copyright Notice
The copyright law of the United States (Title 17, United States Code) governs the making of
photocopies or other reproductions of copyrighted material. Gerald R. Ford donated to the United
States of America his copyrights in all of his unpublished writings in National Archives collections.
Works prepared by U.S. Government employees as part of their official duties are in the public
domain. The copyrights to materials written by other individuals or organizations are presumed to
remain with them. If you think any of the information displayed in the PDF is subject to a valid
copyright claim, please contact the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library.
Digitized from Box 30 of the Philip Buchen Files at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
August 23, 1974
MEMORANDUM FOR:
PHILIP BUCHEN
FROM:
JEAN STAUDT Than Shand
Attorney, Office of the Special Counsel
SUBJECT:
Trial of September 30th, 1974
(Cover-up trial)
I have been requested by the Honorable Judge John J. Sirica to
attend a pretrial conference in chambers on Wednesday,
August 28th, at 10:00 a.m. with the Special Prosecutor and
all defendants involved in the upcoming trial of September 30th,
1974. Although there appears to be very few matters which
directly or indirectly will involve the White House, the Judge
has particularly requested I inform him at that time of the
White House policy concerning the defendants' request for access
to their personal files if at all possible. If you feel that it is
appropriate for me to attend in order to respond to this and any
other procedural issues which may be raised, I would appreciate
meeting with you at your convenience to discuss these matters.
As to the January 5th, 1973 tape that we briefly discussed by tele-
phone on August 22nd, 1974, the Judge has delayed his decision
until Monday, August 26th, 1974. I will apprise you of that decision
as soon as I hear from the court.
FORD is LIBRARY GREATO
United States District Court
for the District of Columbia
Thambers of
Judge John J. Sirica
September 6, 1974
Dr. Richard H. Bolt
Bolt, Beranek & Newman, Inc.
50 Moulton Street
Cambridge, Massachusetts 02138
Dear Dr. Bolt:
The Court has determined that the Advisory Panel on
White House Tapes, on which you have served, will be disbanded
effective this date. This action releases you from any further
obligation to the Court and from any restrictions placed upon you
by the Court during the course of your service. However, for
the sake of caution, the Court urges that you refrain from
public comment about the Panel's work until after a jury has
been sequestered in the "Watergate cover-up case. The Court
and Administrative Office of the United States Courts are re-
leased from further financial or other obligations to members
of the Panel or their agents. I am advised by the Administrative
Office that it will attempt to satisfy the unpaid invoices now in
hand.
The Court expresses its appreciation to you for your
the
work on the Panel and for your willingness to make the personal
sacrifices that this assignment has entailed.
With kindest regards and best wishes,
Sincere
Sincerel John Jusirica yours,
CC: Philip W. Buchen, Esq.
Leon Jaworski, Esq.
Mr. Edward V. Garabedian,
Administrative Office of the
United States Courts
FORD i LIBRARY DERALD
United States District Court
for the District of Columbia
Chambers of
Judge John J. Sirica
September 6, 1974
Dr. Thomas G. Stockham, Jr.
MEB - 3160
University of Utah
Salt Lake City, Utah 84108
Dear Dr. Stockham:
The Court has determined that the Advisory Panel
on White House Tapes, on which you have served, will be
disbanded effective this date. This action releases you
from any further obligation to the Court and from any
restrictions placed upon you by the Court during the course
of your service. However, for the sake of caution, the
Court urges that you refrain from public comment about the
Panel's work until after a jury has been sequestered in the
"Watergate cover-up case. " The Court and Administrative
Office of the United States Courts are released from further
financial or other obligations to members of the Panel or
their agents. I am advised by the Administrative Office
that it will attempt to satisfy the unpaid invoices now in
hand.
The Court expresses its appreciation to you for
your work on the Panel and for your willingness to make
your
to
the personal sacrifices that this assignment has entailed.
With kindest regards and best wishes,
Sincerely
Sincerely Jolin Sirica yours,
CC: Philip W. Buchen, Esq.
Leon Jaworski, Esq.
Mr. Edward V. Garabedian,
Administrative Office of the
United States Courts
GERALD FORD VIBRARY
United States District Court
for the District of Columbia
Thambers of
Judge John J. Sirica
September 6, 1974
Mr. John G. McKnight
1109 Stafford Drive
Cupertino, California 95014
Dear Mr. McKnight:
The Court has determined that the Advisory Panel
on White House Tapes, on which you have served, will be
disbanded effective this date. This action releases you
from any further obligation to the Court and from any
restrictions placed upon you by the Court during the course
of your service. However, for the sake of caution, the
Court urges that you refrain from public comment about the
Panel's work until after a jury has been sequestered in the
"Watergate cover-up case." The Court and Administrative
Office of the United States Courts are released from further
financial or other obligations to members of the Panel or
their agents. I am advised by the Administrative Office
that it will attempt to satisfy the unpaid invoices now in
hand.
The Court expresses its appreciation to you for
make
your work on the Panel and for your willingness to make the
personal sacrifices that this assignment has entailed.
With kindest regards and best wishes,
Sincerely Jolin Sirica yours,
CC: Philip W. Buchen, Esq.
Leon Jaworski, Esq.
Mr. Edward V. Garabedian,
Administrative Office of the
United States Courts
FORD
GERALD
VIBRANIA
United States District Court
for the District of Columbia
Thambers of
Judge John J. Sirica
September 6, 1974
Dr. James L. Flanagan
Acoustics Research Department
Bell Laboratories
600 Mountain Avenue
Murray Hill, New Jersey 07974
Dear Dr. Flanagan:
The Court has determined that the Advisory Panel
on White House Tapes, on which you have served, will be
disbanded effective this date. This action releases you
from any further obligation to the Court and from any
restrictions placed upon you by the Court during the course
of your service. However, for the sake of caution, the
Court urges that you refrain from public comment about the
Panel's work until after a jury has been sequestered in the
"Watergate cover-up case." The Court and Administrative
Office of the United States Courts are released from further
financial or other obligations to members of the Panel or
their agents. I am advised by the Administrative Office
that it will attempt to satisfy the unpaid invoices now in
hand.
The Court expresses its appreciation to you for
your work on the Panel and for your willingness to make. the
personal sacrifices that this assignment has entailed.
With kindest regards and best wishes,
Sincerely John Sirica yours,
CC: Philip W. Buchen, Esq.
Leon Jaworski, Esq.
Mr. Edward V. Garabedian,
Administrative Office of the
United States Courts
United States District Court
for the District of Columbia
Thambers of
Judge John J. Sirica
September 6, 1974
Dr. Franklin Cooper
Haskins Laboratories
270 Crown Street
New Haven, Connecticut 06510
Dear Dr. Cooper:
The Court has determined that the Advisory Panel
on White House Tapes, on which you have served, will be
disbanded effective this date. This action releases you
from any further obligation to the Court and from any
restrictions placed upon you by the Court during the course
of your service. However, for the sake of caution, the
Court urges that you refrain from public comment about the
Panel's work until after a jury has been sequestered in the
"Watergate cover-up case." The Court and Administrative
Office of the United States Courts are released from further
financial or other obligations to members of the Panel or
their agents. I am advised by the Administrative Office
that it will attempt to satisfy the unpaid invoices now in
hand.
The Court expresses its appreciation to you for
your work on the Panel and for your willingness to make the
personal sacrifices that this assignment has entailed.
With kindest regards and best wishes,
Sincerely John G Sirica yours,
CC: Philip W. Buchen, Esq.
Leon Jaworski, Esq.
Mr. Edward V. Garabedian,
Administrative Office of the
FOSO VIBRARY
United States, Courts
United States District Court
for the District of Columbia
Thambers of
Judge John 3. Sirica
September 6, 1974
Mr. Mark Weiss
Nicolet Scientific Corporation
245 Livingston Street
Northvale, New Jersey 07647
Dear Mr. Weiss:
The Court has determined that the Advisory Panel
on White House Tapes, on which you have served, will be
disbanded effective this date. This action releases you
from any further obligation to the Court and from any
restrictions placed upon you by the Court during the course
of your service. However, for the sake of caution, the
Court urges that you refrain from public comment about the
Panel's work until after a jury has been sequestered in the
"Watergate cover-up case." The Court and Administrative
Office of the United States Courts are released from further
financial or other obligations to members of the Panel or
their agents. I am advised by the Administrative Office
that it will attempt to satisfy the unpaid invoices now in
hand.
The Court expresses its appreciation to you for
your work on the Panel and for your willingness to make the
personal sacrifices that this assignment has entailed.
With kindest regards and best wishes,
Sincerely yours
John Sirica
CC: Philip W. Buchen, Esq.
Leon Jaworski, Esq.
FORD
Mr. Edward V. Garabedian,
Administrative Office of the
United States Courts
9/11/74
Sent &
Ship
United States District Court
for the District of Cohunbia
Chambers of
Judge John 3. Sirica
September 6, 1974
Philip W. Buchen, Esq.
Counsel to the President
The White House
Washington, D.C.
Dear Mr. Buchen:
Enclosed please find for
your files copies of the final
three. invoices submitted by the
Court Advisory Panel on White
House Tapes. The originals have
been forwarded to the Special
Prosecutor for approval, and
should be received in your office
in the near future for approval.
Sincerely yours,
Todd Christoffenson
Law Clerk
:
Enc.
Department
I
to,
Hon. Philip Buchen
of the Treasury
Office of the
room.
date, 9/13/74 General Counsel
FORD
RRH
General Counsel
Richard R. Albrecht
room 3000
ext. 2093
OF
OFFICE THE TREASURY THE
THE GENERAL COUNSEL OF THE TREASURY
Gilly
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20220
1789
September 13, 1974
Re: U.S. V. Mitchell, et al,
United States District Court
for the District of Columbia
No. 74-110
Dear Mr. Jaworski:
I understand that the subpeena in the above matter served on
H. S. Knight, Director, United States Secret Service, on September 4,
1974, has been referred to your office for action. This letter will
constitute your authorization to represent Mr. Knight in connection
with the subpoena and to make an appropriate motion to quash the
subpeena.
Sincerely yours,
(Signed) Richard R. Albrecht
Richard R. Albrecht
Mr. Leon Jawerski
Watergate Special Presecutor
1425 K Street, N. W.
9th Floor
Washington, D. C. 20005
ATTN: Mr. Philip Lacovara
is BERALD
LAW OFFICES
ROGER J. WHITEFORD 1886-1965
MARYLAND OFFICE
RINGGOLD HART 1886-1965
WHITEFORD, HART, CARMODY & WILSON
7401 WISCONSIN AVENUE
JOHN J. CARMODY 1901-1972
BETHESDA, MARYLAND 20014
JOHN J. WILSON
815 FIFTEENTH STREET, NORTHWEST
301-656-5700
HARRY L. RYAN, JR.
JO V. MORGAN, JR.
FRANK H. STRICKLER
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20005
JO V. MORGAN, JR.
WILLIAM E. ROLLOW
FRANK H. STRICKLER
CHARLES J. STEELE
202-638-0465
WILLIAM E. ROLLOW
JOHN J. CARMODY, JR.
CABLE ADDRESS
CHARLES J. STEELE
JAMES EDWARD ABLARD
KEVIN W. CARMODY
WHITEHART WASHINGTON
COUNSEL
DONALD L. HERSKOVITZ
September 27, 1974
BY HAND
Hon. Philip W. Buchen
Counsel to the President
The White House
Washington, D.C.
Re: U.S. V. Mitchell, et al.
Criminal No. 74-110
Dear Mr. Buchen:
Now that it appears quite certain that the
"Watergate" trial will begin next week, we would like
to have some relaxation of the current rules for
Mr. Haldeman to inspect documents in the EOB, as follows:
1. That Mr. Haldeman will be permitted to make
notes.
2. That one of his attorneys may accompany him
there and likewise make notes.
Of course, Secret Service surveillance would continue as
heretofore.
I give you my personal and professional assurance
that what we may inspect will not be tampered with in any
way.
I have in mind that we may be permitted to visit
the EOB for the purpose of such inspection and copying on
more than one occasion as necessity requires. Of course,
each time we would make prior arrangements with
Mr. Casselman, or anyone else whom you may designate.
I hope that you may find it possible to give our
request favorable consideration.
With kindest personal regards, I am
FORD
June Sincerely yours,
JOHN J. WILSON
9/27/74
To:
Mr. Silberman
Mr. Casselman
Mr. Bushardt
From:
Phil Buchen
FORD in 071830
Can selman
sillermen
LAW
OFFICES
MARYLAND OFFICE
NOGOLD HART 1886-1985
OHN J. CARMODY 1901-1972
WHITEFORD, HART, CARMODY & WILSON
7401 WISCONSIN AVENUE
BETHESDA, MARYLAND 20014
OHN J. WILSON
815 FIFTEENTH STREET, NORTHWEST
301-556-5700
ARRY L. RYAN, JR.
V. MORGAN, JR.
RANK H. STRICKLER
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20005
JO V. MORGAN, JR.
ILLIAM E. ROLLOW
FRANK H. STRICKLER
HARLES J. STEELE
202-638-0465
WILLIAM E. ROLLOW
OHN J. CARMODY, JR.
CABLE ADDRESS
CHARLES J. STEELE
AMES EDWARD ABLARD
EVIN W. CARMODY
WHITEHART WASHINGTON
COUNSEL
ONALD L. HERSKOVITZ
September 27, 1974
BY HAND
Hon. Philip W. Buchen
Counsel to the President
The White House
Washington, D.C.
Re: U.S. V. Mitchell, et al.
Criminal No. 74-110
Dear Mr. Buchen:
Now that it appears quite certain that the
"Watergate" trial will begin next week, we would like
to have some relaxation of the current rules for
Mr. Haldeman to inspect documents in the EOB, as follows:
1. That Mr. Haldeman will be permitted to make
notes.
2. That one of his attorneys may accompany him
there and likewise make notes.
Of course, Secret Service surveillance would continue as
heretofore.
I give you my personal and professional assurance
that what we may inspect will not be tampered with in any
way.
I have in mind that we may be permitted to visit
the EOB for the purpose of such inspection and copying on
more than one occasion as necessity requires. Of course,
each time we would make prior arrangements with
Mr. Casselman, or anyone else whom you may designate.
I hope that you may find it possible to give our
request favorable consideration.
With kindest personal regards, I am
Sincerely yours,
Just JOHN .T MTT SOM
Read 10-4-74
spw
CO-296
NEW 12/71
Subpoena to Produce Document or Object
Cr. Form No. 21 (Rev. 10-51)
United States District Court
FOR THE
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
No.
74-110
V.
John N. Mitchell, et al
To PHILIP BUCHEN
The White House
Washington, D. C.
You are hereby commanded to appear in the United States District Court for the
District of Columbia
at John Marshall & Constitution,
in the city of
Washington,
on the 1st
day of October,
1974 at 9:30 o'clock A. M.
to testify in the case of United States V. Mitchell, et al,
and bring with you
the documents and tapes described on the attached schedule.
This subpoena is issued upon application of the1 Defendant. John D. Ehrlichman.
September 26, , 1974
Andrew C. Hall
JAMES F. DAVEY
Defendant Ehrlichman
Twelfth Attorney floor, Concord Building
for
&
66 West Flagler Street
By Robert Clerk.
Miami, ddress Florida 33130
Deputy Clerk.
1 Insert "United States," or "defendant" as the case may be.
(305) 377-0241
RETURN
Received this subpoena at
on
and on
at
served it on the within named
by delivering a copy to h
and tendering to h
the fee for one day's attendance and the mile-
age allowed by law.²
Dated:
,
, 19
By
,
Service Fees
Travel
$
Services
Total
$
2 Fees and mileage need not be tendered to the witness upon service of 2 subposus issued in hohalf of the United States
or an officer or agency thereof. 28 USC 1825.
!
FPI-LK-8-14-62 20M-998
GERALD
LIBRAR
Saturday 10/12/74
3:20
John Wilson called.
Said he may need an
333-0024
answer to the letter he sent to you on 9/27.
FORD is LIDRARY 03RALD
9/27/74
To:
Mr. Silberman
Mr. Casselman
Mr. Bushardt
From: Phil Buchen
DERALE FORD LIBRARY
LAW OFFICES
ROGER J. WHITEFORD 1886-1965
MARYLAND OFFICE
RING GOLD HART 1886-1965
WHITEFORD, HART, CARMODY & WILSON
7401 WISCONSIN AVENUE
JOHN J. CARMODY 1901-1972
BETHESDA, MARYLAND 20014
JOHN J. WILSON
815 FIFTEENTH STREET, NORTHWEST
301-656-5700
HARRY L. RYAN, JR.
JO V. MORGAN, JR.
FRANK H. STRICKLER
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20005
JO V. MORGAN, JR.
WILLIAM E. ROLLOW
FRANK H. STRICKLER
CHARLES J. STEELE
202-638-0465
WILLIAM E. ROLLOW
JOHN J. CARMODY, JR.
CABLE ADDRESS
CHARLES J. STEELE
JAMES EDWARD ABLARD
KEVIN W. CARMODY
WHITEHART WASHINGTON
COUNSEL
DONALD L. HERSKOVITZ
September 27, 1974
BY HAND
Hon. Philip W. Buchen
Counsel to the President
The White House
Washington, D.C.
Re: U.S. V. Mitchell, et al.
Criminal No. 74-110
Dear Mr. Buchen:
Now that it appears quite certain that the
"Watergate" trial will begin next week, we would like
to have some relaxation of the current rules for
Mr. Haldeman to inspect documents in the EOB, as follows:
1. That Mr. Haldeman will be permitted to make
notes.
2. That one of his attorneys may accompany him
there and likewise make notes.
Of course, Secret Service surveillance would continue as
heretofore.
I give you my personal and professional assurance
that what we may inspect will not be tampered with in any
way.
I have in mind that we may be permitted to visit
the EOB for the purpose of such inspection and copying on
more than one occasion as necessity requires. Of course,
each time we would make prior arrangements with
Mr. Casselman, or anyone else whom you may designate.
I hope that you may find it possible to give our
request favorable consideration.
With kindest personal regards, I am
GERALD
Sincerely yours
LIBRARY
Just JOHN J. WILSON
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
October 15, 1974
Dear Jack:
John Wilson is pressing us for a reply
to the enclosed letter. Please call me
and give me your thoughts on the matter.
Sincerely,
Thil
Philip W. Buchen
Counsel to the President
Enclosure
Mr Herbert J. Miller, Jr.
Miller, Cassidy, Larroca & Lewin
1320 19th Street, N. W.
Washington, D. C.
Letter Not sent
3) 2) 10/17 10/17 Pros. had second thought. urbn (Andnon Resolve + call Wibm
1) No objection from Jack Millers office -caselmon to
10/16 Caselman asad Spec Pros. who had no objection
4) All drranged. Spec casselman wrote
TORO i LIBRARY 038870
LAW OFFICES
ROGER J. WHITEFORD 1886-1965
MARYLAND OFFICE
RINGGOLD HART 1888-1965
WHITEFORD, HART, CARMODY & WILSON
7401 WISCONSIN AVENUE
JOHN J. CARMODY 1901-1972
BETHESDA, MARYLAND 20014
JOHN J. WILSON
815 FIFTEENTH STREET, NORTHWEST
301-656-5700
HARRY L. RYAN, JR.
JO V. MORGAN, JR.
FRANK H. STRICKLER
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20005
JO V. MORGAN, JR.
WILLIAM E. ROLLOW
FRANK H. STRICKLER
CHARLES J. STEELE
202-638-0465
WILLIAM E. ROLLOW
JOHN J. CARMODY, JR.
CABLE ADDRESS
CHARLES J. STEELE
JAMES EDWARD ABLARD
KEVIN W. CARMODY
WHITEHART WASHINGTON
COUNSEL
DONALD L. HERSKOVITZ
September 27, 1974
BY HAND
Hon. Philip W. Buchen
Counsel to the President
The White House
Washington, D.C.
Re: U.S. V. Mitchell, et al.
Criminal No. 74-110
Dear Mr. Buchen:
Now that it appears quite certain that the
"Watergate" trial will begin next week, we would like
to have some relaxation of the current rules for
Mr. Haldeman to inspect documents in the EOB, as follows:
1. That Mr. Haldeman will be permitted to make
notes.
2. That one of his attorneys may accompany him
there and likewise make notes.
Of course, Secret Service surveillance would continue as
heretofore.
I give you my personal and professional assurance
that what we may inspect will not be tampered with in any
way.
I have in mind that we may be permitted to visit
the EOB for the purpose of such inspection and copying on
more than one occasion as necessity requires. Of course,
each time we would make prior arrangements with
Mr. Casselman, or anyone else whom you may designate.
I hope that you may find it possible to give our
request favorable consideration.
With kindest personal regards, I am
GERALD FORD CLUBARA
Sincerely yours,
JOHN J. WILSON
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
10/17/74
Phil,
FYI
BW
Bill Casselman
filing
Dor
N
Faro LIBRARY is 938870
October 17, 1974
Dear Mr. Kreindler:
This is in response to your letter to me of October 9, 1974, requesting
the stenographie transcripts of White House press briefings which
relate to the so-called Watergate matter.
Enclosed are copies of the mimsographed transcripts of all White House
press briefings conducted by then Press Secretary, Ronald Ziegler OF
his staff from June 17, 1973 to August 9, 1974, I am advised by the
Press Office that the actual stenographic transcripts (from which the
mimsegraph transcripts are made) are part of the records of former
President Nixon which are in the custody of the White House pursuant
to the September 6 Nison--Sampeen agreement. Accordingly, the
permission of counsel for the former President would be required
before the actual stenographic transdripts could be turned over to your
The enclosed mimeographed transcripts are permanent White House
records within the public demain and include materials unrelated
to the Watergate matter. It is my understanding from our recent
telephone conversations that you will review these transcripts and
copy such Watergate-related material as may be required by you,
and that you will return the original documents to me at your carliest
convenience.
Sincerely,
William E. Casselman II
Counsel to the President
Peter M, Kreindler, Esq.
Counsel to the Special Presecutor
Watergate Special Prosecution Force
1425 K Street, N. W.
Washington, D.C. 20005
Enclosures
WEC:bw
FORDO is LIBRARY GERALD
WATERGATE SPECIAL PROSECUTION FORCE
United States Department of Justice
1425 K Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20005
October 9, 1974
William Casselman, II, Esq.
Counsel to the President
The White House
Washington, D. C. 20500
Dear Mr. Casselman:
It is our understanding that when Ronald Ziegler
briefed the press each day, his remarks were recorded
by a stenographer. We would appreciate your making
available to us, for use in connection with the trial
of United States V. Mitchell, et al., copies of the
stenographer's transcripts which relate to the so-called
Watergate matter.
Sincerely,
m. Krundle
Peter M. Kreindler
Counsel to the Special
Prosecutor
SIGNARY
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
October 18, 1974
Dear Mr. Miller:
This is to notify you that I have been served with the
attached trial Subpoena duces tecum captioned United
States V. John N. Mitchell, et al., D. D.C., Criminal
No. 74-110, which was issued upon application of the
United States. Items 1 through 3 of the schedule to
the Subpoena were previously requested of you by the
Watergate Special Prosecution Force in a letter from
Mr. Peter Kreindler dated October 1, 1974. Item 4
of the schedule was requested of this office in a
letter to Mr. William Casselman from Mr. Kreindler
dated October 8, 1974. I understand that the
Prosecution Force has copies of all of the requested
materials.
Response by me or any other defendants in Nixon V.
Arthur F. Sampson, et al. to this subpoena is excepted
from your Application for a Temporary Restraining Order
because it involves a subpoena for materials for
use in a criminal trial presently in progress.
Please be advised that I am arranging to comply with
this Subpoena.
Sincerely,
Philip W. Buchen
Counsel to the President
Herbert J. Miller, Esquire
Miller Cassidy Larroca & Lewin
1320 19th Street, N.W.
Suite 500
Washington, D.C. 20036
Enclosure
C0-296
NEW 12/71
Subpoena to Produce Document or Object
Cr. Form No. 21 (Eer. 10-51)
United States District Court
FOR THE
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Cr. No. 74-110
V.
JOHN N. MITCHELL, et al.
Philip W. Buchen, Esq.
To Counsel to the President
The White House
Washington, D. C.
You are hereby commanded to appear in the United States District Court for the
Constitution Avenue and
Divtrict of Columbia
at John Marshall Place, N.W. in the city of
Washington on the 21st day of October
19 74 at 4:30 : o'clock P.M.
to testify in the case of United States V. John N. Mitchell, et al. and bring with you
See attached schedule.
This subpoena is issued upon application of the1 United States.
October 17 , 1974
LEON JAWORSKI, Special Prosecutor
JAMES F. DAVEY
Attorney for United States
1425 K Street, N.W.
By Cierk.
Address Washington, D. C. 20005
Deputy Clerk.
1 Insert "United States," or "defendant" as the case may be.
RETURN
quali
Received this subpoena at
on
and on
at
served it on the within named
by delivering a copy to h
and tendering to h
the fee for one day's attendance and the mile-
age allowed by law.2
Dated:
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
December 2, 1974
Dear Mr. Hall:
Pursuant to the subpoena issued upon application of the Defendant,
John D. Ehrlichman, and served upon me in the case entitled
United States V. Mitchell, et al., C. A. No. 74-110, D.D. C., I
hereby deliver to you the following:
-
A copy of an eight page unsigned, undated, handwritten
report relating to the Watergate break-in.
-
A copy of a proposed newspaper advertisement dealing
with Watergate allegations and facts concerning those
allegations, appearing on a single, legal-sized lined
sheet of paper.
-
A certified copy of the tape recording produced by the
White House Communications Agency of a meeting in the
White House on September 12, 1972 between the President
and Republican leaders.
-
Certified copies of the news summaries prepared by the
White House for use by the President or the Presidential
staff from June 17, 1972 to and including July 21, 1972.
The items requested in paragraphs five (5) and six (6) of the attachment
to the subpoena cannot be found.
I am informed that counsel for for former President Richard M. Nixon
objects, inter alia, to the production of the items described in
Day
LIBRI
2
paragraphs 3, 4, and 6 of the attachment to the subpoena and has
filed a motion to quash the subpoena as to those items. Accordingly,
those items have not been produced.
Sincerely,
Philip
Counsel to the President
Andrew C. Hall, Esquire
Frates, Floyd, Pearson, Stewart,
Proenza & Richman
Twelfth Floor, Concord Building
66 West Flagler Street
Miami, Florida 33130
Enclosure
cc: Herbert J. Miller, Jr., Esq.
Henry S. Ruth, Esq.
Dec. 12, 1974
Mr. Buchen:
As per your request by telephone
yesterday.
Henry Ruth
LIBRARY
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
)
)
V.
)
Misc. No. 74-128
)
JOHN D. MITCHELL, ET AL.
)
)
)
)
EICED
IN RE NATIONAL BROADCASTING COMPANY,
)
INC. ; AMERICAN BROADCASTING COMPANIES,
)
DEC 51071
INC. ; CBS INC.; RADIO TELEVISION
)
NEWS DIRECTORS ASSOCIATION; and
)
JAMES E DAVEY, Class
WARNER COMMUNICATIONS, INC.
)
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Several television and radio broadcasters noted
in the caption moved pursuant to Rule 47 of the Federal Rules
of Criminal Procedure requesting copies of those portions of
taped conversations initially recorded in former President
Nixon's offices which were subpoenaed, received in evidence,
and played to the jury in this widely publicized criminal case
still on trial before Judge John J. Sirica. Copying would be
accomplished at applicants' expense with the aid of the Clerk
of Court from the evidentiary tapes. There would be no
recording in the courtroom. Applicants propose to broadcast
at least portions of the tapes locally and nationwide over both
television and radio.
The reproduction of trial evidence received in
tape form for subsequent public use raises an issue of first
impression in this District and the Clerk of Court, James F.
Davey, properly seeks guidance from the Court. No published
precedent directly in point has been cited or found in any
other jurisdiction. The matter has been treated as a miscellaneous
proceeding and separately assigned at Judge Sirica's request.
All defendants and the Special Prosecutor have been served and
the Court has before it various briefs and affidavits, including
an affidavit from the Clerk of Court explaining some of the
mechanical and administrative considerations presented.
Former
LIBRARY
-2-
President Nixon, by his attorneys, opposes the motion. The
Reporters' Committee for Freedom of the Press has been granted
permission to file a brief amicus
/
Applicants claim a constitutional right to
reproduction of the tapes under the First Amendment to the
Constitution. This claim is wholly without merit. A public
trial is taking place, all media, including applicants, have
been present, and, by order of the trial judge, provided with
earphones to enable their representatives to hear exactly what
the jury heard when the tapes were actually played in the
courtroom. There were no restraints placed on their subsequent
reporting. Indeed, the contents of the tapes have been fully
reported and written transcripts were made available to all
media to assure reasonable accuracy.
The Supreme Court has repeatedly held in recent
years, although admittedly by split votes, that members of the
press are not constitutionally guaranteed a "right of access"
greater than that afforded the general public. Pell V.
Procunier, 94 S. Ct. 2800, 2810 (1974) ; Saxbe V. Washington
Post, 94 S. Ct. 2811, 2815 (1974) Branzburg V. Hayes, 408
U.S. 665, 684-5 (1972); Estes V. Texas, 381 U.S. 532, 540
(1965). See also, Address of Mr. Justice Stewart, "Or of the Press,"
School Sesquicentennial Convocation, Nov. 2, 1974, at p. 9:
So far as the Constitution goes, the autonomous
press may publish what it knows, and may seek to
learn what it can. But this autonomy cuts both
ways. The press is free to do battle against
secrecy and deception in government. But the
press cannot expect from the Constitution any
guarantee that it will succeed. There is no
constitutional right to have access to particular
government information or to require openness
from the bureaucracy
The Constitution,
in other words, establishes the contest, not its
resolution.
*/ In addition, the Mutual Broadcasting System, Inc. has
made separate application in letter form.
-3-
The question presented by the applications then
boils down to a far simpler issue. Are representatives of
broadcast media entitled along with the general public to
aural copies of exhibits after they have been received in
evidence in a criminal trial as a normal concomitant of the
constitutional requirements of a public trial found in the
Sixth Amendment to the Constitution?
As a matter of practice in this court, if requested,
a copy of any document or photograph received in evidence is
made by the Clerk and furnished at cost of duplicating to any
applicant, subject only to contrary instructions that may be
given by the trial judge at the time of trial. This
privilege of the public to inspect and obtain copies of all
court records, including exhibits while in the custody of the
Clerk, is of long standing in this jurisdiction and reaches far
back into our common law and traditions. Absent special
circumstances, any member of the public has a right to inspect
and obtain copies of such judicial records. Ex parte Drawbaugh,
2 App. D.C. 404, 407 (1894). See also, United States V. Burka,
289 A.2d 376 (1972) Belt V. Pr. George's County Abstract Co
73 Md. 289, 20 A. 982 (1890).
The Court stated in Drawbaugh,
any attempt to maintain secrecy, as to
the records of the court, would seem to be
inconsistent with the common understanding
of what belongs to a public court of record,
to. which all persons have the right of
access and to its records, according to long-
established usage and practice.
2 App. D.C. at 407-8. This proposition applies without a
showing of a particular "legitimate interest" in the records
requested. In re Mosher, 248 F.2d 956, 958 (C.C. P.A. 1957)
*/ The supposed requirement of English common law that one have
a personal "legitimate interest" in judicial records before
access would be granted was in fact simply a requirement of
standing to sue to enforce the right in mandamus where access
FORD
had been wrongfully denied. See Nowack V. Fuller, 243 Mich. 200
219 N.W. 749, 60 A.L.R. 1351 (1928). No one in this instance
has been denied access to copy the tapes in evidence.
In this jurisdiction the practice has been to make court documents
available without a showing of "special interest. " Were this an
action in mandamus, rather than an application to instruct the
(footnote continued on next page)
-4-
In this particular instance this general right
to have access and copy exhibits is especially reinforced by
directives of the Judicial Conference of the United States
issued under authority of 28 U.S.C. § 457. The Clerks of
Court for District Courts throughout the United States are
specifically instructed to retain on file for public inspection
for ten years documentation in cases of significant historical
importance and then to deposit such materials with the Federal
Records Center under the aegis of the General Services
Administration for subsequent years under the guidelines set
by 44 U.S.C. § 3301 and the implementing regulations appearing
at 41 C.F.R. §§ 101-11.101 et seq. The Manual for the Clerks of
the United States District Courts, Chapter 13, Exhibit 2,
(Ref. 1301.4) at PP. 4-5, item 6(a) (1954), directs, among
other things, that "case papers and documentary exhibits" filed
in criminal cases involving the President or officials appointed
by the President must not be disposed of even after ten years.
Cases of this type are considered to contain "documentary
evidence of movements of historical forces" and "biographical
data" of obvious importance for persons interested in "social,
economic and political research." Ibid., note to item 6, P. 16.
Thus there is congressional, judicial and executive
recognition of the need to make available and preserve materials
from a trial like the present, including the evidentiary tapes,
bearing as they do directly on executive conduct at the highest
levels. It should be noted that Warner Communications, Inc. by
its separate application specifically requests access in order
to disseminate permanent phonograph and tape recordings of
evidentiary tapes for use in homes, libraries and schools.
(footnote continued from preceding page)
Clerk as to Court policy, the media would have standing to compel
equal protection of their right of access consistent with that
routinely accorded other members of the public. McCoy v.
Providence Journal Co., 190 F.2d 760 (1st Cir.), cert. denied
342 U.S. 894 (1951).
FORD
GERALD
-5-
Neither the defendants in this case nor the
Special Prosecutor object to release of the tapes, nor has
Judge Sirica indicated any reason to deviate from general
practice in this instance in the interests of a fair trial.
Former President Nixon does object. He seeks to avoid
embarrassment and wide publicity, asserting that he still has
a property right in the tapes and accordingly a privilege
against disclosure, except to the extent that that privilege
has been invaded by the doctrine of United States V. Nixon,
94 S. Ct. 3090 (1974). Former President Nixon is before the
jury as an alleged co-conspirator and his acts, as reflected
in the tapes, are pertinent to the theory of the case on which
the Special Prosecutor is proceeding. The Court has carefully
reviewed transcripts of the tapes in issue. From this review
it is apparent that Judge Sirica has assiduously removed
extraneous material, including topics relating to national
security and considerable irrelevant comment relating to
persons not on trial. Only portions of the tapes strictly
germane to the criminal proceeding have been played to the jury.
Moreover, the portions of the tapes here in issue are now of
public record. Although former President Nixon has been
pardoned, he has standing to protest release by the Court but
he has no right to prevent normal access to these public
documents which have already been released in full text after
affording the greatest protection to presidential confidentiality
"consistent with the fair administration of justice. " United
States V. Nixon, supra, 94 S. Ct. at 3111. His words cannot be
retrieved; they are public property and his opposition is
accordingly rejected.
It should be understood that the Court is not
called upon or in any way attempting to decide whether or not
the dissemination of the tapes to the public is or is not
desirable. On the one hand, much has been already printed; on
FORD
GERALD
LIBRARY
-6-
the other, the aural atmosphere, emphasis and connotations
of the taped discussions may be peculiarly illuminating.
The law must be applied and the fact the evidence is in
aural form is of no special consequence. The tape exhibits
are in evidence and have therefore come into the public
domain and the public should have the opportunity to hear
them. Whether any individual affected has a right under the
law of privacy or related doctrines against anyone who
thereafter republishes is not to be determined here. See,
e.g. Melvin V. Reid, 112 Cal. App. 285, 297 P. 91, 93 (1931);
Briscoe V. Reader's Digest Assn., 93 Cal. Rptr. 866, 483 P.2d
34 (1971) ; Restatement (I) of Torts, $ 867, Comment C (1939).
The courts are a branch of government and a criminal
proceeding involving officials holding high positions of public
trust must peculiarly remain open for the closest scrutiny and
discussion by citizens. It was in just such situations that
the Sixth Amendment was intended to have its greatest thrust.
As the Supreme Court has succinctly stated, "what transpires
in the courtroom is public property. Craig V. Harney, 331 U.S.
367, 374 (1947). Only in this fashion can arbitrary judicial
authority be prevented.
Before the tapes can be released, certain
immediate obstacles must be overcome. Because the tapes
contain material that was not played to the jury, they will
have to be rerun to remove the excluded material. There is
need, as the Special Prosecutor points out, to preserve the
integrity of the tapes as received in evidence during the
reproduction process. Considerable time, perhaps running as
much as several weeks, will be required to reproduce them.
Court personnel and experts now fully committed to the trial
must be consulted. Because of these administrative and
mechanical difficulties no attempt should be made to provide
verbatim sound copies, in addition to the transcript copies
LIBRARY GERALD FORD
-7-
already provided, until after the trial.
If and when released, there will be a broad demand
for copies, aswitnessed by the applications already filed, when
availability becomes better known. The office of the Clerk of
Court is not equipped with trained personnel or facilities
allowing it to become involved in any mass release of numerous
copies of the tapes, even at the expense of applicants.
Furthermore, if any release is to be made, it must obviously
be accomplished on a basis which does not permit
overcommercialization of the evidence. Clearly, all persons,
whether or not members of the press, desiring copies must be
accommodated without special favoritism or priority.
There is time between now and the end of the trial
to determine whether a satisfactory mechanism and procedure can
be evolved which will permit the Court to prepare only a single
copy of the tapes as played and then place its subsequent
reproduction and distribution in the responsible hands of an
organization, agency or person which, without profit, can, for
a defined limited period, assure fair and equitable distribution
to all categories of applicants Without in any way indicating
whether it is practical or possible to release aural copies in
addition to the transcripts already released, the Court solicits
any suggestions which the Special Prosecutor, the defendants or
applicants may have as to an appropriate method for facilitating
a release which is consistent with the considerations enumerated
generally above. Suggestions should be submitted in concrete
detail and filed with the Clerk of Court on or before January 3,
1975.
In the meantime, the Clerk shall upon completion of
the trial promptly proceed to reproduce a single set of the tapes
in evidence which shall contain only those portions played to
the jury during trial. He shall consult with expert personnel to
assure accuracy of this reproduction and to avoid comproming
-8-
the evidentiary value of the exhibit in any respect. He shall
advise the Court when this task is completed and withhold the
reproduced tapes from public inspection until further order of
the Court. Final action on the applications will be taken at
a later date in the light of developments. The opposition filed
on behalf of former President Nixon is denied.
SO ORDERED.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
December 55 , 1974.