◆ SpookStack

. orton acerg ry f ; fo tes : _ a - wot ° _ UNITED STA’ TES GOL "ANMENT * DeLoach £ - . ite Memora ndum ss h Pr eanad _ Gale Rosen Sullivan Tavel TO Mr. Mohr pate: 7/5/66 FROM : J. J. canned f sumect’” SUPREME COURT’ § REMARKS PRAISING Trotter Tele. Room Hoimes \u ! iw Gandy ——___— In view of the attempt being made in some places to shake public confidence in the FBI at this time, it seems that we should have some way of calling public attention now and then to some of the praise that we get. Recently, highly favorable remayks about the FBI and its work have \ been*inade by members of the present Supreme Court. There are at least tyree_ examples, as follows: 2 := QJ]Jn Miranda v. Arizona, decided on June 13, 1966, the majority ~ a) _pPinion, written by the Chief Justice, makes the following .- - gtatement "Over the years the Federal Bureau of Investigation =~. has compiled an exempiary record of effective law enforcement vO while advising any suspect or arrested person, at the outset of an interview, that he is not required to make a statement, , a that any statement may be used against him in court, that the ‘ individual may obtain the services of an attorney of his own Oo choice and, more recently, that he has a right to free counsel ° if he is unable to pay. A letter received from the Solicitor \ General in response to a question from the Bench makes it clear that the present pattern of warnings and respect for the rights of the individual followed as a practice by the FBI is consistent with the procedure which we delineate today," “Pa fer Tena Gy tet ‘ {2} Remarks made by Mr wets _dustice lark containes ied in “Introduction to Symposium on Evidence ani rental Procedures, '' Baylor Law Review, Summer and Fall, 1965, reported as follows: ". . .The rules which the Court has now held applicable to state procedures la Ra fatlanral Da tanal lad. anfa mbt nffin fan wAaAn es nave peen ijuowea by S eacr ai saw Crmocr cement oriicer P=] i10r JeaLDy, some for half a century. Yet the high percentage of convictions in Federal courts has not been lowered...it has improved during the last 30 - 40 years. This has mos? likely resulted from the ee eee TT Enclosur c 1- Mr. Tolson (oc “TES 1- Mr. DeLoach yp SUL 26 866 1- Mr. Wick EC. 25 wi CONTINBED — 0 i, po : fil / 1 —~Mr, Caspers” a, =o ye ee gh * | EX-108 ¢ WL ann MENUS Che AGLALHEL” on 6 Bee : ce ln?