◆ SpookStack

SS ahs? Me Bn 8 1 cori anna SVOi-VF. z e | f A | E 24 A @ubert tted: . THY ATETCSIELLITY OF STATHINT: WILE BLE EF COXTACHT Becnuse of the extrone importance to the Bureau'e ‘investigative operationa, your attention ie called to the opinion of the Suprane Court om varch 1, 1943, in the ones entitiod SolslS et al ve, NF UNIT EUS." Ym thie ence, the Court ruled that oonfessions which hed been taken fron deferdontr hel. in custody a period of 46 hours without having been delivered before a cockiitting officer were, therefore, inadmissibic in evidenos, im eupyort of thin decision, the Court qited the ax overiny statutes “hich Uirit the functions of federal officere to mcke arrests and thereafter S-weiictely taking the prisoner before the comiltting magistreta. It was indicated that « atatencnt teron fra: the defendant curing the parled when the arresting offloere wore exceeding their suthority by holding then without legal corzi tacnt was in- pRroyere The abova case was cited ag authority in the case entitled 1 TOH1LI. Cll PTOR ABLETON et al wa, TO ORT T FIAT, * decided the sane day in which tte defendants were bold in euctoty ix days by atate suthorities, but, during thet period, were questioned by federel officers, resulting in the execution of etrtapentse aghinet taterest,- -: Ta reachin: its Geaision, the Court specifically overruled the Govermant's contention that the statements should be aduissible because they were voluntary, ‘° — , ; In view of thease decisions, I oxnnot daprese upen you too stro: ¢ly the nececalty for strict com liance with the requirements of the act of dune 18, 19%, suthorising Agente of this Bureau to anke arruste thet “persons errested sf01) be immediately ta.en before a committing officer,” x Very truly yours, John Fdgar loover PSST bo. & ~ Bureau lietin to all Investicative Balko: ees ret tereting enced BEG DOES cy Pe, Secetiate arrol enon’,