◆ SpookStack

oo o Seer Bureau officials were in regular contact with Departmental attorneys with regard to a study the Department was making to determine under what conditions microphone surveillances might properly be made. The Department's approach to this problem was outlined in conferences with Departmental attorneys William Foley and Thomas Hall of the Crininal On December 1, 1953, attorneys Foley and Hall stated that it was apparent to them that the Attorney General, as chief law enforcement officer of the country, could not be placed in the position of authorizing outright trespass. (Exhibit 33) However, bearing in mind the value of the microphone technique in cases affecting the national welfare and security, they felt that the Attorney General could, in effect, throw his weight behind the Bureau in those cases where trespass was a technical violation or where trespass was arguable. Attorneys Foley and Hall stated that they believed that the previous interpretation by the Departnent as to what constituted trespass was far too restrictive. Mr. Belmont and Mr. Hennrich of the Bureau suggested to attorneys Foley and Mall at this conference on December 1, 1953, that it might be possible for the es ne em nee nee wo we ee ee =-— 28 = ‘