◆ SpookStack

Eonorabl. Sylvestor J. Ryan, Distriet Judge, oyerruled said Objeetions and dirested ths witness, Robert R.' Granyill., to answer said que tions. 9. Xour petitioner had endeavored to olicit in- formation to the offaet that there had been wire tapping at. the dofendant Coplon's tolephone during a trial in whieh Sbe was the detandant in the,tnited sfates Distriot Court 'Tor the Distriet of Columbia, held before tho Honorabi. Albert L. Rove, Distriet Jadge, but said Distrist Judg. .Restes sustained ths Gorernmont's objection to all questions .soneering wire tapping. It appears, therefore, from'the. feregoing, that the informmtion with respeet to the tappimg. of said defendant's telephone was received only as late as thm pre-trial hearing abore referred to. 10. .sostion 605 of the Fedoral Communication aet prehibits the intorcepting and divulging of tolephone conversations; that this prohibition is not limited smly to private persons but applie! alss to doverrment agints, inoluding ngents of tho F.B,I.; sd that a violation of Haid section is & crime and punishable by iwprisenmont. ll. The suprom Court of the. United States, in the. two Mardone cases, to wit, Mardono y. Unitod statos, 58 supp. Ct. 275, 302 U. s. 379; and Mardone . United States, 60 Sup. Ct, 266, 308 U. 3. 338, definitely sottled ths question involved, to the erreet that evidence obtained through il- legal wire tapping cannot be used in - Federal Court. In the second Nardone case the Supreme Court expressly held that not only the interoepted messages themselves but also all ovidonce and knowledge dorived therefron should be sup-. pressed, that the Governmont should not b. allowed to mak. use of the "fruits of the poisonous tree", and that th. Government should submit in a pretrial hearing to an exam- ination with respect to hose intercopted messages and with - 4 -