◆ SpookStack

OPTIONAL FORM WO. 16 Felson Impnt >t ail. UNITED STATES GOVE “Ar mo, M moran dn Spe Rosen Sullivan To : DATE: q_ a MR bee CONTI - tove} UV Ce Gide ele. Room : v From): B. J. WHITE "A t Ht nara — Tt co th ay cn te t SUBJECT: TELEPHONE CALL°FROM ATTORNEY HENRY a: ‘WHITE Houston, Texas; 1-17-62 At 11:05 PM, 1-17-62, an individual identifying himself as Henry J. Whit an attorney at Houston, Texas, called Special Agent Robert A. Frazier, who was the Laboratory duty supervisor at that time. White was very incoherent and rambling during his conversation and it was Frazier's belief that the individual \ was probably intoxicated. Briefly, Frazier was able to determine that White had been contacted by @ prospective client in Houston and asked to initiate a suit against the Peters Cartridge Company because two shotgun shells had gone dif in the client's jacket injuring the client. White wanted an official opinion whether or not it was possibl for the shells to explode in this manner. Frazier (who is one of the Laboratory's most experienced firearms experts) advised him that he could not give him any opinion in this matter because of the fact that the Laboratory does not give testimony or opinions in connection with dvil matters. During the discussion it was mentioned that White might contact the Houston Office today concerning this matter. As you know, I called the Houston Office at 9:30 this morning and talked with Supervisor Fred Fehl in the absence of SAC Rightmyer to alert Houston to the possibility that White might call the Houston Office today. I told Fehl that under no circumstances should any statement be made to White which could be used in a civil action since this could be a very controversial matter and that Peters Cartridge Company was one of the largest concerns in the firearms business and one with which the Bureau had in the past and undoubtedly will contin to do business. Fehi stated that the Houston Office would be alert for White; that they would make discreet inquiry and advise the Bureau. Bureau files contain no information which could be identified with White, A former employe> iA v= employed as a student fingerprint classifier 4-21-41 and removed from the rolls 9-7-41 because he failed to return to active duty from military leave within the required period However, it would not appear that this individual is identical with the attorney, White. ACTION: wo EC 0 37 $2 -LY: None. . .for infor mation in the event that this individuSl should call’ or” correspond with the Bur eau subsequently. we WEE 1 - Mr. “Belmont Mr. DeLoach Bow: iin (5)