INVESTIGATION OF CRIME AND LAW ENFORCEMENT IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA JANUARY 14, 1952 UNITED STATES SENATE, ON THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, INVESTIGATING CRIME AND LAW ENFORCEMENT, Washington, D. C. The subcommittee met, at 10 a. m., pursuant to Senate Resolution 136, agreed to September 13, 1951, first session, Eighty-second Congress, in room 457, Senate Office Building, Senator Matthew M. Neely (chairman) presiding. Present: Senators Neely, Butler, Welker and Pastore. Also present: Senator William Langer: Arnold Bauman, chief counsel; Harold Solomon, associate counsel; William P. Gulledge, assistant counsel to the Committee on the District of Columbia. The CHAIRMAN. This subcommittee has met pursuant to Senate Resolution 136 which Mr. Solomon, associate counsel for the subcommittee, will read. Mr. SOLOMON (reading): SENATE RESOLUTION 136 Resolved, That the Senate Committee on the District of Columbia, or any duly authorized subcommittee thereof, is hereby authorized and directed (1) to conduct a full and complete study and investigation with respect to crime and related problems, including law enforcement, in the District of Columbia; and (2) to report to the Senate at the earliest practicable date, but not later than January 31, 1952, the results of such study and investigation, together with such recommendations as to necessary legislation as it may deem desirable. SEC. 2. For the purpose of this resolution, the committee, or any duly authorized subcommittee thereof, is authorized to employ upon a temporary basis such technical, clerical, and other assistants as it deems advisable, and is authorized, with the consent of the head of the department or agency concerned, to utilize the services, information, facilities, and personnel of any of the departments or agencies of the Government of the United States. The expenses of the committee under this resolution, which shall not exceed $25,000, shall be paid from the contingent fund of the Senate upon vouchers approved by the chairman of the committee. The CHAIRMAN. The subcommittee has adopted a resolution relative to quorum requirements which Mr. Gulledge, assistant committee counsel will read. Mr. GULLEDGE. The following resolution was adopted by the subcommittee investigating crime and law enforcement in the District of Columbia, January 9, 1952 [reading]: Resolved, That any member of the special Subcommittee to Investigate Crime and Law Enforcement in the District of Columbia shall constitute a quorum for the purpose of issuing subpenas, administering oaths, taking testimony, ruling on the admissibility of evidence, and calling or adjourning any hearings. 1 The CHAIRMAN. The subcommittee has agreed that television recording and broadcasting of its hearings will be permitted, but that no witness will, over his objection, be subject to television while he is testifying. Photographers who wish to take pictures of witnesses will do so before or after the witnesses have testified and not while questions are being asked or answered. Mr. Bauman, chief counsel of the committee, will now please call the first witness. Mr. BAUMAN. Mr. Ahearn. TESTIMONY OF JOHN AHEARN, ACCOMPANIED BY DANIEL B. MAHER, ATTORNEY The CHAIRMAN. Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you are about to give will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God? Mr. AHEARN. I do. The CHAIRMAN. Proceed, Mr. Bauman. Mr. BAUMAN. Mr. Ahearn, Mrs. Ahearn was served with a subpena duces tecum of this committee, is that correct? Mr. AHEARN. That is correct. Mr. BAUMAN. And the subpena called for the presentation of all the books and records of the estate of which she is one of the executors or administrators. Mr. AHEARN. No, according to the subpena, records pertaining to four persons Mr. BAUMAN. What other records have been subpenaed? Mr. AHEARN. Canceled checks. Mr. BAUMAN. Have you produced those records? Mr. AHEARN. I have; yes, sir. Mr. BAUMAN. Will you offer those? Mr. AHEARN. Oh, I should explain that we did not keep ledger accounts. Mr. BAUMAN. Do I understand that-first of all, are you the accountant for this estate? Mr. AHEARN. I have it with my wife; yes, sir. Mr. BAUMAN. Do you have the books and records; is that correct? Mr. AHEARN. That is correct. Mr. BAUMAN. And you state you do not maintain any ledger accounts? Mr. AHEARN. No, we just keep it under cash receipts and disbursement basis, as the Internal Revenue instructed us several years ago. They filled out the first form and told us how to file. Mr. BAUMAN. The only books you maintain are cash records? Mr. BAUMAN. Do I understand the proceeds and income into the estate was deposited in the bank account? Mr. AHEARN. That is correct. Mr. BAUMAN. And all disbursements to the various beneficiaries were by checks, is that correct? Mr. AHEARN. That is correct. Mr. BAUMAN. I have no further questions. The CHAIRMAN. Does Mr. Ahearn's counsel wish to appear. Mr. MAHER. My name is Daniel B. Maher, appearing on behalf of Mr. John Ahearn. May I offer these, sir? The CHAIRMAN. Certainly. (The documents referred to were returned to the witness after analysis by the subcommittee.) Mr. BAUMAN. Thank you very much. The next witness will be Robert J. Barrett. TESTIMONY OF ROBERT J. BARRETT, ACCOMPANIED BY CHARLES E. FORD AND DANIEL B. MAHER, ATTORNEYS The CHAIRMAN. Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you are about to give will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God? Mr. BARRETT. So help me God. The CHAIRMAN. Let the appearance of counsel for the witness be noted in the record. Mr. FORD. My name is Charles E. Ford. Mr. BAUMAN. Is Mr. Maher also appearing for this witness? Mr. FORD. Yes; he is. Mr. MAHER. My name is Daniel B. Maher. Mr. BAUMAN. Major Barrett, were you served with a subpena duces tecum of this committee on Mr. BARRETT. I was. Mr. Chairman, I would like to make a statement, please. The CHAIRMAN. Proceed. Mr. BARRETT. I wish to object to the physical conditions present in this hearing room before I start my testimony. I object to being televised and I object to the television at this hearing; even though my image is not televised I object to the microphones being placed before me, I object to having flash bulbs glaring before my eyes, I object to the glare, noise, and confusion that accompanies all these things that I have mentioned. The reasons for my objections are these: The presence of these lights-[addressing photographers:] When you get through I will continue reading. Mr. FORD. Mr. Chairman, may he be permitted to read this statement to the committee and while he does, that they do not flash bulbs in front of him? The CHAIRMAN. The photographers will comply. Will you proceed to read your statement? Mr. BARRETT. The presence of these lights, cameras, microphones, recording devices, and all others, television, radio, newsreel equipment, subjects me to severe mental and physical strain so that I am unable to think clearly, plus the heat generated by the lights and the general confusion, make this hearing to me a third degree. If I should, because of all this confusion and other physical conditions present, make a misstatement as to facts, I would be subjecting myself to an indictment for perjury. In addition, the presence of a microphone before me and my counsel-the microphone, I am advised, is so sensitive that it can be amplified to a degree that it can record the noise of an insect walking across a piece of paper-it would in effect deny me the right to privately confer with my counsel and therefore deny me the right of counsel. Finally, I wish to state that Mr. Daniel Maher, cocounsel in my behalf, has very poor eyesight. He has, I am advised, less than onethird vision in each eye. His eyes are particularly sensitive to glare and continued exposure to glare impairs his vision and causes violent headaches. When I retained him I did so that I would have full advantage of his talent. If the present conditions prevail he will be unable to read his notes or to think clearly and that in effect will be a denial to me of the right to counsel of my own choosing. I am here pursuant to a subpena to testify but as long as the present conditions prevail, until they are remedied, I must respectfully decline to testify. I hereby avail myself of every constitutional right and privilege which I may have. The CHAIRMAN. No photographs will be taken of this witness while he is testifying. The television cameras will not operate while Major Barrett is on the witness stand. To this extent, Major, your objections are sustained. Mr. FORD. Mr. Chairman would you direct us as to your decision regarding the microphones? The CHAIRMAN. Please repeat your request. Mr. FORD. Would you advise us as to your decision as to the microphones, two of which appear directly in front of us and which we understand are recording and are connected to radio transmitting devices and recording devices, particularly these two mikes that are here. Do you recall that was covered in his statement? The CHAIRMAN. The microphones will not be used while this witness is on the stand. Mr. BAUMAN. Mr. Chairman, I am informed that present in this room is a prospective witness and I shall ask some questions, Mr. Chairman, about him. I am talking about Roger Simkins, who has been subpenaed to testify. My motion is that all witnesses who have been supenaed to testify today who may be sitting in this room be sequestered during the questioning of this witness. The CHAIRMAN. Any other witnesses who have been subpenaed and are present will retire until Major Barrett's examination has been completed. Mr. FORD. Mr. Chairman, may I inquire if that camera [indicating] is on? The red lights indicate to me that it is on. The CHAIRMAN. I do not know. But the cameramen have been requested not to photograph Major Barrett, counsel, or anybody else during the major's examination. Mr. FORD. All right. Now, it has been stated that counsel will not be able to work under these lights, and Major Barrett has indicated that he does not wish to testify under these conditions, and in order to protect those pres ent Mr. BAUMAN. Major Barrett, do I understand that you have no objection to having your image televised but it is the presence of the microphones and the lights Mr. BARRETT. I object to my image being televised, I object to these lights and I object to the confusion in the room here, such as that. Mr. BAUMAN. Do I understand, sir, that you have no objection to the televising of people in the room other than yourself, provided the lights Mr. BARRETT. That is my objection-that television be eliminated in this room while I am testifying. Mr. BAUMAN. Well, is the basis of your objection the fact that the lights and the microphones annoy and distract you, sir? Mr. BARRETT. Yes, sir. Mr. FORD. Correct. Mr. BAUMAN. So that if the lights are turned down completely and the microphones removed your objections will be satisfied? Mr. FORD. In part. Mr. BARRETT. In part. The CHAIRMAN. The lights will be turned down and the microphones will not be used while this witness is testifying. Senator PASTORE. Mr. Chairman, I should like to indicate my personal views on this subject. Taking into account this witness' experience, I deem his objection to be rather frivolous and unfounded. However, I understand the ruling of the Chair at the moment is in order to obtain his testimony and we will abide by that ruling. The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Senator Pastore. Mr. BAUMAN. Major Barrett, on July 24, 1947, the Washington Post Mr. BARRETT. Just a minute, Mr. Bauman. I would like to make another statement, Mr. Chairman. The CHAIRMAN. Proceed. Mr. BARRETT. At the outset of this inquiry, whether by counsel for the committee or any of the members of the subcommittee, any questions answered by me will be answered only according to my best recollection and that will apply to each and every question asked me. May I respectfully point out that on many occasions here before I have testified under oath before various grand juries sitting in the District of Columbia as well as committees of the Congress, involving crime enforcement in the District of Columbia generally and with specific emphasis on gambling. On most of these occasions I had a recollection of immediate or recent events. I also had the benefit of official files and some personal notes which I do not have now, nor do I have access to for the purpose of refreshing my memory-a great many of my personal papers have been destroyed or lost. As far as my business or personal transactions are concerned I am also at a disadvantage because of records which are lost or destroyed and I have nothing to refresh my recollection with any degree of certainty. My answers to the questionnaire to the extent I furnished the information were made purely from memory in most instances and if my testimony about to be given in this hearing should show any variation from what was heretofore given I want to make clear that such should be due to lack of records or other pertinent data with which to refresh my memory now. The human mind could not-it could not be possible to retain a present recollection of what I have said or done over a period of the last several years. For that reason I want it understood that each answer given by me hereafter must be deemed to be qualified and given according to my best recollection. If there should be any conflict between my present |