◆ SpookStack

3. The Grand Jury made a general statement criticizing the performance of upper and middle management of the County Clerk's Office and expressed concern regarding the operations of the divisions of the office. This was based on the charges relating to the care and handling of the Sirhan exhibits. The C.A.0. task force found that the management and overall An Ame arma seman a2 Fanaa ee en tia Fa at a wer operation wv the department was generally eabLloliat Lu ¥ « The Court Order Re Exhibits On June 7, 1968, a court order was promulgated by Judge Arthur Alarcon. His order continued into effect until May 20, 1969, at which time Judge Herbert Walker issued a court order which stated in substance that the original exhibits in the Sirhan case were not to be viewed except upon order of the court. This instruction did not apply to attorneys of record. Judge Walker's court order was preceded by a conference in his chambers on May 16, 1969, which was recorded by a court reporter. Three representatives of the County Clerk's Office, including Mr. Peter J. Talmachoff, Chief of the Criminal Division, were present during this conference in order that the views of the two superior court judges would be clearly communicated and understood. During the conference, and based upon the testimony relating thereto, it was Aamancetranklv waAtaan thrat KRAtKA news sai Tr Chants t na let ae ee Nee NS GES wealg oc wha RE SSiGing Judge Vonar 4é58 Lor ing ana Judge Herbert Walker also expected that the critical ballistics evidence in the Sirhan case was to be specifically packaged to preserve its integrity. This conference occured well after all of the exhibits had been introduced into evidence and had thus come into the care, custody and control of the Los Angeles County Clerk's Office. But the C.A.0. task force found that the idea of special packaging for ballistics evidence was not clearly communicated to or expected of the County Clerk. An although the conference with the judges was recorded, the transcription was not prepared for Circulation until July 26, 1971. The C.A.0O. task force did state that it was unfortunate that Mr. Talmachoff did: not question the lack of reference to special packaging in the court order since it was discussed in conference. Conclusion Re Aeanw a Tosesuer Tree e mbt i nn tian ~ ae MD ele Pe APA Rn w iM owl ¥ Lov LlEaALLAON i eT VeLerrR ” Wii lt There was no real evidence developed during the 1971 Grand Jury investigation that any tampering with exhibits actually occured, but investigators from the District Attorney's Office and. from the Grand Jury were gravely concerned about the problem. The District Attorney's Office stopped short of saying that there was any tampering with the bullets or gun, but their investigators had concern about the possibility that it did occur. - 30 - a oe & O