◆ SpookStack

sean os -teee een rMbebahie tte ae et sbeNE AA Ny A NOE an IO OTS wos eel nyo etl > - have arisen, in not having clearly defined stan | | | | think is the crux of it. Mr. Apamsa. That is true. Senator Scrrwrimen. That’s all I have, Mr. Chairman Senator Tower. Mr. Adams, what use does the Bureau presently make of its intelligence informants, and have they ever been used as provocateurs or.as magnets for action Mr. Avass. No, sir. Well, you asked two questions. Senator Tower. Yes. Mr. Avaus. Let me take the last one first, provocateurs. Our poli has not—or our policy has been to discourage any activities whi in any way might involve an informant doing something that an agent cannot do, which would be in the area of being a provocateur, which basically is entrapment. And we have had some allegations of entrap- ment come up. We feel we have satisfactorily answered them. This is a very technical legal field which boils down, of course, to the fact that if @ person is willing to do something, and the Government merely provides the opportunity, that is not legally entrapment. So if a person comes to us and says, “I have been asked to participate in & break-in of a Federal building, I would like to heip you,” then the law basically would indicate we have the authority to continue to let him operate, The question comes up if he assumes the whole direction and causes people to do something which they would not otherwise have done. That is the entrapment issue. So we are very alert to this. We have instructions, clear guidelines, instructions to our field offices that they are not to use an informant for anything that an agent cannot legally do. I don’t say there haven't been some mistakes in that regard, but I don’t know of any at the present time. Senator Towrr. Senator Huddleston! Senator Hupo.eston. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. _ First, I think to keep this activity in proper perspective, 1t might be wel! to remember that even though a great deal of the testimony and the questioning has been relating to the question of Dr. King, this is by no means an isolated situation. Dr. King’s case is indeed a classic example, utilizing all of the various techniques of the Bureau. both in intelligence gathering, and action against an individual in order to discredit him or embarrass him, and indeed destroy him. But the record is replete, and indeed, here is an entire sheaf of similar targets who are certainly not as well known. Some of them are high school students, some of them are high school teachers. college students, college teachers, broadcasters and journalists, people whose names would be almost totaliy unfamiliar to the vast majoniy of Americans So the activity was not confined to those that are immediately rec- ognizable public figures. I want to just proceed along the question of informants that Senator '- Towet just raised ‘for just ‘a moment or two. You say that your in-. . - formants are not expeeted to do anything that an agent himselfcould *" not do. In the gathering of information do you have any safeguard at all, any rule os to how the informant proceeds in order to gather the information you are looking for! Mr. Apams. Only that he proceed through legal means. Senator Huppresron. Is that specifically stated to him when he is employed? a tae got Fd a uta ale ate da oR eC oe SN