DOCSLIB.ORG

Special Report: the FBI's Compliance with the Attorney General's Investigative Guidelines

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Special Report: the FBI's Compliance with the Attorney General's Investigative Guidelines U.S. Department of Justice Of'fice of the Inspector General The Federal Bureau of Investigation's Compliance with the Attorney General's Investigative Guidelines Ofice of the Inspector General Sentember 2005 TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS ................................................................................ i TABLE OF APPENDICES ...........................................................................vii INDEX OF CASE STUDIES, DIAGRAMS, AND TABLES .............................. ix EXECUTIVE SUMMARY.............................................................................. 1 I. Overview ............................................................................................. 1 II. Background ........................................................................................ 5 III. The Scope and Methodology of the OIG Review .................................... 6 IV. OIG Findings....................................................................................... 7 A. The Attorney General’s Guidelines Regarding the Use of Confidential Informants ............................................................... 7 B. The Attorney General’s Guidelines on Federal Bureau of Investigation Undercover Operations ............................................ 9 C. The Attorney General’s Guidelines on General Crimes, Racketeering Enterprise and Terrorism Enterprise Investigations............................................................................. 10 D. Procedures for Lawful, Warrantless Monitoring of Verbal Communications (Consensual Monitoring Guidelines) ................ 14 E. FBI Compliance Oversight Mechanisms...................................... 14 F. The FBI’s Implementation Process for the Revised Guidelines.................................................................................. 15 V. Recommendations............................................................................. 16 CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION............................................................. 17 I. Background ...................................................................................... 17 II. Scope and Methodology of the OIG Review......................................... 21 A. Scope of the Review.................................................................... 21 B. Methodology of the Review ......................................................... 24 III. Organization of the Report................................................................. 25 CHAPTER TWO: HISTORICAL BACKGROUND OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL’S INVESTIGATIVE GUIDELINES ....................................... 29 I. Introduction...................................................................................... 29 i II. The Pre-Guidelines Period ..................................................................29 III. Establishment of the Attorney General Guidelines..............................36 A. The Levi Guidelines – 1976 .........................................................36 B. The Civiletti Guidelines – 1980-1981...........................................39 C. The Smith Guidelines – 1983 ......................................................46 D. The Thornburgh Guidelines – 1989.............................................50 E. The Reno Guidelines – 2001........................................................55 IV. Conclusion ........................................................................................59 CHAPTER THREE: THE ATTORNEY GENERAL’S GUIDELINES REGARDING THE USE OF CONFIDENTIAL INFORMANTS .................63 I. Role of Confidential Informants..........................................................63 II. The Benefits and Risks of Using Confidential Informants in FBI Investigations ....................................................................................64 III. Significant Requirements of the Guidelines ........................................75 A. Suitability Reviews......................................................................75 B. Instructions................................................................................79 C. Authority to Engage in Otherwise Illegal Activity (OIA).................80 D. Unauthorized Illegal Activity (UIA)...............................................82 E. Deactivation of Confidential Informants ......................................88 IV. Major Revisions to the Guidelines ......................................................89 V. The OIG Review of the FBI’s Compliance with the Confidential Informant Guidelines .........................................................................90 VI. Compliance Findings .........................................................................93 A. Initial and Continuing Suitability Reviews...................................96 B. Instructions................................................................................98 C. Authority to Engage in Otherwise Illegal Activity (OIA)...............103 D. Unauthorized Illegal Activity (UIA).............................................108 E. Deactivation of Confidential Informants ....................................109 F. Seeking Approval or Concurrence from, and Providing Notification to, the United States Attorney’s Office.....................109 VII. OIG Analysis....................................................................................112 VIII. Recommendations ...........................................................................133 ii CHAPTER FOUR: THE ATTORNEY GENERAL’S GUIDELINES ON FBI UNDERCOVER OPERATIONS ................................................... 137 I. Role of FBI Undercover Operations .................................................. 137 A. The Need for Undercover Operations ........................................ 137 B. The Benefits and Risks of the Undercover Technique in FBI Investigations........................................................................... 140 II. Significant Requirements of the Undercover Guidelines ................... 144 A. Group I Undercover Operations................................................ 145 B. Group II Undercover Operations............................................... 148 III. Major Revisions to the Guidelines.................................................... 148 IV. The OIG Review of the FBI’s Compliance with the Undercover Guidelines....................................................................................... 150 V. Compliance Findings....................................................................... 151 VI. OIG Analysis ................................................................................... 156 VII. OIG Recommendations.................................................................... 164 CHAPTER FIVE: ATTORNEY GENERAL’S GUIDELINES ON GENERAL CRIMES, RACKETEERING ENTERPRISE AND TERRORISM ENTERPRISE INVESTIGATIONS.................................. 169 I. Levels of Investigative Activities ....................................................... 169 II. Preliminary Inquiries....................................................................... 170 A. Significant Requirements ......................................................... 170 B. Major Revisions to the Guidelines............................................. 171 C. The OIG Review of Preliminary Inquiries................................... 172 D. Compliance Findings................................................................ 172 E. OIG Analysis and Recommendations ........................................ 173 III. General Crimes Investigations ......................................................... 174 A. Role of General Crimes Investigations....................................... 174 B. Significant Requirements ......................................................... 175 C. Major Revisions to the Guidelines............................................. 175 D. The OIG Review of General Crimes Investigations ..................... 176 E. Compliance Findings................................................................ 176 F. OIG Analysis and Recommendations ........................................ 178 IV. Criminal Intelligence Investigations ................................................. 178 A. Role of Criminal Intelligence Investigations............................... 178 B. Significant Requirements ......................................................... 179 iii C. Major Revisions to the Guidelines .............................................181 D. The OIG Review of Criminal Intelligence Investigations..............181 E. Compliance Findings ................................................................182 F. OIG Analysis and Recommendations.........................................186 V. Part VI of the General Crimes Guidelines: Counterterrorism Activities and Other Authorizations..................................................188 A. Rationale for the New Part VI Authorities ..................................188 B. New Authorities Added to the General Crimes Guidelines..........190 C. The OIG Review of the FBI’s Use of Part VI Authorities ..............191 D. Compliance Findings ................................................................192 1. The FBI’s Use of Part VI Authorities Since May 30, 2002, and the FBI’s Implementing Guidance......................192 2. Internal Controls Regarding Predication for the Exercise of Part VI.A.2 Authorities .....................................196 3. Internal Controls for Record Retention Relating to the Exercise of Part VI.A.2
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Domestic Security: Confronting a Changing Threat to Ensure Public Safety and Civil Liberties 1
    Domestic Security: Confronting a Changing Threat to Ensure Public Safety and Civil Liberties 1 Domestic Security: Confronting a Changing Threat to Ensure Public Safety and Civil Liberties 2 Domestic Security: Confronting a Changing Threat to Ensure Public Safety and Civil Liberties BENS Practitioners Panel Michael Allen Thomas Kean Former Majority Staff Director House Perma- Chair, The National Commission on Terrorist nent Select Committee on Intelligence United Attacks Upon the United States States House of Representatives Former Governor of New Jersey Alfred Berkeley Michael Leiter Vice Chair National Infrastructure Advisory Former Director of the National Counterter- Council rorism Center Former President NASDAQ Stock Market, Inc. Joseph Lieberman Michael Chertoff (Vice Chair) Former United States Senator (CT) Former Secretary of Homeland Security Former Chairman Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee Commissioner Edward Davis United States Senate Former Commissioner, Boston Police Department James Locher Former Assistant Secretary of Defense for Robert Graham (Vice Chair) Special Operations and Low Intensity Conflict Former Governor of Florida Former Chairman Senate Select Committee Steven McCraw (Vice Chair) on Intelligence United States Senate Director, Texas Department of Public Safety Homeland Security Advisor to the Governor David Hall of Texas Director Missouri Information and Analysis Center Norton Schwartz (Chair) President & CEO Business Executives Lee Hamilton for National Security Former United States Representative (IN) Vice Chair The National Commission Maurice Sonnenberg on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States Former Member President’s Intelligence Advisory Board Michael Hayden Vice Chair Report of the National Former Director CIA Commission on Terrorism Former Director NSA Frances Townsend Brian Michael Jenkins Former Assistant to the President for Home- Senior Advisor to the President RAND land Security and Counterterrorism Corporation Juan Zarate Loch K.
    [Show full text]
  • Board of County Commissioners Agenda Thursday, June 20, 2019, 9:00Am Commission Chambers, Room B-11 I
    BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AGENDA THURSDAY, JUNE 20, 2019, 9:00AM COMMISSION CHAMBERS, ROOM B-11 I. PROCLAMATIONS/PRESENTATIONS l. Presentation of award from the Kansas Breastfeeding Coalition-Human Resources II. UNFINISHED BUSINESS III. CONSENT AGENDA I. Consider authorization and execution of Contract C227-2019, updating a UMB signature card for the Dept. of Corrections Controlled Disbursement Account by adding Joshua Reamer as an authorized signer-Administrative Services. 2. Consider approval of Resolution No. 2019-37 updating the resolution from 2008 to include the appropriate approvals for issuance and cancellation, as well as providing authority for necessary temporary credit limit increases-- Commissioner Archer. 3. Consider approval of Resolution No. 2019-38 authorizing the issuance of a Shawnee County credit card for official business for Nancy Mitchell, Shawnee County Health Department, with a credit limit of$7,500.00- Commissioner Archer. 4. Consider authorization and execution of Contract C228-20J9 for annual maintenance of the PRTG network monitoring software through state contract pricing with Software House International at a cost of$599.00 with funding from the 2019 budget-lnfonnation Technology. 5. Acknowledge receipt of correspondence from Sheriff Hill to send Captain Shane Hoobler to the FBI National Academy Training Seminar in Phoenix, Arizona focusing on 21" Century contemporary law enforcement trends and issues at a cost of no more than $1,895.00 with funding from the Federal Forfeiture funds. 6. Consider authorization and execution of Contract C229-2Ql9 with COW Government for an extended four year warranty on one recently purchased computer at a cost of$35.00 from the department's operating funds-- Parks+ Recreation.
    [Show full text]
  • Suspect Until Proven Guilty, a Problematization of State Dossier Systems Via Two Case Studies: the United States and China
    University of Pennsylvania ScholarlyCommons Publicly Accessible Penn Dissertations Fall 2009 Suspect Until Proven Guilty, a Problematization of State Dossier Systems via Two Case Studies: The United States and China Kenneth N. Farrall University of Pennsylvania, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.upenn.edu/edissertations Part of the Asian Studies Commons, Communication Technology and New Media Commons, International and Intercultural Communication Commons, and the Social Influence and oliticalP Communication Commons Recommended Citation Farrall, Kenneth N., "Suspect Until Proven Guilty, a Problematization of State Dossier Systems via Two Case Studies: The United States and China" (2009). Publicly Accessible Penn Dissertations. 51. https://repository.upenn.edu/edissertations/51 This paper is posted at ScholarlyCommons. https://repository.upenn.edu/edissertations/51 For more information, please contact [email protected]. Suspect Until Proven Guilty, a Problematization of State Dossier Systems via Two Case Studies: The United States and China Abstract This dissertation problematizes the "state dossier system" (SDS): the production and accumulation of personal information on citizen subjects exceeding the reasonable bounds of risk management. SDS - comprising interconnecting subsystems of records and identification - damage individual autonomy and self-determination, impacting not only human rights, but also the viability of the social system. The research, a hybrid of case-study and cross-national comparison, was guided in part by a theoretical model of four primary SDS driving forces: technology, political economy, law and public sentiment. Data sources included government documents, academic texts, investigative journalism, NGO reports and industry white papers. The primary analytical instrument was the juxtaposition of two individual cases: the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Suppuration of Powers: Abscam, Entrapment and the Politics of Expulsion Henry Biggs
    Legislation and Policy Brief Volume 6 | Issue 2 Article 2 2014 Suppuration of Powers: Abscam, Entrapment and the Politics of Expulsion Henry Biggs Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.wcl.american.edu/lpb Part of the Legislation Commons Recommended Citation Biggs, Henry. "Suppuration of Powers: Abscam, Entrapment and the Politics of Expulsion." Legislation and Policy Brief 6, no. 2 (2014): 249-269. This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Washington College of Law Journals & Law Reviews at Digital Commons @ American University Washington College of Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in Legislation and Policy Brief by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons @ American University Washington College of Law. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Vol. 6.2 Legislation & Policy Brief 249 SUPPURATION OF POWERS: ABSCAM, ENTRAPMENT AND THE POLITICS OF EXPULSION Henry Biggs1 In a government of laws, existence of the government will be imperiled if it fails to observe the law scrupulously . to declare that the Government may commit crimes in order to secure the conviction of a private criminal – would bring terrible retribution. Against that pernicious doctrine this Court should resolutely set its face.2 Introduction .............................................................................................249 I. Abscam .................................................................................................251 A. Origins ����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������251
    [Show full text]
  • Concert Policy Initiated
    $The Observer an independent student newspaper serving notre dame and st. mary's Vol. XII, No. 63 Friday, December 9, 1977 SAGA workers begin unionization procedure by Bob Varettoni Christmas; break. There are 215 SAGA sity on behalf of the groundskeepers. SAGA pays $2.50 an hour for. Senior Staff Reporter employees, and at least 30% of these had One SAGA employee noted, “ Since we The NLRBsupervises any election held to to participate in a card campaign to set up have come so close to unionizing, maybe determine wfhether of not workers choose SAGA food service workers have peti- the possibility for his election. this will encourage University workers to to unionize. According to NLRB regula­ , tioned for an election to decide whether or A hearing will be held on Dec. 20 to be less intimidated about organizing." tions, each employee casts one yes-no vote. not to unionize. determine who will actually vote in the The employee said that Robinson called If more than 50 % of the employees vote The Teamsters, representing the SAGA election. According to Stahl, up to26 of the Teamsters “bad for the University and “yes,” a union is organized. employees, filed the petition for election the employees might be classified as - bad for SAGA at yesterday’s meeting. The Such an election among SAGA employ­ with the National Labor Relations Board “supervisors” sho are unable to vote. employee also noted SAGA’s reputation as ees would be held on the Notre Dame (NLRB) on Monday, Nov. 21. Bob “We don't anticipate any problems at this a union citing the fact that only 22 of the campus.
    [Show full text]
  • The Law As King and the King As Law: Is a President Immune from Criminal Prosecution Before Impeachment? Eric M
    Maurice A. Deane School of Law at Hofstra University Scholarly Commons at Hofstra Law Hofstra Law Faculty Scholarship 1992 The Law as King and the King as Law: Is a President Immune from Criminal Prosecution Before Impeachment? Eric M. Freedman Maurice A. Deane School of Law at Hofstra University Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarlycommons.law.hofstra.edu/faculty_scholarship Recommended Citation Eric M. Freedman, The Law as King and the King as Law: Is a President Immune from Criminal Prosecution Before Impeachment?, 20 Hastings Const. L.Q. 7 (1992) Available at: https://scholarlycommons.law.hofstra.edu/faculty_scholarship/449 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Scholarly Commons at Hofstra Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in Hofstra Law Faculty Scholarship by an authorized administrator of Scholarly Commons at Hofstra Law. For more information, please contact [email protected]. The Law as King and the King as Law: Is a President Immune from Criminal Prosecution Before Impeachment? By ERIC M. FREEDMAN* Table of Contents Introduction ................................................... 8 I. The Original Intents ................................. 15 II. The Historical Practice ............................... 22 A. The Federal Executive Branch ......................... 22 B. The Federal Judicial and Legislative Branches .......... 24 1. The Federal Judicial Branch ....................... 25 2. The Federal Legislative Branch ..................... 30 C. Federal Prosecution of State and Local Officials ......... 33 D. State-Level Practice ................................... 37 III. Theoretical Considerations ........................... 39 A. The Dual Nature of the Impeachment Clause .......... 41 B. The Rule of Law ...................................... 46 1. Civil Immunity .................................... 46 * Assistant Professor of Law, Hofstra University School of Law. J.D. 1979, B.A.
    [Show full text]
  • HSCA Volume V: 9/28/78
    378 Obviously, the possibility cannot be dismissed, although it can hardly be said to have been established. At this point, it is, in your words, Mr. Chairman, perhaps only a little more than a "suspicion suspected," not a "fact found." The committee decided early in its investigation, as soon as it realized that a Mafia plot to assassinate the President warranted serious consideration, to assemble the most reliable information available on organized crime in the United States. The details of this phase of the committee's investigation will, of course, appear, hopefully in full, in its final report, a report that will consider the background of organized crime in America, the structure o£ the Mafia in the early 1960's, the effort by the Kennedy administration to suppress the mob, and the evidence that the assassination might have been undertaken in retaliation for those efforts. To scrutinize the possible role of organized crime in the assassi- nation, the committee early brought on one of the country's lead- ing experts on the subject. He is Ralph Salerno, whose career as an organized crime investigator with the New York City Police De- partment goes back to 1946. Mr. Salerno has since retired from the New York City Police Department and I would note that on the day of his retirement, the New York Times was moved to comment that he perhaps knew more about the Mafia than any nonmember in the United States. It would be appropriate at this time, Mr. Chairman, to call Ralph Salerno. Chairman STOKES . The committee calls Mr.
    [Show full text]
  • Cases of the Century
    Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review Volume 33 Number 2 Symposium on Trials of the Century Article 4 1-1-2000 Cases of the Century Laurie L. Levenson Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.lmu.edu/llr Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Laurie L. Levenson, Cases of the Century, 33 Loy. L.A. L. Rev. 585 (2000). Available at: https://digitalcommons.lmu.edu/llr/vol33/iss2/4 This Symposium is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Reviews at Digital Commons @ Loyola Marymount University and Loyola Law School. It has been accepted for inclusion in Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons@Loyola Marymount University and Loyola Law School. For more information, please contact [email protected]. CASES OF THE CENTURY Laurie L. Levenson* I. INTRODUCTION I confess. I am a "trials of the century" junkie. Since my col- lege years, I have been interested in how high-profile cases reflect and alter our society. My first experience with a so-called trial of the century was in 1976. My roommate and I took a break from our pre- med studies so that we could venture up to San Francisco, sleep in the gutters and on the sidewalks of the Tenderloin, all for the oppor- tunity to watch the prosecution of newspaper heiress, Patty Hearst. It was fascinating. The social issues of our time converged in a fed- eral courtroom While lawyers may have been fixated on the techni- cal legal issues of the trial, the public's focus was on something en- tirely different.
    [Show full text]
  • Brazil-United States
    Brazil-United States Judicial Dialogue Created in June 2006 as part of the Wilson Center’s Latin American Program, the BRAZIL INSTITUTE strives to foster informed dialogue on key issues important to Brazilians and to the Brazilian-U.S. relationship. We work to promote detailed analysis of Brazil’s public policy and advance Washington’s understanding of contemporary Brazilian developments, mindful of the long history that binds the two most populous democracies in the Americas. The Institute honors this history and attempts to further bilateral coop- eration by promoting informed dialogue between these two diverse and vibrant multiracial societies. Our activities include: convening policy forums to stimulate nonpartisan reflection and debate on critical issues related to Brazil; promoting, sponsoring, and disseminating research; par- ticipating in the broader effort to inform Americans about Brazil through lectures and interviews given by its director; appointing leading Brazilian and Brazilianist academics, journalists, and policy makers as Wilson Center Public Policy Scholars; and maintaining a comprehensive website devoted to news, analysis, research, and reference materials on Brazil. Paulo Sotero, Director Michael Darden, Program Assistant Anna Carolina Cardenas, Program Assistant Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars One Woodrow Wilson Plaza 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington, DC 20004-3027 www.wilsoncenter.org/brazil ISBN: 978-1-938027-38-3 Brazil-United States Judicial Dialogue May 11 – 13, 2011 Brazil-United States Judicial Dialogue Foreword ffirming the Rule of Law in a historically unequal and unjust Asociety has been a central challenge in Brazil since the reinstate- ment of democracy in the mid-1980s. The evolving structure, role and effectiveness of the country’s judicial system have been major factors in that effort.
    [Show full text]
  • History of the U.S. Attorneys
    Bicentennial Celebration of the United States Attorneys 1789 - 1989 "The United States Attorney is the representative not of an ordinary party to a controversy, but of a sovereignty whose obligation to govern impartially is as compelling as its obligation to govern at all; and whose interest, therefore, in a criminal prosecution is not that it shall win a case, but that justice shall be done. As such, he is in a peculiar and very definite sense the servant of the law, the twofold aim of which is that guilt shall not escape or innocence suffer. He may prosecute with earnestness and vigor– indeed, he should do so. But, while he may strike hard blows, he is not at liberty to strike foul ones. It is as much his duty to refrain from improper methods calculated to produce a wrongful conviction as it is to use every legitimate means to bring about a just one." QUOTED FROM STATEMENT OF MR. JUSTICE SUTHERLAND, BERGER V. UNITED STATES, 295 U. S. 88 (1935) Note: The information in this document was compiled from historical records maintained by the Offices of the United States Attorneys and by the Department of Justice. Every effort has been made to prepare accurate information. In some instances, this document mentions officials without the “United States Attorney” title, who nevertheless served under federal appointment to enforce the laws of the United States in federal territories prior to statehood and the creation of a federal judicial district. INTRODUCTION In this, the Bicentennial Year of the United States Constitution, the people of America find cause to celebrate the principles formulated at the inception of the nation Alexis de Tocqueville called, “The Great Experiment.” The experiment has worked, and the survival of the Constitution is proof of that.
    [Show full text]
  • The Original Documents Are Located in Box 4, Folder “COINTELPRO” of the Ron Nessen Papers at the Gerald R
    The original documents are located in Box 4, folder “COINTELPRO” of the Ron Nessen Papers 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. Ron Nessen 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 4 of the Ron Nessen Papers at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL WASHINGTON, D.C. 20!130 November 14, 1974 MEMORANDUM FOR: FROM: SUBJECT: COINTELPRO Attaqhed for your use at your press briefing on Monday, November 18, are the following: A. Proposed questions and answers for your own use. I suggest that you refer all specific inquiries concerning the or1g1n, scope, details etq. of COINTELPRO to the Department of Justice; B. Questions and answers which will be used by the Attorney General in his own press conference on that day; C. The COINTELPRO report to be released in conjunction with the Attorney General's press conference; and D. A memorandum from the Attorney General to the FBI Director which will also be released in conjunction with the Attorney General's press conference.
    [Show full text]
  • Beyond 1984: Undercover in America–Serpico to Abscam Robert Blecker New York Law School, [email protected]
    digitalcommons.nyls.edu Faculty Scholarship Articles & Chapters 1984 Beyond 1984: Undercover in America–Serpico to Abscam Robert Blecker New York Law School, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.nyls.edu/fac_articles_chapters Part of the Criminal Law Commons Recommended Citation 28 N.Y.L. Sch. L. Rev. 823 (1983-1984) This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Faculty Scholarship at DigitalCommons@NYLS. It has been accepted for inclusion in Articles & Chapters by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@NYLS. BEYOND 1984: UNDERCOVER IN AMERICA- SERPICO TO ABSCAM ROBERT I. BLECKER PART ONE PROLOGUE ................................................. 824 SERPICO To ARCHER ........................................ 840 The Archer Trial-United States v. Sherman: Subjective versus Objective Entrapment-Judge Friendly and Federal Jurisdiction-United States v. Russell-Archer reversed-A Second Try-The New York State Archer Case-Hampton v. United States: The Government on Both Sides-Archer's Conviction Affirmed: The Technique Vindicated. ABsc m ................................................... 872 The Undercover Background-Guccione and Williams-The Coaching Incident-Meyers' Payoff-Kelly-Schwartz and Jannotti. TRIALS AND HEARINGS ...................................... 899 United States v. Jannotti: Due Process-Congressional Hearings-The Archer Stain-United States v. Meyers-United States v. Williams-A Linguistic Probe of Abscam-Jannotti on Appeal: Entrapment and Due Process-United
    [Show full text]