◆ SpookStack

According to Plaza and Weir, Weinberg was criti- cized at that meeting for having given Senator Williams instructions prior to the June 28th meeting. This. testimony was corroborated to some extent by two of the New Jersey FBL agents. Weinberg's alléged response was that if he - did not put words into the subjects' mouths the government would never be able to make cases. By the time of the due process hearing Plaza and Weir, and, of course, the defendants, urged that this incident with Williams constituted serious misconduct that jeopardized the entire investigation. Plaza and Weir testi- fied that a serious argument developed between Plaza and Weinberg at the August 9 meeting, and that "putting words in subjects’ mouths" became a major point of concern for the rest of the investigation. - There is no question but that some sparks were. generated at the August 9th meeting. Plaza's abrasive . -Manner and blunt criticism caused Weinberg to argue with, him and later even to threaten to quit Abscam if Plaza and the New Jersey prosecutors were going to run it. Even before the August 9th meeting Lawrence Scharf of the Eastern District strike force had cautioned Weinberg that he should not put words into the subjects' mouths. Weinberg and Good disliked and distrusted Plaza and his participation