Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
HEARINGS
BEFORE THE
S. Res. 67
ON
PART 7
OCTOBER 12, 13, 14, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, DECEMBER 14 AND 15, 1955
0
UNITED STATES
GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
71515
WASHINGTON : 1956
I I
SUBCOMMITTEE ON IMPROVEMENTS IN
CODE
CONTENTS
Statement of-
Page
CONTENTS
Statement of-Continued
Herring, Charles, attorney, Austin, Tex ------------------------Hicks, Thomas Odell Bond, Dallas, Tex ------------------------Hightower, Cato, chief of police, Fort Worth, Tex_
----------
-------------------
Levine, Morris, Los Angeles, Calif ----------------------------La Cascio, Allec-, Houston, Tex ------------------------------Look, Joan, El Paso, Tex------------------------------------Lott, John Thomas, Fort Worth, Tex., accompanied by R. C. Green,
his counsel ---------------------------------------------Love, Edward Keith, Houston, Tex ---------------------------McLeaish, Bernard J., customs agent in charge, Bureau of Customs,
Brownsville, Tex ----------------------------------------McMahan, J. C., captain, Houston Police Department, Houston, TexMesser, Luther Spurgeon, Houston, Tex ------------------------Miller, Tom, Hon. mayor, city of Austin, Tex -------------------Moreno, Rudy, San Antonio, Tex., accompanied by Raul Villareal,
2604,
his counsel -----------------------------------------Murphy, Merle, customs inspector, Bureau of Customs, Laredo, Tex.,
2572, 2575,
Department of the Treasury ----------------------Murray, Frank captain of the homicide squad, Houston Police
Department, Houston, Tex --------------------------------Naylor, Walter E., chief, narcotics division, Department of Public
2381,
Safety, State of Texas--------------------------------Niess, William Lee, Dallas, Tex ------------------------------Od-m, Brian S., assistant United States attorney, Brownsville, Tex-Orosco, Ignacio, Jr., San Antonio, Tex -------------------------Parrott, Harmon, assistant United States attorney, Western District
of Texas -----------------------------------------------Parrott, James Edward, San Antonio, Tex_ --------------------Paul, Ida, Brownwood, Tex TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT
Perez, Pura Rodriguez, Houston, Tex --------------------------Queves, Angel, Richmond, Tex --------------------------------
Page
3300
3037
3189
3293
3447
3260
3464
3406
2909
2655
3452
3453
2711
2461
2928
3463
2388
2404
2725
3389
3281
3336
2815
2701
2771
2422
3476
2592
3438
3349
3166
2963
2584
2629
3343
3179
2949
2961
3418
3175
3370
2901
2440
2523
2476
3304
2600
CONTENTS
Statement of-Continued
Saulter, Helen, Houston, Tex ---------------------------------Scharff, Alvin F. customs agent in charge,. Bureau of Customs,
Houston, Tex., department of the Treasury -------------------271 6,
Schofield, Mary Ann, Houston, Tex -----------------------Schoultze, William Francis, Dallas, Tex ------------------------Scott, Chester, Galveston, Tex -------------------------------Scott, R. C., investigator, Austin Police Department, Austin, Tcex_ Selman, Lawrence R., patrolman, Dallas Police Department, Dallas,
Tex---------------------------------------------------Shepperd, John Ben, attorney general, State of Texas; president,
National Association of Attorneys General --------------------Sistrunk, Roy, Dallas, Tex., accompanied by Clayton Fowler, his
counsel ------------------------------------------------Speer, Wayland Lee, special investigator, Subcommittee on Illicit
Narcotics, Committee on the Judiciary, United States Senate. 2456,
Steger, William M., United States attorney, Eastern District of TexasTaylor, Walter B., Dallas, Tex -------------------------------Thornberry, Homer Hon., Representative, 10th Congressional District, House of Representatives, United States Congress ---------Thorp, R. D., chief of police, Austin, Tex -----------------------Tollenger, William F., agent in charge, Bureau of Narcotics, Houston,
Tex., Department of the Treasury ---------------------------Trautman, John A., M. D., medical officer in charge, United States
Public Health Service Hospital, Fort Worth, Tex ---------------Turner, Perry Milton, Austin, Tex ----------------------------Tyler, Olin Ray, Grand Prairie, Tex ---------------------------Undisclosed witness, Austin hearing ---------------------------Undisclosed witness A, San Antonio hearing ---------------------Undisclosed witness B, San Antonio hearing ---------------------Undisclosed witness X, Houston hearing -----------------------Undisclosed witness B, Dallas hearing --------------------------Velasquez, Raul, Chicago, Ill ----------------------------3365,
Wade, Henry, criminal district attorney, Dallas County, Tex -------Wallace, Luke Murray, Dallas, Tex ----------------------------Walton, Dan, district attorney, Harris County, Tex ---------------Weilbacher, William, San Antonio Police Department, San Antonio,
Tex---------------------------------------------------Whitburn, W. J., chief of detectives, Police Department, Galveston,
Tex---------------------------------------------------Wilkey, Malcolm R., United States attorney, Southern District of
Texas -------------------------------------------------Williams, Gladys, Houston, Tex ------------------------------Wine, Russell B., United States attorney, Western District of Texas-Wood, Harry, Fort Worth, Tex -------------------------------Woods, Richard, assistant district attorney, Bexar County, Tex- - --Wright, Harlon, sheriff, Tarrant County, Tex
Statement submitted by Hidalgo, J. L., assistant director, Catholic Youth
Organization, Archdiocese of San Antonio, Tex ---------------------
Page
2928
2936
2729
3051
3324
2396
3049
2430
3119
3417
3069
2997
2357
2385
2957
3226
2371
3130
2423
3352
3356
2734
3062
3396
3018
3007
2917
3371
2926
2740
2832
2624
3212
2642
3205
2656
EXHIBITS
Letters to Dr. Oscar Rabasa, Director General del Servicio Siplomatico,
Secretaria de Relaciones Exteriores, Mexico City, D. F., and Licenciado
Carlos Franco Sodi, Procurador General de Justicia de La Naci6n,
Mexico City, D. F., from Senator Price Daniel, chairman, Subcommittee
on Improvements in the Federal Criminal Code, Committee on the Judiciary, United States Senate, dated October 1, 1955, inviting both to sit
in on hearings -----------------------------------------------Telegram (in Spanish) to Senator Price Daniel from Licenciado Oscar
Rabasa, dated October 11, 1955, and letter (with translation) to Senator
Price Daniel from Licenciado Carlos Franco Sodi, dated October 4,
1955, refusing invitation to sit in on hearings__.
Report entitled "Summary of Arrests for NTarcotics Violations by Sex,
Race, and Age, 1947-55," by R. D. Thorp, chief of police, Austin Police
Department, Austin, Tex--------------------------------------Photograph and description of Simona Y. Cavazos, prepared by Austin
Police Department, Austin, Tex ---------------------------------
2366
2367
2389
2397
CONTENTS
Page
2398
2399
2419
2426
2457
2486
2494
2495
2504
2508
2533
2534
2565
2566
2595
2633
2635
2636
2643
2645
2679
2685
2687
2749
2767
CONTENTS
VII
Page
2770
2804
2824
2826
2830
2841
2905
2921
2923
2932
2932
2937
2947
2948
2959
2963
3023
3074
3094
3100
3201
3207
3228
3241
3248
VInI
CONTENTS
Page
CONTENTS
N. -0
IX
APPENDIX
Laws pertaining to narcotics enacted at the regular session of the 54th
Legislature, 1955, State of Texas, taken from the general laws as published under the authority of the State of Texas, as follows:
H. B. No. 308, chapter 30097, entitled "Contraband NarcoticsTransportation or Possession" ------------------------------H. B. No. 204, chapter 354, entitled "Uniform Narco ic Drug ActPenalties" ----------------------------------------------H. B. No. 65, chapter 385, entitled "Narcotic Drugs and Barbiturates-Penalties" ----------------------------------------H. B. No. 647, chapter 386, entitled "Narcotic Drugs-Paraphernalia"
S. B. No. 143, chapter 486, entitled "Narcotic Drugs and Barbiturates".
Testimony presented by Lawrence Fleishman, supervising customs agent,
10th Customs Agency District, accompanied by John J. Givens, assistant
supervising customs agent, El Paso, Tex., in the hearing before the
Subcommittee to Investigate Juvenile Delinquency of the* Committee
on the Judiciary, United States Senate, 83d Congress, 2d session, pursuant to Senate Resolution 89, entitled "Investigation of Juveline Delinquency in the United States," pp. 17-33 --------------------------Letter to Mr. Lee Speer, investigator, Investigating Committee, Senate
Subcommittee on Improvements in the Federal Criminal Code, San
Antonio, Tex., from J. H. Osborn, postal inspector, Inspection Service,
United States Post Office Department, dated October 13, 1955, on the
relationship between thefts of mail and addicts --------------------List of known addicts and their associates who crossed the bridge at
Laredo, Tex., into or from Mexico, submitted by Bureau of Customs,
Laredo, Tex ------------------------------------------------Police records of Luther Spurgeon Messer, submitted by the Department
of Police, Bureau of Criminal Identification, Houston, Tex -----------Map of Dallas, Tex., showing locations of concentrations of narcotic traffic
and list of locations by streets -----------------------------Faces
List of narcotic cases indicted in the Northern District of Texas, their last
known address, sentence received, or final disposition of their cases...---
Page
3481
3483
3484
3485
3486
3486
3487
3499
3500
3544
3551
3551
~PA~
Austin, Tex.
The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice at 10 a. m., in the crystal
ballroom of the Driskill Hotel, in Austin, Tex., Senator Price Daniel,
chairman of the subcommittee, presiding.
Present: Senator Price Daniel, of Texas (presiding), and Senator
John Marshall Butler, of Maryland.
Also present: C. Aubrey Gasque, of South Carolina, subcommittee
counsel; and Wayland Lee Speer, of Amarillo, Tex., committee investigator.
Senator DANIEL. The committee will come to order.
This is the first session of this committee in the State of Texas. We
are convening in Austin today, will sit in San Antonio tomorrow and
Friday, and in other Texas cities during next week.
WTe have for the first witness to appear before the committee today
Congressman Homer Thornberry. I want to say before I call him
before the committee that Congressman Homer Thornberry offered
the first resolution calling for a nationwide investigation of the narcotics traffic. We offered our resolutions about the same time, but
his was the first. When he saw the Senate was going to act first he
very graciously said he would be willing to cooperate with our committee rather than set up a duplicate committee in the House.
So it gives me real pleasure to call before our committee as our first
witness in Texas this Member of Congress who introduced the first
resolution for a nationwide investigation of the narcotics traffic, Congressman Homer Thornberry, if you will come forward. Homer, just
proceed in your own way, either from your statement or as you desire.
STATEMENT OF HON. HOMER THORNBERRY, MEMBER, HOUSE OF
REPRESENTATIVES, UNITED STATES CONGRESS
Congressman THORNBERRY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Chairman, Senator Butler, Mr. Gasque, I very deeply appreciate your courtesy in granting me this opportunity to testify this
morning.
My interest in this problem goes back many years-specifically to
the days when I had the privilege of serving as district attorney of this
county, Travis County. Like every other law-enforcement officer, I
quickly learned the close relationship of narcotics to a long series of
crimes other than the drug traffic itself.
2357
2358
2350
The best estimates available-those of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics-indicate there are about 60,000 addicts in this country. They
spend somewhere between $219 million to $657 million annually in
their futile effort to satisfy an appetite that cannot be satisfied.
The majority of these addicts are centered in our border and coastal
regions. They flock to the points where narcotics are most easily
obtainable. Here in Texas our attention has been called to the fact
that narcotics are crossing our international border. Mr. Chairman,
you will recall Mr. Charles Herring, United States district attorney for
this western district, made the statement that this border area was the
undisputed national gatepost for this deadly multibillion dollar narcotics traffic that flourishes illegally in the United States.
Senator DANIEL. For the record, I believe Mr. Herring served several years as Federal district attorney handling cases that involved
narcotics smuggling across the border?
Congressman THORNBEIRRY. Yes, sir, he did, and did a fine job in
checking the problem that existed on the border.
Those figures I have cited are sufficiently disturbing standing alone.
But they become positively alarming when we realize that those
60,000 addicts are a criminal fifth column--driven by forces over
which they no longer have control to wage perpetual warfare against
our society.
There is another factor of even greater importance. It first appeared on the horizon when the Communists took over control of mainland China. It has since become the cause of major concern to the
highest officials of our Government.
This factor is the use of narcotics as a "cold war" weapon by international communism.
As I said earlier, my interest in this problem arose from my background as a law-enforcement officer. As such, I followed the facts
for many years. But when this new factor appeared, I came to the
conclusion that drastic action was necessary.
Action without forethought or study is not only futile but dangerous. On that basis, I introduced my resolution calling for a select
committee of the House to investigate the situation and make recommendations.
When it became apparent that the Senate could act more quickly
than the House, I was happy to defer to the distinguished junior
Senator from Texas.
Senator DANIEL. I might say the reason we could act more quickly
was due to the fact that Senator Johnson heard both of us as majority
leader. He pushed that resolution very fast in the Senate. through.
Congressman TIORNBRERRY. I am happy that he did push it,
I know that in the hands of Senator Daniel and Senator Butler' the
public can be certain there will be a thorough and fearless inquiry.
The major point that I wish to urge upon this committee is concommunism.
sideration' of the narcotics traffic as an instrument of leaders
when
This instrument fell into the hands of the bolshevik
they took over the opium-producing sections of China.
to iruore
It would have been too much to expect the Communists
abandoned
the possibilities of the drug trade. They have long since world
conany moral scruples which conflict with their designs for help them
quest. In narcotics, they found a double-edged weapon to
achieve their goal.
2360
In the first place, the sale of opium and opium derivatives provides
them with foreign exchange for which they are so desperate. In the
second place, the spread of the narcotics habit contributes directly to
undermining the will of the free world to resist their aggression.
It is no accident that the Chinese Communists have located a heroin
factory in a suburb of Peiing -in the same area where Communist
political agents are trained., cor is it any accident that non-Communist South Korea has been granted a special priority in the distribution of heroin produced in Communist North Korea.
The fact that our country is a drug target of Communist China
has been attested by Harry J. Anslinger, United States representative
to the U. N. Commission on Narcotic Drugs. He has repeatedly laid
before that body documented cases of Communist efforts to bring
large supplies into our country through the west coast.
When I was district attorney of Travis County, the narcotics problem was entirely a matter of law enforcement. Today, it is a matter
of international diplomacy and ideological conflict.
We cannot take any chances on leaving unplugged this breach in
our cold-war defenses.
I do not intend to make specific recommendations to this committee
today. I believe that proposals for action should await the conclusion
of your study.
But I would like to outline some aspects of the problem which I
believe should be considered.
First, there is the question of the traffic itself. Are the laws sufficiently stringent? Is a Federal force of somewhere between 200 and
300 men sufficient to stem the tide? Is there adequate machinery for
cooperation between Federal and local officials?
Second, are there adequate controls over the somewhat milder narcotics whose effects may not be quite as drastic but which do so much
to lead young people into the more severe forms of addiction?
Third, do we have adequate machinery to handle addicts in the
early stages when reform and rehabilitation might be possible without
drastic treatment?
Fourth, do we have adequate machinery to handle the confirmed
addict, or must we be content with the familiar pattern of sentence
after sentence which does nothing other than to give society a brief
vacation from the depredations of the individual addict?
Fifth, should there be especially severe penalties for selling narcotics to minors who have not developed the resistance to vice which
comes with maturity?
I do not pretend to know the answers to these questions although I
am aware that cities which have cracked down and cracked down hardI
on narcotics violators have been blessed with immediate results.
refuse to believe that the traffic cannot be brought under control.
This is an issue which has a direct bearing upon our future and the
the
future of our children. I am confident that this committee has
await
ability and the determination to do the job and I will eagerly
its conclusions and recommendations.
Mr. Chairman, I thank you for your many courtesies to me and the
kind statement about me. I wish all of you well.
for your
Senator DANrEL. Congressman Thornberry, we thank youthis
comwonderful help and fine contributions you have made to
urn
2361
mittee, and while we are here today or any of the other Texas hearings,
we will certainly welcome you to sit in with us if you have any time
to spare.
Senator Butler, do you have any questions?
Senator BuTLER. Mr. Chairman, I want to congratulate the Congressman for his very clear and concise statement. I wholeheartedly
agree with that statement.
I want to remark about this in particular, that law enforcement,
where you have a severe penalty attached for peddling and pushing of
narcotics seems to dry the traffic up. I think it is particularly true of
the city where I was born, Baltimore; we used to have quite a problem
but our problem has been brought under control and it has been
brought under control because there are law-enforcement officers and
the judges have been tough on the people who engaged in this traffic.
Senator DANIEL. Any questions?
Mr. GASQUE. No.
2362
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
TRAFFIC
2363
2364
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
TRAFFIC
gists, and medical people, and I shall not attempt to encroach in this
eld.
After all of those things have been considered, however, there remains the other side of the narcotics problem, and that, of course,
deals not with those who use it but with the wholesalers and pushers
who traffic in them.
I am sure that the psychiatrists, the psychologists and the doctors
to whom I referred a moment ago can ably explain the complicated
motivating force which drives the addicts, themselves, and that is
another discourse which I will have to leave to them.
On the other hand, I think that I can very well point out to you
the motivating force which lies behind the dealers in drugs.
It is
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
TRAFFIC
2365
Colonel GARRISON. They have done an excellent job with what they
have to do with.
Senator DANIEL. It is your opinion that Congress is not providing
sufficient forces here in the Customs and Narcotic Bureaus to take care
of the situation in Texas?
Colonel GARRISON. That's correct, sir. May I go on just a few
minutes, if I may?
The State in 1937 set up a State narcotics bureau. In 1939 the then
governor, in rather an economy move cut it out, cut the appropriation out and it died. About 2 years ago it was reinstituted by the
legislature and during the past session added additional men where
we will have a force of 10 nen in the State narcotic bureau. lncidentally, as you well know, it takes specialized men to do the job.
In the average crime, you call a policeman after the crime has been
committed but in narcotics enforcement the officer must be there at the
time when the offense is committed, otherwise he will never be able
to make a case.
May I say I am extremely proud of the 4 men and only 4 men in our
narcotics section who cleared some 430 cases. Some of course, were
unfounded, some were not prosecuted for lack of evidence. The final
analysis, 140 convicted peddlers of narcotics and addicts for a total of
595 years confinement and $2,200 in fines.
I know time is of the essence. May I emphasize this, there are two
things. We think the Federal forces should be increased. We think
some thought should be given to amending the Federal law which says
when an addict goes into a governmental hospital the director cannot
give information that he is there and he may leave at any time even
against medical advice. Therefore, he is turned back into the community. In Texas we have a hospital where they are being turned
back. We do not know when an addict is uncured and when an addict
hits Texas. We feel law enforcement should know where these people are and who they are.
That brings us to the thing the Federal Narcotics Service is now doing in asking each law enforcement officer to fill out a form of known
addicts. We are doing it and asking Texas officers to do it. It would
be a wonderful weapon to know what the situation is.
Senator DANIEL. You put your finger on one thing in the Federal
law that seems to be inconsistent; of the Federal Narcotics Bureau trying to get the names to know where the problem is. It is a contagious
disease and is going to spread addiction and pushing drugs and stealing to pay for their drugs, as you have said. On the other hand we
have a law which says the Federal narcotics hospitals at Fort Worth
and Lexington. Ky., cannot give the names of those who come for
treatment and leave the hospital and go back on the streets. You put
your finger on something I imagine this committee is going to have to
try to straighten out.
You do think it is a good thing to have some centralized system for
finding where the addicts are so we can keep an eye on them?
Colonel GARRISON. Absolutely, Senator; I certainly do.
Senator DANIEL. Now, Senator Butler, do you have any questions?
Senator BUTLER. And I would say you also believe they should not
be able to go in and out at will that they should be retained by law
until the medical authorities see At to let them go .
2366
1, 1955.
MexTico City, D. F.
DEAR DR. RABASA: Our United States Narcotics Commissioner, Hon. Harry J.
Anslinger, has told me of your excellent cooperation and interest in combating
the evils of the illicit narcotic-drug traffic. At this time we have a Senate Judiciary subcommittee conducting the first nationwide investigation of the subject,
and we are about to begin hearings in Texas and California which may be of
interest not only to our country but to yours. I attach a schedule of these
hearings.
I am writing to both you and the attorney general to extend an invitation for
you to sit with our committee at any of these meetings, and especially urge that
one or both of you, or a representative of your office, be with us at the hearings
in San Antonio and Houston. It is in these two cities that we expect evidence to
be developed bearing on the traffic on both sides of our border.
A precedent for this type of cooperation was set at the first session of our
committee in Washington, D. C., where Canadian Senator Tom Reid, chairman
of the Canadian Senate's narcotics investigating committee, sat with us and made
a short statement to the committee. We would not expect you to be a witness
or even to make a statement unless you wanted to do so. The main purpose
would be for you to have the opportunity to observe and to ask any questions
that might be of special interest to your country and to our combined efforts to
end this drug traffic.
If there is a member of your own Federal Congress whose committee has jurisdiction over this subject, or who might be interested, we would be glad also for
him to sit with us at any of the meetings, and in such event I will extend formal
invitation if you will send his name and address by collect wire.
In any event, I would appreciate hearing from you on this matter by wire collect
in order that I might make hotel arrangements at San Antonio and Houston,
,a
2367
Please be
2368
1111li11111111111
2369
I am sure that they will experience the fullest cooperation from all law enforcement agencies.
I am sure that as you conduct your investigation through the State, you
will be presented with testimony and evidence over which you have some jurisdiction on a Federal level. I particularly hope that during this investigation
the committee will obtain evidence to warrant actions, on a Federal level, toward
attempting to stop the flow of illicit narcotics from Mexico. On the basis of interviews which we have conducted with narcotic addicts, we can say that 90
percent of the narcotics seized by Texas officers came from or through Mexico.
I hope too that the committee will see the necessity of recommending an increase in the personnel of the Federal Narcotic Bureau, since this agency is
directly responsible for enforcing the Federal narcotic laws. All peace officers
are confronted with the narcotic problem and should welcome the work of an investigating committee such as this, because it assists in focusing the spotlight
of attention on a very grave problem. Although the public has heard and
read a great deal about the narcotic situation, I am sure that the majority of the
citizens of the State are not fully aware of how serious the problem of narcotic
addiction really is.
We readily admit that we do have a serious dope problem in Texas. At the
same time, however, our best information Indicates that we do not have
nationally organized or syndicated crime in Texas.
The solid and closely knit front which the law enforcement team of Texascourts, prosecutors, and police-have continually exhibited, is the best deterrent
and the best assurance in the world that it it has not and will not happen here.
A large number of criminals use narcotics, but they are criminals because of
this fact alone. They commit crimes to secure the necessary finances to purchase
their narcotics. The majority of these criminals operate alone and are not
members of a gang and, therefor, have not organized themselves.
The narcotic aspect in Texas is simply this. A serious narcotic problem
exists because of our geographical location with respect to a very large supply
point-Mexico. Not only are Texas addicts and pushers taking advantage of the
supply point, but we are a crossroads for out-of-State buyers.
The concern of our Texas lawmakers over this problem goes back nearly a
score of years when the 45th Texas Legislature created a narcotics section in
the Texas Department of Public Safety, effective September 1, 1937. This unit
was abolished as of August 30, 1939, because the then Governor of the State
vetoed the appropriations that had been set up for the support of the narcotics
Section. The 53d legislature again set up a narcotics section, effective September 1, 1953, with a chief and three narcotic inspectors. The 54th legislature
granted six additional men, effective September I of this year.
I would like to emphasize the considerable difference between the work requried of officers investigating narcotics cases and that of police engaged in the
investigation of most other crimes. In the usual crime, the police are called
after the crime has been committed, but if a narcotics investigator is to make a
case, he must be on the scene when the offense takes place-that is, when the
sale of the narcotics is made. Added to this is the fact that narcotics investigation poses one of the most dangerous assignment incumbent upon any law enforcement agency.
To show you just what can be accomplished by even a small 4-man force of
trained investigators, I would like to give you some very brief statistics concerning the activities of the chief and 3 inspectors that were assigned to the
Texas Department of Public Safety narcotics section from September 1, 1953,
to August 30, 1955. During that time these men received requests for assistance in investigations in 173 instances. These requests came from Federal,
State, and county and city agencies, as well as the other divisions of the Texas
Department of Public Safety. These 4 men cleared 430 cases during that time.
Some of the reports were unfounded and in others no complaint was filed because
of lack of evidence but they did file a total of 168 cases in the Federal, State,
and county courts. Convictions were secured on 140 cases for a total assessed
penalties of 595 years' imprisonment and fines of $2,200; 28 of the cases made
during this time are still pending. In addition to all this, and aside from actual.
investigating work, this quartet participated in 706 other activities pertaining
to narcotics, such as delivering speeches and teaching in police training schools,
et cetera.
In addition to the six men who have been added to our narcotics section, we
have been given some new tools with which to work, also. These are the new
2370
Texas narcotic laws which were recently enacted. One is the car seizure law
which provides for the seizing of vehicles transporting illegal narcotics.
Another is the paraphernalia law which makes it a felony to possess a hypodermic syringe, needle, or any instrument adapted for the injection of a liquid
under the skin. Two cases have been filed, to date, for the illegal possession
of this equipment and are awaiting trial.
Texas recently had what is commonly referred to as a compulsory treatment
law. The law at that time was knocked out by higher courts because it was
Illegal to probate a misdemeanor. The Fifty-fourth Texas Legislature, under
the provisions of house bill 65, changed this section, and now this violation is a
felony, which can be probated if the defendant enters a hospital for treatment.
Several dope addicts have been handled under the provisions of the new law
and have plead guilty to being addicted to the illegal use of narcotics and have
entered hospitals for treatment. Under the provisions of this new law, certain
problems have been created concerning the treatment and rehabilitation of the
addict. A person convicted of being addicted to narcotics can be sentenced to
a maximum of 3 years and probated if he agrees to enter a hospital, He, or she,
can be handled in one of several ways. They can be sentenced to the penitentiary
and placed under the supervision of a doctor. I am informed that at the present
time, there is sufficient bed space in the penitentiary system to accept male
patients but the women's ward of the penal institution is overcrowded and the
female dope addicts must await their turn to enter. On a number of occasions
this waiting period Is carried out in equally overcrowded county jails without
proper medical treatment. Dope fiends can be treated in the Texas State hospital. However, the person must be adjudged insane before he can be admitted.
Naturally, 4 out of 5 dope addicts refuse to volunteer for treatment and, by the
same token, they refuse to voluntarily commit themselves to the penitentiary.
To be treated in a Federal hospital, the patient must commit himself on a
voluntary basis because State court sentences cannot be honored. The patient
has a right to leave if, and when, he wishes, even against medical advice. Now,
here is an important point which I would like to make-the Federal hospital
authorities are prevented by Federal law from notifying law-enforcement officers,
or anybody else, for that matter, that the patient is leaving. Thus it is that the
United States Public Health Service hospitals must release half-cured dope
addicts if they want to leave. And, further, the authorities are prohibited by
law from letting us know that these probable menaces have been turned loose.
These are not only Texas addicts but those who have been gathered from other
States as well. Women addicts must be transported to another State for Federal
treatment.
On the other hand, we are attempting to do as much as we can to keep the
Federal Narcotics Bureau informed on narcotic addicts which come to our
attention. The Federal Narcotics Bureau furnishes us with a printed addict
form. These cards have also been sent to a majority of the peace officers
throughout the State. We are filling out the reports and forwarding them as
soon as we make arrests. Naturally, we are of the opinion that this compiling
of statistical information by the Federal Narcotic Bureau, and its dissemination
to the various police agencies throughout the United States will greatly benefit
all peace officers.
I would respectfully recommend that this committee look to the possibility
of amending section 344 (d) of the Public Health Service Act (42 U. S. C. 260)
which prohibits the Public Health Service officials from letting us know when a
half-cured addict leaves their hospitals.
In conclusion, I would like to say that narcotic enforcement in Texas, as a
whole, is as good as can be expected with the limited number of trained personnel we have assigned to those duties. Texas narcotic officers are closely united in
this fight. The Texas prosecutors and courts make every effort to act on the
evidence submitted by the officers as quickly as possible.
Texas is limited on penal institutional space, and no State hospital facilities
are available for the overall treatment in the rehabilitation of narcotic addicts.
The source of supply-Mexico-is more or less wide open and something needs
to be done about it.
Texas narcotic enforcement needs to be Improved with the addition of trained
personnel both at the Federal and State level.
Enhanced treatment and rehabilitation facilities are desperately needed.
El--
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
TRAFFIC
2371
2372
DANIEL.
DANIEL.
Senator
DANEL.,
Mr.
TURNER.
great deal of them, but a vast majority of them to try that this day
and time, is that ballyhoo and that propaganda in the papers. I
don't mean it isn't good; don't misunderstand. I know it is wrong to
2373
morphine awhile?
Mr. TURNER. Yes, sir. You see in later years-I say in later years,
after I got to using it off and on morphine just about went out, got so
expensive. Heroin is cheaper. That is when we switched.
Senator DANIEL. You switched to heroin when it became cheaper
than morphine. In the depression what did you do to get enough
money to buy the heroin and morphine?
Mr. TURNER. The majority of the time I was stealing.
Senator DANIEL. Stealing?
Mr. TURNER. Yes, I worked some. I worked some. I worked last
year about 6 or 8 months.
Senator DANIEL. What about your associates who were also on the
drugs here in Austin, did they steal, too?
Mr.
TURNER.
I am just
2374
Senator
DANIEL.
Mr.
TURNER.
Mr.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator DANIEL. Well, let me ask you in view of all this, is it hard
for a person after he once gets addicted to heroin or morphine to
break the habit?
Mr.
TURNER.
Senator
DANIEL.
phine is still used for medical purposes. Heroin has been outlawed
by most of the nations of the world. Still we have the traffic in them
and misuse of these drugs. Do you think your treatments at Lexington
or Fort Worth helped you any?
Mr. TURNER. Well, it's like this, Senator, when I was admitted in
Fort Leavenworth annex in 1935 and they opened up this hospital
in Kentucky in May of 1935 and I was transferred down there in
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
TRAFFIC
2375
November, I was off of drugs then. You see, I had been in since
about a year.
Senator DANIEL. What were you convicted of ?
Mr. TURNER. Narcotics.
Senator DANIEL. For selling?
Mr. TURNER.
TuRNER. Yes.
it's not a right, don't misunderstand, I don't lnow how to even suggest how to solve it, I'll just state this. United States is the only country in the world that has a problem of addicts. You take all the free
2376
2377
Mr.
TURNER.
Well, you can get it, you can locate the source of it
and buy it, buy what you want, whatever money you've got.
Senator DANIEL. You mean to say it is that free over across the
Mexican border?
Senator
DANIEL.
2378
Senator
much in Austin?
Mr.
DANIEL. How
TURNER. Well, you
TURNER.
Mr. TURNER. I bought the heroin. I told him I would like to get
it delivered on the other side. He said all right, cost you so and so.
So I paid the fee.
Senator DANIEL. You paid the amount of the heroin and paid for
the delivery, paid for the messenger to bring it across the river?
Mr. TURNER. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. When you crossed the bridge and they searched
you, they couldn't find it on you?
TURNER. That's right.
Senator DANIEL. How much
Mr.
2379
No,sir.
Senator DANIEL. You paid them the money, then when you went
Mr.
TURNER.
back across the bridge without any heroin you went to an appointed
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator DANIEL. In talking with people and finding out how you
could do this, did you find out whether or not it was a relatively easy
lm~atter to get someone to run that heroin across the border for you ?
In other words, is that a common pract ice? Did you find that to be so?
Mr. TURNEiiR. Yes, sir. You know that American dollar down in
Mexico, Senator, it's highly thought of. That dollar will (et just
about anything you want, anything you want.
Senator DXIEL. What I am trying to get is, do you think this is
ai unusual thing the way you got your heroin across the border?
Mr. TUINNER. No, sir, that wasn't unusual.
Senator DAXIEL. From your having talked with other people and
other addicts, you think that is a pretty common practice?
Mr. TTun,NER. I would think so. I never, you know, looked into anything like that. I imagine that's the way it worked.
Senator DAN.IEL. In other words, you found it worked relatively
easy, is that right ?
Mr.
TURNER. Yes.
2380
Senator DANIEL. You may stand aside for the time being but remain in the witness room until we notify you.
Mr. YELDERMVA\N-. I am William Yelderman, a local attorney here in
Austin, and here as attorney represeniting Rudy Rodriguez. Rudy
Rodriguez appeared before the committee as a witness who is under a
subpena. Now, Rudy Rodriguez appeared in the presence of a confessed addict who appeared on the witness stand just a few moments
aoo.
I never knew Rudy Rodriguez until yesterday when
he informed
me he had been served a subpena to appear before this committee.
2381
2382
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
TRAFFIC
Mr.
NAYLOR.
Not directly.
speech in which he dealt with the Mexican situation. Shortly thereafter the Mexican consul came out and talked to Colonel Garrison,
wanted to get his country and Texas together to attempt to partially,
or to control the narcotic traffic that we alleged was coining out of
Mexico, and colonel told him he would be glad to work with him
any way he possibly could, any way to try to control that flow of
illegal drugs from Mexico. The Mexican consul suggested Colonel
Garrison meet with some officials. I understand him to say one of the
officials would be a member of the Attorney General's department out
of Mexico City. The consul called me. A tentative date was set and
the consul called me later and said that because of some other plans
that they wouldn't be able to meet with the colonel. They would meet
with him later. We haven't heard anything from them since then.
I did write down to Mexico City through the consul, attempting to
find out what the statistical setup on the narcotics traffic in Mexico
was and asked for some statistics and how many cases were made and
how many arrests were made, and so forth. We haven't received a
reply from that letter. Some of the officials in the border towns in
Mexico worked with us; some of them wouldn't.
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
TRAFFIC
2383
marihuana business, that we could go down there and buy all you want
from him. Of course, due to the funds on which we operate, we
couldn't use those legally by buying narcotics in Mexico, and so we
told him we would see him later.
Senator DANIEL. Did you further check to see if there might be
something to the report -that a local chief of police inland might be
dealing in marihuana?
Mr. NAYLOR. I talked to some Mexican officials. They said they
thought that was true, that particular chief was dealing in marihuana.
Senator DANIEL. Can the addicts or peddlers across the border in
Mexico buy marihuana and heroin, both?
Mr. NAYLOR. Yes, sir, most ayone can whether he is an addict or not.
Senator DANIEL. They can be bought?
Mr. NAYLOR. Yes, sir.
Senator BUTLER. Do they have any organization that resembles in
any way our Narcotics Division?
Mr. NAY IOR. I don't know, sir.
men would get killed. Later on, after it dies down, we will go with
them, do anything to try to set to the root of that problem in Mexico.
Senator DANIEL. Do you think the committee could put enough heat
2384
would say if you have a very large epidemic and those germs were
getting over and contaminating our people, narcotics traffic is more
or less contagious, and with the ease of your buying narcotics in Mexico it makes it instrumental in the creation of the number of new addicts we are getting here in this country, put it that way.
Senator DANIEL. You brought up a good comparison. Take the
hoof-and-mouth disease. When that broke out in Mexico our Government went to work cooperating with Mexican officials and sent a lot
of money and men down there to keep that disease from spreading to
the cattle of our own country.
Mr. NAYLOR. That's right.
Senator DANIEL. Is there any reason why we couldn't have the same
chiefs of police. We are getting the leaves of the tree, getting nowhere
near the root of that tree.
Senator DANIEL. Are there any further questions?
Senator BUTLER. No.
Senator DANIEL. Mr. Counsel?
Senator DANIEL. How do you identify this heroin that comes from
Mr. NAYLOR. We know from the addicts, the dope fiends themselves
that ends up for use in Texas, as well as the amount that goes on through
north and east or to other parts of the country?
Mr. NAYLOR. From the number of arrests and number of informers
and dope fiends themselves that have purchased down there, we figure
about 90 percent.
Senator DANIEL. What percent of marihuana would you say is
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
TRAFFIC
2385
Mr.
NAYLOR.
course, you know from your experience, too, with Federal narcotics,
your morphine, then on down to heroin, in the first stage of the chemical
reaction there you have a brown color and then if they want to purify
it further, which they very seldom go to the trouble, you can bring
it on out.
Mr. SPEER. So the heroin from Mexico does have a characteristic
tinge?2
Mr. NAYLOR. By the same token, you have white heroin.
Mr. SPEER. Is there white heroin coming from Mexico at the present
time?
Mr. NAYLOR. We have had information from Houston that they
can buy white heroin.
Mr. SPE ER. What would that indicate to you?
Mr. NAYLOR. It means just going to a little more trouble and purifying.
Mr. SPEER. Probably have better laboratories?
2386
Senator DANIEL. You have some statistics you are going to put in
the record ; go right ahead, sir.
Chief THORP. It makes us very happy and I want to thank you,
Senator Butler, and your committee along with our fine Congressman
Homer Thornberry for making it possible to open the official hearing
in Texas on narcotics in Austin, your capital city.
We of the Austin Police Department have the full cooperation,
we enjoy the full cooperation of the Federal Narcotics Bureau, from
Mr. Anslinger's Department, to Mr. Toni Brumley in San Antonio,
also the full cooperation of Col. Homer Garrison and his fine department of public safety, and especially so with Mr. Dub Naylor in
charge of his narcotics division. Also, our fine sheriff, T. 0. Lange,
and his deputies. We work together a hundred percent. We have to
do it a hundred percent in order to combat this evil of the narcotic
problem.
I did not prepare a speech or a paper and you will have to bear with
me as I am just talking off the cuff.
We realize that the narcotic problem is great throughout the United
States, and we need the help of every man, woman, and child to help
us enforce this problem. It is a problem for the people, and I am so
proud that you and your committee have undertaken to pioneer in this
kind of a meeting, hearing, on this very, very important problem,
narcotics, that the people might learn more and be educated into what
their enforcement officers are trying to do in combating this problem.
I have done quite a lot of hunting in my life, and I have had the
opportunity to watch wild animal life come, in to drink, and I have
never yet found one that ever came in with the wind under its feet.
He always keeps the wind in his nose, especially the coyote. But
after he gets in the coyote lets his presence be known by lapping the
water, drinking. You can hear him a quarter of a mile against the
wind. That is the way we kill the coyote. Now, he lives by his wits.
By the same token a pusher and a seller of narcotics is in that class.
He lives by his wits. The enforcement officers have to match.their
wits against their wits much the same as hunting coyotes and, as I'say,
when you kill the coyote after he comes in and you don't see him, and
he laps the water and gives himself away, and you kill him, that might
be called the law of entrapment.
I have been in enforcement work over half of my life. and of all the
laws to enforce the narcotic law is the hardest one, especially making
cases. It is easy
to arrest, but you have got to have a case when you
law, but this law we have, called entrapment, I am sure it has a place.
But we intend and I do as long as I am head of the police department,
to gig them and trap them and then trap them just as long as I am
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
TRAFFIC
2387
here and let the burden fall upon them and not upon us, until some
judge tells me I am wrong. We are fighting fire and we have got to
hIght it with fire. I am speaking of pushers and peddlers.
Senator DANIEL. And when you used the word "entrapment" you
mean the use of undercover men or other people?
Chief TiIoRp. Yes, sir.
I don't know that there is anything much more that I could add
other than to say this, I am so glad that you have started out with your
hearings in Austin, the capital city, and wherever you go we of the
Austin Police Department in this city wish you and your committee
the very best of everything, and do not hesitate to call on me and my
men for anything we might do. We will come to you or do anything
we can to help you with your hearings.
I certainly do thank you.
Chief TiLORP. And I am not going to read the reports that have been
Senator
DANIEL.
2388
that you are giving them that kind of cooperation, too. As a matter
of fact, haven't you had considerable arrests recently for narcotics violations here in Austin?
Chief THORP. Yes, sir, just recently.
Senator DANIEL. Would you say that is an indication of an increase
in the traffic here or not?
Chief TnoiP. Well, yes, I guess you could call it an increase.
Senator DANIEL. Of course some of the arrests I first remember
seeing in the paper concerned the confirmed addicts that you had arrested over a hundred times, some of them that were testified about
a minute ago, but it seems to me I recall your making recent arrests
of some musicians here?
Chief THORP. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Was that on narcotics or not9
Chief THORP. That was not good information, Captain Laws says.
Senator DANIEL. Is there anything else to indicate an increase of
the use of marihuana or narcotic drugs in Austin in recent months?
Chief THORP. Oh, I don't think that there is anything that would
indicate that. I think it is just about a 50-50 proposition between
marihuana and narcotics here.
Senator DANIEL. We certainly thank you, Chief, and if you will
let Mr. Laws trade seats with you, we will go into this.
Chief THORP. Thank you.
Senator
DANIEL.
part of the record at this point. Would you call the attention of the
subcommittee to any particular items that should be stressed?
TESTIMONY OF R. B. LAWS, CAPTAIN, CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION
DIVISION, AUSTIN POLICE DEPARTMENT
Captain LAWS. Senator, the first flysheet here describes the detail
the chief of police has in the department. He has already given you
the number of men assigned. Lt. K. R. Herbert is the officer in charge
under the supervision of the chief of police and myself. It describes
the hours that these men have worked, the hours regulated by the activities of the offenders. That is all in that report. I will go into our
figures here.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
All right.
AGE,
SUMMARY OF ARRESTS FOR NARCOTICS VIOLATIONS BY SEX, RACE, AND
1947-55
This report reflects the number of persons charged with violations of Federal
and State narcotic laws and an analysis as to year of arrest, sex, race, and age
of offenders. Also, a summary of recent cases involving narcotic law violations
in this vicinity, by vice detail, Austin Police Department.
The Austin Police Department has a detail assigned to the criminal investi-
2389
POLICE
DEPARTMENT
Summary of arrests for violations of State and Federal narcotic laws for the
period of 1947 until October 1, 1955:
Persons
Year:
charged
9
9
14
15
19
29
Per8on8
charged
Year-Continued
1953 ----------------------32
1954 -----------------------29
1955 ----------------------23
Total -------------------
179
31
32
33 --------------34--------------35--------------36
37--------------38
39--------------40
41
42
43---------------
44----------------45----------------46 - - - - - - - - -
47------------------
48 ------------------
5
1
1
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
1
Total--------- 170
2390
Joseph Gonzales, and Ernestine Gomez. Two additional cases which were filed
and were dismissed for lack of evidence.
From information obtained in this investigation, the Federal Narcotics Bureau
made case* against a notorious San Antonio seller of heroin, Ray Murdock, who
is.now serving a long sentence in a Federal penal institution.
In October. 1954, a consultation was held with the county court at law judge
and the district attorney's staff regarding the validity of the State narcotic
addiction law then in force. It was their belief that the law was invalid. For
that reason no effort was made at that time to arrest suspected narcotic addicts
for observation to determine their state of addiction, since no successful prosecution could be accomplished.
Numerous amendments were made to the existing narcotics laws by the last
legislature, one of which made valid the narcotics addiction statute.
On September 17, 1955, Chief W. E. Naylor, of the State narcotics bureau,
John Allen of the district attorney's office, Dr. Ben Primer and Dr. Lee Edens,
of the city health office, Capts. Bob Miles and R. B. Laws, and Lt. K. R. Herbert
met in the office of Chief of Police R. D. Thorp, to discuss procedure for the
arrest, examination and observation of suspected narcotic addicts in Austin.
It was agreed that assistance would be given by Chief Naylor's men in locating
and arresting these subjects and that they would be examined for signs of narcotic addiction by Dr. Ben Primer and Dr. Edens.
As a result of this meeting 10 arrests were made on Friday, September 23,
1955. After observation by the arresting officers and Dr. Lee Edens. Physical
examinations were made by Dr. Edens and it was determined that 6 of the 10
subjects were narcotic addicts. Written confessions, admitting addiction, were
given by the six who were retained. The other four subjects were released. Of
the 6 retained 4 were women.
On September 27, 1955, the cases against the 6 subjects were presented to the
Travis County Grand Jury and indictments against all 6 were returned the same
day. On Wednesday, September 28, these subjects were brought to trial before
Judge Jack Roberts in the 126th district court and entered a plea of "guilty" to a
charge of being narcotic addicts. The 4 women were sentenced to 2 years each in
the Texas State Prison and then placed on probation. One of the requirements of
the probation was voluntary commitment to the Austin State Hospital for a cure
of the addiction to narcotics. On Thursday, September 29, Ruby Bell Turner,
white, female, 40; Julia Mae Snowden, white, female, 47; Peggy Watson, white,
female, 44; and Mabel Plumley Wilson, white, female, 38, were admitted to the
Austin State Hospital.
On October 7, 1955, the 2 remaining subjects, Louie Leslie Taylor, white, male,,
42; and George Arthur Thompson, white, male, 31, were sentenced to serve 2
years in the Texas State Prison on a charge of being narcotic addicts and then
placed on probation, one of the requirements of probation being their voluntary
commitment to the United States Public Health Service Hospital in Fort Worth,
Tex., for a narcotics-addiction cure. They were transported to Fort Worth by
personnel of the State narcotics bureau.
On Thursday, September 22, 1955, James Wade Braswell, white, male, 32, of
Dallas, Tex., and a driver, were apprehended by State Highway Patrolmen W. D.
Wilson and Don W. Ross, for road-law violations and were taken before Justice
of the Peace Frank W. McBee. Judge McBee called Investigator Scott of the
vice detail of the Austin Police Department, stating that he suspected these subjects were in possession of narcotics. Investigator Scott called Investigators
Petri and Guentzel, also members of the vice detail, who accompanied these subjects to Brackenridge Hospital for a thorough search. Five and one-half grams
of heroin were found secreted in a cast worn by Braswell.
Thomas H. Bromley, agent in charge, San Antonio Division, Federal Narcotics
Bureau, was notified of the apprehension and of the impounding of the car, a
1955 Olds 98 Holiday sedan with air-conditioning and power features. Agent
Bromley came to Austin and took possession of the automobile and custody of
the subjects. A complaint of "possession of heroin" was filed by Agent Bromley
with United States Commissioner Robert C. Sneed, on September 23, 1955, against
James Wade Braswell. Interrogation of these subjects revealed the heroin seized
was purchased in San Antonio and that the purchaser was en route to Dallas, Tex.
The services of a special employee were obtained who professed to be able to
buy heroin from Simone Cavasas, a Latin American female, 34 years of age, of
434 Merida Street, San Antonio, Tex., known to be the source of supply for most
of the Austin narcotic users.
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
TRAFFIC
2391
Chief George W. Bichsel, of the San Antonio, Tex., Police Department, was
advised on September 24, 1955, that a special employee was available who had
contacts from whom he could purchase heroin in that area and who would introduce an undercover officer of the Austin Police Department to these contacts.
Chief Bichsel requested by letter that an officer of this department be permitted
to work in San Antonio with the special employee. A similar request was also
made by Agent Bromley.
Chief R. D. Thorp assigned Investigator R. C. Scott to accompany the special
employee and Federal Narcotics Bureau agent to San Antonio, September 26,
1955.
the special employee, went to 434 Merida Street where the special employee
bought three grams of heroin from Patsy Saurez Terrazos. On the afternoon of
September 27, 1955, Investigator Scott was introduced to Simone and Alfonso
('avasas and the purchase of heroin by Investigator Scott from Simone Cavasas
was discussed. The same night a gram of heroin was purchased from Alfonso
Cavasas by Investigator Scott. On the afternoon of September 29, 1955, Investi-
gator Scott was able to make a direct purchase of 16 grams of heroin from Simone
Cavasas in the presence of John Palmer, Jr. Shortly after this purchase was
made, Lt. Jack Hutton and Sgt. Barney Saenz of the San Antonio Police Department and Federal Narcotics Bureau Agent Bromley and other agents effected
the arrest of Simone Cavasas, Latin American female, 34 years of age, Alfonso
Cavasas, Latin American male, 45 years of age, Patsy Saurez Terrazos, Latin
American female, 25, and John Palmer, Jr., white male, 27, who were arraigned
before United States Commissioner Lockhart in San Antonio, Tex., on September
29, 1955, for violations of the Federal narcoti-cs laws.
2392
Senator
Captain
DANIEL.
LAWS. I
DANIEL.
Senator
It is nice to see you do not have too many under
21. I see in the age group of 19 you have 7; 7 are 19 and 6 are 20.
Other than that you have only 3 under the age of 19?
Captain. LAWS. Yes, sir, going on from this, still in the age groups,
we had an unfortunate incident that occurred here. We had an 18year-old boy die from narcotic poisoning. Lieutenant Herbert probably will go into that with you on this 18-year-old boy who died a
couple of years ago from an overdose or narcotic poisoning.
You have heard both Colonel Garrison and Chief Thorp. In our
opinion they are the most outstanding men in Texas in law enforcement. You heard their remarks about what they think should be
done, and we certainly agree with them. We have had wonderful
cooperation from the Federal Narcotics Bureau, from the Department of Public Safety Narcotics Section headed by Chief Naylor.
Sheriff Lange has assisted in every way and has a very good department. I am sure that Lieutenant Herbert and Mr. Scott will bring
2393
out the fact that we don't lack for cooperation. The only thing we
lack is that we haven't got more people to help us in this problem here.
Senator DANIEL. How about yourself? Just as an incidental inquiry, do you have enough? It's not the business of the Congress,
except for the record, but I would like to know if you think you have
enough of a local force to take care of the problem, your part of the
problem.
Captain LAWS. Every city probably is lacking in sufficient police
personnel to take care of all their problems. Narcotics is one problem
every city has in law enforcement. We have four men assigned to
this detail, and they spend about half their time dealing with narcotics,
the rest of their time is spent with gambling, prostitution, and other
related problems. Certainly we could use more but the men Chief
Thorp has in this detail are eager and they are anxious to do a good
job. I personally think they do a very good job.
Senator DANIEL. You think you could do even a better job if you
BUTLER. NO,
sir.
2394
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
TRAFFIC
HERBERT.
of June 1954. He was a white male, 18 years of age, who was found
unconscious in an automobile parked on an east side street. Later investigation developed he had been abandoned in this State by an associate of his. The autopsy surgeon's report reflected his death was due
to an overdose of opium derivative taken or self-administered while
he was under the influence of alcohol. There was no way to prove
that he had self-administered this drug but it was fairly common
knowledge that he had been using drugs prior to that time.
Senator DANIEL. What was the source of his heroin?
Lieutenant HERBERT. As far as we were able to determine the source
HERBERT.
familiar with the color, texture, and other things on which they base
their opinion, the narcotic comes originally from Mexico.
Senator DANIEL. From Mexico?
Lieutenant HERBERT. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Do you have any wholesalers or large operators or
some other place in Texas from which the narcotics come into Austin?
Lieutenant
HERBERT.
have been able to obtain, from San Antonio, from wholesalers there.
Senator DANIEL. All right, go ahead.
Lieutenant HERBERT. After this boy was found he was carried to
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
TRAFFIC
2395
Narcotics Bureau agent was able to make purchases and witness sales
by one to the other. They were more or less dealing among themselves on a small scale. As they would get enough together one would
go to San Antonio and buy heroin and bring it back, cap it up and mix
a little with milk and sugar, and sell it. They weren't getting wealthy
but able to get enough money to keep it up. And in other ways, stealing from merchants, such things as coffee, sugar, things that were readily salable. They were supporting in that manner.
Along about the latter part of October we raided this small hotel
and arrested numerous people. We were able to make cases. The
Federal Narcotics Bureau was able to make cases against these people
with our assistance; several were sentenced to terms in Federal penal
institutions and are now serving their time.
Senator DANIEL. I believe you have listed the names of these people?
Lieutenant HERBERT. Yes, sir.
in -thepenitentiary.
Senator DANIEL. This is the first experience the committee has had
with this type of law.
Lieutenant HERBERT. It was our first experience, too.
Senator DANIEL. Yours, too?
Lieutenant HERBERT. Yes, sir. Later we effected apprehension here.
with the assistance and aid of the State highway patrol, the cooperation of the justice of the peace, Frank W. McBee, of a man arrested for
road-law violation who was possibly holding narcotics. He was carried to Brackenridge Hospital, searched by one of the investigators
who found 51/2 grains of heroin-excuse me, 51/ grams of heroin concealed in his cast.
Senator DANIEL. In a what?
Lieutenant HERBERT. He had a broken leg, his leg was in a cast, a.
broken hip, I believe.
Senator DNTEL. Concealed in the cast?
Lieutenant HERBERT. Yes, sir.
Senator TANTE. In what part?
Lieutenant HERBERT. He had an opening in the cast and this was
near the crotch, and this officer removed 6 papers which weighed out
to be about 51/2 grams.
Senator DANIEu.. When (lid this happen?
71515-5.6-pt. 7-4
2396
September.
Senator DANIEL. This year?
Lieutenant HERBERT. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Well, we have heard of hiding it in everything,
in a lot of places, but this is the first time we have had that kind of
hiding place before the committee.
Lieutenant HERBERT. This gentleman had quite a criminal, record.
It indicated he was a procurer and lie had at one time on his sheet, I
believe a narcotic conviction which he told us was on appeal and he had
never been in the penitentiary on it.
Senator DANIEL. Now, wait, was this man peddling narcotics?
Lieutenant I-EBRERT. No, sir; at least we had no sure information
hearing.
(Exhibit A of the Austin hearing appears on the following page.)
2397
Senator DANIEL. All right, will you proceed to tell us about how
you were able to catch this person and any information that it might
reveal with reference to the narcotics traffic here in this area?
request of the chief of police in San Antonio and Mr. Thomas Bromley of the Federal Narcotics Bureau. And it was just more or less a
pattern handed to me that I had to conform to and I was first introduced to these people by a special employee furnished by the Federal
Narcotics Bureau.
Senator DANIEL. Another undercover agent?
Mr. SCOTT. No, sir.
EXHIBIT A
S"16"'
$"
"
"46
l:
,
"ON"
Picture of Simona Y. Cavazos, age 34, 434 Merida Street, San Antonio, Texas; 5
feet 3 inches; 200 pounds; short and fat; brown hair and eyes.
Mr. ScoTT. He himself had quite an extensive record and was well
known to these people. On our first few visits there he made a small
purchase.
Senator DANIEL. This was in San Antonio?
Mr. ScoTT. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. And when you say these people, who do you mean
by that?
Mr. ScoTT. Alfonso Cavazos who is the husband of Simona Cavazos.
Senator DANIEL. All right, I'll ask you to identify this picture. Is
this the picture of Alfonso Cavazos?
Mr. SCOTT. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. That will be marked "Exhibit B" of the Austin
hearing.
2398
..
cl*
S.
P
be
s T.
Picture of Alfonso Cavazos, 45 years: 434 Merida Street, San Antonio, Tex.,
5 feet 8 inches; 170 pounds; black hair and brown eyes.
Senator
DANIEL. What
other person?
other subject there by the name of John Palmer, Jr., I believe. This
was the last purchase that was made shortly before the arrest. I
hadn't seen this subject prior to the last buy.
Senator DANIEL. Did John Palmer, Jr., have anything to do with
the sale?
Mr. ScoTT. He was present at the time the transaction was made.
2399
EXHIBIT C
Picture of Patsy Suarez Terrazos, age 25, 434 Merida, San Antonio, Tex.; 5 feet;
139 pounds; black hair; brown eyes; short and fat. Possession and sale of
heroin, September 28, 1955.
Mr. Scorr. This was operated in conjunction with a bar down there,
a very small bar in the Latin American district in San Antonio.
Simona Cavazos and her husband lived next door to this bar, just
about a 15-foot driveway that. separated the 2 buildings. In other
words, they ran the bar.
On our first visit down there I didn't try to make a purchase. The
special employee purchased three grams, and he had previously been
an addict. He had come from Lexington; I believe he was discharged
against medical advice on the 16th of September, this year. And he
was still thought by Simona and her husband to be an addict.
Senator DANIEL. How much did he pay for it?
Mr. SCOTT.
$90. She sold, if you bought more than 4 grams you could get it at
$20, anything less than a 4-gram. purchase costs you $30 a gram. On
the first visit there he made a purchase of three grams and this was
made from Patsy Terrazos. Simona and her husband were not there
at that time.
We returned to the bar again next afternoon and spent approximately 4 hours there at which time they evidently looked me over and
decided I was all right. I was invited over to the house. At this time
Simona and her husband, X1, were both present and we discussed the
purchase of an ounce of heroin. And she told me she had had difficulty lately in Mexico getting it at an ounce; that is, in bulk ounce.
She said dealers over there were selling the papers because they could
make more money by selling by papers than just bulk ounce. I think
bulk ounce someone previously stated sold around three or four hundred dollars, depending on the market. By selling that at$25 a paper
I believe they could derive a larger profit.
2400
Senator DANIEL. You know what it sells for a paper, how many
papers you can make out of an ounce?
Mr. SCOTT. No, sir; I don't.
Senator DANIEL. Thirty papers to the ounce.
Mr. ScoTT. No, sir. She didn't say that at all, we talked at great
Mr. ScoTT. From what Simona told me her story conformed to Mr.
Mr. ScoTT. No, sir, she told me she crossed. I didn't want to press
2401
Senator
DANIEL.
"I can't quit selling heroin as long as I can sit on my butt and make
$400 or $500 a day." Did she tell you that?
Mr. SCOTT. Yes, sir ; she told me tliat.
Senator DANIEL. She told you she couldn't quit?
Mr. ScoTr. Yes, sir.
Senator
DANIEL.
recommended hanging?
Mr. SCOTT. Yes, si'.
Senator
DANIEL.
for this traffic, after having examined what she has done?
Mr. ScoTT. My personal opinion; it wouldn't.
Senator DANIEL. What?
Mr. SCOTT. My personal opinion would be I don't think it is too
severe.
Senator DANIEL. Has she been convicted since?
Mr. SCOTT. No, sir.
S'enstor
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
$2,500 bond?
Senator
BUTLER.
2402
Mr. SCOTT. I don't know. That question came up, Mr. Bromley
was going to question that. I believe that they are because this particular women I noticed had been in business down there for some
time and had been under surveillance and observation for some time.
1 believe if she hadn't been an American citizen it would have come
out before.
Senator
DANIEL.
Mr. SCOTT.
No, sir.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
Senator
BUTLER.
Senator
BUTLER.
DANIEL.
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
TRAFFIC
2403
Mr. ScoTT. I don't know what the price was in Mexico. She just
refused to sell me a. bulk ounce of it. I don't know whether she was
telling the truth, I doubt she was. I think she was just asking for
more money, because if I had bought a bulk ounce I could have gotten
a cheaper price than papers.
Senitor BUTLEIR. I think Colonel Garrison said $350 for a pure
ounce.
Mr. Sco'rr. I have never had the occasioii to bnuy anything in that
amount.
Senator DANIEL. Anything further, Mr. Counsel?
Mr. (GASQUE. NO, sir.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Before recessing I will say the committee intends to call this afternoon Morris Levine, Rudy Rodriguez, other officials, Attorney General John Ben Shepperd, and not necessarily in this order, but also the
witness, Antoine d'Agostino.
We will stand recessed until 2 o'clock this afternoon, meet back
promptly at 2.
(Whereupon, at 12: 30 p. m.. the subcommittee recessed to reconvene
at 2 p. m.,the same day.)
2404
DANIEL.
Senator DANML. Had you lived here in Austin at any time before
being placed in the jail?
Mr. LEVINE. No, sir; I was just passing on through here.
Senator DANIEL. YOU were just passing through here?
Mr. LEVINE. Yes. [Indicating by nodding his head.]
Senator DANIEL. What age are you?
Mr. LEVINE. Forty-three.
Senator DANIEL. Are you being held on some charge that was com-
mitted here?
this county?
Mr. LEVINE. I don't know where it was found on me. They claimed
I had a box that was taken from the hospital under my arm. I was
in no condition to remember what was in the box. The box was sealed
at the time, never had been broken open.
Senator DANIEL. Where had you gotten the box?
Mr. LEVINE. The box came out of the hospital, out of this Brackenridge Hospital.
Senator DAoiEL. How did you happen to be at the
hospital?
Mr. LEVINE. I was sick.
Senator DANIEL. And being treated there at the hospital ?
Mr. LEVINE. I was sick and went there for treatment and they shot
me up, gave me a couple of shots of some kind of medicine, gave me,
I believe it was the second shot, all told, and then the next thing I
know they claim they found me wandering around about a block
from the hospital with a box under my arm.
1111111111
Senator
DANIEL.
2405
And convicted?
Senator
Senator
try it?
Mr.
Heroin.
DANIEL.
LEVINE.
flowing with it. That is the Harlem section of New York City. It
seemed to be sort of a style, all the kids were going for it, all for kicks.
Senator DANIEL. Kids you had been acquainted with?
Mr. LrVINE. That's right.
Senator DANIEL. And did one of them offer you the first shot of
heroin?
Mr. LEVINE. No; I'll tell you how I got started. I knew what it
was. I tried it a time or two and one time I was arrested and put
under the Federal Detention Home on West Street. And that place
was just crawling with addicts at that time. It was in 1932 and I
really had had a taste of it before, you know. I wasn't hooked or
anything.
Senator DANIEL. When you say you weren't hooked, in the terminology of addicts that means you had not become addicted; is that
right?
Mr. LEVINE. That's right.
Senator DANIEL. All right, go ahead.
Mr. LEVINE. And, well, there was a lot of stuff in the place. These
addicts used to send lines down and get it smuggled in, have balls
thrown on the roof when we were taken up for exercise.
Senator DANIEL. Was that in the prison?
Mr.
LEVINE.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator DANIEL. That was in West Street Prison, New York City ?
Mr. LvIN. That's right.
Senator
DANIEL.
2406
Senator
be-
fore you committed the offense that caused you to be put in this West
Street Prison?
Mr. LEVINE. I had a taste of it, I never shot it, you know, I took a
sniff, smoked a little weed.
Senator
DANIEL. By weed
Mr. LEVINE. Marihuana.
Senator DANIEL. But you had not become hooked before you got in
other tvpes of trouble; is that right?
Mr. LEVINE. No; that's right.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
In the prison ?
Mr. LEVINE. In the prison.
Senator DANIEL. And in 1932 it was possible to get the narcotics in
DANIEL.
that prison?
Mr. LEVINE. Yes, possible to get it anywhere.
Senator
DANIEL.
Mr. LEVINE.
Senator DANIEL. All right, have you ever gone to any of the hospitals for treatment of addiction?
Mr. LEVINE. I took about 50 cures.
Senator
Mr.
I have been with private institutions. I have been in hospitals. I have been sent away to prison
numerous times and every time -I come out it didn't seem to do any
good, I just wanted the stuff more.
Senator DANIEL. Did you say 15?
Mr. LEVINE. Fifty.
Fifty times ?
Mr. LEVINE. F-i-f-t-y.
Senator DANIEL. You tried about 50 times?
Mr. LEVINE. That's right.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
pital?
Mr. LEVINE. I have been to Lexington, and Fort Worth.
Senator
DANIEL.
Federal Hospital?
Mr. LEVINE. Four or fives times. Been in the Marine hospitals.
Been in Fort Worth about a half dozen times. I wouldn't even stay
there. You know, I checked out of there.
Senator DANIEL. What do you mean, when you were in Fort Worth
you checked out?
Mr. LEVINE.
Senator
2407
DANIEL.
Fort Worth?
That's right.
Senator DANIEL. Did you enter as a volunteer patient?
Mr. LEVINE. That's right.
Senator DANIEL. Each time?
Mr. LEVINE.
Senator
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator DANIEL. You say you did leave too soon to do any good?
Mr. LEVINE. It wouldn't done any good if I had stayed there.
Senator DANIEL. Why?
Mr. LEVINE. Because I just kept it in my mind. They can cure you
physically but they can't cure a man mentally. It gets into your
mind and your only way to get it out is the good Lord.
That's right.
Senator DANIEL. How long did you say you have been off the drug?
Mr. LEVINE. About 8 months. I don't care for it. You can lay it,
put it down alongside of me now and I'll go to sleep, you can believe
that, without touching it.
Senator DANIEL. Now, have you been in jail these 8 months?
Mr. LEVINE. Been in jail these 8 months.
Senator DANIEL. You now have a conviction of 5 years in prison?
Mr. LEVINE. That's right.
times be-
narcotics
in prison
became a
2408
was on the stuff and on probation and in order to get money to buy
some stuff I had to steal and I broke a telephone open, that was the
first time.
Senator DANIEL. That is after you got out of the West Street
Prison?
Mr. LEVINE. That's right, I was on probation.
I broke a telephone
open to get some money to buy narcotics and I was sent away 3 years.
Senator DANIEL. Was that on a charge of burglary?
Mr. LEVINE. NO, they dropped that, maliciousSenator DANIEL. Malicious mischief?
Mr. LEVINE. That's right, and sent me away for violating my
probation.
Senator DANIEL. Violating probation.
Senator
score"?
DANIEL.
LEVINE.
Senator
DANIEL.
II I I1
2409
LEVINE.
Mr. LEVINE.
Senator DANIEL. You talk about "at that time", say back in 1934,
that period of time; after you got out of Lewisburg, after you were
released from Lewisburg in 1937 ?
Mr. LEVINE. That's right.
Senator DANIEL. Three years
you?
LEVINE. That's right.
Senator DANIEL. After having
Mr. LEVINE. That's right.
Senator DANIEL. Did you take
Mr.
prison?
in Lewisburg
getMr.
them
LEVINE.
Every now and then.
Senator DANIEL. Did you want them while you were there?
Mr. LEVINE. 1 craved it every day I was there, wanted it, desired it.
Senator DANIELS. How long after you got out of the penitentiary
befdr you went to buying drugs again?
Mr. LEVINE. I bought some the first day.
Senator DANIEL. Where?
Mr.
LEVINE.
In Harlem.
Senator DANIEL. All right, about what did it cost you then per day
Senator
DANIEL
kind of drugs?
2410
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
TRAFFIC
Mr. LEVINE. No, sir, I never handled drugs, never sold ally.
Senator DANIEL. Well, did you ever commit any other kind of offenses in order to get money to buy your drugs?
Mr. LEVINE. I broke into a drug store one time.
Senator DANIEL. And what did you do that for?
Mr. LEVINE. Down in Florida.
Senator DANIEL. What did you do that for ?
Mr. LEVINE. Because I was sick and needed the niedicine.
Senator DANIEL. Did you take some type of narcotic drug out of
Mr. LEVINE. Here's what happened, I'll tell you what happened
was blacked out, just a little dim light over the register, and I could
look in there and see all them prescriptions laying there that was
filled. I was sick. I mean I was desperate, needed my medicine bad.
I went next door to the neighbors, people who lived next door and
asked them where the druggist lived. They said they didn't know.
Down there they use them screen doors, little light locks, you know.
I went around to the back door, pushed the door in, went in there and
got my medicine. I picked up the medicine that belonged to me and
I got
picked up for it and they didn't want to punish me, thought they could
cure me, after I explained it. The man who operated the drug store
told them I didn't touch any other narcotics. They gave me a year
anyway.
Senator DANIEL. Well, do you know of other addicts who have
broken into drug stores to steal the narcotic drugs? I'm not going
to ask you to name them. I want to know, is that a customary or
usual thing?
Mr. LEVINE.
Yes.
Senator
Mr.
2411
Senator
DANIEL.
that has been assessed against you you are going to be able to stay off
of drugs?
Mr. LEVINE. I got peace of mind now. I don't see why it would
leave me.
Senator DANIEL. I certainly hope that that is correct, and we appreciate your coming before this committee and giving us this information. I want to ask you, you went into the merchant marine in World
War II?
Mr. LEVINE. I joined the merchant marine in 1940. I though it
would help get me off narcotics sorta by travel, took a different, you
know, outlook.
71515-56--pt. 7-
2412
Senator DANIEL. But I believe you did not get off, continued to
use narcotics?
Mr. LEVINE. In every port I hit, everywhere I went.
Senator DANIEL. In how many countries have you bought heroin ?
Mr. LEVINE. Pretty near every port I went to.
Mr. LEVINE. Germany has quite a few, mostly prostitutes and under-
I never had no
trouble. If you want that you can find the devil anywhere, the same,
you know, you find it anywhere.
Senator DANIEL. Did you ever land in any port in your merchant
marine service or your travels over the world where you did find it
difficult to get heroin-in any country?
Mr. LEVINE. I found it pretty hard here in Texas.
Senator DANIEL. In Texas?
Mr. LEVINE. Yes.
Senator DANIEL. What cities did you visit in trying to find heroin?
Mr. LEVINE. You can buy black-market stuff. I wasn't looking for
I prepared a
little, some notes on this here deal. I wasn't ready for you. I didn't
know what was going to happen and I wrote some notes down, sort of
a little testimony you may call it and I'll read it to you and that may
cover all you want to ask.
Senator DANIEL. All right, go ahead.
Mr. LEVINE. Well, gentlemen, I take it we are all here to try to
solve this terrible problem which is growing into a monstrous mountain. It is not only ruining the lives of younger generations but also
demoralizing our entire country. Newspapers and many more ignorant publicity seekers who are trying their utmost to get you to
pass more drastic laws in order to mete out severer punishment to
2413
the offender, if that would help I would be the first to beg you to do
so. Gentlemen, I hope and pray that you understand what severer
punishment will do in order-will do or in fact is now doing-just
helping to create a bigger racket. It is boosting the price. It is making it tougher on old dopey, he is forced to go out to steal, rob, or
push the stuff in order to obtain a supply. 1e may even push it ,to
your own son, daughter, or your neighbor's kids, anybody. If he gets
desperate enough he may even kill for it. It is just boosting the price
for the manufacturer, smuggler, and manufacturer, all connected with
the bigger profits for them. It is just ruining the lives of our teenagers. It is just putting a heavier load on our taxpayers. Why not
face this problem in a sensible manner? A few years ago in China
death sentences were meted out to offenders. Did that stop it? They
took those addicts out in the city square and shot them before the
eves, of the people and now-now they have more offenders than ever.
'the death penalty could not stop it. Where do we expect to get with
meting out severer prison terms? If an addict is honest and gets a
supply through a doctor's prescription the narcotic agent will be
around to visit the doctor and tell him if he don't quit prescribing too
much for his patient, he is prescribing too much for his patient, and
there are other medicines to prescribe, and if he don't stop he will
revoke his license aiid send him to prison, even go around threatening and scaring the druggist, try to keep him from filling the prescription. In the same way the poor addict is then forced into a life of
crime or if a girl she is forced into prostitution.
(The next portion of Mr. Levine's prepared notes were stricken
from the record by Senator Daniel.)
Senator
DANIEL.
talk about that will not be libelous or otherwise libelous if not made
under oath before a committee.
Mr. LwImE. Well, they should at least realize that certain problems belong to God only and God is not the Devil, that's for sure.
Confinement, punishment will never cure an addict. He is just creating a monster and playing right into the hands of the Devil. The
only way to cure an addict, that an addict can ever be cured, is through
God, through real deep and sincere prayer and in due time you will
actually overcome its affliction. The affliction probably is so great
that it don't belong to man, it is out of man's reach. That is how
big God is, I believe. It is just plain nonsense to even think of curing
an addict in prison, prison cell, or in a hospital. It is of paramount
importance that drug" addicts be recognized and treated as sick people
just as the insane are. Years ago people regarded insane as possessed
of the Devil. We flogged them and chained them. We burned them.
Today we realize these people are sick, and we look upon them with,
compassion. An addict should also be looked upon with compassion
and not thrown into a prison cell to be forgotten.
Senator
DA=IEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
hospitals, keep them off the streets? You admit yourself a drug
addict is going to spread his addiction to other people?
Mr. LEVINE. He won't spread it, I'll tell you why, I'll come into
that.
addicts.
2414
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
TRAFFIC
Mr. LEVINE. That's right. I'll tell you why, I'm coming to that.
Senator DANIEL. All right, if insane or leprous, you would be for
putting them in some kind of institution, wouldn't you, where they
wouldn't infect other people?
Mr. LEVINE. Dangerous to anybody else, but an addict isn't even
damaging anybody but his own self.
Mr. GASQUE. Nobody but the whole community; he spreads addiction; he commits crimes, burglary, stealing, and shoplifting.
Mr. LEVINE. Why?
Mr. GASQUM. In order to support his habit.
Mr. LEVINE. I'm going to tell you why.
Senator
BUTLER.
Senator
BUTLER.
Senator
BUTLER.
Senator
BUTLER.
register.
Mr. LEVINE.
Senator
Yes.
BUTLER.
open.
Mr. LEVINE. How long ago?
Senator
had
Senator
BUTLER.
you didn't want anybody to know about your addiction. You kept it
away from your family, from all your friends, and broke open telephone boxes and other things.
LEVINE. That's right.
Senator BUTLER. So you could
Mr.
body to help you with it because you didn't want it known. One of
the chief things about the clinics you're talking about is that the
addicts come out in the open. He confesses publicly that he is an
addict.
2415
Senator DANIEL. But if you can't break a man from addiction after
beats the law, after he uses it he thinks land feels like he is the smartest
and biggest guy in the world.
Senator DANIEL. That is all a mistake-just a minute.
You have
already told the committee that youngsters who beat the law for thrills
think that is going to make them the biggest guy in the world.
Mr. LEVINE. They don't know, them kids don't know.
Senator DANIEL. You have been through it, an addict all these
years, you know all about it, and you are testifying it is a big mistake
and leads to plenty of misery?
Mr. LEVINE. It sure does. Ruins their lives.
Senator DANIEL. Before this record goes any further with statements you have made, I think you speak from the standpoint of an
addict, and from the standpoint of one who has been convicted many,
many times for violations of other laws since you became an addict
and once before you became an addict. How many offenses have you
been convicted of, can you tell us?
2416
like beating the law, hiding it once they have got it, making it tough,
and you've got it half solved. It is the secretiveness, them kids get together, want to smoke in closed rooms, shoot that stuff.
Senator BUTLER. Take the lock off the safe and prevent all the
burglaries.
2417
Senator
Go ahead.
the big bootlegger, illicit factories out of business.
Mr.
That's the only way out, put the bootlegger out. That's the only way
you're going to solve this narcotic problem.
Senator DANIEL. What about the poor narcotic addict?
Mr. LEVINE. They will eventually die out.
Senator DANIEL. By shooting the narcotic addict with dope and
leaving them on the streets?
DANIEL.
LEVINE. Put
I am.
2418
Senator
Senator
DANIEL.
TRAFFIC
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
2419
statement after we asked our questions. We appreciate your appearing before the committee.
Mr. LEVINE. Thank you.
Senator DANIEL. At this point the p hotograph and the police record of Morris Levine will be inserted in t he record.
~(
:~
N'
N
Auitin, Tex.
The following is a transcript of the record, including the most recently reported data, as shown in the files of identification and records concerning our
Austin police department No. BE-17787.
D. P. S. No. 342625. FBI No. 469635.
R. D. THORP, Chief.
As Morris Levine No. 24958, PD Salt Lake City, 8-22-45, Held-Narcotic;
8-23-45, rel. to State Nar. Ag.
As Morris Levine No. 138S95-MM Fed. Corr. Inst., Milan, Miih. 11-3-49 Narc
Laws (Forg Prescrip) 3-15-50 trans, to Texarkana.
No. 7566-H Med. Center for Fel. Pr., Springfield, Mo.; 1-6-51, Narc (Forg. of
Prescript) ; viol. date since August 1951, (leaving limits w/o permission, loss of
contact, fail to report, use of Narc, & Obtaining or possessing Narc. by means of
forged fictitious or altered prescriptions) 10-5-51, wt issued, wt withdrawn &
case closes as approved by Bd of Par, 11-1-51.
Morris Levine if appre prior to 1-2-57, notify St. Div. of Crim. Ident. & Invest.,
Secramento, Calif., per inf rec therefrom 8-6-54.
Wanted: Morris Levine for vio. of parole. Notify Chief Div. of Adult Paroles
Room 504 State Office Bldg. No. 1 Sa-cramento 14, Calif. per inf rec therefrom
10-18-54.
Arrested or
received
Dec. 2,1929
May 31,1930
Oct. 5,1932
D o ------July
4,1934
5,1934
Jan.
5,1938
Aug. 26,1939
Jan. 14,1940
Mar. 8,1940
July
Nov.
Jan.
Mar.
Mar.
11,
14,
24,
10,
31,
1940
1940
1941
1941
1941
Apr.
July
Sept.
Sept.
Oct.
23, 1941
8, 1941
2,1941
16, 1942
13,1942
May
4,1943
Oct. 2,1943
Dec. 28,1944
Aug. 28,1945
Dec. 3, 1945
July 22, 1947
Do.....
July 24, 1947
Nov. 13,1947
Contributor of fingerprints
Number
Charge
Disposition
Dismissed.
Investigation
----------------Discharged June 3, 1930.
Grand larceny
......................
----Violation see.----Oct. 10, 1932, sentence suspended.
151
----------Possessing and
passing counterfeit $10
----notes.
malicious mischief, Sept. 6, 1934, sentence suspended.
d o -------------- -------- Burglary tools,
----petty larceny.
Violation of-----probation in former 3 years.
do .....................
charge
Counterfeiting
and violation of proba- 3 years, conditional release, Jan. 2, 1937.
do_
----tion.
---- d o ---- - -- - -- - -- - Drugs .....
Treat.
Morris Levine_
E-8676
York, N. Y..
B-107845
17242
Police department, Shreveport, La- - Police department, Macon, Ga -------Police department, Orlando, Fla -----Police department, San Antonio, Tex.-Bureau of Narcotics, Washington, D.
C., and Houston, Tex.
Police department, Pensacola, Fla-.Sheriffs office, Tampa, Fla ...........
Police department, Mansfield, Ohio. - Sheriff's office, Tampa, Fla .........
Hillsborough County prison camp,
Tampa, Fla.
Sheriff's office, Tampa, Fla .........
Name
2362
184761
200640
15947
34780
do
-----------------.
do ...
----.......................
Investigation ----.........................
do .....
d o ----------------------- Investigation-shooting.
----Vagrancy and----loitering.
do ..............
Do.
Released from custody.
January 16 1940, released.
Discharged on official charge of loiterIng.
July 12, 1940, $7.50.
$19 or 37 days.
Released, out of town.
29440
43060
8006
133D-75
do .....
do ......................
do
do..............
d o --------------------
5553
8990
1917
8890
do
do ......
do ......
do ......................
do..............
do ......................
Resisting arrest,
unarmed robbery,
----destroying county property.
Investigation ----.....
Battery .....................
----Narcotics ....
----Drunk, resisting
----- and holding investigation.
Vagrancy investigation .........
8990
-----
4, 1950
do ..............
15947
do...............----do
67713 ----d o -- -- - -- - -- - -- 10526
67713
3365
13895
7566-H
5916-TT
Jan.
7566-H
6, 1951
July 17,1951
D o ------July 18, 1951
Jan.
2,1962
Mar.
3,1955
169460
9139
B-192701
119215
A-19856
BE-17787
do .......-
d o ......................
Narcotics laws
----- (forging prescription).
In transfer from Federal corrections
institution, Milan, Mich.
do................... Narcotics (forging
-----prescription) --------
do ..............
do ...............
Felony warrant
----71414 (4) 11715 health
and sanitation code (3 counts).
Investigation,
----- health and security
code, 11,500.
Obtaining or
possession of narcotics
----by means of forged fictitious or altered prescription (3 counts).
Addict
----Forging prescription (11715 health
and security) and prescription forgery code.
Felonious theft of narcotics ..........
do-.............
...do - - - - - - - - - - do ..............
-----
NOTE.-Morris Levine No. 10354 US Det Hdqtrs Oct. 6, 1932 counterfeit SS and 5 yrs prob on Nov. 10, 1932 (as on rpt No. 17242).
-_-
- Narcotics laws
----- (forging prescription)__
do .....
2 years.
2 years, October 11, 1950, transferred tO
Federal corrections institution, Texarkana, Tex.
2 years, Jan. 6, 1951, transferred to medical center for Federal prisoners,
Springfield, Mo.
2 years, May 19, 1951, conditionally
released (see notations).
Chino Street Precint, No. 42, December
26, 1951 (Case 143230).
2422
Senator DANIEL. Let the record show that we have Attorney General John Ben Shepperd, who will appear shortly, and Mayor Tom
Miller sitting with the committee this afternoon.
We will have a 2-minute recess before calling the next witness.
(Committee recessed for 2 minutes.)
Senator DANIEL. The committee will come to order.
The Chair is going to call for any coimnent Mayor Miller might
have for the record of this committee. We are especially glad that
he has been able to sit with us part of the time this morning and
this afternoon. Mayor Miller.
STATEMENT OF HON. TOM MILLER, MAYOR, CITY OF AUSTIN,
TEXAS
Mayor Mi.LER. Thank you, Senator Daniel, Senator Butler, mem-
bers of the committee and others that are here. We know that we
don't have utopia in Austin, there is no perfect man, and there hasn't
been for several thousand years.
We are glad that the committee is here. We hope that good will
come out of it. It has been said by a noted author that the increase
of appetite grows by what it feeds upon, and that you soothe the
serpent, but you haven't killed it. That is the literal translation. I
am not literal, but we think we have a fine police force here under
Chief Thorp. We are undermanned.
I often say, Senator, we are a virtuous lady here in Austin, not kept
up by the State, about like Washington. You do so much for Washington. We have had more help from the State lately under our Sena-
tor here; out there in the audience, the Governor, and the board of
control, and the Attorney General, who are on the committee, they
have been making plans.
We are again very happy to have this committee here. We know
the frailities of nature. We hope that you can work out a cure and
I expect all it takes is money, that makes the mare go. It seems from
the testimony this morning, that we will have to redouble our efforts
on the boards and bring in the various branches of governments, City
government, of course, likes to work with the State and with tho
Federal Government, there is no jealousy of office. And we have
proven in the past that we will work with you, Federal and State, and
we continue that promise to you.
Thank you very much.
Senator DANIEL. Thank you, Mayor Miller, you certainly have
proven that in dnvs gone by. I observed that as a citizen here; when
I was Attorney General for 6 years, I worked with you and with your
subsequent administration as mayor of this city. I want to tell you
how much we appreciate what your fine police force has done for this
city.
2423
further with it, because it is the only way the committee finds it possible to get the information that we expect to develop from this witness.
If the witness will come forward, please. You may raise your right
hand.
(The witness was duly sworn.)
TESTIMONY OF AN UNDISCLOSED WITNESS
Senator DANIEL. You may be seated. First, I want to say that the
committee appreciates your appearing before us to give us firsthand
information as to what narcotics can do to a member of a family.
I believe that you have had that experience with a son in your family,
is that correct?
WITNESS. Yes, one of my sons.
Senator DANIEL. You might speak a little louder into that microphone. So, if you will speak clearly, please. When did your son first
become involved in any type of narcotic charges?
WITNESS. Well, he was never involved in any narcotic charges.
He
that trouble and out of his assocb,tes, or do you know how he became
addicted to drugs?
WTTNESS. Well, I believe he bee.ame addicted innocently. He didn't
realize the potency of this heroin druo. Thev say it is an outlawed
drug and one of the most insi(lious drugs and it takes very little to
get you on it, not like the others.
S .nqtor D %N1FL. Did it come from his associates?
WITNESS. YeS.
Senator Dx\nw,. And how did you find out about it?
one I think you are speaking of, and I knew hA was addicted.
Senator D\NIFL. You say your son got violently sick?
WITN-ESS. Yes.
2424
Was it successful?
WITNESS. NO; it wasn't. I shouldn't say it was, he went back later.
He has taken it twice, 10 days the first time and 5 days the last. It
didn't seem to be enough.
. Senator DANIEL. Did he go back to the use of narcotic dzugs after
these attempted cures each time?
WITNESS"
did.
Senator
DANIEL.
Did you feel like that you had to help him get
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
DANIEL.
WITNESS.
Senator
DANInL.
WITNrs. Yes.
Senator DANIEL. YOU helped him buy his drugs in Mexico?
WrrINSS. NO; there didn't seem to be any market in Monterrey, but
there was in Nuevo Laredo.
Do you know from whom you bought in Nuevo
Senator DANimE
Laredo?
WITNmss. No, I do not. I didn't buy from them. We had contact
there in Nuevo Laredo, so I don't know.
Senator DANTEL. Your contact in Nuevo Laredo was a Mexican citizen or American citizen?
WrrNmss. I imagine they were Mexicans.
WITNESS. Yes.
2425
place in Mexico?
WITNESS. No.
DANIEL.
WITNESS. Yes.
right.
What is this woman's name there?
Simona.
person here
2426
(Exhibit D follows:)
ExIIBIT 1)
..
Born in
Sain tonio, 'May 6, 19.14, is 40 years of age, 5 feet, It inc.hes tall, 184 pounds;
light brown hair, brown eyes ; niedium build; light complexion; is single,
and
addicted to heroin.
VWrrNl.,SS. Well, -NhloeN'er was withl me would call anld she would have
to nmet us at a certain Place.
Senator ]).\UL. D~id you use the telephone in arr-anging for this
Yes, you could.
Senlator DAN. IEL. D~id you do that oil several occasions.?
WIT NESS.
YeS.
Senator DA\NEL. W(e11, would you call for Simona, Ray Murdock, or
wlioni ?
AVIrNES. \.Vell, it was usually for Ray.
Senator DA
-kL
ll right, did you ever talk to Simona ?
WVITNqESS.
No.
2427
Senator DANIEL. Anid tlen someone there woull give you the heroill.
and you would pay the money?
W WITNESS. Yes.
Senator DANIEL. And about how much did that cost over in Sait
Antonio?
WrrTNEss. Thirty-ffive dollars a gram.
Senator DANIEL. About how mucl a day or a week did your son's
habit cost?
You can't depend upon the
WITNESS. Well, it varied, you know.
strength of the heroiln; sonme of it is strong and some it not. I should
say from 1 to 11/ or at most 2 grams a week.
Senator D)\NIE1'L. In other words, it; would run as high as seventy
dollars a week at times ?
W'NESS. Well, yes, I guess it did.
Senator l).\xImi.Amid ldid that last over a period of time, over a
long period of time?
XrITrNESS. Well, 1() (ays or 2 weeks. Like I say, it depends upon the
strength of it.
Senator DANIEL. Well, at Hie rate of cost that you gave us, anywhere
1'rom $5)0 to ')70 a week did your soiis addiction last over a goo(
period of time ad cost you that much a week over several years?
WrrINEss. Oh, 110, no.
Senator DANIEL. For how long0?
Of 1954.
a young boy?
WITNESS. Well, I made a trip to San Antonio and I called her on
lhe 'phone and I told her that I didn't know anything about the setup
over there but I said, it was after my son had gone to the hospital,
I said "Fe is in the hospital now." 1 said, "If you or any of the rest
of you sell him anything," I said "aly mre," well, I said "then I am
going to try to draw a circle around you," that is the expression.
Senator l.\NI':.L. Try to do what
WArrN.ss. "Draw a circle around you." It wasn't my business to
catch people but I was personally connected there and she said, "Well,
I don't blame you." She said, "lie is a good-looking boy and he is
young," she said "I don't blame you." I said, "You just pass the word
around because that is the way it is."
Senator DANIEL. So, from what she told you, she knew she was
selling to a young boy ?
WITNESS. I don't know, I tried to get Ray Murdock.
You could
get him at that time. I don't know whether it was Al's Bar, I rather
think it was, but I talked with him.
Senator DANIEL. And had your son been buying over there before
you went over and found out about it, went over there with him
yourself ?
71515-56Ipt. 7--6
2428"
WITNESS.
Senator
DANIEL.
WrrNEsS. Yes.
Senator DANIEL. Did you apply for him to go into the Federal
hospital on a voluntary basis?
WITNESS. That was on
Senator DANIEL. Did
Senator
DANIEL.
WITNESS.
Senator
No.
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIFL.
borrow any money to take care of this addiction for your son?
WITNESS.
it with that, and then we had some other debts, lawyer's fees and
living expenses. My husband is out of work so we did sell some property, but it wasn't that entirely, some of it you might say did go for
the addiction habit but not all of it.
Senator
DANIEL.
hospital?
WITNESS. Yes.
Senator
DANIEL.
WITNESS.
Yes.
Senator DANIEL. Now, while you were making these trips, to -San
Antonio did you ever see the apartment of Ray and Simona?
WITNESS.
No; I just waited out in front and I was inside the bar
2429
Senator DANIEL. That he thought the best way to get rid of peddlers
and smugglers would be to legalize it, give it out in clinics free or at
little cost. As a mother who has gone through the misery and worry
of a son addicted, would you like to make any comment? Do you
think that would be the way to handle the problem, to let your son have
all the narcotics, or a minimum amount, every day?
WITNESS. No; I hope he never touches it again. I have a feeling
he will not because he realizes since he was on it a very short time.
As I say, he didn't have too much of a habit. He had enough, it was
pretty bad. I really couldn't say about that. My thought has always
been that if we had more money appropriated so the Rio Grande that
runs by Nuevo LaredoSenator DANIEL. Yes?
WrrNESS. If the Rio Grande could be better patrolled, because from
all I could gather, most of this down around in here is coming in from
Nuevo Laredo. I have heard by the grapevine that they grow the
poppy seed and manufacture lots of heroin in Old Mexico, but there
is a doubt in my mind that is true. When you get in the interior it
is not so easy, at least it wasn't.
Senator DANIEL. You found it was easier to buy the heroin along
the border, south side of the border?
WITNESS.
Probably
that was sent in from Europe, shipped there someway, I don't know.
Senator DANIEL. And do you also know that it was difficult to get
I got acquainted with several of them, went to San Antonio for their
supply.
Senator DANIEL. Were some of them young people ?
WITNESS. No, no.
(Witness excused.
Senator DANIEL. Let the record show that the next witness is not
2430
beginning, that the only reason you weren't president is that you
were called on for greater things.
We are very pleased that this committee is holding hearings in
Texas on the narcotics problem. The people of Texas are deeply concerned about it. Texas law enforcement officers and agencies are devoting an increasing amount of effort to its solution, and the attorney
general's office is working on it with diligence, primarily in an effort
to bring about greater coordination and cooperation among the States,
and between the State and Federal Governments. There is a great
need for better Federal-State cooperation in all areas of law enforceinent, with a more clear-cut definition of responsibilities. On both
the State and Federal level there is considerable abdication of responsibility which only a more sincere cooperative effort can remedy.
I appear here both as president of the National Association of Attorneys General and as attorney general of Texas, and my remarks
will be made from both viewpoints.
Since 1877, when 1 person out of 400 in this country was a narcotics
addict, the ratio has been lowered to not more than 1 in every 3,000,
primarily because of State and Federal legislation.
The history of narcotics legislation in this country began with a
regrettable lack of uniformity and considerable renunciation of enforcement responsibility on the part of the States, and recently has
seen vast improvements which are by no means complete as yet. In
a word, the States were the first to pass narcotics laws, but then they
backed away, leaving the field mainly to the Federal Government,
and now are reentering the field with a great deal more teamwork.
The earliest narcotics laws were State laws intended to protect the
public health and morals, but they were chaotic and impractical. One
State didn't know what another State was doing, and no State was
doing much. although practically all States had narcotics laws of
some kind, most of them passed between 1895 and 1910.
The first narcotics law passed in Texas was typical of what most
States adopted in those early days; passed in 1905, it prohibited the
illegal distribution of cocaine, morphine, opium, or chloral hydrate.
The penalty on a first conviction was a mere $25 to $50 fine. Other
States had comparable laws, often against entirely different drugs.
The first Federal narcotics law was passed in 1909, and was merely
a revenue measure designed to govern the sale and use of opium.
It had nothing to do with policing, because that was strictly a State
function.
It is an interesting fact that the use of narcotics by teen-agers was
one of the major reasons for the passage of the Federal Harrison Act
in 1914, which was more or less a policing instrument. However, it
ILLICIT' NARCOTICS
TRAFFIC
2431
2432
Only a minority of the States have any kind of special appropriation for the enforcement of their laws. California has about $400,000,
Illinois $155,000. Oklahoma $27,000, Iowa $12,700, Montana $8,000,
North Carolina $8,000, and so on. These do not include appropriations
by counties or municipalities. In most cases these State appropriations
are not by any means commensurate with the incidence of narcotics
violations reported in those States by the FBI.
As a matter of fact, very few States are able to give reliable statistics
as to the percentage of crimes in which narcotics figure in one way
or another-not because of a failure in the keeping of records, but
because of the lack of uniformity in State laws. For example, States
which have no provisions for making addiction an offense may arrest
hundreds of addicts on other charges and never record that their
crimes were committed to obtain money to support the drug habit.
In Texas, however, 12 percent of the inmates of the Texas prison
system have a narcotics history. More than 15 percent of the inmates
of Federal prisons were convicted on narcotics charges.
Senator DANIEL. General, what Federal prisons are you including
there? Our figures show a much higher percentage from the Federal
prisons we have heard from. Did you say more than 15 percent of
the inmates?
Mr. SHEPPERD. That's on narcotics charges itself.
It would not
include addicts who had committed crimes, some other crimes, charged
to the crime instead of possession or other narcotics charges.
Senator DANIEL. I believe if you included there addicts who had
been put in the penitentiary and Federal prisons on other charges,
that is, stealing, robbery, murder, et cetera, that it would be a much
higher figure: you would agree with that?
Mr. SHEPPERD. Yes; I think that's right.
In about 75 percent of the States the attorneys general are not
charged by law with the enforcement of narcotics statutes, and even
where State agencies are set up to do so, they generally do not attempt
to coordinate the enforcement efforts of their cities and counties. Consequently there is much variation in the intensity of enforcement even
within a given State.
Almost unanimously, the attorneys general of the other States believe that cooperation between the Federal and State Governments is
seriously hampered by the simple lack of adequate personnel on both
levels, which by the nature of the problem means trained personnel.
since officers on narcotics details cannot function with any degree of
efficiency unless trained for that purpose and allowed to devote full
time
it. been
Wetohave
interested in Texas to know how much of the volume
of illicit drugs used in other States arrive there from Mexico through
Texas. Attorneys general have estimated it, and it is only an estimate,
in such a way that it appears that drugs going through Texas fan
out in an arc on all sides of the State, and penetrate to the depth of
1 or 2 States. Colorado. for example, estimates that most of the
narcotics entering that State come through Texas. New Mexico
guesses about 60 percent, which is odd, considering that it has a long
border in common with Mexico. States as far away as California,
Washington, Montana, Nevada, Illinois, Nebraska, and Mississippi
estimate that little or none of the narcotics used in those States come
2433
from Texas. The principal narcotic going through Texas is undoubtedly marihuana.
The greatest disparity among the States'. laws on narcotics is found
inrtho various statutes-or lack of them---ealing with the incarceration and treatment of addicts. To be a narcotics addict is not a
criminal offense under Federal law, which merely defines the term
in order to provide for the commitment of addicts to Federal hospitals
for treatment on a voluntary basis, or prescribes confinement of those
convicted of other Federal violations. There are 2 Federal narcotics
hospitals, 1 in Fort Worth and the other in Lexington, Ky.
It is fundamental that a business without customers will go bankrupt. If all addicts could be institutionalized, the seller of narcotics
would probably go broke, because without the aid of persons already
addicted, new drug users cannot be recruited fast enough for profit.
For half a century we have worked on the major premise that the solution to our narcotics problem is to cut off the sources of supply, but
now attention is also being drawn toward drying up the market by
rounding up the addicts. Emphasis is now being given to the need
for uniform compulsory treatment.
The Uniform Narcotics Act omits any provision for the commitient, care, and treatment of addicts, as well as for search and seizure,
because these were felt to be strictly within the province of the individual States. But under the new philosophy to which I subscribe.
I think there should be a redefinition of the authority of the Federal
Government in this particular field, and certainly we will start out
with the painstaking idea and premise that the individual States are
not doing their part at all in this field.
In only about one-third of the 48 States is narcotics addiction an
offense. Some make it a misdemeanor, and some a felony-again no
uniformity. Addiction has been an offense in some States for periods
up to 46 years, as is true in Washington, or for as little as 6 months,
as in Nevada and Oklahoma. As further examples, laws against
addiction were passed in Wisconsin and Oregon in 1923, in Z6uarn
in 1933, Mississippi in 1936, Michigan in 1952, and in Texas in 1955.
Again, State laws reflect a regrettable lack of uniformity in the
penalties assessed for drug addiction. Oklahoma provides 6 months'
imprisonment; California, Michigan, Missouri, Nevada, Washington
give 1 year; Wisconsin gives 2; and Oregon imposes a 5-year penalty
and a $5,000 fine. Texas law allows imprisonment up to 3 years.
New Jersey, which has an unusually good set of narcotics laws in
most respects, passed a law in 1952 that interested me a great deal,
and I think it would be well for this committee to go into the idea,
requiring the registration of all persons convicted of crimes involving
narcotics within 10 years prior to the passage of the act, if they intend
to remain in New Jersey as long as 24 hours. They are required to
give a complete written statement as to name, aliases, arrests, convictions, penal institutions served in, and places of residence. They are
photographed and fingerprinted, and this data is sent to local and
State police agencies.
A startling number of even those States which have legislated
against drug addiction and prescribed mandatory treatment have
failed to provide even the minimum required facilities for treating
addicts. California is an exception, having 8 State hospitals and 12
2434
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
TRAFFIC
approved private hospitals for that purpose. New Jersey, oni the
other hand, which has a model narcotics code, has no facilities. Texas
is one of those States which have none whatever.
In many States addicts are sent to State mental hospitals, but
as in Texas, these hospitals are not equipped to treat narcotics patients.
These are sick people, and a padded cell is not the answer. The addict
can be sent to prison, and often is, but the best care afforded there is
a little tapering-off treatment.
Most States do not have any set procedure for the commitment of
addicts to Federal hospitals, and the two Federal narcotics hospitals
accept patients from the States on a very limited quota. Of the 2
hospitals, only the 1 in Lexington, Ky., accepts women patients.
When addicts are committed to these Federal hospitals on court order
from the States, there is nothing to hold them there, because under
the Federal voluntary treatment law they cannot be detained against
their will.
Nowhere in the ITnited States or its possessions, as far as I am able
to determine, is there a hospital devoted exclusively to the treatment
of narcotics addicts. Although. 2,848 of the 2,934 patients admitted
to the Federal hospital in Lexington during the last fiscal year were
addict patients, the Federal hospital in Fort Worth carried an average daily patient load of 809, of which only 285 were addict patients;
524 were psychiatric.
Obviously, if you have no provision for the care and treatment of
addicts, you have virtually nothing, because they cannot cure themselves, and unless they are cured or confined, they continue to support
the illegal traffic. Actually, there is no known permanent cure for
drug addiction. Any effective treatment must begin with the realization that addiction is caused by a defect in human personality, and
continue with psychiatric and social adjustment, once the physical
withdrawal from drugs has been accomplished. This cannot be
achieved by nmere confinement for a short period among other criminals. All efforts to cure drug addiction without long-term supervision and personality adjustment have been consistently a failure.
This, then, is the picture of antinarcotics law and addict rehabilitation among the 48 States. The relationship between Federal and
State legislation and law enforcement on the local level can be seen
in the problems and opinions of Texas sheriffs and prosecutors who
were consulted on the question by the Attorney General's office.
To begin with, narcotics enforcement is almost altogether a city
problem in Texas, although it exists also in smaller towns and rural
areas along the Mexican border, and is intensified in port areas along
the coast. At least partly because of the scarcity of narcotics offenses
in the less populous counties, about 25 percent of the 59 sheriffs consulted constier narcotics strictly a Federal problem. In half the counties surveyed, according to the sheriffs, marihuana is the source of
most trouble, while roughly one-fourth of the counties are more
troubled with morphine, and the rest with barbiturates and other
drugs. A few sheriffs, most of them in the more populous counties,
cite heroin and paregoric.
Sheriffs who know the source of the drugs illegally dispensed in
their counties (and about half of them do) list neighboring cities or
Mexico as the origin. One in ten said that doctors, rather than a
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
TRAFFIC
2435
city or foreign country, were the primary channel of the illicit traffic
in their counties.
District attorneys in counties bordering Mexico are almost unanimous in saying that law-enforcement officers receive little or no cooperation from officials of the Mexican Government in stopping the
influx of marihuana into Texas. Most of these prosecutors leave the
narcotics problem to the Federal Government on the grounds that
Federal officers are better trained and equipped for the job, and even
those who assume the burden of enforcement are concerned mostly
with providing for treatment as a condition of probation, sheriffs were
overwhelmingly against probation. Prosecutors tended to disapprove
it also, but in the main indicated that they would weigh the individual
case.
Everyone conversant with the narcotics problem is aware that addiction among juveniles is on the increase. What is the picture of
drug use among the schools and colleges of Texas?
The Attorney General's office took a sample poll among a large
representative selection of students and administrators in Texas high
schools and colleges which brought interesting information to light.
What the vast majority of Texas students know about drugs, for example, is learned from magazines and movies, and only about half
the students polled were aware of the general effects of drug use.
Only a minute percentage stated that they had ever been approached
by a person urging the use of marihuana or drugs, or had ever heard
of anyone else's being approached, and these were almost all in one
citSchool
.
administrators in communities large and small stated, with
only one exception, that they had no narcotics problem. In answer
to the question, Do you believe the use of drugs by students has been
exaggerated?, most high-school superintendents answered no, but at
the same time admitted that their opinions were not based on experience or observation in their own communities. College administrators, almost in a body, answered yes, with the same reservation.
When asked whether a new Texas law requiring public-school instruction in the effect of narcotics would be a deterring factor in juvenile use of drugs, most high-school officials shrugged off the question
on the grounds that they had no problem.
Senator DANIEL. Is there a new law in Texas on the subject or were
you just asking about it?
Mr. SIIEPPERD. No, there is a new law.
Senator DANIEL. There is a new law requiring education in the harmful effect of drugs.
Mr. SHEPPERD. Yes, there is a new law, passed by the last legislature, to be combined with some of the other courses, Mr. Chairman. I
think that is true in about 16 or 17 of the other States who have
similar laws in varying degrees. Most of them are combined with
other courses of instruction.
Some of these superintendents when asked about it answered with
a categorical statement that instruction could only excite students'
curiosity and lead to increased drug use. The greater number of those
who answered suggested that instruction would be all right if given
incidentally to a course in biology, physical education, or other
standard courses. A few approved the idea only if visual aids were
used to show actual pictures of drug addicts and the terrible effects of
2436
2437
Mr. GASQUE. What is your view? Do you believe that would tend to
decrease the curiosity rather than excite, increase curiosity about
drugs, when in isolated counties and rural areas there is no problem?
I grew up in a rural area. I never knew that there was a drug problem
till I got to the big city.
Mr. SHEPPERD. Well, I argued the teaching of communism with
Commissioner Studebaker and others for a number of years. I favor
the teaching but I certainly subscribe to the observation the chairman
made here today, that the courses should be properly prepared and
that was the main reservation I had on teaching the evils and the
philosophy of communism; I wanted to know who was preparing the
courses. We had a very successful politician, a predecessor of mine
and Senator Daniel, who said: "Let the other people worry about the
other people, let me know the fellows counting the cost." On this
whole idea, I think that is the crux of the whole thing-who is preparing and if it is prepared in a practical way, there is no romance in
this thing at all.
Senator
DANIEL.
law, along with all the copies of all the new laws passed by the Texas
Legislature this last time. There were several passed on narcotics,
is that right?
Mr. SHEPPERD. I will be glad to supply all of them to the committee.
(Laws pertaining to narcotics enacted at the regular session of the
fifty-fourth legislature, 1955, State of Texas, may be found in the
appendix at pp. 3481-3486.)
In connection with schools and colleges, I would like to mention
that among a cross-section of addicted inmates of the Texas prison
system questioned by the attorney general's office, including all of the
4 drug addicts confined in the Texas State Hospital under the drugaddiction law passed by the last legislature, the educational level was
consistently below the ninth grade, with the exception of 1 surgeon
and 1 female high-school graduate.
While sheriffs and prosecutors in some heavily populated counties
believe the use of narcotics by juveniles in their areas is serious, the
great majority state that in their sections it is minor or nonexistent.
I am happy to say that during the last fiscal year in Texas, only 34
children were committed to the State youth development council for
detention in State schools with liquor or drugs listed as a major factor
in their delinquency, and the majority of these records listed liquor
alone. These represented only 3 percent of the total number of
juveniles committed. If there is a serious problem regarding juveniles and narcotics in Texas, it is not revealed in the cases in which
juveniles are committed to State training schools.
I believe that the first thing vitally needed is a national effort to lay
out and crystallize all phases of the narcotics problem, beginning with
conferences on the State level to outline definite factual information,
and moving to a White House Conference under the sponsorship of
the Federal Government to coordinate our scattered efforts, define
spheres of operation, and promulgate a unified, workable program of
criminal law, treatment and rehabilitation, preventive education, and
what have you. From there the representatives of the various States
would outline to their respective legislatures the needed reforms.
Much improvement can be made through small efforts with large
effect. Federal officers assist in making most of the narcotics arrests
2488
2439
Senator
DANrEL.
by the Congress.
Mr. SHEPPERD.
have it.
A private foundation has been started by a group of industrialists
in New York to work on a national scale among the country's 5 million
alcoholics and estimated 60,000 drug addicts. The National Association of Attorneys General is looking into this organization to see if it
is reputable and responsible.
It would be of great help to the Western States if women patients
were admitted to the Federal narcotics hospital in Fort Worth, and if
the facilities of that hospital could be enlarged to handle more addicts.
There is no reason why the States should not pay the cost of their
treatment, and those funds could be used to increase the hospital's
capacity.
The States, in that connection, could pass enabling legislation preparatory to the passage of the Payne bill, Senate Joint Resolution 19,
which is designed to permit the admission of State patients to Federal
narcotics hospitals at State cost. This would speed up their admission
when and if the bill is passed, at it should be.
I believe that under authority already granted by Congress to the
States for making interstate compacts, regional hospitals could be set
up on a share-the-cost basis, perhaps with Federal help if needed. One
thing is certain-anything we could establish or provide by any means
at all would be better than what we now have.
In this enlightened age it is foolish to continue trying to solve co-mplex moral problems with repressive laws that we allow to' stack up
on the books and violate at leisure, or enforce only sporadically when
the public becomes aroused. Sooner or later we must face the issue
of what type of personal morality we wish to regulate by law and
what type we will leave to the individual's conscience and personal
restraint. Unenforceable laws and laws not supported by a clear majority of the people should then be erased from the books, and the reinainder enforced with all of the combined financial, physical, and
moral forces at our command.
The records of counties and municipalities are replete with concrete instances of the general philos6dhy of enforcement after the
fact, in which officers with the wisdom of experience will break up a
sudden spurt of criminal activity merely by rounding up all drug
addicts. It is surely time for us to realize that the better method is
to lock the stable door before the horse has bolted, by rounding up the
addict first, preventing the crime by removing the criminal.
Senator DANIEL. We certainly thank you for this comprehensive
statement, General Shepperd.
Mr. SHIEPPERD. Thank you.
Senator
DAnEL.
2440
Willium Yelderman.
DANIEL.
Mr. YELDERMAN.
Senator DANIEL.
2441
Mr. RoDRI:UEZ.
NO, Sir.
Mr.
RODRIGUEZ.
Senator
in San Antonio?
Senator
DANIEL.
2442
Senator DANIEL. I know that isn't the usual word that is used bu.
what have you heard? What do you understand me to mean when I
I
ask about narcotics
Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Well, all I know about narcotics, what I see in the
paper, a man got arrested about narcotics.
Senator DANIEL. Did you ever hear narcotics called by any other
name ?
Mr. RODRIGUEZ. No.
Senator
Senator
Senator
Yes.
Or heroin?
Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Well, marihuana, I think.
Senator DANIEL. Did you ever smoke any marihuana?
DANIEL.
sir.
Senator DANIEL. Did you ever sell any marihuana?
Mr. RODRIGUEZ. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Did you ever hear anybody talk about buying stuff
at Mannie Laredo's Bar in San Antonio?
Mr. RODRIGUEZ. NO, sir; most of the people who go there is Spanish
people.
Senator DANIEL. And you never sold any nor heard anything about
anybody else selling or buying any stuff, heroin or marihuana, in
Mannie Laredo's Bar in San Antonio?
Mr. RODRIGUEZ. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. You say most of the people are Spanish-speaking
people, what do they call marihuana?
Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Lucas.
Senator DA-NIEL. What do they call heroin?
Mr. RODRIGUEZ. No,
Mr. RODRIGUEZ.
Tacata.
sir; I can't.
2443
Mr.
RODRIGUEZ.
Senator
Mr.
DANIEL.
No, sir.
RODRIGUEZ.
Senator
N[r.
DANIEL.
RODRIGUEZ.
RODRIGUEZ.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
had dope?
Mr. RODRIGUEZ. No, sir; those people behind, I mean on the front
of the bar.
Senator
DANIEL.
there?
M1r.
the bar?
Senator
Mr.
Senator DANIEL. Where did they get the marihuana?
RODRIGUEZ. I wouldn't know, sir.
Senator DANIEL. How did you know they were smoking marihuana?
Mr. RODR1GUEZ. I see a lot of times, you can smell it when it is
Mr.
strong, you know the smoke, I knew what it was, when a lot of people
mention it.
Senator
DANIEL.
Describe it.
71515-56-pt. 7--7
2444
Mr.
white paper.
Senator DANIEL. Are they about the size of a normal cigarette or
smaller?
Mr. RODRIGUEZ. No, sir; little smaller.
Senator DANIEL.
Mr. RODRIGUEZ.
Considerably smaller?
Yes,
sir.
Senator DANIEL. Did you see any of them using heroin or stuff?
Mr. RODRIGUEZ. No, sir.
Senator DANLIEL. Well. did you hear any of them there talking about
this, what did you say was the Spanish word for heroin?
Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Tacata.
Senator DANIEL. Did you hear them using that word there?
Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Well, yes, sir;: I did.
Senator DANIEL. And was that when they asked whether you had
any?
Mr. RODRIGUEZ. They didn't ask me. I heard them saying to the
people down at the bar about tacata.
Senator DANIEL. They would talk to other men at the bar?
Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Yes.
Senator DANIEL. A minute ago you said they asked you if you had
any dope, what words did they use?
Senator
DANIEL.
2445
.[r.
YELDERAIAN.
You are under oath and if you tell a lie you are
committing, violating the law yourself. You have got to tell the
truth.
Senator DANIEL. Do you understand that?
Mr. RXODRIGTU-EZ. Yes.
Senator DANIEL. You understand that if a jury found you had lied
to this committee you could be sent to prison for that; you understand
that?
Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Yes.
someone had not told our committee investigator the matters about
which I am going to ask you.
All right, did you ever tell anyone here in Austin, Tex., or anywhere
else that you were selling heroin to colored people here in Austin?
M.r. rODRIGUEZ.
No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. You are positive you never told anyone that?
Mir. R ODRIGUEZ. No, sir, I haven't told nobody that.
Senator DANIEL. Well, did you ever sell any heroin where you call
it stuff. tacata.
Mr. RODRIG-UEZ. Tacata.
Senator DANITEL. By whatever name, did you ever sell any or deliver
any to any person here in Austin?
Mf r. RODRIGUEZ. NO, sir, I haven't.
Senator DANIEL. Did you ever deliver any heroin, tacata or stuff to
2446
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
TRAFFIC
to anybody in Texas?
Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Well, just tell us, did you ever discuss anything
Mr.
RODRIGUEZ.
with him or did he ever discuss with you anything about dope, narcotics, stuff, marihuana?
Mr. RODRIGUEZ. I knew what he came for.
Senator DANIEL. How did you know?
Mr. RODRIGUEZ. A lot of people up here wait for him to get here.
Senator DANIEL. Where would they wait?
Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Over at the Olmos poolroom.
Senator DANIEL. Wait for him to bring dope?
Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Come from San Antonio, yes, they always wait for
somebody to come from San Antonio and Ray come from San Antonio
all the time.
Senator DANIEL. Did he bring marihuana over here?
Mr. RODRTGITEZ. I seen one time he did, sir.
Senator DANIEL. You saw him do it?
Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Yes.
Senator
DANIEL.
Mr. RODRIGUEZ. I didn't see him make the sale, I seen him give a
boy a jar, one of these big jars full of it.
DANIEL. Full of
RODRIGJUEZ. Yes, sir.
Senator
Mr.
marihuana?
Senator
DANIEL.
IIIIIIIIIII
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
TRAFFIC
2447
RODRIGtEZ.
Senator DANIEL. Who was the boy to whom he gave the marihuana?
Mr. RODRIGUEZ. To-he's in the penitentiary now, I forget his name.
Senator DANIEL. Will you try to think of his name 'You say this
Ray Murdock gave him a jar of marihuana on that occasion?
Mr.
RODRIGUEZ. Yes.
Senator BUTLER. Did
trial?
Mr.
RODRIGUEZ.
Senator
BUTLER.
No.
Senator DANIEL. Did you ever see Ray Murdock deliver any heroin?
Mr. RODRIGUEZ. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Did you ever see him deliver any other kind of
dope to anyone?
Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Nothing but that jar, all I seen.
Senator DANIEL. How do you know he was delivering heroin over
here from San Antonio?
Mr. RODRIGUEZ. I heard it.
DANIEL. It was pretty common talk?
Mr. RODRIGU7EZ. Yes.
Senator DANIEL. They do get it from Ray Murdock?
Senator
Senator DANIEL. You have seen him coming in and going out of
th hoftpl ?
Mr. Ro'RTO ,z. Cnmino out ad goi-nq into the hotel.
Sownf nr DANIEL. (oinlg into the hotel?
z. Y',.
,,natoi D,V\TTF. You hnve h,'c people talking. waiting for him
to 1---viiiomp qfiiff -from qqn Antonio?
M'*,
,OPTGUiFr7
2448
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
TRAFFIC
Senator DANIEL. Did Ray Murdock ever talk to you about helping
him out with his business?
Mr. RODIGUEZ. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Did you ever talk to him about the dope business
or the marihuana business?
Senator DANIEL. Are you sure you haven't had marihuana in your
Senator I)ANIEL. Did you ever see this Prince Albert can before'?
Mr. RODRIGU-EZ. No, sir. They picked it up from under my bed.
Kids had been playing around with toys and the can was in one of
the boxes where the kids had toys.
Senator DANIEL. You never had that Prince Albert can in your
pocket?
Mr. RODRIGUEZ. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Was that the first time you ever saw it when the
officers found it?
Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Did you look in it after the officers found it, did
you look to see what was init?
Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. What was in it?
Mr.
RODRIGUEZ.
No, sir.
Senator
DANIEL.
hands?
Sir?
Senator DANIEL. You have had them in your hands, on your person?
Mr. RODRIGUEZ. I found them and give to this boy.
Mr. RODRIGUEZ.
2449
MIfr.
RODRIGUEZ.
Mr.
RODRIGUEZ.
Fourteen.
Senator DANIEL. What side of the bar?
Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Sir?
Senator DANIEL. What side of the bar?
Mr. RODRIGUEZ. On the outside, on the booths, where they sit, on the
booths.
Senator DANIEL. On the booths? On the rail?
Senator
DANIEL.
Mr. RODRIGUEZ.
Senator
Mr.
Senator
.Mr.
DANIEL. To whom
RODRIGUEZ. To a boy.
Senator
Mr.
DANIEL.
RODRIGUEZ.
Senator
DANIEL.
from him?
Mr. RODRIGUEZ. I seen him and Ray.
Senator DANIEL. Ray Murdock?
Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Yes.
Senator DANIEL. Where did you see him and Ray Murdock?
Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Over at Mannie's.
Senator DANIEL. That is the bar you worked in?
Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Yes, sir; and over at Cinco de Mayo, next bar from
where I was working, in the next building, and I seen him over at
Market Cafe. All the time come to Market Cafe and drink coffee and
eat.
2450
Senator DANI EL. Did you ever see Al when Murdock was delivering
dope?
Mr. RODRIGUEZ. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Did you ever hear anybody talk about buying
dope from Ray Murdock.
lr. RODRIGUEZ. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. You know he deals in dope?
Mr. RODRIGUEZ. No, I didn't.
Senator DANIEL. You heard him talk about it?
Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. I want you to think real well. Just a moment,
Mr. Rodriguez, think again now and tell me whether or not the 14
marihuana cigarettes are the only marihuana you have ever handled,
ever possessed or had in your hands or in your pockets, anywhere; are
you sure?
Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Yes, sir, I ami sure.
Senator DANIEL. You are sure that is all?
Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Yes.
Senator DANIEL. Are you sure that is the only marihuana yol
Mr.
RODRIGUEZ.
Yes, sir.
Mr.
RODRIGUEZ.
Yes.
RODRIGUEZ.
Senator DANIEL. Did you ever know that they were in the business
of selling heroin?
Mr. RODRIGUEZ. I know he used it.
Senator DANIEL. Who did?
Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Pete. One day playing pool he dropped out of his
handkerchief, he dropped a needle.
Senator DANIEL. A needle?
Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Yes, sir, and a box of matches.
Senator DANIEL. Did you ask him whether or not he was using it?
Mr. RODRIGUEZ. I didn't ask, I knew.
Senator DANIEL. How did you know what that was for?
Mr. RODRIGUEZ. I seen them in the paper, things like that.
Senator DANIEL. You saw about it in the papers?
Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Carmel Campbell and Pete Eden are in the penitentiary on charges of sale of heroin, you know that?
Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Yes, sir, I seen them in the paper.
Senator DANIEL. Did you ever hear they said you were one of their
connections?
Mr.
RODRIGUEZ.
I didn't.
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
TRAFFIC
2451
Senator
DANIEL.
Mr. RODRIGUEZ.
Senator
Senator
DANIEL.
or to Taylor, Tex.?
Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Yes, sir.
Senator
DANIEL.
Yes.
Senator
DANIEL.
Yes, sir.
Work.
*Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Behind the bar for Miss Hattie, during the cotton
season I tend bar for her.
Senator DANIEL. At Taylor?
2452
Mr.
Yes, sir.
Senator
heroin?
Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Yes, sir, that's the boy I'm telling you about, the
one that Ray give him the bottle.
Senator DANIEL. Ray gave him the bottle of marihuana?
Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Ben Curry.
Senator DANIEL. I believe he is now in prison?
Mr. RODRIGUEZ. He is in prison, yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. She is now serving in the penitentiary on a narcotics charge, isn't she?
Mr. RODRIGUEZ. About the same, all met at the cab stand in the
morning, about 8 or 9 o'clock in the morning, always hang around the
pool hall.
Senator
DANIEL.
RODRIGUEZ.
Some mornings.
Senator DANTIEL. And these 3 young people would meet out there?
Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Yes.
Senator DANIEL. And how often did they meet Ray Murdock there?
Mr.
there.
RODRIGUEZ.
Senator
heroin ?
DANIEL.
I I
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
TRAFFIC
2453
him?
huana for?
Mr. RODIGiuUEZ. Bobby? But this other boy, Ben Curry.
Senator DANIEL. I mean Ben Curry.
Mr. RODRIGTEz. No: I didn't know why he was buying it.
Senator DANIEL. Did you know Ben Curry was using marihuana '
Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Yes.
Senator DANIEL. Had you seen him?
Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Yes, a couple of times.
Senator DANIEL. Did he ever ask you to get him some?
Mr. RODRIGUEZ. No.
Senator DANIEL. Did Doris C0atana ever ask you to get her some
marihuana?
Mir. RODRIGUEZ. No, sir.
Senator DANieL. Or heroin?
Mr.
RODRIGUEZ.
No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Well, about these meetings that you had out at
the pool hall in the mornings where you saw these three people, wis
that after you worked over in San Antonio or before?
Mr. RODRIGUEZ. I wasn't working when I was seeing Bobbie.
Senator DANIEL. You worked over at Mannie's Bar in San Antonio
in the fall of 1954; is that right?
Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Was that before you met these young people out
here at the pool hall?
Mr. RODRIGuEz. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. And over in San Antonio you had met Ray
Murdock?
Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. And this man whose picture you have there,
Alfonso Cavazos?
Mr.
RODRIGUEZ.
2454
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
TRAFFIC
Senator DANIEL. Did they ask you if you ever saw Ray Murdock
sell or deliver any marihuana to any one of these three young people?
Did they ask you that?
Mr. RODRIGUEZ. No, sir, they didn't.
Senator D.NLIEL. They never asked if you saw him deliver any kind
of drugs?
Mr. RODRIGUEZ. No, sir.
that.
Senator DANIEL. Why?
Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Well, it ailn't my business to tell people what other
people do.
Senator DANIEL. Youi knew this Ray Murdock was selling to these
18-year-old children, boys-is Doris Oratana a girl or boy?
Mr. RODRIGU-EZ. Girl.
Senator DANIEL. You knew he was selling to this 18-year-old boy
that was found dead, Bobbie Joe Phelps, and Doris Cratana, a young
girl, and to Ben Curry ?
Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Seen to Ben Curry, not them, I didn't see them to
Bobbie or Doris.
Senator DANIEL. Didn't you know what they were out there for?
Mr. RODRIGUEZ. I knew what Ben Curry was doing there after I
seen Ray.
Senator DANIEL. You didn't know what the others were doing out
there?
Mr. RODRIGUEZ. No, sir; I didn't.
Senator DANIEL. You knew he was coming over to sell to Ben
Curry? You knew he was in the dope racket over in San Antonio,
you found that out; didn't you?
Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Yes, sir.
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
TRAFFIC
2455
DANIEL.
Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Officer asked iirn if 1 see Ray deliver stuff; no, sir,
I didn't.
Senator DANIEL. They asked yott, didn't they?
Senator
right
DANIEL.
And you told tlhei no, you never saw it; is that
doing?
Senator DANIEL. Did you ever call Simona Cavazos or Ray Murdock?
Mr. RODRIGUEZ. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. You never called by phone at any time?
Mr. RODRIGUEZ. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. You never arranged for them to come over and
meet any of these people?
Mr. RODRIGUEZ. No, sir; I didn't.
Senator DANIEL. Any questions, Senator Butler?
2456
Senator
Mr.
Senator DANIEL. How long have you been with the Bureau of Narcotics, Federal Bureau of Narcotics?
Mr. SPEER. Eighteen years.
Senator DANIEL. You are now loaned to this committee as our chief
investigator?
Mr. 9PEER.
Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. During your experience with the Bureau of Narcotics have you had occasion to work in foreign countries?
Mr. SPEER. Yes, sir; I have.
Senator DANIEL. How many years?
Mr. SPEER. Seven years.
Senator DANIEL. Where?
Mr. SPEER. In the Far East.
2457
Settimo Accardi, alias Big Sam Accardi, who jumped a $75,000 bond
on a narcotic charge in New York on the 28th day of September of
this year.
Senator DANIEL. That is last month?
Mr. SPEER. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. And this Sam Accardi-let's put in the record at
this time a newspaper report of him having junped $75,000 bond.
Mr. SPEER. Yes, sir; I have it.
Senator DANIEL. Let's place that in the record here at this point.
(Following is the newspaper article :)
[From the Daily News, Thursday, September 29, 1955]
WARRANT OUT FOR BIG SAM: 75G FORFEITED
The $75,00) bail of Settimo (Big Sam) Accardi, 52-year-old New Jersey
racketeer, was ordered forfeited yesterday by Federal Judge Irving R. Kaufman
when Accardi failed to appear for his trial on charges of conspiracy to violate
Accardi was arrested August 3 at his home, 188 Franklin Street, Bloomfield,
N. J., as Federal agents in Manhattan, Brooklyn, and New Jersey smashed
three big-time rings of narcotics distributors with connections reaching back
to the Italian haunts of Lucky Luciano.
United States Attorney Paul Williams said Accardi was reputed to be a close
associate of Lucky, and added: "He is on the Federal Narcotics Bureau's list
and is rated as one of the major international dope peddlers. Every effort will
be made to find him."
FREED IN BAIL AUGUST
18
He was freed in bail August 18 after pleading not guilty to the sale of drugs
valued at $300,000 in the retail black market.
Officials said that Judge Kaufman's warrant covers all the United States and
that an alarm was being sent to Mexico, Cuba, and Canada.
(Article carried picture of Settimo (Big Sam) Accardi.)
Senator
on that
DANIEL.
Go ahead.
Al. SPEER. Accardi was one of the bio,'gest wholesale smugglers and
Senator
DANIEL.
Mr. SPEER.
Senator
DANIEL.
SPEER. No,
Mr.
States in 1948 and immediately became involved in the drug traffic.
All of these members that I have mentioned are traffickers who are
in the so-called Sicilian traffic narcotics in the United States. In 195,
t'hat was after ('orge and Jolm Mallock
2458
DANIEL.
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
Mr. SPEER.
TRAFFIC
2459
Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Did this person say he made other false bottom
trunks to be used in smuggling narcotics?
Mr. SPEER. As I recall that was the modus operandi, they smuggled
it in this particular type of article concealed in this manner.
Senator DANIEL. All right. Now then, do you have any evidence
to show as to how long this d'Agostino operated with Mexico as his
base of operation?
Mr. SPEER. Well, by his own admission he went there in 1952 but
evidence indicates he went there considerably before that.
Senator DANIEL. His admission to whomV
Mr. SPEER. To me.
Senator DANIEL. YOU have interviewed d'Agostino yourself?
Mr. SPEER. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. He admitted having been in Mexico since 1952?
Mr. SPEER. Yes, sir. He admitted going to Mexico actually in 1947
and being in Canada in 1949, and he skipped a period there saying
he was in Mexico in 1952.
Senator DANIEL. Now then, is this same man wanted on narcotic
charges anywhere else?
Mr. SPEER. In New York City, the southern district of New York.
Senator DANIEL. -[as he ever made bail on the New York charges ?
Mr. SPEER. I don't believe he has. sir.
Senator DANIEL. Is he wanted on conspiracy of smuggling narcotics in New York?
Mr. SPEER. Yes. sir.
Senator DANIEL. Mr. Speer, just on this point, after these bail
bonds were jumped, after these men in this ring had gotten out on
bail, have you found evidence, while working for the committee or
for the Bureau, that they continued to engage in narcotic traffic?
Mr. SPEER. That is the evidence and information that we have, yes,
sir. Of course, it has been well established that Cisco did this very
thing, he jumped a bond in 1949 and he was in the traffic in Mexico,
either continuously or intermittently after that time until recently.
Senator DANIEL. Did the Bureau of Narcotics have cooperation
from the. Mexican officials in apprehending d'Agostino finally?
Mr. SPEER. The only thing I know about that. Senator: he was
arrested when he illegally entered the United States in San Antonio.
Senator DANIEL. Did -the Narcotics Bureau put out a reward for
dAgostifo?
Mr. SPEER. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. How much?
Mr. SPEER. Twenty-five hundred dollars.
Senator DANIEL. And he was picked up then by an agent of the
Federal Government in San Antonio
Mr. SPEER. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIE. When he landed there from Mexico?
Mr. SPEER. Yes. sir.
Senator DANIEL. That is the same man that is in the jail here in
Austin?
Mr.SPEER. Yes. sir.
Senator I)ANI. Now. have you got any evidence that he might
7151 5-56-pt. 7-
2460
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
TRAFFIC
have been engaged in making bail for other prisoners in San Antonio
when he was in jail over there?
Mr. SPEER. I have direct evidence. I didn't establish it myself but
authorities have informed me.
Senator DANIEL. From your investigation do you feel that there
is evidence?
Mr. SPEER. Yes, sir, he did that.
They
deal in such tremendous sums of money. For instance, in our investigation they speak of putting up $20,000 or $40,000 as if, well, to me
maybe a hundred dollars would be comparable to that. Money means
very little to them.
that someone undoubtedly carries the organization and pays the bonds.
Senator DANIEL. All right, sir. Now, if you will give the committee the information that I requested about informing Mr.
d'Agostino of the material you presented to this committee some
time ago as soon as possible after adjournment, it will be appreciated.
Senator DANIEL. Senator Butler, any questions?
committee wants to thank you for this investigator and all the help
you have already given the committee. For the record, will you state
your name?
TESTIMONY OF OWEN W. KILDAY, SHERIFF OF BEXAR
COUNTY, TEX.
Mr. KILDAY. Owen W. Kilday.
Senator DANIEL. And your title ?
2462
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
TRAFFIC
Bureau of Narcotics'?
observation?
Mll. KIL IAY. I don't think any of those tlifngs could be improved
upon in any way.
Senator DANIEL. Sheriff, what, type of narcotic drugs are you principally bothered with in San Antonio and Bexar County . "
Mr. KILDAY. That is a matter of opinion but I believe the most
widespread use here is marihiiana; that is, more people use marijuana.
Of course,
2463
Mr. KILDAY. I wNiii relate just a recent experience that I had with
i S-year-old boy. He had a heroin habit. His parents didn't lkow
it. IIIvestigatio(i showed that he miiet a 2,-3-year-old man at a filling
station who gave him a needle l)et)are(l, told him to shoot limuself
with that. He didn't even know what it was. Next day he went back.
This boy happened to be suffering fr'on stomach ulcers alld felt bad
anyway. That made him feel so niiichl better he returned to the place.
The nman was tlheie again, charged him '2.50. The boy had a summinertime job., so he coiltinued to use it.
Senator DANIEL. The, man gave the first shot free?
Ar. KILIAY. leS, b)ut lie ('iarge(l $2.5() for the next one. Investigation shows that particular peddler imust have put 40 or 50 boys and
girls of high-school age using heroin. This community will be paying
off for 40 or 50 years tor his action.
Senator DANIEL. What happened to that peddler?
Mr. KILDAY. He is (loing 8 years in the State prison. Of course,
this developed after lie was already in the prison on another charge.
Senator DANIEL. You mean to say the evidence Yoti have related
as to his selling to 40 or 50
in
1uvemils
this county was developed
after he had been convicted and (iven 8 years on another charge
Mr. KrLDAY. That's right. Of course, we lha\e't ffiislh(l with that
invpstigatiom, he may l)e tried a,,aiu.
Senator DANIEL. Possibly, of course, he will be tried again. Now,
Sheriff, did the conviction he received have anything to do with the
sale of narcotics to minors?
Mr. KILDAY. I believe he was convicted of assault on a minor girl.
Senator DANIEL. What is your idea as to the penalties that we now
have in our Federal laws and State laws concerning peddlers who sell
to juveniles?
rn
Mr.
KILDAY.
death penalty; they could get the death penalty for that under State
law.
Senator DANrEL. Under our Federal laws, what is your idea there?
You know the maximum is notMr. KILDAY. Twenty years, isn't it?
Senator
DANrEL.
bill introduced-a bill before this committee which would make it possible to give the death penalty on second sale to minors. What is your
opinion about that bill?
Mr. K1-LDAY. Well, that's all right. You know jurors are so reluctant
at times to give the death penalty. If that would carry the alternative of a life sentence it would be much better. Of course, you could
do that under all of them.
Senator DANIIr,. Of course, in the death penalty bill now pending
before our committee, it would simply provide that the jury could
give up to death.
Mr. KLDAY. Life term, they should get nothing less on second
offense.
Senator DANIEL. You think that would help deter people selling to
minors if we had such a law?
Mr. KLDAY. I believe that it would.
Senator
DANIrEL.
2464
probable cause for issuing the warrant, otherwise he would not issue it?
All. KILDAY. Well, if a man was under $10,000 bond it would prevent
him from making unreasonable searches. That is my idea of the bond,
that he would be sure of what he was doing before he made that
affidavit.
Senator DANIEL. And you would provide that he had reasonable
cause?
Mr. KILDAY. Yes; in other words, he would be subject to suit on his
bond if he was wrong.
Senator BUTLER. That may be true, that may not satisfy the con-
stitutional requirements.
Senator DANIEL. Sheriff, I think one of the main things that concerns Senator Butler is whether or not it would satisfy the constitutional requirements as interpreted by the Supreme Court.
Mr. KILDAY. I understand that. It might not be constitutional.
Years ago, of course, we did that all the time; to the best of your
knowledge and belief you could get a search warrant. Since then it
was held by the State court of criminal appeals that you must have
a statement of facts.
Senator DANIEL. This testimony is interesting to this committee,
although we have nothing to do with the State laws, because the
same recommendation has been made to our Federal search and seizure
laws by practically every Federal district attorney and Federal official who has appeared before us, including Commissioner of Narcotics
Anslinger. He related to this committee how he had a man on whom
they had a tip in New York, who came into the airport with a suitcase
in which he had narcotics. They got him. He let them search, he
said "go on." Still the Federal court threw the case out. That man
was never convicted for bringing those narcotics into Washington.
So you see, in the Federal courts we are having the same trouble that
you now say you are having in the State courts on search and seizures.
Mr. KLDAY. In my first experience, a narcotics peddler shot me:
of course, I shot him.
Senator DANIEL. Shot you?
Mr. KILDAY. Yes.
Senator DANIEL. Would you detail that?
Mr. KILDAY. I was in a room in a hotel where a United States
agent was in the act of purchasing 2 ounces. The agent was under-
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
TRAFFIC
2465
KILDAY. Yes.
Senator DANIEL.
sir.
Some men have told us these mneiare not dangerous characters. Can you give the committee any information about
what type of men they are?
Mr. KILDAY. Ordinarily an addict is not dangerous. He lives in
fear and dread of that terrible sickness, all he worries about is getting
a supply of the narcotics. Some of tflem, of course, when they are
bordering on that stage have a terrible illness. They are dangerous
but not too many of them.
Senator BUTLER. How many of those people who are addicts go to
peddling for the purpose of spreading addiction and getting money
to make money to satisfy their own needs?
Mr. KILDAY. Well. not too many addicts peddle, because they have
a rough enough time getting what they need. Ordinarily the peddler
is not. an addict.
Mr. G.ASQUE. I wonder if you are speaking of your experiences here.
KILDAY.
GASQUE.
I mean that.
Mr.
The reason I make that observation is that in New
York the street pusher, the gum and shoe pusher is ordinarily an addict.
Mr. KILDAY. I understand that, but here I am thinking of local conditions. Ordinarily, of course some of the addicts do push also. The
majority of them are just hustling, trying to get it.
Senator BUTLER. You would make a distinction between a pusher
to minors and a pusher to adults in the penalties?
Mr. KILDAY. I certainly would. There is a great lot of difference
in that fellow that gave that kid out there the first shot.
Senator BUTLER. In other words, you believe that a man that is
guilty of a second offense of supplying minors with narcotics should in
the discretion of the jury be hanged, if they so provide?
Mr. KILDAY. I don't think there is anything bad enough that you can
do to him.
Senator BUTLER. And you leave it, up to the jury, either life im-
prisonment or death ?
2466
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
TRAFFIC
Air. KILDAY. Talking about the second offense, miglt inake a inistake on the first.
twice, first, the taxpayers have to support them in jails and hospitals
and, secondly, the citizens are going to pay for it in terms of property
stolen .
Mr. KILDAY. Packages from automobiles, shoplifting, all things of
that kind. The pitiable thing about it as far as that goes, is that any
addict, after he becomes addicted, no one has any sympathy for hini,
no one, he is just another dope fiend.
Mr. GASQUE. Can't get a job?
Mr. KILDAY. Can't get a job, everybody kicks him. Medical men
have no sympathy for him.
Mr. GASQUE. Only about 15 percent at a maximum are cured once
they get on it?
Mr. KILDAY. I don't believe it is that high.
Mr. GASQUE. You don't believe it is that high?
M r. KILDAY. Any reformation must come from within. I have
found few addicts who really had a sincere desire to quit.
Senator DANIEL. That brings us to a very important question in
our hearings and that is, what should we do with these addicts who
are out on the streets? You say that people do not have sympathy
for them, that they continue to engage in various crimes and do you
believe that they spread the addiction to their friends?
Mr. KILD-AY. In some instances they do.
Senator DANIEL. Now, what shall we do with the addicts? What
do you think would be the best solution?
Mr. KILDAY. I don't know what could be done with those people.
Of course, the United States Government has spent a lot of money
putting these narcotic farms around. I think they have done a lot of
good in some cases.
Senator DANIEL. We have two hospitals, one at Lexington and
one
Mr. KILDAY. And one at Fort Worth.
Senator DANIEL. Lexington, Ky., and Fort Worth, Tex.
Mr. KILDAY. I know a man who has been in and out of those hos-
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
TRAFFIC
2467
derstand the terrible craving that these people have for those drugs
and the mental condition that they are in. They live in a terror of
not being able to get it, and they bring on that sickness that they
]lave. No one that has ever seen an addict kicking a habit, that is
what we call it-a real one with 10- or 12-grain habit a day, can 1inderstand how
sick he gets.
Senator I)ANIEL. You mean when the drug is taken away?
Mr. KILDAY. WYhen we put tlen in jail-no one whto has never seen
an addict while he is kicking a habit can understand how sick lie is.
Senator DANIEL. What do you call that treatment when you just
put them in jail and take the narcotic away?
Mr. KILDAY. Iron cure.
Senator
Mr.
DANIEL. The
KILDAY. Yes.
iron cure?
Mr.
2468
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
TRAFFIC
Mr.
KILDAY.
first name.
Senator
DANIEL.
Joe Escevado.
KILDAY.
Senator
BUTLER.
Mr.
KILDAY.
Senator
BUTLER.
category.
2469
Senator BUTLER. Mostly confined to home, are they not, with dread
diseases?
Mr. KILDAY. Some conduct pretty big businesses, addicted to
morphine. They don't use morphine any more, they use heroin.
Mr. GASQUE. The wealthy addicts who exist use heroin rather than
mlor)hine which they get on doctor's prescription?
Air. KILDAY. That's right. If he gets it through the doctor he has
to get morphine or Demerol, synthetic morphine, but the wealthy man
caII buy the heroin.
Senator DANIEL. Before we leave this, I know we will want to ask
some more questions here on this subject. Before we leave this matter
entirely about the riot in the jail, did you find out this same Joe
Escevado was also involved in a riot in Cook County jail?
Mr. KILDAY. Well, I presume he was. There was a riot in Cook
County jail; he was in it at that time.
Senator DANIEL. Just how violent did these men get? Did it come
to the point you had to shoot one of them?
Mr. KILDAY. Three of them.
Senator DANIEL. Which ones?
Mr. ICMDAY. Shot Rudolpho Escevado, shot a man named Betranwell, I really shot 2 and 1 was hit by ricochet.
Senator DANIEL. By ricochet. What about Joe Escevado?
Mr. KILDAY. He was not hurt. Morales wasn't hurt.
Senator DANIEL. But they did get violent enough?
2470
Senator
DANIEL.
2471
phine. Most of them have told me when they take morphine they
just feel normal, but that heroin makes them feel that way and gives
them somewhat of a boost, too. I don't know how true that is, that
might be mental. Oh, fifteen or twenty have told me that.
Senator DANIEL. The heroin gives them a boost, too?
Mr. KILDAY. Years ago, they would take the morphine then take
a small shot of cocoaine and get that boost.
Senator DANIEL. Well, I am certainly inclined to agree with you,
Sheriff, that from what I have heard on this committee, although
heroin might be a depressant, a certain amount, a certain level that
an individual has, one can get enough of that to make him, so to speak,
higher, make him commit crimes and violent crimes.
Mr. ILDAY. Well, like a professional criminal plies his trade a
certain number of years, and starts to lose his nerve--you take a pickpocket, it takes a good deal of nerve to stick your hand in a man's
pocket. He takes narcotics to regain that so he can carry on his
occupation. Hotel prowlers, for instance, go into a room with people
asleep in them. As they grow older they lose that nerve and they
can't do it. They take some kind of a stimulant to do it.
Senator DANIEL. That is exactly the evidence I have been wanting
to hear from some peace officers who have had experience with this
thing because already the committee has got some intimation of that,
but it was never developed under oath from people who have looked
into the matter like you have.
Mr. KILDAY. It works both ways.
Senator DANIEL. These criminals take that to help go and do the
heinous crimes which otherwise they might not do because they lose
their nerve?
Mr. KILDAY. Lose their nerve. It works both ways, the addict and
the thief. The thief has to become an addict to carry on.
Senator DANIEL. Commissioner Anslinger told this committee. I
believe, that John Dillinger used narcotics to help him hold his nerve,
and I may say to you that there have been some murders in this State
and some robberies in which the police officers indicate to us that the
people committing them were under the influence of heroin at the
time. We are going to go into that in one of the cities in Texas. Do
you have any other experiences or have you had any other experiences
of violent crimes that have been committed either by marihuana
addicts or heroin addicts?
Mr. KLDAY. Oh, there have been a lot of them over these years.
I couldn't name any right now but especially the marihuana. You
know we were one of the first cities that felt the impact of marihuana
on its creep northward.
Senator DANIEL. On what?
Mr. KTT)DY. On its creep northward from Mexico. You see, it came
out of Mexico. We were contending with it without any law back
in 1912, 1913, 1914, the rest of the country didn't know anything
abnut it. It grows wild here. This climate suits it fine.
Senator DANIEL. Is there any marihuana grown in Bexar County?
Mr. KrTDAY. Not now.
Senator DANIEL. You have stamped that out?
Mr. KTLDAY. Yes; they have chopped down acres of it.
Senator
Antonio?
DANIEL.
24-72
Senator DANIEL. But from what you hear you think it needs
enforcement?
Mr. KILDAY. I don't know, I just knew they started growing it.
Mr. GASQUE. Sheriff Kilday, could you tell us whether the opium
or the heroin that comes out of Mexico into Texas is produced in
Mexico, or do you believe it is foreign heroin that finds its way into
Mexico?
Mr. KILDAY. Most of it is foreign.
Mr.
KILDAY.
It is a worldwide problem.
I III
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
TRAFFIC
2473
Yes.
Senator DANIEL. And also that overdoses, overuse of the barbiturates themselves are or have been connected with a lot of crimes.
Mr. KILDAY. Caused thousands of deaths.
Senator DANIEL. There is one thing that we are certainly going to
have to watch, according to evidence before the committee; if we dry
up and lick the marihuana and heroin racket we will have to watch
the other drugs. the barbiturates which people with a criminal mind
turn to.
Mr. KILDAY. Philipon and demorol are habit forming the same
as morphine and heroin, aren't they?
Senator DANIEL. The ones you have named are, yes, sir.
Any further questions, Mr. Butler ?
Senator BUTLER. No.
Senator DANIEL. Mr. Counsel?
Mr. GASQUE. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Any questions, Mr. Speer?
Mr.
No, sir.
DANIEL. Sheriff,
SPEER.
Senator
do you think that we have covered the
situation as far as any recommendations that you might make to
the committee as to what we can say to the Congress when we go to
make our report to the Congress? We have gotten the picture where
the source of these drugs are, and so forth. You have given us some
very valuable testimony today coming from your long experience.
Do you have any other specific recommendations as to what Congress
ought to do to help beat this narcotic traffic?
Mr. KILDAY. No, I don't. I think they have done everything they
could. Of course, that wouldn't come in Congress' province to do
something about the worldwide situation. I think the United Nations
ought to do something about that. Of course Red China doesn't
belong. I understand a lot of that stuff is being produced in Red
China.
Senator DANIEL. You are right. That is one reason this committee
got started to work on a nationwide investigation, the first held.
Both Senator Butler and I are members of the Committee on Internal
Security of the United States Senate and we heard evidence, con-
2474
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
TRAFFIC
Senator
DANIEL.
KILDAY. I
Senator
DANIEL.
the border, you think there are enough customs officers there?
Mr. KILDAY. No, I don't. But San Antonio-anyone that brings
it across the border at Laredo, Del Rio, Eagle Pass-will come through
here.
Senator DANIEL. Will you name those over again so that we might
be questioning some later witnesses ?
Mr. KILDAY. Laredo, Del Rio, Eagle Pass. Of course, they don't
have to come through here but they generally do. That is why so
many seizures are made. Most of that stuff, those large quantities of
marihuana are not destined just for San Antonio, but are going to
the northern and eastern markets.
In Austin yesterday they said that was their source of heroin, at least
their intermediate source, and in New York week before last, I believe
it was, Senator Butler and I held hearings in which we found marihuana coming from San Antonio to New York.
M r. KILDAY. From Mexico through here.
Senator
DANIEL.
is simply one of the transit points for these narcotics; is that your
belief?
Mr.
KILDAY.
That's right.
2475
that most of those large quantities of drugs seized here are not to be
used in San Anonio.
Mr. GASQUE. In other words, the truth of the matter is you have
no control over the airports; you can't go out and search the planes;
is that what you are saying?
Mr. KILDAY. No, no, we get a kickback from various congressional
committees, like before the Kefauver committee when we were designated as one of the dope centers of the United States. The record
shows more arrests and seizures made by the police and narcotics
squad because they had that efficiency, and the only pay was to be
labeled as a dope center.
Senator DANIEL. I am glad to say the chairman took care of that.
One Federal official was about to testify before this committee with
a prepared statement that San Antonio was the dope center for
marihuana, and I believe that Laredo was the capital, marihuana
capital of the world. Before he got on the stand I said, "Sheriff,
you are going to leave the wrong impression. Do you mean to tell
me that Laredo and the people around Laredo are using this stuff and
they are participating in this traffic?"
"No, no, that's not what I mean," he said, "but what I mean is, it is
passing across the river at Laredo."
I said, "Now with reference to San Antonio, what do you mean?
Do you mean the officers are not working at it there, that that is the
place you can go and get it easier than any other place?"
"Oh, no," he said, "what I mean is," just like you said, "San
Antonio is one of the transit points. It passes through San Antonio
going to other parts of the country."
I said, "Don't you think you ought to change that and word it so
it will be known what you mean?"
The Federal official saw he was going to leave the wrong impression.
I am certainly glad you brought it out. I think the situation in San
Antonio, as far as the use of narcotics, is bad enough, even though
it is, of course, not as bad as many cities in this country. But I am
glad that you have clarified the record and made it certain that the
public will understand that much of this marihuana and heroin that
gets to San Antonio is intended to go to other parts of the country.
Mr. KILDAY. It is just a crossroads where they happen to be, we
catch them.
Senator DANIEL. We are not minimizing the fact that some of the
stuff stays and we ought to get rid of it.
Mr. KILDAY. Oh, the situation is bad, no question about it, but not
2476
TESTIMONY OF GEORGE W. BICHSEL, CHIEF OF POLICE, SAN ANTONIO, TEX., AND SERGEANT ALBERT SAENZ, NARCOTICS SQUAD,
SAN ANTONIO POLICE DEPARTMENT
Mr. BiCHSEFL. George W. Bichsel.
Senator DANIEL. And you spell that?
Mr. BICHSEL. B-i-c-h-s-e-i.
Senator
DANIEL.
Antonio?
Mr. BICHSEL. A little short of 2 years.
Senator DANIEL. And you have with you whom ?
Mr. BICHSEL. Sgt. Albert Saenz.
Senator DANIEL. .nd what is Sergeant Saenz" position with the
police force?
Mr. BICHSEL. He is in charge of one detail of the narcotics squad.
Senator DANIEL. And how long have you been in police work?
Mr. BICHSEL. That is for me?
Senator DANIEL. Yes.
Mr. BICISEL. I have been in police work 15 years.
Senator DANIEL. Where?
Senator DANIEL. Yes, if you like: ll ask you this. is your narcotic
traffic centered pretty well in certain localities?
Mr. BICHSEL. It is much more intense in certain localities which I
can indicate here on this map much better than I can describe.
Senator DANTEL. All right, if you will refer to the map and show
that to the committee.
Mr. BICHSEL. This circle in the upper right-hand corner of the map
represents the 2-mile circle or the center of the city which would be
identical with this circle here. It is expanded some on a little larger
scale than this map it is imposed upon but this is the center of the city.
from San Fernando Cathedral out about 2 miles. Each one of the map
tacks on this map represents a possession case or a sale case. There
is no indication on here of the arrests made on suspicion. This covers
a period from January 1, 1953, until June 1, 1955.
The yellow pins are suspects who were of Latin American descent.
The red pins with the w lite dots are Anglos, as we refer to them.
Anglo-Americans, and the black pins with the white dots are colored
people. The pins without the dots are marihuana. The pins with the
dots are heroin.
This represents a total of about 309 arrests. The concentration is
mostly in a 1-mile circle west of the central downtown area and a
little south of the downtown area.
Senator DANIEL. WVould you outline that 1-mile area by streets?
I don't get it clearly in my mind what area that would be. First, let
me thank you for the best map of this nature showing more detail than
any I have seen on this committee. Would you identify that heavily
concentrated area there by streets'.
2477
Street, that being this heavily pinned section right in here [indicating] or it is bounded on the west by the Missouri-Pacific
tracks and on the east by Military Plaza, on the north by Martin Street
and on the south by South Laredo, I think would be pretty close.
Senator DANIEL. Now, what kind of residential section is that?
I see most of those pins would indicate that those are Latin American
areas.
Mr. BICHSEL. Yes, sir, that is correct, predominantly Latin American. It is very heavily populated. It is in some instances slum district. I think if you had an opportunity to look at the health department map indicating concentrations of tuberculosis and diarrhea
you would find the pattern is very similar. It seems there is a strong
connection between narcotic addiction and narcotic sale and poverty.
Senator DANIEL. In other words, the people who can least afford it
are out spending money for these drugs?
Mr. BICHSEL. Either that is the inducement or the fact is that kind
of a neighborhood makes the best contact for them.
Senator DANIEL. And, of course, being in a low income area, naturally those people are going to have to steal or do something to get the
money to buy the drugs?
Mr. BICHSEL. That's correct.
Senator BUTLER. But also that could be a contact point where people
living in other areas would come to get their drugs?
Mr. BICHSEL. That's right. It is so congested, so many people there,
activity day and night. There is, of course, a number of beer joints
that enjoy pretty heavy trade; once in a while contacts are made
there. Its concealment is easy. Albert do you offer any other reasons why that area gets more business than any other part of town?
Mr. ZENz. It is so easily accessible from one street to another,
those alleys back of those houses and the people will not give us any
information whatsoever when someone isSenator DANIEL. People who live in that area?
Mr. SAENZ. That's right.
Senator DANIEL. All right, Chief, do you have any other significant
things on the map before you leave that map? You say the pins with
white dots are heroin?
Mr. BICHSEL. The pins with the dots are heroin.
I would say a
heroin traffic here vas becoming probably more of a problem than the
marihuana problem.
Mr. BICHSEL. Yes, we find it more of a problem.
We find more
crime, put it that way, we find more crime connected with heroin than
with marihuana.
Senator DANIEL. Marihuana is bad enough.
2478
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
TRAFFIC
Senator. DANIEL. When did this change come about? When did
heroin become used here more than marihuana?
Mr. BIOHSEL. I would rather let Sergeant Saenz answer. He has a
closer working knowledge of this problem than I do.
Mr. SAENZ. Probably right after the war, sir.
Senator
DAN IEL.
Senator
BUTLER.
No.
Mr.
BCHSEL.
been
before. We do receive fine cooperation and assistance from the Federal narcotics agents and from the State, but both of them suffer our
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
TRAFFIC
2479
problem, too. They are short handed. They have got bigger areas,
Much larger than they have manpower to even make a dent in it.
Senator DANIEL. So your recommendation to this committee, as far
as the Congress is concerned is the same one you would make to your
city officials, that is, try to have more manpower to enforce the narcotic laws, is that correct'?
Mr. BICHSEL. Yes, sir, that is correct. The recent grand jury suggested that men be removed from other duty and placed on this kind
of work. We did that. We removed several and placed them on it.
In a sense it is justified that we take men off other crime investigation
and place them on narcotic investigation, inasmuch as it is sort of a
common denominator.
Senator DANIEL. Before you leave that, you say a common denominator, you mean that narcotics causes other crimes?
Mr. BICHSEL. It causes, it is, it figures heavily in theft.
Senator DANIEL. How much other crime in San Antonio would
you say is attributable to narcotic addiction and traffic now?
Mr. BICHSEL. I am guessing or estimating, if you want to put it
that way. I would estimate that in burglary, in theft and in automobile theft, accessory theft connected with the automobile, that in
those three lines the narcotic figures in about 60 percent or more of
the' cases. That may be a conservative estimate. Going from that
some people jump to the conclusion that, why not cut all other criminal investigation down 50 percent and put those men on narcotic
investigation? Of course you have to say, the people who suffer
these losses, a man whose car is stolen is interested in the recovery of
that car, and it is not going to be satisfactory to answer him that
you are working on a long-range program against narcotics, the thief
may be a narcotic so you may be doing him good. He wants some
results now. You have to maintain adequate investigators in all those
different types of crime.
Senator DANIEL. Well, do you think that you would be assisted
much better in stamping out the narcotic traffic here if you had some
more Federal agents from the Bureau of Narcotics here?
Mr. BICH SEL. I certainly do, the ones here do an excellent job.
Senator DANIEL. You have full cooperation from them?
Mr. BICESEL. Yes, sir, we certainly do.
Senator DANIEL. You consider you have a good working relationship with them or do you just get along?
Mr. BICHSEL. I go along with the sheriff, I don't think it could be
2480
to testify about it. Do you know whether or not during the time that
she was waiting trial 21/2 years that she sold narcotics or acted as a
fence for stolen goods which were tied into narcotic sales?
Mr. SAENZ. We' had information to that effect and she was raided
twice, I believe, but I understand all they found was just stolen stuff.
Senator DANIEL. Well, what about the time lag between arrests and
convictions or trial in San Antonio; do you have any trouble with that?
Mr. BECHSEL. We have had, or, that is, we have had long periods
between the time of arrest and the time of trial. In many ways
it was understandable, court docket crowded, had an office overworked,
and so forth. Nevertheless it left that long on-bond period. At this
time it has been reduced considerably. Of course that is having a
marked effect. We feel like it is.
Senator DANIEL. Well, do you think that speedy trials of narcotics
violators will help in stamping out the racket?
Mr. BECHSEL. I certainly do.
Senator DANIEL. Do you think that is important?
Mr. BECHsEL. Yes, sir; I do.
2481
Senator DANIEL. Under this new law passed in the last session of
the legislature, that was this year-under this new Texas law, as I
understand it, just simply being a narcotic addict and using the drug
as an addict is a felony offense; is that correct?
Mr. BICHSEL. Is it a felony offense? My understanding that the
penalty-well it would be a felony offense.
Senator DANIEL. Imprisonment in the penitentiary orMr. BICHSEL. Or in the hospital so it would be the same thing.
Senator DANIEL. In other words, imprisonment in the penitentiary
but give probation of the sentence while the person goes and gets
treatment?
Mr. BICHSEL. That's right.
Senator DANIEL. You say you think that is a good law?
Mr. BICHSEL. If we can get that.
Senator DANIEL. Have you all made any arrests under that law yet?
Mr. BICHSEL. Seems like about two.
Senator DANIEL. That wouldn't be any secret. Have you made any
arrests?
Mr. SAENZ. No, sir; I haven't been in this narcotic detail till here
2482
made any arrest under the addicts; we have made under paraphernalia
arrests.
Senator DANIEL. I won't ask you if you have plans to make any.
Mr. BISCHEL.
Mr.
BECHSEL.
Mr.
BECHSEL.
had good luck with it, but there haven't been too many convictions.
We haven't been able to make too many cases, but we have found in too
many instances juveniles in possession.
Senator DANIEL. Well-has there been any effort, by anyone, any
kind of a city conrnittee, commission, to go into this matter of barbiturates; has there been any public education or awareness as to the
damages of these barbiturates and amphetamines here in San Antonio?
Senator
DANIEL.
reason?
Mr. BECnISEL. That was the request made by the firm that we bought
the film from, purchased by the department and they more or less
asked for an agreement it would only be shown to adult and responsible adult groups.
Senator DANIEL. I am sure that is because of the fact many people
in authority think that certain films should not be shown to children
because of curiosity it might arouse.
Mr. BECHSEL. That is correct.
Senator DANIEL. I would like to say this, that I hope that every
effort will be made here and over this country to let adults at least
know about the dangers of these barbiturates drugs and amphetamines,
what they will lead to, especially how they are going to bring on trouble
among people who are inclined that way if we do get rid of the heroin
and marihuana. They are dangerous drugs and those who are giving
to children, selling to children against the law, it seems to me should be
punished just like the dope peddlers.
Senator Butler, any questions?
Senator BUTLER. Have you given any thought to the question of
an addict or peddler being put in almost on a permanent basis on an
indefinite sentence after the second, after the first or second time?
Senator BUTER. Do you think there is any merit in an indeterminate sentence to handle the addict?
2483
all the statistics I have run into indicate that only somewhere between
2 and 5 percent, after they have been gone a year or 2 years definitely
off the habit, go right back on it.
Senator BUTLER. So you think the time may come when it may be
legally possible, you may have to incarcerate these people for an
indefinite period of time?
Mr. BEc1ISEL. I assume that is possible.
Senator
DANIEL.
make money for him, induces his wife to take it and puts her to work.
Senator DANIEL. You are talking about your local and personal
observation?
Mr. SAENZ. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. I will say to you that out observations and testimony before this committee show that they spread it like a disease
whether spreading for money or not, and if that is true-you know
we find a lot of things different in these localities in Texas, the two
we have been in, and you may be right. I notice Sheriff Kilday
showed that the pushers for profit started these young people off,
and we find several things like that different in our Texas hearings,
but we have found in other places, Philadelphia, New York, and
Washington, that the addicts want to get their families into it even
though they are not selling it and that it spreads in that fashion.
That is in justification of what you say, they ought to be taken off
the streets some way.
Mr. BICHSEL. That is right.
Senator DANIEL. Just like we do lepers.
Mr. BICHSEL. That's right.
Senator DANIEL. We put lepers away where they cannot, spread
the disease or commit crimes to sustain the disease, that, would be the
case in narcotics.
Is there anything further?
M[r. GASQUIE. Chief, there is a wide difference of opinion on the
value of educating youth on the dangers of narcotics. We are gathering some evi(lence on that. I wonder if you would give us your
opinion?
Mr. BICIISEL. I doubt if I am really qualified to render an opinion
on that. It seems to me that boys and girls in the last year of high
school at least ought to be ready for something, some pretty factual
information on what narcotics consist of, how it is distributed and
2484
them since this addict law was passed in Texas; isn't that correct?
Mr. GASQUE. That is your view on it, for the purpose of gaining
corroborative type evidence and leads?
Mr. BICHSEL. You mean from a standpoint of the narcotic
enforcement?
Mr. GASQUE. Yes sir.
Mr. BIcHsEL. I think it is justified.
Senator DANIEL. All right, thank you very much, Chief, for your
excellent assistance to this committee and for your testimony today.
Mr. BICUSFL. This data I have you want that left up here?
pared statement that you had will be made a part of the record at the
_ .
conclusion of your testimony.
Chief, did you finish giving all the recommendations you had so
far as anything else Congrbss could do on that, you have some more
recommendations in your prepared statement ?
Mr. BICHSEL. I have only one recommendation, that was fairly well
brought out by Sheriff Kil day, that was search and seizure evidence.
We have a specific problem there and I guess more of a State law
problem.
Senator DANmm. On search and seizure?
2485
Mr. BICHSEL. That is correct. But our hands are tied a little too
tight.
2486:
1953:
Arrests from Investigations --
609
138
--
Evidence. seized:
Heroin (grains)
Morphine (grains)
'Marihuana (grains)
Hypo needles
Money expended .......
1954:
Arrests from investigation ......
Arrests for possession and/or sale ....
Evidence seized:
Heroin (grains)
Morphine (grains)
Marihuana (grains)
Hypo needles
Cocaine (grains)
Opium (grains) approximately
Codeine (grains)
Money expended
1955 (first 5 months) :
Arrests from investigations
Arrests for possession and/or sale
Evidence seized:
Heroin (grains)
Marihuana (grains).
Opium needles
Barbiturates (grains)
Money expended
23, 768
302
781, 857
350
$804. 63
567
138
5, 626
171
1, 184, 712
292
16
2, 000
165
$1,439.35
44.5
57
29 075
65, 221
196
1, 246
$665. 75
___
17
21
31
41
to
to
to
to
20
30
40
50
Marihuana
White
Heroin
Marlhuana
Colored
Heroin
Marl.
huana
------------------------------------------------------------------or over----------------
19
50
16
7
19
80
25
6
2
4
3
5
0
4
4
2
Total --------------------
92
130
14
10
Grand total.
----
309
I
Heroin
3 ----------29
II
12
1
61
50
13
13
14
15
MX F
M IF
1[ ....
8-23-- 4
16
17
Year
FK1I! F
1953 --------------2
1954 --------------..1955 (to June 1) --- ------
-2-
Awalo
L"atin
A meria
24
MI F
11---------
4 -------------
4 11
1
_
_ _
Colored
5
_ _
2487
Disposition
Charge
Date
NOVEMBER
Carlos Lujano ---------------Ray Flores ------------------Felix Ortiz -----------------Joe Esquivel -----------------Robert Gomez ---------------Floyd Bennett ---------------Carmen Balderas
Betty Hanson ---------------Rudy Zamora-..
M arihuana ------------------
do .......
----5 years, penitentiary
H eroin ---------------------- 6 years, penitentiary -------No billed (defective search
do ......................
----warrant).
-- d o ------------------------------ d o ......
d o --------------------------- ----- d o .......
.. . ..-d o ----- - - - - -- - -- - - -- - - - - Feb. 21,1955
Jury dismissed
Mar. 25,1955
M arihuana ------------------ Not guilty, jury. -- d o ----------------------Do.
----N o billed -------------------d o ----------------------Do.
----do -....
----d o --------------------
DECEMBER
May 23,1955
Apr.
May
May
Apr.
JANUARY-FEBRUARY
Merideth C. Stone -----------Hector Maldonada -----------Jessie Ram irez ---------------Helen Cuevas .......
Joe Cam pos ..................
Joe L. Esquivel ---------------
. . . ..-d o ------
- - -- - - -
- - - - --
25, 1955
10, 1955
31,1955
25,1955
MARCH
Harold Francis-_
Samuel E. Fouther ----------Augustine Zepeda -----------Manuel Zepeda -------------Nick Palacios .-------------Jesus Escobedo --------------Epifano Sanchez -------------Benito Alonzo ---------------Domingo Cantu_
Pedro Alvarez_--------
Marihuana ........
do
(10. -. -. -. -. .
-...
- - - ----- - - 4 years, penitentiary ----
do .....
----2 years, probation_
d o ..........
--------- 4 years, suspended ----------d o .....
H eroin ---------------------. . ...- d o ------ ------- --- - --- -....
-do
3 years
Mlarihuana ------------------
3, 1955
APRIL
Loretta Terrazos..
James Locke
Tom Oarza ..................
Porfirio G. Rios
Paul Ellis
heroin ............
3 years ------- ------- --Marihuana ......
d o ------ --------------------- ..............................
d o ------ -------------- ----d o --..........
MAY
-- do -----------------------
JUNE
4 y ears
-------...
.. ...
3 years, penitentiary .......
4 rears_ _.
3 years, penitentiary -------3 years, penitentiary --------
2 yenrs --
- -- - --
2488
Charge
Date
Disposition
I-
AUGUST
-- -- -- - :::
--------: - :------ -..
. .. . . .. . . .. . . .. . . . . .. . . .. . .
H eroin ............
_do ......................
M arihuana ------------------ - -- -d o ------------------------ - -do .......
Heroin_...............
M arihuana ---------------------- do.
do.__
-----
....
32 years,
years,J$100
100 ................--
Jan.
13, 1955
1)o.
May 2, 19.i
Do.
JANUARY
2 years .....................
MARCH
M arihuana ------------------
4 years -
APRIL
YAY
Albert Rodriquez.
do_--5 years ---------------------Lilly Rodriquez -------------- ----- do ......................
..............................
Rudy Garza-----d o --------------------------- ..............................
Ernest Trevino --------------do .....
----- 3 years ---------------------Roy Trevino ------------------ M arihuana ------------------ 2 y ears ---------------------Epifano Sanchez__
Heroin ....
10 years ....
May 1955.
Tomasa Terrazas ------------do ......................
----Beto Huerta .................
Marihuana-.
5 years - - - - - - - - - - Do.
Rudy Flores ------------------ .--- d o ---------------------d o -------- ----------------Robert Garnet ---------------H eroin ---------------------- 3 years ---------------------Ignacio Luna.. -.-.---------Rosa Terrazas -----------------d o --------------------------------------------------Bidal Montalbo ..
..
M arihuana -----------------JUNE
do ......................
----Killed resisting arrest -----d o -------------- -------- ---Heroin .....................
JULY
......................
-do
d o ---------------------Marihuana ....
5 years ....................
--d o .....
.................4 y ears ----------------------
July 1955.
Do.--Do.
2489
Senator
DANIEL.
249.0
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
TRAFFIC
Did they give you the drug or did you buy it?
Mr. CONTRERAS. We all got together and chipped in and bought it.
Senator DANIEL. How long did you use marihuana? Now, Juan,
to save time we would appreciate it if you would answer in English
if you can.
Senator BUTLm.
Senator DAaEL. What was the general name used among those
who used heroin, what is the general term used for it, what did you
call it?
Senator
DANIEL.
heroin?
Mr.
CONTRERAS.
DANIEL.
The
INTERPRETER.
habit.
Senator DANIEL. To support your habit. You became addicted to
heroin; did you?
Mr. CONTRERAS. Yes, sir.
DANIEL.
Senator DANIEL. And have you more recently been convicted again?
Mr. CONTRERA.S. Yes. sir.
Senator DA\Nr,. How many years were you given this last time?
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
Mr.
CONTRERAS.
Senator DANIEL.
2491
TRAFFIC
Senator BUTLER. You are not now under indictment, you have been
tried ?
Mr. CONTRERAS. I have been tried; yes, sir.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator DANIEL. About how many heroin addicts are in San Antonio?
Mr. CONTRERAS. I haven't an idea.
Senator
DANIEL.
Do you know
Senator
DANIEL.
Mr. CONTRERAS.
Senator DANIEL.
Older?
Yes. [Indicated by nodding his head.]
Do you know any of them among the 17-, 18- or
19-year-old group?
Mr. CONTRERAS. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Well, did
younger group?
Mr. CONTRERAS. Yes, sir.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
in San Antonio?
Mr. CONTRERAS (by the interpreter). I know some that sell but I
haven't any idea how many.
Senator DANIEL. Well, would you say you know at least 10.
Mr. CONTRERAS. Could be.
Senator DANIEL. At least 10 people in San Antonio who sell heroin?
Mr. CONTRERAS. Could be.
Senator
DANIEL.
the market price was, what is the going price for the heroin?
Mr. CONTRERAS. By caps.
71515-5-5--pt. 7-
10
2492
Two fifty.
$2.50 per capsule ?
Senator
Mr. CoNTwmAs. Yes, sir.
Mr. CoNT
Rs.
DANIEL.
Senator DANIEL. Now, do you know what these dealers were having
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator DANIEL. Now, where were these, you used the term "guy"?
I'll use the same term you used for them, where were these guys getting
the heroin that they sold here in San Antonio?
Mr. CONTRERAS. Well, they say it come from Mexico.
nickname.
Senator DANIEL. What is his nickname?
Mr. CONTRERAS. Raton.
CONTRERAS. Well,
want some stuff, you got to find, you know, look around for them.
Senator BUTLER. It is not too difficult to find one, is it?
Mr. CONTRERAS. No, you ask for one, you find.
Senator BUTLER. If you ask about them, you find them. They are
there to be found?
Mr. CONTRERAS. Yes, sir.
Senator DAN=L. Did anyone tell you before you went across the
river at Laredo to ask for this Raton? Did they tell you were you
could find him?
Mr. CONTRERAS. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. In other words, when you left here and went over
to Laredo, Nuevo Laredo, you were looking for this man, Raton?
Mr. CoNTRERAs. I was lookinF where I could find stuff.
Senator DANIEL. You weren t told about this particular man before
you left here?
Mr. CoNTRERAs.
2493
No.
Senator DANwiE. You just looked to see where you could find stuff?
Mr. Cow mas. That's right.
Senator DANEL. How long did it take you to find it?
Senator DANrEL. But you have talked to them about buying it, is
that how you know where they buy the heroin?
Mr. CONTRERAS.
How's that?
Senator DANIEL How do you know where some of these guys who
sell heroin in San Antonio were buying it, how do you know they
bought it over in Mexicof
Mr. COwTRAS. How do I knowI
Mr. COMTRERAS. Well, you know, some guys used to tell me.
Senator DA NmL. They would tell you?
Mr. CoNTRERAs.
Yes.
Senator DANlEL. Name one of them that told you he bought his
heroin in Mexico?
Mr. CONTERS. Well, I don't know their names. I know the nicknames.
Senator DANIEL. You know the nicknames. Well, do you know
Robert HernandezI
Mr. CoNTwmAS. Well, I was convicted with him.
Senator DANIEL. You were convicted with Robert HernandezI
Mr. CONTRERAS. Yes, sir.
Yes, sir.
DANIEL.
Senator DANIrEL. About how much heroin did you sell every week
for them?
2494
Senator
DANIEL.
AMr. CONTRERAS.
Senator DANIEL.
DANIEL.
Mr. CONTRERAS.
for them ?
Mr. CONTRERAS. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. And on what date was that? We'll get the records on that in a minute. Let's see if you can identify these men. I
hand you this picture which will be marked "Exhibit: A" of the Sani
Antonio hearing, and ask you if you can tell us who this is 2
Mr. CONTRERAS. That is Simon.
Senator DANIEL. That is Simon Rodriguez?
Simon Rodriguez, 611 Southwest 25th Street, San Antonio, Tex. Mexican male,
45 years of age, 5 feet 4 inches, 180 pounds; has brown eyes, dark complexion,
of heavy build.
11111
2495This
EXHIBIT B
2 , .
)< :A
"
"
Roberto Hernandez, 2020 San Luis Street, San Antonio, Tex. Mexican male,
born in Rockdale, Tex., March 27, 1901, is 54 years old, 5 feet 6 inches tall, dark
complexion, black hair, 160 pounds, brown eyes, medium build.
Now, the record here shows you were arrested April 30, 1955, for
violation of the Federal Narcotics Act; that is April this year?
Mr. CONTRERAS. Yes.
Mr. CONTRERAS.
2496
Senator BUTLER. Did you ever get any for him from any source?
Mr. CowTRmAs. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Now, do you know what the runners who brought
the heroin across Mexico were paid? Did you ever hear them tell
you whatthe-cstis to bring it across the border?
Mr. CONTiRAS. Well, some paid about a hundred dollars.
Senator DANIEL. About a hundred dollars?
Mr. CONTRERAS. That is what I heard.
Senator DANIEL. Well, did either Simon or Robert, Simon Rodriguez
Senator DANIEL. Did you ever know any of these runners that
Mr. CONTRERAS.
Senator DANIEL. Did you go back to using heroin after you got out
ofprison the last time?
Mr. CONTRERAS.. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. About how much did it cost you a day to keep up
your addiction?
Mr. CONTRERAS. Well, some, about seven fifty.
IIIIIIIIIII
2497
his name.
Senator DANIEL. Well, do you know his nickname?
Mr. CONTRERAS. Well, he ain't got no nickname.
Senator DANIEL. Where does he live?
Mr. CONTRERAS. I used to meet him on the streets.
Senator DANIEL. What?
Mr. CONTRERAS. On the streets.
Senator DANIEL. Where did you get it, where did you buy it?
Mr. CONTRERAS. Well, I was buying from that guy I was telling
you about.
Senator DANIEL. The guy whose name you do not know?
Mr. CONTRERAS. That's right.
Senator DANIEL. Did you ever hear of Pancho Trevino?
Mr. CONTRERAS. Yes, I heard about him.
Senator DANIEL. 'ho is he?
Mr. CONTRERAS. He is supposed to be a dope peddler up in Mexico.
Senator DANIEL. Where does he live?
Mr. CONTRERAS. I don't know.
Senator DANIEL. In Mexico?
Mr. CONTRERAS. Yes.
Senator DANIEL. Does he live at Nuevo Laredo?
Mr. CONTRERAS. Yes, Laredo.
IIIIIIIIIIII
2498
DANIEL.
Mr. CONTRERAS.
Senator DANIEL.
you have to put it both ways there. Where is that hotel supposed
to be?
Mr. CONTRERAS. Over in Laredo.
Senator DANEL. In Nuevo Laredo?
Mr. CONTRERAs. I don't know whether over or not.
Senator DANIEL. You don't know?
Mr. CONTRERAS. It is across the border, I know that.
DAN-EL.
heroin there?
Mr. CoNTRERAs. Well. I know a bunch, I know Poncho Trevino
peddlers around here that you can go there to get some heroin, is it
Senator DANIEL. A few guys, more than one. How long have you
Senator
DANrEL.
Mr. CoNTRERAs.
Senator DANIEL.
in San Antonio?
2499
Senator
DANuL.
Mr. CONTRERAS.
Senator DANIEL. And how long did you sell for Robert Hernandez?
Mr. CoNTmsRAs. I don't remember either.
Senator
is that correct?
quite a while?
They were
Senator DANIEL. Why do you believe they were? Didn't they tell
Senator DANIEL. Which one did you go to get your heroin from?
Mr. CONTmrERAs. Robert Hernandez.
Senator DANIEL. Did you also go to Simon Rodriguez at times?
Mr. CONTRERAS. No, sir: I used to gyo to his place; I used to see
Roberto.
Senator DANIEL. Did you always have your dealings with Roberto?
Mr. CONTRERAS. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. What makes you think Simon Rodriguez was
Senator DANIEL. 'Well, did you ever see Simon Rodriguez with
some heroin?
Mr. CONTRERAS. With some heroin?
Senator DANIEL.
Yes.
2500
Senator DANIFL. In 1951. And did he ask you to sell it for him or
did you ask him to give it to you so you could go sell and use it?
Mr. CONTRERAS. I was buying it.
Senator DANIEL. For your own use or for resale?
Mr. CONTRERAS. For my own use and sell it.
Senator DANIEL. For your own use and sale, both?
Mr. CONTRERAS. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. About how much heroin did you buy a day from
Simon Rodriguez?
DANUEL.
Mr.
Roberto
Hernandez?
Mr. CONTRERAS. Yes, sir.
DA-NIEL.
Senator DANIEL. Simon's Place, that was the name it went by?
Mr. CONTRERAS. Yes. sir.
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
2501
Manuel Ortiz?
Yes.
Senator DANIEL. What else did they call him?
Mr. CONTRERAS. Flaco.
Senator DANIEL. How do you spell it?
Mr. CONTRERAS. F-l-a-c-o.
Senator DANIEL. He is in prison; isn't he?
Mr. CONTRERAS. He is out on the streets.
Senator DANIEL. Is he out on the streets now?
Mr. CONTRERAS. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Well, did he sell for Simon Rodriguez?
Mr. CONTRERAS. Well, I believe he was.
Senator DANIEL. Did you see him get his heroin from Simon?
Mr. CONTREIRAS. Well, I saw him up there.
Senator DANIEL. You saw him?
Mr. CONTRERAS. Yes. I saw him up there.
Senator DANIEL. You saw him at Simon's place and you knew he
was selling heroin?
Mr. CONTRERAS. Yes.
Senator DANIEL. Did Manuel tell you he was selling for Simon?
Mr. CONTRERAS. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Well, did you see him ever give Simon any money?
Mr. CONTRERAS. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. All right, do you know Felix Ortiz?
Mr. CONTRERAS. Felix Ortiz, that is the same one.
Senator DANIEL. I asked you about Manuel Ortiz.
Mr. CONTRERAS. Oh, yes.
Senator DANIEL. We will simply change that, all you have said so
far refers to Felix Ortiz; is that right?
Mr. CONTRERAS. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. All right, now then I will ask you next about
Manuel Ortiz, did you know him?
Mr. CONTRERAS. Manuel, he was in the same. raid over in 1951, he
was picked up with us, too.
Senator DANIEL. He was picked up with you. Was he selling for
Simon Rodriguez?
Mr. CONTRERAS. All supposed to be selling for him.
Senator DANIEL. All these people picked up were supposed to be
selling for Simon, the same person you were selling for, is that right?
Mr. CONTRERAS. Yes.
Senator DANIEL. That was Manuel Ortiz. What about Manuel
Delgado?
Mr. CONTRERAS. Well, he was picked up the same time.
Senator DANIEL. Was he selling for Simon Rodriguez?
Mr. CONTRERAS. I believe so.
Senator DANIEL. He was latex killed?
Mr. CONTRERAS. I don't know whether he was killed or not.
Senator DANIEL. Did you see him get any heroin from Simon?
Mr. CONTRERAS. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Did you ever see him get any from Roberto
Hernandez?
Mr. CONTRERAS.
I I
2502
Nicholas Hernandez?
That is Roberto's brother.
Mr. CONTRERAS.
Senator DANIEL. That is his brother. He was pushing for Roberto
DANIEL.
Mr.
from him?
Mr. Co-NTRE.As. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Did you ever see anybody else get any heroin from
Simon Rodriguez?
Mr. CONTRERAS. Are you talking about Simon Rodriguez?
Senator DANIEL. Yes.
Mr. CONTRERAS. I thought you were talking about Roberto.
Senator DANIEL. All right, now on Simon, did you ever see anybody else buy from him?
Mr. CONTiERAS. Well, I didn't see nobody.
Senator DANIEL. No one but yourself ?
Yes.
Senator DANIEL. All right, did you ever see anybody buy heroin
from Roberto Hernandez?
Mr. CONTRERAS. Well, I used to see guys, you know, up at his house,
I didn't see him hand him the stuff.
Senator DANIEL. You (lidn't put down the name, you didn't remember the name ?
Mr. CONTRERAS. No, I didn't see Roberto hand the stuff to them.
Senator DANIEL. You didn't see that. All you ever saw Roberto
handle was always to you; is that right?
Mr. CONTRERAS.
2503
Senator DANIEL. How much did you pay for your heroin to Mike
Escobedo?
Mr. CONTRERAS. $30 a gram.
Senator DANIEL. $30 a gram?
Mr. CONTRERAS. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. And then would you break it down and go out
and sell it to other people?
Mr. CONTRERAS. No, I used to shoot half of it myself.
Senator DANIEL. Shoot some of it yourself and then sell the rest to
others?
Mr. CONTRERAS. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. In capsules
Mr. CONTRERAS. Capsules.
or by the gram?
Senator BUTLER. Did you ever reach the point where you had to
have all of it for yourself ?
Mr. CONTRERAS. How's that?
Senator BUTLER. Did you ever reach the point where you used all
of it for yourself ?
Mr. CONTRERAS. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. All right, I hand you this picture here and ask
you if you can identify who this person is?
Mr. CONTRERAS. This is Mike Escobedo.
Senator DANIEL. That will be exhibit C
2504
(Exhibit C follows:)
EXIT C
Escobedo, Mike G.; age, 29; height, 5 feet 9 inches; weight, 142; born, September
29,1922; complexion, dark; eyes, brown; hair, black; build, medium.
don't remember.
Senator DANIEL. Well, was it this year?
Mr. CONTRERAS. Yes, sir.
Mr.
CONTRERAS.
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
TRAFFIC
2505
Senator DANIEL. Where did you buy this heroin from Henrique
Terrazos, at what place?
Mr. CONTRERAS. Over at his house.
Senator DANIEL. All right, did you ever go to his mother's house?
Mr. CONTRERAS. That is where he lives.
Senator
DANIEL.
Victoria's house ?
CONTRERAS.
Senator DANML.
Mr. CONTRERAS.
Senator DANIEL.
No, sir.
How about from his sister, Rosa?
Yes, sir.
You bought heroin from her?
Senator
This year?
No.
Senator DANIEL. How long ago?
Mr. CONTRERAS. I believe it was last year.
Senator DANIEL. Last year. How about Tomasia?
Mr. CONTRERAS. Yes, sir, I bought some.
Senator DANIEL. Is Tomasia a sister?
DANIEL.
Mr. CONTRERAS.
Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. I believe that Rosa, Tomasia, and Henrique are
children of Victoria Terrazos?
Mr. CONTRERAS.
CONTRERAS.
DANIEL.
CONTRERAS.
Senator
Henrique Terrazos.
All right, what about Rosa, where does she live?
I don't know her address.
Mr.
Senator DANIEL. Where did you buy from Rosa?
At her house.
On what street?
Mr. CONTRERAS. I don't know the name of the street.
Senator DANIEL. Do you know the name of the street where Victoria Terrazos lives?
Mr. CoNTRoERAS. I don't remember.
Senator DANIEL. Is it Mercedes Street?
Mr.
CONTRERAS.
Senator DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Mr. CONTPRE
2506
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
TRAFFIC
Senator DANIEL. Did you ever buy any this year from him at $25 a
gram?
Senator
you ?
DANIEL.
2507
Senator
yes, sir.
Mr.
Senator DANIEL. And where did these pople go to get their heroin?
Mr. CONTRERAS. I don't know.
Senator
Senator
DANIEL.
Mr. CONTRERAS.
this year ?
Mr. CONTRERAS. I don't remember.
Senator DANIEL. Well, did you ever hear of Gilbert LitterioI
Mr. CONTRERAS. Yes, sir.
DANIEL. L-i-t-t-e-r-i-o?
Mr. CONTRERAS. Yes, sir.
Senator
Senator
DANIEL.
Somewhere in there?
Senator DANIEL. Did you buy the heroin there from Gilbert Litterio
at this bar?
Mr. CONTRERAS. Yes, sir.
S i for T)ANrTl. Did vou do flmt sometime, this summer?
Mr. CONT E,AS. I don't remember.
S.n,+or DANIEL. It wns this
Mr. CONTE r AS. Could be.
Senator DArE,L. What.?
year, though ?
I don't remember.
,onmtor DANIEL. This year?
Mr.
Co,NT
nAs.
Senator DANIE,L. Now, this Litterio had iut gotten out of prison
himself before you bought from him, hadn't he?
71515-6-pt. 7-11
2508
Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. lie.had been off to prison on what charge?
Mlr. CON'TRERAS. I think it. was, I don't know what it was.
Senator DANIEL. You don't remember
Mr. CONTRERAS. NO.
Ilndi(ated by shaking his head.j
Sew'tor DANIEL. You know he just came back from prison wheli
you started buying heroin from him ?
Mr. CONTRERAS.
,,
,',
Gilbert Litterio, 2505 Guadalupe, San Antonio, Tex. Litterio is a Mexican male.
born in San Antonio, Tex., June 8, 1932; is 23 years of age; 5 feet 4 inches
tall: 116 pounds; black hair, brown eyes.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Mr. Counsel?
Mr. Speer?
Mr. SPEER. When you got out of prison from the sentence you got
in 1952, when did you get back to San Antonio?
Mr. CONTRERAS. About 1953, I believe.
Mr. SPEER. 1953?
Mr. CONTRERAS. Yes, sir.
2509
SPEER.
Mr. SPEER. That was about 2 months after you got out
Mr. CONTRERAS. That's right.
SPEER.
Speak
That is
2510
Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. How long have you lived in San Antonio?
Mr. HERNANDEZ.
Senator DANIEL. Since 1929. Where did you live before then?
Mr. HERNANDEZ. I lived on Guadalupe Street, Guadalupe Street.
Senator
DANIEL.
Antonio?
In the country. Can I get in touch, don't think
I can answer all these questions
Senator DANIEL. Go right ahead, we will have an interpreter up if
you need it.
Mr. HERNANDEZ. I think I will, I would rather have one.
(An interpreter was furnished.)
Senator DANIEL. You lived out in the country from San Antonio?
Mr. HERNANDEZ. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Now, were you sentenced to the Federal penitentiary on a narcotics charge?
Mr. HERNANDEZ.
2511
Senator DANIEL. And that he would like to have you tell your story
to this committee as to what you knew about the narcotic business in
San Antonio?
Mr. HERNANDEZ. Well, I don't think he asked me that question to
be here.
Senator DANIEL. What?
Mr. HERNANDEZ. I don't think I remember that lie told me that.
Senator DANIEL. You do remember you did tell him about what you
Senator DANIEL. I want you to know, to caution you, you are under
oath and you realize that if you do not give us a truthful answer that
you would be subject to punishment for perjury; do you understand
that?
Mr. HERNANDEZ.
Yes, sir.
mittee and swear falsely, then you could be convicted and sent to the
penitentiary for telling a lie before this committee. Do you understand that?
Mr. HERNANDEZ. Yes, sir.
W2*512
Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. In the sale of heroin?
Mr. HERNANDEZ.
HERNANDEZ.
Yes.
HERNANDEZ.
Yes.
Senator DANIEL. Is that the same Simon Rodriguez you saw in the
courtroom this morning?
Mr. HERNANDEZ. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Where did you all get your heroin?
Mr. HERNANDEZ. From Nuevo Laredo.
Yes, sir.
111lll
lll
llll
ll
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
TRAFFIC
2513
You
1)lace?
Mr.
HERNANDEZ.
Senator DANIEL.
Mr. HERNANDEZ.
Senator DANIEL.
Senator DANIEL.
Mr. HERNANDEZ.
Senator DANIEL.
Mr.
HERNANDEZ.
Senator DANIEL.
Mr. HERNANDEZ.
Senator DANIEL.
Mr. HERNANDEZ.
Senator DANIEL.
Mr. HERNANDEZ.
Senator DANIEL.
Yes, sir.
At office, house, hotel, or where?
His house.
His house. And did you buy the heroin there and
the river yourself?
No, sir.
How did you arrange to get it delivered?
To send it.
What?
They sent it over here.
With whom did you deal'? Pancho, himself?
Yes, sir.
And where was the heroin delivered to you?
Delivered to, just anywhere here in town.
Where, in San Antonio?
Yes, sir.
Did you see the runner who would bring it across
the border?
Senator DANIEL. Tell us just exactly how that happened, the first
time you ever went to Mexico and got heroin. Do you remember what
you paid for it?
Mr. HERNANDEZ. Twenty dollars a gram.
2514
Senator DANIEL. Where did he tell you he would deliver it the first
time you ever got any?
Mr. HERNANDEZ (By the interpreter). He told me that he would
leave, that he would leave it at the corner near a cemetery.
Senator DANIEL. And what place at the corner?
Mr. HERNANDEZ. Guadalupe and Stephenson Road.
DANIEL.
Mr. HE iRNAN.DEZ.
Senator DANIEL.
trips to Mexico during the 3 or 4 months you all were selling?
Mr. H'F-RNVANQDEZ. I make 3 or 4 trips myself.
Senator DANIEL. Did he give you part of the money each time to pay
for the heroin?
Mr. HERNANDEZ. Yes.
Mr.
HERNANDEZ.
Senator
Mr.
DANIEL.
HERINANDEZ.
Yes.
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
Senator
DANIEL.
Mr. HERNANDEZ.
TRAFFIC
2515
2516
Senator DANIEL. Did it take you very long to find out where to bny
in Monterrey?
Mr. HERNANDEZ. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. How long?
Mr. HERNANDEZ. Same day.
Senator DANIEL. Did you bring it back across the border yourself?
Mr.
HERNIANDEZ.
Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Did you ever have heroin delivered to you from
Monterrey to San Antonio?
Mr. HERNANDEZ.
Senator DANIEL.
Mr. HERNANDEZ.
No, sir.
Senator
To Monterrey?
DANIEL.
What?
That is the first and last time I went up there.
Senator DANIEL. Were all your deliveries from Nuevo Laredo made
by other people or did you ever bring any back across the river.
Mr. HERNANDEZ.
Senator DANIEL.
sir.
Senator DANIEL. Do you know the name of the man who delivered
it, over here?
Mr. HERNANDEZ. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Did you ever hear his name?
Mr. HERNANDEZ. No, sir.
Senator DANIEl5 . Where did he leave the last batch of heroin for you
here in San Antonio?
Mr. HERNANDEZ. Same place.
Senator DANIEL. Same hiding place?
Mr. HERNANDEZ. Yes, sir.
Mr.
HERNANDEZ.
Yes, sir.
Senator
DANIEL.
here?
Mr. HERNANDEZ. Just before I got caught.
Senator DANIEL. And you were caught this last time when-in 1952?
Mr. HERNANDEZ. Yes, sir.
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
TRAFFIC
2517
Senator DANIEL. Since the 3d of March, you have been out, 15th of
March 1952-now you have been on parole since December 18, 1953;
liaven't you?
Mr. HERNANDEZ. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. What have you been doing since then?
Mr. HERNANDEZ. Working.
Senator
Mr.
DANIEL.
HERNANDEZ.
DANIEL.
HERNANDEZ.
know.
Senator DANIEL. After you got back here in San Antonio out of
jail, you did see Simon?
Mr. HERNANDEZ. I seen twice.
Senator DANIEL. What did you all talk about?
Mr. HERNANDEZ. Oh, just talking, just talking, that's all. I don't
talk about no dope.
Senator DANIEL. Did he talk to you about going back to Mexico for
some more heroin?
Mr. HERNANDEZ. Well, I don't remember that, if he told me that
or not.
Senator DANIEL. You understand, I want to just admonish you
again that all we ask you to do is tell this committee the truth?
Mr. HERNANDEZ. I'm telling the truth, I can't remember, I can't remember everything I told him that night.
Senator DANIEL. I appreciate your telling us what you have already, you understand that?
Mr. HERNANDEZ.
Yes, sir.
2518
riguez, you and Simon go to Mexico together to buy dope, alid didn't
they go to a cousin of Simon in Monterrey?
Mr. HERNANDEZ. That's right, I remember that one time.
Senator DANIEL. What were you all over there in Monterrey for?
Mr. HERNANDEZ.
Yes.
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
TRAFFIC
2519
Senator
DANIEL. Who?
Senator DANIEL. Simon and some other guy was taking it up where 2
Mr. HERNANDEZ. Well, to Chicago and Dallas and Houston and some
of those other places.
Senator
DANIEL.
Fort Worth?
Senator DANIEL. Did you hear them talk about their trip?
Mr. HERNANDEZ. No, sir; not to him.
Senator DANIEL. What?
Mr. HERNANDEZ. Well yes; he told me once he was going to deliver,
he would deliver or send some marihuana to Chicago.
Senator
DANIEL.
Mr. HERNANDEZ. Yes, yes; one of those, I think one of those times,
two times I met him. I was working in the filling station. That is
when I told him he can do anything he wants but I am free forever.
Senator DANIEL. Say that a little louder and a little plainer, you
didn't remember telling Mr. Speer that?
Mr. HERNANDEZ. Yes, that's right.
know, they don't have no money to help me, he knew I was broke but
he said when deliver marihuana to Chicago, soon as that money
come back he was going to help me out with some money.
Senator DANIEL. And what did you tell him about the dope business?
Mr. HERNANDEZ. I told him I don't have nothing to do with it, no
more dope.
Senator DANIEL. Did you tell hin he could do whatever he wanted
to, you weren't going to fool with dope any more?
Mr.
HERNANDEZ.
That's right.
Senator BuTLER. Did Simon ever tell you who was pushing the
half of the dope he got from you?
Mr. HERNANDEZ. No, sir.
Senator BUTLER. You never talked to him about what he did with
his?
Mr. HERNANDEZ. No, sir.
Senator BvrLER. You don't know what he did with his?
BUTLER.
2520
it?
dition that you bought it or did you mix something else with out
more
That would only be $5 a gram difference. Did you make
of it?
Mr.
HERNANDEZ.
Mr.
Mr.
HERNANDEZ. Capsules.
SPEER. You sell it in capsules?
Mr.
IERNANDEZ.
Yes.
Mr.
HERNANDEZ.
$12.50.
would
Mr. SPEER. One gram. But how much, how may capsules
you make out of a gram?
Mr. HERNANDEZ. Two of them.
Mr. SPEER. Oh, you would divide it?
Mr. HERNANDEZ. Yes.
you mean. You have
Mr. SPEER. I don't exactly understand what
a gram that you bought for $20?
Mr. HERNANDEZ.
Mr. SPEER.
11111
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
2521
TRAFFIC
Yes.
Mr. SPEER. Divide into half?
Mr. HERNANDEZ. Yes.
Mr. SPEEI. And sell each half, but you would mix something else
z-o you would have maybe four?
[r. HEHNANDEZ. No, not quite.
AlJr. SPEER. Not quite four ?
Mr. I-ERXANE'Z. Not quite three, just a little.
Mr. SPEER. Now on occasion when this heroin was delivered to you
by the man from Mexico, by the peddler from Mexico, did you turn
it. all over to Simon Rodriguez?
Mr. HE1NANIEz. No; I gave him half.
Mr.I HERNANi)EZ.
Ile
would tell you occasionally about his business, something about his
business, what did he tell you?
Mr. IEIERTNANDEZ. He wouldn't say nothing to me.
Mr. SPEER. Did he tell you occasionally someone beat him out of
part.of hiis aud he couldint pay you the money?
Mfr.
HERNANDEZ.
Yes.
Mr. SPEER. Ile told you that, didn't he? What did he mean by
tim t ?
Mr. HERNANDE Z (by the interpreter). He meant that I should
replace or make good the amount of heroin that he got beat out of.
Mr. SPEER. Well, he said he wouldn't pay you the money because
he uot beat out of it, right?
Mr. HERN ANDEZ. Yes.
Mr. SPEER. Now, he had already paid you half of it?
Mr. IHERNANDEZ.
Yes.
Mr. SPEER. When you bought it, so why would he have to pay you
again? lie was paying you part of the profit, wasn't he? was he
paying you part of the profit he made?
Mr. HERNANDEZ.
No.
Senator
DANwiL.
2522
Senator
did he?
DA-IEL.
Mr.
HERNANDEZ.
Yes.
Is that right ?
Senator DANIEL.
Mr. HER-ANDEZ. Yes. sir.
Senator DAN.NIEL. Any further questions?
You were making pretty good money at this, weren't you?
Mr. HERNANDEZ. Not much.
Senator DANIEL. Well, how much did you pay for attorney's fees,
lawyer's fees?
Mr. HERNANDEZ. Well, I had that money when I had the saloon.
Senator BUTLER. That money didn't come from the sale of heroin?
Mr. HERNANDEZ. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. You did pay your lawyer $3,000?
Mr. HERNANDEZ. That's right.
Senator DANIEL. Did you ever have to pay any Mexican officials any
money for letting you bring that dope back?
Mr. HERNANDEZ. No.
Senator DAN.WIEL. You never did pay any money to any officials at
all?
Mr. HERNANDEZ. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. All right, that's all. You may stand aside. Thank
you very much.
Simon Rodriguez.
Mr. GARCIA. I am the attorney representing Mr. Rodriguez. M. W.
Garcia.
I I I I
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
TRAFFIC
2523
25324
Senator DANIEL. And what type of business did you run there?
Mr. RODRIGUEZ. What type, now?
Senator DANIEL. What kind of business did you have at this pla'e?
Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Oh,
beer, saloon.
Senator
anywhere in San
Antonio?
Mr. RODRIGUEZ. No.
Mr. GARCIA. At this time I am instructing my client to refuse to
answer on the grounds it may incriminate.
Senator DANIEL. I said any time he wishes to consultMr. GARCIA. May I instruct?
Senator DANIEL. No, sir; you may not instruct or nudge him.
Mr. GARCIA. May I instruct him he has that right?
Senator DANIEL. As to his rights you may instruct him, as to what
Senator DANIEL. Was whether or not you had ever sold any heroin
in San Antonio and you answered that you had not.
M1r. GARCIA. He wants me to interpret, Mr. Daniel.
Senator DANIEL. All right.
Mr. GARCIA. He says that is true.
Senator DANIEL. Is that true?
Mr. GARCIA. That is true.
Senator DANIEL. Now. I want to give you the same warning I am
sure your attorney has. I want to warn you again so our record will
show it, you understand if you do not give a truthful answer to a
question from this committee that it is possible that you could be
charged with perjury and convicted for failing to give truthful answers to the questions. Do you understand that?
Mr. GARCIA. He understands that. May I again advise him of his
rights?
Senator DANIEL. Do you understand that?
Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Yes.
Senator DANIEL. In view of that I am asking you again whether or
not you gave a truthful answer when you said that you had never sold
heroin to anyone in San Antonio?
Mr.
RODRIGUEZ.
No.
2525
GARCIA.
count of'the fear that it might incriminate him, to stand on his right
under the fifth amendment, it should be stated but it can be stated
once and you do not need to state it over again every time in the same
complete full language. But he has certainly waived any right to
claim any right. He answered the question that he never sold heroin
in San Antonio, and I will ask you after your attorney has counseled
with you and after the admonition from the Chair, if you still want
to say that this is a truthful answer, that you never sold any heroin
to anyone in San Antonio?
Mr. GARCIA. His anwser is: No, I have not sold to anyone.
Senator DANIEL. Have you ever bought any from anyone in San
Antonio?
Mr. RODRIGUEZ. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Have you ever bought heroin from anyone in
Mexico?
Mr. RODRIGUEZ. No, sir.
No, sir.
2526
Senator DANIEL. NOW, Mr. Counsel, the colmnittee is just not going
to let you advise him "no contesto" is that what you call it?
Mr. GARCIA. Yes, sir, that is correct.
under the Constitution provided you will not put "no contesto," whatever you say, in his mouth.
Mr.
for pleasure.
Senator DANIEL. Why did you take Roberto Hernandez with you ?
Mr.RODRIGUEZ. We both went for pleasure.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
RODRIGUEZ.
Senator
No.
BUTLER.
No.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL. That
Senator
DANIEL. Did
Senator DANIEL. Did you ever sell Juan Contreras any heroin?
Mr. RODRIGUEZ. No.
Senator DANIEL. Did you ever give Juan Contreras any heroin?
Mr. RODRIGUEZ. No.
Senator DANIEL. Do you know Pancho Trevino in Nuevo Laredo?
2527
Mr.
RODRIGUEZ. NO.
Senator DANIEL. Did
Senator DANIEL. Have you recently been out to Odessa and Big
Spring, Tex.?
Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Yes.
Senator
DANIEL.
Mr. RODRIGUEZ.
'When?
About a month ago.
a half.
Senator DANIEL. What did you go to Odessa and Big Spring for?
Mr. RODRIGUEZ. I went to see sonic friends of mine and also a. boy
who was going to be tried in Midland.
Senator DANIEL. Did you take any marihuana with you to Big
Spring or Odessa?
Mr. RODRIGUEZ. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Did you take any heroine with you to Big Spring
or Odessa?
Mr. RODRIGUEZ. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Iave you ever been to Chicago?
Mr. RODRIGUEZ. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Did you ever send any marihuana to Chicago?
Mr. RODRIGUEZ. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Did you ever go to Dallas?
Mr. RODRIGUEZ. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Were you ever in Temple?
Mr. RODRIGUEZ. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Fort Worth?
Mr.
RODRIGUEZ.
No, sir.
2528
Mr. RODRIGUEZ.
No.
Mr. GASQUE. Have you ever heard in referring to heroin the word
tecata?
Mr. GASQUE. You are testifying under oath before this committee
that you never heard these names used?
Mr. RoDPIGuEZ. If I have heard them I haven't paid any attention
to them because I don't get involved in that.
Mr. GASQUE. Do you have any knowledge of what narcotics are!
Mr. RoDR oGEz. No.
2529
Mr. GAsQuE. Have you ever had in your possession any marihuana
or any heroin?
Mr.
RoDRmGUEZ.
Senator DANIEL. I say, you were sitting out there, did you hear
Roberto testify that you had some heroin in that car that you brought
back across the border?
Mr. GACIA. He says: I didn't understand him too well because
I don't understand too much English. I don't know if he had anything with him when he caiue across the border.
Senator DANIEL. And Robert never handed you any heroin at any
time?
Mr.
RoDmuGEz.
on 1802 Guadalupe.
of that?
in 1952.
Mr. G. ,nrr. Wherp are you getting the money to make the payments on that property?
Mr.ROw mTrUZ. I had a little money and the rent that I collect on
the place, I am making the payments with that.
fr. GAsor.. Do vou hove a bank ,account?
Mr. ROnT(rTr-7. No. Rir.
2530
RODRIGUEZ.
Senator DANIEL. Does either one of you have any further income
over $1,200?
Mr.
GASQUE.
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
Senator
DANIEL.
Mr. GASQUE. No.
Senator DANIEL.
Senator BUTLER.
Mr. GASQUE. Up
TRAFFIC
2531
your income?
Mr. RODRIGUEZ. I am not working. I had to borrow a thousand
dollars from Garza Finance to help out the family. The family is
now out in west Texas picking cotton.
Mr. GASQUE. Your family?
Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Yes. My family is picking cotton out in west Texas.
Mr.
GASQUE. So,
have had nothing to do with the drug traffic in San Antonio and across
the border into Mexico?
Mr. RODRIGUEZ. No.
Mr. GASQUE. Do you understand that the prior witness testified
under oath that you and he had been engaged in the drug traffic?
Mr.
RODRIGUEZ.
No.
Senator DANIEL. I want to ask you if you were ever with Roberto
Hernandez when he made a sale of narcotic drugs, heroin, to any
person; did you ever see him make a sale of narcotic drugs to anyone?
Mr. RODRIGUEZ. When I was with him I never did see him sell
anything.
Senator DANIEL. On March 4, 1952, at about 11 o'clock in the morning were you riding with Roberto Hernandez when a man came up
and asked for some stuff and gave Roberto Hernandez the money
for some heroin?
Mr. GARCIA. That was what date?
Senator DANIEL. March 4, 1952, 11 o'clock in the morning.
Mr. RODRIGUEZ. I
2532
Mr. GARCIA. I would like to ask the committee if they have any
DANIEL.
Senator DANIEL. You may pass out the copies up here to the cominittee and to the press.
Will you state your name?
Mr. FLEISHN AN. Lawrence Fleishman.
Senator DANIEL. And what is your position?
Mr. FLEISHXAN. I am supervising customs agent. I have supervision over the 10th Customs Agency District which comprises the
States of Arizona, New Mexico, Texas, and a very small portion of
Louisiana.
Senator
DANIEL.
2533
a supervisory capacity for all of Texas and New Mexico border then?
Mr.
FLEISHMAN.
And Arizona.
2534
Volume
seized
Fiscal year
Number of
arrests
Pounds
1952 ----------------------------------------------------------
1,401
124
166
1,052
1,132
1,080
146
132
131
138
23
190
182
205
41
OPIUM DERIVATIVES
Ounces
1952_.
1953
3---------------------------------------------------------19
47
------------------------------------------------------
14
21
19
57
23
27
36
46
Ounems
None
1,429
262
None
None
7
3
None
None
7
4
None
None
None
None
OPIUM
1952
--------------------------------------------------1953
---------------------------------------------------1954----------------------------------------------------1955
--------------------------------------------------1956 --
No. 6-441
Information was received in this office on May 28, 1952, to the effect that certain individuals, including Rafael Rodriguez, mayor of the little Mexican town
of San Antonio, Chihuahua, opposite Candelaria, Tex., were seeking an outlet in
the United States for a large quantity of opium. After prolonged negotiations,
Customs Agent George Scales finally succeeded in introducing himself as an
opium buyer to the group of persons concerned, who completed final arrangements in a small tavern in the city of Presidio, Tex., with Scales unarmed and
outnumbered 5 to 1 at the time negotiations were completed and a sample of
the opium was given Agent Scales.
This case culminated in the arrest of Ernesto Aguirre-Cano on July 8, 1952,
as he was effecting delivery of 47 pounds, 5 ounces of crude gum opium to Agent
Scales in his undercover capacity at the San Jacinto Motor Courts in Marfa, Tex.,
under the surveillance of three other customs agents. Also seized with the
opium was 1 1951 Chevrolet pickup truck, in which the opium was being delivered, together with 1 loaded rifle, a val-pack valise, in which part of the opium
was being transported, and 1 wheel and tire casing, in which over 38 pounds of
opium had been concealed.
Interrogation of Aguirre-Cano, directly after his arrest, revealed that he was
a principal opium dealer, residing in Parral Chihuahua, where his connections
I I I I
2535
2536
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
TRAFFIC
No. G--742
On January 30, 1954, customs agents seized a small handbag containing approximately 2 pounds 12 ounces of bulk marihuana, which had been smuggled from
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
TRAFFIC
2537
Mexico by Adolfo Aguilera Martinez, who was not arrested at that time since
he had made complete arrangements to deliver, the following week, a quantity
of cocaine which he had in his possession in Juarez, Mexico. After many (lays
of tedious negotiations, the trap was finally sprung on Martinez as he arrived
from Juarez, Mexico, at the Santa Fe Street International Bridge carrying
a pharmaceutical bottle concealed on his person, which bottle was found to
contain 5 ounces of a substance, which Martinez claimed was cocaine. This
culminated a lengthy investigation involving long hours of tedious work on
the part of customs agents acting In an undercover capacity.
When Martinez was taken before the United States commissioner on February
12, 1954, he waived hearing, as well as grand-jury action, and indicated that
it was his intention to plead guilty to cocoaine-smuggling charges. The case
took a peculiar turn when analysis by the United States Customs Laboratory of
the substance, believed to have been cocaine, disclosed that it was actually
procaine hydrochloride and contained no narcotic drugs. It is significant, however, that Martinez is known to have been a prominent narcotic dealer in
Mexico and at no time following his arrest did he indicate that the substance
he smuggled from Mexico was other than cocaine. He possibly had been
deceived himself upon acquisition of the substance in Mexico.
Although the procaine hydrochloride in question is not a narcotic drug, it
is said to be extremely dangerous and might have caused the death of unsuspecting addicts to whom it might have been sold as cocaine. Martinez was found
guilty in Federal district court of smuggling this substance from Mexico, following which he was sentenced to serve 2 years in the penitentiary.
BRIFv ON THE JOHN H.
JACKSON CASE,
No. 6-534
During the early part of December 1952, Customs Agent Bourke received
information from a confidential source to the effect that John H. Jackson was
engaged in importing marihuana cigarettes from Mexico for the purpose of selling them in El Paso. On several occasions, the activities of this person were
placed under surveillance, at which time he was seen to have made at least
two trips to Juarez, Mexico, between December 1 and December 12, 1952.
At approximately 9 p. m. on December 12, 1952, Customs Agents Griffin and
Bourke observed the defendant returning on foot from Mexico to El Paso at
the Santa Fe International Bridge and caused a thorough search to be made
of the defendant's person. This search revealed 32 marihuana cigarettes concealed in the sleeve of a sweater worn under other clothing of the defendant.
Interrogation of Jackson, subsequent to his arrest, disclosed that he was
employed as a waiter at Radford School in El Paso, Tex., where he had resided
during the previous month. He admitted having been a marihuana user during
the past 5 years, but denied having smuggled marihuana cigarettes to El Paso
for the purpose of selling them.
Although the quantity of narcotics in this instance is relatively small, this
case is not without importance since it demonstrates the ease with which smugglers of Jackson's character are able to obtain employment in respectable institutions where their potential danger to the unsuspecting public is considerable.
After pleading guilty in Federal court to marihuana-smuggling charges, this
defendant was sentenced to 2 years, which sentence was suspended for 2 years,
and to payment of a $1 fine.
BRIEF ON THE CASE OF THOMAS EVERETT AND GUMERCINDO RODRIGUEZ,
No. L6-904
On June 11, 1952, information was received to the effect that Jose Vallejo,
driving a 1941 Dodge sedan, bearing an Ohio license, would attempt to smuggle
a quantity of marihuana into the United States.
2538
A lookout for the vehicle in question was placed at the International Bridge
and on June 12, 1952, the vehicle was seen to enter the United States, following
which it was placed under surveillance by United States customs agents, who
followed it to a point approximately 40 miles east of Laredo, where it was
stopped and submitted to customs examination by Agents Yates and Palacios.
In the trunk of the vehicle were found 2 burlap bags containing approximately
.56 pounds of bulk marihuana, which had been smuggled from Mexico.
On July 29, 1952, Vallejo entered a plea of guilty in Federal district court, following which he was sentenced to serve 5 years. At a subsequent term of court
on September 25, 1952, his sentence was reconsidered and reduced to 3 years.
BRIEF ON THE NORAL
"BILLY"
WILLIAMS
CASE,
No. L6-885
HINOJOSA,
AND CANALES
2539
No. B-438
No.
BM6-75
In November 1951, information was received by Customs Agent Herbert F.
Scott, in McAllen, Tex., to the effect that a Mexican national by the name
of Leonel Rodriguez, a resident of General Teran, Nuevo Laredo, Mexico, had
in his possession approximately 100 kilos of marihuana, which he was en(leavoring to sell in the United States.
An initial attempt was made to introduce Customs Agent Abraham G. Palacios
as an undercover buyer for this marihuana. However, following his contact
with the seller in Matamoros, it was evident that the sale would have to be
consunmmated at a subsequent date. At the time this original contact was made,
it was ascertained that Rodriguez had an accomplice by the name of Jorje
)avila and that both men were anxious to sell the 100 kilos of marihuana for
the sum of 250 pesos per kilo. At the termination of this initial contact, Agent
Palacios indicated that if he were unavailable for any subsequent dealings,
he would provide satisfactory introduction for his partner to conclude the
deal.
During the early part of December 1951, Customs Agents Joe F. Ray and
John R. Kent, acting in an undercover capacity, introduced themselves to Rodriguez and Davila and, following a lengthy discussion regarding purchase of the
marihuana, it was agreed that it would be delivered on December 10, 1951,
-it the intersection of Military Highway and the Alamo Road, Hidalgo County,
Tex., at which time payment of 20,500 pesos was to be effected.
In accordance with the usual pattern in cases such as this, delivery was
not effected at the place agreed upon, which place was kept under constant
surveillance by customs agents.
Another contact with the sellers brought out a second agreement to deliver
th'niarihuana on the American side of the border, which delivery was scheduled
71515-56-pt. 7-13
2540
for 12: 30 a. m., December 10, 151, at a place on the Rio Grande River east of the
Santana Ranch. Although surveillance of the second agreed-upon place was
maintained until 6 a. m., delivery of the marihuana was not effected and Davila
was seen to contact Agents Ray and Kent at their automobile, following which a
third agreement was made to deliver the marihuana at 9: 45 a. m. on December
11, 1951, a short distance from where the previous delivery was to have beeti
made, east of the Santana Ranch. The sellers stated that the marihuana was
contained in 6 burlap sacks and 3 boxes and was concealed under a pile of brush
near the river south of Alamo, Tex.
The undercover buyers met the sellers at the agreed-upon place on the morning of December 11 and were advised that the marihuana was ready for delivery,
following which the undercover agents left under the pretext of "running the
road out" prior to accepting delivery of the marihuana. Customs agents,
assisted by United States border patrolmen, then proceeded to the delivery spot
and placed under arrest the 2 defendants, 1 of whom was armed with a loaded
9-millimeter Luger automatic pistol found in the waistband of his trousers.
The marihuana was not found in the place previously described, but by following the men's tracks in the soil, the marihuana was found about 35 feet froiii
the fence corner where Rodriguez and Davila had first been observed. The
marihuana was found in a pile of brush concealed in 6 Mexican burlap sacks
and 2 cardboard boxes, which were hidden under a large brush heap approximately 10 feet from where the men had been standing.
When interrogated subsequent to arrest, both men admitted participation in
the sale of the marihuana, but denied having actually participated in the
smuggling of it to the United States. They both admitted knowing they were
violating the law by handling the marihuana in Mexico and in the United States,
but stated that they took the chance because they needed the money. They
both waived hearing when taken before the United States commissioner and
were held under $2,500 bond.
Our file on this case does not show ultimate disposition relative to final
sentencing of these defendants.
Senator
DANIEL.
rivatives, and opium seized during the fiscal years 1952 up to and
including the first 2 months of the fiscal year 1956. In fiscal year
1952, that part of my district which includes Texas, we seized 1,401
pounds of marihuana. In 1953, 1,052 pounds; in 1954, 1,132 pounds;
in 1955, 1,080 pounds; and in 1956, 146 pounds.
Senator DANIEL. Those 2 months are simply July and August of
the 1955-56 year, you call that 1956 fiscal year.
I1II1
2541
years to bring it over in the so-called prepared or man-cured marihuana. In the first place it is less bulky. It takes, we estimate, from
2 to 21/4 pounds of bulk inarihuana, crude marihuana, to make 1 pound
of the man-cured marihuaiia. It does not appear in this statement.
There has also been a trend in the past 5 years for an increase in the
number of marihuana cigarettes that have been seized all along the
border coming from Mexico. I believe, if my memory serves me correctly, about 5 years ago we only had about 700 of them. There has
been a gradual increase each year. I believe last year we had around
3,600 of them. That doesn't sound very big when you reduce quantities to cigarettes but it indicates to ne the people on the Mexican side
have found out probably they can make more money by peddling in
that manner, or some other manner, or there are more people going
down there willing to buy it in that form.
Now for opium derivatives. Begin with the years 1952. 1953, 1954,
1955, and 1956 for the first 2 months. In 1952 we only seized 31/ ounces
of opium derivatives, a total of 19 seizures and 47 arrests. In 1953 we
seized 2 ounces, with 14 seizures and 21 arrests. In 1954, 19 ounces,
23 seizures and 36 arrests. In 1955. 57 ounces, 27 seizures and 46
arrests. That included a kilo of heroin which we seized in Brownsville, Tex., in which there was no definite-it was actually placed in a
locker by a young boy.
Senator DANIEL. Well, Mr. Fleishman, for 1955 you seized more
heroin and other opium derivatives than all the previous 4 years put
together?
Mr. FLEISHMAN. Yes, sir, Senator.
Senator DANIEL. Can you account for that?
Mr. FLEISHMAN. Actually we seized more in that year than we
did in the previous 5 years.
Senator DANIEL. Would that indicate to you that there is an increase in the traffic in heroin across the Mexican border?
Mr. FLEISHMAN. If you will notice also, in 1954 we seized 19 ounces
which was considerably more than we seized in the previous 2 years.
I don't know whether it indicates an increase in the traffic or whether
we had a little better luck that year. I think it is a combination of
both.
Senator DANIEL. Did you make any particularly large seizure in
1955 that would account for this total being so large?
Mr. FLEISHMAN. Yes, there was one which we seized at Brownsville, as I just related, approximately one kilo.
Senator DANIEL. How many ounces are in a kilo?
Mr. FLEISILMAN. That is 2.1 pounds.
Senator DANIEL. Now, when we talk about ounces it sounds like a
small amount but with opium derivatives what would that amount to
in dollars, approximately, on the retail market, the 57 ounces which
you seized in 1955?
Mr. FLEISHMAN. Well, I would say 57 ounces by the time that it
reaches the addict on the street would be worth many thousands of
dollars.
Senator DANIEL. Do you have any estimate there .
Mr. FLEISI-IHAN. No, sir, I don't have an estimate, by the time that
is cut as it always is and recut-
2542
At
that time I did not have the northeastern and the eastern part of
Texas in my district. That was the two eastern collection districts.
Just since September 23 they have been put in my district.
Senator )ANIEL. Do you have the figures prepared for the other
States?
Mr. FLEISHMAN. I do not have them with me. I understood this
hearing at this time related to the State of Texas only.
Senator DANIEL. Well, we would like to have the figures on the
other States. We are moving on west from here and would like to
have the same figures with reference to the other States. Senator.
Mr. FLEISHMAN. They will be very readily produced,
Senator DANIEL. Thank you.
Mr. FLEISIHMAN. We have had a number of what I would consider
stateto be important cases inasmuch as they are all set forth init the
would be
ment. I don' t believe I should go into each one because
quite time consuming.
you
Senator DANIEL. Well, we have made all of these cases that comthe
have outlined here part of the record, and I want to say that
illusmittee appreciates your giving us this large number of cases
and what you have
trate how the smuggling is done across the border
summarize
to do in your enforcement problem. I wonder if you would
ideas about the main
those cases, though, and give ;us some of your what
you have to do
systems that are used by the smugglers and
there?
with law enforcement. Could you give us a little picture a couple
Mr. FLEISIMAN. Before I do, Senator, may I relate just
of cases that I think would be of interest?
Senator DANIEL. -Yes.
2543
Senator DANIEL. By top men you mean the top men in Mexico City ?
Mr. FLEISHMAN. Yes, sir.
Senator
Mr.
DANIEL.
FLEISHMAN.
2544
Senator
FLFTSH mAN.
Senator DANIEL.
Yes, sir.
What is the heroin situation along the border in
Mexico? Would you say it is plentiful? You have heard the witnesses here today who say it is pretty easy to go over there and find
it. What is your opinion?
Mr. FLEISHiaAN. Well, I think those figures I just read off speak for
themselves. I think that the volume of our seizures, the number of
seizures, the ease with which a violator can go into cities in northern
Mexico and buy it and bring it back is indicative of the fact that
it is plentiful and is readily available.
Senator DANIEL. You mean to say that it is plentiful and can be
bought with ease, is that right? Purchases of heroin can be made
with ease south of the border in Mexico?
Mr. FLEISHMAN. In my opinion, yes. Now, I would like to illustrate this a little bit if I may. Sheriff Kilday this morning said he
had heard they were growing opium poppies in Mexico. I don't think
anybody can dispute that fact. The opium poppy has been grown
in Mexico many years. I can remember 20 years ago when agents
from the United States, customs agents, went down with Mexican
officials. They toured all over Mexico with them. They were supposed to be burning fields of opium poppies. To this day you hear
about burning oDium. I have always had a little
reservation. I have
always felt possibly they burnt the fields after they had been harvested.
Senafor DANIEL. Mexico is a party to the opium treaty?
Mr. FLEISHMAN. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Under which they obligate themselves to prevent
thp growing of the poppy, isn't that true?
Mr. FLTS:HAW. Yes. sir: I believe in recent years the Federal
government in Mexico has taken some considerable measures to fulfill
that oblization.
Spnmtor DANIEL. I think that's true. Let me ask you this first.
doe Mexico have laws outlawing marihuana and heroin the same as
we do?
2545
as they are on the United States side, but I would say they are being
enforced as rigidly as they are in position to do at the present time.
They have a small force of Federal narcotic officials in Mexico City,
and I believe that their funds appropriated for the purpose are probably very limited. I don't know how much. I don't believe their
salaries are overly large and I believe -that they are doing the best
they can with what they have to do with.
Senator DANIEL. You mean the Federal officials of Mexico?
Senator BUTLER. You don't swap figures with the Mexican Government?
Mr.
FLEISHMAN.
the State of Chihuahua, there has been a change in the State government recently. The former governor was removed from office
or was forced to resign. There was a lot of talk in the press and
on the air, a lot of publicity given to this former governor of his
connections with narcotic traffic, prostitution, and other forms of
law violations. He is alleged to have made a great deal of money;
allegations are he had money in banks in Europe and in the United
States. The former mayor of Juarez was also forced to resign and
with him went the chief of police and chief detectives, and so forth.
Well, now, immediately thereafter there were 2 or 3 raids made in
Juarez on the so-called shooting galleries and they came up with a
couple of seizures of marihuana in considerable quantities, 30 or 40
pounds. I know we made 1 in El Paso last month, in 1 case we got
313 pounds and immediately thereafter the Mexican police came up
with 1 in Juarez, I think they had 34 pounds. But there was one
case in Juarez some time ago, several years ago, a great big seizure
was announced; when it came time to destroy it, it was decided it
wasn't marihuana, it was mint. I think any enforcement officer,
knowing what it smells like, wouldn't go for the fact that marihuana
would be mistaken for mint.
Senator DANIEL. Do you feel that was an instance where you did
not have cooperation across the border?
Mr. FLEISHMAN. We didn't have cooperation, we didn't have anything to do with the particular case.
Senator DANIEL. Well, do you think if the Mexican Government
could increase its personnel along the border and help enforce its own
laws a little bit that that would help the situation over on our side?
Mr. FLEISHMAN. Senator, I think insofar as any traffic from Mexico
is concerned the only place to stop it, the proper place to stop it is
at the source.
Senator DANIEL. I believe the customs agency has one man who
works in Mexico with the top Mexican officials; is that right?
Mr. FLEISHMAN. That is correct. His name is Ben White, he used
to be an agent. He worked for me at Laredo, Tex.
2546
of them.
Senator DANIEL. Well, that should help the situation some?
Mr. FLEISHM3AN. It should relieve it a great deal.
Senator DANIEL. Now, in addition to your work right on the
border
where you have your agents, then you have your investigators: do
you not?
Mr. FLEISHMAN. I am speaking of investigators only.
Senator DANIEL. Only of investigators?
Air. FLEISHMIAN. Yes, sir.
agents ?
Mr. FLEISHMAN. Customs agents are the investigative personnel.
You may be mistaking customs inspector for customs agent. Customs inspectors would come under the collector of customs.
Senator DANIEL. So the customs agents handle investigation work?
Mr. FLEISLIMAN. And the development of cases; yes, sir.
Senator DANieL. And the inspectors are the ones who handleMr. FLEISHMAN. Commerce and the traffic as it crosses the border.
Senator DANIEL. Searching those who come across the border?
Mr. FIEISHMAN. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Now, the inspectors are under a different supervisory setup from yours?
....--
2547
trict
Mr. FLEISHMAN. Each collector in his own particular district would
be the man responsible for the inspectors.
Senator DANIEL. Now, in addition then to these?
Mr. FLEISHMAN. Of course the collector would have subordinate
personnel who would be in charge of the inspection forces. For example, a witness here I understand from El Paso who is the chief
inspector at El Paso is in charge of all the customs inspectors in that
particular area.
Senator DANIEL. The customs inspectors stay right along the border
itself?
Mr. FLEISIMAN. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. And where do your agents stay?
Mr.
FLEISHMAN.
Tex.: that is the headquarters office for the entire customs agency
district. In addition to that, I have a customs agent in charge at
Houston, Tex., and under him we are opening an office at Corpus
Christi. We have an agent in charge at Brownsville, Tex., and under
him we have an office at McAllen, Tex.
Senator DANIEL. What other laws do you all enforce, other than
laws against smuggling narcotics?
Mr. FLEISHMAN. Well, the customs laws, of course narcotic laws
the foot-and-mouth disease, public health laws, smuggling of parakeets, parrots, and so forth, the Gold Reserve Act.
Senator DANIEL. All types of smuggling?
Mr. FLEISHIMAN. All types of smuggling and any of the violations
of the Air Commerce Act, the navigation laws. Any of the many
laws that are enforced by customs, any violations of international
traffic in arms and munitions of war, export-control laws.
Senator DANIEL. Can you give us any idea what percent of your
time is spent on the enforcement of the narcotic laws?
Mr. FLESITSMAN. Along this border I would say, safely say, 60 percent. of our time, 50 percent anyway, probably the outside figure might
go as high as 60 percent.
Senator DANIEL. Does that include about the same percentage of
your personnel
?
Mr. FLEISHMLAN.
Service.
Senator DANIEL. And they have many men along the border?
Mr. FLEISIMAN. Yes, sir. May I say something about that, at this
time?
Senator DA-NIEL. Yes.
Mr. FLEIsIt1AN. We have recently inaugurated a new program.
2548
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
sometimes in Washington they want to blame all the evils on the border
on wetbacks, the laborers, they blame them sometimes for Communist
activities, next they want to say the laborers are bringing across narcotics. I frankly did not know what it was. I was a little afraid I
might find some of those people were smuggling, but I was very pleased
to hear General Swing's testimony that the laborers who come across
the border very seldom get in this trouble.
Mr. FLEISHMAN. Our records do not show that they are any menace
from that point of view.
Senator
Senator
Senator
DANIEL.
BUTLER.
DANIEL.
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
TRAFFIC
2549
an enforced parole for those people where they go back for a period
of time periodically to some public health doctor for an examination
to see if the cure has taken, to see if they have reverted to an addiction. I don't believe it is being done at the present time. but it always
seemed like a good idea to me.
Senator
DANIEL.
mendation ?
Mr.
FLEISI-IAN.
2550
BUTLER.
Mr.
FLEISHMAN. We haven't
GASQUE. Thank you.
your testimony before another subcommittee of our Judiciary Committee at pages 17 through 32 of our Juvenile Delinquency Committee,
held last year, will be made a part of the appendix to this record.
Thank you very much.
(The testimony referred to may be found in the appendix at p. 3487.)
I believe your agents in charge at El Paso and at Laredo are here?
Mr. FLEIsHrAN. Yes, sir, both of them.
Senator DANIEL. Mr. Richards, is he here?
Mr. FLEISHMAN. Mr. Richards is the agent in charge at Laredo.
Under his jurisdiction he has an office at San Antonio, one at Eagle
Pass.
I heard Del Rio mentioned this morning. We are opening an office
in Del Rio. I am in the process of appointing two agents for Del
Rio.
Senator DANIEL. Now, are there any other places in Texas where you
have not had agents along the border that you are opening up offices now?
Mr. FLEISHMAN.
Senator DANIEL.
Mr. FLEISHMAN.
Senator DANIEL.
2551
Mr. RICIHADS. I would like to file the statement with the committee
and then more or less summarize the important high points in the
statement.
Senator
DANIEL.
main things in the statement that you think will be of interest to us.
Mr. RIcnARDs. Well, I would like first to go over the figures of the
seizures during the past fiscal years, from the fiscal year of 1953 up
to and including 2 months of the fiscal year of 1956.
During the fiscal year of 1953 the agents under my supervision in
Laredo made 107 arrests, seized
a ch,1ne.
have been
However,
there were
2552
Senator DANIEL. Does that indicate to you the heroin traffic from
Mexico is growing?
Mr. RICHADS. Well, it would, yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Well, are you short-handed with 2 men?
Mr. RicHARDs. I have been promised under this new increase 2
additional agents in Laredo, 2 additional agents in San Antonio and
2 additional agents in the Del Rio office which is now going to be open.
Senator DANIEL. Do you need that personnel?
Mr. RICHARDS. Yes, sir.
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
TRAFFIC
2553
or State officials to have these men extradited, brought over here for
trial?
Mr. RICHARDS. I do not.
Senator DANIEL. At least you know these men have not been
brought to trial in the State or Federal court?
Mr.
RICHARDS.
That's correct.
Senator DANIEL. Do you know from the evidence that you have
examined that these men have been engaged in a conspiracy to smuggle narcotics into the State of Texas?
States?
2554
Mr.
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
RICHARDS.
TRAFFIC
We have
there. Do you have any way of watching that, do you have anybody
who can watch and see the juveniles or addicts who might go across
and buy dope so as to check them when they come back across the
bridge to see what they have on them?
Mr. RICHARDS. That would be very hard. Thousands and thousands
of people are crossing the bridge daily and coming back. However,
we do have a check. When an inspector on duty sees someone they
susl)ect of being .an addict, when they find they have needle marks or
admit it, we make the card up on them with the name, address, and all
the information we can. That is kept on file so that any time the man
is picked up in the future the inspector who examines him will know
he has been handled previously.
Senator DANIEL. The information has come to our committee that
quite a few narcotic addicts are crossing the border into Mexico. Have
you had any occasion that you could tell us about? You say you watch
them, those you know?
Mr. RICHARDS. We can't watch them all, Senator. However, when
an inspector at the bridge stops an addict or sees one we know is an
addict they have handled before, they try to detain them. Most of
them will not bring the narcotics back across with them, they have
someone deliver to them in Laredo. So the inspector detains them
and calls the office and I send an agent or I will go, try to tail these
people to the point where they make the pickup, but there are so
many we can't tail them all.
2555,
2556
Senator
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
DANIEL.
TRAFFIC
Senator DANIEL. Well, do you believe that they are going over to
get a few shots or most of them are trying to arrange to get narcotics
delivered to them after they get back on this side?
Mr. RICHARDS. Some go over for their shots.
Senator DANIEL. A few?
Mr. RICHARDS. A few hangers-on around Laredo until run out of
town. Others try to get enough for their own use and to make enough
money to come back and buy more.
Senator DANIEL. Mr. Richards, why does our Government let the
addicts go across the border?
Mr. RICHARDS. I would not answer that.
Senator DANIEL. Sir?
Mr. RICHARDS. I would not answer that.
Senator DANIEL. Do you know of any other way in which your
narcotic addict can leave this country ?
Mr. RICHARDS. Well, there is no law to prevent them from leaving.
Senator DANIEL. Well, as I understand the law, narcotic violators
and addicts are prohibited from leaving the United States on passports or visas.
Mr. RICHARDS. You 'don't need a passport or visa to cross at the
border. All you need is 5 cents.
Senator DANIEL. Five cents?
Mr. RICHARDS. Yes, Sir.
Senator DANIEL. In other words, the way our laws are today,
2557
ing at other points as much as they are at Laredo these addicts could
be bringing a lot of drugs into this country.
Mr. RICHARDS.
Senator
DANIEL.
2558
Senator DANIEL. Those information sheets you have not been sending in in the past?
Mr. RICHARDS. That's correct.
DANIEL.
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
TRAFFIC
2559
Ad(licts that might be coming across your border so you can recognize
],iore of them.
Mr. RICHARDS. They are giving me every bit of that information
they have, I'm quite sure.
Senator DANIEL. Well, I will be frank with you, this testimony
astounds me, that our laws are not any more strict on this matter of
addicts leaving the country.
Senator Butler, do you have any questions?
Senator BUTLER. Mr. Richards, insofar as the State of Texas is concerned, do you give information to the local authorities of persons that
you know to be addicts so they can be apprehended under the Texas
law ?
Mr. RIcIl\RDS. I give all the information relative to addicts in the
State to Mr. Naylor.
Senator BUTLER. Well, so far as you know, are those addicts appreheded under Texas law and taken off the streets or are they perrnitted to go across the bridge?
Mr. RICHARDS. As far as Laredo is concerned they do not enforce any
of the law. I meani they do not pick them up and take them off the
streets.
Senator BuER. That is possible under the Texas law, isn't it?
Mr. RICHARDS. That's correct.
Senator BUTLER. That is mandatory?
Mr. IiCHARDS. However, before I came I had the office checked,
there has not been a )rosecution under the Texas law in Laredo since
the law.
Senator BUTLER. That,is because of such recent origin?
Mr. RICHARDS. That may be, yes, sir.
'Senator BUTLER. You don't luow whether the State of Texas has any
plan on foot to pick these addicts up that you know are crossing the
bridge every day?
Mr. RICHARDS. I do not know what the plans are, no, sir.
Senator )ANIEL. Mr. Counsel?
Mr. GAsQUE. No questions, Mr. Chairman.
Senator DANIEL. Now, do you know any other narcotic violators
from tle Unlited States who have fled over there to Mexico and whom
iw can't get back to the United States for trial?
Mr. RICnARDS. I have three major violators who are fugitives at the
present time in Mexico.
Senator
DANIEL.
RICHARDS. I
Sir?
Mr.
say I have three major violators who are fugitives
in Mexico at the present time.
Senator DANIEL. Would you give us their names and tell us a little
oI)out them?
Mr. RICHARDS. They are in the statement. Vicente Garcia who was
one of the main violators who lived at Beeville, Tex., failed to appear
for trial. 1-is bond was forfeited. He is now operating a saloon in
Reynosa across from Hlidalgo. A man by the name of Francisco Omar
Vela who escaped at Laredo is living in Nuevo Laredo at the present
time.
Senator DANIEL. Now wait, where was Francisco Vela born, in
Lja redo?
Mr. RICHARDS. Born in Laredo, American citizen of Latin American
,descent.
2560
cealed under the hood of his automobile, when the inspector started to
raise the hood he drew a gun on the inspector and escaped'back to
Mexico.
Senator DANIEL. And he is now in Mexico?
Mr. RICHARDS. Now in Nuevo Laredo.
Senator DANIEL. Just across the river?
Mr. RICHARDS. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. But he's wanted, I suppose, for more than one
offense?
Mr. RICHARDS. The marihuana smuggling and the assault on the
officer.
Senator DANIEL. Do you know what attempts have been made to
get him back for trial?
Mr. RICHARDS. I talked to the Federal district attorney in Nuevo
Laredo, and he is the one who informed me of the law of Mexico; any
Mexican citizen or American citizen of Latin American descent could
not be extradited.
Senator DANIEL. Do you know if this Omar Vela is engaged in
narcotics traffic?
Mr. RICHARDS. I don't know what he is doing.
Mr. GASQUE. The individual who drew the gun was a Mexican citizen ?
Mr. RICHARDS. American, of Latin descent.
Mexico, across from Del Rio. I believe he and his brother were two
of the largest smugglers of marihuana shipping it into Chicago that
we had in the Del Rio-Eagle Pass area. We have caught many, many
pounds of marihuana which they had their hanils in. At the time they
were brought up for questioning we couldn't get anything on them
and they were released. Later we found enough evidence to change
them and they escaped across to Mexico. We later apprehended one
of them. He is serving 5 years in the Federal penitentiary. The other
one is still a fugitive in Mexico.
Senator DANIEL. Are they American citizens?
Mr. RICHARDS. They are American citizens.
Senator DANIEL. All right, do you have any other cases of narcotic
violators who are wanted in this country but who are now across the
border in Mexico?
Mr. RICHARDS. I believe those are the only three outstanding ones
I have.
Senator
DANIEL.
RICHARDS.
I1II1
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
Senator
DANIEL.
TRAFFIC
2561
Senator DANIEL. Mr. Richards, do you feel that the Mexican authorities across the border there are doing their best to keep down
narcotic traffic and smuggling?
Mr. RICHARDS. I do not have too much dealings with the Mexican
authorities, the civil authorities. However, the Army has been cooperating very good with me, the officers of the Army, and the Army
now has out patrols up and down the Mexican side of the river to
try to prevent a certain amount of this smuggling, and the officers
in charge have been very cooperative.
Senator
DANIEL.
Mr.
RICHARDS.
Senator
That's correct.
DANIEL.
from Mexico.
Senator DANIEL. Well, now, do you have any other information
that you think will be helpful to this committee?
Mr.
RiCIArMS.
'2562
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Oh. I see.
Senator
DANIEL.
sentence?
Mr. RICHARDS.
That's correct.
Senator
DANIEL.
Mr.
RIcIARDS.
Yes, sir.
I1II1
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
TRAFFIC
2563
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
those cases there. I see 3 defendants here entered pleas of guilty, each
was given 6 months' sentence, suspended for a period of 5 years?
Mr. RICHARDS. That's correct.
Senator DANIEL. Was that for smuggling marihuana, too?
Mr. RICHARDS. Smuggling 18 , ounces of marijuana.
Senator DANIEL. The case of Louis Judge, of New Jersey, arrested
for 4 pounds of marihuana, and it seems he was given, sentenced to a
term of 18 months, suspended for a period of 5 years?
Mr. RICHARDS. That s correct.
Senator DANIEL. And he paid a $500 fine at the rate of $100 a
]flonth ?
Mr. RICHARDS. That's correct.
Senator DANIEL. Now, Mr. Richards, regarding these sentences, do
you think they are going to deter people from smuggling across that
border? In other words, frankly, what is your opinion about the sentences? I am sure, possibly there's something here that causes the
judges to give these low sentences and 1 am not saying it in criticism
of the judges. I am just asking you, if they slapped higher sentences
on these smugglers it would deter people from bringing drugs across
the border?
Mr. RICHARDS. I believe it would have effect on them, yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Generally, what about penalties in the district in
which you operate, are, they heavy or low?
Mkr. RIcHARDS. I would say that they are moderate.
Senator DANIEL. Moderate?
Mr. RichIiARDS. Yes, sir.
Mr. Speer shows ine another case in which a hundred pounds of crude marihuana contained in 4 burlap bags, 250 bags.
of boiler onions, and a 1954 2-ton truck were seized in the raid.
Senator
Mr.
DANIEL.
RICHARDS.
Yes, sir.
'2564
Senator
DANIEL.
Mr. RICHARDS.
Senator DANIEL. That was in March, this year?
Mr. RICHARDS. Yes, sir.
Mr.
RICHARDS.
Senator DANIEL. One was given 2 years in the penitentiary and fined
'$100 and the other sentenced to a term of 18 months and fined $100.
Well, have you ever looked to see how the sentences on narcotics cases
in your district compare with the sentences in the rest of the country?
Mr. RICHARDS. No; I haven't had any comparison, I couldn't tell
you.
Senator DANIEL. Would you have any recommendation to this committee other than what you have given us now?
Mr. RICHARDS. I believe that would have its effect because it would
make it a mandatory sentence of 5 years on second offense.
Senator DANIEL. In other words, do you think that it would help
to get the smuggling over under the Boggs Act which has it mandatory
of 5 years on the second offense?
Mr.
2565
Senator DANIEL. Oh, I see. In other words, you haven't been tapping any wires lately?
Mr. RiCHAIDS. Not lately.
Senator DANIEL. Is that what you mean?
Mr. RICHARDS. That's what I mean.
Senator DANIEL. When you were able to tap them, you found a lot
of information on narcotic traffic?
Mr. RICHARDS. That's correct. We made some very, very large
cases.
Senator DRNIEI.. And it slows you down a lot because under the
rulings of our courts, you could not use wiretapped evidence in
Federal courts?
Mr. RICHARDS. It even goes further, you cannot even wiretap, let
alone use the evidence. We very seldom, in fact, I don't know of a
customs case where they ever used the evidence or information in court,
but used the information to develop the case only.
Senator D. NiIEL. Well, if you will stay with us tomorrow so as to
'ive us any further information or suggestions you might have, we will
appreciate it.
(Following is the prepared statement submitted by Mr. Richards:)
TREASURY DEPARTMENT,
BUREAU OF CUSTOMS,
2566
Narcotic arrests and seizures, 1953, 1954, and 1955, Bureau of Customs,
Laredo, Tex.
FISCAL YEAR 1953
Arrests ........
Crude marihuana .........
Prepared marihuana-_
Marihuana cigarettes ...............
---------------------------------Heroin
107.
88 pounds 11 ounces.
639 pounds 101/ ounces.
160.
98
grams.
Arrests -...
Crude marihuana
Semiprepared marihuana ---------------------Prepared marihuana ......
Marihuana cigarettes---------------------------------Crude opium
Heroin
---------------------------------Codeine
---------------------------------
122.
345 pounds 7 ounces.
52 pounds % ounce.
335 pounds 1% ounces.
99.
17 ounces.
1 pound 6 ounces, 3 grams,
11 grains.
200 grains.
115.
293 pounds 9
ounces.
5 pounds 12 ounces.
468 pounds 9 ounces.
69.
18.50 grains.
10 ounces 24 grams, 10 grain&
(TO DATE)
32.
24 pounds.
55 pounds 8 ounces.
41.
2 ounces 29 grams, 8 grain&
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
TRAFFIC
2567
Noral Williams was given 2 years to serve on count 2; 2 years to serve on count
3, sentence under count 3 to begin at expiration of sentence under count 2.
Gertrude Young was sentenced to serve 18 months on counts 2 and 3, sentences
to run concurrently on count 3 with count 2. Laura Young was sentenced to 18
months to serve on counts 2 and 3, sentence on count 3 to run concurrent with
sentence on count 2. Rebecca Young Smalls was sentenced to 18 months to serve
on counts 2 and 3, sentence on count 3 to run concurrent with sentence on count 2.
L 6-868
On September 21, 1952, Jose Onesimo Gonzalez, Mexican alien residing in
Victoria, Mexico, was arrested approximately 20 miles north of Laredo, Tex.,
afer 93 pounds of prepared marihuana had been found concealed in a 1952 Buick
sedan which he was driving. Information had been received by customs agents
that Onesimo Gonzalez would receive this smuggled marihuana in Laredo, Tex.,
and transport it to Chicago, Ill. He was charged, indicted, and convicted for
violation of section 545, title 18 and 2593 (a), title 26, United States Code. He
was sentenced to serve a term of 2 years on count 1 and 5 years on count 2, both
sentences to run concurrently.
L 6-1081
On January 22, 1953, Juan Baez Gonzalez, Jr., Joel Fernandez, Juan Baoz,
Sr., Trinidad Gonzalez Baez, Concepcion Baez Gonzalez, and Guadalupe Soto
Serna were arrested approxiamtely 20 miles north of Laredo, Tex., after 115
pounds of prepared marihuana had been found concealed in 2 steel footlockers
in a 1937 model Hudson sedan being driven by Guadalupe Soto Serna with Joel
Fernandez as a passenger in the car. Information had been received by customs
agents that the above marihuana would be smuggled into the United States at
Laredo, Tex., and transported in the Hudson automobile to San Antonio where
it was to be transferred to a public carrier and shipped to Chicago, Ill. This
agent received further information that Juan Baoz, Sr. would assist in the smuggling of the marihuana into the United States and Juan Baez Gonzalez, Jr.,
Trinidad Gonzalez Baez and Concepcion Baez Gonzalez would accompany the
marihuana after it left San Antonio but would ride in a Travel Bureau car
between Laredo and San Antonio. These three persons were taken from the
Travel Bureau car at the time it passed the place the Hudson automobile had
been stopped and the marihuana found concealed therein. This case is interestin,, in view of the fact that Trinidad Gonzalez Baez was the sister of Onesimo
Gonzalez, mentioned in the previous listed case; Juan Baez, Jr. and Concepcion
Baez Gonzalez were niece and nephew of Onesimo Gonzalez. The case against
Joel Fernandez, Trinidad Gonzalez Baez, and Concepcion Baez Gonzalez was
dismissed on motion of the United States attorney. Juan Baoz, Sr., Juan Baoz
Gonzalez, Jr., and Guadalupe Soto Serna were tried before a jury and found
guilty as charged. Each of these defendants was sentenced to serve a term of
5 years on counts 1 and 2 of an indictment charging violation of section 545,
title 18 and 2593 (a), title 26, United States Code.
LE 6-11180
On June 1, 1953, Roberto Rodriguez and Daniel Vargas, both American citizens
and residents of Grand Rapids, Mich., were arrested at Eagle Pass, Tex., when
22 pounds of refined marihuana was found concealed in a 1950 Buick sedan
which was being driven by Rodriguez. Rodriguez, when questioned, admitted
that he had picked up Vargas in Chicago, Ill., brought him to Eagle Pass where
he had purchased 10 kilos of marihuana in Mexico, smuggled it across the international bridge at Eagle Pass and intended to return it to Grand Rapids, Mich.,
where he intended to smoke some of it and sell the rest. Each of the above
defendants entered a plea of guilty and was sentenced to serve a term of 2 years
and fined $1.
LS 6-1129
On March 8, 1955, customs inspectors, acting on previous information furnished
by customs agents, searched Pedro Rodriguez, 'United States citizen resident
of Sap Antonio, Tex., when he alighted from an American Airlines airplane
from Mexico City. Search of his person disclosed 1543.72 grains of heroin,
18.50 grains of opium, and 33.35 grains of marihuana concealed in his pockets.
This mnn had been the subject of an investigation by this office since July 6,
1953. Information was to the effect that Rodriguez, after successfully receiving
smuggled narcotics, would transport or have same transported to California
or New York.
This defendant entered a plea of guilty to 3 counts of an
2568
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
TRAFFIC
indictment and was sentenced by a Federal district judge in San Antonio to serve
5 years on count 1 and a $100 committed fine; 7 years on count 2, and a $100
committed fine and 7 years on count 3 with a $100 committed fine, counts 2 and
3 to run concurrently and consecutively to count 1.
LE 6-1138
On July 28, 1953, Vicente E. Mendoza, a resident of New York City, was arrested at the international bridge, Eagle Pass, Tex., when 50 pounds of refined
marihuana were found in a 1949 Buick Roadmaster sedan by customs inspectors who became suspicious of this man's actions when he was asked to declare
merchandise he had acquired in Mexico. This defendant entered a plea of guilty
in Federal district court in El Paso, Tex., and was sentenced to serve a term
of 3 years in Federal penitentiary.
LE 6-1153
On September 26, 1953, Gregorio Guzman and Higinio Galvan, American citizens and residents of Eagle Pass, Tex., were arrested on U. S. 90 near Cline,
Tex., when they attempted to pick up 72 pounds of refined marihuana contained
in 3 suitcases which had been concealed in the brush near the highway. These
men were arrested by United States immigration border patrol inspectors who
had received information from a railroad station agent that two Mexican men
had purchased two tickets to travel on the railroad from Cline, Tex., to Chicago, Ill. They were further advised that the two men who had purchased the
tickets had made the same trip several days before. Acting on this information, Alfredo Menchaca, Armando Menchaca, and Gregorio Guzman wore picked
up and questioned by border patrol inspectors. However, they were later
released and the border patrol and customs agents instigated a systematic
search of the highway leading into Cline to attempt to locate the 3 suitcases
these 3 men had in their possession at the time they purchased their tickets.
On September 26, 1953, the border patrol followed all tracks indicated that a
car had pulled off the highway. At 10: 30 a. m., at a point about 1/ miles west
of Cline, they found tracks showing that a car had pulled off the highway. From
there they followed footprints about 30 yards from the highway and found 3
suitcases. Examination of these 3 suitcases revealed that they were filled with
1-pound packages of marihuana.
Border patrol officers watched this point until approximately 4 p. m., at which
time Higinio Galvan alighted from the car and almost immediately saw the
officers. He was taken into custody and, along with the suitcases, taken to
Cline, Tex., where a witness identified the suitcases as those taken off the bus
by Gregorio Guzman on September 24, 1953. This witness also identified Higinio
Galvan as the man who had delivered the three suitcases to the Men.haca
brothers on a previous occasion during the first week of August 1953. Galvan
later admitted that Alfredo and Armando Menchaca had hired him to haul the
suitcases to San Antonio. Higinio Galvan and Gregorio Guzman were arrested.
However, Alfredo and Armando Menchaca escaped to Mexico before they could
be apprehended. Warrants were issued for their arrest. Subsequent to that
date, Alfredo Menchaca was arrested and has since entered a plea of guilty and
was sentenced to a term of 5 years and fined $100. HLginio Galvan was tried
before a jury in Del Rio, Tex., and found guilty on October 28, 1954, and was sentenced to serve a term of 2 years. Guzman was sentenced to serve 3 years in
Federal penitentiary. Armando Menchaca is still a fugitive living in Villa Acnna, Mexico.
L 6-1171
On February 12, 1954, 83 pounds of manicured marihuana was seized in New
York City after the trunk containing this marihuana had been followed from
Laredo, Tex., to New York City by a customs agent. As a result of the seizure
in New York City, Stanley Halprin and Martin Snyder, residents of New York
City, were arrested. In addition to these two defendants, Jose Daniel Guerrero
Ruiz, and Oscar Frans Toren, residents of Laredo, Tex., were arrested. This
case had been under investigation for quite a period of time and through surveillance on the part of customs agents, they were able to determine when the trunk
containing the marihuana was shipped by railway express from Laredo to New
York.
As a result of these arrests, Oscar Frans Toren and Jose Daniel Guerrero
Ruiz entered a plea of not guilty and stood trial In Federal District Court for
the Southern District of Texas in Laredo. Stanley Halprin and Martin Snyder
both entered pleas of guilty before a Federal district judge in Laredo. Halprin
2569
was sentenced to 2 years imprisonment and fined $100. Snyder was sentenced
to 3 years imprisonment and fined $100. Jose Daniel Guerrero Ruiz was found
guilty by a jury and was sentenced to a term of 8 years due to the fact that he.
had a previous narcotic conviction. However, this 8-year term was reduced
by the Federal district judge to a term of 5 years. Oscar Frans Toren was
found guilty by a jury and sentenced to a 3-year suspended sentence.
L 6-1180
On February 1, 1954, Arkansas State police arrested Waver Louise Ellison
and Richard Eldridge, both of Cleveland, Ohio, at Hope, Ark., while in possession
of 22 pounds of crude marihuana. This arrest was made as a result of an all
points lookout which the customs agents had placed for these defendants and
their automobile after they had succeeded in out-running customs agents in a
dense fog at approximately 5 a. m. on February 1, 1954, near Sinton, Tex. An
investigation had been conducted over a period of approximately 6 months relative to the activities of Vicento Garcia of Beeville, Tex., who was reported to be
smuggling marihuana into the United States and selling it to Negroes from Cleveland, Ohio. As a result of the investigation conducted, in addition to Richard
Eldridge and Waver Louise Ellison, Vicente Garcia, his wife Rosemary Garcia
and his brother Jesus Victoriano Garcia were arrested. At the time of trial,
Vicente Garcia failed to appear and is now a fugitive in Mexico. His wife
Rosemary Garcia was found not guilty and the court, on motion of defense
counsel, dismissed the case against Jesus Victoriano Garcia. At that time Jesus
Victoriano Garcia was under a sentence of 13 months for smuggling a quantity
of marihuana into the United States at Laredo. Richard Eldridge received a
sentence of 5 years and Waver Louise Ellison received a sentence of 2 years,
on December 1, 1954.
L 6-1246
On September 19, 1954, Jesus Andrade Diaz, a citizen of Mexico, was arrested
at Roma, Tex., after a suitcase which he had in his possession was found to contain approximately 30 pounds of prepared marihuana. This defendant had just
purchased a ticket to Chicago, Ill., and when questioned stated he knew
nothing about the marihuana contained in the suitcase but that a stranger,
upon learning he was proceeding to Chicago, requested him to carry the suitcase from Roma to that city. Later, however, upon being questioned by customs
agents, he stated that he had purchased the marihuana in Mexico, manicured it
and smuggled it into the United States across the river and was transporting it to
Chicago, Ill. On November 12, 1954, this prisoner entered a plea of guilty in
Federal district court in Brownsville, Tex., where he was sentenced to a teri
of 5 years and fined $10.
LE 6-1304
On February 1, 1955, acting on confidential information, customs agents seized
48 pounds of manicured marihuana at a railroad station in Del Rio, Tex. Information had been received that a suitcase and trunk locker had been checked
to Gary, Ind., by an unknown man who had purchased a ticket for that city.
Surveillance was maintained at the depot. However, the man did not depart
on the train on which the baggage containing the marihuana was supposed to
have left Del Rio. Surveillance was continued and on the following train leaving Del Rio, the man who was later identified as the person who checked the
baggage, was picked up and questioned. This man identified himself as Federice
Sotelo and readily admitted that he had checked the suitcase and trunk locker
at the railroad station the previous day. A search of his person disclosed
two baggage checks bearing the claim check numbers of those attached to the
suitcase and trunk locker. Further investigation by customs agents established
the fact that Efrain Arredondo was implicated in the shipment of this marihuana. Further, that the marihuana was to go to a Victoria Flores, 7400
Sowers Street, Gary, Ind.
The two men were arrested, indicted, and the defendant Sotelo entered a plea
of gulity and agreed to testify for the Government, which he did. He was given
a two-year suspended sentence and placed on probation for a period of two years.
Defendant Efrain Arrendondo entered a plea of not guilty. However, in the
middle of his trial, after the Government had presented its evidence, he changed
his plea to guilty and was sentenced to serve a term of 2 years in a Federal
institution.
2570
L 6-1309
On February 9, 1955, Raymond John Koren, United States citizen and resident
-of Ilialeah Park, Fla., was arrested at the international bridge with 27 pounds,
4 ounces of bulk marihuana, which were found concealed under the hood of a
1949 Oldsmobile sedan bearing a Florida license. Koren admitted purchasing the
marihuana in Nuevo Laredo and stated that he intended to take the same to
Florida if he had been successful in smuggling it into the United States. This
man entered a plea of guilty to violation of section 545, title 18, United States
Code, and was sentenced to a term of 2 years which was suspended for a period
of 5 years.
L 6-1331
Information was received by a customs agent on March 24, 1955, that what was
believed to be a quantity of marihuana was being transported by two women,
later identified as Petrona Soto Allende and Belen Garcia Athio. Customs agents
followed the travel bureau automobile that was to take these two women to New
York to a point north of Laredo where one of the agents was able to establish
the fact that the baggage being transported by the women contained marihuana.
Authority was granted for this agent to continue on to New York in the travel
bureau car acting as an assistant driver. On arrival in New York on March 27,
1955, the two women alighted from the travel bureau car and were arrested by
New York customs agents and approximately 63 pounds of marihuana was found
in their baggage. These women were to be tried in New York. In addition to the
two women, Fidencio Garcia Benavides, a Mexican citizen and resident of Nuevo
Laredo, Mexico, was arrested as a coconspirator in this case and on September
16, 1955, he was sentenced to serve 6 years in a Federal penitentiary.
L 6-1358
On March 17, 1955, customs agents received confidential information that
there would be a quantity of marihuana smuggled across the Rio Grande River
at Laredo, Tex., and delivered to an out-of-State truck. Surveillance was maintained at the point where the smuggling was supposed to take place and when
the truck bearing Idaho license made contact with unknown persons near the
point where the information indicated the marihuana would be smuggled and
departed, the truck was followed, stopped, searched and 100 pounds of crude marihuana contained in four burlap bags, 250 bags of boiler onions and a 1954 Chevrolet 2-ton truck were seized. The two men in the truck who were arrested,
identified themselves as Pedro Garza Gallardo and Rodolfo Estrada. The marihuana seized was destined for Los Angeles, Calif. Both men entered pleas of
not guilty and requested a jury trial, at the conclusion of which they were found
guilty and Gallardo was sentenced to a term of 2 years in a Federal penitentiary
and fined $1. Estrada was sentenced to a term of 18 months in a Federal penitentiary and fined $1.
L 6-1366
On the morning of June 14, 1955, information was received that a man driving
an automobile bearing Illinois license, had been in Nuevo Laredo, Mexico, inquiring about the purchase of marihuana. This car was placed under surveillance until the afternoon of June 15 when after tailing the car to the outskirts
of Laredo, it was stopped and searched and 8 pounds of crude marihnana was
found concealed under the hood of the automobile. The man driving the Illinois
automobile was identified as Gordon William LeBarge, a resident of Chicago.
Further investigation by customs agents disclosed that Miguel Perez Valdoz
and Jorge Abed Vargas, both citizens of Mexico and residents of Nuevo Laredo,
Mexico, had delivered the marihuana to LeBarge. LeBarge stated that he was
going to take this marihuana to Chicago. On June 23, 1955, when arraigned
before a Federal district judge for the southern judicial district of Texas at
Laredo, LeBarge entered a plea of guilty to violation of section 545, title 18,
United States Code and was sentenced to serve a term of 1 year in a Federal
penitentiary.
Defendant Miguel Perez Valdez, when arraigned in Federal district court,
entered a plea of guilty and was sentenced to 2 years, suspended for 5, provided
his fingerprint record showed no previous criminal record. However, this was
reduced to 6 months to serve when it was found that Valdez had been arrested
in Edinburg, Tex., as a juvenile delinquent. Jorge Abed Vargas entered a plea of
guilty and was sentenced to 2 years suspended for a period of 5 years.
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
TRAFFIC
2571
LE 6-1876
On August 6, 1955, Louis Pulos and Joseph Robin Hood, both residents of the
State of New York, were arrested when a search of their automobile at the International Bridge at Laredo, Tex., disclosed that it contained 26 paper packages containing approximately 161 pounds of crude marihuana. The marihuana was
found concealed in the door panels of the automobile which belonged to Pulos.
When questioned, Pulos admitted he had purchased the marihuana in Monterrey,
Nuevo Laredo, Mexico, and that Joseph Robin Hood had no knowledge of its
being concealed in the automobile at the time they entered the United States at
Laredo. The case against Hood was dismissed on the motion of the United States
attorney. Pulos was sentenced to serve a term of 9 months in a Federal penitentiary.
At the present time, there are three fugitives in Mexico who are wanted by
this service for the smuggling of marihuana, which this office considers major
violators. Vicente Garcia, who was arrested February 21, 1954, and released
on a $2,500 bond, was indicted but failed to put in an appearance at the time
of his trial in Corpus Christi, Tex. A fugitive warrant was issued by a Federal
district judge and bond in the amount of $5,000 was set on this warrant. Information has now been received by this office that Vicente Garcia is operating a tavern in Reynosa, Tamaulipas, Mexico, just across the international
border from Ilidalgo, Tex. Vicente Garcia is one of the principals in the
case described earlier under our file L 6-1180 which involved two Negroes from
Cleveland, Ohio.
Armando Mencha-ca, an American citizen formerly a resident of Eagle Pass,
Tex., is a fugitive now living in Villa Acuna, Mexico. He was the principal
in the case described eariler in our case LE 6-1153. This case involved the
seizure of 72 pounds of manicured marihuana in Cline, Tex., on September 26,
1953. The Menchaca twins, Alfredo and Armando, have been big time marihuana dealers for a number of years in the Eagle Pass-Del Rio area. A
third brother escaped from La Tuna Federal correctional institution by stealing a Government truck and driving to Mexico. He is at the present time residing in Villa Acuna, Mexico.
On August 31, 1954, an automobile driven by Francisco Omar Vela entered
the United States across the International Bridge at Laredo, Tex. This automobile was stopped for searching. When the inspector who was searching
the automobile lifted the hood, he observed a sack laying on top of the motor.
When he started to question Vela about the sack, Vela drew a gun on the inspector and made his escape back to Mexico across the International Bridge.
Vela was arrested by Mexican soldiers on the Mexican side of the river and
taken to the military garrison for further questioning and later turned over to
the Mexican Federal district attorney for prosecution. It has been learned
that all charges against this man were dismissed. He is still a fugitive residing in Nuevo Laredo, Mexico.
Mr. Lee Spear, investigator for your committee, requested that I list certain
cases where marihuana had been smuggled from the Republic of Mexico and the
smugglers apprehended in the United States where only section 545, title 18,
United States Code, which is the smuggling statute, was used in the prosecution
of the criminal aspects of the case. In all cases where marihuana is acquired in
Mexico and smuggled into the United States and no transfer of the marihuana
is made between the smuggler and other persons in the United States, only
section 545, title 18, United States Code, is used in the indictment in this area.
I have been advised that this was due to a California court ruling that held that
a person smuggling marihuana into the United States is not an importer and
that unless a transfer actually takes place in the United States, the smuggler
would not be liable under the provisions of the marihuana tax laws. The follow71515-56-pt. 7-
15
2572
ing are a few representative cases in which marihuana was seized in the United
States from smugglers where section 545, title 18, United States Code, was the
only criminal section used in the prosecuttion.
L 6-1311
On February 12, 1955, Henry Leon Mallory, Chicago, Ill., Marilyn Grant and
Tonia Grant, New York City, were arrested when they entered the United States
across the international bridge at Laredo, Tex., after 1812 ounces of refined
marihuana and 7 marihuana cigarettes were found in their possession. These
three defendants were charged by customs agents before the United States
commissioner with violation of criminal sections 545, title 18 and 2593 (a), title
26 (sec. 2593 (a), title 26 at that time was what is now sec. 4744, title 26). The
indictment in this case, however, only charged violation of section 545, title 18,
United States Code. The three defendants entered a plea of guilty and each was
given a 6 months sentence suspended for a period of 5 years.
L 6-1328
On March 10, 1955, Louis Judge, Camden, N. J., was arrested at the international bridge, Laredo, Tex., after his automobile had been searched and 4
pounds of semirefined marihuana pressed in brick form was found concealed
behind the door panels of a 1947 Buick automobile he was driving. This man
was charged with violation of section 545, title 18 and section 2593 (a), title 26,
United States Code, by the customs agent before the United States commissioner.
The indictment in this case, however, only charged violation of section 545, title
18, United States Code. On September 6, 1955, this man was sentenced to a term
of 18 months, which was suspended for a period of 5 years and fined $500, payable
at the rate of $100 month.
L 6-1407
On August 6, 1955, Louis Pulos, New York City, was arrested after he had
entered the United States driving a 1954 Dodge and a search of this automobile
disclosed 26 paper packages containing approximately 161/2 pounds of crude
marihuana concealed behind the door panels. This man was charged by customs
agents before the United States commissioner with violation of criminal sections
545, title 18 and 4744, title 26, United States Code. Indictment against this man,
however, only charged violation of section 545, title 18, United States Code. This
man entered a plea of guilty on September 19, 1955 and was sentenced to a term
of 9 months confinement.
L 6-1418
On September 4, 1955, Walter Henry Farrier, Boston, Mass., was arrested after
approximately 2 pounds of prepared marihuana had been found concealed in an
automobile he was driving after he had returned from the Republic of Mexico
and was proceeding toward San Antonio, Tex., out of Laredo, Tex. This man
was charged with violation of section 545, title 18 and 4744, title 26, United States
Code. The indictment, however, only charged this man with violation of section
545, title 18, United States Code. On a plea of guilty, Farrier was sentenced on
September 19, 1955, to serve a term of 9 months.
Very truly yours,
A. D. RICHARDS,
Customs Agent in Charge.
MURPHY.
I I I I
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
TRAFFIC
2573
sonal contact.
Senator DANIEL. I wonder if you could leave the cards with the
committee overnight?
Mr. MURPHY. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. And we would like to talk with you about them,
too, so we might go over those cards. I understand we have some of
those people subpenaed here to appear here tomorrow?
Mr. MURPHY. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. And if you will let us have those cards we will
appreciate it.
Mr. MURPHY. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. If YOU will just stand aside until tomorrow mornig we will come back to you in the morning. The committee will
stand adjourned until 10 o'clock tomorrow morning.
(Whereupon at 5 p. m. the subcommittee recessed to reconvene at
10 a. m., October 14, 1955.)
I I I I
SUBCOMMITTEE ON IMrROVEMENTS
IN
Yesterday you gave us the cards that you keep, at Laredo, on known
narcotic addicts and their associates who are crossing the bridge.
That is correct.
Senator DANIEL. Now, I am not sure that we gave for the record
Mr. MURPIxy.
on the bridge?
2576
Senator DANIEL. Is there someone there at all times who is supposed to check those who come and go across the bridge at Laredo,
Mr. MURPHY. Well, all inspectors are, however, we rotate shifts, but
all the inspectors are supposed to do that same type of work.
Senator DANIEL. How many are there at all times?
Mr. MURPHY. Well, you mean how many men do we have?
Senator DANIEL. How many inspectors would you say are on duty
day and night there on the bridge at Laredo? One at a time, or two
at a time?
Mr. MURPHY. No, sir, for a 24-hour period I would say that there
is probably 20 or 22 on duty during the week. On Sundays and holidays that force is reduced to about 11 or 12.
Senator DANIEL. Do you always have someone on duty, at least one
or at least two insp ectors ?
Mr. MURPHY. Xes, sir, never less than two on duty. On midnight
until 8 in the morning, we have two inspectors, one northbound cominm in and one southbound, that is the least traffic.
enator DANIEL. You have less on weekends?
Mr. MURPHY. We have more on the weekends.
Senator DANIEL. On Sundays and Saturdays?
Mr. MURPHY. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Is your force reduced?
Mr. MURPHY. On Sundays, that is because that is an overtime day
and we are on a separate schedule on that day, on any Sunday or holiday, and we have reduced the force on those days.
Senator DANIEL. Although you have more traffic on Sundays?
Mr. MURPHY. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Is that a matter of money that causes you to reduce
your force on Sundays?
Mr. MURPHY. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Because it is an overtime day?
Mr. MurPiHY. Yes, sir; that is it.
Senator
DANIEL.
We have a regu-
Senator DAmEL. And from your own personal viewpoint; the committee understands it will not be necessarily the viewpoint of your
agency
?
Mr. MUPIY.
Yes, sir. Well, I am sure, as Mr. Richards
said, that
2577
Senator DANIEL. You say, yes, sir. Do you mean you do not have
enough to adequately do the job on Sunday?
Mr. MuPHY. That is correct.
Senator BUTLER. That is the time when there is the heaviest traffic
across the bridge?
Mr. MURPHY. That's right.
Senator DANIEL. All right, do you have any recommendations other
than more personnel there on Sunday?
Mr. MURPHY. None that I can think of; that is, outside of our local
problems, more concentration on this particular problem, and so forth,
possibly more training.
Senator DANIEL. During the 9 years you have been there, have you
had occasion to find niarihuana, heroin, and other drugs on people
who came from the Mexican side of the border?
Mr. MURPHY. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. From what you have seen of the traffic across the
bridge, is it your opinion that most of the marihuana that you have
seen stopped there at the bridge is destined for Texas or for other
States?
Mr. MURPHY. Well, I believe the larger amounts are probably destined for other places. The small stuff, where they bring 2 or 3
cigarettes, something like that, is probably for their own use.
Senator DANIEL. What about the heroin? Where do you find that
the people who have been arrested seem to be going with that?
Mr. MURPHY. Well, of course, I am not qualified as well as some of
the others to speak on that. A lot of your seizures on the bridge
amount to quite small amounts. Therefore, that would indicate that
the problem is not destined for outside the State.
Senator DANIEL. Now, I hand back to you your card system here
and ask you to be sure that we have for the record the date you started
Senator DANIEL. In other words, all of the card system that you
have now on the subject consists of the addicts recognized by you or
someone else on the bridge?
Mr. MURPHY. Well, of course our agents oftentimes tell us to be on
the lookout for certain addicts, certain type of driver of cars, but all
these cards are derived from people who were given personal searches
from inspectors on the bridge and were recognized.
Senator DANIEL. It includes also those people who might be accompanying addicts across the border?
Mr. MURPHY. That's correct. In other words, this file is not completely addicts, it is people who are accompanying addicts and who
I1II1
2578
naturally are good suspects in case we see them later on we can refer
back and find that a person was in the company of a well-fnown addict.
Senator DANIEL. Do you agree with Mr. Richards that most of these
addicts bring drugs back with them, or have the drugs brought back
across the border and pick them up?
Mr. MuRPiy. I am sure that many of them do; yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. What is your feeling about the proposal that was
made yesterday that we have a law that would prevent addicts from
crossing the borders of this country leaving the country?
Mr. MURPHY. That would be a step. Sometimes it is often hard to
recognize addicts, it is not just as easy as that. If they have long sleeve
shirts, etc., and have not been on it too long, and are apparently in good
health, it is pretty hard to tell. I am sure we don't tell all of them.
Senator DANIEL. I am sure of that, too, and Mr. Richards so testified
yesterday. But you can recognize, I believe he said an average of at
least 10 a day. Would you think that there is at least 10 a day who
are recognized addicts crossing the bridge?
Mr. MURPHIY. Well, possibly between Mr. Richards' organization
and the inspectional force they probably could recognize 10 a day.
Senator DANIEL. How many addicts do you have in your files
there?
ent addicts in here; that doesn't count the repeat records where male
addicts have made quite a few trips.
Senator BUTLER. There are persons who are well-known addicts, in
other words, persons whose names are in there, and you know them
to be addicts ?
Mr. MURPHY. They are persons we have given personal searches
to, who either admitted being addicts or had complete markings on
them which indicated they were.
Senator BUTLER. In other words, when a man gets in there, you are
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
TRAFFIC
2579
MUPHY.
2580
Senator DANIEL. And if Congress authorized you to make photographs and fingerprints of these addicts that would certainly improve
your records ?
Mr. MURPHY.
have suggested the filling out of a form on these addicts and we decided
to keep the cards from them. I am not sure of that.
Senator DANIEL. Now, then, do you keep any records of returns,
do you have any records which would show whether or not this individual returned, made subsequent trips?
Mr. MURPHY. Yes. sir; if he was given another personal search there
Mr.
MURPHY.
2581
Senator BUTLER. How long has he been the janitor out here at the
high school?
Mr. MURPHY. I don't know, I don't know if he is still the janitor.
Senator BUTLER. I think that would be a pretty sensitive spot for a
man dealing in narcotics.
Mr. MURPHY. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Mr. Murphy, do you put on these records anywhere, where the person was born?
Mr. MURPHY. No,
sir.
this individual had crossed the border more than once; this record
was a personal search made December 2,1954?
Mr. MURPHY. Yes, sir. If he was to cross again and he was taken
inside and given a personal search then there would be another card
filled out on this particular individual. The reason, because it helps
us to know how many times they are coming down to the border, and
so forth, because it might influence you on your followup. In other
words, if you find 6 or 8 cards in here on an individual that had been
coming to the border very regularly you would probably think more
about having him taken to a doctor or something like that to see if any
narcotics could be found on him.
Senator DANIEL. Do you keep cards only when you make personal
searches ?
Mr. MURPHY. Yes, sir.
2582
Senator
DANIEL.
Mr. MURPHY.
going to Mexico would be for the violation of the national traffic in
arms, something like that.
Senator
DANIEL.
particular Ignacio Orosco, Jr., had made more than the one trip in
December 1954?
Mr. MURPHY. No, sir; that is the only record I have on it.
Senator
DANIEL.
individual?
Mr. MURPHY. Yes, sir.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
Nathan Hubbard.
Senator
DANIEL.
Mr. MURPHY.
1505 Sam Rankin, Corpus Christi, Tex. That's the only two ad
dresses, 1505 Sam Rankin. Corpus Christi, and one in Port Lavaca.
Senator
DANIEL.
records how many times do the records show this man has been
searched coming back from Mexico?
11111111
2583
Mr.
he is pretty regular, one of them is dated September 30, 1955, September 21, 1955, September 4, 1955, September 2, 1955, August 27, 1955,
August 23, 1955, August 9, 1955, June 8, 1955, and April 1955. That
shows he is pretty consistent in crossing.
Senator DANIEL. I think those dates speak for themselves.
Is
there any other information there that you wish to call to the committee's attention on that particular case ?
Mr. MURPHY. I believe that I would have to check the cards, but
I believe that in some of these cases he was also accompanied by other
addicts that we have other cards on also. In other words, he didn't
always come alone, he came with other addicts at times, I believe.
Senator DANIEL. All right, do you have a person by the name of
Jerry James Adams?
Mr. MURFi-Y. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Will you please look at your cards to see if you
have evidence there that would indicate there is no question about
him having been an addict?
Mr. MunPHY. According to one of the cards, he said he had a shot
on the day before; he had served time for burglary and each one of
them states that he is an addict, each card.
Senator DANIEL. By his own admission?
Mr. MURPHY. It doesn't say, it states a definite fact: He is an addict.
Senator DANIEL. All right, where is this man from?
Mr. MURPHY. Jerry James Adams?
Senator DANIEL. Jerry James Adams.
Mr. MURPHY. Yes, sir. 181/ North Hutcherson, Houston, Tex.
That is the address we have listed for him.
Senator DANIEL. And on what dates did he cross?
Mr. MURPHY. We have cards for August 21, 1955, August 10,
1955, May 5, 1955, March 19, 1955, and February 5, 1955.
Senator DANIEL. Was he accompanied by anyone?
Mr. MURPHY. He arrived with Richard Clinton Brown, one of
the addicts on the card.
Senator DANIEL. What date was that?
Mr. MURPHY. On August 10, 1955. Another time he was accompanied by a man by the name; you want me to give these names?
Senator DANIEL. Yes.
Mr. MURPHY. James Broussard, which we have listed as an addict,
and also accompanied by a man by the name of Glenn Hawthorne.
Senator DANIEL. How do you spell that?
Mr. MURPHY. H-a-w-t-h-o-r-n-e. It doesn't state whether that man
was an addict or not.
Senator DANIEL. On what date?
Mr. MURPHY. That was in February 1955, February 5.
Senator DANIEL. Do you have any way of knowing whether any of
these people crossed over the border at some other bridge at intervening
periods?
Mr. MURPHY. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Do you know whether or not these records are being
kept at the other bridges along the Rio Grande?
2584
templated starting that but to date there has been no exchange between
our office and the other ports within our districts.
Senator DANIEL. No telling how many times these same people have
crossed some other bridge on intervening dates?
Mr. MURPHY. That's correct. In other words, if we perhaps give
them several personal searches, maybe they get scared or somethingof
this sort; we have no way of knowing to my knowledge whether they
cross at other ports or not.
Senator DANIEL. I am going to give you these other names on paper
so you can check to see what evidence you have on them before we go
into them. Suppose Mr. Speer does that while you stand aside and
we hear another witness. Senator Butler, do you have any further
questions until we go into some of these other cards?
Senator BUTLER. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. I will ask our investigator, Mr. Speer to confer
with the witness, listing these other names that might be inquired about
so that you will eliminate any on which there is any question about
the person being an addict.
Mr. MURPHY. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Is Ignacio Orosco, Jr. in the room? Come forward.
(Ignacio Orosco, Jr., was duly sworn.)
Senator DANIEL. State your name.
TESTIMONY OF IGNACIO OROSCO, JR.
Mr. OROSCO. Ignacio Orosco, Jr.
Senator DANIEL. Are you the same person that Mr. Murphy was just
testifying about?
Mr. OROSCO. Yes, sir.
Senator
2,1954?
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
I I I
2585
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Mr. ORosco. No, sir, I sold one that I had found in my taxicab while
I was driving a taxicab and I sold it to a colored man.
Senator
DANIEL.
man?
Mr. ORosco. Yes, sir.
Senator
DANIEL.
2586
24, 1952.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator DANIEL. After you got out of prison were you off of
narcotics or did you go back to using them?
Mr. ORosco. No, sir, I didn't. I was off.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
Senator DANIEL. After you went to prison and got out you came
back and got a job in September 1954 with the Burbank High School?
Mr. ORosco. No, sir, I got a job with the book department first.
And I put in my application as a janitor, as a custodian, and then I
was called, I was laid off from the book department and a week or two
later I was called as a janitor and I was assigned to Burbank High
School.
Senator DANIEL. And you worked there how long; do you remember the day you were discharged?
Mr. ORosco. No, sir; I don't.
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
TRAFFIC
2587
Senator DANIEL. Well, on this trip you made across the border
December 2, 1954, you were coming back to Texas that day; were you
not?
Mr. ORosco. Yes, sir.
Senator
DANIEL.
sir.
Senator DANIEL. NOW, did you tell those who searched you, Mr.
Murphy and the other man there, that you had taken some heroin the
day before in Mexico?
Mr. ORosco. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Did you tell him that you were a joy popper?
Mr. ORosco. Well, not exactly in them words, but I did mean that.
Senator DANIEL. What did you tell him?
Mr. OROSCO. I told him that I took some once in a while.
Senator DANIEL. And you told him you had had some heroin the
day before in Mexico?
Mr. OROSCO. Yes, sir.
Senator
DANIEL.
Mexico?
Mr. OROSco. No, sir.
Senator
DANIEL.
Mr. Onosco. Well, I had to go into, it was a taxi driver and ask him
and he took me to one place and they told him that they didn't have
anything that they, they didn't sell anything there, so then he took
me to another house and I got some there.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
2588
Senator DANIEL. After you became addicted to heroin, did you ever
cross the border any more?
Mr. Orosco. No, sir, I don't think so.
Mr. GASQUE. During the period that you worked at the school, did
you ever use heroin or marihuana?
Mr. ORosco. I never did mess with that while I was working for
the school board.
Senator DANIEL. Now I want to be sure that we have the records
straight. You understand that you are under oath?
Mr. ORosco. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Do you know the penalty if you give us an untrue
answer?
Mr. ORosco. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Even if you do it by mistake, do you know?
Mr. ORosco. Well, I am trying my best to answer.
Senator DANIEL. I know you are, I just wanted to point this fact
out to you.
Mr. ORosco. Yes, sir.
Senator
BUTLER.
Mr. ORosco. Well, I used it when, of course, I got some days off
fTom Burbank, you see that is when I went across the border in Mex-
ico, see, but I got that shot over there not while I was working.
Senator DANIEL. Yes, but you came back to work?
Mr. ORosco. Well, not right away.
111111111
2589
Senator DANIEL. How long did you stay over there in Mexico?
Mr. O.Rosco. In Mexico I stayed for 1 day, stayed that night and the
next day we came over.
Senator DANIEL. And did you report back to work the next day?
Mr. ORosco. No, sir, I didn't.
Senator DANIEL. How long was it before you went back to work
at Burbank?
Mr. ORosco. Well, it was about a month, I guess, 3 weeks at least.
Senator DANIEL. I believe the records show you were discharged
December 15. It isn't important, the only thing is that you did go
back to work after you had used the heroin in Mexico?
Mr. ORosco. I did for about 3 days until that letter got in from the
customs agents that I had been over there.
Senator DANIEL. Then the school authorities discharged you?
Mr. OROSCO. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Because of the fact that you were an addict?
Mr. OROSCO. Well, not necessarily on that, for that.
Senator
DANEI,.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Produce business?
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
are not required to give an answer that might incriminate you; you
understand that?
Mr. ORosco. Yes, sir, I understand that.
answer a question because you fear it might incriminate you; you understand that?
Mr. OROSCO. Yes, sir, I understand that.
Senator DANIEL. Have you bought any heroin in San Antonio since
you were discharged from the school?
Mr. ORosco. Well, not directly.
Senator DANIEL. Well, indirectly?
Mr. ORosco. I have sent for some.
Senator DA\NIEL. You have sent for some?
Mr. ORosco. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. What do you have to pay for it?
2590
Senator
get it.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
I I I I
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
TRAFFIC
2591
Mr. ORosco.
Mr. GASQuE.
Mr. ORosco.
house.
Mr. GASQut.
Mr. ORosCo.
Mr. GASQUE.
Mr. ORosCo.
Yes, sir.
And came to your house?
No, I met him on the street but I brought him to my
Mr. GASQUE.
Mr. ORosco.
Mr. GASQtE.
Mr. OROsco.
Mr. GASQUE.
Mr. Oi~osco.
Mr. GASQUE. Do you have any idea where he got his heroin from?
you have made at least some of the purchases of this heroin, and we
are not going to ask you to go into that. I will say for the record
that the information was not gained from you and so, therefore, we
are not going to ask you to name these places that you buy your
heroin. The only final question I want to ask you is, do you know
where you could go and get this heroin after ou leave this courtroom, do you know how you could get some? How long do you think
it would take you to get some heroin today in San Antonio?
Mr. ORosco. Arell, it could be quick and again it could take a long
time, I don't know, sir.
Senator DANIEL. You have gotten it pretty quickly at times?
2592
Senator DANIEL. Without naming the places, you know where you
can send to get it today or tomorrow, or at least where you could have
done it yesterday or the day before; don't you?
Mr. ORosco. I don't know about that.
Senator DANIEL. Well, I am going to ask you that question over
again and I am not going to ask you to name the places, do you understand
Mr. ORosco. Yes, sir.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator DANIEL. But you know where you could have gone to get
some heroin, where you could have done it day before yesterday or last
week; don't you?
Mr. ORosco. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. You know?
Mr. ORosco. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. And there is more than one place; isn't that right ?
Mr. ORosco. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. All right, that is all.
Mr. MURPHY. Yes, sir; in other words, in our opinion, they are con-
We have two cards on this individual, one dated Auguiist 21, one
August 10 given.
Senator DANIEL. Of what year?
Mr. MuRPHY. 1955. On August 10, he, according to this card,
arrived on foot accompanied by another addict by the na:me of Adams
whom we talked about a few minutes ago. Nothing was- found on lhim
and it states he is an addict. On the 21st of August lhe was given a
search by two other inspectors, nothing was found at that time but he
was recognized by one of the inspectors as having been through the
week prior when at that time he was apparently under the influence of
narcotics. After the personal search in a 1949 Mercury sedan, it was
thoroughly searched, 32 marihuana seeds, 6 hulls were found by the
inspectors and the customs agents were called, of course, at that time
and they conducted an investigation on it.
Senator DANIEL. Have charges been filed on this individual?
Mr. MuRPHY. I believe so but I am not sure. Mr. Richards can tell
you about. that I am sure. As I say, we called the customs agents and
2593
they investigated from there on, prepared their cases and everything.
Senator DANIEL. All right now, the next one.
Mr. MURPHY. Charles A. Mikiski, 6805 Lozier, Houston, Tex. We
have cards on him on two different dates, one May 19, 1955, one May
8, 1955. No contraband was found at either time but on the card dated
May 8, he was accompanied by James Broussard, who we also have
listed as an addict and on May 19 he was accompanied by a man named
Glenn Hawthorne; it doesn't say whether he was an addict or not.
That is all we have on him.
Senator DANIEL. All right.
Mr. MURPHY. We have a card on Leo Bustamante, 214 South Pine,
with a notation also, 1331 South Comal, San Antonio, Tex. Arrived
from Mexico accompanied by an individual by the name of Silvester G.
Sanchez. He was given a personal search, nothing was found but the
notation is here that he is an addict. We also have a card on this
Silvester Garcia Sanchez, 3139 West Popular, San Antonio, Tex., with
a cross reference that he was accompanied by Leo Bustamante. He
was given a personal search by inspectors, nothing was found. Here
is a little bit of a description of him, in other words, he is tattooed on
both arms, "La Chiva" on the left arm, "La Chiva" on the left knee,
"Love SSRK," I guess means love or something.
Senator DANIEL. Let's go on. Let's get copies of those cards for our
records so we can check this information.
Mr. MURPHY. Howard Butler, 821 Parkland, Corpus Christi, Tex.,
listed occupation as a taxi driver. He was alone when he arrived, came
in a bus. He was given a personal search, nothing was found on him,
but notation is here that he is an addict, has needle marks on both arms
and hands. Armador A. Cruz, 717 Lane Street. Laredo, Tex. There
are two cards on this individual, one dated February 17, 1955, one dated
January 28,1955.
Senator DANIEL. May we have copies of those cards for our records
Mr. MURPHY. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Suppose you pass along to any others where there
have been several trips across, according to your cards.
Mr. MURPHY. On Marcelino Medina, we have two cards. Do you
want the address? Not necessary?
Senator DANIEL. No; just the name and number of trips is sufficient,
the town.
Mr. MURPHY. San Antonio, Tex. We have two cards on him with
notations that he is an addict and says he uses dope about twice a week,
veins are scarred. At that time he had a vast sum of money on him, on
his person, on one of the searches; it says his age is 20 years.
Senator DANIEL. How much money did he have?
Mr. MURPHY. Three hundred and fifty dollars on one of the searches,
one of the notations.
Senator DANIEL. All right, sir.
Mr. MURPHY. Williamlee Niess, Dallas, Tex., also lists him at the
Hotel Hidalgo, Nuevo Laredo. Another address, different address
than Dallas, another hotel in Nuevo Laredo, Dallas again.
Senator DANIEL. That is sufficient. We will make the cards a part
of the record. How many trips did this man make across the bridge at
Laredo?
Mr. MuRPiiY. We have eight cards on this individual.
Senator DANIEL. Some of those pretty recent trips?
111111111
2594
Senator
Mr. MURPHY.
We have two
Senator DANIEL. It does not show how many trips he took across
the border?
Mr. MumHY. No, sir.
Senator DANIELS. You don't know whether he made other trips
or Mr.
not ?
MURPHY. No, sir; we have
no records of
other trips.
Senator
DANIEL.
All right.
marks on his right arm and foot, no contraband found on him, at that
time driving a 1954 Cadillac, stayed in the Shamrock Hotel in Houston. This card is dated February 15. He stayed there on the 10th and
11th of 1955, paid $11 per day, address shown on bill from the Shamrock Hotel 5201 Denton Boulevard, Kansas City, Mo., a different
address he gave at that time, and there are some names and addresses
listed that were in his possession listed on this card.
Senator DANIEL. Make that a part of the record. Do you have
any idea or have you counted to see how many of those 104 addicts
came from other States?
Mr. MURPHY. No, sir, I haven't. I believe they primarily gave ad-
dresses in this State. I don't think too many are from other States.
There are a few, I know.
Senator DANIEL. All right; go ahead.
2595
2596
2597
111111
2598
Are you familiar with this case of Marilyn Grant of New York?
FURTHER TESTIMONY OF ALBERT D. RICHARDS, AGENT IN
CHARGE, BUREAU OF NARCOTICS, LAREDO, TEX.
I I I
2599
DANIEL.
2600
Senator
Senator
DANIEL.
Mr.
SANCHEZ.
Senator DANIEL.
Mr. SANCHEZ.
I bought it.
Senator
Senator
Mr.
Senator
d
DANIEL.
r. SANCHEZ.
Senator
DANIEL.
2601
heroin?
SANCHEZ. Sometimes.
Senator DANIEL. When it
Mr.
you do?
the border?
SANCHEZ. I didn't get none.
Senator DANIEL. Were you looking
Mr.
Mr.
SANCHEZ.
No.
Senator
day?
left, I
ain't getting something, I didn't need any until we came back, we
just stayed a few hours.
Senator DANIEL. You stayed only a few hours across the border?
Mr. SANCHEZ. Yes, just a few hours.
Senator DANIEL. Well, did you use any narcotics, did you get any
delivered to you back across the river?
Mr. SANCHEZ. I never had any.
Senator DANIEL. Is that the only time you ever crossed the border
at Laredo?
Mr. SANCHEZ. That I remember of, yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Have you crossed into Mexico at other places?
Mr. SANCHEZ. No; that is the only place I have gone to.
Senator
river
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL. Where?
Mr. SANCHEZ. In San Antonio.
Senator DANIEL. How long is
Mr.
I I I I
2602
punish you if you do not tell this committee the truth. You understand that, without any insinuations or inference that there is any
doubt in the mind of the chairman of this committee about whether
you are telling the truth, I just want to give you that warning. Also,
you know you have the right, if you feel any truthful answer would
incriminate you or might cause you to be convicted of some crime to
stand on your constitutional rights not to answer, do you understand
that
Mr. SANCHEZ. Yes. [Indicated by nodding his head.]
DANIEL. Do you understand both of those things?
Mr. SANCHEZ. Yes. [Indicated by nodding his head.]
Senator DANIEL. That you should give truthful answers
Senator
and if
you fear that any truthful answer might cause you or tend to cause
you to be convicted of something, you could stand on your right not
to answer, do you understand that?
Mr. SANCHEZ. Yes. [Indicated by nodding his head.]
Senator DANIFLL. I want to ask you this question over again, after
having given you that warning, When was the last time that you shot
any heroin in your arm?
Mr. SANCHEZ. In May.
Senator D.N\.
IEL.
And then you were locked up, and when did you get
out of jail?
Mr. SANCHEZ. I haven't got out of jail; I am still in jail.
Senator DANIEL. You are still in jail. Did you ever get any heroin
while you were in jail?
Mr. SANCHEZ. No, sir.
Senator
DANIEL.
were in jail?
Mr. SANCHEZ. No, sir.
you were let out of the jail, do you think you would go back to using
heroin?
Mr. SANCHEZ. I don't think I would.
Senator
DANIEL.
Mr. SANCHEZ.
DANIEL.
Mr. SANCHEZ. I
Senator DANIEL.
Mr.
SANCHEZ.
Senator
No.
DANIEL.
San Antonio?
Mr.
SANCHEZ.
2603
the nicknames.
Senator DANIEL. Give us the nickname, whatever you know them
by.
Mr. SANCHEZ. Bought from about two more other fellows because
I don't use it too much.
Senator DANIEL. Name those two other fellows.
Mr. SANCHEZ. Their nicknames only.
Senator DANIEL. What are they?
Mr. SANCHEZ. Pera.
Senator DANIEL. And what is his last name?
SANCHEZ. Just Pera.
Senator DANIEL. Can you spell his name?
Mr. SANCHEZ. They call it Parrot.
Senator DANIEL. Like a bird?
Mr. SANCHEZ. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. All right, who is the other one?
Mr. SANCHEZ. Parrot and Pulmas, Rock, you know like Dracula.
Senator DANIEL. Dracula?
Mr. SANCHEZ. Dracula.
Senator DANIEL. Dracula. Do you know what place you went to
Mr.
born ?
Beeville, Beeville.
Mr. GASQUE. Is Beeville in Texas?
Mr. SANCHEZ. In Texas.
Mr. GASQUE. That's all.
Senator DANIEL. All right, you may stand aside.
Rudy Moreno.
Mr.
SANCHEZ.
71515-56-pt. 7-17
2604
Mr. Counsel, suppose you proceed, begin the interrogatories and then Mr. Speer will go ahead with him.
Senator
Mr.
DANIEL.
GASQUTE.
that question.
Senator DANIEL. We are going to have a 3-minute recess, you might
consult your attorney.
(Short recess.)
Senator DANIEL. All right, Mr. Counsel, you may proceed.
Mr. GASQUE. Mr. Moreno, have you consulted your lawyer on the
previous question?
Mr. MORENO. Yes, sir, I have.
Mr. GASQUE. What is your answer?
Mr. MORENO. I refuse to answer on the grounds it might incriminate
me.
Mr. GASQUE. Now I will repeat the question to you again. Have
you ever at any time used drugs?
Mr. MORENO. I refuse to answer on the grounds it might tend to
incriminate me.
Mr. GASQuE. Have you at any time in San Antonio sold drugs?
Mr. MORENO. I refuse to answer on the grounds it might tend to
incriminate me.
Mr. GASQUE. Have you in San Antonio ever received drugs, narcotics, opium, heroin, or marihuana from any individual?
Mr. MORENO. I refuse to answer on the grounds it might tend to
incriminate me.
Mr. GASQUE. What is your age, Mr. Moreno?
2605
San Antonio?
Mr. MOREN-O. No, sir, I am not.
Senator DANIEL. Have you ever engaged in selling heroin here in
San Antonio?
Senator DANIEL. But you do answer you are not selling them today?
Mr. MORENO. Yes, sir.
DANIEL.
terday ?
Mr. MORENO. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. How long is it since you sold any heroin here in
San Antonio?
MI. MORENO. I refuse to answer that on the grounds it might tend
to incriminate me.
Senator DANIEL. Well, you went back to yesterday, you didn't sell
any; you said day before yesterday you didn't sell any; what about
the day before that, did you sell any heroin 3 days ago?
sir.
Senator DANIEL. Four days ago?
Mr. MORENO. No, sir.
Mr. MORENO. No,
Senator DANIEL. You never sold any heroin in this town in 1955
or 1954?
Mr. MORE NO. No, sir, I have not.
1953?
Mr. GASQUE. Now, what is your present occupation?
Senator DANIEL. What is the answer to 1953.
Senator DANIEL.
2606
Club?
Mr. MORENO. Yes, sir, I am.
Mr. GASQUE. Do you have a liquor license for operating the Diamond
Horseshoe?
Mr. GASQUE. Have you ever sold any heroin or marihuana in the
Diamond Horseshoe Night Club?
Mr. MOPRENO. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Well, have you ever sold heroin or marihuana
anywhere?
Mr. MoRENo. I refuse to answer that on the grounds it might tend
to incriminate me.
Mr. GASQUE. Now, what is the name of your wife?
Mr. MORENO. Maria Moreno.
Mr. GASQUE. And has she been engaged in the narcotics traffic?
Mr. MORENO. I refuse to answer that, it might tend to incriminate.
Senator DANIEL. Was she formerly married to someone who was
to incriminate.
Senator DANIEL. Do you know a man by the name of Martias Martinez? Did you ever know such a man serving now a 10-year sentence
for narcotic violation?
Mr. MORENO. I would like to consult my attorney before I answer
that question.
Senator DANIEL. Well, now, Mr. Counsel, sit over just a little fur-
ther from the witness. You may consult him at any time but you
understand you must wait for him to consult you.
Mr. VILLAREALL. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. You can get close to him when he is consulting
you, that's all right, go right ahead. Let him consult you.
Mr. MARENO. Yes, I know Martias Martinez.
Senator DANIE.
2607
Mr. MORENO.
Mr. SPEER.
To whom?
to incriminate.
Mr. SPEER. You said a few minutes ago you never had sold any
1liii
Mr.
SPEER.
Mr.
MORENO.
In 1949.
2608
I I II I II I I
2609
Mr. MORENO. I refuse to answer on the grounds it might tend to incriminate me.
Senator DANIEL. Well, now, you have just waived your right there,
you have already answered partially and tried to explain it, go on
and give us the complete answer to the question.
Mr. MORENO. Well, I do notMr. VILLAREALL. Just a moment, at this time, Mr. Chairman, I
would like to say he has not given a partial answer to the specific question involved. Now this is a specific question. The man has already
answered previously in generalities that narcotic agents unknown
to him at that time had approached him and thereafter the record will
show that this man invoked the fifth amendment and that the Chair
allowed him to invoke the fifth amendment and that the specific question is whether he offered to sell 500 pieces of paper, whatever it is, for
$500 and he has not attempted to answer that specific question and I
believe he has not waived his rights.
Senator DANIEL. Well, I have ordered you to answer the question.
Mr. VILLAREALL. May I advise him as to his rights?
Senator
DANIEL.
hope that you will tell him, if the Chair is correct and you are wrong,
that he would be subject for charges of contempt of this committee.
Mr. Counsel, because of our tine schedule here today, we are going
to recess now until 2 o'clock. That will give you sufficient time to
talk with your client about this matter in detail. I will say to you
now we intend to go into these matters. The Chair feels any right
to claim the fifth amendment of several questions that are going to
be asked has been waived because of the evidence that this witness
gave without claiming the fifth amendment, and so we intend to go
into those in further detail after we come back at 2 o'clock. So you
might go ahead and advise your client fully on the matter, what is
involved, including the fact that if this Chair is right in ruling he
must answer because of having waived his right to claim the ffth
amendment on certain matters, if the Chair is right, the witness
would be subject to contempt if. he continues to refuse to answer the
questions. I am sure you understand that.
Mr. VILLAREALL. Yes, sir, I do.
Senator DANIEL. We will stand recessed until 2 o'clock this
afternoon.
(Whereupon, at 12: 05 p. m., the subcommittee recessed to reconvene at 2 p. in., the same day.)
AFTERNOON SESSION
The committee will come to order. Now the witness Moreno, will he come back to the stand '?
Mr. VILLAREALL. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Before we resume this afternoon let the Chair
state that Senator Butler, of Maryland, was called back to Washington
on important business. He hopes to rejoin the committee later.
Senator James Eastland, of Mississippi, is to sit in later. The Chair
had the consent of the members of the committee to proceed in the
absence of any members of the committee today.
I believe the last question we asked you before taking a recess was,
on the following day did you offer to sell 14 papers of heroin for
$500 ?
Senator
111111111
DANIEL.
2610
Mr. MORENO.
Senator
your attorney.
to refuse to answer
Mr.
because it might tend to incriminate me under the State law and
Federal law.
Senator DANIEL. Well, have you previously answered that you did
not ever sell, offer to sell, any heroin since 1952? Did you offer to sell
heroin to anybody since 1952?
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Tommy Harrison.
has cautioned you once. I don't know whether you are doing it or not,
but it appears from here that you are in contact with the witness before
he asks to consult you.
Mr. VILLAREALL. No, sir. I am not.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
sure, but here our chief counsel and investigator both felt that it might
be done and you are perfectly welcome to have him consult with you
when he wants to but only then. All right, what about Tommy
Harrison?
Mr. MORENO. I would like to consult my attorney, if I may.
Senator
Mr. MORENO.
incriminate me.
Mr.
All right.
I refuse to answer on the grounds it might tend to
DANIEL.
GASQIJE.
much you want to get," "we sell the papers here for $40 a piece." Now,
what kind of papers were you referring to?
Mr. VILLAREALL. At this time I object to the question.
Senator DANEL. We don't receive any objections from counsel to
questions. Go ahead.
1liii
2611
Mr. GASQUE. What kind of papers were you referring to that you
stated you sold for $40 apiece?
Mr. MORENO. I would have to refuse to answer on the grounds it
might tend to incriminate me.
Mr. GAsQtm. Did you state to Sergeant McGuire, 27 papers to the
ounce so at $40 a paper you can see how much it is going to cost you?
Mr. MORENO. I have to refuse to answer on the grounds it might
tend to incriminate me.
Mr. GASQUE. Did you state to Agent McGuire, "we have the pure
brown stuff here?"
Mr. MORENO. I refuse to answer on the grounds it might tend to
incriminate me.
Mr. GASQUE. Did you state to Agent McGuire you felt the white
stuff was very weak but that the brown stuff was much better heroin?
Mr. MORENO. I refuse to answer on the grounds it might tend to
incriminate me.
Mr. GASQUE. Did you point out a policeman at that time in uniform
and state that "he used to be on the narcotic squad and that they had
just put him into uniform, that is a good fellow but be careful of
him?"
Mr. MORENO. I refuse to answer on the grounds it might tend to
incriminate me.
Mr. GASQUE. Mr. Moreno, do you own any property.
Mr. MORENO. No, sir.
Mr. GASQUE. What is your income?
Mr. MORENO. I would like to consult my attorney before I answer
that question.
Senator
Mr.
incriminate me.
Senator DANIEL. Did you bring your income-tax returns here to
the committee?
Mr. MORENO. No, sir; I don't thinkSenator DANIEL. Well, did you see the subpena that asked that you
bring your income-tax returns to this committee? Did you make
income-tax returns for 1950 through 1954, through 1951 through 1954,
the ones that were called for in the subpena?
Mr. MORENO. I refuse to answer on the grounds it might tend to
incriminate me.
Senator DANEL. Well, you certainly are not going to be allowed
to refuse to answer that question. We subpenaed you to come before
this committee and to bring your income-tax returns, your copies,
1951 through 1954. Did you bring them with you? Do you have
them here?
Mr. VILLAREALL. May I advise my client?
Senator DANIEL. No, sir; you may not advise your client unless he
seeks your advice. I am just asking, did you bring them? Do you
have them here?
Mr. MORENO. Well, I would like to seek my attorney's advice.
Senator DANIEL. Go ahead.
Mr. MORENO. No, sir; I did not bring any.
Senator DANIEL. You did not bring them?
Mr. MORENO. No, sir; I do not have any copies.
Senator DANIEL. What?
2612
Senator
bring, sir.
You never did have any to bring?
Senator DANIEL.
Mr. MORENO. No, sir, never had.
Senator
DANIEL.
your business?
Mr. MORENO. I refuse to answer that on the grounds in might tend
to incriminate me.
Mr. GASQUE. Now, have you ever filed a Federal income-tax report?
Mr. MORENO. I refuse to answer that on the grounds it might tend
to incriminate me.
Mr.
GASQUE.
2613
Mr.
GASQUE.
Senator
DANIEL.
questions, just look over there and consult him at any time you want
to consult him.
Mr. MORENO. I refuse to answer on the grounds it might tend to
incriminate me.
Mr. GASQUE. Are you the Rudolph Ruiz Moreno who was convicted
in November, October 17, 1942, violation of the Marihuana Act and
sentenced to 4 years in Leavenworth Penitentiary? in 1942, violation
of the Federal Narcotics Act?
Mr.
MORENO.
Mr. GASQUE. How many times have you been convicted of violations
of the Narcotics Act or violation of the Marihuana Act?
Mr. MORENO. Several times, I do not recall how many.
Mr. GASQUE. And you have beentimes?
convicted of violating the Federal
Narcotics Marihuana Act several
Senator DANIEL. Was your answer that you have been convicted
several times?
Mr. MORENO. Let me think back just a little bit-i, 2, yes, sir.
Senator
DANIEL.
Mr. MORENO.
Senator DANIEL. You mean it is so many times you don't remember
or has it been more than twice ?
Mr. MORENO. Yes, sir. I do not know exactly how many times I
have been in prison, several times for marihuana.
Senator DANIEL. And you have used marihuana, haven't you?
Mr. MORENO. I refuse to answer that question on the grounds it
might tend to incriminate me.
Senator
DANIEL.
2614
may do it but I am not going to let you simply give your ear for advice
without asking anything, you understand?
Mr. MOPENO. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Now, what is the answer to this question?
Mr. MORENO. Well, I was looking to him for advice at the time. I
under the State law and that's the only reason that I advised of his legal
rights not to answer on the grounds It might tend to incriminate him.
Senator DANIEL. That is the only reason then?
Mr. MORENO. Yes,
sir.
Senator DANIEL. That you don't want to answer, that you are
afraid that you might be convicted if you gave a truthful answer under the drivers-operators license law, right?
Mr. VILLAREALL. Operating without a license.
Senator DANIEL. Operating without a license, that is the only reason he does not wish to answer, is that correct?
Mr. MORENO. That is correct.
Mr. GASQUE. Now, Moreno, do you know a Pedro Rodriguez?
Mr. MORENO. Pedro Rodriguez?
I do
not have.
Mr. GASQUE. In Rodriguez' address book this name appears: Rudy
Moreno, 104 Parker Street, San Antonio, telephone number LE29217. Then on another page in the address book is listed Rudy
Moreno, 424 West Houston Street, Diamond Horseshoe, San Antonio.
Could you tell the committee how your name happened to be in his
address book?
incriminate me.
Mr. GASQUE. Could any of that heroin or narcotics that he was
bringing into the country have been coming to you?
2615
E.
Senator DANIEL. What about the address, 424 West Houston Street?
Mr. MORENO. That is the club's address.
Senator DANIEL. And the telephone number, is that right, Belmont
37106?
Mr. MORENO. Yes, sir, that is correct.
Senator
DANIEL.
to incriminate.
Mr. GASQUE. Was she married to Macias Martinez before you
married her?
Mr. MORENO. Before I married her? Yes, sir.
Mr. GASQUE. Yes. Did you know Martinez to be a major violator
of narcotics laws dating back several years?
Mr. MORENO. I refuse to answer on the grounds it might tend to
incriminate me.
Senator DANIEL. All right, Mr. Investigator, do you have any
questions?
Mr. SPEER. In 1954 did you own an automobile?
Mr. MORENO. 1954, 1954-I would like to consult my attorney on
that answer, sir.
Senator DANIEL. All right, you may do it.
Mr. MORENO. I do not recall what year it was that I had this car.
Mr. SPEER. What car was that?
Mr. MoRENo. The car you just asked me whether I had a car in
1954, I do not recall.
Mr. SPEER. You did have one in 1954?
2616
Senator
DANIEL.
VILLAREALL.
Mr.
permitted to be given here against his will, this would be in efect ,
dual violation of the law under the Federal statutes and under the
State statutes, and for that reason we respectfully except to the ruling
of the Chair.
Senator
DANIEL.
IIIIIII
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
TRAFFIC
2617
ing to answer the question you may do so. You would be subject to
contempt proceeding for contempt of this committee. It is a chance
that you would have to take, so I order you to answer the question.
Mr. MORENO. Answer the last question?
DANIEL. That's correct.
Mr. MORENO. May I consult with the attorney?
Senator DANIEL. YOU may.
Mr. VILLAREALL. I have another exception to make.
Senator
Senator
DANIEL.
All right, we
will ask the reporter to search it out and read it back exactly as it
was asked before.
Mr. SPEER. (read by the reporter). Were you driving his automobile or your automobile with him in it in April 1954?
Mr. MORENO. I didn't understand-his automobile with him in it?
Mr. SPEER. I said, were you driving your automobile with this
Guerro in it on that date?
Mr. MORENO. Now, I would answer that question providing I would
have a chance to explain.
Senator
DANIEL.
Mr. MORENO.
Senator DANIEL. Well, tell us about the case you are thinking about.
Mr. MORENO. This happened last year some time, I had a, oh. must
have been a 1946 or 1947, 1946 or 1947 Lincoln, and we were driving
down Guadalupe Street, and the battery went down on me and couldn't
charge it, so told me to run it. Driving out on Guadalupe Street, had
my wife with me. I saw two boys there I knew, catching a taxi at the
time, and I hesitated for a minute and they waved at me. I stopped,
asked me where I was going. I told them I was driving the car to raise
the battery a little. So they asked me if I would drive them back to
town. I said I would after I drive the car around a little bit. They
got in the car with me.
Senator
Mr.
Senator
names?
names. I know, let's see, one of
them, both of them in prison now, different cases but both in prison.
If I am not mistaken they were some relation, one of them was Blackie,
I don't know what, Blackie something, and the other one
2618
there for the place and searched that. Searched the car and they
asked me what I was doing with these two fellows. I said, well, they
were getting ready to catch a taxi and they asked me if I would bring
them, and I said, yes, I would give them a ride into town, and they
told me right away, said, "You have no business with this class of
people, as long as you fool with this class of people we are going to
stop you." I said, "Why, I have known these people for quite some
time, I don't see any reason why I shouldn't speak to them or pick them
up like I did." They said, "If you do, you know what we are doing."
So I said I would appreciate the advice and they let us go. We drove
about, for about 10 more minutes, I would say we drove around 12 or
14 blocks and by the time that I was getting ready to let them out, at
the icehouse, two detectives drove up again for the second time and
stopped the car. I stopped the car and they came over to the car and
they asked one of the boys, says, they asked Fila, "You threw this
away, didn't you?" So Fila says, "No, I didn't throw anything away."
Senator DANIEL. Was this, was that
Mr. MORENO. It was a bundle, little bundle in a rag or piece of silk
or something. A little rag, I don't know what was in it at the time, see.
So he says, "' ou threw this away, didn't you ?"
Senator DANIEL. Was that what you had just delivered to this man?
Mr. MORENO. No, sir; I didn't deliver anything to this man.
Senator DANIEL. What was in this little bag?
Mr. MORENO. Well, I am getting to that.
Senator DANIEL. Go ahead.
Mr. MORENO. Now, so they said, "You threw this away, didn't you?"
So Fila says, "No, sir; I didn't throw anything away." He said, "You
didn't throw it away?" Says, "I saw you throw it away." So the
officer insisted Fila had thrown this out of the car on the right side
of the car and Fila, because he was sitting on the right side of the car,
Fila says, "No, I didn't throw such thing away." Boston Blackie, he
jumps up, says, "He didn't throw that away," says, "I threw that
away."
Senator DANIEL. Saying he did it or you did it?
Mr. MORENO. NO; that he did it. Boston Blackie, he jumps up
voluntarily and says, "He didn't throw it away," says, "I threw that
out of the car," soMr. SPEER. What did he get for saying that later on?
Mr. MORENO. Well, I am getting to that later on, just a minute.
So, he says, "I threw that out of the car." So this officer says, "You
sure you threw this out of the car?" He said, "I am positive." He
says, You know what is in it?" He says, "Yes, sir; I have some marihuana, some dope." So he says, "All right, if you going to admit it is
yours, come on and we will go see the city sergeant." So they took us to
the sergeant. They told the sergeant about it and the sergeant said,
"The man admits it is his, if he is willing to make a statement that it
is his, he's not going to back out later on, why, file on him." So they
brought him, brought us to the city jail. So I asked him, "What are
you booking me for?" He says, "Well, this two officers claim that they
were watching these two men make some kind of a connection with
this taxi driver at the time that you drove up." Says, "So we are going
to book you for investigation." So they booked me for investigation.
Mr. SPEER. What was in this package?
1111111111
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
2619
TRAFFIC
Mr. MoRENo. Well, I don't know exactly, but when Blackie described
Mr. MORENO. Nobody knew it, I mean, we didn't know the package
had been thrown out of the car, hut the officers claim they saw this
Fila throw it out of the car but yet Boston Blackie jumps up and says
that he was the one threw it out, he, Boston Blackie.
Mr. SPEER. How was the heroin, was it in capsules?
Mr. MORENO. I didn't get to see it. Thiey didn't show me the package, never did show the package to us.
Mr. SPEER. This was your automobile?
Mr. MORENO. The automobile was mine; yes, sir.
Mr. SPEER. At that time did you have a driver's license?
Mr. MORENO. I haven't had a driver's license; no, sir.
Mr. SPEER. You did not have a driver's license?
Mr. MORENO. No, sir.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
from prison.
Mr. SPEER. Do you drive a car without a driver's license?
Mr. MORENO. Occasionally.
2620
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
TRAFFIC
witness testified though under oathi, that he had not sold any heroin or
marihuana since 1952, and, Mr. Speer, any questions you have relating to sales I will make the ruling that he will have to answer them.
Mr. SPEER. Trafficking?
Senator
DANIEL.
Mr.
Mr11'.
SPEER. September
VILLAREALL. Is he
16, 1955.
going to be compelled to answer that ques-
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANrEL.
I1III1
..ANN
2621
were using several capsules of heroin a day. Now, with that information I want to ask you whether or not you want to stick with your
story? I don't mean to call it a story, stick with what you have just
said, that that is not true. Did you tell those officers that, that you
were addicted and that you were using two capsules, several capsules
of heroin a day?
Mr. MoRENo. I would like to consult my attorney before I answer
this question.
Senator DANIEL. All right.
Mr. MORENO. I refuse to answer that on the grounds it might tend
to incriminate.
Senator
DANIEL.
answered the exact question just a few minutes before. You waived
any right to claim the fifth amendment on the question. I simply
asked it over again to you to see whether or not you wanted to stick
with that answer after I told you what I did about two other witnesses. So I order you to answer the question.
Mr. VILLAREALL. At this time I want to repeat the exceptions that
this witness is under the impression that this man is compelled to
testify as to any dealings in narcotics in this hearing and under that
impression he has testified he immediately heretofore under preceding
questions and for that reason we respectfully except to the ruling of
the Chair on the ground that it might tend to incriminate him and
violate his constitutional rights under the 14th and 5th amendments.
Senator
DANIEL.
Chair rules that he has waived the right to claim immunity and orders
you to answer the question. And the question is simply this: In view
of what I have just told you about the evidence we expect to adduce
here from two witnesses, do you still want to say that you did not tell
them this on September, on or about September 16, 1955?
Mr. N1ORENO. Well, there was only one agent there.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
did not tell them this. I ask you is that a true answer?
Mr. M\fORENO. It is a true answer.
DANIEL. Now you may explain.
MORENO. On about that date I was
Senator
2622
Senator DANIEL. And when he asked you what you were using what
did you say ?
Mr. MORENO. He didn't ask me what I was using. He asked me,
what you using, says, you using heroin. I says "naw." He says
and he's looking at my arms and, you know, round about way, and
he says, what are you using, 1, 2, 3, kept mentioning like that. I just
said "naw," that's all. That's the only explanation that I gave this
officer.
Senator DANIEL. Did he ask you if you were an addict?
Mr. MORENO. Yes, sir.
started looking at my arms, kept on talking all the time and I kept
saying "naw." That's the only words that I gave this omcer.
Senator DANIEL. In the whole interview that's the only words you
gave him, in all of his questions, to all of his questions about dope?
Mr. MORENO. Those were the only questions that he asked me.
Senator DANIEL. Now, then, one final question. Have you ever
been across the border to Mexico?
Mr. MORENO. I refuse to answer on the grounds it might tend to
incriminate me.
Senator DANIEL. Well, I'll ask you if you have ever been across
the border to Mexico since 1952 when you say you were not in the
heroin traffic.
Mr. MORENO. I have to refuse to answer on the grounds it might
tend to incriminate.
Senator DANIEL. Well, have you ever been across the Mexican
border for any lawful and legal purpose?
Mr. MORENO. May I consult my attorney?
Senator
DANIEL.
You may.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
Senator
Mr.
2623
Senator DANIEL. Well, have you crossed the border more than that
Senator
purpose?
to incriminate me.
Senator DANIEL. Have you ever had any heroin delivered to you
here in San Antonio which was purchased for you across the Mexican
border?
Mr. MORENO. I refuse to answer that on the grounds it might tend
to incriminate me.
Senator DANIEL. All right, that's all. You may step aside. Just 1
minute, you are not in jail now or under bond at all; are you?
Mr. MORENO. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. And haven't been for how long?
Mr. MORENO. On bond or in jail?
Senator DANIEL. Yes. Several months?
Mr. MORENO. Well, I was, April.
Senator DANIEL. Last April?
Mr. MORENO. 1955.
Mr. Russel Wine. Mr. Wine, is your assistant here in the room?
Mr. WINE. Yes, sir.
2624
of Texas.
Senator
DANIEL. ])o
WINE.
yes. And I have found one of the most wholesome layouts that I
have ever seen in law enforcement since I have been back in office
t hi. time of the cooperation that is given between the Federal, the
State, and the county, and the city enforcement officers. That goes
from the policeman up to the heads of the officers that do the prosecut-
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
TRAFFIC
2625
ing, and I think that is one of the best symptoms that we have cooperation in this district. I have made some records as to the number
of cases that were handled and the sentences that were meted out
beginning on September 1, 1954, and ending September 1, 1955, for
this district. In the San Antonio division there were 32 defendants
in narcotic cases sentenced to get time and they averaged four and a
half years a piece. Four defendants were given suspended sentences
and placed on probation and their probationary sentence averaged
1/ years. The overall average for the San Antonio division was
4.3 years.
In the El Paso division, there were 23 defendants in narcotic cases
who were sentenced to serve time. The average time to serve was 2.7
years. Ten defendants were placed on probation and given suspended
sentences and the average suspended sentence was 2 years. The overall average in the El Paso division was 2.3 years.
Senator DANIEL. You say 10 were giiven suspended sentences?
Mr. WINE. Yes, sir, in the El Paso division.
Senator DANIEL. Was that for selling narcotics?
2626
death penalty permissible. I am not saying death penalty for everybody. I mean fix it so the judge, or the jury in that case, the jury can
assess the highest penalty in cases that deserve it, for instance, smugglers that brought it over here and sold to a lot of minors. You take
a case on sales, as Sheriff Kilday mentioned where this fellow sold to
40 or 50 young people here in town. It seems to me we ought to have
the highest penalty available in case the jury wanted to mete it out
in certain cases. What do you think of that?
Mr. WINE. I think that is fine. There is a distinction though from
a prosecutor in the State and Federal. In the Federal court the jury
has nothing to do. In the State court to qualify a jury, you have
to qualify on death penalty. You would have a hard time selecting
juries, I am afraid, if you made it mandatory and made it too high.
Senator DANIEL. Well, of course, it wouldn't be mandatory, as you
Mr. WINE. I have qualified a lot of juries on that kind of case when
this punishment is about the only thing that tends towards retarding
trafficking in narcotics in my opinion.
Senator DANIEL. Excuse me for interrupting, go right ahead.
Mr. WINE. That is all right. In the Del Rio division 6 defendants
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
TRAFFIC
2627
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator DANIEL. You know if all of those have been reported into
the Bureau?
Mr. WINE. I don't know.
2628
Senator DANIEL. Some of the courts were not meting out very heavy
penalties on narcotic cases. I suppose the Members of Congress felt
they should make an absolute minimum sentence and set that sentence
at 5 years in the cases provided as the lowest that could be given. You
would recommend, though, that we study that matter?
Mr.
WINE.
that the local judge is trying a case, is there on the ground and knows
what the situation is. And if you give him latitude enough to handle
WINE.
Mr.
WINE.
tying their hands for everybody or to loosen their hands and make it
worse in some of the districts, you have to weigh one against the other;
it would depend entirely on the makeup of the judge handling the
case. It is a hard job for Congress to pass a general law that would
cover all of them.
Senator DANIEL. Right.
Mr. WINE. Another thing that I believe would help the prosecution
of these cases a whole lot is that in questions of search and seizure the
law is strict. The Bill of Rights gives the defendants all these protections and puts around him all of these safeguards so that you can't
go out and search his place without a search warrant, and the Commissioner can't issue a search warrant without proper cause that crime
is being committed there. Well, we come into court, I think that is
covered by all of our new criminal rules that the defendant's attorney
should be compelled to file his motion to suppress the evidence because
of illegal search before the man is arraigned so he wouldn't be in
jeopardy, and the Government and defendant each have the right of
appeal, because of the question of law, and I believe both sides should
have the right of appeal and let the circuit or appellate courts decide
what the law was, whether the facts in the particular case are covered
by the law to the effect that was an illegal act or not.
Senator DANIEL. Since the Government has no appeal from the
ruling of the court on search and seizure cases, it is uncertain just
what the law is. Some courts rule one way and some another. Thanks
for that recommendation. I will say it has been made by the Attorney
General of the United States to the committee, too.
General has made the recommendation, that is that this committee
should consider, and I think Congress should consider favorably,
to one
passing a law that when a man takes the witness stand, testifies
state of facts today, takes the stand tomorrow and turns coat and
testifies to another state of facts, when you make proof of those two
2629
Senator
You
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
one definitely. That was about all we had on him was telephone conversations. I think if recording could have been made I don't think
there would have been any question but what he would have been
convicted.
Senator DANIEL. In other words, the dope traffickers use the most
modern means of getting orders and messages back and forth, while
law enforcement officers are prohibited from using those means or
intercepting those messages. I think one district attorney in New
York told us he thought that. was sort of like chasing traffic violators
who were in Cadillacs. chasing them with a horse and buggy, not
being able to use the same modern methods the traffickers are using to
catch them.
2630
Senator DANIEL. Of course you know the reason why wire tapping
is not admitted into Federal courts. It goes back to the whole theory
of one of the great theories of our Government, that is, to protect
everyone in individual rights. We don't want people wire tapping
our private conversations and all that. I certainly agree with you
that in certain exceptions with a sealed court order, that it would
be perfectly proper for wire-tapping evidence to be used. And the
three I have in mind are kidnap cases, subversion, where somebody
over the telephone is working out plans to destroy this country, and
in narcotic cases. It seems to me that those are justified, especially
if you set up procedures where you can go to the court, tell the court
what you have, what makes you want to wire tap a certain phone or
certain line and then get a sealed order from the court permitting you
to do it. That would be a proper safeguard it seems to me and I agree
with your recommendation wholeheartedly on that.
Mr. WINE. Now yesterday Mr. Richards, the customs officer from
Laredo, was talking about several rulings that the court had recently
made and I have made an excerpt from both of them, it will be very
short, in iValker v. The United States.
Senator DANIEL. Suppose we put those excerpts in the record. (See
p. 2635.)
Mr. WINE. These are cases, one pertaining to heroin, in which a
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
TRAFFIC
2631
that up with the attorney for Mr. Brownell who is in charge of writing his laws and he thinks that the bill I drew covers the situation.
I have given a copy of that to Mr. Gasque.
Senator DANIEL. We will make that a part of the record following
ance before the committee and all the excellent help you have been
to the committee in conducting this investigation; we especially appreciate your sitting with us as much as you have and hope you will
continue.
Mr. WINE.
2632
Senator
A kilo is 2 pounds?
Mr. PARROT. 2.2.
DANIEL.
Senator DANIEL. Thirty-three ounces, worth about what on the retail market, Mr. Parrott ?
Mr. PARROTT. Mr. Speer is an expert on those things. Mr. Speer
says it's worth fifteen to twenty thousand dollars on the retail market.
And I understood from our testimony on the removal of d'Agostino,
they were talking in terms of buying 3 kilos, so that is a tremendous
amount and as I pointed out he can get only 5 years upon conviction
where a simple addict case or 2-cap or 1-paper man can still get 5
years, just the same, see?
Senator DANIEL. in other words, the conspiracy in which d'Agostino
has been indicted and for which he is wanted in New York involves
from forty-five to sixty thousand dollars' worth of heroin?
Mr. PARROTT. Yes, sir.
1111111
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
TRAFFIC
2633
or Iran, France and other places. That is, much of it has in the past.
In other words, Mexico, to some extent, is a transit point and a base
of operations for these international sellers. Do you have any other
PARROTT.
Senator
the excellent testimony you have given this committee, both before
and during the hearing.
Mr. WINE. May I make this one more suggestion?
Senator DANIEL. Yes. sir.
Mr. WINE. There is another recommendation I think should be
followed, that on these cases at present the law has a mandatory fine,
and the courts often will mete out a sentence of time to serve and
only to be collected on execution only. Well of course, that doesn't
mean much but it keeps the case open, always on the clerk's docket,
you never close up the case but always have a pending case unless
that is eliminated; somebody pays a fine and if it is not for any purpose I have an idea when the court imposes a fine like that it never
expects to be paid. I believe if we should not make it mandatory to
impose a fine but let them have a fine without any minimum, it will
expedite the closing of a lot of these cases that might be carried as
pending cases. It might look like a big backlog when you haven't one.
Senator DANIEL. Thank you very much.
(Following are the prepared statements of Russell B. Wine and
Harmon Parrott:)
PREPARED STATEMENT OF RUSSELL B. WINE, UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, WESTERN
DISTRICT OF TEXAS, SAN ANTONIO, TEX.
2634
The records of the courts of the western district of Texas, for the period beginning September 1, 1954, and ending September 1, 1955, reveal that in the
San Antonio division 32 defendants in narcotic cases were sentenced to serve
time, and the average sentence was 41 years. Four defendants were placed on
probation, and the average suspended sentence of the defendants placed on probation was 1% years. The overall average sentence in the San Antonio division
was 4.3 years.
In the El Paso division 23 defendants in narcotic cases were sentenced to serve
time. The average time to serve was 2.7 years. Ten defendants were placed on
probation and given suspended sentences. The average suspended sentence being
2 years. The overall average for the El Paso division being 2.3 plus years.
In the Del Rio division 6 defendants in narcotic cases were sentenced to serve
time, with an average of 2.3 years. Eight defendants were given suspended
sentences and placed on probation. The average suspended sentence being 2.3
years. The overall average being 2.3 years.
I am showing Austin and Waco divisions together, and 14 defendants in
narcotic cases were sentenced to serve time with an average of 42 years. One
defendant was given a suspended sentence of 2 years and placed on probation.
The overall average for these 2 divisions is approximately 41 years.
There were no narcotic cases in the Pecos division.
From information derived from a number of sources, I venture the guess
that there are over 300 narcotic addicts in San Antonio with records and many
without records. There are from 12 to 15 in Austin and a very few in Waco.
Few of these known addicts are getting their supply through legitimate channels.
The cost to the addict to satisfy his or her craving is from $15 to $20 per day.
In El Paso most narcotic offenders are indigent persons and many of them
aliens. In imposing sentence upon these defendants, due to the mandatory fine
provision of the law, the court usually imposes a sentence of imprisonment and
a fine of $1 to be collected on execution, only. I doubt if it is ever intended that
the fine be paid, and it seems to serve no purpose. When the defendant has
served the sentence and is discharged the case should be closed, but such is not
the case. The clerk's records carry the fine as an uncollected judgment. By
eliminating a mandatory fine would bring finality to the record when the imprisonment part of the sentence was ended.
Since the object of this committee and the results obtained through these
hearings is an attempt to improve the Federal Criminal Code, I will direct
my remarks to that end. I believe the penalties provided in the Boggs Act should
have the maximum raised in order to meet the situation when a flagrant and
persistent offender is convicted, but I also believe that there should be a minimum
equal to the last prison sentence imposed upon the defendant. Each case should
be considered separately in the light of all the circumstances and I believe as
much latitude as possible should be given the court in discharging this important
and unpleasant function. A mandatory minimum could be too severe in some
instances. The Boggs Act should also apply to conspiracy to violate narcotic
laws.
Questions of law frequently arise in connection with motions to suppress evidence due to alleged illegal search. It seems that such motions should be filed
and acted upon before arraignment under the present rules, and I believe that
both the defendant and Government should have the right of appeal.
Some years ago there was a movement toward a clinic plan, whereby any
addict would get free treatment upon being registered as such addict. This,
in my opinion, would encourage the use of narcotics, since they would always
be assured of a haven to resort to when pressed for narcotics. The greatest fear
and deterrent to an addict is that the supply will be cut off. Many such addicts
would cooperate with law enforcement agencies in exchange for a promise to take
care of them.
The detection and enforcement of the narcotic laws is tedious and entails considerable expense, and the manpower and appropriation for this purpose should
be considerably augmented. From my observations I am convinced that the
addict is an addict first and then enters other fields of crime in order to satisfy
his addiction. The same applies to young women addicts who resort to prostitution in order to purchase narcotics to gratify their addiction to drugs.
We use the smuggling statute (18 U. S. C. A. 545) on the border in connection
with marihuana cases and therefore the Boggs Act should be made to apply
to such cases.
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
TRAFFIC
2635
Under the ruling of the court in Walker v. U. S. (176 Fd. 2d 796), the ninth
circuit-where the indictment charged defendant with selling narcotics (heroin)
without having registered and paid the tax-defendant contended that the indictment did not state an offense, because it did not allege that defendant was a
person required by law to register-the ninth circuit court held that the statute
applied only to legitimate dealers In stamp drugs and not to dealers in contraband drugs, and that therefore the indictment did not state an offense. This
was under article 3224 (a) title 18, United States Code, now article 4755; and
U. S. v. Horton (180 Fd. 2d. 427), the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals-a case
in which the defendant was indicated and convicted of unlawfully selling, dealing in or distributing marihuana without registering and paying the tax, the
appellate court in reversing the case said "the statute was intended to apply to
persons in business and not to isolated transactions." I doubt if there is an
instance where a person holds himself out as a seller, dealer, or distributor of
heroin or marihuana, therefore there is a need for a change in the wording of
the statute to meet this objection.
It would appear that the present marihuana law does not include an isolated
importation. These cases hold that the only persons required to register and
pay a special tax are those persons engaged in the respective businesses (not
isolated cases). Congress should amend the law to make the importation of
marihuana, whether an isolated instance, or otherwise, a Federal offense.
We are fortunate in having law enforcement officers, courts, and juries in
this district who respect the defendant's rights and at the same time preserve
the people's rights by the honest enforcement of all laws, and I feel confident
that any changes in our criminal laws which this committee recommends and
Congress passes will be impartially administered.
(The following recommendation was submitted by Russell B. Wine, United
States Attorney, Western District of Texas:)
Due to much conflict of opinion concerning the constitutionality of 8 U. S. C. A.
1324, resulting in the inability of prosecutors to try cases involving transportation
of aliens, it is my belief that this statute should be amended to read as follows:
"BRINGING IN
ARREST.
AND
HARBORING
CERTAIN
ALIENS; PERSONS,
LIABLE; AUTHORITY
TO
"(a) Any person, including the owner, operator, pilot, master, commanding
officer, agent, or consignee of any means of transportation, who"(1) brings into or lands in the United States any alien not lawfully entitled to enter or reside therein, by any means of transportation or otherwise, or attempts, by himself or through another, to bring into or land in
the United States by means of transportation or otherwise any alien, including an alien crewman, not duly admitted by an immigration officer or
not lawfully entitled to enter or reside within the United States; or
"(2) whoever knowing that any such alien is in the United States in violation of law, and knowingly or having reasonable grounds to believe that
the last entry into the United States by such alien occurred last within three
years prior thereto, transports or moves, or attempts to transport or move,
within the United States by means of transportation or otherwise in furtherance of such violation of law; or
"(3) whoever willfully or knowingly conceals, harbors, or shields from
detection, or attempts to conceal, harbor, or shield from detection, any alien
who is in the United States in violation of law, in any place, including any
building or any means of transportation or
"(4) whoever willfully or knowingly encourages or induces, or attempts
to encourage or induce, the entry into the United States of any such alien
shall be guilty of a felony, and upon conviction thereof shall be punished by
a fine not exceeding $2,000 or by imprisonment for a term not exceeding five
years, or both, for each alien in respect to whom any violation of this subsection occurs: Provided, however, That for the purposes of this section, employment (including the usual and normal practices incident to employment)
shall not be deemed to constitute harboring.
"(b) No officer or person shall have authority to make any arrest for a violation of any provision of this section except officers and employees of the Service
designated by the Attorney General, either individually or as a member of a
class, and all other officers whose duty it is to enforce criminal laws."
71515-56---pt. 7-
19
2636
1. Title 18 United States Code, section 545 should be amended to contain the
standard provisions of the Boggs Act and the penalty provisions found in title 21
United States Code, section 174 and title 26 United States Code, section 2557 (b)
(1) should be amended to include a violation, of title 18 United States Code, section 545 where such violation was for the smuggling of a narcotic.
2. The standard provision of the Boggs Act should be amended to include prior
convictions of a conspiracy to violate the Harrison Narcotic Act, the Narcotic
Drug Import and Export Act or the Marihuana Tax Act. That is, if a defendant
was convicted in 1938 of a violation of the Harrison Narcotic Act, the Narcotic
Drug Import and Export Act or the Marihuana Tax Act and convicted again in
1955 of the Harrison Narcotic Act, the Narcotic Drug Import and Export Act, or
the Marihuana Tax Act, on a conspiracy to violate any of them, then a minimum
sentence is 5 to 10 years under the Boggs Act. However, if a defendant was convicted in 1938 of a conspiracy to violate the Harrison Narcotic Act, the Narcotic
Drug Import and Export Act or the Marihuana Tax Act, then the Boggs Act does
not apply and the maximum sentence is 2 to 5 years. This could be cured by
amendment of the standard provision of the Boggs Act by adding in the fifth
sentence of 2557 (b) (1) in the definition of the second or subsequent offender
those who have been convicted of a conspiracy to violate any of the enumerated
acts set forth in such sentence.
3. Title 18 United States Code, section 371 should be amended to allow the
imposition of a greater maximum penalty upon conviction; that is, increase the
maximum from 5 years to 10 years, since most conspiracies involve the bigger,
more culpable and vicious defendant. On the other hand the maximum penalty
imposed for a violation of the narcotic laws could be increased from 5 years to
10 years and thus avoid the necessity of amending the conspiracy statute, if upon
increasing of the penalty for violation of narcotic laws it was stated that a conviction for conspiracy under title 18, United States Code, section 371 would carry
the penalty equal to that of a principal.
4. The statute should be amended in such manner to get around Eugene Carroll
Stone v. U. S. (5th Cir., 223 F. 2d 23). It might be the statute could be amended
to give venue in any place the person is apprehended with the stuff or that a
codefendant or coconspirator was apprehended with the stuff, regardless of
where the transfer took place.
5. The Boggs Act could be amended to include State offenses. That is, State
convictions of conspiracy or as accessory before and after the fact or as principal
of the handling of the narcotics of the grade of felonies might be considered a
previous conviction for purposes of involving the Boggs Act.
6. The Boggs Act could be amended to include a penalty of 15 to 25 years for
a fourth offense under the Boggs Act.
Senator
County?
DANIEL.
2637
Senator
DANIEL.
what you say and in view of what Mr. Wine said a minute ago, he
2638
Senator DANML. Mr. Speer just handed me this figure, that there
were 361 addicts reported from this county by name and address to
the Bureau of Narcotics in Washington, 361.
Mr. GREEN. That's right. Senator DANIEL. So, and Mr. Wine estimates there are others that
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
TRAFFIC
- N
2639
keep in touch with that addict when he leaves that hospital and during
the time he serves out his probationary sentence.
Now, I believe the committee earlier expressed an interest in the
various kinds of narcotics. You will see first of all before we leave
that question we have in 1953 a total conviction of 20 cases for 52
years, an average of 2.6 years per conviction, 66 percent conviction,
which includes no bills and dismissals. That is what that percentage
includes. Now, compare that with 1954, there were 57 convictions,
totaling 208 years, an average of 3.65 years per conviction, 70 percent conviction, also which includes no bills and dismissals. Comparing that with the present year thus far we have had 25 cases of
convictions, that is of cases filed in 1955, totaling 83 years, being
an average of 3.32 years per conviction or 74 percent conviction.
Now, as to the kind of narcotics. We see an increase in heroin.
We see in 1953 13 cases of heroin and 13 of marihuana and two others
of minor drugs. Comparing that with 1954, we see a great increase in heroin, 41 heroin cases filed, 39 marihuana, one of opium.
Now, the breakdown to the present year, 1955, we see again an increase in marihuana of 21 heroin cases filed, 42 marihuana cases
filed and 2 of lesser known drugs.
Briefly that summarizes the statistical summary that we have given
you. We have given you each case by name of the defendant and
by number during each one of these years. Wre have shown the type
of drug and our particular interest should be the amount of drugs
in which the defendant was charged with possessing or selling.
It has been our experience in State courts, the cases filed in the
State cours, there was primarily a small amount of drugs involved.
You have heard testimony from some of the other individuals in
Federal court handling the larger cases. Perhaps they should. Our
cases involve, as you will see, small amounts, 1 capsule of heroin, 1
cigarette, maybe 4 caps all the way down. I think on the whole, considering the amounts of drugs that we have and we deal with in our
State courts, that the sentences that have been given have been good,
have been fair.
Senator DANIEL. When you say that, do you think that sentences
have been stiff enough?
Mr. GREEN. Of course, we would like to have them a lot stiffer.
Senator DANIEL. Most prosecuting attorneys would like to have the
sentences stiffer in most cases?
Mr. GREEN. That's right, we are never satisfied with that. I think
you know under the previous law under which all these statistics fall
there are a minimum of 2 years and a maximum of 10 years on first
conviction. Now, under our new law effective just this past month,
we have a greater leeway, the minimum 2 years as before, the maximum is life imprisonment. So now under our present law we have
that broad area to deal with and the jury may assess punishment
anywhere between that 2 years and life sentence.
Senator DANIEL. I want to say to you, after saying that most prosecuting attorneys like to see higher sentences, I certainly agree with
you in this instance that they are justified in this in 'narcotic cases.
Mr. GREEN. We have a few examples here. For instance, here in
1955, on the 26th day of May a defendant was charged with possession
of an infinitesimal, very small amount and he was given 10 years
in the penitentiary, the maximum. We have other cases of that type
2640
in which only being found with small amounts we have given quite
a large sentence. We have here in 1954 the sale of 1 marihuana
cigarette to a minor, a 7-year penitentiary sentence was inflicted. We
have another instance of the possession of an infinitesimal amount of
heroin, 5 years, of the sale of 1 cap of heroin, 7 years in the penitentiary.
Senator DANIEL. Do you think these heavy sentences will help deter
the traffic here in San Antonio?
Mr. GREEN. I think undoubtedly they will, Senator. I think primarily it is a matter of education. I think the thing, as I pointed
out here in my summary, the thing that impresses me most about
this whole problem, is the matter of education of the entire public
to the problem that we have, educating the general public, educating
the judges, Federal judges that inflict these penalties in the Federal
courts, educating the jurors and peace officers themselves on the problems we have in this narcotic traffic. It is primarily a matter of education. One thing I would stress to the committee so far as I am
personally concerned, in the way of legislation or anything else, it is
a matter of education, something that can be done from Federal standpoint, Federal Government, to assist in educating the public all over
the Nation in this problem, and I think you will be doing quite a
job in rendering a blow to this illegal narcotics traffic. It is a matter
of understanding the seriousness of it.
Senator DANIL. I agree with you, Mr. Green, and I will say this
to you, the purpose of this committee in conducting this first nationwide investigation of narcotics traffic, is to recommend back to Congress what the Congress may do in order to bring about better cooperation of the State and local officials on narcotics enforcement, and
in order that we might see if Congress should pass some new laws, but
I believe an incidental result of these investigating committees sometimes is just what you have mentioned; that it gives us a chance to get
the law-enforcement officers together over the country. We are going
into the 10 States which are most bitterly affected and have the most
traffic, and we hope that one of the incidental benefits of this committee's work will be to do just exactly what you have recommended
there, to awaken the interest of law-enforcement officers in cooperating
together in stamping out this traffic and also to awaken the interest of
the public. I can't help but say this at this time, while there may be
some corunittee proceedings which shouldn't be televised, I believe in
the people knowing about their business, and especially about something as serious as narcotics. And I think these newspapermen here
who have been covering these hearings, radio and television, WOAI
and others who have given this coverage so the public can know about
it, are doing a great service.
Mr. GREEN. I believe you are right.
Senator DANwm. Not just to this committee but to the country and
to the people who might be affected because there are so many people
that know nothing about this narcotic traffic, and you are looking at
one of them. I knew nothing about it until I started getting reports
fron grand juries in Texas and from Mr. Herring, the former district
attorney over here, and I heard about how Red China was pushing it
to the free nations when I was in the Internal Security Committee in
the Senate. I didn't realize that was going on. And so I just want
to say I think you are exactly right, and I want to express my appreciation to you and all of the officers who have helped make this hearing
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
TRAFFIC
2641
possible and also to the press and the radio and the television, and
others who have helped get this message from the enforcement officers
and others over to the public. And I also want to thank you for the
detailed information that you have given this committee. We have
received information from a lot of State district attorneys over the
country but this is perhaps the best, most detailed that we have received, and we appreciate the trouble that you and your assistants
went to on this information.
Now, excuse me for interrupting you and go ahead.
Mr. GREEN. I was simply going to give you an example of the need
for education. You know the seriousness of this problem stems from
the fact that there are so many of the young people coming in contact
with these narcotics. Our caseload shows a very large percentage of
the cases prosecuted in court are against defendants under 21 years of
age, as a matter of fact.
Just several weeks ago I had an individual approach me and he
said his son, while he was walking home from school, was stopped by
a man who tried to sell him some marihuana cigarettes. The boy
fortunately did nothing in the way of cooperating with the man and
waited several days and told the man about it. The man waited
severa.1 days and was asking me the question as to whom he should
report it? what about it? is it a. problem? and asking general questions
such as that. If the father had known of the seriousness of that situation, if that child had known of the seriousness of that narcotic situation and understood what that man was trying to do to him, he would
have been in position to report to responsible authorities, and, of course,
they perhaps might have put a stop to that situation. Simply an
example of a child completely ignorant of what was going on and of
how the parent was not fully acquainted with the full dangers that
lie in that particular thing. "We see it is increasing as time goes on.
We know that we must do everything we can to reduce it and put a
stop to it. I have made some general recommendations here in the
report I have handed you. I won't go in detail on those.
One thing I have pointed out, the matter of searches and seizures.
Of course, as any prosecuting official sees the problem come up in
court, it is a matter of search, seizure, and legality of the arrest. I
think again it is a matter of educating the law-enforcement officials in
this particular area, and I would be quite willing in conjunction with
anybody else to assist in perhaps something along the lines of narcotic institutes to acquaint all of the surrounding officers now to recognize an addict, how to handle, what to do with him, things of that
nature and perhaps make that on an annual basis, have annual narcotic institutions so all those peace officials in this territory, including
south Texans even who are interested in this problem, might. come
and get expert training from those people who know how to handle
this situation. I think something should be done to improve the
situation from the standpoint of the prosecutors, both State and
Federal.
We have a number of assets, as I call it, on the assets side of the
docket in fighting this narcotic traffic. We have 2 criminal district
courts and 2 judges who are very active and very interested in the
narcotic situation. In discussing this with one of our judges, Justice
Buck Jones, judge of the criminal district court No. 1. he pointed
out to me it was his opinion that this area needed an additional num-
2642
that we are operating under now that gives us that leeway. We will
be able to prosecute these individuals, also an additional law makes
it illegal to possess paraphernalia, such as a hypodermic needle, just
possession is illegal under the present new narcotic law. And also
we have our addict law which as I mentioned, permits an individual
to be convicted and given probation and sent to a hospital for treatment even though he has previously been convicted of a felony offense,
and so we think, although that law has not been tested yet, we think
that perhaps some good can come from that and the Federal hospitals
certainly should be maintained and maintained in an adequate position to be able to receive these individuals that are placed on probation
under the Texas law.
Senator DANIEL. We certainly thank you for your appearance. Do
you have any other suggestions other than what you might have in
your prepared statement!
Mr. GmE.
DANIEL.
Mr. WooDs. I have one. It has been brought out that there would
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
TRAFFIC
2643
To
the Senate
Chairman:
Suboonmittee
ATTORNEY, BExA
TEx.
In accordance with the request of your chairman, I have prepared this written
statement for your use in the study of the narcotics problem, and as it affects
Bexar County. I personally have been criminal district attorney for a period
of only 3 months, but from the Information that I have gained in my office,
and, in coordinating my activities with other local officials I recognize that the
illegal narcotics traffic Is the No. 1 crime problem in Bexar County.
We have submitted herewith a detailed analysis of the handling of all narcotics
cases in the criminal district courts of this county (State courts), covering the
2644
2645
smuggled into the United States across the Iexican border between Del Rio
and Brownsville. San Antonio is viewed as a distribution center for these drugs,
much of which winds up in the northern and eastern portions of the United States.
Since the Federal officials are more concerned with the international traffic, and
properly so, and have made adequate funds for the making of cases against large
sellers and buyers, it would seem that the San Antonio area should receive prime
consideration in the allocation of Federal narcotics agents. Of course any such
stepped-up program against the large operators would diminish the local narcotics supply, and thus permit the local officials to more adequately handle the
local problem.
Most will agree, however, that the greatest need is for more money and more
undercover agents.
III. We cite now some of the assets that we have in fighting the narcotics
traffic :
We now have in Bexar County two criminal district courts, presided over by
judges who are extremely interested in the narcotics problem. Considering the
type of cases which are filed in State courts, primarily cases involving small
amounts of narcotics, the punishment and sentences that have been levied by the
courts and juries have generally been good.
Since taking office, I have been particularly interested In expediting our
felony cases before the grand jury, so as to reduce the delay in indicting the
offenders and thus reducing the time before disposal. Our present Bexar County
grand jury is now meeting 4 times a week instead of 2 times a week as was
customary in the past, and with the cooperation such as displayed by this
grand jury, we have brought our cases to a current status.
We also expect to receive great benefits from recent amendments of State
narcotics laws. For instance, the penalty (for first offenders) under our State
law is now any term in the penitentiary not less than 2 years nor more than
life. This gives the prosecutor the latitude that is required. The minimum
is not too large, so that a jury may give a light sentence where it feels so
inclined. On the other hand the maximum has been increased from 10 years
to any term of years including life, so that a jury may now assess any term
which it feels is justified by the facts in the case. Another benefit has been
the amendment which makes it illegal to possess a hypodermic needle, which is
not possessed under doctor's instructions. This permits a conviction in cases
where various narcotics paraphernalia is seized on the person of an individual.
Our law now permits a probationary sentence in the case of an addict who should
be sent to a hospital for treatment and cure, despite a previous narcotics conviction. This law is relatively untested, yet we trust that many benefits will
come of it. A suspended sentence is not permitted under the present law.
If any further facts or statistics concerning the disposition of narcotics cases
in the Bexar County courts are required by the committee, we would be very
happy to furnish them.
We thank you for the opportunity of appearing before this subcommittee.
NARCOTIC CASES FILED IN CRIMINAL DISTRICT COURTS OF BEXAR COUNTY,
DURING YEARS
TEX.,
1953-55
Included are a list of every narcotic case filed during the respective years, a
brief explanation of each case no-billed by the grand jury, a brief explanation
of each case dismissed by the court and a statistical breakdown of the cases filed
as to kind of narcotic and disposition.
1955 to date
1954
1953
28
81
72
20
0
57
2
25
0
No bills ------------------------------------------------------
Pending ---------------------------------------------------
3
0
7
7
1
8
38
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3 months 25 days.
3 months 26 days.
2 months 15 days.
2646
Year 1953
-------------------------------------------
28
No bills
-------------------------------------------------------Dismissals
-----------------------------------------------------Convictions
----------------------------------------------------Acquittals
-------------------------------------------------------
5
3
20
0
Convictions
Cases
Penitentiary ---------------------------------------------------------------Probation -----------------------------------------------------------------Suspended sentence -----------------------------------------------------Total -----------------------------------------------------------------
Years
14
6
0
36
16
0
20
52
Cases
Kind of narcotics
Heroin
--------------------------------------------------------------------------Marihuana ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Dilandid
-------------------------------------------------------------------------Morphine -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
13
13
I
1
28 cases
Heroin
Marihauna
Dilandid
Morotine
Cases ------------------------------------------
13
13
2
0
11
0
3
3
7
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
13
11
13
7
1
1
1
1
10
1
0
26
4
0
6
1
0
15
2
0
0
1
0
0
3
0
0
1
0
0
2
0
11
30
17
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
TRAFFIC
2647
Defendant
William D. Henson_
Dilandid ----tablets. - 24
Heroin ---- capsules - 21
Disposition
Disposition
date
Filing
date
Feb. 19
3 years probation.
Do.
Probationary retiew.
63713 Lorenzo Medrano - ----- do---------- do ---1 July 13 July 29,1953 No bill.
63763 Moises Contreras ------- do---------- do ---15 July 21 July 24, 1954 3 years probation.
June 30,1955 Probationary review.
63754 Milton Wyatt ------ Marihuana.cigarettes.. 10 July 27 Aug. 21,19,53 2 years pen tentiary.
---.
do ---------- do...
63771 Juan Cisneros ------July 23
Oct. 13,1953 No bill.
--capsules.
63800 Roy Trevino -------- HeroinJuly 24 Nov. 16,1953 2 years probation.
Oct. 13,1954 Probationary review.
July 25 Dec. 3, 1953 Dismissed.
63803 John Matula -------- Marihuana.cigarettes.
Heroin- --- capsules.
63876 Percy Williams ....
Aug. 21 Oct. 22, 1953 2 years penitentiary.
63877 Pete Alcoser, Jr_____-Marihuana- cigarettes_.
Aug. 24
Oct. 23, 1953 2 years probation.
63878 Raul Moreno ----------..do --------- do- - -do...... Oct. 22,1953
2 years penitentiary.
do --------- do-_63880 Rudy Orosco .......
.....
3 Aug. 18 ---- do----- 3 years probation.
do -------- do. .....
7
June 20, 1955
Probationary
rev iew.
Morphine- --- gram. ..L
63882 E. C. Klobedous ....
Aug. 18 Dec. 14,1953 2 years probation.
63932 Juan Garcia --------- Marihuana. cigarettes- 2 Sept. 2 Nov. 10, 1953 3 years probation.
June 18, 1953 Probationary review.
_ d o -----Oct. 22,1953 2 years penitenHeroin.....-- capsules. - 1 -63938 Lorenzo Medrano --tiary.
63939 Emilio Ramos .....
------------ do-.... I -do
--do -l)o.
----.
do
No%
.
3,
19h3
19----3
6395
Alejandro Aguirre. _ Marihauna-cigarettes..- 15 Sept. 8..
Dismissal.
Nov.
10,
19.53
63974 Carroll L. McMa. ------- do ___
1 -(doSupt. 12
No bill.
han.
(10 -grains..
13-----do-- 63975 Ruben H. BuckNov. 17.1953 Verdict, insane.
holdt.
I)(-c. 8, 1954 Verdici, sane.
63978 George Moore ------- Heroin ..................
Nov. 5, 1953 2 years penitentiary.
63995 Jesse Villalobos ------- do ------- capsules.
Sept. 21 June 22, 1954 3 years penitentiary.
Oct. 14
64098 -Crescencio Ramirez- --.. do---------- do....-Nov. 18,1954
No bill.
64111 Antonio Fernandez- --- do ---------- do- Oct. 23
2 years penitenJan.do .5,...
tiary.
Leonardo Varela ------ do ---------- gram s
64143
Nov. J_ dtn. 25, 1954
5 years penitentiary.
64159 Aaron Walker ------ Marihuana -grains
Nov. 4
.1i1t1. 19,1954 No bill.
do ------ cigarettes
64220 James L. Grant ------an. 28, 1954 3 years probation.
Nov. 24 Feb.
re10,1955 Probationary
view.
64239 Samuel Mireles ....
Heroin ------- grams.
2 Dec. 3._.
Aug. 30,1954
4 years probation.
64334 Henry Lee Williams. Marihuana...ounces._ 10 Dec. 30.. Mar. 24, 1954
2 years penitentiary.
6182
68021
June 10
NO BILLS, 1953
2648
8
7
57
---------------------------------------------------------
Acqittals --
Pending
Convictions
Years
Cases
Penitentiary --------------------------------------------------------------Probation -----------------------------------------------------------------Suspended sentence -------------------------------------------------------Total -----------------------------------------------------------------
49
7
1
188
15
5
57
208
Kind of narcotic&
4
3
--------------------------------------------------------------------------Heroin
Marihuana ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Opium
81 cases
Marihuana
Heroin
Opium
Cases --------------------------------------------------------
41
39
5
3
29
1
3
3
4
28
1
3
0
0
0
0
1
41
29
39
26
1
0
Cases Years
26
3
0
102
6
0
22
4
1
86
9
5
0
0
0
0
0
0
29
108
26
90
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
2649
TRAFFIC
Defendant
64342
Catarino Hernandez-
Jan.
Apr.
64365
Marihuana ---------
Jail.
64415
Emillano Hernandez. 2
Luis Ramos
Joe Perez, Jr -------Joe Castro ..........
Jan.
25
Mar. 18,1954
()
do ----cigarettes------2
Filing
Disposition
date
date
1,1954
Disposition
years penitentiary.
2 years penitentiary.
3 years probation.
No bill.
Do.
2 years penitentiary.
64419 David Pena.
25 Apr. 6,1954 No bill.
... .
(1) Jan.-(do
64420 Carlos Guzman -----do ----cigarettes-_----6 Jan. 25 Dec. 16, 1954 3 years penitentiary.
__do ....................
64421 John Doe .......
Pending.
... 27do3 years peniten64424 Frank L. Martinez. -_
do ---- cigarettes.----18 Jan. 27 Mar. 1,1i94
tiary.
64435 Joe Escobedo .......
-.. do --------- do....
38 Jan. 28 Aug. 31. 1955 10 years penitentiary.
64436 Robert Bueno ----do --------- do ....
----1 --- d o -----Apr. 15, 1954 2 years probation.
64528 Aurelio Silva -------- Heroin ---- capsules- 10 Feb. 9 Apr. 6,1954 No bill.
64529 Francisca Garcia ..-do ------ grains-_ 2 ---do-....
Apr. 15,1954 2 years probation.
64539 Samuel Sheppard .... Marihuana cigarettes 10 Feb. 10 Dec. 3, 1954 D ismissed.
64579 Santiago Benavides._ - -- do- ------- do-- 98~ AMar. 8 May 13,1954
years penitendo ------ pounds------_1
tiary.
64608 James Shaw_
do cigarettes -----10 Mar. 11 Sept. 13, 1954 2 years probation.
do ---------- do-..-.. 30 ----64618 Rudy Gomez -------Mar. 12 May 6,1954 4 years penitentiary.
d o -------- 2 years peniten64624 Susano Mercado-.do------- pound. ----- 1 Mar. 16 _---tiary.
5 Apr. 2 June 9,1954 Dismissed.
64683 Antonin E. Gascar -- --.. do ------ pounds.
capsules__ 30 Apr. 6 May 25, 1954 No bill.
64700 Rudy Gomez -------- Heroin ....
64734 Robert O. Quintero.. Marihuana cigarettes- 9 Apr. 12 Dec. 14, 1954 4 years penitentiary.
1 Apr. 19 June 14, 1954 Dismissed.
64746 Rudy Gonzales ------ Heroin ---- capsule-. 64841 Rudy Flores -------- ......
grams..
(In Federal Peni3 May 6
(3)
tentiary) 10 years
sentence.
do --------- do-..----I May 10 Feb. 2,1955 2 years probation.
64846 Antonio Perez ------64880 Maria Torres ------- Marihuana-cigarettes - 53 May 21 Nov. 16,1954 3 years penitentiary.
do..-------- do ...
----- 1 June 3 June 11, 1954
64885 Oscar Guerrero -----Do.
(2)
do -------- do .... ----- 2 May 28
64892 Pat Phillips ........
Bond forfeited Dec.
15, 1954.
Heroin ---- capsules.
2 May 28 Mar 11, 1955
64893 Antonio Garcia 2 _ _.
Dismissed.
-.-.-.-d o ..
-- .-----.. . d o ---- 5 -- do..-64894 Felix Ramos 2.......
July 19,1955 3 years penitentiary.
do --------- do...---5
64895 Martin Sanchez 2....
May 28 Oct. 26,1954 5 years penitentiary.
64896 Joe Armauza 2 --- Marihuana-cigarettes._ 25 May 28 Nov. 3,1954 2 years penitententiary.
Heroin ---- capsules__ 3 May 28 Aug. 2,1954
64897 Mike MartineZ 2____
1)o.
64898 Sabino Jaramillo 2 __ ----- do --------- do .... 4 May 28 May 23, 1955
Do.
3 May 28 July 9, 1954
64899 Baltazar Garcia 2 ._ ----- do--------- do ....
Do.
----- do -------- do .... 5 May 28 _---- do -----64900 Paul Leyva 2 .......
3 years penitentiary.
64901 Genaro Molina 2....
----- do.........
do....
3 May 28 Sept. 16,1954 4 years penitentiary.
4 -.. do.....-- July 19, 1954 3 years peniten64902 Cresencio Martinez 2 ----- do --------- do ....
tiary.
.... do ------- grams_ 2 June 1 Oct. 26, 1954 o years peniten64917 Joe Vasquez, Sr .....
tiary.
(1)
__do --------- do ....
6 June 18
64986 Jose F. Encina_
Bond forfeited
(Federal; infinistesimal).
65001 Marcos Baez -------do -------- do-do---- .....
June 26 July 28. 1954 5 years penitentiary.
do -------- do .... ----- 2
65002 Ciralda Ramirez 2_ __
Aug. 7,1954 2 years penitentiary.
--- d o ----65003 Cresencio Ramirez._
do .........
do.... ..... 9
June 23, 1955 Dismissed.
----- do ---------- do ....
4 July 6 Sept. 9, 1954 10 years peniten65032 Alfonso Terrazas -tiary.
Mar ihuana-cigarettes_ 20 July 8 July 19, 1954
65054 Eligio Nino-----3 years penitentiary.
65061 Alphonso Hernandez.
- do.... -do. July 12 --2 years pewitenDee. 6. 1954
tiary.
65070 Joe Barrientes ------do
..
.do-.... 50 --- do.. Dec. 15, 1954 10 years penitenS
oI
tiary.
See footnotes at end of table, p. 2650.
64416
64417
64418
{2
2650
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
TRAFFIC
Defendant
65074
65095
65096
65100
Maudine Mosely...-
65124
65125
Esequiel Salinas.....
--- do -------
4 -.do
6.51.51
65164
Heroin -
capsules-..
)Osition
16
July
Aug. 19,1954 2
-do....
Aug.
Oct. 9,1954
Oct. 12,1954
Nov. 8, 1954
...-
Nov. 15,1954
Aug. 13
Oct.
Eddie Espiniza_....
Heroin ----capsules. - 21
Aug. 27
Sept. 16,1954
65165
65211
65264
65295
Loranshiel Tealer 2
65348
Rudy Escamilla
65349
Robert Quintero_....
6&361
Arturo Gonzales-----
65372
65406
----do -- capsules. - 5
George Espara-.
Billy Jean Davis....-d o -------- ---------------
65440
Gene M. Smith 2
Marihuana ----------
65454
65487
65489
Victor Villarreal_-_
Carmen Balderas..Joe Gonzales 2.......
65490
Carlos Lujano
65498
Mar. 29,1955
Jan. 12, 1955
Mar. 29, 1955
Mar. 24, 1955
do........
Mar. 28, 1955
Dec. 23, 1954
-....
.... cigarettes..-do3
---.
._do..
2_ _ _ _
o ... ..
65562
Daniel Estrada...----
65589
Moses Westman
65590
Opium..............
65591
Marihuana ..........
I Unknown amount.
2
Denotes sale.
Oct. 13
Mar. 8, 1955
Oct.
34
9
-cigarettes.-
Heroin -------------
Oct.
Oct. 16
Apr.
Oct. 19
(3)
Apr. 15,1955
Nov.
Jan.
()
(1
_-d...
6,1954
Marijuana cigarettes..
(4)
(4)
...
(4)
42 Nov. 29
42 --- do-.11 Nov. 9
I Dec. 2
-_
4))d
.(. 13
Dec.
Dec. 20
Pending.
1,1955
5,1955
Nov. (8)
15, 1954
May 23, 1955
Feb.
9,1955
4 Infinitesimal amount.
years penitent.
tiary
Do.
No bill.
2 years penitontiary.
3 years penitentiary.
4 years penitentiary.
2 years penitentiary.
5 years penitentiary.
Do.
2 years probation.
4 years penitentiary.
6 years penitentiary.
3 years penitentiary.
4 years penitentiary.
3 years penitentiary.
Do.
(In narcotic hospital.)
3 years penitentiary.
2 years probation.
Set Nov. 21, 1955.
5 years penitentiary.
6 years penitentiary.
3 years peniteiitiary.
No bill.
Not guilty.
No bill.
Dismissed.
Do.
Not guilty.
7 years penitentiary.
5 years penitentiary.
7 years penlte 'tiary.
(In narcotic hospital.)
5 years suspended
sentence.
To minor.
NO BILLS, 1954
64416. Luis Ramos: Possession of marihuana; 12 cigarettes. Marihuana purchase was made by Sergeant Sandoval. Deposition of Sandoval taken.
.....
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
2651
TRAFFIC
1954
2-------------
Acquittals
Pending
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------25
------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Convictions
Cases
Years
Penitentiary ................................................................
P ro b atio n . . ...... ........... ...............
........... .. ..........-Sqspended sentence --------------------------------------------------------To ta l . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Averge: 3.32 years per conviction; 74 percent conviction.
,1515-56-pt. 7-
20
83
2652
21
42
I
I
Heroin ------------------------------------------------------------------------Marihuana
----------------------------------------------------------------------Dolophine -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Demerol -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------65
NoTE.-Habitual user of narcotics cases and possession of narcotic paraphernalia cases, of which there
are 7, are included in the total number of cases filed.
Marihuana
Dolophine
Demorol
Cases ------------------------------------------
21
42
1
0
7
0
13
7
1
14
0
20
0
0
0
0
0
1
21
7
42
14
1
0
1
1
7
0
0
30
0
0
11
2
1
35
5
4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
2
0
30
14
44
Defendant
Narcotics andFiling
65761
65767
65779
Marihuana ..........
Heroin.
Marihuana cigarettes__ -
65783
Helen Cuevas----.--
Heroin ----------------
65810
65811
date
Disposition
date
Feb. 1
__ do----Feb. 7
Feb. 15
--- do----
Mar. 30,1955
Mar. 22, 1955
65812
65900
65906
65943
Mar.
Fedo 21--Feb. 21 May
Apr.
Feb. 23
Mar. 5 May
65956
65957
66003
do
do ---------------
66007
do ---- capsules.
66023
661)24
6i080
65081
65093
65139
66140
do..-..
Feb.
Mar.
--- doMar.
Mr.do
Mar.
Mar.
15, 1955
20,1955
25, 1955
23, 1955
(2)
Disposition
No bill.
Do.
2
years penitentiary.
4 years peniten.
tiary.
2 years probation.
4 years pcitenitiary.
No bill.
3 years penitentiary.
Do.
4 years suspended
sentence.
Dismissed.
Nonarrest.
Do.
10 years penitentiary.
3 years penitentiary.
NMar. 15 Aug. 25, 1955 No bill.
Do.
- - do-.------ do ........
(2)
Mar. 28
--_do ---- Sept .19, 1955 3 years penitentiary.
Mar. 31 Apr. 15,1955
2 years probation.
Apr. 13 Sept. 30, 1955 4 years penitentiary.
--- do ....
June 14, 1955 3 years penilntiary.
(2)
14
(2)
14-11 May 26,1955
14 June 3,1955
-.-.-----
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
2653
TRAFFIC
Defendant
ase
Filig
Disposition
date
date
(2)
(2)
(2)
66163
66165
66233
66238
(6239
Apr. 18
__do _
May 3
. do_ May 10
May 23,1955
66237
do -------- do..-..
May 17
June 20,1955
66288
66300
66335
June 7
May 23
June 8
6W85
June 21
June 28
C6389
66394
66402
66F,411
Mike Sanchez 3.
- do ------- do
19
Ricardo Torres 3.
-- do ------- do-...
3
Willie Win --------- ----- do -------. do.... 15
Eulalio Cisneros-.----- do --------- do ... 23
66412
Manuel
Moon
(Luna).
Charles Girdy .....
Frank White -------Raymond Royster__
Loretta Tarrazas .. - -..
Enrique Tarrazas_-_
Dr. H. G. WhitmoreEmilio Rosas -------Manuel Zuniga....
6423
66424
66462
66471
66472
66474
66482
66495
1
9
July 1
June 28 Sept. 8,1955
July 1 ----- 13,1955
July 5
Sept. 27, 1955
_do-....
do --------- do ----.... 1 ---
66496
66498
66522
66523
66524
6531
66539
66548
66560
66573
66574
66580
66581
66617
66626
66645
66670
66672
66681
63688
6.3708
66729
66732
o;6737
66736
....
Aug.
Aug.
years penitentiary.
2 years penitentiary.
Set Oct. 19, 1955.
Set Oct. -, 1955.
4 years penitentiary.
2
years
tiary.
peniten-
(In penitentiary).
4
years penitentiary.
2 years penitentiary.
Set Nov. 14, 1955.
No bill.
Set Oct. 17, 1955.
Set Oct. 20, 1955.
Do.
Aug. 23,1955
Oct. 7.1955
Oct. 11, 1955
8
9
._do....
-_
son.
Disposition
Sept. 20
Sept. 23
Sept. 28
Sept. 29
O(4. 3
.- do ....
Oct. 7
'Unknown amount.
Pending.:
Denotes sale.
4 Infinitesimal amount.
NO BILLS, YEAR 1'955
officers arrived at the scene, they found a match box containing marihuana in the automobile of the defendant. Defendant made a written
statement in which he admitted the possession of the marihuana, and
said that he used it for his sinus headaches. That he had twice been
2654
65767.
65812.
66574.
66023.
'AM
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
TRAFFIC
2655
YEAR
1955
J-u-r-a-s-c-h-e-k.
2656
of San Antonio.
1. I have been employed by the Archdiocese of San Antonio since July of 1946:
my chief work has been centered in the development and promotion of a youth
program that has had for its chief emphasis the concentration on a recreational
or physical activity. Boys and girls of all colors, nationalities, and creeds, have
participated actively in this year-round, character-building program that has been
sponsored by the Catholic Church of the Archdiocese of San Antonio, with His
Excellency, the Most Rev. Robert E. Lucey, S. T. D., Archbishop of San Antonio.
honorary chirman of this project that numbers around 450 clubs or athletic teams
in any given year; last year alone in conjunction with the D. C. C. Y. effectively
reaching 25,491 youthful participants.
2. Many professional and lay leaders who daily work with our boys and girlsand with our adults, too-will testify that our program has certainly been a pre-
ventive one in fighting the encroachment of several vices that are always endeavoring to come in as a "fifth column" and damage the welfare of our society.
Included in the category of vices, we must single out the one that our Senate
We
sincerely congratulate the work of this brave committee and wish all of its Ineinbership complete success in its mission, pledging to this commission all of the
2657
Senator
DANIEL.
are colored, more Anglo American addicts in Texas, that is, who have
been reported, than there are Latin Americans.
Reverend JURASCHEK. Thank you very much, Senator. I propose
the question in regard to this compulsory treatment because I think we
want to try to mae some recommendations to you good men that you
might carry back for your considerations. Shall registration of all
addicts, those receiving voluntary treatment in clinics included, be
followed up by notation on their file in Central Medical Index of
whether or not patient completed the treatment, and the like. I think
it should be so. I was tying that up with the idea the assistant district attorney recommended a while ago, of some source of keeping tab
of these people and taking care of those who could be helped, at the
same time stiffening up on those where we figure they are beyond hope.
Creation and extension of local facilities to do direct preventive
and rehabilitative work with potential and active addicts. These f acilities are law-enforcement agencies, social agencies, medical clinics,
26ydo5 8
2659
with the medical care of narcotic addicts and severe penalties for trafficking in drugs, there should be an adequate program of education by
means of all educational media.
Community, church, school, civic organizations, and so forth, make
every effort to use attractive media of education that also effectively
secure the desired end results and do not merely appeal to idle curiosity
of the public.
I was most appreciative, Senator, of your fine remarks in covering
this particular Senate subcommittee hearing. I do think it is through
means like that that we can begin to stimulate the consciousness of our
people to take this thing seriously, and above all I am concerned about
the youngsters who are involved. That is why I think you are making
a real contribution to our community. The media should be designed
in such way that commercially sponsored movies and literature designed along thrill interest lines be given competition along acceptable
but attractive lines.
Just as an off-comment, I have it here, I would advocate that the law,
contributing to the delinquency of a child, the law that we have in existence be changed in that it says misdemeanor. I would advocate that
it be made a felony. I get quite vehement when I see some things occur
and some of the things I have heard, and I do wish we could make these
things more effective to control the trouble we are here facing.
We:should like to call your attention, Senator, and 'that of the committee, to the report of the New York State Joint Legislature Committee To Study the Publication of Comics, Legislative Document, 1954,
No. 32.
Gentlemen, if time would permit I could show you a few things that,
these comics, movies, and the like are doing. I am of the opinion that
among a lot of youngsters, their morale is broken down. Their sense
of morality is thinned down certainly by this rubbish, this garbage
that some of these peddlers are putting on our stands, making it wi e
open for any kiddo to read, to see, to put I guess in his little head as he
grows up into a teen-ager, I do think if the opportunity comes along
and he thinks it is a wonderful thing-just to quote you one example of
something that you will find in these magazines quite frequently.
Here is a classical passage taken from one, we quote: "He never asked
her to share the needle. He didn't have to. She was well aware of his
scheming, of why he made her give him a fix. Rusty just lived for the
day he could get her on the needle again. When that day came she
would belong to the needle, not to Bart, not to Rusty, but Rusty would
possess her because Rusty knew in that hour, on that day, she belonged,
she would be with him, with Rusty." That sort of a thing is bound to
be by repetition-we have learne', those of us who are in education,
have learned that repetition is a good source of education. Certainly
if they keep reading this hogwash, keep getting it, it strikes me we
have got to go to that cause, to where they get the ideas.
We note that communitywide efforts be made to study multiplecausative factors that lead to antisocial behavior and encourage the
influx of criminals to our community. I should like to state that San
Antonio is unfortunately a victim of circumstances in some of the
things you are hearing. That communitywide efforts be made to set
up resources that, stimulate and furnish the people of the community
with means toward normal physical and moral growth, that stimulate
their cultural development so that, the sense of values of the corn-
2660
sciousness, and I do hope and pray that we shall see much more response of our people, of parents and others, to the responsibility of the
things that are quite terrible in our midst.
Senator DANIEL. Thank you so much for your fine contribution.
We appreciate your appearance and any material you wish to leave
with the staff we would be glad to have.
(Following is the prepared statement of Reverend Juraschek:)
We may pass all the effective laws that may result because of these hearings
but unless we get to the core of the problem our solution will not be realized.
We need a return of all our people to sound basic morality. If the 10 commandments of God guided our people in their everyday lives, you men would find
your job comparatively easy.
June 7, 1955, report on drug addiction issued by committee on public health
of New York Academy of Medicine, drew up six-point program of recommendations, of which we wish to call your attention to a few for the record.
1. "Change in attitude toward the addict that he be looked upon and treated
as a sick person and not as a criminal."
2. "Take the profit out of illicit drug traffic by making it possible for the
addict to obtain his drug at low cost under Federal control, in conjunction with
efforts to have him undergo withdrawal. Under this plan these addicts as sick
persons would apply for medical care and supervision." 1
(a) Use of public-health clinics to administer medical treatment to addicts.
(b) To avoid misuse of public-health and private medical care, but all cases
of addicts treated by these facilities be registered with a central medical index.
(c) That patients receiving medically prescribed barbiturates for diseases
other than drug addiction be registered with a central medical index to prevent
potential or undiagnosed addict from receiving duplicate administration of barbiturates from several physicians.
3. "Medical supervision of existing addicts, with vigorous efforts toward
their rehabilitation."
(a) American Medical Journal, October 8, 1955, subcommittee hearing on
drug addiction cites a case of a witness (former addict) who recommended compulsory treatment program including checkup every 30 days.
(b) We propose this question to the point: Shall registration of all addicts
(those receiving voluntary treatment in clinics included) be followed up by
notation on their file in central medical index of whether or not patient completed the treatment. I think so.
(c) Creation and extension of local facilities to do direct preventive and rehabilitative work with potential and active addicts. These facilities are lawenforcement agencies, social agencies, medical clinics, school counseling and
school social worker programs. (Provided for by Gilmer-Aikin bill. We have
no school social workers-only attendance officers.) That these facilities be
created. expanded, and encouraged to work as a team, rather than as isolated
agents in the prevention and treatment of addiction.
4. "No relaxation in the efforts toward complete and permanent elimination of
the supply of illegal narcotic drugs; provision for suppression of illegal traffic
should be retained."
(a) Adequate control of our State highways is one means of detecting and
.upnressing illegal narcotics traffic. 2 Texas State highway patrol Is presently
understaffed. Recruitment is slow as highway-patrolman salaries do not attract enough men who could undergo the rigid preparatory training, maintain
the high standards of on-the-job performance required by State highway patrol.
Presently the State highway patrol is some 72 men short of the original
strength allotted of 470 men. The last legislature allowed for 200 additional
men, but no provision has as yet been made for raise in salaries. State highway
if
patrol cannot compete with private Industry in recruiting workers. Also,
training
rate of turnover of the last 60 or 90 days continues, the State highway than add
school will do well to keep abreast of trying to fill old vacancies rather
the 200 additional men provided for by legislature to the training program.
'I think this Is very Important.
2I think this Is Important.
2661
SOURCES
2662
I I I
2663
Senator
2664
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
TRAFFIC
be kept and direct that it be kept on all these bridges, on all of these
points where there are lawful crossings from our country into Canada
or Mexico?
Mr. CmRRY. I think it's a very fine thing to have.
Senator
DANIEL.
such a -progam?
Mr. CHERRY. Well, I will be very happy to discuss the matter with
to leave the country so easily to go over into Mexico are people who
bring it back in here, to your own knowledge in many instances.
isn't that right?
Mr. AVANT. That's true.
Senator DANIEL. Is that right, Colonel Cherry?
Mr. CHERRY. That's right.
Senator DANIEL. I think we figured yesterday at the very inimurn
from what Mr. Murphy and Mr. Richards thought about those people
going across the Laredo bridge, the average amount that they might
be bringing back ran' close to half a million dollars' worth of narcotics
I I I I
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
TRAFFIC
2665
,iyear. Then if you have about the same number going across at
El Paso, it would run it up to about a million dollars' worth a year
in traffic by addicts alone, to say nothing of what they might have
spent across the border for shots they took there.
Mr. AVANT. I think the big majority of the addicts who walk across
go over to get their shots and do not bring back
the bridge to Juarez
person.
their
on
anything
Senator DANIEL. Well then we have sort of a clinic system
operation ?
Mr. AVANT. Yes, sir; we have shooting galleries, well known.
Narcotics.
to get shots?
Mr. AVANT. We have known of juveniles.
Senator D.\NIEL. That's what I mean, juveniles.
2666
would threaten, they wouldn't have to do it, but if they would threaten
to place Juarez off limits for the military personnel unless the local
officials cleaned up Juarez, they would clean it up, because the local
citizens over there who receive from a hundred thousand dollars on
up a month of this military pay for various things, they would force
the local officials to clean it up, and that is true in Del Rio and all
your border cities where you have large military establish mients.
Senator DANIEL. In other words, at Del Rio the military men go
across the border there-what is the name of the Mexican city?
Mr. AvANT. Villa Acuna.
Senator DANIEL. And spend considerable money there?
Mr. AVANT. Yes. sir. And we have noticed that with an increase in
the military personnel on this side, the town adjacent there, there is
always an increase in prostitution, narcotic peddling, and other things
which build up along with the increase in the military personnel.
Senator DANIEL. Do you find that prostitution and narcotics go
hand in hand across the border?
Mr. AVANT. Hand in hand.
Senator DANIEL. How about on this side?
Mr. AVANT. Same thing all over the United States, all over, every
place I have ever worked.
Senator DAmTEL. Do we have that kind of situations in cities in
ened with the cutoff of the money which the Army in El Paso is
spending over there every month, they will clean up their own city.
Senator DANIEL. Well, are some of these Army boys getting into
narcotics?
Mr. AVANT. Yes, sir.
2667
less?
2668
to be open except anything that has to do with any pending investigation, and probably that is why that hasn't been mentioned here. I
wonder if we might not just pass that for the time being. You said by
air, didn't you?
Mr. AVANT. Yes, sir.
attention some time ago in New York where the largest amount of
cocaine ever brought into the United States was brought in from
Mexico City through Texas and on to New York.
Mr. AVANT. I am not speaking of commercial air lines. I am talking of clandestine flights by plane which are constantly crossing the
border and violating the commercial regulations.
Senator DANIEL. Well, you are familiar with the cocaine case that
Senator
DANIEL.
2669
the border ?
2670
In other words,
Mr. CHERRY. That one he mentioned, but I have never been there
personally.
Senator DANIEL. Colonel Cherry, do you have any further suggestions to give to the committee?
Mr. CHERRY. Well, they are strictly local conditions there at El Paso
'III''''''ll
ILLICIT NARCOTICS TRAFFIC
2671
which one are just citizens, people going by there trying to live up to
the law and cause no trouble. It is a big job.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL. Why?
Senator
reasons?
so much money to operate.
Mr.
We have to try to divide it up in such a way as to take care of everything, but briefly, we mean because we have to pay overtime.
DANIEL. On those
Mr. CHERRY. Yes, sir.
Senator
days?
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
I am sorry to say that the evidence so far that we have heard shows
as much drugs going from the American side to the Canadian side as
coming from the Canadian side coming to our side.
2672
2673
you know. So we are asking you for the information. We are asking
you to furnish that and any other suggestions you gentlemen might
have, and we certainly appreciate your coming in here from El Paso
and being with us throughout these hearings.
Mr. AVANT. Thank you.
Senator
DANIEL.
2674
graphed above the hands but the rule we will follow here: he is not to
be photographed at all.
Mr. Thomas H. Bromley.
(Mr. Thomas H. Bromley duly sworn by Senator Daniel.)
Senator DANIEL. State your name please.
narcotics office.
Senator DANIFE,. How long have you been stationed in San
Antonio?
Mr. BROMLEY. Approximately 3 years and 8 months.
Senator DANIEL. How many men do you have under you here in
this office?
Mr. BROMLEY. Four men and a clerk.
Senator DANIEL. And what area does your office cover?
Mr. BROMLEY. It covers 58 counties in South Texas from Terrell
County above Del Rio down the river to Brownsville, takes in Corpus
Christi, swings back in behind Austin, Tex., almost to Temple, then
back again to the river.
Senator DANIEL. Fifty-six counties?
Mr. BROMLEY. Fifty-eight counties, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Fifty-eight counties, five men?
Mr. BROMLEY. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. What type of cooperation do you have with State
and local law enforcement officers in your narcotics enforcement?
Mr. BROMLEY. It has been excellent in the complete territory, affiliations with State, Federal and local officers and military included. In
some cases it has been outstanding. At the present time it remains
at a very excellent position insofar as Federal supervision and control
of narcotics is concerned.
Senator DANIEL. Do you have good cooperation with the officers
here in Bexar County?
Mr. BROMILEY. I do, sir.
Senator DANIEL. And in San Antonio?
Mr. BROMLEY. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Have there been any instances since you have been
in San Antonio in which lack of cooperation has hurt the efforts to
stamp out the narcotics traffic here?
Mr. BROMLEY. None that were intentional or that could not be
resolved by a fuller or broader understanding of the problem at hand.
I would not say that would exist in the true sense.
Senator DANIEL. Now, I believe you have been kind enough to
stay with us throughout these hearings. I want to express the appreciation of this committee for all that you did and for all that your
agents did in helping to prepare for these hearings, and since you
heard all of the other testimony, I just wonder if you have any
recommendations or suggestions to make to the committee in summing
up before we close this hearing.
Mr. BROMLEY. I do have, sir.
2675
Senator DANIEL. Do you also have some statistics and other information that you prepared at our request?
Mr. BROMLEY. Yes, sir, which I will give, Mr. Speer has copies of
those.
Senator DANIEL. We will make all of this information that you
have written a part of the record at the conclusion of your testimony.
(The material submitted by Mr. Bromley will be found on p. 2679.)
Mr. BROLEY. I have, of course, as you say Senator, heard the testimony by the other officers and witnesses and they have brought up
many suggestions which I think are of paramount concern to enforcement in this particular area and, of course, nationwide. They
have brought out the matter of prior convictions, perhaps there in the
Boggs Act, and the way it operates insofar as the State laws are
concerned. One of the recommendations that I might make is that
it should be reciprocal, in that at the present time if a man is convicted in State court, then it is not considered as a second conviction
if a man is given one sentence in Federal court. In other words, he
can have five convictions in State court and then be convicted the first
ime in Federal court and lie had been given the minimum under the
Boggs Act, if that could be reciprocal I think it would greatly aid
in the curtailment of this problem by giving stronger punitive action.
Senator DANIEL. All right, do you have any other recommendation?
Let me ask you about one right offhand. Do you feel that you need
more personnel for these 58 counties?
Mr. BROMLEY. Yes, sir. I believe that more personnel in this area
would be greatly beneficial in many ways. More personnel would
naturally entail more money and more equipment. I think those
things go hand in hand. Also some consideration might be given
by the local officers that we should have-I heard one officer say who
is well qualified in my opinion and by everybody else who knows him,
that we might do better with 25 additional men. I do not believe
that 25 additional men are needed in this particular area. I think
they would crowd into a position of where they will nullify their
efforts to a oreat extent. I do, however, believe we should perhaps
double our force and give us a broader cooperative position insofar
as working with local officers are concerned. Many of them tell me
that we operate on a one-way street basis, for example, that we
expect a great deal of cooperation but when it comes down to some
of the facts where they need cooperation, such as prosecution because
of search warrants or arrests in State courts, it cannot be permitted.
Then they would have an opportunity to bring it into Federal courts
under certain conditions. I believe if that could be worked out in
some way, it would give us a broader sense of cooperation. Mr. Wine,
I believe, and I have discussed that matter on many occasions and
we have it worked out at the present time in good form, but I believe
that that would help and assist the Federal arm in keeping the
excellent position that they have now.
Senator DANIEL. Well, do you think your force should be increased
at least double?
Mr. BROMLEY. Yes, sir, I believe that would assist us greatly in conducting investigations in the proper manner.
Senator DANIEL. Of course, you are well aware of the fact that it is
not the fault of the Commissioner of Narcotics or anyone in your organization probably that you do not have more men. The Bureau of
2676
Narcotics for the entire United States and for its foreign operations
has only slightly over 250 men.
Mr. BROMLEY. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. You know that?
Mr. BROMLEY. Yes, sir, I am quite well aware of it.
Senator DANIEL. The city of New York on its narcotics detail alone,
devoting whole time to narcotics, has almost as many men as the Federal Bureau of Narcotics to work the United States.
Mr. BROMLEY. Yes, sir, I was stationed there 2 years.
men himself and a detective who has a great deal of initiative and intelligence on the subject, an excellent officer of long standing and one
who understands the problem and the methods of operation and has the
complete cooperation of his local courts, to the point where it has almost eliminated our need for going in there on anything except the
larger type cases where extra funds and specialized equipment and
training is needed.
Senator DANIEL. What do you mean by cooperation from the courts?
Mr. BROMLEY. When he makes a case he gets prosecution, it is run
through.
Senator
DANIEL.
Fast prosecution?
Mr. BROMLEY. Fast prosecution and they give them precedence per-
haps over other cases, but they do get handled through their courts.
Senator DANIEL. What about the sentences?
Mr. BROMLEY. The sentences are good.
Senator DANIEL. Heavy sentences?
Mr. BROMLEY. Yes, sir, in keeping with what Mr. Green, our district attorney here for Bexar County, described.
Senator DANIEL. Do you think that rapid trials, that is, getting to
trial soon after arrests and then heavy sentences will dry up the narcotic traffic in most any city?
Mr. BROMLEY. It will aid greatly.
2677
Senator DANIEL. Would you say that has been done in Corpus
Christi ?
Mr.
BROMLEY.
the
trial down there upon completion of the court term advised me that
the sheriff and chief of police in that town told them that in the
future they expected to avoid the Federal court in every way possible
in order to take it into a court that would give them sentences commensurate with the crimes committed.
Senator DANIEL. Do you have any detailed information about these
13 cases at Victoria?
Mr. BROMLEY. No, sir, I have no detailed information.
Senator DANIEL. Would you work it up for us?
Mr.
BROMLEY.
Senator DANIEL. Could you have one of your agents give us the
information and any statements that you can obtain from the local
officers there about the cases?
Mr.
BROMLEY.
Senator
DANIEL.
years, it
2678
he could get into a hospital, she ought to go and help him get the
drugs. Whether that was a mistake or not, she did it and she told
us of coming over here and buying at a certain place from a woman
named Simona Cavazos. Do you know that woman?
Mr. BROMLEY. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Has she been arrested?
Mr. BROMLEY. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Is she now awaiting charges?
Mr. BROMLEY. Yes , sir, she is at present in the Bexar County jail
juveniles?
Mr. BROMLEY. I have had no direct knowledge of that, sir. I have
never been able to prove such. I have heard that but that is all I can
say, we never have been able to prove it.
Senator DANIEL. Was she working with a man named Ray Murdock?
Mr. BROMLEY. Yes, sir, Ray Murdock was her paramour, in spite
of the fact she lived there with her reputed to be husband.
Senator DANIEL. How was that?
Mr. BROMLEY. Ray Murdock was reputed to be a paramour of
Simona, even though all lived in the same house with her husband
included. But he was found guilty this spring and given a 12-year
sentence in this court.
Senator DANIEL. Now, was that a Federal sentence?
Mr. BROMLEY. Federal sentence; yes, sir.
Senator
DANIEL.
complete cure but from that he will go to Leavenworth or such institution as is designated.
Senator DANIEL. He is an addict?
Mr. BROMLEY. An old inveterate user of narcotics and a hardened
criminal.
Senator. DANIEL. Do you mean a hardened criminal?
Mr. BROMLEY. He had four previous convictions, his attitude in the
courtroom, when you would speak to him, and our knowledge of him
on the street definitely placed him in the category of a hardened
criminal.
Senator DANIEL. You know, once in a while you hear people who
want to establish clinics and treat confirmed addicts, who say you
ought to give free drugs; they say the addicts are harmless. Have
you seen other hardened criminals, who would perform heinous crimes,
2679
this point in the record. I certainly want to say again how much we
appreciate all that you have done toward helping us with these committee sessions.
(Following is the prepared statement of Mr. Bromley:)
STATEMENT OF THOMAS H. BROMLEY, AGENT IN CHARGE, SAN ANTONIO BRANCH
OFFICE, BUREAU OF NARCOTICS
A. Total number of defendants and quantities of seizures of heroin and marihuana for the years 1953, 1954, and 1955:
Defendants
Seizures
1953:
Narcotic --------------------------------------------Marihuana ---------------------------------------------
76
103
16 ounces heroin_
156 pounds marihuana ----
179
Total -------------------------------------------------------------------------------1954:
Narcotic --------------------------------------------------------------------------Marihuana
Total----------.
1955:
-------------------------------Narcotic
Marihuana ----------------------------------------------
33
31
.64
23
10
33
Total --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Total number of addicts reported from the San Antonio branch office territory for the years 1953, 1954, and 1955:
Over 21
1953 ----------------------------------------------------------1954 --------------------------------------------------------1955 ----------------------------------------------------------Total --------------------------------------------------
Under 21
Total
164
54
98
22
7
12
186
61
110
316
41
357
2680
Lita Demos was one of San Antonio's largest receivers of stolen goods and
accepted stolen merchandise in exchange for narcotic drugs. Many of the
top-flight shoplifters in San Antonio did regular business with her. A narcotic
agent operating under cover made his first purchase of heroin from Lita Demos
and Richard Najero June 12, 1952, and again on June 15 and 17, 1952, of approximately 4 grams heroin for $125.00.
2. During 1953 one narcotic agent assigned to the San Antonio office developed
cases against 22 defendants In San Antonio, I defendant in Del Rio, 13 defendants in Victoria, Tex., and 11 defendants In Austin.
3. Undercover work by the narcotic agent in Victoria, Tex., constituted the
largest single clean-up ever accomplished in that city's narcotic problem and
an estimated 95 percent of the marihuana peddlers there were arrested as a
result of his excellent work.
4. When working in the city of Austin during 1953 with cooperation from
their vice squad through the services of a special employee developed by the
San Antonio Police Department, narcotic squad, 21 defendants were arrested.
One of the undercover agents was successful in working into the source of
supply for this group of Austin peddlers by developing a case in Corpus Christi
which involved 3 defendants and arrest of a Mexican citizen in Laredo. It will
be noted this important cleanup was accomplished with the cooperation of the
Austin, San Antonio and Corpus Christi Police Departments.
5. A narcotic agent working with the sheriff's department in Nueces County,
Corpus Christi, Tex., and the police department in Kingsville, Tex., developed
a case against an important Kingsville source of supply. The principal violator
Arturo B. Garcia and his accomplice Jesus Gomez were smuggling marihuana
from Mexico for consumption by students at the Texas A. and I. College of
Kingsville and navy personnel of the naval auxiliary air station of Kingsville
and the naval air station in Corpus Christi. Garcia at the time was a student
and ex-GI attending the Texas A. and I. College in Kingsville.
I (NOTE.-67 ounces, 125 grains marihuana seized; $210 expended for purchase
of evidence; both defendants received 5-year suspended sentence.)
6. A narcotic agent working in an undercover capacity in 1953 was successful
in developing a case against major violator George Gilmore, at Truelove, and
two other defendants in San Antonio and El Paso, Tex. They were engaged
in the trafficking of marihuana to New York, Detroit, Baltimore, Washington,
and Chicago from Mexico. Twenty-one pounds of marihuana were purchased
for $1,000. The customs agency service cooperated in the El Paso area. One
defendant found not guilty, and the other two principals are out on appeal
since date of sentence, October 22, 1954.
7. San Antonio narcotic agents In San Antonio developed cases against major
violator Guadalupe Villareal Rocha and two others. Rocha supplied marihuana
and heroin in San Antonio proper and other major metropolitan areas in Texas.
Thirty-five pounds of marihuana and 114 ounces heroin were seized; $730 was
expended for evidence purchases. Rocha was sentenced to 10 years.
8. In the latter part of 1953, while working in an undercover capacity under
the supervision of narcotic agents, an airman of the United States Air Force,
then stationed at Randolph AFB purchased heroin and marihuana from narcotic
traffickers in San Antonio, eliminating 19 narcotic traffickers and major sources
of supply in this important military area.
9. Alfonso and Enrique Trevino Ramos of Nuevo Laredo, Tamaulipas, Mexico,
were wholesale suppliers of both heroin and marihuana out of the Rio Grande.
With the cooperation from Treasury representative Benjamin S. White of
Mexico City, Mexico and Federal officers of the Republic of Mexico, narcotic
cases were developed against both of the Trevinos. Alfonso was arrested February 13, 1953, and Enrique was arrested June 14, 1953, in Nuevo Laredo, and
both for sale of 10 grams of heroin each -for a sale price of $200 each. Both
defendants were sentenced to 7 years in prison In Nuevo Laredo jail. They
have since been released after serving approximately 2 years of their sentence,
and it has been reported that the son Arturo carried on the same business all
the time has father and uncle were in jail.
1954
1. During the fall of 1954, narcotic agents working in San Antonio developed
cases against a major group of wholesale dealers working together named
George Georges, Mike Georges, Gregorio de Luna and Rudy Flores out of the
Embassy Bar on West Commerce Street. They dealt In large quantities of
Mexican heroin obtained from Julio Almarez Bazan of Laredo, Tex., and Nuevo
2681
Laredo, Mexico, to large dealers in major Texas cities, Oklahoma City, Kansas
City and Denver, Colo.
NoTE.-George Georges was found not guilty; Mike Georges received a 4-year
sentence as did Gregorio de Luna. Rudy Flores sentenced to 10 years as first
offender. (De Luna filed notice of appeal and is out on bond.)
2. A narcotic agent working undercover in Austin and San Antonio with full
cooperation of the Austin Police Department, was successful in developing a
narcotic case involving seven dealers in Austin and their source of supply dealer
in San Antonio who was a major violator having four prior convictions for
violations of Federal narctic laws-a hardened criminal addict selling to dealers
in all metropolitan Texas areas.
Years
8entence
Raymond Murdock
----------------------------------------------12
Sebe Stephenson
------------------------------------------------10
Ernestine Sullivan
-----------------------------------------------2
(armel Campbell
------------------------------------------------5
Jose Gonzales
--------------------------------------------------6
Willie C. Eaton
------------------------------------------------3
Arthur M. Fulton
------------------------------------------------5
1Iuby King -----------------------------------------------------3
The sum of $137 expended for purchase of 37 grains heroin.
31. A narcotic agent from district No. 2, New York City, working in an undercover capacity over an extended period of time during 1954 was successful in
developing a marihuana and heroin case against Eugene J. Sullivan, Louis V.
Cawley and E. L. Brice (Cawley an American citizen residing in Tampico,
Mexico). Although the agent's operations centered in San Antonio, Tex. Sullivan
negotiations with these defendants in Austin, Dallas and Waco, Tex. Sullivan
and Brice had been engaged in the narcotic traffic over a period of 6 years as
important sources of supply for both marihuana and heroin doing business both
ways to New York City and other metropolitan northeastern areas. Eighty-one
pounds of marihuana seized, 8 grams heroin seized, $1,100 expended for purchase
O evidence.
October 24, 1955, is trial date on these defendants in Federal court, San Antonio,
Tex. Sullivan now serving 10-year sentence in State prison, Huntsville, Tex.,
on State charges in this case.
4. Narcotic agents working undercover in Corpus Christi, Tex., with the
(ooperation of the Corpus Christi Police Department narcotic squad developed
cases against 11 defendants peddling both marihuana and heroin on a wholesale
basis during the period July to November 1954.
5. During January 1954, the Customs Agency Service coordinating, a narcotic
agent was successful in developing a narcotic case in Eagle Pass, Tex., involving
3 defendants who were international traffickers of narcotic drugs in wholesale
qnntities to major Texas cities, Oklahoma City, Kansas City, and Chicago.
Years
sentcnce
Nasario J. Benavides
---------------------------------------------5
Mathias Benavides
-----------------------------------------------5
Francisco M. Tovilas
------------------------------------------5
The sum of $5,565 expended for purchase of evidence totaling 14 ounces heroin$4,500 recovered.
6. In 1954 a narcotic agent working undercover developed a case against a
San Antonio tavern owner, David R. Trevino, by the purchase of 111 grains heroin
for $240, and he was sentenced to 5 years. This case culminated with the
arrest also of his source of supply, one Dolores Rodriguez who delivered to him
direct from Mexico the amount of 2 ounces 372 grains heroin which amount was
seized without expense, she receiving a 4-year sentence.
7. In 1954 a narcotic agent working undercover developed a case against Carlos
R. Vasquez in Del Rio, Tex., expending $1,200 in the purchase of 3 ounces of
bulk morphine, he receiving a 5-year suspended sentence. Vasquez was a Mexican
citizen and principal member of a large wholesale combine in Villa Acuna,
Mexico, supplying dealers in Dallas, Fort Worth, San Antonio, Houston, Kansas
U'ity and Chicago.
26S2
1955
1. During the spring of 1955 two narcotic agents working in San Antonio and
Laredo, Tex., developed cases against 14 narcotic and marihuana dealers in
wholesale lots. Although all the dealers were important sources of supply, one
of the defendants in Laredo (Julio A. Bazan-not yet tried) and San Antonio
defendant Pete Rodriguez (See internation list No. 218A) were international
violators supplying narcotics to Los Angeles and San Francisco, Calif., Seattle,
Wash., Denver, Colo., Kansas City, Chicago and other major violators through
the United States. He had connections in New York City and maintained an
expensive residence and automobiles in Mexico City-he supplied major dealers in
San Antonio, Galveston, Houston, Dallas, and Fort Worth. Eight hundred and
sixty dollars were expended for the purchase of approximately 2 ounces of heroin
and negotiations were in process for kilo lots (35 ounces).
2. Narcotic agents in August 1955 working with the San Antonio sheriffs'
department, developed arrests of Modesto, Guadalupe and Maria Rodriguez for
sale and possession of 67 pounds of marihuana-found guilty in September 1955
term of Federal court and now awaiting sentence. They supplied wholsesalers
in Austin, Corpus Christi, Houston and Galveston, Tex., obtaining their supplies directly from Mexico through Monterrey and Nuevo Laredo suppliers.
3. On September 28, 1955, with a vice squad detective from Austin Police
Department operating as the undercover buyer, arrests were concluded of Simona
D. Cavazos, Alfonso Cavazos, Patsy Terrazos and John Palmer, Jr., and the seizure
of 34 grams of heroin. $520 were expended for the purchase of evidence and
$430 were recovered upon arrest and seizure. This case against one of San
Antonio's most important wholesale combines was also coordinated and aided
by San Antonio Police Department narcotic squad officers. All defendants
waived hearing and are awaiting trial in Federal court. These violators supplied dealers and bueysr in wholesale quantities from Austin, Ft. Worth, Dallas,
Houston, Galveston, Oklahoma City, Kansas City, Denver and Chicago-also
New Orleans.
D. Description of traffic in San Antonio, Austin, Corpus Christi and Border
areas:
Marihuana.-Observations during recent months indicate the use of marihuana in the San Antonio area is considerable in some sections of the city.
These source of supply dealers can obtain marihuana in large quantities in
Mexico on short notice. They make deliveries within 3 to 10 days after orders
are placed. Austin peddlers obtain regular supplies in small lots from San
Antonio dealers, however traffic there appears considerably restricted at the
present time.
In Corpus Christi the availability of marihuana appears to be at an alltime low
because of the excellent curtailment activities performed by the Corpus Christi
Police Department narcotic squad under its Lt. W. T. Jackson.
In the Border areas, the marihuana problem seems to be mainly transient
dealers, both inter- and intra-state, who smuggle considerable large quantities
or handle on a commission basis through various ports of entry.
Heroin.-In San Antonio the prices of heroin have dropped about 33 percent
during the past 3 years on a retail basis. There is considerable business in
ounce lots of gram decks (27 grams to the ounce) transacted with out-of-town
dealers. The wholesale price of heroin has remained almost constant throughout the past several years in San Antonio. Although numerous source of supply
dealers and their peddlers have been apprehended by local, Federal and State
officers during the past few years, we have tabulated 357 addicts since January 1953. There is a large number of San Antonio dealers transferring on
contraband which have been smuggled out of Mexico to a constant out-of-town
dealer trade.
With respect to Austin and vicinity, narcotic traffic is somewhat impaired as
a result of continued enforcement activity and implementation of the new State
compulsory addict laws, but, there is some traffic with San Antonio dealers as
well as with dealers in Mexico.
With respect to Corpus Christi, narcotic traffic has been greatly reduced because of the highly efficient police department narcotic squad. Addicts in the
Corpus Christi area generally obtain small quantities of the drug from larger
dealers in San Antonio, San Diego and Mexico.
E. The narcotic purchaser can negotiate with the large wholesale dealer only by
having sufficient funds to purchase evidence in large quantities:
Enforcement by narcotic agents in this territory has ranged generally toward
the larger sources of supply and necessary expenditure of large purchase funds has
reduced the volume of cases.
2683
Senator DANIEL. Before I adjourn or declare a recess of this cornrnittee I want to again thanik von, our committee staff. our reporter,
and all of the law-enforcement officials and other witnesses who have
71515-56-pt. 7-
22
2684
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
TRAFFIC
appeared before us, especially the press, the television, and the radio,
WOAI, for giving up all its programs 2 days to run these hearings
as a public service. I think it is a good public service, not only to
the committee and to the Congress but to the public, the people of
the country, in letting them know how dangerous this narcotic traffic
is, what a menace it is, what a cancer it is in our society. I hope that
this committee will end up with recommendations that will help
us get new laws, improvements in our laws, more personnel and above
all, that the public as well as the Members of Congress will give the
law-enforcement officers the support that they should have in our
efforts to pass any needed legislation.
I thank you, the members of the press and all others who have been
with us in these meetings.
We will stand recessed at the call of the Chair. 1We will meet, if
not before, then in the Federal Court Building, in Houston, October
17, 1955, at 10 o'clock.
(A letter to Mr. Lee Speer, investigator, Senate Subcommittee on
Improvements in the Federal Criminal Code, San Antonio, Tex., from
J. H. Osborn, postal inspector Inspection Service, United States Post
Office Department, dated October 13, 1955, on the relationship between
thefts of mail and addicts, may be found in the appendix at p. 3499.)
(Whereu pon at 5: 30 p. m. the subcommittee recessed to reconvene
at 10 a. m., October 17, 1955, in Houston, Tex.)
11111111
IN
Houston, Tex.
The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 10 a. m., in courtroom
No. 2, United States Courthouse and Post Office Building, Senator
Price Daniel, chairman of the subcommittee, presiding.
Present: Senator Price Daniel, of Texas (presiding).
Also present: C. Aubrey Gasque, subcommittee counsel; Lee Speer,
committee investigator.
Senator DANIEL. The committee will come to order.
Let the record show the presence today of the chairman, our
counsel, Mr. Aubrey Gasque, to the chairman's right, and our chief
This is simply a part of our nationwide investigation of the narcotics traffic, the first that has ever been authorized by the Congress.
We are going into all places in the United States which happen to be
within the concentration of the traffic, according to evidence developed
by us in our first hearings. It so happens that Houston, I regret to
say, is among the top 45 cities in the Nation as far as addiction
arrests and convictions are concerned.
I might add that the original item that interested me in this matter
was a grand jury report early this year from the Federal grand jury
here in the southern district of Texas pointing out how the narcotics
traffic seemed to be increasing, and that more should be done about
it. At this time I would like to make a part of the record the report
from the grand jury, which was meeting at that time in Galveston.
(The report of the grand jury is as follows:)
To the honorable judge of the United States District Court, Southern District of
Texas, Galveston Division
The Federal grand jury in session for the Galveston Division of the Southern
District of Texas for the January term 1955 here tenders to this court a report of
findings and recommendations which are based on its observations during the
2685
2686
current session. That this report is tendered to the court for appropriate action,
with the request that it be forwarded to officials of the United States Government
as deemed proper by the court.
During the current session of this body, the largest number of cases presented
to it were cases which involved either the sale, possession, transportation, or
smuggling of narcotics and marihuana, except for immigration cases. That this
grand jury, upon questioning of witnesses, was advised and believes that the
southern portion of Texas is a most fertile field for narcotic traffic and is probably
one in which narcotic traffic is greater than in other areas of the United States.
This grand jury was informed that for a 3-State area of Texas, Mississippi, and
Louisiana, there are currently approximately 17 Federal narcotic agents assigned,
which number does not include clerical help, persons in a supervisory capacity,
or special employees of the Bureau of Narcotics.
This grand jury further has information that the number of narcotic agents
operating in this area is below the assigned number of agents which are authorized
and is far less today than it was 3 or 4 years ago. It was further ascertained that
the traffic in narcotics and marihuana has remained about the same or has increased slightly.
This body was advised that a narcotic addict may require as much as $35 to
$40 a day in narcotics, and it is peculiarly within the knowledge of this grand jury
that the average person cannot realize this amount of money from a legal source
which necessarily results in the conclusion that the sum of money mentioned is
the result of robberies, thefts, burglaries, etc. It is within the personal knowledge
of the members of this grand jury that the gulf coast area of Texas from Orange to
Corpus Christi is one of the fastest growing areas in population and industry in
the United States today. That it is the belief of this body that as the population
increases, the crime rate also increase, and as an incident to the rising crime,
particularly in the narcotic field, the loss in terms of money and property to lawabiding citizens becomes greater.
The cases presented to this grand jury and the. testimony elicited clearly indicate that the Federal Bureau of Narcotics in this area, while understaffed, is
performing an outstanding duty in its detection and apprehension of narcotic
and marihuana pushers. However, this grand jury realizes and believes that
the problem of apprehension and detection in the field of narcotics and marihuana
is not one that should be under the sole jurisdiction of the United States Treasury
Department, Bureau of Narcotics, but is one that must necessarily come under
the joint jurisdiction of the Federal Government and the local county and State
law enforcement officials. It is apparent to this grand jury that the Federal
agents, assisted in some areas by local law enforcement officials, are apprehending
narcotic law violators in numbers, there is still a greater percentage of violators
who escape undetected and unapprehended, and that such percentage can be
greatly reduced by an increase in trained narcotic agents in this area. This
body must necessarily conclude that an increase in the number of agents assigned
to this area would materially effect an increase in the number of narcotic violators
who are apprehended, and as an incident to the apprehension of these violators,
would result in a lowering of violations of the State laws.
It is this grand jury's conclusion and recommendation that there is a lack of
trained narcotic agents in this particular area encompassed within the Southern
District of Texas, and that the percentage of narcotic violators who escape undetected is far greater than the number who are detected and subsequently apprehended. That this grand jury would recommend an increase in the staff of the
Federal Narcotic Bureau in this area and cannot too strongly urge such increase
and an increase in the appropriations allowed the Narcotic Bureau for its operation.
Respectfully submitted.
E. M. HUGGINS, Jr.,
Foreman.
LEE H. COLLINS,
Deputy Foreman.
H. W. NOWOTNY
MZ ember of the Grand Jury.
C. A. DANKLEFS, Secretary.
2687
Senator
DANIEL.
Mr.
Mr.
problem in Houston?
Mr. HEARD. Yes, sir; I do.
Senator DANIEL. Do you think that the narcotics traffic here in
Houston is responsible for crime, other than narcotics addiction and
narcotic peddling?
Mr. HEARD. Yes, sir; I do, Senator. I believe that taking all
things into consideration, that probably 50 percent of our crime can
be traced either directly or indirectly to narcotics.
Senator DANIEL. By that you mean that you think that 50 percent of all crime in Houston could be dried up if you could dry up the
narcotics traffic and addiction?
Mr. HEARD. Yes, sir. I might explain that a little further. When
I said directly or indirectly, for example, our safe burglaries, approximately 75 percent of all safe burglaries in this area can be traced to
narcotics or to narcotic addicts.
Senator DANIEL. Do you have any other -figure that you would like
to present along that line?
Mr. HEARD. Yes, sir. About 15 percent-we have approximately
a 15-percent increase in burglaries this year, that is burglaries of all
types, such as house burglaries, store burglaries, and so forth, and a
good percentage of this can be traced directly, the robberies, and so
forth, to narcotics and narcotics addicts, and of robberies, burglaries,
and so forth, on a percentage basis, I would say approximately 50
percent of all crimes can be traced directly or indirectly to traffic in
narcotics or to individuals addicted to the same.
Senator DANIEL. Chief, do you have a prepared statement?
Mr. HEARD. Yes, sir; I do.
Senator DANIEL. We will make your prepared statement a part of
the record here in full, together with all of the statistics you might
have arranged for us. In the meantime, you may proceed as you
desire, either to read from your statement or to summarize it. Also
the committee would be glad to hear any recommendations you might
have, and any information concerning the narcotics traffic in Houston,
together with any recommendations you can give to us.
(The prepared statement of Mr. Heard is as follows:)
STATEMENT FROM J. F. HEARD, CHIEF OF POLICE, HOUSTON, TEXAS, TO SENATE
SUBCOMMITTEE INVESTIGATING NARCOTICS.
SUBMITTED TO THE HONORABLE
SENATOR
PRICE
OCTOBER
17, 1955
DANIEL
AND
HONORABLE
SENATOR
JAMES
0.
EASTALND,
2688
for law-enforcement officers does not cover the full extent of the problem.
It is
my earnest opinion that a considerable amount of the increase in other crimes can
be traced directly to the use of narcotics. In Houston alone this year the burglary
rate has increased approximately 15 percent. We realize that some of this increase
can be traced directly to the fact that we do not have a sufficient number of lawenforcement officers in Houston and Harris County. To properly furnish the
community with the preventive methods of policing that are necessary for correct
law enforcement but at the same time we find that one of our most serious problems does arise from the use of narcotics. The use and sale of narcotics itself being
not only a violation of the law but the requirement that the body needs forces the
individual into the commission of other crimes to supply this need, thereby not
only creating and continuing a narcotic problem but a law-enforcement problem
in other crimes, particularly robbery and burglary and theft cases.
We find that one of our most serious problems in the enforcement of robbery
and burglary cases is the narcotic user being arrested, allowed numerous bonds
during which time he is free to commit any type of crime and during the same
time continuing in the use of narcotics. It is common knowledge amongst lawenforcement officials in this area that addicts contribute a large-percentage to our
burglary records. Based on records in the Houston Police Department, it is
felt that approximately 75 percent of our safe burglaries are committed by addicts.
And although we will attempt to cover in this particular report safe burglaries
and robberies, this report does not cover many other offenses which have been
traced to the addicts, such as shoplifting, burglary, auto theft, forgery, and the
procuring of girls for prostitution in order to help the addict party secure money
for his habit. We feel that if it were made more difficult for criminals to secure
bond. the police officers of the Houston Police Department would have more time
to direct attention to other cases. For example the case of Luther Spurgeon
Messer, released from the penitentiary in June of 1955, was charged with possession of heroin on July 8, 1955, posted bond of $1,000. On September 16, 1955,
again arrested for the possession of heroin with one Dolly Harris, well known to
this department. Subject is presently in the county jail on this last charge but
under our present system again would be eligible for bond which would make three
cases where this individual was arrested for the possession of heroin and allowed
bond and the freedom to roam the streets and commit other crimes. Attached
to this report please find the Houston Police Department Bureau of Identification
record of Luther Messer which consists of three pages tracing the history of this
individual when he was first brought to our attention, up until the present day.
(See the appendix at p. 3544.)
It is our sincere belief that this is one of our weakest escape clauses in the present
laws for the law enforcement officials and one of the strongest points in our present
laws for the criminal. It gives the criminal the opportunity and the advantage
in that he is protected by our laws which we as police officers are sworn to enforce.
It is generally considered by police officers that, once arrested and charged, the
criminal is on the street almost as fast as the officer. We do not attempt to lay
the blame for this on any one individual or group but sincerely wish to point up
the fact that under our present laws the criminal has freedom in his activities
with the protection afforded by the laws covering an individual's bond. We
strongly urge and recommend changes in our present laws covering the bonds and
criminal cases. As stated before, we feel that is one of our greatest assets to the
criminal. It is sometimes disheartening to find an individual with a long criminal
record arrested in 2 or 3 cases and even allowed and in additional cases. We wish
also to point up another problem concerning appeal bonds and that is where an
individual convicted of a crime-and this occurs in narcotic cases also-is tried and
convicted and sentenced and then is allowed an appeal bond, then while on appeal
bond is caught, tried, and convicted on following cases while still out on appeal
bond in the original case. For example, let us say that an individual is arrested,
tried, and convicted in a felony case and sentenced to 10 years in the penitentiary,
then makes an appeal bond, then while on appeal bond is arrested, tried, convicted and sentenced in two other cases and given 10 years in each case. Then
when he is sentenced, it is generally found that he may serve all 30 years within
a 10-year period, all cases running concurrently. We are not attempting to
criticize the judgment or the rights of the courts, but we do wish to point out the
problem it does create for law-enforcement officials where an individual is allowed
freedom to commit crimes while under bond.
To cite an additional case recently brought to our attention, the case of Jerry
Wayne Connor. This individual was arrested on January 12, 1955, for the sale
and possession of marihuana. Sentenced to 2 years in the penitentiary made an
appeal bond and since January of 1955 until the present has had the freedom of
2689
the streets in the city of Houston. On October 13, 1955, this subject was arrested
for the possession of heroin which consisted of nine caps, which were found in his
possession at the time. This subject is at present out on bond on this second case
of October 13, 1955. The case of Donald D. Parsons, now under conviction of a
series of safe burglaries, charged with narcotic violation on November 14, 1952.
Subject admitted several large safe burglaries in which the loss of property was
heavy, one case involved several thousands in electrical appliances and jewelry
which he stated was traded to narcotic sellers for narcotics.
The case of William P. Scelles, alias Billy Scalles. This subject has a criminal
record dating back several years and on December 13, 1948, sentenced to the
penitentiary for 5 years for murder. He was also under suspended sentence for
burglary, was charged with safe burglary on December 13, 1953, and remained on
bond until February 17, 1955, at which time he received 7 years in the penitentiary
for burglary, felony, theft, and forgery. This subject was continually on narcotics
during the time he was under bond and many cases of safe burglary were cleared,
that he had committed while on bond.
The case of Donald D. Owens, alias Rooster. This subject was sentenced to
the United States Narcotic Farm on October 25, 1946, for the unlawful use of narcotics. Sentenced to the penitentiary, State of Texas, on November 14, 1947,
for 4 years for burglary and felony theft from Harris County. Again sentenced
to the penitentiary, State of Texas, on July 27, 1950, for 3 years for burglary from
Harris County, discharged on August 16, 1951, was sent back to the Texas Penitentiary on April 11, 1955, for 8 years on convictions from Harris and Washington
Counties for a series of safe burglaries. This subject was a constant user of narcotics during the period of time that he was brought to the attention of this
department.
The case of Glen Hawthorne. This subject was sent to the Texas Penitentiary
on May 15, 1952, on charge of burglary having been caught in a building seeking
narcotics. His sentence was 2 years and discharged on June 9, 1953. Subject
was arrested and charged at Waco, Tex., with burglary and made bond and on
July 6, 1955, caught on a safe-burglary charge, is now under 12 years conviction
for safe burglary and the present investigation connects him with a series of safe
burglaries. As stated before, we feel that approximately 75 percent of the safe
burglaries in this city were committed by narcotics addicts. This is primarily
based on the record of cases cleared by arrest. There is no doubt that the prime
purpose of the burglar of the type listed and attached to this report is to get money
to supply the necessary narcotics for the habit.
During the first part of 1952, this department had some 18 known criminals
out. on bond for safe burglaries that were second offenders in crime and all were
drug addicts. The loss of money and property to supply their habit creates
alarm not only among law-enforcement officials but legislators and laymen.
The majority of these 18 criminals that were out on bonds during this period of
time were narcotic users. It is a known fact that we have many cases where
actual burglars are merely living at liberty day to day due to the privilege of
unlimited bonds. There is a general feeling among criminals that they might as
well steal as much as they can after they are caught in the act of committing a
crime the first time and then make bond. Another outstanding example is the
case of Floyd Carl Davis and Johnny P. Wright; at the time of their arrest for
burglary of a supermarket, they had obtained $7,400 in cash and were arrested
less than 24 hours after the crime. Each man had a bondsman and attorney
waiting to make their bond immediately after charges were filed. It prevented
the recovery of most of the stolen money being found. There is little doubt as
to where the property finally went to. The merchant faced bankruptcy as he
was unable to absorb the loss. The individuals named in this report and attached
to this report have been involved in all crimes for many years and each has had
a major part in furthering the flow of narcotics into this community. Some of
them have led others into crime and into prostitution and into narcotic addition.
In years past, we have secured information in cases where valuable jewelry was
stolen and that the jewelry and the property was taken to Mexico and traded for
narcotics.
The recent narcotics raid conducted by Federal, State, county, and city officers
was ably accounted for by the local newspapers. To quote from an article of
one of the local newspapers in which an individual, one George Angel Cantu,
said that he was using three capsules of heroin a day at the cost of $21. He
stated he had no trouble finding enough money to pay for the habit. By a life
of crime, theft, and burglary, Cantu probably was able to supply this habit.
Another individual giving the account in this particular article of the local newspaper, one Walter E. Cook, age 30, listed himself as a jobless housepainter. He
2690
said he had been arrested approximately 75 times mostly for the possession of
narcotics but had never served time in prison. This type of individual is what
gives emphasis to our rising crime rate. We feel that if it were made harder for
these criminals to secure bond, the law enforcement officials in this area and other
areas would have a better chance and better weapons to fight the rising crime
rate that is facing us today. The Federal Bureau of Investigation in its reports
has indicated the problem in a clear and concise manner. Mr. John Edgar Hoover,
in reports which are submitted to the public from time to time, points up the
overall problem in that our rising juvenile delinquency rate can provide the
criminals of tomorrow. We feel that if the narcotic addicts were limited in their
ability to make bond, that we could possibly see a sharp curtailment in other
types of crime.
It is not our intention to attempt to interfere with the civil rights of any one
individual nor to violate any ones individual constitutional rights even though he
may be a criminal but at the same time we feel that the law enforcement officials,
the legislators, the district attorneys, the judges and Mr. John Q. Citizen have
rights also which are being violated day to day not only against their person but
against their property. That the loss of property suffered by the citizens certainly
calls for some strong check to curtail the rising crime which can be traced directly
to the use of narcotics. We feel that the average citizen has constitutional rights,
civil rights that are being violated daily by the users of narcotics particularly when
he is free on several bonds and therefore privileged to commit crimes against the
public. We give our strongest appeal to this committee and to all law enforcement
officials and legislators, district attorneys, and judges to give their utmost attention and study to this problem that we have attempted to present. We feel that
the facts speak for themselves not only in this community but in communities over
these United States. The necessary steps should be taken to prevent this almost
unlimited freedom of the criminal due to our present system of bonds. I speak for
myself as a law enforcement official, as a citizen, and as a father of 4 children4 children whom I as a father must raise in a community where criminals may gain
their freedom to commit crimes with ease. Speaking as just a plain police officer,
we urge this committee and all other officials to give their utmost attention and
consideration to this matter.
2691
of Houston, and commit any crime that he saw fit to. He has a
three-page record in our files.
Senator DANIEL. What is the name of that individual?
Mr. HEARD. Luther Spurgeon Messer.
Senator DANIEL. The point you are making is that after he is
arrested on a narcotics charge, he gets out on bail rather easily?
Mr.
HEARD.
Senator
bail?
Yes, sir.
DANIEL.
Senator
Mr.
DANIEL.
HEARD.
Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. All right, you just go ahead and develop that.
Mr. HEARD. Luther Spurgeon Messer, M-e-s-s-e-r, released from
the penitentiary in June of 1955, was charged with possession of
heroin on July 8, 1955, and posted bond of $1,000. On September
16, 1955, he was again arrested for the possession of heroin with one
Dolly Harris, well known to the police officers here, and other law
enforcement officials. Subject is presently in the county jail on this
last charge, but under our present system again would be eligible for
bond, which would make three cases where this individual was arrested for possession of heroin and allowed bond, and the freedom to
roam the streets and commit other crimes. That type of individual
has a three-page record with our department alone, covering burglary,
theft, all types of crime.
We also have another individual here, or two individuals, that I
would like to point up. It is another outstanding example in this
case that I am trying to make, and that is the case of the individuals
Floyd Carl Davis and Johnny P. Wright. At the time of their arrest
for burglary of a supermarket, they had obtained $7,400 in cash, and
were arrested less than 24 hours after the crime had been committed.
Each man had a bondsman and attorney waiting to make their bonds
immediately after charges were filed. It prevented the recovery of
most of the stolen money being found. There is little doubt as to
where the property finally went to. The merchant in this case faced
bankruptcy, as he was unable to absorb the loss. These types of
individuals are out on bond continuously, and as I said before, I
wanted the committee to remember that 75 percent of our safe
burglaries are committed by narcotics addicts.
Senator DANIEL. By narcotics addicts?
Mr. HEARD. By narcotics addicts, yes, sir; and when you see individuals that do commit these crimes, once they commit the crime and
get out on the street again on an easy bond, they are free to commit
the same crime again. In other words, we have them on our hands
again.
The point I am trying to make is that practically under our present
system, it gives the individual or individuals, the narcotic addicts, a
license to steal. In fact, they almost force him to go and steal, because
when he is out on the street and everything he gets goes to his addiction, so due to the fact that he can secure his release so easily, he is
licensed and he must steal to keep up his habit, and he must turn to
stealing to make his livelihood, he must turn to crime.
Senator DANIEL. You mean to say that narcotic addicts usually
turn to crime, such as thefts and burglary, in order to buy narcotics?
2692
Senator
DANIEL.
2693
angle of it does enter into it, and I realize that full well. We realize
we may not be able to do that, but if the law enforcing officials have
our complete wishes in the matter, that is what we would have done,
but at the same time we do feel-or at least I do; I probably should
not be speaking for every individual in law enforcement, but I certainly personally feel that some stringent changes are needed, and
are needed immediately.
Senator DANIEL. Well, there is one other possible solution, I
believe, and that would be a quick trial, isn't that true?
Mr. HEARD. Yes, sir, that would help, too.
Senator DANIEL. In other words, if the courts-and some of them
are doing it-were to give preference to these narcotic cases, before
the individuals would be out very long, and the trial would be held
and the case disposed of quickly, that would be of some help, too?
Mr. HEARD. Absolutely, yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. I just want to pay tribute to the city of Philadelphia, where this year the city has rounded up 240 narcotic addicts
and peddlers, and they made peddling cases on these people, and have
tried them and convicted them. Those trials, as you may imagine
since that all being done this year, were speedy trials; and I think
that may be a solution to the problem you are talking about here.
isn't that right?
Mr. HEARD. I believe it will help, Senator, yes, sir. I would like
to point up something in regards to that, in our own locality here.
We have, as I have said before, have testified before, we have an
increase in crime, we have a 15 percent increase in ordinary burglary
cases, felony cases, the problem of a quick trial of these peddlers of
narcotics, and narcotics addicts, and the addicts committing these
crimes, the burden follows right on down the line. In other words,
we, are arresting these individuals, and they get out on bond; the
courts are overburdened with burglary cases, robbery cases, and so
forth, but if we could eliminate the problem of narcotics, or at least
curtail it, that burden will not only be lessened on us, but it will also
be lessened on the district attorney, the United States attorney and
the judges, because I believe we will see a tremendous drop in crime,
and speedy trials will automatically bring that about. I believe that
is correct, indeed I do.
Senator DANIEL. Go ahead. You were going to give us another
case, I believe.
Mr. HEARD. I was going to mention the case of Puri Perez. I
don't have all of the detail on that particular case, but she is con-
2694
sidered one of our better known narcotic pushers in this area, and
she is out on bail bond right now. You see it amounts to the same
thing.
SENATOR DANIAL.
Puri Perez, is she also known as Purificacion
Rodriguez?
Mr. HEARD. That is correct; yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. I believe she is under subpena.
Mr. HEARD. I don't know, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Is Puri Perez, or Purificacion Rodriguez, in the
courtroom? Please stand.
(No response.)
Senator DANIEL. Well, she is under subpena, and we do expect her
file, this report that has been submitted to the committee. I would
like to point up one or two here, just as a matter of record, and that is
the case of one Donald D. Parsons, now under conviction of a series
of safe burglaries, who was connected in crime with another individual,
Robert C. Harvey. He was charged with narcotic violation on
November 14, 1952, and he spent some time on a narcotic farm on this
charge. He admitted to several large safe burglaries, and the loss of
property was heavy, extremely heavy. One case involved several
thousand dollars worth of electrical appliances and jewelries, which
all went for narcotics, which he stated was traded to narcotic sellers
for narcotics.
So pointing this thing up, these additional burglaries which occur
all go back into narcotics in some way, or at least the greatest percentage of them do, and it is a problem that we are not going to be
able to get away from.
One other point I would like to point up, or another case, and that
is the case of William R. Scelles, S-c-e-l-l-e-s, alias Billy Scelles, and
this subject has a criminal record dating back several years, and on
December 20, 1948, he was sent to the penitentiary for 5 years for
murder. He was charged and was also under a suspended sentence
for burglary. He was also charged with safe burglary on December
13, 1953, and remained on bond until December 17, 1955-I want to
stress this, for the purpose of the record-he was charged with safe
burglary on December 13, 1953, and remained on bond until February
17, 1955, at which time he received 7 years for burglary, felony theft,
and forgery. He was a continual user of narcotics during the time
he was under bond, and he cleared many cases of safe burglary that
he had committed while on bond.
I may go on for any amount of time on this type of cases, but I
don't want to burden the committee or the chairman with them.
Senator DANIEL. Well, Chief, we can probably make the whole
summary of this kind of cases with this fellow George Hall, who was
a member of the Sutton ring, I believe.
Mr. HEARD. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. George Hall is a Texas colored boy who began
with marihuana use at 10 years of age. He was convicted on a narcotics charge in New York, and around 1949 I believe was the date
of the conviction, and he had an appeal pending for 3 years.
1111111111
2695
Senator
time.
DANIEL.
and we are still picking them up. Of course we set it up with the
doctor in prison for examinations, and we realized that this was the
first trial under the new law of the State of Texas, under this new law,
and more or less we were trying to break the ground for it. We hope
to follow this up in other cities, and again in Houston. I personally
intend to attend the next raid, the next thing that occurs, in whatever
city it may be. We do not intend to stop it at this point. We feel
this was more or less the original experiment in it, and we can see
improvements that we need to make, but I feel certain that we did
make an inroad or a dent in the situation, and we are generally satisfied, with approximately fifty arrested so far.
Senator DANIEL. Chief, about how many narcotic addicts would
you estimate you have in Houston?
Mr. HEARD. I would have to say that as to metropolitan Houston,
because our county is fairly well populated. I would say we would
have somewhere between 150 to 200. That, of course, includes all
types. We had 133 on this list the other night, but we didn't get all
of them. In other words, I am including the joy poppers, the individuals that take an occasional shot just for the fun of it, and the
ordinary habitual user, and all of them.
Senator DANIEL. Does that include marihuana users too?
Mr. HEARD. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. If you added in your marihuana users, what
2696
Mr.
HEARD.
Yes, sir.
Mr. HEARD. That is right, but I think the cost would be more than
that, Senator.
Senator
DANIEL.
$4,000 a day.
Mr. HEARD. For this reason, that the individual, the merchant, or
the citizen, the one who has his place robbed, or he is robbed himself,
or some type of theft is perpetrated against this merchant or citizen,
and he loses, say, $300 worth of merchandise, why, that individual
that gets it will sell that merchandise, and the addict cannot near, in
any way, shape, form or fashion, come close to selling it for that
amount, so he sells it, say, for $100, and buys narcotics with this
hundred dollars. Well, the actual cost is overlooked, that that
particular individual would lose, because the addict, in turn, will
actually sell $300 worth of merchandise for a hundred dollars, and will
take that hundred dollars, say, and for instance, say he buys $100
worth of narcotics; then say he sells $50 worth of it to another addict,
or an individual, and then that second one steals another $300 in
11111111
2697
order to pay for that, for which he probably pays a hundred, and it is
a repetition process right on up to where the loss to the public in
generall is tremendous.
Senator DANIEL. In other words, the one who steals the property
loes not get full value for the property?
Mr. HEARD. No, sir; he definitely does not. He has to sell it to a
ence, or something like that.
Senator DANIEL. Colonel Garrison told us in Austin last week that
he figured that the amount of property and money involved would be
3 or 4 times the actual cost of the narcotics. Do you agree with that?
Mr. HEARD. I definitely agree with that; yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Then the people of this city are losing from $12,000
to $16,000 a day to have these 200 addicts keep up their habits?
Mr. HEARD. That is right. All you have to do is to look at the
Federal Bureau of Investigation reports and see what it is that is
influencing the rate of crime over the country. I pointed that up in
this report. Mr. Hoover pointed up the fact that we have a rise in
juvenile crime rate, and we do have a rise in juvenile crime rate all
over the country. That is your criminal of tomorrow. If you will
look at the narcotics addiction rate, at the number of teenagers, the
individuals went up, that is individuals under 21 years of age. Some,
of course, vary. I believe in the recent raid we found 1 individual that
started at 14 years of age, and that individual has, of course, continued
with that narcotic habit, and that, of course, creates a greater problem,
and we can't say the same thing can't happen again. If it can happen
to one 14-year-old, it can happen to another and to another.
Senator DANIEL. Do you have much trouble with juvenile addiction
in Houston?
Mr. HEARD. I would say we have our share of the trouble, Senator.
Senator DANIEL. Is it on the increase or decrease?
Mr. HEARD. I would have to check my records on that to give an
accurate answer, but it is holding its own.
Senator DANIEL. It is holding its own?
Mr. HEARD. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. In this raid you made the other night, did you
find any juveniles?
Mr. HEARD. I don't believe we arrested any juveniles the other
night; no, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Did you find any who had started on heroin when
HEARD.
Yes, sir.
DANIEL.
2698
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
TRAFFIC
HEARD.
Yes, sir.
HEARD.
Yes, sir.
DANIEL.
2699
Senator DANIEL. In other words, they get out and if they are in
the traffic they make so much money they can afford to forfeit bail
bonds.
Mr. HEARD. Yes, sir. It is much easier to get sent up for stealing
a car, and harder to make your bond on that, we will say, than it is
on narcotics. Possibly I should not say easier, but I will say certainly
an individual that steals a car, and nothing else, and is out on bond,
and he does nothing else, and is not addicted to any narcotics, is
certainly not as dangerous an individual as one using narcotics, or
selling it while out on a bond, an appeal bond or bail bond.
Senator
DANIEL.
HEARD.
Mr.
HEARD.
Senator
DANIEL.
DANIEL.
Senator
Mr.
tell us the source of the narcotics
that find their way into Houston?
Mr. HEARD. I think most of it, from what I have been informed of
by odr narcotics agents, that is of the Houston Police Department, I
think the majority of ours is the yellow heroin from Mexico.
Mr. GASQUE. Do you believe it is produced in Mexico?
Mr.
HEARD.
71515-5G-pt. 7-23
2700
Mr. GASQUE. Can you tell the difference between narcotics )roduced in Mexico and those coming, say, from New York?
Mr. HEARD. Usually by the color, yes, si'. 1 am, of course, not as
experienced a narcotic agent as some of the men working on that
detail, and I don't want to claim to be that experienced, but I do know
the difference in the types of narcotics, heroin and so forth, in the
color, and the makeup of it, and in my opinion I think most of it we
are getting here is coming from Mexico.
Mr. GASQUE. That would represent your belief then, that there are
some clandestine factories in Mexico producing heroin?
Mr. HEARD. Oh, I don't know how clandestine they are, but in my
opinion there are factories operating there.
Mr. GASQUE. How does it get to Houston?
Mr.
HEARD.
MN
r. GASQUE. Through what routes?
Mlr. HEARD. Several different routes, of course. I imagine they
would try most any route to bring it across. They bring it across in
cars, on their person, or any route possible.
Mr. GASQUE. Through what cities?
Mr. HEARD. I couldn't say offhand, but I figure, not having gotten
any knowledge of that, but in my opinion, and not considering myself
an expert, I would say any route they could get it across, and from
the amount we are getting, there must be plenty of routes.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
I believe, to my
Senator
DANIEL. Mr.
SPEER. Chief, an
Mr.
addict or not, manages to maintain an automobile and perhaps live
above the average standard of a working man, does he not?
Mr.
HEARD.
SPEER.
Mr.
How does that compare with what he does after he
has been arrested and gets out on bond? Does that activity become
more or less feverish?
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
HEARD.
SPEER.
HEARD.
SPEER.
HEARD.
Mr.
Mr.
Well, usually he has to, of course, keep up his attorneys
fees, his bonds, and if he has the habit himself, he has to keep it up,
and of course we all-I don't see that there would be any differenceI would say they would like to have a little next egg laid aside somewhere, and if they had been apprehended once, it would by my opinion,
just purely as a business matter, that they would have to be a little
better salesman than before, because their buyers are apprehensive.
of them; they have got competition.
SPEER. So they would be the most dangerous type of seller
Mr.
then, in your opinion?
2701
SPEER.
forth, with these easy bonds for narcotics traffickers, the ease with
which they make bond, would you say that perhaps the narcotic
traffic right now is one of the safest rackets that a major law violator
can get into?
'Ir. HEARD. Well, I don't know whether I would say, Mr. Speer,
whether I would use the word "safest" or not. Not at this particular
time, but, certainly it would be one of the most practical and profitable
ones under th~e conditions, because he is under bond , an.d it certainly
would be one of the most driving ones, because lie figures he is on the
hook anyway, he is sunk, and he is going to tl e penitentiary, if they
have a good case on him, and they usually know wliether they do or
not, and certainly he is going to be a. little more cautious, it is going
to be harder for the undercover agents or officers of whatever agency
they may be to reach him, and with that caution, and in the normal
operation of the. narcotic sellers and peddlers, I would say he would
stand less chance of being apprehended there than he would if he
robbed a store, or committed some other type of crime. Yes, sir.
I don't -kn.o-w whether the word "safe" would be correct or not, but.
let's say that the chances of apprehension would be less.
Probably one of the most inviting
Mr. SP ER.
Mr. HEARD. Yes, sir.
Mr. SPEER. For a real major law violator?
Mr. HEARD. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. We thank you very much, Chief, and I believe
you may want to stay while we ask Captain McMahan to come
forward.
Mr. HEARD. Yes, sirl.
Senator DANIEL. Do so, if you would like to, and also sit with us
at any time you can through these hearings.
Captain McMahan?
(Captain J. C. McMahan, of the Houston Police Department, was
duly sworn.by the chairman.)
2702
Senator DANIEL. How long have you been captain of the narcotics
squad?
Mr. MCMAHAN.
Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. How many doctors have you had trouble with ii,
this connection?
Mr. MAHAN. I could name off about four doctors.
Senator DANIEL. Now, what-would you say concerning the danger
of these barbiturate drugs here in Houston? Would, you say there is
enough use of them to make it a dangerous problem here or; not?
Mr. McMAHAN. It is dangerous in this respect: it is the,firerummer
of a heroin habit.
2703
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator DANIEL. Is that the map prepared for the purpose of locating your concentrations of narcotics here in Houston?
Mr. McMAHAN. Yes, sir.
Senator
DANIEL.
or particulars?
Mr. MCMAHAN. Our heaviest concentrated area on narcotics,
especially narcotics traffic, in the city of Houston is in this particular
area bounded by black, which is in our police districts. Those districts are known as No. 7, and the large district is known as No. 8.
All of district 7 and the northeast portion of district 8, in here [indicating on map], carries 55 percent of our dope traffic in thecity of Houston.
Senator DANIEL. Will you outline those districts by street names.
just give us the approximate boundaries of the distircts?
Mr. MCMAHAN. The bayou, Buffalo Bayou, which runs into the
the Houston ship channel and turning basin area and then
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
channel area?
Senator
DANIEL.
MCMAHAN.
Mr.
or Blodgett Avenue, on out to that outlying district-I can't see these
street names from this distance, but over allSenator DANIEL. Your line there of the heaviest traffic in narcotics
branches off, and tell us just approximately what is that street, that
looks like quite a good sized street along your district line there?
2704
the rest of this district, the black line from the railroad.
Mr. MCMXHAN. From the railroad here [indicating]?
Senator DANIEL. Yes; from the railroad that you have mentioned,
and then just about how you would describe that curve around back
to the navigation channel.
Mr. MCMAHAN. This takes in a lot of the Golfcrest area. Tele-
phone Road runs here, and this is the Golfcrest area in here, and this
is a section there, on both sides, in the new Greenway addition in
there, where we have in this particular area, right in here [indicating],
what is known as the Telephone Terrors. That is a gang of boys and
girls that use marihuana and heroin. They will do anything in the
world they can. They will steal automobiles, they will beat up on
people, they will catch lone people on the street and they will beat him
up and rob him, and steal his property and cars, if he has one.
Senator DANIEL. And you call that gang the Telephone Terrors?
Mr. MCMAHAN. Yes, sir; they call them the Telephone Road
Terrors.
Senator
DANIEL.
2705
DANIEL.
Senator DANIEL. Isn't there some way they can be sent off to a
Federal hospital?
Mr. MCMAHAN. To a reformatory, yes; sir, but that would have to
be the Federal function there.
Senator DANIEL. So all you can do is to try to catch them on some
of the other crimes?
Mr. MCMAHAN. Yes, sir.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
That handles
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
MCMAHAN.
Mr.
the northeast part of district 9, which, as I said before, is predominantly colored. All right, this district here is colored, and is known as
the fifth ward. The fifth ward, that is the old ward heelers' day, and
the ward still remains known in those districts as the fifth ward, the
third ward and the fourth ward. That is all colored people.
Senator
DANIEL.
2706
Senator DANIEL. And in the Army the same thing is true. Our
committee was quite surprised to find in Austin and in San Antonio,
and now I am glad to say here in Houston, that the colored people
account for a much smaller percentage of all the narcotics traffic
than white people and Latin Americans.
Mr. MCMAHAN. We sure do.
Senator, and that is our biggest trouble here, is keeping those people
off the streets. I want to disagree with something I heard, a remark
I heard, about the traffic situation-the dope traffic. They say
that wherever you have more traffic, the more arrests-narcotic
arrests-the more you have, the more narcotics you have, and it
makes the city look bad. I disagree with that. I think that the
more arrests that are made goes to good law enforcement. I can give
you the reason I say that.
From July 1 of 1953 to July 1, 1954, there were 178 felony cases
filed. I took charge of the narcotics and the.vice squad in July of
1954, and the cases filed from July 1954 to July 1955 were against
366 defendants. Now, that is quite an increase. I don't think that
we had that much increase in dope. We just got below the surface,
and we waded out into these underground quarters, these underworld
people.
Senator DANIEL. In other words, you had an increase in law
enforcement and convictions during that time, and you don't think
those figures should be taken to mean that there is an increase in dope
traffic in the city?
Mr. MCMAHAN. Yes sir; that is right.
Senator DANIEL. It is true that these arrests and conviction figures
2707
Senator DANIEL. You can still feel pretty good about it, but, on
the other hand, you have enough here in Houston to where it is going
to be a real problem.
Mr. MCMAHAN. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. As both you and the Chief have stated that it is
already a real problem.
Mr. MCMAHAN. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. It is going to be worse if it is not stopped.
Mr. MCMAHAN. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Do you agree that addicts spread their addiction
like disease, to other people?
Mr. MCMAHAN. Yes, sir, definitely.
Senator DANIEL. So the big problem is to get the addicts and
Mr. MCMAHAN. I think that will solve our problem, yes, sir; more
dope, both marihuana and heroin, comes from Mexico. We have very
little coming in on boats, and very little on airplanes. The customs
agents are keeping that down very, very good.
Senator DANIEL. Well, of course, some of it is coming in on airplanes
to Houston, and going on to other cities.
Mr. MCMAHAN. Yes, that would be possible.
Senator DANIEL. We heard evidence that Houston is a transit point,
a point of entry, for illicit narcotics. We heard evidence in New York
not long ago that the largest shipment of cocaine in history came in
from Mexico through Houston. Two Cubans brought it in to the
airport here at Houston, and got by customs here by concealing the
cocaine in false-bottomed suitcases. It was 2} million dollars worth
of cocaine on the retail market. Of course the customs agents caught
it when they came to New York, and I can't say for sure that, these
2708
Senator DANIEL. But it does appear that Houston and San Antonio
are points of transit for a lot of this stuff coming from Mexico.
Mr. MCMAHAN. I suppose so; yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. And then are you still finding some New York
heroin here?
Mr. MCMAHAN. Very little.
I sure would.
feel that you operate under a disadvantage today in not having the
same facilities as the smuggler or the peddler of narcotics?
Mr. MCMAHAN. Yes, sir, I sure do.
Senator DANIEL. Mr. Speer, any questions?
Mr. SPEER. Captain, these arrests in 1953 and 1954, and 1954-55,
cases filed.
Mr. SPEER. Now, from your statement there, I believe you agree
that the number of addicts on the street in any given area, rather
than the number of arrests, might be indicative of the extent of the
traffic, is that right?
MIr. SPEER.
MCM AHAN.
Yes, words,
I thinkthat
thatthe
is true, yes.
TMfr.
In other
2709
Senator DANIEL. And your office does intend to do,, that in the
future?
DANIEL.
Senator DANIEL. IS there anything you could suggest, or anything you would like to say, that could add to that cooperation?
fr. MCMAHAN. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL.
Houston?
ir. MCMAHAN. I don't think we have enough men in any branch
2710
Senator DANIEL. Are you and those nine other men devoting your
time exclusively to narcotics work?
Mr. MCMAHAN. Yes, sir, entirely.
Senator DANIEL. How many men does the Federal Bureau have
here in Houston, working with you?
Mr. MCMAIAN. Three, three that I know of.
Senator
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator DANIEL. Last year, but they came to a point where they
said they had no more money to work with?
Mr. MCMAHAN. Yes, sir.
2711
the same as I do, and they are having to do the same as we are, I
think they should have something there to offset these expenses that
are coming out of their own pockets. Of course I have taken that
up with my.Chief, Chief Heard, and he has agreed with me readily.
Senator DANIEL. I thank you very much, Captain, for all of your
cooperation, and between now and January 1, if you have anything
else to offer, before we submit our report to the Congress, we will be
glad
from you.or Puri
Is to*hear
Puri Rodriguez,
Perez, in the courtroom? Or Purificacion Rodriguez?
This committee has received indirect evidence or advice that this
witness went to the hospital this morning, and I will say to anyone
who might know the witness, or be familiar with her, or her whereabouts, that the committee has received no direct communication
from the witness, and unless the witness is to be held in contempt,
some communication should be received by this committee as to the
whereabouts of this witness, and whether the witness will be here
today or tomorrow.
We will take a 5-minute recess at this time.
(Recess.)
Senator DANIEL. Sheriff Kern.
The committee will come to order.
(Thereupon the witness C. V. (Buster) Kern. sheriff of Harris
County, Tex., was sworn by the chairman.)
TESTIMONY OF C. V. (BUSTER) KERN, SHERIFF, HARRIS COUNTY,
TEX.
Senator DANIEL. Will you state your name?
Mr. KERN. C. V. (Buster) Kern.
Senator DANIEL. And your official position?
Mr. KERN. Sheriff of Harris County, Houston.
Senator DANIEL. The chairman can fill in the qualifications of this
officer, having worked with him as attorney general of Texas for a
long time, against the race-horse rackets, gambling wires, slot machines, and other things, and we are happy to hav e you before the
committee today, Sheriff.
Mr. KERN. Thank you, sir.
Senator DANIEL. How long have you been sheriff, Mr. Kern?
Mr. KERN. Since January 1949.
Senator DANIEL. Sheriff, do you think the narcotics problem in
Harris County is a serious problem?
Mr. KERN. I do, sir.
Senator DANIEL. I will ask you the same question I asked Chief
Jack Heard-what is your estimate of the crime in this county that
is attributable to narcotic addiction and traffic?
Mr. KERN. Senator, I would say 70 to 75 percent.
Senator DANIEL. Are you speaking now of the area outside of
Houston, or are you taking Houston in?
Mr. KERN. I am taking in Houston.
Senator DANIEL. You would put the figure even higher than Chief
Heard did?
Senator DANIEL. Will you explain to us why you put such a high
figure on the crime in this county attributable to narcotics?
2712
22LICIT'
NARCOTICS THAFFiC
Mr. KERN. Well, just from the records, looking at the records,
reading offense reports and dealing with these individuals over a
period of years, some 27 years, to be exact, and naturally I have
ecome acquainted with a number of them, and we find in our records
and reports there that they are either addicted to heroin or morphine,
or they are marihuana users, one or the other.
Senator DANIEL. What was the figure you finally put on it?
Mr. KERN. I would say 70 to 75 percent.
SENATOR DANIEL. Of all of the crime in the county?
Mr. KERN. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. You think if you could clean up the drug addiction
and drug traffic in this county you could, by the same token, clean up
that much of the crime in the county?
Mr. KERN, NO, I wouldn't say that. I would say it would cut it
down to a minimum figure, but I wouldn't say it would cut it down
that much, because regardless of whether they use narcotics or not,
there is always going to be stealing, I guess.
Senator DANIEL. Some of these people, as soon as they are on the
street, will probably be doing something else, is that what you mean?
Mr. KERN. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Do you find many narcotic addicts are of the
criminal bent to begin with, and went into crime even before they became drug addicts?
Mr. KERN. I do, sir, but I think narcotics has been a great point in
contributing to the criminal records that most of them have.
Senator DANIEL. At least their addiction has been one thing that
makes them continue in the life of crime?
Mr.
KERN.
Yes, sir.
DANIEL.
office?
No, sir.
DANIEL.
2713
Yes, sir.
I have
2714
2715
Mr. KERN. Well, I don't know whether I have covered the bond
situation sufficiently or not.
Senator DANIEL. You said you agreed with Chief Heard.
Mr. KERN. For second offenders, I think they should be denied
bond.
Senator DANIEL. Mr. Counsel.
Mr. GASQUE. Sheriff, I would like to know how you feel about wiretapping?
Mr. KERN. I am very much in favor of it-not only using wire-
2716
Mr. GASQUE. What would you think would be the route it takes to
get to Houston?
Mr. KERN. Well, to Houston naturally the closest route would be
through Brownsville. There are times when you can walk all over
that river. You can come out anywhere. There are times when
there is not a bottle of water in that river, and they could cross it
most anywhere.
Mr. GASQUE. You do feel that is the source of heroin into Houston?
Mr. KERN. From Mexico, yes.
standing.
Senator DANIEL. We certainly appreciate your testimony, Sheriff,
and your desire to give this committee the benefit of the experience
and information you have obtained. We hope you will let us have
any other information you may have during the hearings, and we will
be glad to make it a part of the record, before we report to Congress
in January.
Senator DANIEL. M{rs. Schofield, you will stand up and be sworn.
Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you are about to give
this subcommittee of the Senate Judiciary Committee will be the
truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?
Mrs. SCHOFIELD. I do, sir.
1948 or 1949.
Senator
heroin?
DANIEL.
2717
Senator DANIEL. Did someone give you your first heroin or did
you buy it?
Mrs. SCHOFIELD. I bought it.
Senator DANIEL. About how many other people did you know that
that were using it?
Mrs. SCHOFIELD. I knew about 20 kids that were using drugs at
that time. Some of them were in high school and some had just
graduated.
Senator DANIEL. How many times did you use heroin before you
felt like you had to have it every day or every other day?
Mrs. SCHOFIELD. It took 6 months to a year before I had a habit.
Senator DANIEL. Six months to a year before you had a habit?
Irs. SCHOFIELD. Yes.
Senator DANIEL. Did you
Mrs. SCHOFIELD.
Senator DANIEL. What does it cause, what kind of pain, when you
are a. heroin addict and you have it taken away from you?
Mrs. SCHOFIELD. How does it feel?
Senator DANIEL. Yes.
Mrs. SCHOFIELD.
nose runs, and then you start getting cramps, and every bone, muscle
and nerve in your body aches. And then you start vomiting, and get
diarrhea, and you can't eat, and you can't sleep.
Senator DANIEL. Have you ever known anyone to die from that?
Mrs. SCHOFIELD. Yes, I had a girl friend in New York that died.
Senator
DANIEL.
Mrs. SCHOFIELD.
Senator
DANIEL.
Mrs. SCHOFIELD.
Senator DANIEL. And when you got out of jail or wherever you
were, did you go back to using heroin?
2718
Mrs. SCHOFIELD.
And eventually I
Senator
DANIEL.
you in California?
Mrs. SCHOFIELD.
Senator
DANIEL.
Mrs. SCHOFIELD.
Senator
DANIP'.L.
Mrs.. SCHOFIELD.
Senator DANIEL.
Do I have to answer?
rather not.
SCHOFIELD.
Senator DANIEL.
Mrs. SCHOFIELD.
Senator DANIEL.
In California.
What type heroin, was there any difference?
It was about the same.
About how high would your heroin habits run
you in Texas?
Mrs. SCHOFIELD. When I had the habit?
Senator
DANIEL.
Mrs. SCHOFIELD.
Senator DANIEL.
Mrs. SCHOFIELD.
Yes.
I have had it where I spent $50 a day.
Since you have been in Texas?
Yes.
Senator DANIEL. Did you find it was necessary to violate the law
to get the money to buy that heroin?
Mrs. SCHOFIELD.
Senator
DANIEL.
Yes.
Was your husband an addict?
My legal husband, well he had used some drugs,
Mrs. SCHOFIELD.
but he is not an addict.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Was he an addict?
Senator
DANIEL.
Mrs. SCHOFIELD.
Senator
DANIEL.
Mrs. SCHOFIELD.
Senator
DANIEL.
Mrs. SCHOFIELD.
Senator
DANIEL.
Mrs. SCHOFIELD.
Senator
DANIEL.
the man you have just told us about, given 6 years in 1954 on a
Federal charge, and 10 years in the State court, for a total of 16 years"
Mrs.
SCHOFIELD.
That is right.
11111111
2719
Senator
in Houston?
convicted?
Senator DANIEL. How long did you live with George Drury?
Mrs. SCHOFIELD. Two or three years.
Senator DANIEL. During that time when he was selling heroin
did you help him in any way?
Mrs. SCHOFIELD. Well, I never did sell any of it. I carried it
across the border.
Senator DANIEL. You helped carry it over the border?
Mrs. SCHOFIELD. Yes.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
SCHOFIELD.
Mrs.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Mrs. SCHOFIELD.
Yes.
Senator
DANIEL.
Mrs. SCHOFIELD.
Senator
DANIEL.
Mrs. SCHOFIELD.
Senator
Yes.
warned of her constitutional rights, and also of the fact that she could
refuse to testify on the grounds that her refusal to answer certain
questions might incriminate her; and that she has answered all questions we have asked her except as to the identification of certain
people who are in the narcotics traffic; and in view of the fact that
she has agreed to tell us everything except these connections we are
going to receive her testimony and accede to her desire not to reveal
those connections. So that the record may be clear, that is the
understanding we have had with this witness, that this information
will not be given in a public session.
I don't know whether you meant to include the people you bought
from in Mexico. Do you mean to include those as the people you do
not identify in open session?
Mrs. SCHOFIELD.
session.
Senator
DANIEL.
DANIEL.
2720
Mrs.
SCHOFIELD.
$20 a gram.
DANIEL. It
cost
Senator
der?
DANIEL.
SCHOFIELD.
Senator DANIEL.
Senator DANIEL. You were arrested the other day in this round up
of narcotic addicts?
Mrs. SCHOFIELD.
Senator DANIEL.
your arrest?
Yes, sir.
Had you been using heroin up to the time of
Senator
DANIEL.
city?
Mrs. SCHOFIELD. In San Antonio.
Senator
DANIEL.
in Mexico.
Senator DANIEL. Would that be white or brown heroin?
Mrs. SCHOFIELD. Brown.
Senator DANIEL. Do you know whether there is any difference
between the white and the brown?
Mrs. SCHOFIELD. As far as I know, the brown comes from Mexico
and the white comes from the east coast.
Senator DANIEL. You can get either one in San Antonio?
Mrs. SCHOFIELD. Yes.
Senator
Mrs.
DANIEL.
SCHOFIELD.
2721
white now.
Senator DANIEL. How long has it been mostly white?
Mrs. SCHOFIELD. The last 3 or 4 months.
Senator DANIEL. Would that indicate that the heroin is coming
from the west coast or from New York?
Mrs. SCHOFIELD. It would indicate it was coming from New York.
Senator DANIEL. Why do you say that those purchases of white
heroin for the last 3 months indicate to you that it is coming from
New York?
Mrs. SCHOFIELD. Well, I know of no white heroin sold in Mexico.
Senator DANIEL. Did you get any white heroin from California?
Mrs. SCHOFIELD. I never have.
Senator DANIEL. Was it also dark like Mexican heroin?
Mrs. SCHOFIELD. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Has it been possible to get white heroin pretty
easily here in Houston for the last 3 months?
Mrs. SCHOFIELD. That is all they have had practically.
Senator DANIEL. I want to be sure I understand you. You say
that is all they have had practically for the last 3 months?
Mrs. SCHOFIELD. Yes, sir.
Senator
2722
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
TRAFFIC
Senator
DANIEL.
Mrs.
SCHOFIELD. Yes.
Senator DANIEL. About
SCHOFIELD.
capsules.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
SCHOFIELD.
Senator
DANIEL.
SCHOFIELD.
No.
Senator DANIEL. Did you have any trouble getting druggist to fill
your prescriptions in New Orleans?
Mrs. SCHOFIELD.
No.
Senator DANIEL. Did you ever try the same thing here in Houston?
Mrs. SCHOFIELD. I tried it here.
Senator DANIEL. Were you able to get any doctors to sell you?
Mrs. SCHOFIELD. No.
Senator DANIEL. Or give you a prescription here?
Mrs. SCHOFIELD.
No.
Senator DANIEL. Did you say heroin was easier to get in San Antonio or easier to get here?
Mrs. SCHOFIELD.
buy it there?
Yes.
Senator DANIEL. How much did that heroin cost in New York?
Mrs. SCHOFIELD. I was spending about $35 a day.
Senator DANIEL. How long did you live in New York?
Mrs. SCHOFIELD. About 8 months.
Senator DANIEL. The heroin was costing you more in New York
than in Houston. Was that because it cost more there?
Mrs. SCHOFIELD. No; I had to use more because it was not as good.
Senator DANIEL. By that you mean it was not as strong as the
Houston heroin?
Mrs. SCHOFIELD. That is right.
Senator DANIEL. Did you ever buy heroin in San Francisco?
Mrs. SCHOFIELD.
IlIII
Once or twice.
Mrs.
Yes.
2723
Senator
DANIEL.
Mrs. SCHOFIELD.
Senator
DANIEL.
Mrs. SCHOFIELD.
Senator DANIEL.
DANIEL.
Mrs. SCHOFIELD.
In the vein.
2724
I think the only thing that could be done that would stop the
narcotics traffic would be if they would open up clinics where addicts
could get it.
Senator DANIEL. So that they could get it free?
Mrs. SCHOFIELD. Not free, but, maybe for $2 or $3.
Senator DANIEL. That wouldn't, break anybody from the habit, cure
the habit.
Mrs. SCHOFIELD. No, but it would stop drugs from coming from
Mexico.
Senator
DANIEL.
Mrs. SCHOFIELD.
Senator DANIEL.
where it was tried in other cities was that it did not, satisfy addicts,
and that they would go out. to the black market to supplement their
supply and get more of the black market stuff. Do you know about
that?
Mrs.
SCHOFIELD.
Senator DANIEL.
NO.
Mrs. SCHOFIELD.
No.
Senator
DANIEL.
Mrs. SCHOFIELD.
Senator DANIEL.
Mrs. SCHOFIELD.
addicts.
years.
Senator
DANIEL.
Mr. Counsel.
Mrs. SCHOFIELD.
streets?
Previous to the raid.
Senator
Mr.
DANIEL.
aside.
Mrs. LoCascio, you will stand up and be sworn.
Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you are about to give
to this subcommittee of the Senate Judiciary Committee will be the
2725
truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?
Mrs. LoCAscoO. I do, sir.
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
you?
doing it?
Mrs. LoCAsCIO.
Senator DANIEL. And the first time you took some were some of
Your friends with you?
Mrs. LoCAsCIO. No, not when I took my first shot, no.
Senator DANIEL. Did you shoot the needle in the skin or in your
vein?
Mrs. LoCAscIO. In my vein.
Senator DANIEL. Who helped you do it?
2726
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator DANIEL. How much did it finally cost you to keep up your
heroin habit?
Mrs. LoCAscIo. Oh, more than $35 or $40 a day.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Mrs. LOCASciO.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
What trial?
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
2727
Senator DANIEL. Did you meet in New York some addict whom
you had previously met in Lexington in the Federal hospital?
Mrs. LoCAscIo. Only one.
Senator DANIEL. And did that one person whom you met at the
Federal hospital tell you where you could buy some heroin?
Mrs. LoCAscIo. No, she didn't tell me where I could buy it. She
bought it, and I used some of it.
Senator DANIEL. She bought it for you?
Mrs. LoCAscIo. Yes.
Senator DANIEL. She had already gone back on heroin herself after
being dismissed from the hospital?
Mrs. LoCAscIo. Yes.
Senator DANIEL. Did you know the shot of heroin in New York
that you got was going to do more than usual damage to you?
Mrs. LoCAscIo. No, I didn't think it was going to do any damage
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator DANIEL. Didn't your friend tell you that he knew of some
addict in New York who had died from these shots?
Mrs. LoCAscIo. Yes, a doctor did.
Senator DANIEL. A doctor told you that?
Mrs. LoCAscIo. Yes.
Senator DANIEL. Was that the doctor who treated you?
Mrs. LoCAscIo. Yes.
Senator DANIEL. Do you know where your husband got the drugs
that he sold?
Mrs. LoCAscIo. No.
Senator
DANIEL.
MJr.
GASQUE.
Mr.
GASQUE.
2728
7LLICLt
NARCOTICS TRAFFIC
Senator DANIEL. And I appreciate your coming under those ciicumstances. And your advice to any young person is to keep away
from heroin oir any other type of drug.
Mrs. LoCAscIo. Yes.
Senator DANIEL. Is that right?
Mrs. LoCAscIo. Yes.
Senator DANIEL. How high did your habit come here in Houston"
Mrs. LoCAScIo. About. a gram a day at the peak.
Senator DANIEL.
Mrs. LOCASCIO.
Senator DANIEL.
want you to try to
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
No
specific place.
Senator DANIEL. Your mother and father were separated?
Mrs. LOCAscIo. Yes.
Senator DANIEL. When you were 2 years old?
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator DANIEL. About how many users of heroin did you know
here in Houston?
Mrs. LoCAscIo. I didn't know too many.
My husband wouldn't
2729
Senator DANIEL. All right, thank you. You may stand aside.
Pictures may not be taken of the next witness we are about to call.
It is time to recess, so we will recess until 2:30 this afternoon.
(Whereupon, at 12:30 p. in., the subcommittee recessed until
2:30 p. M.)
AFTERNOON
SESSION
Senator DANIEL.
SCHOFIELD.
Senator
DANIEL.
Mrs. SCHOFIELD.
Senator DANIEL.
Yes.
Drury cross?
Santor DANIEL. Was that the place you usually crossed during the
Senator
DANIEL.
Mrs. SCHOFIELD.
Senator
terey?
DANIEL.
Mrs. SCHOFIELD.
2730
bringing their names into this hearing. I would like to ask you
whether or not one of those men was Enrico Trevinio.
Mrs. SCHOFIELD. Yes.
Senator DANIEL. T-r-e-v-i-n-i-o?
TMrs. SCHOFIELD. Yes.
Senator DANIEL. I will ask you if another one of those was his
brother, Pancho Trevinio?
Mrs. SCHOFIELD. Yes.
Senator
Mrs.
DANIEL.
SCHOFIELD.
Senator
DANIEL.
Mrs. SCHOFIELD.
Senator
DANIEL.
Mrs. SCHOFIELD.
Senator
DANIEL.
Mrs. SCHOFIELD.
someplace else.
Senator DANIEL. I believe you said you purchased about $1,000
worth of heroin per week during this year's period?
Mrs. SCHOFIELD. Yes.
Senator DANIEL. And then did you bring it back across the river
yourselves, or did you pay a runner to bring it back across the river?
Mrs. SCHOFIELD. I
Senator
DANIEL.
Mrs. SCHOFIELD.
Senator
DANIEL.
Mrs. SCHOFIELD.
brought it back.
over mn a taxicab.
Senator DANIL. You left your car in Laredo?
Mrs. SCHOFIELD. Yes.
Senator DANIEL. And crossed the bridge over the Rio Grande to
Nuevo Laredo in a taxicab?
Mrs. SCHOFIELD. Yes.
Senator DANIEL. Which one of you brought the heroin back?
Mrs. SCHOFIELD. I did.
Senator DANIEL. Where did you hide the heroin?
Mrs. SCHOFIELD. In my vagina.
Senator DANIEL. Did he ever bring it back himself?
Mrs. SCHOFIELD. No.
Senator DANIEL. You hid it then within your person?
Mrs. SCHOFIELD. Yes.
Senator DANIEL. And then did you change the method of smuggling
heroin back across the border?
Mrs. SCHOFIELD.
Yes.
DANIEL.
us from McAllen.
2731
Senator DANIEL. Was that the same trip you told us about when
Senator
Mrs.
DANIEL.
SCHOFIELD.
Senator DANIEL. Then how did you arrange to get the heroin
Six months.
SCHOFIELD.
it?
DANIEL.
I can try.
SCHOFIELD. I
Mt r. GASQUE. But
Irs. SCHOFIELD. I
will try.
what do you think now?
guess I could.
Mr. GASQUE. You think you can?
Mrs. SCHOFIELD. Yes.
Mr. GASQUE. Hasn't it ruined your life?
Irs. SCHOFIELD. Well, yes, on account of I have gotten in trouble.
M[r. GASQUE. Do you go to church?
Mrs.
Irs. SCHOFIELD.
No.
Mr.
M11r. GASQUE. Did you ever have occasion to hustle before you
Went on heroin?
7 1515-56-pt.
7--25
2732
Mrs. SCHOFIELD.
Before?
Mr.
GASQUE. Yes.
Mrs. SCHOFIELD. No.
Mr.
were faced with being thrown in jail, or sent to some kind of colony
or some kind of farm, for the rest of your life after you went back,
do you think that would help keep you off of drugs?
Mrs. SCHOFIELD.
I couldn't really say. I don't think that would
be fair, though.
Senator DANIEL. You don't think that would be fair?
Mrs.
SCHOFIELD.
No.
I II
Senator
DANIEL.
2733
tentiary?
Senator DANIEL. It is my understanding you will be sent to a
hospital first to see if you can be 'cured.
Mrs. SCHOFIELD. First?
Senator DANIEL. That is my understanding.
Mrs. SCHOFIELD. Than what would happen?
Senator DANIEL. Under the Texas law it would be possible to send(
you to the penitentiary, but I understand you will be given ample
opportunity to be cured.
Mrs. SCHOFIELD. By the time we leave up there we have gone
through the most severe pain anyway. We have had no treatment at
all.
Mr. GASQUE. That is the physical withdrawal?
Mrs. SCHOFIELD. Yes, but that is the worst part of it.
Mr. GASQUE. There is no psychiatric treatment. No social treatment. And now after you left Lexington how long was it before
you went back on drugs?
Mrs. SCHOFIELD. About 3 days.
Mr. GASQUE. Where did you go back on drugs?
Mrs. SCHOFIELD. New York.
Senator DANIEL. Do you think you would go back on drugs if
you were turned out tomorrow?
Mrs. SCHOFIELD. I would try to stay off.
SCHOFIELD.
No.
Senator DANIEL. But if drugs were available do you feel like you
could stay off, or do you think you would probably go back as you
did before?
Mrs. SCHOFIELD. With this new law I think I would stay off of
of them. It. isn't worth while to be a drug addict any more. Why
they have gotten too hard. Before I never was afraid of anything
because I had never been in trouble. Now I think I would stay off,
2734
111111111
2735
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
111111111
2736
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
TRAFFIC
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
did you both have to violate other laws in order to take care of your
habit?
Witness X. Just a few weeks.
Senator
DANIEL.
A few weeks?
Senator
DANIEL.
heroin?
Witness X. White.
Senator DANIEL. Do you know where that came from?
Witnes X. No, sir. I have no idea.
Senator
DANIEL.
Have the people who sold him all the heroin been
arrested?
Witness X. I don't know. I don't know who it came from.
Senator DANIEL. Who did the buying?
Witness X. My husband.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
2737
Senator DANIEL. Well, how many drug addicts would you say,
how many would you estimate you think you would know in Houston?
Witness X. I really don't know.
Senator DANIEL. In what section do you live?
Witness X. In the north side.
Senator DANIEL. I believe you have a child?
Witness X. Yes, sir, I do.
Senator DANIEL. How old is the child?
Witness X. Thirteen months.
Senator DANIEL. Are you going to try to take the treatment?
Witness X. I don't need to.
Senator DANIEL. You think you can break the habit?
Witness X. I have quit. I already have.
Senator DANIEL. Did you quit that before you were arrested?
Witness X. Yes, sir. I had just got out of jail not 2 weeks before I
was arrested. You can't get the habit in 2 weeks. It is impossible,
unless you are shooting a gang of stuff, and I didn't have that kind of
money.
Senator DANIEL. Did you shoot any heroin between the time you
got out of jail and the time you were last arrested?
Witness X. Yes, sir; one time.
Senator DANIEL. One time?
Witness X. Yes.
Senator DANIEL. How much (lid you shoot then?
Witness X. About a cap and a half.
Senator DANIEL. Was your husband arrested?
Witness X. No.
Senator DANIEL. Has he been arrested yet?
Witness X. No, sir; not that I know of.
Senator DANIEL. Are you living together now?
Witness X. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. How long since you know that he was using
heroin?
Witness X. What?
Senator DANIEL. How long has it been since you know that he
used heroin?
Witness X. I don't know.
Senator DANIEL. When did you last see him use heroin?
Witness X. Well, the other day before I came to jail.
Senator DANIEL. What was that?
Witness X. The other day before I came to jail.
Senator DANIEL. How long before you came to jail?
Witness X. The same day I came.
Senator DANIEL. The same day you came to jail?
Witness X. Yes.
Senator DANIEL. You saw him take how much heroin?
Witness X. I don't know how much he took.
Senator DANIEL. Did you also shoot yourself with heroin on that
day?
Witness X. Yes.
Senator DANIEL. The day you came to jail?
Witness X. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. That is this last time you came to jail?
2738
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
TRAFFIC
2739
2740
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
TRAFFIC
DANIEL.
Yes, I am, Senator, and I consider that those recommendations of the grand jury were extremely well taken. The grand
jury's statement that more cases were concerned with narcotics than
anything except immigration was correct as to that time. I think it
has been generally true over the past 2 years here in this office. I
have only been in office a year and a half, and we have got some statistical service over that period of 2 years, and the prosecution of narcotics violators amounts to from one-fourth to one-third of the business prosecuted through my office.
Mr.
WILKEY.
2741
Senator DANIEL. You think that with your office staff narcotics
takes from one-fourth to one-third of the time?
Mr. WILKEY. I believe that is correct.
Senator DANIEL. How many counties in your district?
Mr. WILKEY. Forty-six.
Senator DANIEL. Generally describe the area composing your district.
Mr. WILKEY. Well, it
extends from the Mexican border from
Brownsville along the Rio Grande to about halfway between Laredo
and Rio Grande City.
Senator
DANIEL.
Brownsville?
Yes, sir. I would point out two things that are
very important in this narcotics traffic in this area. We have along
the border with Mexico only the Rio Grande. Some of the witnesses
have stated that you can walk across it at some times during the year.
There are ports of entry at Brownsville, McAllen, Hidalgo, and
Laredo.
Mr.
WILKEY.
Senator
DANIEL.
WILKEY.
Senator
DANIEL.
That is right.
2742
Have you checked to see how your district compares with other
districts of the country in the type of penalties that are assessed by
the courts?
Mr. WILKEY. No; Senator, I have no basis of comparison of the
types of penalties in this district as compared to other districts. I
believe that is compiled by, among other people, the director of
prisons, Mr. James V. Bennett, who keeps a tabulation of all sentences,
and also the actual months served on those sentences, including what
they were given originally and what the offender serves. We are not
furnished that report by the Bureau of Prisons, so I have no basis of
comparison with other districts.
Senator DA.NIEL. I am sure we have those figures. Let me ask you,
are you one who believes heavy sentences will help retard this racket?
Mr. WILKEY. Yes, sir. I think heavier penalties in this type of
offenses would definitely be a deterrent to this traffic. That is not
necessarily true of all types of crimes. For instance, in the crime of
murder, where the extreme penalty may historically be assessed, that
does not necessarily act as a deterrent. Narcotics is a premeditated
crime for the purpose of making money. And when you have that
sort of a crime then if you make it extremely risky that the offender
is going to serve a long term in prison then that encourages the man
who is doing this purely for money to get into some other line of
business. If the smuggler finds out it is so risky to smuggle narcotics
that he is faced with a life term in the penitentiary or death he is going
to be encouraged to get into some other line of activity, rather than
smuggling narcotics.
Senator
DANIEL.
the time you have been in office and over any previous period of time
to see whether the sentences in the Southern District are fairly stiff,
or do you have any opinion on that?
Mr. WILKEY. Yes, sir.
I have looked over the sentences in the
Houston division and in the Laredo, Brownsville, and Corpus Christi
divisions for the pei'iodgoing back to the first of July 1953.
Senator DANIEL. And what did you find?
Mr. WILKEY. Some of those sentences it seemed to us would be
adequate. In some cases we have felt that the sentences might have
been stiffer. One thing I have noticed in going over the list of the total
penalties assessed is that the penalties for smuggling, under the
smuggling statute, seem to be lighter than under the narcotics statute.
The reason for that is that under the smuggling statute there is no
minimum. Under the Boggs Act the first offense is a 2-year minimum,
and for the second offense it is a 5-year minimum, and for the third
offense a 10-year minimum. In Laredo and Brownsville where the
smuggling statute is most frequently applicable to the fact situations
involved, the judges seem to prefer that the cases be brought under
the smuggling statute. In the Houston division, we bring them under
the Boggs Act, and you will find the sentences follow the statutory
minimum.
Senator DANIEL. You say the statutory limit under the Boggs Act
is 5 years?
Mfr. WILKEY. For the second offense.
Senator DANIEL. What is it under the smuggling statute?
Mr. WILKEY. There is no minimum in smuggling cases.
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
TRAFFIC
2743
Right.
MNr.
Senator DANIEL. Now you say you bring them under the Boggs
Act, with higher penalties, for certain offenses here in the Houston
Division?
see.
There is a distinction there.
Senator DANIEL. I
NM1'. WILKEY.
WILKEY. I
time we have a case under any of the narcotics laws, because heroin
Senator
2744
Senator
DANIEL.
Houston division?
Mr. WILKEY. Yes.
Senator
DANIEL.
That is right.
2745
year. I went into the thing about a year ago, and initially I was
considerably impressed. The scheme has a plausibility about it that
is somewhat misleading. But the more I studied it and the more I
looked into the results of the plan where they have tried it, the more
convinced I have become that such a thing would be a step backward
as far as the suppression of narcotics is concerned.
Senator
DANIEL.
favor of that plan was that it would cut out the black market and cut
out the smaller peddler if you have this free clinic.
Mr. WILKEY. That argument doesn't hold water. You will not cut
the smuggler and the peddler out because the ration these people get
at the clinic must in some way be limited. It cannot be unlimited.
If it is limited, those people will go to the free clinic and get their
minimum requirements, and then they will go out on the black market
and supplement their requirements by illegal purchases. You will
still have illegal traffic to supplement the amount that can be
obtained at the clinic.
Then there is another objection that to my mind is a more important
objection. It has not been brought out here as yet. And that
objection is this: You and I, and the other people here in this room
generally, unless they are law enforcement officers and have come in
contact with it, the normal average American citizen doesn't come in
contact with drug addicts. And he does not come in contact with the
source of supply. If he desired to go off in this dream world induced
by heroin shots he wouldn't know where to go to get his first shot
of heroin.
Furthermore, it is known that addicts commonly come from the
criminal classes. The areas where you can find it are generally in
the slums. And the average citizen wouldn't want to put himself
in those contacts to get the drug habit. In other words, addiction
is looked upon as a horrible thing. If you legalize it by some type
of clinics sponsored by the Government, whether State or Federal
Government, then you remove the social stigma that is attached to it.
Respectable citizens who are the victims of the habit now find it
advisable to conceal it from their most intimate friends. If the
satisfying of a craving for drugs becomes legal, and becomes the topic
of conversation in normal human relations, then many persons who
have never knowingly come in contact with drug addicts would do so,
and might be induced to become addicts simply by contact and
example.
I do not mean that perfectly normal human beings are likely to
become addicts. But there are persons suffering from psychological
deficiencies who do frequently seek drugs to compensate for their
2746
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
TRAFFIC
put them in jail, or in some manner keep them off the streets.
Mr. WILKEY. Yes. One of the great, things would be to get a.ll of
them off at once in order that the narcotic peddlers would be cut. off
from his market.
Senator DANIEL. You have a prepared statement, do you not?
Mr. WILKEY. Yes, sir.
Senator
DANIEL.
your
then
your
have
2747
We have gone into this problem fairly thoroughly. On the penalties, it seems to me there are two places where the penalties in use
should be revised upward. First, for the smuggler, and, second, for
the peddler.
A distinction should be made between the peddler and the mere
possessor. The possessor is frequently only an addict, and a distinction should be made in the law between a sale and a mere possession.
The addict is always a weak character and subject to influence by
his associates, and the proper guidance and a different environment
might make the temptation be resisted the next, time.
The peddler however is a vicious animal. When he sells narcotics
it is a conscious, willful, and criminal act, for which no penalty is
really too severe. The minimum penalty for the sale of narcotics
should be fixed at 5 years.
Mr. GASQUE. As I understand, you would increase the penalty
under the Boggs Act?
Mr. WILKEY. For the peddler.
Mr. GASQUE. On the first offense.
Mr. WILKEY. First offense.
Mr. GASQUE. Would you give the judges any leeway there, or
would it be mandatory for a 5-year sentence?
X'Mr. WILKEY.
2748
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
2749
TRAFFIC
Mr. WILKEY. I don't have them right now, but I can get them.
Senator DANIEL. Will you get them for the committee.
Mr. WILKEY. Yes.
Senator DANIEL. We are interested in identifying all the people
who were active who have jumped bond and are fugitives, either in
this country or in Mexico, carrying on the narcotics racket. I would
appreciate it if you would get us the names of these five men, and any
additional evidence you can give us on that.
Now, Mr. Wilkey, we appreciate your help, your statement and the
study you have given, and we appreciate your courtesy to our staff.
Mr. WILKEY. Thank you.
Senator
DANIEL.
WILKEY.
Yes,
sir.
We
have
tabulations
for Brownsville
THE PROBLEM
2750
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
TRAFFIC
THE LAWS
1. Federal laws should be based on the equal right of the Federal Government
along with the several States to control narcotics.
The whole artificiality of Federal control as based on the taxing power is not
a handicap when it is adequately explained by the trial judge. But undoubtedly
many offenders have escaped because the juries simply did not understand the
complexities of the law.
If a constitutional amendment is needed to provide for Federal control of
aldicts, the whole Federal control of narcotics should be based on the undisputed fact that the unrestricted use of narcotics is evil, and not on the taxing
power. The necessity of proof of demand ! for a Treasury order form is an absurdity in the trial of a marihuana smuggler. Most jurors understand it after
But
explanation bv the trial judge, and few prosecuting attorneys forget it.
the pitfall is there.
2. The Marihuana Tax Act needs to be revised in regard to the venue provisions to make venue lie where the marihuana was found in possession.
Under the present law, venue is depenlent entirely on the plC( of acquisition.
A revelation of the place of acquisition at the time of trial may surprise the
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
TRAFFIC
2751
ENFORCEMENT
2752
relations of the local agents on the spot. But in all events, cooperation and vell
intended liaison are no substitute for command, whether it be in law enforcement
or in a military organization.
Where narcotics and customs agents now occasionally exchange information,
they should be working out of 1 central office under the direction of 1 man in I
locality.
(b) The Narcotics Bureau has 250 men to cover the entire United States and
foreign territories. The New York Police Force alone has over 200 men detailed
to narcotics with a budget larger than that of the entire Federal Narcotics Bureau.
The lack of manpower shows up glaringly in the methods of work of the narcotics agent as compared to larger Federal enforcement agencies. If the investigation calls for more than two agents, the Narcotics agents usually consider it a
large case. Most agents over a period of years have grown accustomed to working either singly or in very small groups, concentrating on apprehending a single
pusher at a time. Sometimes the agents are successful in penetrating beyond the
retail pusher to his source of supply, but narcotics enforcement rarely gets beyond
that level in the illicit distribution system. The narcotics agents have shown in
some instances that large-scale operations can be conducted by them, if and when
the manpower is available.
The available force of the Narcotics Bureau is stretched so thin that agents
are pretty well tied down to definite geographical spots in the United States, and
agents cannot be easily drawn from one section of the country to another when
a major effort is desired. The converse is true in the Federal Bureau of Investigation, which on numerous occasions, such as the Greenlease kidnaping, has
shown that it can in a 24-hour period mass scores of agents from all over the
country at one critical point. The Narcotics Bureau could not attempt this
because it would leave too many other vital sections unguarded.
The combining of the Narcotics Bureau, Customs Bureau, the Secret Service,
the Internal Revenue Service, and other Treasury enforcement agencies in one
large bureau would permit the concentration of manpower whenever and wherever the critical situation arises.
(c) Treasury agents generally receive, even after some years of experience,
less pay than the FBI agent does initially. The FBI agents deserve the pay that
they get, but Congress has authorized it because the prestige standards, and size
of the FBI has succeeded in attracting to it a type of man that Congress has
recognized requires this amount of pay to secure his services. The Treasury
enforcement agencies are entitled to the same scale of compensation. This will
attract better men and better men attract other better men, and so the esprit
de corps and prestige of the organization would spiral upward. This would be
augmented if all Treasury agents were in one large agency with an esprit, discipline, size, and traditions similar to the FBI.
(d) Just as large American business corporations are able to provide larger and
better research facilities, larger and more varied training programs for the employees, and other advantages making for the efficiency of the organization which
cannot be provided by smaller competitive companies in the same line of business,
so the large law enforcement agency is able to provide better technical facilities,
better training programs for its agents, and other facilities and tools important
to law enforcement operations.
(e) There is observable in the agents of the smaller independent Treasury
enforcement agencies a certain lack of versatility in outlook, methods and technique, which would be changed if they were all part of one large organization.
While there is specialization in the FBI, yet the individual agents have a variety
of types of investigation which the average narcotics, customs or secret service
agent does not have a chance to handle because of the more limited jurisdiction
of his special Treasury service. The versatility produced by a variety of work
and training in a larger investigative agency would redound to the benefit of all
phases of Treasury investigative work.
4. To insure adequate enforcement of the narcotics laws as revised, after reorganization of the Treasury enforcement agencies into one Treasury enforcement
bureau, still additional men and funds would be needed for the next few years
to reduce the narcotics traffic to the irreducible minimum.
V.
A PROGRAM
2753
1. Reorganization of all Treasury enforcement agencies into one Treasury enforcement bureau under the direction of the Secretary of the Treasury, comparable
to the position occupied by the Federal Bureau of -Investigation in the Justice
Department.
2. More men, money, and equipment allocated to such a reorganized Treasury
enforcement bureau. The individual allocation of effort within this bureau could
be determined by its director as the enforcement problems of the Treasury vary
from year to year.
3. Better men, better trained men, and better paid men.
4. The Federal law should provide for the confinement of narcotics addicts,
with or without proof of any other violation.
5. Stiffer penalties for the narcotics peddler should be imposed, both by legislation and in the courts under existing laws.
6. Stiffer penalties for the smuggler should be imposed.
VI.
Disposition
Trial
Offense charged
__
_________________________________
I
-
convicted.
Boggs Act
2d offense.
Do.
1st offense.
Do.
Do.
I)o.
1)o.
1)o.
-do
-----do
----
)o.
I)o.
Do.
I)o.
Revoked old probation.
1st offense.
)o.
I)o.
1)o.
I)o.
----1)o.
I)o.
-----
Do.
Do.
Do.
Do.
I)o.
Do.
i)o.
Do.
Do.
2d offense.
Do.
1st offense.
Do.
Do.
2d offense.
-----
-----
H ero in ------------------------------------------------------------------------do
Marihuana ...................................
Roberto H. Moreno -------------- ----- do ...... an h r----------------------------M arihuana and heroin -----------------------Pete C. Arce
Jury .................
Pleaded guilty
C ourt ...............
----- do
Clyde Tillman ------------------Alvin D ockins ------------------Raymond Pena -----------------Herman McElroy ---------------Manuel R. Martinez.
Fernando Cleavez ..............
Roland E. Wilkins_
Marie E. Rayburn.
Tony L. Gabriel ----------------Pedro Cosine -------------------George L. Drury ----------------Frank Garza --------------------Joe N . Powell -------------------Ruben Flores -------------------Arthur J. PeguesAlma Mouton_
Terrell E. Lee Caradine ---------Raymond Vargas ----------------Edward Lopez -------------John Edgar Vargas --------------Phillip D. Lamar-_.
Willie E. Scott .................
Earl Voice ----------------------Hector D. Lamas ...............
- - -- - - - - - - -- - - -- - - - - - - - - -- - -- - - - - - - In hospital -----------------------------------Ramiro R. Acuna ---------------- -- -- -- -- --dd oo -------- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Do.
2 years- $ 10 ----------------------------------Pleaded guilty ---Lorenzo P. Tellez ---------------.........................
shown
No
disposition
Oscar Campos ------------------- - - - -d o - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Arturo H. Hernandez ...........
Do.
.......
3 years-$10 ..................................
guilty
Pleaded
Louis Arriola -------------------Marihuana
--------------------------Do.
2 years- 10 ----------------------------------Jury
Laura B. Oliver__.
offense.
2d
$
10
..................................
5
years-------guilty
Pleaded
Benjamin V. Francis ------------1st offense.
Ju ry ------------------ 30 m onth s ..........................
Julius B. McBride.
Do.
.
.....
.....
3
y
ea
rs
.
.
....
....
.
..
.
.
........
..
...
C
our
t
----------------Sidney Smith -----------------Heroin --------------------------------------Do.
months-10_._
27
guilty
-------Pleaded
Ellis Scott, Jr -----------------.
.
-do.
-...
.
..-----------------------------1)o.
----d o ----------------- 2 years- $10 ..................................
Charles Tucker -----------------do -------------------------------------------Do.
m
onths$
10
...............................
42
------d
o
-------------Frank H . Olivia -----------------do -------------------------------------------)o.
.Jury------------------ 2 years-10 .................................
Pedro G. Rodriguez ------------
Offense charged
H ero in ----------------------------------------
Trial
Pleaded guilty .......
Alfredo G. Rodriguez ............ H eroin ---------------------------------------- C ourt ----------------Manuel B. Garcia ---------------- - - - - -d o ----- - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Jury _
Rafael M. Martinez -------------do .........................................
----d o --------- -------Nathan Daniels ------------------ M arihuana -----------------------------------do ................
Nick A. Aquilar .......
Heroin ......
Pleaded guilty.....
Donald R. Jordan .....
Heroin and marihuana__
Jury -----------------Manuel Rodriquez --------------- .. . . . .d o ---- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Jury -----------------Edward W. Cron ----------------- Heroin .......................................
Pleaded guilty
------- ------ -----------Francisco Cron ------------------- .....-ddoo ---------------do ..........
.....
----Clarence Crump
do ---------------- - - - -..
d o ----- - - - - - - - - - - - - -- -- - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - Icie Granville -------------------do.
----Jury.............
Lister Yarborough
do ................
L . Z . C lay ------------------------ ................................................
Oscar Campos..
M arihuan a -----------------------------------do.............
Antonio Hernandez Ramirez ----do . . . . . . . .
do .........................................
----do
Herman Pittman ..........
- . . d o --------------------------------------do .............
Willis Anderson_
do .............
H
eroin
--------------Cora R. Luna ...................
do ................
Isaac Johnson M arihuana -----------------------------------d o ----------------Lawrence J. Veniable
do .........................................
----d o ----------------Hulen G. Templeton ..........
........................................
-do
do-_
Antonio G. Arrenando ----------do...........................
----do ................
Juan C. Morena.._
do ........................................
---------.
d o ---------------------------------------- Pleaded guilty -------Jose R. Rodrequez .....
~do
Julio A. Garcia-_
.................
H eroin ---------------------------------------- Jurydo
Foy D. Melton_
................
Houston Ross_
M arihuana -----------------------------------do
.. . . . .d o ---- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Leroy Robinson -----------------do
Isiac Livingston ------------------ - - - - - d o ---- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - do...........---H eroin ---------------------------------------Geraldine Pierce
.---- do .....
James R. Yanez ......
Pleaded guilty -------W illiam Brown ------------------- M arihuana ------ -- --- -- --- --- -- --- -- Jury-..
- --d o ----- - -- - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - George McDade -----------------d o .------- ------Archie Doza ....
----do
....
do..........
Alfred M . Oliver ----------------- H eroin ---------------------------------------do
Alfred M . Oliver --------------------do .........................................
Pleaded
guilty
-------...... d o --------------Manual Rodriquez_
do .........................................
----Jury
- -- Juan Rodriquez Estrada ---------do -...
----_--do........
.
Pruification Rodriquez_
o --------------------d-------------------- --- d o ----- - - - - - - -- - - -- - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- John Valda Lopez ---------------Pleaded guilty .......
Disposition
Boggs Act
C,'
FEBRUARY TERMA,
1955
- - --- d o -----
- - - - -d o --- -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
H arold Jackson ------------------Tony Raney Charles ------------Abelino M altos ------------------Victor Lo Soya ------------------Joe Jabara ..................
Jew Tin H ong -------------------L in Y ou -------------------------Manfredo Martinez -------------Lionel H errera ------------------Filberto de la Garza.
Hector de la Garza --------------Arturo M ireles ------------------Roberto M ireles -----------------John Ellis Sutton ----------------Everett Cooper ------------------Orange N olan -------------------Nathan Johnson -----------------Teodora Robledo ----------------Edward Hooker -----------------Ed Riley
Isaac W allace ....................
Frank M ires ....................
George Gale CooperWillie Winn___
L eo O choa .......................
Joe Buck Kllian .................
Don Chun Ben ..................
- - - - -.
d o ----
- - - - -- - -- - - -- - - - -- - - - - - -- -- -- - - - - -- - -"
- -- - -d o
. . . . .d o -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - -- -- - - - -- -- - -- -- - - - - - - - - - - - -
- -- - - -- - - - -- - - - -- - - -- - - - - -- - - -- - - - - --
O p iu m ----------------------------------------
d o -------- --------
. . . . .-d o --- -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - -- - d o ----
-- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
O p iu m ----------------------------------------
---
- - - - -- - -
-- - ---- - - - - ..---
1st offense.
3d offense.
2d offense.
1st offense.
- - -- - - - - -- - - -
5 years- 10 ----------------------------------Do.
3 years- 10 ----------------------------------Do.
F u gitive -------------------------------------Do.
30 months-$10_._
Do.
----6 years-$10 ----------------------------------2d offense.
Dismissed (sub. not opium) ------------------F u gitiv e -------------------------------------. . . . .d o --- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - -d o --- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Offense charged
Trial
IDisposition
Boggs Act
9653
1. Moreno, Merced -------------
}Smuggled
I year to serve
------------------------$250 fine to be paid ...........................
$50 fine to be paid ............................
Prosecution delined.
6 m onths to serve ----------------------------F u gitiv e -------------------------------------2 years suspended sentence, 3 years and $1
fine to be paid each defendant.
----6 m onths to serve ----------------------------2 years to serve and $25 ----fine to be paid, each No previous
defendant.
tion.
Imposing of sentence, suspended sentence,
Do.
1 year.
$100 fine to be paid ---------------------------18 months suspended sentence, 5 I-cars
Do.
acquitted.
6 months to serve suspe nded sent nce, 3 years_
----4 m onths to serve ............................
6 months to serve ............................
Do.
1954
}Marihuana
INo
previous
tion.
convic-
convic-
3
)o.
1)o.
Do.
--Do.
I)o.
Do.
24. AnesqIti,
.o.e
{N
Do.
Trial
Offense charged
Disposition
Boggs Act
-f--
1968
69.
70.
71.
72.
73.
74.
75.
76.
)Smuggled
}Marihuana
ISmuggled
} Marihuana
huana.
1 year to serve --------------------------------10 years to serve and I col----ex only ----------5 years to serve and 1 to be paid --------------6 months to serve ............................
----4 months suspended sentence
5 years ....
Not guilty
Dismissed on court's motion -----------------Pleaded guilty -------- 4 m onths to serve ------------...............
do .......
----6 months to serve_
1
year
suspended
sentence
3 years and $100
do ..............
----fine to be paid, each defendant
o ----------------- 2 years to serve and $100- dfine suspended senPleaded guilty -------- Prosecution declined .........................
3 years and $1 fine suspended sentence 4 years
-- --- d o --------------- 6 months suspended sentence 3 years .........
Prosecution declined .........................
iPlea-no-lo"contend re- - $10 fine to be paid. Found guilty ------------F u gitive -------------------------------------------------------C ourt ----------------- 2 years and $100 fine suspended sentence 3 years.
Pleaded guilty -------
Pleaded- -guilty......
- ------- -- ----
-- --- d o
d o ----------------
Prosecution declined -------------------------2 years and $100 fine suspended sentence -----3 years each defendant -----------------------6 months to serve
5 years to serve and $10 fine
---to be paid.......
1 previous conviction.
18 months to serve
-------...............
2 previous convictions'
1 previous conviction
40 months to serve.....................
2 years to serve and $10 fine to be paid -------5 years and $100 fine suspended sentence 5
years.
3 years and $100 fine to be paid and jail sentenceProsecution declined ..................
Dismissed on court's strike motion ...........
Acquitted ....................................
ISmuggled
{Dismissed
fendants.
------------------------
. d o ----------------------------------------..
1955
83.
84.
85.
86.
87.
88.
89.
90.
91.
92.
93.
94.
95.
96.
97.
98.
99.
100.
101.
102.
IMarihuana
ISmuggled
Pleaded guilty.
do ...............
_do ..............
C ourt ---------.----
{Court-Not guilty.
--
Pleaded guilty.
do ..............
do ------------
--------------
---------..-----------------------......
---do ........................................
-le-a-ded-guilty
----
cd
-----
Offense charged
Trial
Disposition
1955
Rutherford ...............
Blankenship, Bobby E .....
113. Chamberlain, Jr., Sam R. -.114. Sanders, Handy, Jr -.....
115. Garcia, Secundino G ........
Qaribay, Beatriz ...........
Guerra, Raul Garcia
Kenneth Lonzo..........
Flores, Plutarco Varela .....
MeEntree, Joseph A -------McEntrec, Ida -----------Keller, John H ...............
Griffin, Ray -------------Vives, John V --------------.
121. Robles, Antonio M --------116.
117.
118.
119.
}Smuggled
-.--------
124. Burke, Loyal E ...----M iller, W ayne L ---------125. Gillins, Robert_----------Gardner, Sylvester D -----6/
Beverly, Robert S ---------- Smuggled
ounces marihuana---------Cobb, Harvey._
126. Rangel, Marcario Salinas..:_- Marihuana Tax Act,
ounce marihuana,
4 marihuana cigarettes.
127. Mitchell. Jimmie ---------Smuggled 1/i ounce marihuana ----------------
IPleaded
Pleaded guilty
guilty .......
---d o -- -- -- -- -- -
{2
{5
{Awaiting
...do ----------------------------------------1 -.
........................
----- d do
- ------------------------------------------ d-do --------------------------------------
.......-d - - -...................................
Boggs Act
Offense charged
Trial
Disposition
Boggs Act
I-
6 years ---------------------------------------
---..............
Offense charged
Trial
Disposition
Narcotics ------------------------------------
do ----------------do -----------------
Boggs Act
Pleaded guilty.
Source: The preceding case tabulation has been compiled by Assisanit U. S. Attorneys Brian S. Odem at Brownsville and Charles L. Short at Laredo.
2766
United States v. Jose Daniel Gherrero Ruiz, Oscar Frans Toren, Stanley Halprin,
Martin Snyder-16641 Laredo Division- September 1954
This case involved a conspiracy to smuggle 85 pounds of marihuana and to
transport the same to New York City. After trial all defendants were found
guilty. The marihuana had been shipped to New York City by express in a
steamer trunk. Dave Ellis, customs agent, followed the marihuana to New York
City and apprehended the defendants Halprin and Snyder when they called for
the trunk containing the marihuana. Mr. Smith and Mr. Oden prosecuted. A
jury returned a verdict of guilty.
United States v. Richard Eldridge, Waver Louise Ellison, Vicente Garcia, Rosemary
Garcia, Jesus Victoriano Garcia-5961-CorpusChristi Division-November
1954
The defendants were indicted with the conspiracy to smuggle marihuana and
to transfer same in violation of the Marihuana Tax Act. Mr. Wilkey and Mr.
Oden prosecuted. After trial before a jury the defendants Eldridge and Ellison
were found guilty. Rosemary Garcia and Jesus Victoriano Garcia were found not
guilty. The defendant Vicente Garcia is a fugitive.
The defendants Eldridge and Ellison were from Cleveland, Ohio, and were apprehended in Little Rock, Ark., with 22 pounds of marihuana concealed in their car.
The customs agents had information that these two defendants had made frequent
trips from Cleveland to the Mexican border for the purpose of obtaining marihuana.
United States v. Pedro Garza Gallardo, Rodolfo Estrada-17081-Laredo DivisionSeptember 1955
This is a Laredo case involving the smuggling of 100 pounds of ma.rihuana.
This case was tried at Laredo on September 14, 1955, by Mr. Wilkey. A jury
returned a verdict of guilty for both defendants. The marihuana was contained
in four tow sacks and was concealed underneath a large truckload of onions. The
onions were being shipped to Los Angeles, Calif.
United States v. Fidencio Garcia Benavides, Petrona Soto Allende, Belen Garcia
Athie -17057 Laredo Division-September 1955
This case charged the conspiracy to smuggle and transport 62 pounds of marihuana. The marihuana in question was transported to New York City, via automobile in two suitcases. The defendants Allende and Athie were apprehended in
New York City with the marihuana in their custody. All defendants plead
guilty.
The foregoing data furnished from the Official files at Brownsville Tex.
BRIAN S.
DEM,
2767
Name
Narcotic amount
Statute
-1
11873
11874
11876
11876
11877
11878
11932
11878
11878
11878
11879
11880
11881
John Doe
Daniel Zepeda ----------Gorden Winters --------Roberto M. Martinez- _
Vernon L. Nichols -------
10985
11882
11883
Archie Sample
Alfonso S. Cardenas ----Refuglo D. Rodriquez. -.
11884
11885
11886
11942
11887
11888
11889
11893
11896
11933
11936
11936
11938
11938
11939
11940
11941
11944
12012
12048
do
----
-.d o ------
---
-- -- ---
-- - ---
-- - -----
---
do ------------------------------------
do........................
.....
12060
Envaldo Perez-..
12060
12061
12061
12061
12061
12061
12061
12412
12081
12082
12085
12086
12087
12088
12103
12103
12103
12193
12194
12195
Sec. 2553 (a), tit. 26, U. S. C ---------Sec. 174, tit. 21; sec. 2553 (a), tit. 26
U. S. C.
See. 2593 (a) tit. 26; sec. 2591 (a), tit. 26,
U. q. C.
See. 2593 (a), 2591 (a) tit. 26, U. S. C_
do ---------------------------------.....
Sec.
Sec.
U.
Sec.
See.
545, tit. 18, U . S. C -------------2557(b) tit. 26; see. 371, tit. 18,
S.C.
2553(a), tit. 26, U. S. C.
2553(a), 2554(a), tit. 26, U. S. C.__
d o . ---------- ------------ ...........do
----Sec. 2593(a), tit. 26, U. S. C_
Sec. 2593(a), 2591(a), tit. 26, U. S. C___
Sec. 371, tit. 18 U. S. C
Sec. 371 tit. 18; sec. 174, tit. 21; sec.
2553(aS, tit. 26, U. S. C.
Sec. 174, tit. 21; sec. 2553(a), tit. 26,
U. S. C.
Sec. 2593(a), tit. 26, U. S. CSec. 2553(a), 2554(a), tit. 26, (J. S. C.__
Sec. 2553(a), 2593(a), tit. 26, U. S. C---
12 grains of heroin.
40 grains of heroin.
100.5 grains marihuana.
935 grains of marihuana.
54 grains of heroin.
642 grains of heroin.
145 ounces of marihuana; 54
grains of heroin.
145 ounces of marihuana.
)o.
40 pounds of marihuana.
54 grains of heroin.
3 grains of heroin.
4 grains of heroin.
10 grains of heroin.
4 grains of heroin.
410.5 grains marihuana.
39 grains of marihuana.
550 grains of heroin.
550 grains of heroin.
550 grains of heroin.
1,322 grains of marihuana.
11 grains of heroin.
62 grains of heroin; 6 grains of
marihuana.
L.
2768
Name
Narcotic amount
Statute
Willie E. Scott --------Earl Voice ------------Hector D. Lamas ------Lorenzo P. Telles------Louis Arriola ---------Laura B. Oliver -------Benjamin V. Francis ..-Julius B. McBride ------
SEPTEMBER 1954
See. 2593 (a). tit. 26; Sec. 2591 (a), tit.
26, U. S. C.
Sec. 2553 (a), tit. 26, U. S. C ----------
Sec. 2593 (a), 2591 (a) tit. 26, U. S. C. - Sec. 2553 (a), tit. 26, U. S. C_ Sec. 2593 (a), 2591 (a), 2553 (a), 2554(a),
tit. 26, U. S. C.
Sec. 2553 (a), tit. 26, U. S. C
See. 2553 a), 2554 (a), tit. 26. U. S. C._
12334
12335
12336
12337
12338
12339
12343
Alfredo 0. Rodriquez...
Manuel B. Garcia ......
Rafael Martinez San
Chez.
Nathan Daniels ---------Nick A. Aquilar ........
Donald R. Jordan ......
12423
12345
Manuel Rodriquez_......
Edward W. Crow -------
12345
do --------------------------------
12345
do --------------------------------
12352
12352
12354
12354
12356
12358
12369
12376
12377
12383
12383
12388
12388
Houston Ross........
Leroy Robinson ........
Isaic Livingston --------James R. Yanez ........
William Brown......
12M6 Gqorgq McDade -------12396 Archie DoVa..........
12407 Alfred M. Oliver ........
12423 Manuel Rodriquez .....
12462 Juan Rodriquez Estrada12392
12392
12392
12394
12396
12481
12481
Purification Rodriquez. -
-_-do
-----------------------------------do ---------------------------------
Sec.
26
Sec.
Sec.
5 grains of heroin.
14 grains of heroin.
360 grains of heroin.
UbC.
Sec. 2593 (a), 2591 (a), tit. 26, USC
do --------------------------------
---
-----
do -------------------------------....
Sec. 2554 (a), tit. 26 USC -------------Sec. 2591 a), 2593 (a), tit. 26, USC ..--do -------------------------------do -------------.---------------....
Sec. 2553 (a), tit. 26 US C----------------
16 grains of heroin.
151.5 grains of marihuana.
101.5 grains of marihuana.
82.5 grains of marihuana.
1,138.5 grains of marihuana.
1,742 grains of marihuana.
63 pounds of marihuana.
Do.
392 g-ains of marihuana.
270 grains of marihuana.
1 ounce of heroin.
250.5 grains of marihuana.
Do.
Do.
70 grains of heroin.
765.5 grains of heroin.
65 grains of heroin.
67 grains of heroin.
Do.
2769
Name
Statute
12503
12508
12508
12508
Paul Wayne Rogers----- See. 2593 (a), tit. 26 USC ----------Manuel Cruz --------See. 4744 a), tit. 26, USC ----------Antonio Cruz ------------......
do ------------------------------Gravela Campos ------- Sec. 371, tit. 18, USC ---------------
1258
12593
12593
12655
12660
12351
12417
12473
12473
12667
12670
12562
Filiberto de la Garza.
Sec.
Arturo Mireles --------- Sec.
Joe Buck Killian -------- Sec.
Don Chun Ben --------- Sec.
John Ellis Sutton -------Everett V. Cooper.....
Orange Nolan .....
Nathan Johnson
Teodora Robledo -------Edward Hooker ------- Sec. 4744 (a), 4742 (a), 4751, tit. 26 and
Ed Riley --------------sees. 454, 371, tit. 18, U. S. C.
Isaac Wallace
Frank Mims
-ded).
George Gale Cooper ....
Willie Winn._
Leo Ochoa ...............
Narcotic amount
67 grains of marihuana.
449.5 grains of marihuana.
475 grains of marihuana.
1,701.5 grains of marihuana,
plus 5 ounces.
614.5 grains of marihuana.
24j ounces of marihuana.
243j ounces of marihuana.
9,400 grains of marihuana.
303.5 grains of opium.
66 grains of marihuana.
120 grains of heroin; 22.5 lbs.
marihuana.
545, tit. 18; sec. 381, tit. 18, U. S. C__ 2,588 grains of heroin.
545, tit. 18; sec 381 tit 18, U. S. C.. 2,588 grains of heroin.
4742 (a), tit. 26 V. S. C --------- 486 grains of marihuana.
174, tit. 21, U. S. C_
-262
grains of opium.
Clifford Billy Holbrook-Sam C. Pereida -------Alvin Herbert-------Federico P. Vela------Owen L. Carr --------Gladys Martinez -------
LA1I I I1I I
2770
Type
Amount
Statute
William Denton Henson -------- Marihuana ....1 4 pounds ---------------- 26: 2593 (a).
Arthur Baker Bee -------------- Heroin-.:--:: ligram_
21: 174.
George Colon .........
Marihuana .... 3 pounds, 3 ounces .......
26:2557 (b) (1), 18: 545.
Sergio Morin Cardenas.
---- do .-------.----do
------------Do.
Antonio Hernandez Gascar_....
Marihuana..--- 314 pounds ---------------- 18: 545, 26: 2593 (a).
Donald Winston Reeves -------- H eroin -------- 10 grams
-----21: 174.
Guadalupe Lozano Zuniga ------ Marihuana---- 100 pounds
18: 545, 26: 2557 (b) (1), 26:
2591 (a), 2593 (a).
do
2593 (a).
.....-do
-d
--------------- --Do.
-----. d o . . . . . ...-----do --------------Do.
18: 545, 26: 2.593 (a).
----------.....- do ...... 53 pounds
Do.
----do ..------------------ do
Crude
opium_. 17 ounces ------------------ 21:174.
Do.
20 grams ----------------Heroin .......
18: r-45, 26: 2593 (a).
Marihuana.... 14 pounds ------------34 grams ----------------21: 174.
Heroin .......
Do.
12 grams ----------------Do.
.....-----do --------------18: 545.
Marihuana --- 1 pound, 2 ounces ........
Do.
_-----do
----------------21174.
6 grams ................
18: 545.
6 ounces -----------------... do
Marihuana....
21:174.
1 gram -------------------Heroin
------------- ----do--------20 grains ----------------- 18: 545.
Heroin--------do --- 3 cigarettes -------------- __ Do.
Do.
4 ounces -----------------Do.
pound, I cigarette .....
1)o.
88 pounds ------------Heroin
-..... 4 grams --------------- 21: 174.
Do.
--------------- - --o----18: 545.
Marihuana. . 27 pounds, 4 ounces--------do-----
2771
Type
Amount
Charles B. Head -------------Heroin ------- 6 grams ----------------Charles Celaya Ortiz ---------- Marihuana --- % pound --------------Gordon William Lebargo ---------- do ------- 8 pounds -----------------Miguel Perez Valdez -------------- do--------- -- do --------------------Jorge Abed Vargas----------------- do ------------ do --------------------Manuel Martinez ------------- Heroin ------- 33 grams -------------Louis Judge -----------------Marihuana .... (Transferred to Houston).
Fidenclo Garcia Benavides -------- do------- 62 pounds -------------Petrona Sato Allende -----------do ----------do -------------------Belen Garcia Athie -------------..
do ----------do -------------------Pedro Garza Gallardo -----------do -------- 100 pounds -------------Rodolfo Estrada ---------------do ----------do --------------------Louis Pulos-------------------- ----.
do -------- 16 pounds ------------Joseph Robin Hood -------------do ----------do -------------------flenry Leon Mallory ------------- do ------4 cigarettes --------------Marilyn Grant ----------------do----------do -------------------Tonia Grant ------------------do--------- -- do --------------------Ellis Eugene Porter .-------------.....
do-------. 2 pounds -----------------W alter Henry Farrier ------------- do--------. -- do -------------------Alejandro Rea Martinez .----------- do-------- %ounce -----------------Heroin ------- 15 grains ---------------Sam Vernon May ---------------......
.do ------- 98 grains -----------------Otis Oscar Rogers ----------------do --.- do -------------------Doyle Elton Meeks -------------do--------- -- do -------------------Sabino Molina Torres --------- Marihuana..-. 2 pounds --------------Roland Litterio-------------Heroin ------- 45 grams --------------Martina Litterio----------------.
do ----------do -------------------Sarapio Arreaga ----------------do----------- do -------------------Antonio Hernandez Gascar-....Marihuana-..
3% pounds -------------Roberto Ochoa Gallardo ---------do ------- 4 oz ------------------Wanda Sharpe Guy ---------Heroin ------- I gram ----------------Jesus Maria Lara Gutierrez --- Marihuana--4 oz-------------------Julio Alvarez Bazan ---------- Morphine.....
665 grains -------------Heroin ------- 146 grams --------------John Doe, alias El Manchado__ --- do ----------do -------------------Fayette B. Bius --------------do-------. 3 grams ---------------Charlotte Harris ---------------do ------------ do --------------------William Gus Nobel -------------do ------------- do --------------------Francisco Sanchez Villalpondo-_ Marihuana .... 1 pound ----------------
Statute
21: 174.
18: 545.
Do.
Do.
Do.
21: 174.
18:545.
18: 371, 545; 26: 2593 (a).
Do.
Do.
18: 545, 26: 2593 (a).
Do.
18: 545.
Do.
Do.
Do.
)o.
Do.
Do.
Do.
21: 174.
Do.
I)o.
Do.
18: 545.
26: 2557 (b) (1), 21: 174.
Do.
Do.
18: 545, 26: 2593 (a).
18: 545.
21: 174.
18: 545.
26: 7237 (a), 4704 (a).
4705 (a) 11954 IRC].
Do.
21: 174.
Do.
Do.
18:5031 (18: 545).
Senator DANIEL. Have you ever used any type of narcotic drug?
Mr. MESSED. Yes.
Senator DANIEL. What type drug?
Mr. MESSER. Mostly heroin.
Senator DANIEL. When did you start?
Mr. MESSER. March 1949.
Senator DANIEL. How old were you then?
Mr. MESSER. Nineteen.
AIIII
2772
Senator
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator DANIEL. Did you start using any other type drug, maria.
huana or anything else, before you began using heroin?
Mr. MESSER. Yes.
Senator DANIEL. What did you use?
Mr. MESSER.
Senator
Marihuana.
DANIEL.
starting heroin?
Mr. MESSER. Oh,
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL. Was
Mr. MESSER. Yes.
Senator DANIEL. How much did you have to pay for it?
Mr. MESSER. Anywhere from 25 cents up per cigarette.
Senator DANIEL. Did you start dealing in marihuana or heroin?
Mr. MESSER. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. How did you start using marihuana? Who first
showed it to you and asked you to try it?
Mr. MESSER. I can't even recall. I think I ran into a marine at a
pool hall and we got to talking, and he offered me a cigarette. I didn't
realize what it was. He told me what it was. I didn't realize what
it was actually. And I went ahead and smoked it with him.
Senator
DANIEL.
before?
Mr. MESSER. I bad heard it mentioned.
Senator
DANIEL.
do to you?
Mr. MESSER. No, sir.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
Senator
DANIEL.
2773
then?
Mr. MESSER. Yes, sir.
DANIEL. And I believe you had been convicted of what?
Mr. MESSER. Possession of marihuana and possession of heroin.
Senator DANIEL. That was in 1948?
Mr. MESSER. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. And you served how much time on that?
Mr. MESSER. Fifteen months.
Senator DANIEL. And you got out of prison when?
Mr. MESSER. In March 1946.
Senator DANIEL. And did you start back using marihuana?
Mr. MESSER. That is when I started using heroin. I used morphine
Senator
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL. Quite
Mr. MESSER. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Quite
a few?
a few in the third ward neighborhood you
lived in?
Mr. MEssER. Yes, sir.
DANIEL. What streets?
MESSER. About what location
Senator
Mr.
San Felipe Courts.
All around
Senator
hooked on
heroin?
Mr. MESSER. I think I first realized I was hooked about 3 months
after I had started.
DANIEL. What did you understand I meant by hooked?
Mr. MESSER. Addicted.
Senator DANIEL. It took you about 3 months before you were
Senator
addicted?
Mr. MESSER. Before I realized that.
Senator
DANIEL.
In
.111
2774
DANIEL.
Senator DANIEL. Otherwise you, would not have the right to refuse
to answer the question. You might be held in contempt for failing to
2775
Mr. M/ESSER. I can give you the man's name because the man is
not in the United States at this time.
Senator DANIEL. All right, what is his name?
Mr. MESSER. His name is Ellis.
Senator DANIEL. What Ellis?
Mr. MESSER.
Ralph Ellis.
Senator
Mr.
DANIEL.
MESSER.
Senator
Yes.
DANIEL.
Senator
About
Senator DANIEL. How high did your habit ever get, how much
money a day?
Mr. MESSER. About $25.
Senator DANIEL. How were you getting the money to take care of
it?
Mr. MIESSER. I had a girl that was giving me some money.
Senator
DANIEL. Here
MESSER. No, sir.
in Houston?
Mr.
Senator DANIEL. Where?
Mr. MESSER. San Antonio.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
2776
Senator DANIEL. She was keeping up both your addiction and hers?
Mr. MESSER. Yes.
Senator DANIEL. Did you do any work in San Antonio during that
time?
Mr. MESSER. No, sir.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator DANIEL. Did you ever sell any drugs here in Houston?
Mr. MESSER. I don't know whether I want to answer that question.
Senator DANIEL. For what reason?
Mr. MESSER. On the ground it might incriminate me.
Senator DANIEL. All right, the committee respects your right not
to answer on the ground it might tend to incriminate you.
I might state it more fully, that if you had an attorney he could
make that objection for you in the proper manner. Since you do not
have an attorney representing you, the committee is going to give
you the same right to state it in your own words, and will respect
your position, just the same as if you had an attorney sitting by your
side. And the same thing is true on any other questions where you
honestly feel that a truthful answer might tend to incriminate you.
Now you answered that you had not sold any herion in San Antonio.
Mr. MESSER. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Isn't it true that you are in two separate cases
charged with possession of heroin?
Mr. MESSER. Yes.
DANIEL.
Senator DANIEL. Then you never have sold any heroin here, is
that right?
Mr. MESSER. I wouldn't say that.
Senator DANIEL. Have you ever possessed any heroin for the purpose of sale?
Mr. MESSER. Not specifically for that purpose; no.
Senator DANIEL. You have possessed it?
Mr. MESSER. Yes.
2777
Senator
Senator
Senator DANIEL. When was the last heroin you bought here in
Houston?
Mr. MESSER. I don't remember.
Senator
DANIEL.
It is weaker.
Senator DANIEL. You get stronger heroin in San Antonio?
Mr. MESSER. Yes, sir.
Mexico.
Senator DANIEL. Is that what the sellers tell you?
Mr. MESSER. I never asked them. I just figured it did.
Senator DANIEL. Did you buy from anybody else in San Antonio
besides Ratan?
Mr. MESSER. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Who was the last person you recollect buying
from in Houston?
Mr. MESSER. I don't recall, it has been so long.
Senator DANIEL. You were arrested on the 16th of September here?
Mr. MESSER. Yes.
Senator DANIEL. As soon as you got out of jail on bond did you
get more some heroin?
Mr. MESSER. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Didn't the officers find you on the night of
October 13 with heroin in your apartment.
-Mr. MESSER. They found some in my apartment,
Senator DANIEL. Where did you get that?
Mr. MESSER. That didn't belong to me.
yes.
2778
Senator
Senator
DANIEL.
Yes.
Senator DANIEL. Who were they?
Mr. MESSER. Cook, Campbell, Frost, Tucker. That is all the names
Mr. MESSER.
I remember.
Senator DANIEL. As you ran what did you throw to the ground?
Mr. MESSER. I didn't throw anything on the ground.
They claimed
Senator DANIEL. Did you throw a bottle to the ground that had
It is my right to clain
2779
Yes.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
rented it?
Mr. MESSER. Yes, I went back out.
night.
Senator
2780
2781
I met her.
Senator DANIEL. Did she give you heroin?
Mr. MESSER. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. How did you buy heroin?
Mr. MESSER. I don't know. I ran by some money somehow or
other.
Senator DANIEL. How?
Mr. MESSER. I rustled up some money some way.
Senator DANIEL. Did you have to violate some law to get the
money?
Mr. MESSER. No, sir.
DANIEL. Did you borrow
Mr. MESSER. Part of it.
Senator DANIEL. Who from?
Mr. MESSER. My mother.
Senator DANIEL. Did you borrow
Mr. MESSER. No, sir.
Senator
it?
Senator DANIEL. Did you ever have anybody else sell heroin for
you?
Mr. MESSER. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Did you ever see a list in her purse of heroin
users?
Mr. MESSER. I saw a list of names.
Senator DANIEL. Was that a list of names of various dope fiends
here in Houston?
Mr. MESSER. It could have been.
Senator DANIEL. Don't you know that is what they were?
Mr. MESSER. To the best of my knowledge, that is what they were.
Senator DANIEL. Didn't it have telephone numbers on it?
Mr. MESSER. There was a telephone number on it.
Senator DANIEL. Didn't it have on that list the amount of money
these people owed them?
Mr. MESSER. I don't know. There were some letters written out
by the side of the name.
Senator DANIEL. What?
Mr. MESSER. There were some numbers written by the side of
each name.
2782
Senator
Mr.
there at the time.
Senator
DANIEL.
I wasn't
or not you have ever sold heroin here in Houston, is that right?
Mr. MESSER. Yes, sir.
Senator
DANIEL.
Houston?
Mr. MESSER. I would like to take the fifth amendment on that.
Senator
DANIEL.
MESSER.
No, sir.
Senator
any.
selling any?
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
at any time?
Mr. MESSER. I would like not to answer that question.
Senator
DANIEL.
Mr. MESSER. On
Senator DANIEL.
On what ground?
the ground it might tend to incriminate me.
Didn't you subsequently, when the officers told
you about it, admit that you owned those 45 grains of heroin, or 45
grams of heroin?
Mr. MESSER. I may have. I don't remember.
Senator
DANIEL.
San Antonio?
Mr. MESSER. I believe I did.
Senator
DANIEL.
Antonio?
Mr. MESSER. Yes, sir.
Senator
DANIEL.
Mr. MESSER.
Senator
heroin?
get the
2783
Senator DANIEL. How long have you been going to San Antonio
for heroin?
[r. IESSER. I don't know. A long time.
Senator DANIEL. Have you been making these trips once a week,
more than once a week, or how often?
Mr. MESSER. Maybe about once a week.
Senator DANIEL. For how many years?
Mr. MESSER. About 2 months. 1 think it has been about 3 months.
Senator DANIEL. Did you do that before you went to the penitentia , go to the same place for your heroin?
MESSER. I would rather not answer that.
Senator DANIEL. On what ground?
Mr. MESSER. On the ground it might incriminate me.
Senator DANIEL. You have told us that you went to San
I.
Antonio.
About how often did you go for your heroin to San Antonio after you
grot out of the penitentiary?
Mr. MESSER. I didn't go for about a month, and I went for about
a month and a half.
Senator DANIEL. How often?
travel bureau?
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
to San Antonio?
of the time?
Senator DANIEL. How much did you usually buy over there in
San Antonio?
Mfr. MESSER. Do I have to answer that?
Senator DANIEL. You have to answer unless you want to claim the
fifth amendment, and I believe you have waived the fifth amendment
on these purchases from San Antonio.
Mr. MESSER. Well, about 5 or 6 papers.
Senator DANIEL. Five or six papers?
Mr. MESSER. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. What would they cost?
Mr. MESSER. $20 or $25 apiece.
Senator DANIEL. $20 or $25 a paper?
Mr. MESSER. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. So you would usually buy $125 to $200 worth of
heroin each trip?
2784
DANIEL.
trips?
Mr. MESSER. I believe about $175 worth.
Senator DANIEL. Where did you get the money to buy the heroin?
Mr. MESSER. Well, from Dollie.
DANIEL. From
Mr. MESSER. Yes.
Senator
Dollie Harris?
Senator
DANIEL.
I don't remember.
I think you told us
DANIEL.
2785
I put it there.
Senator DANIEL. Did you tell the police that was what was left
out of a total of 10 grams you purchased on October 12, 1955?
Mr. MESSER. I don't remember telling them that. I might have.
Senator DANIEL. What is the truth about it?
Mr. MESSER. I don't remember any exact times.
Senator DANIEL. Well, approximately October 12. It has not been
long ago. Did you purchase a total of 10 grams in San Antonio?
Mr. ME SSER. I refuse to answer.
Mr. MESSER.
Senator DANIEL. Was that time you purchased $175 worth, was
that your biggest purchase this year in San Antonio?
Mr. MESSER. I didn't say I purchased that in San Antonio.
Senator DANIEL. I think you did say you purchased it in San
Antonio. The record will speak for itself, however. Was this $175
purchase your largest purchase in San Antonio?
Mr. MESSER. I don't remember.
Senator DANIEL. When was it you purchased $175 worth of heroin
in San Antonio?
Mr. MESSER. I don't remember the exact date.
Senator DANIEL. Have you ever sold heroin to any young people
here in Houston?
Mr. MESSER. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Have you ever sold any heroin to any older people
in Houston?
Mr. MESSER. I told you I refuse to answer that question.
Senator DANIEL. On the grounds it might tend to incriminate you?
Mr. MESSER. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. About how many dope addicts do you know here
in Houston?
Mr. MESSER. I know a lot of them.
Senator DANIEL. Just how many would you think offhand you
personally know to be dope addicts here in Houston?
Mr. MESSER. About 15 or 20.
Senator DANIEL. They all live in the same neighborhood in town?
Mr. MESSER. No, sir.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator DANIEL. Did you ever have any trouble getting it?
Senator
DANIEL.
with it?
Mr. MESSER. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Couldn't you buy heroin here in Houston?
2786
Mr. MESSER.
Senator
Yes, sir.
DANIEL.
heroin?
Mr. MESSER. Yes, sir; one of the reasons.
Senator
white, and
sometimes yellow.
Senator DANIEL. Raton didn't tell you it came from Mexico?
Mr. MESSER. No, sir; he never did say.
Senator DANIEL. How did you
M1r.
MESSER.
Senator DANIEL. Did you ever buy heroin any place else besides
San Antonio and Houston?
Mr. MESSER.
Senator
No, sir.
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
sir.
Senator DANIEL. Were you with someone who made a purchase?
Mr. MESSER. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. How many times?
Mr. MESSER. I never actually made a purchase myself; no,
I first started. I
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
Trevinio?
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
2787
Senator
Senator DANIEL. Did you hear the name of anyone that sold it
to him?
Mr. MESSER. No, sir.
Senator
bridge?
Senator
her to
Mr.
That is all.
in Houston?
were peddling.
Mr. GASQUE.
Mr. MESSER.
Mr. GASQUE.
these questions,
only 2 months.
2788
Mr.
GASQUE.
Why?
sir.
long did you stay there?
months.
months?
drugs?
Mr. MESSER. I don't recall the exact date.
Mr.
GASQUE.
Mr. MESSER.
2789
Mr. GASQUE. You realize that these drug peddlers who are on the
streets now are peddling what Chairman Daniel has so aptly termed
murder on the installment plan?
Mr. MESSER. Yes, sir.
Mr. GASQUE. But you are not willing to cooperate at all?
Mr. MESSER. I don't know what I could do.
Senator DANIEL. I will tell you one thing you can do, and that is
to name some of these people you have bought heroin from here in
Houston. Let's name some of them? Name the first one that comes
to your mind? Can you name one?
Mr. MESSER. I am thinking.
Wait a minute.
(Long pause.)
Senator DANIEL. Can we help you in any way? You say 2 months
ago you bought it. Who did you buy from that last time?
Mr. MESSER. My mind has gone completely blank. Wait a minute.
Senator DANIEL. Do you want a little more time?
Mr. MESSER. Yes, sir.
(The witness sat for considerable time with his head down on the
table.)
Senator DANIEL. Would you rather take a little time to think this
over?
Mr. MESSER. I am trying to think. My mind has gone completely
blank. It just won't come to me.
Senator DANIEL. What about George Drury, did you ever know
him?
Mr. MESSER. I have heard of him.
Senator DANIEL. Did you every buy any heroin from George
Drury?
Mr. MESSER. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. How about Pura Rodriquez, or Purification
Perez, did you ever know her?
Mr. MESSER. I have heard of her, yes.
Senator DANIEL. Did you ever buy any heroin from her?
Mr. MESSED. No.
Senator DANIEL. About how many people would you say you
bought from here in Houston?
Mr. MESSER. About three. At least that many.
Senator DANIEL. Can you name us 1 of the 3?
Mr. MESSER. I am trying to, if you will let me think. I told you
I was trying to think of the names.
Senator DANIEL. All right. All right, you tell me when.
Mr. MESSER. I remember one boy's name I bought some stuff from.
2790
DANIEL.
DANIEL.
DANIEL.
MESSER.
Senator
$7.
DANIEL.
$7 a capsule?
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator DANIEL. The truth of the business is that you were in the
business of selling heroin here in Houston.
Mr. MESSER. I refuse to answer that.
Senator DANIEL. You refuse to answer that on the grounds that it,
might tend to incriminate you?
Mr. MESSER. Yes, sir.
Mr. GASQUE. You may have been your best customer. Now one
way you can help us is by answering this question: Do you want to
be cured?
Mr. MESSER. Yes, sir; I would like to be.
Mr. GASQUE. Is that an honest answer?
Mr. MESSER. Yes; it is.
Mr.
GASQUE.
ever be cured?
Mr. MESSER. I believe they (an.
Mr. GASQUE. Have you ever known of any instances where they
have been cured?
Mr. MESSER. No, sir; but I believe if you want to strong enough,
you can.
Mr. GASQUE. But you don't know of anyone who has gotten on
drugs who has been cured?
2791
Senator DANIEL.
Mr. BROUSSARD.
Senator DANIEL.
Mr. BROUSSARD.
Senator DANIEL.
Mr. BROUSSARD.
Senator DANIEL.
Mr. BROUSSARD.
think. It has been
Senator DANIEL.
Mr. BROUSSARD.
2792
Mr.
Yes, sir.
on heroin.
DANIEL.
marihuana?
Mr. BROUSSARD. Oh, about 14, I guess.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
here?
Mr.
BROUSSARD.
Senator
DANIEL.
2793
Senator DANIEL. This year with Jerry James Adams and Richard
C. Brown, all of whom told the customs inspector that they were
addicts. Do you remember that trip?
Mr. BROUSSARD. Yes, sir; I do.
Senator DANIEL. How many trips have you made across the Mexican border for heroin?
Mr. BROUSSARD. We didn't bring any heroin back.
Senator DANIEL. Why did you go across the border?
Mr. BROUSSARD. We went over there more or less as-the reason
I went over there, I just went over there for a good time myself.
Senator DANIEL. Were you an addict at that time?
Mr. BROUSSARD. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. You told them that when they stopped you at
the bridge?
Mr. BROUSSARD. Yes. It was quite evident I was an addict.
Senator DANIEL. How was it evident?
Mr. BROUSSARD. I had marks all over my arm.
Senator DANIEL. You have got needle marks all over your arm?
Mr. BROUSSARD. No, sir; I haven't.
Senator DANIEL. You did then?
Mr. BROUSSARD. Yes.
Senator DANIEL. Do you know Jerry James Adams?
MR. BROUSSARD. Yes.
Senator DANIEL. Where does he live?
Mr. BROUSSARD. I don't know his address.
Podunk somewhere.
Senator DANIEL. In this county?
Mr. BROUSSARD. Yes, in this county.
Senator DANIEL. Is Jerry Adams in the courtroom?
talking about?
Mr. BROUSSARD. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. How many times havb you crossed the Mexican
border?
Mr. BROUSSARD. I have crossed it a number of tines when I was in
the Army and stationed at Fort Bliss, at El Paso.
Senator DANIEL. When were you in the Army?
Mr. BROUSSARD. 1954.
Senator DANIEL. Just 1 year?
Mr. BROUSSARD. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Part of 1954?
Mr. BROUSSARD. Yes, sir.
2794
Mr. BROUSSARD. No, sir; I never did wear a uniform off the base.
Senator DANIEL. Was there any way people in Juarez could tell you
reasons Red China was pushing the heroin traffic throughout the
United States was to try to get it to our soldiers?
Mr. BROUSSARD. Yes, I have read articles on that.
what you would call addicts or nothing. They would just shoot a
little heroin.
Senator DANIEL. A lot of American soldiers would go over the
bridge to Juarez?
Mr. BROUSSARD. Yes. Sometimes they put it off limits.
Senator DANIEL. They spent a lot of money over there?
Mr. BROUSSARD. Yes, we kept it up.
Senator DANIEL. You kept Juarez, Mexico, going?
Mr. BROUSSARD. About.
Senator DANIEL. If we cut our American troops off from crossing
the bridge until they clean up Juarez do you think it might have a
good effect on Juarez?
Mr. BROUSSARD. No, sir; because I think feminine favors would
be the main thing that keeps Juarez going, other than dope. There
Gambling?
Yes, lots of them gamble.
What else do American soldiers do over there?
The biggest percent go over there and get drunk.
knows.
depends.
Senator DANIEL. Did you have any trouble getting any?
Mr. BROUSSARD. No, sir; I never had any trouble getting any.
Senator DANIEL. How much did you pay for it?
Mr. BROUSSARD. I had one connection that sold it to me for $20
a gram, $300 an ounce.
Senator DANIEL. What was the biggest amount you ever bought?
Mr. BROUSSARD. Well, I just bought those decks mostly.
Senator DANIEL. What was the biggest amount you ever bought?
Mr. BROUSSARD. At one time?
Senator DANIEL. One trip?
Mr. BROUSSARD. Oh, I don't know. I imagine about 10 grams.
2795
2796
Senator
Mr.
ADAMS.
Senator
DANIEL.
DANIEL.
Mr.
ADAMS.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
Mr.
DANIEL.
ADAMS.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Mr. ADAMS. They had him in the office, but I was not with him.
2797
DANIEL.
Senator DANIEL. Have you ever crossed the border at Laredo with
him?
Mr. ADAMS. He was in the office. He came across at the same
time, but I was not with him.
Senator DANIEL. You all crossed at the same time on several other
occasions.
Mr. ADAMS. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. All right, we will hear from you further tomorrow.
We will stand recessed until 10 o'clock tomorrow morning.
(Whereupon, at 5:25 p. In., the subcommittee recessed.)
OF THE JUDICIARY,
Houston, Tex.
The subcommittee met, pursuant to adjournment, at 10 a. m., in
situation as to whether or not you crossed the border with the man
sitting by you, Jerry James Adams?
Mr. BROUSSARD. Well, just like I said, you know you asked me
about that; did I come back across with him. I was in the office
down there with him.
Senator DANIEL. You were in the office on the bridge with him?
Mr. BROUSSARD. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Did you cross the border with him from the
Mexican side over to the American side on any occasion?
Mr. BROUSSARD. No, Sir.
Mr.
Senator DANIEL. Did you know him before you saw him in Mexico?
Mr. BROUSSARD. I didn't know him until he was in the office there.
Senator DANIEL. Is that where you first met him?
Mr. BROUSSARD. Well, more or less, first officially meeting him,
where I really knew him. I had seen him on the streets before.
Senator DANIEL. Where had you seen him on the streets?
Mr. BROUSSARD. Around town and places like that.
Senator DANIEL. Did you know that he was a dope addict?
Mr. BROUSSARD. No, sir.
2799
2800
Yes, sir.
Mr. BROUSSARD.
1 III I
2801
BROUSSARD.
Senator
DANIEL.
Mr. BROUSSARD.
perjury charge if it were proved that you had given this committee
untruthful answers.
Mr. BROUSSARD. Yes, sir.
2802
this committee would indicate that it has been since the middle of this
year.
Mr. BOUSSARD. Well
Senator DANIEL. In all fairness to youMr. BROUSSARD. Well, this is October. September, AugustWell, I will put it this way: Since 3 or 4 months ago.
Senator DANIEL. Where did you get your last shot of heroin?
Mr. BROUSSARD. I refuse to answer that question on the ground it
might tend to incriminate me.
Senator DANIEL. Did you buy it?
Mr. BROUSSARD. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Where, Houston or San Antonio, or where?
Mr. BROUSSARD. Houston.
Senator DANIEL. Who did you buy it from?
Mr. BROUSSARD. Fred Haynes.
Senator DANIEL. Is that the man who has since been killed?
Mr. BROUSSARD. Yes, I think he got killed.
Senator DANIEL. Who else have you bought heroin from in Houston
any time this year?
Mr. BROUSSARD. In this year?
Senator DANIEL. Yes.
Mr.
BROUSSARD.
Senator
DANIEL.
Mr. BROUSSARD.
Senator DANIEL.
Mr. BROUSSARD.
Senator DANIEL.
Mr. BROUSSARD.
months ago.
Senator DANIEL. Who else did you buy dope from here in Houston?
Mr.
BROUSSARD.
Well,
Senator DANIEL. You are telling me that those are the only two you
have bought heroin from?
Mr. BROUSSARD. That I know the names of.
Senator DANIEL. You have bought from other people in Houston,
haven't you?
Mr. BROUSSARD. Not directly during that time.
Senator DANIEL. Before you are asked to call any names, and without calling any names, how many people do you know in Houston
selling heroin this year?
Mr. BROUSSARD. I don't know how many.
Senator DANIEL. I mean how many do you know that were selling
heroin in Houston this year?
Mr. BROUSSARD. Well, the only ones I would know would be the
ones I bought it from.
Senator DANIEL. That is right, or that you saw somebody else
buy from.
Mr. BROUSSARD. Then that would be 2 or possibly 3 people.
Senator DANIEL. You know you bought from some people who are
not now dead, don't you?
Mr. BROUSSARD. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Well, name those for the committee.
Mr. BROUSSARD. Well, I refuse to answer that on the grounds it
I I
2803
Senator DANIEL. You don't want this committee to think that you
are trying to protect people who are selling dope to these young
people?
Mr. BROUSSARD. Well, you know I don't know if they sell it to
young people or not.
Senator DANIEL. How old are you?
Mr. BROUSSARD. Eighteen.
Mr. BROUSSARD.
Senator DANIEL.
Mr. BROUSSARD.
Senator DANIEL.
Mr. BROUSSARD.
Senator DANIEL.
boy?
Mr.
BROUSSARD.
Somewhere around
in there.
Senator
DANIEL.
sold you heroin here in Houston when you were 15 or 16 years old?
Mr.
BROUSSARD.
Do you
Mr.
BROUSSARD.
A woman?
DANIEL.
Purification Perez?
Mr.
BROUSSARD. I
know of her.
Mr. BROUSSARD.
Senator DANIEL.
Mr. BROUSSARD.
Senator DANIEL.
2804
<V...
Photo of Pura Rodriguez Perez from Police Department, Houston, Tex., No.
25190, December 29, 1954.
Senator DANIEL. Did you ever buy any heroin from her?
Mr. BROUSSARD. No.
Senator DANIEL. Did you ever buy any heroin from any other
Houston woman?
Mr. BROUSSARD. Not that I remember.
Senator DANIEL. How many people did you buy from in Houston,
Tex.?
Mr. BROUSSARD. Well, you know sometimes you buy from some
Chicheno. They are not going to tell you.
Senator DANIEL. You buy from some Chicheno?
2805
Mexican.
heroin from in Houston, at least how many? You have only named
two. Who else have you bought from? Both of those are dead.
Mr. BROUSSARD. That is all I remember.
Senator DANIEL. Did you ever buy from any colored fellow or
woman?
2806
Senator DANIEL.
Mr. BROUSSARD.
Senator DANIEL.
Mr. BROUSSARD.
Senator DANIEL.
Mr. BROUSSARD.
let that answer sta nd. The girl I am talking about, that you went
with when she was 16 or 17, you mean to tell me you never did make
dates for her with Teople who were going to see her as a prostitute?
Mr. BROUSSARD. No, sir; I never did pander a girl's charms; no sir.
Senator DANIEL. Did you ever pander the charms of any girl?
Mr. BROUSSARD.
Senator DANIEL.
Mr. BROUSSARD.
dealings with them,
Senator DANIEL.
Mr. BROUSSARD.
Senator DANIEL.
Mr. BROUSSARD.
Senator DANIEL.
Mr.
BROUSSARD.
No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. What kind of money did you get from them?
Mr. BROUSSARD. I didn't get any money from them.
Senator DANIEL. Not from any girls?
Mr. BROUtSARD. Well, this Mrs. Z, she helped me off the pea farm
one time.
shot me right down into court and gave me some time out on the pea
farm. And I stayed there a few days, and she came up, and her and
my mother helped pay me out.
Senator DANIEL. You did use heroin with that girl. Did you use
heroin with girls in San Antonio?
Mr. BROUSSARD. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Did you ever have a girl in San Antonio that
you used heroin with?
Mr. BROUSSARD. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Did you buy any heroin when you crossed the
border at Laredo on various trips you talked about?
Mr. BROUSSARD. I shot some heroin while I was on the other side;
yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. In Nuevo Laredo?
Mr. BROUSSARD. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Did you ever cross the border at any other place
I I I I
2807
Senator DANIEL. Did you bring some heroin back when you came
back from Laredo on these trips?
Mr. BROUSSARD. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Did you have somebody bring some back for you?
Mr. BROUSSARD. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. When you were in the Army and crossed the
bridge over at Juarez where did you get your shots of heroin over
there?
Mr. BROUSSARD. In Juarez.
Senator DANIEL. At what place?
Mr. BROUSSARD. There is not any certain place. Little shacks,
that is all.
2808
Senator
DANIEL.
Mr. BROUSSARD. The party that gave me the $200 was Fred Haynes,
but there were some other people involved with him that I didn't
know about.
Senator DANIEL. What were you supposed to do with the $200?
What did you do with it?
Mr. BROUSSARD. I bought heroin with it.
Senator DANIEL. In Nuevo Laredo?
Mr. BROUSSARD. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Who from?
Senator
Mr.
DANIEL.
BROUSSARD.
Mr.
BROUSSARD. Yes.
Senator DANIEL. Did
the border?
2809
No.
And that was the most you ever bought?
Yes, sir, $200 worth.
You just bou ht enough for your habit?
That is all. I didn't have a habit in the Army.
What were you buying it for?
I was just joy popping then, that is all.
Is movement of military personnel pretty easy
across the border at Juarez?
Mr. BROUSSARD. Yes, if you had a pass you could go on across there.
Senator DANIEL. Mr. Dave Ellis, is he in the courtroom?
Mr. BROUSSARD.
Senator DANIEL.
Mr. BROUSSARD.
Senator DANIEL.
Mr. BROUSSARD.
Senator DANIEL.
Mr. BROUSSARD.
Senator DANIEL.
Mr. BROUSSARD.
Senator DANIEL.
Mr. BROUSSARD.
Senator DANIEL.
Yes, sir.
Senator
DANIEL.
to Houston?
Mr. BROUSSARD. Somewhere there in Laredo.
street.
Senator
DANIEL.
2810
Senator
Mr.
DANIEL.
ADAMS.
On the bridge.
DANIEL.
ADAMS.
Senator
Mr.
Yes, sir.
DANIEL.
ADAMS.
Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Any witness may claim the right under the fifth
amendment, provided he honestly believes a truthful answer miglt
tend to tie him up with some offense for which he could be convicted.
Mr.
ADAMS.
Senator
Mr.
Yes.
DANIEL.
ADAMS.
Yes.
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
2811
TRAFFIC
Senator DANIEL. Is there any reason that you know of why you
should not, tell us who across the border in Nuevo Laredo is selling
heroin to young people?
.MIr. ADAMS. I couldn't name anyone.
Senator DANIEL. How old are you?
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
Mr.
Good time.
Senator
Do you
this year?
I went down there.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
Go to what?
Mr. ADAMS. Go to Boys' Town.
Senator DANIEL. What is Boys' Town?
DANIEL.
Mr. ADAMS. That is just where there is dancing and open bars.
Senator
Mr.
DANIEL.
ADAMS.
Open bars?
Yes.
Senator
DANIEL. Heroin?
Mr. ADAMS. I wouldn't say that.
Senator DANIEL. Mr. Adams, do
you have never seen any heroin across the border in TMexico?
I just want to
Senator
DANIEL.
Mr. ADAMS. No, sir. I haven't seen any of them brothers over
there.
Senator DANIEL. I didn't ask you that.
over to Mexico?
Mr.
ADAMS.
7 1515-56--pt.
7-30
2812
Mr. GASQUE. Did you just joy pop over a period of time there?
Mr. ADAMS. No, sir, I wouldn't say over a period of time. I did
one time, or maybe once or twice, while I was there, but that was all.
Mr. GASQUE. On these other occasions when you stayed there
until your money ran out you didn't use heroin at all?
Mr. ADAMS. These other cases?
Mr. GASQUE. Yes.
Mi. ADAMS. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Did you have a job during this period of time?
Mr. ADAMS. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Have you had a job any time this year?
Mr. ADAMS. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. How did you get the money to go to Mexico on
these trips?
Mr. ADAMS. I am going to hold the fifth amendment on that.
Senator DANIEL. You won't testify in answer to that because you
claim your rights to refuse under the fifth amendment?
Mr. ADAMS. Yes.
Senator DANIEL. Do you think a truthful answer to that question
might tend to incriminate you?
Mr. ADAMS. Yes.
Senator DANIEL. Here is what the record shows: You did cross the
border, on February 5, 1955; March 18, 1955; May 5, 1955; May 8,
1955; and August 10, 1955, all this year.
Mr. ADAMS. May 5 and May 8?
Senator DANIEL. That is correct.
1111111111
2813
Senator
Mr.
DANIEL.
ADAMS. No,
sir.
Senator DANIEL. Actually, you were making about one trip each
month?
Mr. ADAMS. No, Sir. No, I went when I got ready to go.
Senator DANIEL. Didn't you ever cross the border when they failed
to stop you and search you?
Mr. ADAMS. No, sir, I don't believe I did. Well, I did one time,
they didn't search me.
Senator DANIEL. One time they didn't search you?
Mr. ADAMS. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Did you ever cross the border at any other place
besides Laredo?
Mr. ADAMS. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Never have?
Mr. GASQUE. Then why did you take the fifth amendment when
the chairman asked you if you bought heroin in Mexico and brought
it back for sale?
Mr. ADAMS. How is that?
Mr. GASQUE. You have no right to take the fifth amendment unless it might incriminate you, and I think you have waived that right
when you stated that you had bought heroin only once, and used it
yourself.
Mr. ADAMS. That is true.
Mr. GASQUE. Now then I think if the chairman might want to ask
you that question again you might give a different answer.
Senator DANIEL. Counsel is right. You have told the chairman
you bought hereoin only one time, and that you used it for joy
Popping.
Mr. ADAMS. I am not an attorney. I don't know whether I can
take the fifth amendment or not. I would like to take it if I can.
I I
I I I I
2814
111111111
2815
Senator DANIEL. You mean to tell this committee you have never
sold any heroin?
Mr.
ADAMS.
No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Have you ever bought any heroin for someone
else in your life?
Mr.
ADAMS.
ADAMS.
Mr. ADAMS. I refuse to answer that on the grounds it might incriminate me.
Senator DANIEL. When was the last time you bought heroin here
in Houston?
Mr. ADAMS. I never bought any-about 5 months, or 6 months
though.
Mr. GASQUE. I believe you told the chairman you hadn't used
heroin for the last 5 or 6 months; that you had been off the habit for
5 or 6 months?
Mr. ADAMS. That is right.
Mr. GASQUE. That you went to Fort Worth?
Mr.
ADAMS.
That is right.
Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you are about to give to
this subcommittee of the Senate Judiciary Committee will be the
truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?
Mr. MCLEAISH. I do, sir.
TESTIMONY OF BERNARD J. McLEAISH, CUSTOMS AGENT IN
CHARGE, BUREAU OF CUSTOMS, BROWNSVILLE, TEX., DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
2816
2817
Mr. McLEAISH. I really don't know what they are doing on the
Mexican side.
Senator DANIEL. All you know is that good heroin, clean and pure
heroin, is pretty hard to get in Matamoros?
Mr. MCLEAISH. That is true.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
river?
Mr. McLEAISH. No, I didn't.
Senator DANIEL. You heard Broussard testify yesterday?
Mr. McLEAISH. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. We had some addicts before the committee in
San Antonio.
It-. McLEAISH. I believe they crossed the bridge and were searched.
Senator DANIEL. Some of them said they arranged for their deliveries of narcotics to be made back on this side. Is that a customary
procedure down at Laredo?
Mr. McLEAISH. When I first went there right after we got into the
Second World War we had addicts going in there 40 or 50 a day, and
we arrested so many of them that it looked like the Trevrinio brothers
had sent circular letters out to the narcotics traffic.
Senator DANIEL. Addicts?
Mr. MCLEAISH. Addicts.
Senator DANIEL. Peddlers?
M1r. McLEAISH. Yes, peddlers. Some were peddlers. They usually
had from 10 grams all the way up to 100 grams of heroin. They were
from all parts of the United States. Because their source of supply
was good, the quality was good, and they got the full quantity they
paid for.
Senator
DANIEL.
Mc. MCLEAISH.
Senator DANIEL.
McLEAISH.
2818
DANIEL.
Mr. MCLEAISH.
Senator DANIEL.
Mr. McLEAISH.
Senator DANIEL.
Senator
Mlr. McLEAISF.
2819
working on
narcotics. You do not have any man in Mexico who is devoting his
time exclusively to narcotics work?
Mr. McLEAISH. I wouldn't know that.
is concerned with diamonds and anything involving customs transactions. Is that correct?
Mr. MCLEAISH. That is true. Every customs agent does that.
Senator DANIEL. So you mean that our representative, Mr. Ben
down there.
Senator DANIEL. From what this committee has heard, especially
on this Texas trip, I think we could use several more over there working with the Mexican Government.
Here is what we are faced with. When hoof-and-mouth-disease
broke out in Mexico we got busy with the Mexican officials and
worked out some kind of an agreement by which we would send our
money and help them stop the hoof-and-mouth-disease. And a lot of
our men were working below the border exclusively on that.
Mr. McLEAISH. The Department of Agriculture.
Senator DANIEL. Don't you think this narcotics traffic is more
dangerous to us than the hoof-and-mouth-disease?
Mr. McLEAISH. I certainly do.
Senator DANIEL. Do you know of any reason why our men should
not work from the top level to stop this terrible traffic?
Mr. McLEAISH. No, I don't. I think they should do something
about it.
2820
own words and describe to the committee the situation on the border
with respect to narcotics, and give any recommendations that you may
have for us.
Mr. MCLEAISH. I have a prepared statement. Do you mind if I
take a look at it?
Senator DANIEL. You may look at your prepared statement. We
will make it a part of the record. (See p. 2830.)
Mr. MCLEAISH. I will make it very brief.
Senator DANIEL. You may proceed.
Mr. MCLEAISH. I don't know whether you have been furnished
with these figures before, but I will give you a little bit of an idea
about the marihuana traffic in the Laredo and Brownsville sections. I
will be able to divide it up when we get down to 1951.
Senator DANIEL. That will be fine.
Mr. McLEAISH. In the period 1949-54 our customs agents in
Laredo and Brownsville area, seized 8,677 pounds of marihuana, which
is the equivalent of 60,739,000 grains.
Senator DANIEL. What would be roughly the retail value of that?
Mr. McLEAISH. That would be approximately 10 million cigarettes, and a cigarette sells all the way from 25 cents along the border to
$1.50 up in the interior of the United States.
Senator DANIEL. So that would be approximately how much marihuana per year in dollars, if you take an average?
Mr. McLEAISH. The average marihuana cigarette will contain 4 to
5 grains. We usually figure 5 grains per cigarette. I will have to
do a little calculating.
Senator DANIEL. $1.50, that is the price in New York at that time?
Mr. McLEAISH. The average would be about $1, taking near the
border and on up to New York. So you would have $12,000,000 in
marihuana cigarettes taken out of circulation in seizures.
Senator DANIEL. Over what period of time?
Mr. McLBAISH. Six years.
Senator DANIEL. In a 6-year period $12,000,000 worth seized?
Mr. MCLEAISH. Yes.
Senator
DANIEL.
Mr. McLEAISH.
Senator DANIEL.
able to seize?
Senator
DANIEL.
MCLEAISH.
Senator
DANIEL.
McLEAISH.
2821
the grand jury, to Galveston to the grand jury, and to Corpus Christi
to the grand jury and to Laredo to the grand jury, and to trials in
Corpus Christi. And we also had men working on cases in other divisions who had to go to court in El Paso and Del Rio, Tex. So you
can understand what we have to contend with along the border area,
to the customs agents and have helped us a great deal. On the other
hand, we have been in position to help them. As a matter of fact,
we have arrested and delivered to them more aliens than they have
picked up people for us.
Senator DANIEL. When you say picked up people for you, you
mean smugglers?
Mr. MCLEAISH. Smugglers, narcotics.
Senator DANIEL. Does the border patrol have any patrol actually
along the river?
Mr. McLEAISH. Up until a few weeks back they didn't.
They are
across are just poor hardworking people looking to make a little money
to take it back home with them. We don't have any trouble with
them. It may be true that three or four of them may bring over a
little marihuana to use themselves, but they are not selling it.
Senator DANIEL. They are more professional smugglers that are
bringing it across?
Mr. MCLEAISH. They are professional everything.
Senator DANIEL. This border patrol you say actually doesn't have
anybody watching the river?
2822
That
2823
whole thing is to got all the information we can so that we can make
recommendations to Congress with a view to putting a stop to this
terrible traffic.
Mr. McLEAISH. I want to say this, Senator: I think that probably
the best thing that could be done would be to put the narcotics addict
away. And if this new State of Texas law on it holds up I think that
would be one of the best things that has ever happened to the addicts
themselves.
Senator
DANIEL.
2824
Senator
to ask.
DANIEL.
from this country who are operating in the dope traffic in Mexico.
And also there were some charges made in our San Antonio hearing
that there are some Mexican officials in local offices who are associated
with the dope traffic. Do you have any information on that in your
own experience on the border?
Mr. McLEAISH. Yes, sir, I have, Senator.
Senator
DANIEL.
that?
Mr. McLEAISH. Right at this time we have 13 fugitives in Mexic(
Senator DANIEL. By fugitives do you mean they are under indictments in this country?
Mr. McLEAISH. Yes, and we have lookouts for them.
File No. B-6-77, H-6-234, Brownsville, Tex., Customs Agency Service Photo of
Ernesto Jiminez Herrera, alias "Chamaco", taken in Monterrey, Nuevo Leon,
Mexico, November 1951.
I I I I
2825
Senator
DANIEL.
Where
is he now?
Mr. McLEAISH. He is operating out of Monterrey, Mexico.
Senator DANIEL. What is he doing?
Mr. McLEAIsH. He is in the narcotics traffic between Mexico
and
Senator
DANIEL.
McLEAISH.
Mr.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
over at Reynosa.
Senator DANIEL. Is he the same one who was furnishing the Sutton
gang here in Houston?
Mr. McLEAISH. He is a Bureau of Narcotics fugitive.
Senator DANIEL. Do you know what he is doing?
Mr. McLEAISH. Leo Ochoa operates probably on a legitimate basis
in Mexico.
Senator DANIEL. All right. Do you know him to identify him
personally?
Mr. MCLEAISH. Yes.
Senator
DANIEL.
hearing.
(The photograph marked as "Exhibit C," follows.)
I I I I
2826
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
TRAFFIC
made a part of this record, it was testified that Leo was operating in
marihuana from here to New York, and back here. Is that your
understanding?
Mr. McLEAISH. That I wouldn't know.
Senator DANIEL. Proceed to the next.
Mr. M CLEAISH. The next is Herberto Gonzalez. He is also a Bureau
of Narcotics fugitive from Houston.
Senator DANIEL. He is wanted for a narcotics trial here in Houston?
Mr. MCLEAISH. That is right.
Senator DANIEL. You don't know how much bond this Gonzalez is
under?
Mr. MCLEAISH. No, I don't know.
Senator
DANIEL. Is he in Reynosa?
MCLEAISH. 1 don't know where
Mr.
he is.
Senator DANIEL. Mr. Dave Ellis, do you know what this man
Herberto Gonzalez is doing?
Mr. ELLIS. No, sir, I don't.
Senator DANIEL. We have down here on our investigation that lie is
chief of police, traffic department, Reynosa, Mexico.
Mr. ELLIS. My experience was north of there, through Laredo.
I II
2827
I am a little bit
handicapped about the Reynosa side of it. Our agent, Mr. Herbert
Scott, who was on duty at the bridge, he told me that Herberto
Gonzalez Casanova, is the last name, is now traffic officer at Reynosa
for the State of Tamaulipas, Mexico.
Senator DANIEL. So he is now an officer in Mexico and is wanted for
narcotics charge here?
Mr. McLEAISH. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. And is now an officer for the State of Tamaulipas
Where is he wanted?
He was wanted in Brownsville. A lot of these
cases, I don't have the dispositions of them by the United States
attorney recorded. We are still carrying them as fugitives in our
Senator
DANIEL.
Mr. McLEAISH.
Senator
DANIEL.
71515-56--pt. 7----81
2828
Senator
DANIEL.
McLEAISH.
Mr.
Senator DANIEL. I have down here that in 1955, April of this year,
he was chief of police in Victoria, Tamaulipas, Mexico. Will you
see if Mr. Scott has that on his report?
Mr. MCLEAISH. I don't, have any information from Mr. Scott
on this.
Senator
DANIEL.
that. It is reported that this man this year served as chief of police,
and his partner became chief of police at Matamoros. Do you
happen to know about that?
Mr. McLEAISH. I don't have that information.
Senator
DANIEL.
you have named, are wanted here in Houston for narcotics offenses,
and they can not, only remain fugitives but can get positions in the
police department, I think it is significant, don't you?
Mr. McLEAISH. From my observation, it is one of the qualifications
that they must have.
Senator DANIEL. When we are making these statements about our
good neighbor to the south I want to make it perfectly clear that according to top officials in our country the top officials in Mexico are
sincerely trying to do something to stamp out the narcotics traffic, and
that the cases that have been referred to should not be considered
typical. Further, if they didn't have buyers for it on this side they
wouldn't be smuggling it to us.
Mr. McLEAISH. That is true. I don't want to leave you with the
impression that everybody in Mexico is engaged in illegal operations
in the narcotics traffic. We have our own people right here at home
who do a lot worse things, and I am not proud of them myself. A lot
of people in Mexico are just as good as we are.
Senator DANIEL. All right, let's go to the rest of the fugitives
hurriedly.
Mr. MCLEAISH. Guadalupe Cantu Martinez.
DANIEL. Where is he wanted?
Mr. McLEAISH. He is wanted in Brownsville.
Senator DANIEL. What is he doing now?
Mr. McLEAISH. That I don't know.
Senator DANIEL. I wonder if you would complete
Senator
the information as to where they are wanted, whether or not they have
jumped bail, whether or not they have any official position in Mexico,
or whether they are in the drug traffic.
Mr. McLEAISH. It would be almost impossible for me to give that
information. In Mexico they don't keep any criminal records like
we do in the United States. Once these people go back across the
river, a lot of them come from the remote sections of Mexico, from the
marihuana growing sections there, and you have so many people with
the same names in Mexico, it makes it very difficult to keep up with
them or get any record on them. If you are looking for one of these
men it is like looking for a needle in a haystack. Those that come
back up to the border towns and stay around there, we can pretty well
find them. We know them by sight. But to go looking for them in
Mexico, it is practically impossible.
2829
Senator DANIEL. During the noon hour I wonder if you would complete from Mr. Scott's report and yours any other information you
can give us on fugitives you do know about.
Mr. McLEAISH. I will be glad to do that.
Senator DANIEL. Do you have any recommendations
you want to
make to the committee that, are not included in your written statement?
Mr. McLEAISH. I would like to say this is my personal opinion.
You are never going to get a second offender under the Boggs Act if
you keep prosecuting under the general smuggling laws. Under the
general smuggling laws some of them may get, 20 months or 2 years.
That not only doesn't do anything to discourage them, but you have
a Federal law in the United States to where a person who was sen-
McLEAISH.
Senator DANIEL. Thank you very much, and we will see you after
our noon recess.
Mr. McLeaish, Mr. Gasque, our counsel, has something he wants
to ask here.
Mir. GASQUE. Mr. McLeaish, I wondered if these were the type of
sentences which you say caused concern along the border.
I will hand these to the reporter later.
Here is one smuggler, 40 pound marihuana, 1 year to serve.
Here is another one, a smaller amount, $150 fine.
Here is another smuggler, marihuana, 3 years suspended sentence.
I I I
2830
Mr. GASQUE. Here is another one, in Laredo, that was tried, 100
That was the largest seizure of marihuana, and they only get
Mr. GASQUE. Are all these Federal cases you are reading?
Mr. McLEAISH. Yes.
Senator DANIEL. What about the State courts along the border,
feel that stiffer penalties are necessary if you are going to stop this
traffic on the border?
Mr. McLEAISH. I really do.
Senator DANIEL. And that they should bring the cases under the
Boggs Act, and not under the General Smuggling Act?
Mr. McLEAISH. I do.
Mr. GASQUE. Is smoking marihuana across the border against the
law?
Mr. McLEAISH. That I wouldn't know. I am not acquainted with
the laws of Mexico.
Mr. GASQUE. Does anyone know?
Mr. McLEAISH. I know you can get a license in the United States
to produce it, to grow it.
Mr. GASQUE. That is for legitimate purposes?
Mr. MCLEAISH. Yes. In Mexico, I don't know.
Senator DANIEL. Thank you very much.
working in such areas. In addition, I was stationed in New York City, N. Y.,
as a customs agent, from 1946 to 1949, and while there I worked most of New
York State and New Jersey and some parts of Connecticut and Massachusetts.
I1III1
2831
My supervisor in the Mexican border area was and is now, the supervising
customs agent, El Paso, Tex. My supervisor in New York was the supervising
customs agent, New York, N. Y.
From my experiences along the United States-Mexican border area I have
found, as a general rule, that United States dealers and users of heroin have found
Nuevo Laredo, Tamaulipas, Mexico, to be the ideal place of supply for their demands. The heroin there was of top quality; the supply was unlimited, and the
price remairied stable at $20 for a full gram of heroin.
With exceptions, I would say that the bigtime marihuana dealers in the United
States have also found Nuevo Laredo, Tamaulipas, Mexico, to be their best
source of supply, as they could always get the best grade of marihuana there for
the best price and without being cheated as to the quantity purchased.
The situation differs, as a general rule, in the areas south of Nuevo Laredo,
Tamaulipas, Mexico, as it is usually found that Mexican dealers are looking for
buyers in the United States and not being acquainted with the United States
buyers, they usually come up to some Mexican border town and send runners
across into the United States to locate buyers. In almost every case in which
customs agents have apprehended these Mexican dealers, or their runners, it has
been found that they have either cheated or attempted to cheat their customers
either by short weight, poor quality, and in some instances in substituting some
other thing, such as epsom salts for cocaine talc for heroin, etc., and that their
prices were a great deal higher than the N'uevo Laredo prices. As a result of
such gouging and cheating, the reputation of these characters has apparently
spread to the traffic in the United States and there has not been any continued
large scale development between any single one of these operators. However,
in this area, there has been, and no doubt still are, large scale operations in the
marihuana traffic on a family relationship basis between relatives living in Mexico
and relatives living in the United States in the vicinity of the Mexican border in
this area. These families have long had connections with the large-scale muovement of marihuana to the principal markets in the United States, and while a
number of them have been caught by customs agents and agents of the Bureau
of Narcotics, they have not been hampered to any great extent because when one
gets caught there is always another to step in his place. It has been found to
be extremely difficult to make contact, or to get in close to these rings, as a stranger who lingers in these small border and valley cit-ies is ahnost immediately
pegged, and the people in such locales do not put out any information as they
know that they have to live there, and they want to continue to live.
As a general rule, most smugglers of narcotics and marihuana are caught by
customs agents either through information furnished by characters who are either
working for the dealers, acquanited with the dealers, or acquainted with characters who work for the dealers. In order to contact, and to keep in contact
with such persons, they have to be met and associated with in their own environment. They are paid for the information that they furnish. The utmost caution
and patience is required in these operations as they are extremely dangerous in
many ways.
In the Brownsville division of the customs agency service there are assigned,
besides myself four customs agents at Brownsville, Tex., and two customs agents
at McAllen, tex., and in addition to the handling of narcotic-marihuana violators, we are charged with the investigation and enforcement of other matters
such as the customs laws and regulations in general; the marine and navigation
laws and regulations; the Air Commerce Act; the Mutual Security Act relating
to the control of the importation and exportation of munitions, etc.; the Export
Control Act of 1949, and a number of other laws and regulations of other departmients of the Government relating to imports and exports, etc. However, the
following seizures of narcotics and marihuana, and connected arrests, were made
by this staff during the past 4 years:
July 1, 1951 to June 30, 1952
484.81 pounds marihuana (equivalent to 3,393,670 grains).
180 marihuana cigarettes, 113% grains, heroin, 120 grams morphine, 20 codeine
phosphate tablets.
(64 arrests.)
July 1, 1952 to June 30, 1958
233.70 pounds marihuana (equivalent to 1,635,400 grains).
19 marihuana cigarettes, 1 gram heroin, 1 ampoule morhpine sulphate.
(57 arrests.)
2832
DANIEL.
Senator
John Sutton?
DANIEL.
DANIEL.
Mrs. WILLIAMS.
Senator DANIEL.
2833
Senator DANIEL.
Mrs. WILLIAMS.
Senator DANIEL.
the marihuana?
Mrs. WILLIAMS.
Senator
DANIEL.
Mrs. WILLIAMS.
Senator
DANIEL.
Yes, sir.
Senator
DANIEL.
your bringing back as much as four or five thousand dollars for mariuana?
Mrs. WILLIAMS. Yes.
Senator
DANIEL.
Hall?
Mrs. WILLIAMS. No, sir; I don't remember it.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
Mrs.
DANIEL.
WILLIAMS.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Mrs. WILLIAMS.
Senator DANIEL.
Mrs. WILLIAMS.
Senator
DANIEL.
Mrs. WILLIAMS.
Senator
DANIEL.
that?
Mrs. VWILLIAMS. I would probably know his picture if I would see
his picture.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
2834
DANIEL.
Mrs. WILLIAMS.
Senator DANIEL.
DANIEL.
Mrs. WILLIAMS.
Senator DANIEL.
DANIEL.
Mrs. WILLIAMS.
Senator DANIEL.
2835
Senator
DANIEL.
WILLIAMS.
Mrs.
Senator
DANIEL.
Mrs. WILLIAMS.
Senator DANIEL.
Mrs. WILLIAMS.
the stuff from.
Senator DAN-IEL.
Mrs. WILLAIMS.
Senator
DANIEL.
Mrs. WILLIAMS.
Senator DANIEL.
Yes.
They would send money where?
Mexican Johnny.
Senator
Mexican Johnny?
Mrs. WILLIAMS. I probably could.
Senator
DANIEL.
Mrs. WILLIAMS.
Senator DANIEL.
Mrs. WILLIAMS.
Senator DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Mrs. WILLIAMS. He would call from the house some and sometimes
he would call from some other place.
Senator DANIEL. And what place did he call, a place in Mexico, or
in the United States?
Mrs. WILLIAMS. I believe Mercedes.
Senator DANIEL. Mercedes, Tex.?
2836
Senator DANIEL. And would he let the person on the other end of the
line know he wanted marihuana?
Mrs. WILLIAMS. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. About how often did he bring marihuana in here
from Mexico?
Mrs. WILLIAMS. I would say at least once a week.
Senator DANIEL. About how large quantities?
Mrs. WILLIAMS. From 50 to 100 pounds.
Senator DANIEL. Do you know what he was paying for it?
Mrs. WILLIAMS. No, sir; I don't.
Senator DANIEL. Do you know where it was coming from?
Mrs. WILLIAMS. Mexico, I guess.
Senator DANIEL. Did you ever go across the border with him?
Mrs. WILLIAMS. With Johnny?
Senator DANIEL. Yes.
Mrs. WILLIAMS. Yes, sir, I did.
DANIEL.
Senator DANIEL. Did you make contact on the other side with
someone who had marihuana?
Mrs. WILLIAMS. We met this Mexican Johnny on this side, at
2837
If that is Leo, I
won't say.
Senator DANIEL. Do you know Sutton did have some business dealings with Leo?
Mrs. WILLIAMS. No, sir. The only one I know him ever dealing
with was Mexican Johnny.
Senator DANIEL. But you did meet Leo?
Mrs. WILLIAMS. Yes, sir.
Senator
DANIEL.
Mrs. WILLIAMS.
Senator DANIEL.
Mrs. WILLIAMS.
Johnny.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
York?
Mrs. WILLIAMS. Maybe once or twice a week.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Mrs. WILLIAMS.
Senator DANIEL.
Mrs. WILLIAMS.
2838
Senator
Senator DANIEL. About how many people did Cooper and Sutton
have selling marihuana here in Houston?
Mrs. WILLIAMS. Well, as far as I know, here in Houston, I don't
know of them selling any here in Houston at all. All I know, when
they would get it they would take it to New York.
Senator
DANIEL.
them here in Houston except those you said ran the marihuana to
New York?
Mrs. WILLIAMS. No, sir. I wouldn't say. Snooty Mims.
Senator DANIEL. Is that Frank Mims?
Mrs. WILLIAMS. That is right.
Senator
DANIEL.
At this moment.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
2839
WILLIAMS.
Senator DANIEL.
Yes, sir.
Who told you that he was Mexican Johnny?
M[rs.
Sutton.
Mrs.
WILLIAMS.
Senator DANIEL.
Yes, sir.
[EXECUTIVE SESSION]
New York, N. Y.
The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 9:45 a. m., in room
618, United States courthouse, Foley Square, New York City,
Senator Price Daniel (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding.
Present: Senator Daniel (presiding).
Also present: C. Aubrey Gasque, subcommittee counsel, and W. L.
Speer, committee investigator.
Senator DANIEL. You will stand up and be sworn.
Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you are about to give
to this subcommittee of the Senate Judiciary Committee will be the
truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?,
Mr. HALL. I do, sir.
TESTIMONY OF GEORGE HALL
Senator DANIEL. State your full name.
Mr. HALL. George Hall.
Senator DANIEL. How old are you?
Mr. HALL. Thirty-seven.
Senator DANIEL. Where were you born?
Mr. HALL. Dallas, Tex.
Senator DANIEL. How long did you live in Dallas?
Mr. HALL. About 16 years.
Senator DANIEL. And then where did you go?
Mr. HALL. New York.
Senator DANIEL. Where did you live in New York?
Mr. HALL. At 96 Riverside Drive.
Senator DANIEL. Did you live at that address all the time that
you lived in New York?
Mr. HALL. No, sir. I lived there for about 3 years; and after that
I went by myself. I was with my father there, and I left home, and
from there I moved to myself.
Senator DANIEL. Your father had lived in Dallas, and you moved
with him to New York?
Mr. HALL. No, my father was in New York; he moved from Dallas
to New York.
Senator DANIEL. I see.
Mr. HALL. Later I followed him here.
Senator DANIEL. Did you work, go to school, in Dallas?
2841
2842
DANIEL.
HALL.
Senator
He was superintendent.
DANIEL.
Of what?
DANIEL.
Up to when?-
DANIEL.
New Jersey?
Mr.
HALL.
2843
Senator
DANIEL.
Mr.
HALL. Paroled.
Senator DANIEL. After
how long?
.Mr. HALL. After 14 months, I think it was.
Senator DANIEL. After having served that sentence, did you go back
into marihuana traffic?
HALL. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. I mean
Mr. HALL. No sir.
Mr.
Senator
DANIEL.
Mr.
sell marihuana?
.Mr. HALL. Well, after I served this term, I didn't buy or sell any
marihuana at all at any time.
Mr. SPEER. What date were you convicted on that first charge?
Mr. HALL. In 1948. You mean the first charge in 1948?
Senator DANIEL. Yes.
Senator DANIEL. Did you have two charges pending against you
at that time?
Mr. HALL. Yes.
Senator DANIEL. Possession of marihuana and unlawful use and
possession?
Mr. HALL. That is right, sir.
Senator DANIEL. And then later were you tried on the second
charge, too?
Mr. HALL. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Was that after you had served your first sentence?
Mr. HALL. No, sir; that was at-during the same time.
Senator HALL. During the same time?
Mr. HALL. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. And were you convicted on the second charge,
too ?
Mr. HALL. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Did you serve those sentences concurrently or not?
Mr. HALL. No, sir; one sentence was on appeal. It was the last
conviction, and it was referred back to the courts, and it was an
acquittal on the case.
Senator DANIEL. There was an acquittal on that case?
Mr. HALL. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Now, your record here shows August 4, 1953off the record.
(Discussion off the record.)
Senator DANIEL. Back on the record.
You appealed from your conviction on the possession of marihuana
charge in 1949; is that correct?
Mr. HALL. That is right, sir.
Senator DANIEL. And you were out on bond pending appeal?
715-15-56-pt. 7----82
2844
of it?
Mr. HALL. No, sir; I had charge of it.
Senator DANIEL. Your own restaurant?
Mr. HALL. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. And were you selling marihuana there at the
restaurant?
Senator
DANIEL.
2845
Senator DANIEL. In other words, you had a lapse there from 1948
to 1951?
Mr. HALL. Yes, sir.
Senator
DANIEL.
All right.
Before we go into that, let us go back now to the time when you
first started engaging in the marihuana business. Just tell us in your
own words the first time you ever became acquainted with marihuana.
Did you use it yourself?
Mr. HALL. Well, when I first became acquainted with it, I was a
kid.
Senator DANIEL. Where was that?
HALL.
marihuana and the marihuana traffic and your part in it from the very
beginning, the first time you ever heard of it; let us even go back to
that.
Had you ever had any warning against marihuana, the dangers of
it?
Mr. HALL. No. I would say I was about 10 years old, and at this
time we had a place in Texas where we called it the Front; that was
at State
Senator DANIEL. The Front?
Mr. HALL. The Front, yes. Well, I mean, it is more or less like a
residential section of a Negro neighborhood, residential section; it is
where all of them congregate, and we all call it the Front, because
that is where everybody was, and that was the nickname.
Senator DANIEL. That is at the corner of State and-
Mr.
HALL.
Hall Street.
2846
Senator
DANIEL.
Mr.
HALL.
Senator
Yes.
DANIEL.
Mr.
HALL.
Senator
smoking?
That is right.
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
On the front.
Senator
DANIEL.
At 10 cents a cigarette?
2847
long, well packed, and they would bring them, walk across the border,
walk in and out of the border with them, and bring them back to
Texas; more or less usually they would travel to go there, they would
hobo there and back.
Senator DANIEL. They would tell you this?
Mr. HALL. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. They would tell you how they got it?
Mr. HALL. That is right.
Senator DANIEL. All right.
Mr. HALL. And after they arrived back into Texas proper, they
would let us know that they had some marihuana in their possession,
and we would buy it from them until they run out of it, and when
they run out they would go back and get some more.
Senator DANIEL. All right. Go right ahead and tell us, how long
did you smoke marihuana as a boy there in Dallas?
Mr. HALL. I don't think it was ever any time when I didn't smoke.
Senator DANIEL. Did you smoke some every day?
Mr. HALL. Every day, certainly.
Senator DANIEL. From the time you were 10 years old until the
time you left Dallas at the age of 16?
Mr. HALL. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Every day?
Mr. HALL. Every day.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
doing that?
Mr. HALL. Oh, there would be something like maybe 8 or 9 fellows.
HALL.
Senator DANIEL. Where did you get the money to buy it with?
Mr. HALL. Well, it would be like a show allowance; weekends we
have a show, we go to a show twice a week, and instead of going to a
show I would take money and buy marihuana for it.
Senator DANIEL. And your Mama would give you the show
allowance?
Mr. HALL. Yes, sir; would give us something like a dollar, a show
allowance for two shows, popcorn and candies.
Senator DANIEL. This occurred all the time while you were living
there from about 10 years old until you left Dallas?
2848
Senator
DANIEL.
HALL. Well,
Senator
I I I I
2849
Senator DANIEL. Now, did it cause you any increase'in any other
of your appetites, such as your sexual appetite or anything like that?
Mr. HALL. Well, no, because I never did look at it from that standpoint. It didn't give me anything; it didn't add anything to me
normally, what I would normally do, normally.
Senator DANIEL. Except get you high once or twice a day?
Mr. HALL. That is right. You see, you would have to-excuse
me, you see here is what they call-it is two ways about marihuana, to
smoke marihuana, and you will just get high off marihuana.
Then you can smoke marihuana, and you can take some whisky;
you can take a little wine, take a little beer, and you can take a little
creme de menthe, and any drink that you know has a high potency
of alcohol in it, and you can put that on top of that, of marihuana,
and it will hold you, it will hold you up longer.
But, I mean, that is more or less from the counter-reactions of the
different drinks and the marihuana. In other words, one will hold
the next one; it goes like a chain reaction.
Senator DANIEL. It keeps you high?
Mr. HALL. Keeps you high. So you really don't know which one
is keeping you high the longest.
Senator DANIEL. Did you try them all?
Mr. HALL. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. You say you never personally got into any kind
of trouble before leaving Dallas, other than smoking the marihuana?
Mr. HALL. No trouble whatever.
Senator DANIEL. Did any of your associates get into trouble with
the law during this time?
Mr. HALL. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. All right.
long as a week?
Mr. HALL. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Did you have much craving for it during that
week's period?
Mr. HALL. No more than waiting for him to return.
Senator DANIEL. But you were ready for him when he got back?
Mr. HALL. That is right.
Senator DANIEL. All right. Now, after moving to New York you
kept on using the cigarettes?
Mr. HALL. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. About the same amount a day?
Mr. HALL. Well, no. I would say it would be more because the
price was higher, so you would have to buy more in order for you to
keep a supply of it. You see, so instead of buying cigarettes you would
buy something like an ounce or half an ounce.
Senator DANIEL. Is that what you did after coming to New York?
Mr. HALL. Yes, sir.
2850
Senator DANIEL. When you first moved to New York how did you
find out where to get marihuana?
Mr. HALL. Well, when I moved to New York I used to go like to
Harlem, to the show, and I would hang around the corner, you know
what I mean, and I would watch the different fellows, see what they
were doing, and eventually one would lead me to the man who was
selling the marihuana.
Senator
DANIEL.
DANIEL.
Jenkins?
11111
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
TRAFFIC
2851
Senator
DANIEL.
All right.
around Harlem during the years that you were buying it?
Mr. HALL. Yes, sir.
Senator
DANIEL.
Smoking it?
Senator
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
followed here, and you told me about bakery and restaurant businesses.
Now tell me about your musician's work.
Mr. HALL. Well, the musician's work goes back to school days as
well as professional bands after school, after I left school there in
Texas.
2852
Senator
Mr. HALL. This was in Dallas. And we got jobs around Dallas,
like the North Dallas Club. We went there and went to WRR radio
station there, and broadcast every Sunday.
Senator DANIEL. What type of music did you play?
Mr. HALL. Jazz music.
Senator DANIEL. And you would broadcast there?
Mr. HALL. Yes.
Senator DANIEL. On Sundays?
Mr. HALL. On Sundays.
Senator DANIEL. How long did you do that before leaving Dallas?
Mr. HALL. I think we were doing that for about a year in Dallas.
When we started
Senator DANIEL. What was the name of that band?
Mr. HALL. That was Jimmy Wagner's Romeos of Rythm.
Senator DANIEL. Jimmy Wagner's
Mr. HALL. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Did all those men in that band use marihuana?
Mr. HALL. Some of them, not all of them.
Senator DANIEL. How many of them?
Mr. HALL. Oh, about 3, mostly about 3 of us.
Senator DANIEL. About three of you?
Mr. HALL. Yes, sir. Let's see, there was myself and 3 trumpet
players-with myself there -were 3 of us.
Senator DANIEL. All right. Then go ahead and tell me the rest
of it. Did you work with any bands in New York?
Mr. HALL. No, sir. I formed my own band in New York.
Senator DANIEL. All right. What was the name of that band?
Mr. HALL. Well, my big band's name was the Syncopaters; that
was a 17-piece band, and then I had a small combination; I just used
my name-a small combination when the big band wasn't working. I
would merely take five or six musicians and we would work together.
Senator DANIEL. What did you call that?
Mr. HALL. Small combination, small combo, under my name.
Senator DANIEL. Under your name?
Mr. HALL. Yes.
Senator DANIEL. What name did you use?
Mr. HALL. George Hall.
Senator DANIEL. What was the name of your 17-pieceMr. HALL. Big band? Syncopaters.
Senator DANIEL. Was that the name you went by in Dallas?
Mr. HALL. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. What was the name you went by in Dallas?
Mr. HALL. The name I went by in Dallas was Lonnie Hall.
Senator DANIEL. How did you get the "Lonnie"?
Mr. HALL. Like I had two names, one chosen name and one gven
name, so I accepted the chosen name there, and I used my given
name here.
111111111
2853
Mr.
HALL.
Yes, sir.
DANIEL.
HALL. George.
Senator DANIEL. I
Senator
DANIEL.
York?
Mr. HALL. I started my band in New York in 1949, and I kept
them together until 1951.
HALL.
Trumpet.
111111111
2854
DANIEL.
Yes.
Mr. HALL. Then he hocks his horn, and then he has no horn. Then
he is out of an occupation altogether then; he handicaps himself two
ways: He loses his horn and he loses his job, and he loses his ambition.
Senator DANIEL. Have you known some pretty good musicians here
in New York who lost out on account of using heroin?
Mr. HALL. All of them.
Senator DANIEL. All of them that used it, you mean?
Mr. HALL. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Do you know any with any famous, prominent
names who were making much money who used heroin?
Mr. HALL. Sure; a pretty good piano player. But he stays on
Rikers Island; he stays over there on the island for maybe 7 months
out of every year.
Senator DANIEL. Rikers Island is what?
Mr. HALL. That is the penal institution in New York City.
Senator DANIEL. And did they pick him up on account of possession of heroin or something like that?
I I I
2855
DANIEL.
Senator DANIEL. Did you make it your business to find out who
used it?
Mr. HALL. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. You say most of the musicians you knew did use
it, they used marihuana?
Mr. HALL. Yes, sir.
Mr. HALL. Here is the way I would say that: Some of the fellows
like, that would be associated with me, they would get the marihuana
from me; if it was the leader to use it, well, if they would get it from
me, and then probably the leader would get some from them. But
for me to get it to them personally or sell it to them personally, I
would never myself sell it to them like that.
Senator DANIEL. Well, did you ever smoke it with any of the big
name band leaders?
2856
Mr. HALL. No, but I know that, like the grapevine tells you who is
doing what.
Senator DANIEL. By the grapevine do you mean any big name
band leaders here that are using marihuana; first, Cab Calloway wrote
an article once, I believe, in which he said that he agreed with you
that most all of the musicians that he knew around New York used
marihuana. I think he went on to say-what was it he said?
Mr. GASQUE. He said that if all of the musicians who used marihuana were put in one hall, you would have the greatest symphony
orchestra in the world.
Mr. HALL. Well, that is about the size of that.
Senator DANIEL. Do you know a well-known drummer who uses.
marihuana or who has used it?
Mr. HALL. Yes.
Senator DANIEL. All right. Just tell us how you got started now
in this traffic. That brought in the musicians, you see.
Did you engage in any other kind of business now up here in New
York besides bakery, restaurant, and band?
Mr. HALL. Music. No.
Senator DANIEL. And marihuana?
Mr. HALL. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Four businesses. Well now, you were conducting
the restaurant business and the marijuana business and the band business all at the same time, were you not?
Mr. HALL. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. For several years?
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
TRAFFIC
2857
DANIEL.
Mr.
DANIEL.
HALL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
Senator
DANIEL.
told us about?
Mr.
HALL.
pound?
Yes, sir.
Senator
DANIEL.
That is Kelly?
Mr. HALL. That is Kelly-he come back after maybe about 3 weeks
being in Texas. When he arrived he had, I think it was, about 50
pounds of marihuana.
Senator DANIEL. Had you arranged with him to bring some back?
Mr. HALL. No, I didn't know he was coming back with some more.
Senator DANIEL. All right.
Mr. HALL. All I know was that he left, he left New York, and his
wife told me he was away, so I didn't actually know. So by going
2858
back and forth to his house when he arrived I found he had brought
this marihuana back in.
Senator DANIEL. I see. His wife moved here from Texas with him?
Mr. HALL. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. And she stayed here?
Mr. HALL. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. But he went back home?
Mr. HALL. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Did she tell you what he was going for?
Mr. HALL. No.
Senator DANIEL. All right, go ahead.
Mr. HALL. Then after this he and I got together with this marihuana. It was too much for me to handle by myself. So I think I
made Jimmy Suggs acquainted with him; 1 am sure it was like that.
I made him acquainted with Kelly, and Jimmy must have introduced
another fellow to Kelly, I can't remember his name, all I know it
was Red, he is from Brooklyn, he was an old fellow, about 55 now,
and Demon. This is another old man, I can't remember his name
now to call it by his name. But he is well known as far as the department-they know his name.
Senator DANIEL. Demon is?
Mr. HALL. Yes, sir.
IIIIIIII
2859
Or it
might have been just like a chain, Suggs brought Demon in, and Demon
might have brought Red in. In other words, we all four knew each
other.
Senator DANIEL. And you took the 50 pounds from him?
Mr. HALL. The four of us.
Senator DANIEL. I mean the four of you?
Mr. HALL. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. This 50 pounds?
Mr. HALL. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. What did you do with your part of it?
Mr. HALL. And Suggs brought the other two parties in.
Senator
DANIEL.
At that time?
Mr.
HALL.
It was
Senator
DANIEL.
All right.
How long
Senator
DANIEL.
DANIEL.
I II II I II
2860
Senator DANIEL. During that time then he would be the one you
would get your marihuana from. Did your amounts increase as to
what you would handle?
Mr. HALL. Well, it increased over a period of 2 years.
DANIEL. Yes. To about how much a month?
HALL. Oh, like when I started out with him from
Senator
Mr.
10 pounds,
2861
and then he paid them the balance of the money on the American
side, and picked up his marihuana.
Senator DANIEL. I see. That is where the messengers came in.
They were the ones who brought the marihuana or collected the
money?
Mr. HALL. They collected the balance of the money.
Senator DANIEL. Collected the balance of the money. Did they
also bring the marihuana across?
Mr. HALL. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. That is, at least, what he told you?
Mr. HALL. Well, I mean, as I go along I will tell you the other part.
Senator DANIEL. You go ahead and tell us the whole story from
tlrore on. You tell us what other people you started getting it from,
and so forth.
Mr. HALL. So then after that in 1947, I think this was the time that
he had trouble with the Federal Government, and he went away.
And thenSenator DANIEL. To prison?
Mr. HALL. Yes, sir. I think it was about 1948 that I met another
fellow. This fellow is J. R. Henderson.
Senator DANIEL. Before you leave Kelly too far, was he arrested
in New York or Texas?
.Mr. HALL. He was arrested in Texas.
Senator DANIEL. Do you know whether they sent him up for smuggling, possession, or what?
Mr. HALL. I don't know whether it was for possession-I know it
was for possession.
Senator DANIEL. Possession?
Mr. HALL. For smuggling-I don't think it was for smuggling; I
think it was possession. They caught him with a hundred pounds in
a chicken coop or something like that.
Senator DANIEL. All right. Where was J. R. Henderson from?
Mr. HALL. Well now, J. R. Henderson come in in 1948.
Senator DANIEL. From where?
Mr. HALL. From Houston; Seguin was his native home, I think,
Seguin, Tex.; and it happened that one of the trumpet players in my
band told me about him. In other words, he said, "I know a fellow,
you know, that has some marihuana," and he asked me if I wanted
to meet the fellow, so I told him, yes, I would meet him. Se we met
at his home.
Senator DANIEL. Whose home?
Mr. HALL. J. R.'s.
Senator DANIEL. Had he moved to New York?
Mr. HALL. Yes, sir. He moved to New York, I think it was, it
must have been, about 1947, but he wasn't-I didn't meet him until
1948. I know it was 1947 when he arrived here. But I met him in
1948, and at this time he told me I could get marihuana from him in
case I wanted it. I told him, "0. K." So we went to New York, and
he went to Texas for himself, and
Senator DANIEL. Did you tell him how much you could use?
Mr. HALL. Well, I told him we could get rid of all that he could get.
Senator DANIEL. All right. By that time you had gotten into the
whOlesale business yourself?
Mr. HALL. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. On a pretty big scale?
I I I
2862
DANIEL.
Mr. HALL. The same fellows. It was the same dealers involved.
There never was no new dealers.
Senator DANIEL. The four of you were all working together?
Mr. BALL. Yes, sir; as far as bringing them in. Now, new dealers
did come in in 1952, but the reason for that was that the old dealers
were in the Federal penitentiary.
Senator DANIEL. I understand. You four were working together.
Were you all working together as partners or separately?
Mr. HALL. No, separate.
Senator DANIEL. YOU are just using the same smuggler?
Mr. HALL. Same source.
Senator DANIEL. All right.
Mr. HALL. So, J. R. started to doing business with myself personally by myself. When he had a hundred pounds of marihuana-well,
he was sort of an anxious typo of person. He didn't want it around
him too long, and he wanted money right quick, so I had to bring in
Suggs again with me and, naturally, Suggs told the other parties about
it, and they was getting their marihuana through Suggs until they
found what Suggs was getting it-where he was getting it from, and
then they cornered J. R. off and cornered him with a few drinks, and
he decided to do business with them, and so between the four of us we
were handling all of his marihuana up until 1950 or the latter part of
1951, and now when you asked me did I know about some parts of
how this marihuana was coming across and how it was brought back,
now this I can say truthfully is that when his business got large and
he couldn't handle it by himself, then he brought me in with him.
In other words, I was to go down into Texas proper, and get this
marihuana.
So we left New York in 1949, and we went to Seguin, and we stayed
in Seguin for about 3 days. Then we left Seguin and come into
Laredo, and we stayed in Laredo for a couple of days; and J. R. had
the money that he was going to purchase this marihuana with on his
person, and he left me at a little hotel there in Laredo called the
Hollywood Hotel-you probably heard of it. I can't remember the
person's name that run the place. He left me there in this person's
care, I mean, to look out for me, while he goes across and transacts
this business in Mexico.
Senator DANIEL. Did this person running the hotel know what you
were there for?
Mr. HALL. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. He was a friend of J. R.'s?
Mr. HALL. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Was he white or colored?
Mr. HALL. He was a colored fellow. So I stayed there in his hotel
for a day, and J. R. went over into Mexico.
But he stayed over for a whole day, a whole day and night, and I
decided I wanted to go into Mexico myself. So there was a couple
11111
2863
of fellows living in the same hotel and they said, "Come on, we will
go to Mexico, and you go with us."
So we went over to Mexico and had a few drinks and hung out
over there. We didn't do anything else other than enjoy ourselves,
and we came back, and J. R. had arrived by the time we had arrived,
and so he told me to get ready, that we were going to pick up some
marihuana. So we waited a day until about 12 o'clock that night,
and we went out on the highway there, right out of Laredo-I don't
know whether it was 75 or 80.
Senator DANIEL. It is the highway where
Mr. HALL. Well, it was between Laredo and Seguin. In other
words, we traveled down the highway from Laredo towards Seguin,
and we stopped and parked the car at a designated spot there on the
highway, and we waited for something like over the time we were
supposed to wait.
It wasn't supposed to have been no more than 5 minutes between
the stopping of the car and picking up the marihuana. But something happened whereas they didn't show up that night, so we went
back to Laredo, and he went back into Mexico, and he found out
that something did happen, so we had to arrange it for the next night.
Senator DANIEL. Did he tell you what place in Mexico he was
going?
Mr. HALL. Well, he went into-I can tell you what part where he
went in from.
Senator
DANIEL.
Yes.
2864
Mexico this second time to see what had gone wrong, he did not go
DANIEL.
I see.
NIr. HALL. So he came back from across the river, and we waited
over until the following night; and the following night we got on this
same highway.
And a car drove past us without any lights, and then about, say,
maybe about a half block from us, he switched his lights on.
Well, then or in other words, that was the signal to let us know
they were prepared, and he went on ahead of us, and we drove up to a
stop light on the highway, and at this spot there was a bridge crossing
the highway, and we stopped the car just opposite this bridge and
got out the car. He flashed a flashlight, and a couple of these peons
came out of the bushes.
So he handed them a Mexican coin, and the Mexicans accepted
the cQin, and matched the coin, and when the coin matched, then
they told us the marihuana was there under the bridge. SO_ we
picked up the marihuana and they left, and we put that marihuana
in the car, and then we went back to Seguin.
Senator DANIEL. What was the marihuana in under the bridge?
Mr. HALL. It was in big crocus sacks. There was two of them.
Senator DANIEL. Two big feed sacks?
Mfr. HALL. Yes, sir.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
Mr.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
whose place?
Mr. HALL. It was at a place there that was his home, at least I
think it was.
Mr. HALL. No sir. There was furniture there, you know; someone lived there, but at the time when we bagged this marihuana there
2865
was nobody there. He had the key to the premises; he left the key
in the mail box, and we left to come back to New York.
Senator DANIEL. Were you driving a station wagon?
Mr. HALL. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. What about his cousin; what was his name?
Mr. HALL. I don't know his cousin's name. All I know they would
introduce us, I mean, I wasn't interested.
Senator DANIEL. Did his cousin live in New York, too?
Mr. HALL. No; he lived in Texas.
Senator DANIEL. Where did the cousin live in Texas?
M[r. HALL. I don't know.
Senator DANIEL. But the cousin sometimes would bring it up
here?
Mr. HALL. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. During this period of time that you were dealing
with J. R. Henderson, would
you say that he averaged more or less
month?
a
pounds
hundred
a
than
Mr. HALL. Yes, sir; he would average a hundred pounds a month
every month.
Senator DANIEL. And the four of you that you named would sell
that out?
2866
I I I
2867
Mr. HALL. Yes, sir. So you figure, well, you have to separate
this element of people.
So the way I separated, it was like this: I gave my retail trade to
a couple of fellows; in other words, the retail trade that I had at the
time I gave it to them, I guess it must have been about $400 a day,
and then I gave it to them, and plus giving them the retail business,
I gave them the marijuana right along with it, and I took a. percentage.
Senator DANIEL. From them?
Mr. HALL. From them.
Senator DANIEL. Who were they?
Mr. HALL. There was a little fellow named, I can't remember this
fellow's name, but I called him Gabriel.
2868
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
TRAFFIC
2869
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
after?
Mr. HALL. That is after I got in the wholesaling.
Senator
DANIEL.
HALL. Then
Mr.
with these fellows working off me, they decided
they wanted to take it over for themselves.
Senator DANIEL. Let me see, at that time you were averaging about
$400 a day, that is about $12,000 a month?
Senator
Mr.
DANIEL.
HALL.
Senator
Yes, sir.
DANIEL.
$12,000 a month.
and then out of that you would have to pay for the marihuana?
Mr. HALL. That is right.
Senator DANIEL. Yourself?
Mr. HALL. That is right.
Senator DANIEL. At the rate of $60?
Mr. HALL. $60 a pound.
Senator DANIEL. But, of course, by the time you had cut it down
you were selling 32 ounces, that would be 32 ounces to you?
Mr. HALL. That would be about 32 ounces; I was getting $15 an
ounce.
Senator DANIEL. On the retail market?
Mr. HALL. Yes, sir.
Senator
DANIEL.
HALL. That
Mr.
would be about $350 a pound, you see, and when
they decided to take it over for themselves, well, naturally, I charged
them $90 a pound for their pound, and I let them have it for themselves.
Senator DANIEL. A full pound or in the sacks?
I I I
2870
So I said, "Well, no, I figured better that since I have gotten rid of
that trade, to leave it alone," so little by little I begged out of it
through one conversation to another, and they eventually drifted
away.
But in other words, it took care of itself anyway, because there were
two fellows that I was doing business with, they had ruined their
business as far as the retail business was concerned, and then they had
to make a dollar, so they had to sell it by the pound themselves. So
this trade just went from me to them, and then the fellows that
probably was buying cigarettes from them, decided to try to buy a
pound from them, and once they convinced themselves there was no
selling in that neighborhood, they probably let them have it, and that
started them to handling pounds, and plus the trade went into other
channels, and these other people that was getting it from them, they
kept the ball rolling just the same; in other words, the ball didn't stop
rolling because they went broke. Another party picked it up and
carried it on.
Senator DANIEL. Picked up the retail trade?
Mr. HALL. That is right.
Senator DANIEL. And did these two fellows still buy from you
wholesale?
Mr. HALL. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. All right.
Mr. HALL. So this went on, I think, up until, I think, 1951-say
from 1949 to about 1951.
Senator DANIEL. Were you dealing with Henderson all that time?
Mr. HALL. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. He was your source of marihuana?
Mr. HALL. Yes, sir. And then Henderson was arrested in Texas.
I think his wife put him in jail.
Mr. HALL. Well, J. R. had another woman here in New York, and
she had another man in Texas and--
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
Mr. HALL. She went to prison for heroin. I think Daddy Lorddid you ever hear of Daddy Lord in Texas?
Senator DANIEL. Did she tie in with him?
Mr. HALL. Daddy Lord; and I think Daddy Lord had her arrested.
Anyway, it was over some heroin. She had about 4 or 5 ounces of
heroin in a restaurant there in Texas, and 1 day she was arrested; it
111111
2871
was up over the ceiling, right over the door as you go in the door,
they confiscated this heroin from her, and she didtime for it.
Senator DANIEL. What was her name?
Mr. HALL. Leona Henderson.
Senator DANIEL. Where was her restaurant?
Mr. HALL. I don't know where it was located.
Senator DANIEL. What town?
Mr. HALL. Houston.
Senator DANIEL. And she was the wife of J. R. Henderson?
Mr. HALL. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. At one time you said she was up here. Did she
move back to Texas?
Mr. HALL. Moved back to Texas.
Senator DANIEL. She ran a restaurant?
Mr. HALL. And ran her heroin from New York to Houston.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
was arrested?
I I I I I
2872
Mr. HALL. She didn't have to. I knew the day she was here, what
train she was leaving on, what hour; put her on the train myself, and
when she left the train or with the train at Pennsylvania Station to
go to Houston, I would meet her when she would come back to
ew York, say, or I would meet him sometimes when he arrived back
in New York.
Senator DANIEL. And who told you that she was bringing the marihuana in here?
Mr. HALL. Well, I would ask Demon. Sometimes I would ask Red
if she was bringing it.
lII II
2873
Mr. HALL. Heaved, yes, and I bled sort of from my system, something must have broken loose there and I bled a while, too, and they
brought me around with milk, fed me a lot of milk, you know, and
once I felt better I left the premises and went to my home, and I didn't
bother with it any more.
Senator DANIEL. Where was that?
Mr. HALL. This was in New York at J. R. Henderson's house.
Senator DANIEL. In his house in New York? J. R. Henderson's?
Mr. HALL. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Where was his house located?
Mr. HALL. At 112th Street between Lenox and St. Nicholas Avenues. I think it is 101.
Senator DANIEL. What year was that?
Mr. HALL. This was in 1948 to 1951.
Senator DANIEL. Was he selling heroin, too?
Mr. HALL. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. here in New York?
Mr. HALL. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. But he gave you this heroin to try yourself?
Mr. HALL. Yes, sir; he was using cocaine.
Senator DANIEL. He was what?
Mr. HALL. He was using cocaine.
Senator DANIEL. He was using cocaine?
Mr. HALL. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Regularly?
Mr. HALL. Regularly.
Senator DANIEL. HOw much cocaine would he use, do you know?
Mr. HALL. Oh, he had, I guess it must have been about $1,000-a-
Senator
DANIEL.
using cocaine?
Mr. HALL. Well, they had Leona, J. R., Johnson-85 is his nickname, can't think of his first name-Murphy, Harold Murphy; and
another lady named Katie, that is Katie Jenldns, that is Jenkins'
wife.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
cocaine?
Mr.
HALL.
Senator
DANIEL.
2874
Senator DANIEL. Were you also associated with them in the cocaine trade?
Mr. HALL. No, sir; no more than being there on parties with them.
Senator DANIEL. How did they take the cocaine?
Mr.
HALL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Sniffed it?
Mr.
McCloskey.
DANIEL.
HALL. Billie
DANIEL.
What office?
Senator
DANIEL.
HALL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
trading him?
Mr. HALL. Well, he had him hooked; in other words, here is the
way he would do with J. R. J. R. would bring him an extra 50
pounds of marihuana for cocaine. Before he was spending like $1,000
a week to Billy McCloskey for the cocaine, and McCloskey sees where
he could make some money with this marihuana, so he decided he
would trade, so this gave J. R. a chance to have all the cocaine he
wanted, so he just kept him vials of cocaine; I mean, that was his
habit.
It is like anything; that was his habit, just like if you drink whisky;
well, he used a lot of cocaine.
Senator DANIEL. He had the most expensive habit of all then.
Mr. HALL. He had the greatest habit in the world.
Senator
DANIEL.
1111111111
2875
Senator
DANIEL.
All right.
cocaine there when you were at their house, what would you take?
cocaine?
Mr. HALL. Well, I didn't bother with it.
with the heroin first.
I I
I I I I
2876
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
TRAFFIC
Senator DANIEL. Her market was so great she wanted to get that
and trade marihuana?
Mr. HALL. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. For it?
Mr. HALL. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Well, do you know if she made some contacts
where that was worked out?
Mr. HALL. Well, I don't know whether she did or not. All I
know is that Ozzie told me he was getting heroin for her, and any time
I wanted marihuana he would let me have my marihuana for the
same price I used to let him have it for, so I decided better than to
have nothing, I would take that proposition up.
Senator DANIEL. Did you help him try to find some heroin here in
New
to trade?
Mr.York
HALL. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. But you do know from him that he worked out
that kind of an arrangement with her?
Mr. HALL. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. And he was able to give you marihuana that she
had brought in?
Mr. HALL. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. From then on?
Mr. HALL. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. About how much were you getting from Ozzie?
Mr. HALL. Well, I had to pay over the price for it, and sometimes
I would fall under a percentage of $5 percentage on the bag on the
strength he was charging me what I was charging him, and from the
price, you know, that I was selling it for, well, it was a great difference.
In other words, he was taking half of my profits. He would say,
well, he would take $5 off the top, and I would take $5, and that was
$10, and we were selling it for $70.
Senator DANIEL. A pound?
Mr. HALL. A pound, and they were letting us have it for $60.
Senator DANIEL. Have you got any idea how much heroin was
getting back into Houston through this woman on this arrangement?
Mr. HALL. No; I really wouldn't have no definite ideas.
Senator DANIEL. If it were worked out on a trade basis like she
wanted it, can you give us some idea; in other words, how much
marihuana was she bringing in here after her husband was arrested?
Mr. HALL. Well, I mean as much as I have actually bought from
her, I would say about 60, 65 pounds a month.
Senator DANIEL. A month?
Mr. HALL. Through Ozzie, between the both of us.
Senator DANIEL. Through her, you and Ozzie together were
buying aboutMr. HALL. Sixty-five pounds a month.
Senator DANIEL. Was that the amount that you were putting out
on the retail market?
Mr. HALL. No; between the both of us.
Senator DANIEL. Between the both of you, the two of you, and
others were getting some, too?
Mr. HALL. Others, too.
Senator DANIEL. Some marihuana in addition to that?
Mr. HALL. They continued to do business with Demon, Jimmy and
Red, and later on Red and Gold Tooth brought other trades in to her.
2877
In other words, she later on got big enough she didn't need anybody,
that was her personality, that was the way she felt, and I was much
more or less like after J. R. was in jail, I drifted away from her little
by little.
Senator DANIEL. If she was trading heroin, if she was trading this
marihuana for heroin, then she must have been taking back a lot of
heroin every week.
Mr. HALL. That is right. In other words, I know this, as asource,
too, from my friend Ozzie, like she would come to town with marihuana,
and the minute she would get here--her heroin connections-she
would take a plane, fly back to Houston, drop it at Houston, and
wait for her money in Texas; she had connections where she could
afford to do it.
Senator DANIEL. She would fly back and forth?
Mr. HALL. Yes, sir. Her marihuana connections here in New York
were safe. She had no worry about taking care of it. She had proper
people taking care of it for her, which she knew, and she undoubtedly
must have had the same type of connections in Houston in order for
them to rely on them handling her heroin and getting rid of it, and
just going back and getting her money.
Senator DANIEL. Yes. Do you know what rate she was being
charged for the heroin what price?
Mr. HALL. I don't know. All I know is that the prices, like for
$2.50 to $3.50 an ounce in Texas.
Senator DANIEL. $2.50 to $3.50 an ounce?
Mr. HALL. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. On what market?
Mr. HALL. On the wholesale.
Senator DANIEL. Wholesale market. How long did she keep this
up?
Mr. HALL. Well, let's see, she kept it up until 1952, and that is
when I completely abandoned the idea of even doing business with
her or any of the intermediates. 1 just decided to quit.
Senator DANIEL. Why did you quit?
Mr. HALL. Well, one reason why I was, I was in trouble myself as
of 1948 and 1949, and plus I was having these court trials and plus I
was going to jail like this.
I would be in jail on an appeal case, and after I won the appeal case
and got an acquittal, I had been in jail 90 days, it was during 1951,
and I got out in 1951 and come back in the street, and during, say,
1950, it was the same case, I was in jail and out of jail, so between the
both of them I decided, well, I will just leave it alone and take care of
my restaurant and whatever come.
In other words, I was just grabbing whatever I could grab onto
and leaving it alone. It was a hit and miss proposition until 19511951, and 1952.
Senator DANIEL. 1951 to 1952?
Mr. HALL. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. You would just take whatever marihuana came
to you and you would make what you could out of it?
*Mr.HALL. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. You went out of the business on a big scale
during that time?
Mr. HALL. Yes, sir.
2878
Senator DANIEL. You have given us the reasons, and part of the
reasons were that you became dissatisfied with this Henderson
woman?
Mr. HALL. That is one reason, and I didn't like to split my profits
with a man I was doing business with.
Senator DANIEL. With Ozzie?
Mr. HALL. That was giving a definite break; whereas I figured if
he could come to me and get abreak from me, I could get a break.
If he decided he would take a 5 percent or 10 percent break, so I
figured-so rather than cut my own throat and work for him, you
know, take the whole business, I didn't want any part of it. In other
words, she preferred him over me because she figured she was getting
my money anyway.
She said, "I don't have to worry about him and crawling to him
and get my money from him, so I will just let you go in there and get
the money from him," which she did as long as I had the desire to
continue to do business with her.
Senator
DANIEL.
HALL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Instead of you?
Mr. HALL. Well, here is the way it was. She figured, she might
start to like me, and that was one reason, and the next reason she
figured I knew enough in order to hold down, and she don't want
nobody to have strings attached, and her man was in jail, you see.
She actually had presented herself to me in one respect, whereas I
could have been her friend, her boy friend, and I had no desire to be
her boy friend, so then after that she couldn't use me like she wanted
to use me, and she decided she would get another way of using me.,
and this is when she brings my friend in and lets him take care of the
business where I was concerned.
Senator DANIEL. Also you have already told us he was willing to
get her heroin which she wanted to carry back to Houston.
her some
Mr. HALL. No; she never told me she wanted to do anything.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
HALL. Yes.
Senator DANIEL.
did you conclude that she was particularly interested in getting heroin
instead of money to take back to Houston for the marihuana?
Mr. HALL. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. You do?
Mr. HALL. Yes, sir:
did the business with Ozzie instead of you?
Mr. HALL. Well, she knew I wouldn't handle heroin.
Senator DANIEL. She knew that?
Mr.
2879
II lIII
2880
Senator DANIEL. So you think that the Hendersons then had the
one big source of supply for all of New York City and surrounding
areas?
Mr. HALL. Yes, sir.
Senator
DANIEL.
It is true, definitely.
2881
Mr. HALL. In a suitcase. And I told them, I said, "Well, you see
me this evening in New York." I said, "I will bring the money to you
for this marihuana."
He says, "This evening in New York?" I say, "Yes." He says,
"What's the matter?" He says, "Man, can you get rid of it that
quick?" And I said, "I can get rid of it this morning."
He said, "I wish you could," he said, "Because I owe some people in
Houston money," and he said, "I have been in New York a month
trying to get rid of this marihuana and everybody I turned to says they
got marihuana; they don't need it. And I have been in touch with
Johnson and he can't seem to get in touch with people who want
marihuana and he has held me here, and almost past my time to get
back and to report to my parole officer."
He said, "You will not only help me on parole but you will be able
to help me to get some more marihuana."
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Mr. HALL. And he wanted to break off, plus I had some customers
that wanted to break off, so this was when this fellow Young, and I
got Malone back into my confidence again, and Suggs, and between
the three of us we just took-I imagine this is the way it actually
happened-I sold my part outright to Suggs, but I think Suggs took
Leona's money and bought all of this marihuana from me at one
trip, see, and then he distributed it to Malone, and I gave Young some
parts of mine, and between the four of us we just got up this money
right quick, and I gave it to Sutton and I carried him to the Idlewild
Airport, and put him on a plane, and he flew back to Houston.
Senator DANIEL. What was Suggs doing with Leona Henderson's
money?
Mr. HALL. Well, he was doing business with her at the time.
DANIEL. I see.
Mr. HALL. You see; she was still doing business.
Senator DANIEL. You think he owed her some money
Senator
or the money
Senator
DANIEL.
2882
Senator
DANIEL. Go ahead.
HALL. We put Sutton on
Mr.
the plane, and he flew back to Houston,
and Johnson left New York, I think it was, about a day or so later,
and he went back to Houston also.
Senator DANIEL. Did Johnson come originally from Houston?
Mr. HALL. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. All right.
Mr. HALL. So he was down there with Sutton for a few days, and
Sutton called me on the phone and told me he was sending 100 pounds
of marihuana.
Senator DANIEL. Did he tell you that on the telephone?
Mr.
HALL.
2883
I says, "Well, you call him on the phone and you tell him to give
me the shoes."
He says, "Well, all right, I will call him."
So I hangs up the phone and goes back to New York to Johnson's
house, and he called him while I was there, and they had a big argument on the phone about the marihuana, so Johnson made him promise
him after he was sort of leery about the way he had transacted business, the first business, started off the business with us, that was the
first thing; in other words, he says, "I don't feel good about the way
I treated myself," so he figured he had to get some kind of guaranty
with Sutton that he was going to do business with him.
He said, "Sutton, if I give him the 75 shoes," he says, "Will you
guarantee me that whatever you and him get together and do that I
will get some benefits out of what you and him do?" So Sutton
guaranteed it.
So he gave me 75 pounds of marihuana, and I took the 75 pounds of
marihuana and I turned it over-I think it was 10 pounds to Malone,
15 pounds to Suggs, Young got 10 pounds, and I handled the balance
of the marihuana; and Johnson handled his 25.
So I think it was about 4 days later that I called Sutton and told
him that all those shoes was gone, and the money, I said, "Your
money is hanging on the fence, so you will have to come and get your
own money."
He says, "Man, I can't make it down here; I have a reporting day,
but I will send my wife for the money."
2884
DANIEL.
2885
Senator DANIEL. Did that freeze Leona Henderson out for those
months?
Mr. HALL. It must have because she began to handle heroin exclusively, as far as we heard or knew, because her market was bad
for marihuana, because I made it bad.
Senator DANIEL. You took the market away from her on marihuana?
Mr. HALL. Yes.
Senator DANIEL. You and Johnson together?
Mr. HALL. Yes, sir.
2886
Senator
DANIEL.
Mr. HALL. Yes, sir; and we went back to his home, and I went
back there, and I had to leave again and come on back to New York.
And the last time that I remembered that they involved heroin,
was when they had an accident there in Houston, and 0. G. was
using the car, and he was using heroin, and he nodded-
Senator
DANIEL.
Mr. HALL. This was his right-hand man, Sutton's right-hand maii.
DANIEL.
There in Houston?
DANIEL.
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
All right.
time.
Mr. HALL. This time I went back, and they were supposed to be
on the road driving, but the inside conversation was that Sutton and
0. G. told me, he nodded at the wheel, was using heroin, and they
tried to get him not to drive; Gladys was asking to drive, and she
had been slowed up with heroin, and 0. G. wouldn't let her drive, so
they were asleep, and 0. G. hit an abutment on the side of the road,
and turned the car over, and practically killed her, didn't just luckily,
and they called me and let me know she had had this wreck, and I
flew back down there in August to see about how bad she was, you
know, hurt.
Senator DANIEL. This is Gladys Sutton?
Mr. HALL. Yes, sir; and at this time I carried a quantity of money,
went to the hospital where he was, paying some of the bills for the
hospitalization, and so forth. And this is when they really told me
about what really did happen, and how the accident really did happen, you know.
2887
So after this, this was the last time I seen any of them other than
during the trial, which I went into Danbury to have a sentence.
Senator DANIEL. You had your sentence when?
Mr. HALL. In 1953, March of 1953.
Senator DANIEL. When was this that you say you went down
that?
Mr. HALL. No.
Senator DANIEL. Were they arrested about that time?
Mr. HALL. No, sir. I was arrested about that time in 1952, and
he heard that I was arrested, and he had had this accident and all
of these things were happening to them, so he flew up here for some
money; I was in jail and needed some money. So I used $6,000 of
his money for my bonds and bails and lawyers, and so forth, and after
I got out of jail I decided that he didn't want to have no business
relationships with me because I owed him $6,000, so I just forgot
about him.
Senator DANIEL. That ended it?
Mr. HALL. That ended it.
Senator DANIEL. Who carried on your business from then on?
Mr. HALL. My business?
Senator DANIEL. Who did you turn your business over to here in
New York?
Mr. HALL. No one. Johnson took it from there.
Senator DANIEIL. Nathan Johnson?
Mr. HALL. Nathan Johnson.
Senator DANIEL. Until he was arrested?
Mr. HALL. Yes, sir; he handled it from 1952 until 1954.
Senator DANIEL. And he handled marihuana traffic here in New
York?
Mr. HALL. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. From whom did he get his marihuana?
Mr. HALL. From Sutton.
Senator DANIEL. Do you know whether or not Sutton was getting
heroin in exchange?
Mr. HALL. Well, Sutton started getting his heroin during the time
he was doing his business with me in 1952.
Senator DANIEL. Did he ask you to get him some heroin?
Mr. HALL. Yes, sir; he asked me to make arrangements to connect
some people with him for heroin, and I refused him; so from then on
he was sort of, well, he was angry with me because I wouldn't exclusively handle his heroin for him. So he went into Johnson and
Johnson would say, "I will handle your heroin for you."
Johnson was getting his heroin for him, and they brought it to my
house to wrap it one night, and we was in the back room, and they
took this-there were three ounces they had that they put in a little
box, wrapped it up with some wrapping paper and tied with a ribbon,
and so forth, you know, make it look like a present, and that was
the heroin that I knew that was going to Sutton.
Skmator DANIEL. Who was there in the room?
Mi. HALL. Myself, Orange Crafton Nolan, and Isaac Wallace.
Senator DANIEL. 0. G. Nolan and yourself?
2888
the -heroin?
Mr. HALL. Yes, sir.
Senator DANiEL. And he had asked you to make his contact there
for heroin?
Mr.
HALL.
Yes, sir.
Mr.
HALL.
Either one.
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Mr.
with it.
Mr.
Senator
Mr.
DANIEL.
HALL.
DANIEL.
HALL.
No, sir.
DANIEL.
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
2889
Mr. HALL. In Houston; and he told me-I asked him how long he
had been associated with Sutton after I quit doing business with him.
He said, well, he worked along with Sutton for about 5 or 6 months
after I quit doing business with him or rather we quit each other, and
he said that they treated him raw, and I asked him, "How do you
mean?'
He said, "Man, I was dealing with all the heroin, and I didn't know
what I was carrying," and he said, "I am bringing this up"-let me
clear up where he was on this carrying business first. He knew what
heroin was, but he didn't know the price for it. He didn't know how
much Sutton was getting for the heroin, but he eventually found out,
and when he asked for more money for bringing marihuana and the
heroin, Sutton told him that the price had to be the same as it was
when I and he was doing business with it, and he was carrying two
loads, he realized he was carrying two loads, and so he spoke up and
asked for a bigger cut.
Senator DANIEL. In other words, when he was bringing it up to
you, except for a few cases when he would pick up some heroin from
Nathan Johnson, actually he was bringing just. a load of marihuana
to you?
2890
Senator
Senator
DANIEL.
New York?
2891
Mr. HALL. Well, nobody but Sutton and Orange Crafton Nolan,
they would be the only ones who would actually know where and who
he was getting it from and how.
Senator DANIEL. Did you talk to all of them?
Mr. HALL. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. And all you remember them telling you was that
it was in Mexico?
Mr. HALL. Yes, sir.
Senator
DANIEL.
But did they mention and did you hear him men-'
tion a name?
Mr.
DANIEL.
HALL. Yes,
sir.
Senator
Mr.
he would take a certain amount, and Cooper-
know,
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
DANIEL.
But I had
Mr.
HALL.
Per pound?
DANIEL.
DANIEL.
Mr.
DANIEL.
HALL.
No, sir.
71515-56--pt. 7-35
2892
Senator
DANIEL.
Mr.
.Mr.
HALL.
Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Did they also pick up heroin here in New York
to take back to Sutton in Houston?
Mr.
Mr.
it?
Mr.
he had been using it, but
I knew he had to have some during the times he was here in New
York, and when I gave him that money he bought him some.
Mr. SPEER. So he had a heroin habit. When was that?
Mr. HALL. That was in 1952 when I first met him.
Mr. SPEER. What month?
Mr.
HALL.
SPEER.
March.
Mr.
You mentioned awhile ago that the effect of marihuana
on you was to make you a little bit high. What about the effect on
other people that you know? Have you ever known anyone who got
violent, mean, using marihuana?
Mr. HALL. No. I mean, I really haven't. I have never heard of
a case of anyone using marihuana doing anything. But heroin, I
know what they will do for heroin. I mean, I can tell you what
they will do for you for some heroin.
First, they will come to you and ask you to give them some money
just outright for heroin to buy if they are broke, and if you know them
as a friend you say, "Well, I don't have the money."
They will say, "Well, 0. K." Then they will get mad with you,
and if you go outside your home or something, they will go in and
break in your home, take whatever possessions you have, take them
and hock them and buy them some heroin or they will cash checks,
they will break in mail boxes, and anyway they can get some money
for some heroin they will use that means to get some money.
Mr. SPEER. What part did Cooper play in the distribution of
heroin in Houston?
Mr. HALL. Well, Cooper, they were selling it like by the pills.
Mr. SPEER. How much would he sell it for?
Mr. HALL. They would-Wallace told me they was getting $5 a
pill, $7.50 a pill.
Mr. HALL. And a pill would be about how many grains, how many
pills out of an ounce, in other words?
2893
Mr. HALL. They were getting something like 300 pills out of an
ounce, a little better; I don't know.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
or not there is any portion of this testimony today that would cause
you any personal fear and make you want to keep it in executive
session, not made public?
Mr. HALL. No, this other part is all right.
Senator
DANIEL.
2894
Senator
DANIEL.
Mr.
HALL.
Senator DANIEL. Well, are there any of those that you knew in
connection with the business at the top that are not now in jail?
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
HALL. This is
Bill Williams?
Mr.
an entirely different Bill now, this is Bill Williams.
He was doing business with Gilmore.
Senator DANIEL. Wos Bill Williams here in New York?
Mr. HALL. Yes, sir; and Kane Young; and Kane Young and Bill
Williams fell out. So I didn't have any use for Bill Williams' business,
but he came to me and asked me if I would take care of it, so I told
him, "Yes, I will."
So offhand I was taking care of his business, for him and Kane
Young, and when they fell out, then I started doing business with
Bill Williams and George Gilmore; and Kane Young and Bill Williams
were down in San Antonio, down there-no, they went into Mexico
proper, and had a fight with a couple of those Mexicans over there,
so they told Kane Young if he ever came back to Mexico they would
kill him. So he never went back.
So instead he let Bill Williams go in and take care of his marihuana
for him.
So he double-crossed Bill Williams, and he sent his three sisters in to
get the marihuana from the Mexicans, and they got some marihuana
and somehow or other it leaked out they were going to get it, and
2895
they were arrested in San Antonio with 107 pounds of pure clean
marihuanaSenator DANIEL. Three sisters?
Mr. HALL. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. They were all arrested?
Mr. HALL. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Were they convicted?
Mr. HALL. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Did you testify in that case?
Mr.
HALL.
No, sir.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
I I I I
2896
Senator
Senator
mittee.
DANIEL.
I want to ask you this: Do you think you have had enough of this
marihuana traffic?
Mr. HALL. As far as trafficking, I couldn't do anything in it anyway,
so I am through with it.
Senator DANIEL. I mean, do you think there is going to be a temptation to you after you get out of prison to get back in it?
Mr. HALL. Not necessarily, sir.
Senator DANIEL. What?
Mr. HALL. No, sir.
Senator
DANIEL.
by that?
Mr. HALL. I can do something different.
Senator
Mr.
DANIEL.
HALL.
Yes, sir.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
huana?
Mr. HALL. NO, I don't know about
it. I don't know what the
chances of smoking it are concerned, because, well, you just never
can say. I mean it is just like drinking whisky or water. You can
never say definitely one way or the other.
You know, I couldn't just say it because I wouldn't want to tell you
a lie today, and tomorrow something happened.
Senator DANIEL. Well, you have been smoking it since you were
10 years old?
Mr. HALL. That is right.
go back to smoking it when you get out of prison?
2897
2898
Senator DANIEL. What dealings did you have with Johnny Sutton?
Mr. ROBLEDO. Well, bringing the marihuana to Houston and giving
it to him.
Senator DANIEL. Would he call you and ask you to bring marihuana
whenever he was ready for it?
Mr. ROBLEDO. Sometimes, and sometimes not.
Senator DANIEL. On those occasions when he would call you, how"
did you get the marihuana?
Mr. ROBLEDO. Well, the marihuana was gotten from the border,
from the other side, from Mexico.
Senator DANIEL. From what town?
Mr. ROBLEDO. They crossed the river from Reynosa., but I don't
know where they came from.
Senator DANIEL. Who on the other side would you get in toucll
with?
Mr. ROBLEDO. Leo Ochoa.
Senator DANIEL. Who was your largest one source of marihuana
that came into Houston here, John Sutton?
Mr. ROBLEDO. Yes; he was one of those men.
Senator DANIEL. Over how long a period of time did lie buy from
you?
Mr. ROBLEDO. I didn't buy. He do all the business with him.
The only thing they hired me to give interpretation to the other man,
He bring the marihuana to Houston.
Senator DANIEL. In your case Sutton would call you, and what
would you do?
Mr. ROBLEDO. I tell him Sutton was ready for some more manhuana. Wanted some more marihuana. They would bring it to
Houston. In other words, I tell him he was ready, and they would
bring it over here. I just show him the place they had to receive the
marihuana, and that is all.
Senator DANIEL. What were you paid for your work?
Mr. ROBLEDO. They paid me sometimes, let's see. I receive $125
sometimes, and sometimes $75, depending on the deal.
Senator DANIEL. Who were you paid by?
Mr. ROBLEDO. Leo Ochoa.
Senator DANIEL. Were you doing the interpreting for Leo Ochoa?
Mr. ROBLEDO. No. I was doing the interpreting for the man that
bought the marihuana.
Senator DANIEL. Give us the name of that man slowly. Was he
the runner that brought the marihuana across?
Mr. ROBLEDO. Yes, sir. Serapio de Anda.
Senator DANIEL. All right, when he would call you at Mercedes
and tell you that he was ready what would you do?
Mr. ROBLIUDO. When Sutton called me?
Senator DANIEL. Yes.
Mr. ROBLEDO. Well, I notify him. And he said
Senator DANIEL. Notify who?
Mr. ROBLEDO. Notify de Anda.
Senator DANIEL. Notify de Anda?
Mr. ROBLEDO. Yes. And he said: "I believe it better to go across
the border and tell Leo to get everything ready to bring it over when
he gets ready."
Senator DANIEL. Then would de Anda bring the marihuana back
across the border?
Mr.
ROBLEDO.
2899
Yes.
Senator DANIEL. Did Leo ever bring any back across the border?
Mr. ROBLEDO. I can't state because I don't know anything about
that.
Senator DANIEL. Did you ever go and get some?
Mr. ROBLEDO. NO, sir; never in my life. You mean cross over the
river and get some?
Senator DANIEL. Yes.
Mr. ROBLEDO. No.
Senator DANIEL. Then when de Anda would get the marihuana
would he bring it back to your house?
Mr. ROBLEDO. No. He went straight to the house and told me
he was ready.
Senator
DANIEL.
Rode a bus.
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
He introduced me as Mexican
this?
Senator
is right.
Senator
Johnny?
DANIEL.
2900
SPEER.
Mr.
ROBLEDO. I
SPEER. Did
Mr.
ROBLEDO.
No.
Mr.
ROBLEDO.
Mr.
ROBLEDO.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
times.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
him?
ROBLEDO. Well, I saw him, I believe I saw him about 3 or 4
I don't remember exactly.
SPEER.
Mr.
ILLCIT. NA
Mr. ROBLEDO. Yes.
ICS TA90
He is in Mexico.
Senator DANIEL. Was your life ever threatened in this deal at any
time while you were working with Leo Ochoa or Sutton?
Mr. ROBLEDO.
Past?
and tell you what you had better do and what you had better not do?
Mr. ROBLEDO. Exactly right.
Senator DANIEL. What did they tell you?
Mr. ROBLEDO. You mean Sutton?
DANIEL.
recess.
The committee will stand recessed until 2 o'clock this afternoon.
(Whereupon, at 12:30 p. m., the subcommittee recessed.)
AFTERNOON SESSION
Mr. Speer,
been threatened, and I believe you told me during the recess you didn't
understand what threatened meant.
Mr. ROBLEDO. Yes.
2902
mLici
ARCOTICS TRAFFIC
bond with reference to possible bodily harm, hiring you in some way?
Mr. ROBLEDO. Well, I believe I said yes, sir. Don't remember
exactly, but I believe it was in September two fellows
Mr. SPE R. A little louder.
Mr. ROBLEDO. There were two fellows went to my shop.
Mr. SPEER. Where?
Mr.
Mr.
that neighborhood?
Mr. ROBLEDO. No.
Mr. SPEER. You did sell 50 pounds over in Corpus Christi when
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
2903
Christi?
Mr. SPEER.
Mr.
Victoria, Tex.
Does Serapio de Anda live on both sides of the border
ROBLEDO.
Mr. SPEER.
or not?
Mr. ROBLEDO. Yes, sir. He has got a house on the other side and
one on this side.
Mr. SPEER. Houses on both sides?
Mr. ROBLEDO. Yes, sir.
Mr. SPEER. So he could drive across the border without arousing
any suspicion?
Mr. ROBLEDO. Yes, that is right. Because some businessmen live
on this side and live on the other side you know. And they don't
suspect them because they go and come back in.
Mr. SPEER. Did Serapio de Anda bring all this marihuana across
that you were involved in?
Mr. ROBLEDO. Honestly, yes, sir, that is right.
Mr. SPEER. Did he receive a sentence?
Mr. ROBLEDO. I don't know.
Mr. SPEER. You don't know whether he did or not?
Mr. ROBLEDO. No, sir, 1 don't know anything; no, sir.
Mr. SPEER. When was the last time you saw Emelio Cavasos?
Mr. ROBLEDO. The last time I saw him was-let's see-a long time
ago. I don't remember. Maybe 1951 or 1952. I don't remember
for sure.
Mr. SPEER. I believe that is all.
Senator DANIEL. All right, you may
stand aside.
2904
from George Hall given before this committee in New York in executive session, which has now been made public and will be included in
this record?
Mr. FRILOUX. That is right. I read that testimony. I think I
have heard George Hall's statement three times, and had it recorded
once, and it never varied an inch.
Senator DANIEL. You have the same opinion, that these people
who were sending the marihuana to New York were bringing heroin
back?
Mr. FRILOUX. That is right.
Senator DANIEL. Large quantities of money were involved in those
marihuana transactions?
Mr. FRILOUX. That is right. And in addition to that, their profits
were greatly enhanced by heroin brought back to Houston in that
period of three months.
Senator DANIEL. You say this was a large operation?
Mr. FRILOUX. I believe the largest single marihuana operation in
the country.
Senator DANIEL. I am inclined to agree with you. It looks like
this fellow George Hall was the biggest marihuana wholesaler in
New York. He was a Government witness, was he?
Mr. FRILOUX. Yes, he was a Government witness in this particular
case.
There was one other case I would like to mention, and that was the
Tillman-Dockins case. Their activities included a heavy volume
2905
OF
C.
ANTHONY
17, 1955
I have been informed that I may be called before the committee to discuss the
narcotic situation from the Federal enforcement standpoint in the Houston area.
After my initial conference with your committee investigator, Mr. Speers, I
have e$mpiled and outlined the background, modus operandi, scope, and end
result of three of the largest narcotic conspiracies which emanated from this
geographical area during the years 1953-54 and 1954-55. The first conspiracy
of the three which is indicative of the scope of the problem facing State and Federal
2906
agencies in this immediate area was the Tillman-Dockins case. There were
seven major participants in the distributive phase of the narcotic traffic engaged
in. by the Tillman-Dockins gang. Tillman and Dockins were locally known and
nationally known violators of the narcotic laws and were listed on the national
list of narcotic offenders.
Their activities included a heavy volume traffic in heroin hydrochloride, and an
extremely large amount of marihuana.
BACKGROUND
Both Tillman and Dockins were known for a long period of time locally as
heavy traffickers, but due to extreme wariness on their part, had managed to
evade the effort of the enforcement agencies in their attempt to break this gang.
The initial break came when an undercover (colored) agent purchased 10 pounds
of marihuana from the defendant, Tillman, in New York City and used this
purchase as a way of establishing contact with the ring's activities in this area.
he other defendants in this case were traffickers of smaller standing and were
predominantly runners, smalltime smugglers, middle-size and small peddlers
(paper lots), and various other fringe area underworld characters in the dope
traffic.
Two of the defendants were actually aliens whose prime purpose for being in
Houston was to sell 40 pounds of marihuana which they had smuggled into the
United States to sell on the open narcotic market in Houston.
MODUS
OPERANDI
Clyde Tillman and Alvin Dockins had known contacts in the areas of
Philadelphia, Pa., Detroit, Mich., and New York City, and would forward money
to these areas by money orders (postal) in one phase of the conspiracy, and receive
through the mails varying amounts of narcotics (never less than 1 ounce), which
was sent to a "drop station" under a fictitious name.
In this case, Pearl and Herman Walker's home was used as the drop station
where the narcotics were received by registered mail.
After receipt, the defendants Dockins and Tillman would drive by and pick up
the narcotics.
Reliable sources indicated that these two defendants alone received 4 to 5
packages per month here in Houston containing not less than 1 ounce per package
and in some cases amounting to 3 to 5 ounces of heroin.
During the course of trial, evidence arose which indicated that there were other
drop stations in the immediate area at Port Arthur and Beaumont to which
quantities of heroin were being delivered to this ring by the same method.
While the primary source for the heroin in this particular conspiracy strangely
enough was from the East Coast, Tillman and Dockins also received heroin from
Mexico in large volumes.
I interviewed a special employee who had stated prior to his activity being
terminated by arrest, he had purchased between 500 and 700 pounds of marihuana
from these defendants here in Houston. In addition to wholesaling heroin and
marihuana, these two defendants sold, generally, to the entire narcotic traffic in
any amount the purchaser desired.
SCOPE
This conspiracy extended from the source of supply of the marihuana in the
interior of Mexico (location unknown) to the east coast area where heroin was
smuggled, in all probability, from the Middle East. These defendants sold
generally to this area as well as the States of New York and Detroit, and were
national and international traffickers in scope.
RESULT
These defendants, Clyde Tillman and A. Dockins pled guilty after the court
denied their motion to ,upress the evidence seized by officers from the United
States mail. Tillman received 7 years for this second offense and Dockins received 6 years for his participation. Herman McElroy received 4 years as a
first offender, for his work-as a member of the Tillman-Dockins gang. Manuel
Martinez and Fernandez Chavez, aliens, received 2 years apiece as first offenders
and will be deported at the conclusion of that time served. Roland Earl Wilkins,
a second time offender who smuggled heroin to the defendants from Mexico (from
an undetermined source) received 5 years for his part in this conspiracy. Raymond Pena, a third time offender in the marihuana traffic, received 10 years for
his part in the sale of marihuana in the Houston area as a member of this gang.
2907
COMMENT
All these men will be dumped back into the illicit traffic within 4 years, more
or less, and will revert to large scale nefarious activities immediately.
COOPER-SUTTON
RING
The Cooper-Sutton gang operated from Mexico to New York using Houston
as..the central location for their underworld narcotic activities, including the
maintenance of a house filled with scales, paper bags, sacks, wax paper and other
paraphanelia used to pack, weigh and sort large amounts of marihuana. Here
the marihuana was broken down into small lots, bagged and packed into cheap
suitcases for air transportation.
BACKGROUND
This case involved 12 defendants actually indicted and some 10 to 20 defendants who are named as coconspirators but not indicted in order that they might
testify as to their activities in what I consider to be one of the largest syndicated
marihuana operations in the country. In addition to this extremely large operation in marihuana, there is ample evidence indicating that a two-way narcotic
activity was in process, including the supplying of marihuana to the east coast
markets and the acquisition of heroin from the east coast as well as Mexico to
sell on the open market in the underworld of Houston, Tex. Everett (Cap)
Cooper has been known to be a nationally listed peddler for 5 years and yet has
evaded every attempt on behalf of the Government to apprehend him in these
illicit activities. John Sutton was known in the narcotic traffic for some 8 years
and when he combined with Cap Cooper to form the Cooper-Sutton gang, the
volume and scope of narcotic handling by this conspiracy was astronomical.
The rest of the defendants occupy the following status: Teodoro Yabarro Robledo
was Mexican distributor in the border area of Texas and sold marihuana to this
ring in lots never less than 50 pounds. Robledo got his marihuana from his
brother-in-law, Leo Ochoa, who is a Mexican national in Reynosa, Mexico.
Ochoa is a major source of marihuana in this area, and has been known to supply
wholesale shipments of marihuana to the Houston area since 1950. This man is
still operating in the border area of Mexico near Laredo and Brownsville. Orange
G. Nolen was a general associate of Cooper and Sutton and used as a runner for
large narcotic deliveries, as well as helping wet down, sort, weigh, pack, and process for shipment the hundreds of pounds of marihuana on the Cooper farm.
Isaac Wallis occupied the same capacity as Nolen. Frank Mims was unknown
to the narcotic traffic until his participation in this conspiracy and he was used
as a runner for carrying large quantities of marihuana to New York to George
Hall and Nathan Johnson.
Willie Winn, Everett Cooper's brother-in-law, was also used as a runner and
was apprehended carrying 152 pounds of marihuana in Tennessee destined to
Sutton in New York. Nathan Johnson was a wholesale peddler of small stature
who peddles marihuana in New York City, N. Y., and in the Houston area.
Ed Riley and George Gale Cooper were caretakers and guardians of the marihuana stasche on the Cooper farm and occupied a restricted but important status
in the conspiracy.
MODUS
OPERANDI
2908
When an order for a large amount of marihuana occurred, these men would
travel to the farm, pour out large quantities of bulk marihuana, wet it down for
shipment, weigh it on several sets of scales maintained for this purpose, then
bag it into 8-pound grocery sacks (placed one inside of the other) containing
approximately 1 pound of marihuana each.
These one pound bags were then packed into cheap suitcases and covered by
conventional wax paper to kill any odor from the weed. After packing, these
men would send runners, mentioned earlier, to New York carrying these suitcases
of marihuana (predominantly by air).
Cooper and Sutton, the ring-leaders avoided making trips with any narcotics
except on one occasion when Cooper carried 80 pounds of marihuana to New York
to George Hall. He was accompanied by runner, Mims.
Generally, the common law wife, or mistress of John Sutton was sent to collect
the money for the shipment of marihuana. During the course of the investigation,
development of the case, and the subsequent trial evidence reflected that at
least $47,345 in cash passed between George and iRuth Hall and Cooper and
Sutton. Large sums also passed from Nathan Johnson to Sutton and Cooper.
It can safely be presumed that this is only a small part of the money handled.
(Incidentally this took place during a 4-5-month period in the year 1952.)
Additionally, evidence during the trial showed that Government witnesses
testified to having carried or received between 1,200 pounds and 1,500 pounds of
bulk marihuana having a wholesale value in New York of approximately $150,000.
(Retail value many times greater.)
Eye witnesses testify, covering a period of 2 years, 1952-53, 1953-54, that a
minimum of 2,000 pounds of marihuana was processed and shipped by this dope
ring prior to the arrest and conviction of each and every defendant mentioned.
It is conclusively known that paralleling the syndicated operation of supplying
extensive marihuana shipments to these east coast markets, this gang in return
received substantial volumes of heroin hydrochloride and further enhances the
profit for this illicit activity.
SCOPE
Name
Sentence
Year
John Sutton -------------------------------------------------------------------Everett Cooper ----------------------------------------------------------------Orange Nolan ------------------------------------------------------------------Nathan Johnson ---------------------------------------------------------------Teadora Ybarra Robledo ------------------------------------------------------Ed Riley .--------------------------------------------------------------------Isaac Wallace -------------------------------------------------------------------Frank Mims ------------------------------------------------------------------George Gale Cooper ------------------------------------------------------------Willie Winn -------------------------------------------------------------------I Suspension
15
9
5
5
6
3
3
4
3
6
Fine
$1,000
1,000
500
500
250
1100
100
100
250
100
for 5 years.
JOHNSON.
I do, sir.
2909
Senator
DANIEL.
Mr. JOHNSON.
DANIEL. In Houston?
Mr. JOHNSON. Houston, Tex.
Senator
Senator DANIEL. Are you the Nathan Johnson that Mr. Friloux
just mentioned?
Mr. JOHNSON. Yes, sir.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
JOHNSON. I
Mr.
Cooper, Nolen-
DANIEL.
activity?
Mr. JOHNSON.
Senator
DANIEL.
Yes.
DANIEL. By what?
Mr. JOHNSON. By him having
Senator
Senator
huana?
DANIEL.
Mr. JOHNSON.
indictment.
Senator
DANIEL.
What?
In my indictment it was said I had made arrangements for people to buy it.
Mr. JOHNSON.
Senator
DANIEL.
Mr. JOHNSON.
Senator
DANIEL.
291-0
in your hands?
No officers have ever
arrested me when I had marihuana in my possession. I have never
had any narcotics in my possession.
Senator DANIEL. Let me ask you the questions. I asked you,
have you ever had any marihuana in your hands? I will ask you if
you ever had any marihuana in your hands?
Mr. JOHNSON. I never had any in my hands.
Senator DANIEL. Did you ever see any marihuana?
Mr. JOHNSON. No, sir; no more than what I saw in this courtroom.
I did see that.
Senator DANIEL. That was the first you ever saw?
Mr. JOHNSON. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Do you mean to tell this committee you did not
see marihuana and sell it in New York City?
Mr. JOHNSON. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. You never had any business with John Sutton?
2911
Mr. JOHNSON. I never had. I know John Sutton, but I never had
any business with him, no more than we gambled. We like to shoot
dice and we have had a number of games.
Senator DANIEL. Didn't you know John Sutton wanted some
heroin?
Mr. JOHNSON. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Isn't it true you made his arrangements for his
heroin?
Mr. JOHNSON. No, sir.
DANIEL.
Mr. JOHNSON. I
Mr. JOHNSON.
Senator
"85".
DANIEL.
handle heroin, and that he wouldn't send Sutton heroin back from
New York, but that he would continue to buy marihuana?
Mr. JOHNSON. No, sir.
Senator
DANIEL.
Mr. JOHNSON.
No, sir.
Senator
Senator
Mr.
DANIEL.
JOHNSON.
Senator
For Sutton?
No, sir.
DANIEL.
is more than one witness testified that you did. I don't know whether
you want to keep on giving those answers or whether you want to
stand on your constitutional rights, or what you want to do. I am
warning you that there is more than one witness, more than George
Hall that said that you had arranged for heroin to be brought back
to Houston for Sutton in exchange for marihuana. Did you do that?
Mr. JOHNSON. I refuse to answer that question on the grounds it
might incriminate me.
Senator
DANIEL.
Mr.
didn't do it.
You didn't do it?
didn't do it, that is right.
Why do you want to refuse to answer the ques-
tion on the grounds that it might incriminate you? You can refuse,
but having once answered I am wondering why you changed your
mind. Why don't you tell this committee the facts about this thing,
exactly how arrangements were made to bring heroin to Houston
from New York.
Mr. JOHNSON. I didn't know of any activity of any heroin at the
time we were being prosecuted.
Senator DANIEL. Did you ever buy any heroin for anybody else?
Mr. JOHNSON. No, sir.
Senator
Mr.
IIII
DANIEL.
JOHNSON.
No, sir.
2912
Senator
Mr. JOHNSON.
Or on your person?
No, sir.
DANIEL.
Mr. JOHNSON. I
Senator DANIEL.
Senator
No.
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Yes.
Senator DANIEL. You haven't met anywhere, you two together?
Mr. JOHNSON. In the Supango lounge.
Mr. JOHNSON.
I
Senator
DANIEL. That
Mr. JOHNSON. Yes, sir.
2913
Mr. JOHNSON.
Senator
DANIEL.
Mr. JOHNSON.
Senator
That is right.
DANIEL.
Mr. JOHNSON.
Senator
I have not.
bail?
in Houston had you
Senator
DANIEL.
Cooper?
Mr. JOHNSON. No, sir.
Senator
Senator
DANIEL.
heroin?
No.
Senator DANIEL. You never have seen any marihuana?
Mr. JOHNSON. I have seen marihuana in this courtroom.
Senator DANIEL. You have seen marihuana in this courtroom?
Mr. JOHNSON. That is correct.
Senator DANIEL. Otherwise, you wouldn't know what either one of
Mr. JOHNSON.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
Senator
Neither one?
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Mr. JOHNSON. I
Senator
DANIELS.
Senator
DANIEL.
Mr. JOHNSON.
Senator DANIEL. Did you ever have it delivered to him?
2914
Mr. JOHNSON.
No.
Senator
DANIEL.
Mr. JOHNSON. I
Senator DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
about marihuana and heroin since you got out on bail after this last
conviction?
Mr. JOHNSON. Talked about marihuana?
Senator DANIEL. Yes.
DANIEL.
Senator DANIEL. You haven't talked about the dope traffic at all?
Mr.
JOHNSON.
No.
DANIEL.
Senator
York?
Senator
you in in Texas?
1943.
Mr. GASQUE. What did you do before you were arrested this last
time in Houston?
Mr. JOHNSON. What did I do before I was arrested this last time
in Houston?
Mr. GASQUE. Yes; what kind of work?
Mr. JOHNSON. I worked with gambling.
Mr. GASQUE. What was your income a year?
III
2915
JOHNSON.
about 1953?
Mr. JOHNSON. I will say close to $1,500.
Mr. GASQUE. In any of those years did you ever have a gambler's
license?
Mr. JOHNSON. No. Just gambling places where fellows lived. If
you are lucky perhaps you can win enough to keep you for 3 to 6
months.
Mr. GASQUE. Do you have a home?
Mr. JOHNSON. No, sir.
Mr. GASQUE. Do you own any property?
Mr.
JOHNSON.
Mr. GASQUE. Did you file an income-tax return for the year 1954?
Mr. JOHNSON. Did I file what for 1954?
Mr. GASQUE. Income-tax return?
Mr. JOHNSON. No, sir.
Yes.
2916
Senator
DANIEL.
Yes.
Mr. JOHNSON. I filed for the yearDANIEL. Since 1950 have you filed
JOHNSON. Have I filed one since 1950?
Senator
Mr.
one?
Mr. JOHNSON. Well, for the years 1953 and 1954 1 was lucky in my
gambling, and I had $1,400 or $1,500.
Senator DANIEL. What about 1952?
Mr. JOHNSON. Well, I was
DANIEL. Doing pretty good in 1952?
JOHNSON. In 1952 I was getting two or three
Senator
Mr.
a month.
hundred dollars
DANIEL.
this time.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator DANIEL. Who did you turn your business over to here in New York?
Mr. HALL. No one. Johnson took it from there.
Senator DANIEL. Nathan Johnson?
Mr. HALL. Nathan Johnson.
2917
Yes.
was at his business place.
Were you ever in his house?
Mr. JOHNSON. No.
Senator DANIEL. Were you ever in the back room of his business
place?
Senator
DANIEL.
Mr. JOHNSON. I
Senator DANIEL.
Senator
Mr. JOHNSON.
place?
DANIEL.
Mr. JOHNSON. Yes; I was in New York when they were there.
Senator
knowledge.
Senator DANIEL. I believe that is all we need to ask you. I will
instruct the counsel here to turn the record of your testimony over to
the Department of Justice.
Senator
DANIEL.
Mr. WALTON.
sir.
mendations.
(Mr. Walton's statement appears on p. 2921.)
Senator
DANIEL.
First, I would like, Senator, to commend this committee on its diligent efforts in ferreting out the facts in what I consider to be one of the greatest problems currently facing law enforcement officials.
Mr. WALTON.
2918
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
TRAFFIC
I think you will find in this report which I have made some statistical information which may, together with other information which
I am sure this committee has gathered, serve as some yardstick by
which to judge the incidence of the illegal narcotics traffic in Harris
County.
You will find in this statement that in the last year we have convicted 174 individuals for traffic; that is, sale or possession of heroin
or marihuana.
Senator DANIEL. Is that just in a year?
Mr. WALTON. That is in a 1-year period.
Senator DANIEL. Are those different people?
Mr. WALTON. Yes; that is 174 different individuals.
And I might say you will see from this report that we feel that the
juries in this county have never shown any hesitance at all to convict
where the evidence was clear in narcotics cases; nor have they shown
any hesitancy in assessing the maximum penalty in aggravated cases.
You will see they assessed a total of 719 years for 174 individuals.
You will find some information in here just about barbiturates in
this county. I do not know whether those statistics are of particular
interest to this committee or not.
Senator DANIEL. They certainly are of interest, not only because
they are dangerous drugs themselves when misused, but because they
lead to the use of heroin and other narcotic drugs.
Mr. WALTON. That certainly has been my observation.
It par-
I think that
2919
Senator DANIEL. How do you feel about the actual sentences, the
penalties, on these traffic charges?
Mr. WALTON. I feel certainly that a firm policy as to penalties is
important, and I feel that the certainty of punishment is equally as
important as a deterrent to crime as the severity of the punishment.
I feel that the laws our last legislature enacted in this State will prove
to be an effective deterrent. Of course it has not been on the statute
books long enough as yet to have enough experience to substantiate
that opinion.
Mr. GASQUE. Do you find you have good cooperation among your
county, State, city, and Federal authorities here?
Mr. WALTON. Yes; I have always found that we have good cooperation in this jurisdiction here. Of course, I am not in position to
know what kind of cooperation exists on what you might say the direct
law-enforcement level itself; that is, between the Bureau of Narcotics,
for instance, and the Narcotics Division of the Houstou Police Department. I would have no way of knowing, of any firsthand knowledge,
as to what the liasion may be there.
Mr. GASQUE. We are particularly interested in your suggestion in
your statement that the States should work out some arrangement
with the Federal Government for the treatment of these addicts, and
that the State should pay the costs. I wonder if you would tell us
something on that.
Of course, in
Mr. WALTON. I simply wish to make this suggestion.
view of the new addiction law which was enacted by the last session
of the legislature, as you know, we are currently in a process of a
rather large program here to put that law into effect. In preparation
for doing so, I had personnel from my own office make a survey of what
facilities would be available for the treatment-and when I say treatment I mean treatment by trained personnel looking toward the rehabilitation of the first offenders before they become hardened criminals of some sort. And in making that survey we found that Texas
has limited facilities in the Texas State penitentiary for the treatment
of male narcotic addicts, and no more than token facilities available
for the treatment of female narcotic addicts.
Our office is advised that the United States Public Health Service
Hospital in Fort Worth, Tex., can handle only a limited number of
voluntary cases for Harris County. Of course, the State courts do
not have the power to commit anyone to this institution for involuntary
treatment. The desirability of probating narcotic addicts for treatment to the Federal hospital in Fort Worth is rendered highly questionable by the current Federal statutes and regulations prohibiting
the authorities of such hospital from giving reports on the progress of
the treatment of patients admitted. We are advised that not even
a. confidential report could be made to the court which granted the
probation.
I think it is obvious that it, is questionable as to whether a judge
would feel that it was entirely the better part of wisdom to entrust the
probation for treatment without any further control or supervision
from the bench, or from the court itself.
Senator DANIEL. We received evidence that where they are prol)ated, they leave to the court no further jurisdiction over them.
Mr. WALTON. That is right. As I understand, you would not be
able to get any report. You would be relegated to this situation
2920
law that will take care of that situation, as the result of this committee's investigation.
Mr. WALTON. I certainly think that is a part of the law that needs
2921
OF
DAN
WALTON,
DISTRICT
ATTORNEY,
HARRIS
COUNTY,
TEX.
2922
point.
(Statement of W. J. Burns is as follows:)
2923
1955
The records of the Galveston Police Department show that during the years
of 1953 and 1954, the narcotic cases were about 50 percent heroin and 50 percent
marihuana. During the year of 1953 we did not handle any cases of barbiturates,
while in the year of 1954 there was a total of seven cases made which would indicate a rise in the use of barbiturates.
It has been our experience that while the red-light district was open we found
a far greater amount of narcotic addiction among the prostitutes and their associates than we have found since the closing of that segregated district. In the
handling of prostitutes at the present time we find that a very small percentage
of these persons, or their associates, are addicted to narcotics.
We find that people convicted in the State court are more severely dealt with
than those convicted in the Federal court. It is our opinion that no one over the
age of 21 years should have his sentence suspended or be put upon probation for
the violation of narcotic laws. We also believe that no case should be dismissed without trial to allow the person, or persons, charged under the narcotic law, an opportunity to enter the Armed Forces of the United States. This is a practice
that has been widely used to the advantage of the law violator and detriment of
the enforcement agency. In the past, numerous cases have been dismissed to
allow addicts to be confined in a Government hospital so that they could be cured
of their addiction, only to have these same persons return to our community and
continue in the narcotic traffic, after they are released from these institutions.
We believe that the narcotic laws should be amended so as to provide higher minimum penalties, starting at 5 years for first offenders and raised according to the
gravity of the additional offenses, because we find that the policy of the Federal
court is too lenient in narcotic cases. We feel that the uncertainty of punishment for persons found guilty of narcotic violations tend to build up a disrespect
of the narcotic law, as borne out by second, third, and fourth offenders.
We do not know of any narcotic addition among juveniles in Galveston.
While it has been reported to us in many instances that the situation exists, our
investigations have failed to disclose any violations, nor have we been able to
gather any evidence or make any arrest involving juveniles. There is without a
doubt instances where juveniles do some into the possession of barbiturates,
marihuana, and milder forms of narcotics which are so easily obtained throughout
the country, but we have not had any occasion to handle a case involving juveniles.
The cooperation given us by the United States Narcotics Bureau has been excellent, and we do not know of any way this cooperation could be improved upon.
Due to the lack of manpower in the Narcotics Bureau this cooperation has been
limited, but the Bureau has always cooperated with the Galveston PoliceDepartment to the best of its ability. It is our opinion that the Narcotics Bureau has
done an excellent 'job considering the shortage of manpower and funds appropriated for the purpose of purchasing narcotics. A lot more could be accomplished by the Narcotics Bureau if the personnel was increased and if they were
granted more funds for operation. However, it is our opinion that the increase
in penalties will do more than any other one thing to discourage the traffic in
narcotics.
It is our opinion that the speedy trial of persons charged with narcotic violations
would deter the persons charged and others from becoming narcotic peddlers and
addicts. We have had cases stay on the dockets of the courts for a period of 1
year without going to trial.
One, George Flake, was arrested on July 1, 1954, charged with possession of
marihuana. He made bond in State court, and on February 5, 1955, he was again
arrested for possession of marihuana and he had not been tried for the first case.
One, Katie Rivera, was arrested on September 21, 1954, charged with possession
of marihuana and was again arrested on May 1, 1955, and charged with the sale
of marihuana by the Federal Government, while out on bond.
Likewise, Jovina Rivera was arrested on September 21, 1954, charged in the
State court with possession of marihuana, and on May 1, 1955, he was again arrested and charged with sale and possession of marihuana in Federal court.
All three of the above-named persons immediately went back into narcotic
traffic after being originally arrested, and none of them were tried before the second
arrest. We cite these three instances for the purpose of pointing out that narcotic
iolators should be speedily tried. There have been numerous other instances,
but we do not feel that it would be of any value in cluttering up the records with
these instances.
In the case of Jovina Rivera, he was tried in State court, was given a 5-year
sentence in the State penitentiary, and later brought back from the State peni71515--56-pt. 7-37
2924
tentiary, convicted in the Federal court, and given a 5-year sentence to run concurrently with that of the State court, while in our opinion he should have been
filed on as a second offender.
In the case of Katie Rivera, she was given three 5-year sentences to run concurrently in the Federal court, but she has never been tried in the State court and
probably never will be.
The following is a record of narcotic arrests and cases handled by the Galveston
Police Department for the years of 1953 and 1954:
1953
Marihuana --------------------Heroin -----------------------Total --------------------
13 State cases, convictions ---------20 Federal cases, convictions -------Dismissed or no billed cases
33
7
20
6
33
1954
Marihuana --------------------Heroin -----------------------Barbiturates --------------------
Total --------------------
22 State cases, convictions ---------16 Federal cases, convictions-------7 Barbiturate cases, convictions----No billed and dismissed cases ----Pending -----------------------
18
2
7
15
3
45
45
(S)
(S)
W. J.
BURNS.
W. J. WHITBURN.
(S)
N.D. MCCOWN.
(S)
J. B.
KLINE.
Senator DANIEL. All right, Chief, you may present the picture you
We have
2925
2926
Senator
DANIEL.
Mr.
WHITBURN.
We did.
3 weeks ago, and they were checking one man that we arrested approximately 8 months ago. That is a long time to check them.
Senator
DANIEL.
tions, do you?
Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. I certainly agree with you that it is a serious
matter, and we will call it to the attention of the Congress and to
the attention of the Federal agencies that have control over it. If
there are any other details that you want us to help you with in
Mr. WHITBURN.
2927
BURNS.
Senator
DANIEL.
2928
Mr. BURNS. I would like for you to hear from Detective Kline.
for it would keep them from getting sick, and that is all.
Senator DANIEL. And it assures them of that much.
Mr. KLINE. That is true.
Senator DANIEL. If you are talking about getting rid of addicts
by restoring them to being normal persons they never would get well.
Mr. KLINE. That is right. They get enough to keep from being
sick, and they get that for nothing.
Senator DANIEL. Thank you very much.
Mrs. Saulter, will you stand up and be sworn.
Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you are about to give
to this subcommittee of the Senate Judiciary Committee will be the
truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?
Mrs. SAULTER. I do, sir.
TESTIMONY OF HELEN SAULTER
State your name.
Mrs. SAULTER. Helen Saulter.
Senator DANIEL. To whom were you married?
Mrs. SAULTER. Frank Saulter.
Senator DANIEL. Are you separated from Frank Saulter?
Mrs. SAULTER. I am divorced from him.
Senator DANIEL. You are divorced from him?
Mrs. SATJLTER. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Mrs. Saulter, Mr. Speer has talked with you and
I am going to let.'him carry the examination. This committee is
interested in anything concerning the narcotics traffic from Red
China, and particularly because of the information you have had,
Senator
DANIEL.
2929
though it does not bear directly on Houston; while you are in this
proximity we would like to get that evidence at this time, the evidence
that you had at the time you lived in California and elsewhere on the
subject. And that is the purpose of calling you before the committee
at this time. As I understand it, your husband was engaged in importing heroin from China. Is that true?
Mrs. SAULTER. That is true.
Senator DANIEL. All right, Mr. Speer.
Mr. SPEER. Had you lived in California prior to 1949?
Mrs. SAULTER.
during the year did you have occasion to meet a Chinese who had
just recently come to this country?
Mrs. SAULTER. Yes.
Mr. SPEER. What was the name of that Chinese?
Mrs. SAULTER. Donald Dong.
Mr. SPEER. Who introduced you to this Chinese?
Mrs. SAULTER. Frank Saulter.
Mr. SPEER. Where was that introduction
Mrs. SAULTER. In Oakland.
Mr. SPEER. At that time did you know
made?
narcotics?
Mrs. SAULTER. I believe Hong Kong, China.
111111111I
2930
SPEER.
Mr. SPEER. When you talked to your husband about Donald Dong
what did he tell you about the arrangements for receiving this heroin?
Mrs. SAULTER. I really don't remember. All I know is that he
received it in the post office in magazines.
Mr. SPEER. At a post-office box?
Mrs. SAULTER. At a post-office box.
Mr. SPEER. Who made arrangements for the post-office box?
Mrs. SAULTER. I believe Donald Dong.
Mr. SPEER. Was
Oakland?
Mrs. SAULTER. The first one was in San Francisco.
However,
2931
Senator
DANIEL.
Mrs. SAULTER.
Selling narcotics.
The bottles
Mr. SPEER. I would like to show you a photograph and see if you
I I I
2932
10%.
Photo: Frank Leroy Saulter. Age, 31; height, 5 feet 8 inches; weight, 150 pounds;
red hair, ruddy complexion, of medium build.
SAULTER.
hearing.
(The photograph marked "Exhibit E," Houston, follows:)
EXHIBIT E
Senator DANIEL. Is this the first time you have given evidence
Senator DANIEL. So far as you know, has your husband ever been
arrested and tried for smuggling narcotics into this country?
Mrs. SAULTER. No; only for addiction.
2933
5 years.
but he was
from Oakland.
to your knowledge?
Mrs. SAULTER. I think it was almost a month or so.
Mr. SPEER. About a month or so?
Mrs. SAULTER. I think he stayed in town for about a month.
Mr. SPEER. What arrangement did Frank Saulter make to com-
United States?
Mrs. SAULTER. I know the cable name. I don't
Mr. SPEER. What was the name?
Mrs. SAULTER. Spitfire.
Mr. SPEER. What was the cable code address in
Mrs. SAULTER. Castlefield.
I I
2934
Mr. SPEER.
cables?
Mrs. SAULTER. Yes, I did.
Mr. SPEER. Did you see letters your husband received from Donald
Dong?
Mrs. SAULTER. Yes. However, I never did read them.
Mr. SPEER. How did your husband write letters?
Mrs. SAULTER. He just typed every one of them over.
Mr. SPEER. How would he do that?
Mrs. SAULTER. He would run the typewriter and type them.
Mr. SPEER. Did they have some agreement about a means of
heroin?
Mrs. SAULTER. He sent large bills.
Mr. SPEER. What do you mean by large bills?
Mrs. SAULTER. Go to the bank and get large bills, thousand dollar
bills, five hundred dollar bills, whatever he could get, and mail them.
Mr.
SPEER.
2935
Senator
DANIEL.
here now.
Mr. Speer, how many years did you spend in the Far East in narcotics work for the Federal Bureau of Narcotics?
Mr. SPEER. I have had 7 years straight, and then 3 years since
that time, for a total of 10 years.
Senator
DANIEL.
Castlefield, and did you know who that cable name identified?
Mr. SPEER. That was the cable code address used by Judah Ezra.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
he live?
of the big operators and exporters of
Senator
DANIEL.
you divorced?
Mrs. SAULTER. In 1953, June 3.
DANIEL. 1953?
Mrs. SAULTER. That is right.
Senator DANIEL. Thank you
Senator
very much.
When were
2936
Senator
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Agency been?
Mr. SCHARFF. Starting at Nogales, Ariz., Mexico, the continental
United States, and Europe.
Senator
DANIEL.
here in Houston.
I have been in Houston since 1938.
Senator DANIEL. How many men do you have in your organization?
Mr.
SCHARFF. At present there are three of us.
Senator DANIEL. What area do you cover?
Mr. SCHARFF. From the Oklahoma line to Corpus Christi in the
State of Texas, and over into part of Louisiana.
Mr. SCHARFF.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
SCHARFF.
Senator
DANIEL.
I I I
2937
DANIEL.
TREASURY DEPARTMENT,
BUREAU OF CUSTOMS,
I have prepared for you the following memorandum, more or less statistical, of
facts and circumstances involved in certain cases involving the smuggling of
narcotic drugs resulting from investigations conducted by customs agents and
other customs officers, occasionally with the assistance of agents of the Narcotic
Service and/or the local police. I have tried to select from the many cases those
in which I believed the committee would be interested and those which may
illustrate the types of such cases which are made in this area by Customs.
File 6-298. December 1952, the master of the SS. Furman Victory, upon
arrival in Houston, Tex., reported that during a search conducted of his vessel on
the high seas on December 16 he found a small package containing two sheets of
a brownish, pressed substance concealed in the personal effects in a locker being
used by Lucien Collins, messman, Z-663370. Capt. Carl Johnson delivered the
substance to Customs and it was found to be hashish. Complaint was filed against
Collins before the United States Commissioner. He was released on a $400 cash
bond which he subsequently forfeited. On February 22, 1953, Collins, who had in
the meantime been arrested in San Francisco in connection with this violation,
pleaded guilty to the indictment returned against him in Houston, Tex., and was
placed on probation for the period of 2 years.
This and one other seizure of hashish are the only ones we have encountered in
this district in 5 years. Collins stated that he had purchased the hashish in
Alexandrette, Turkey, for his own use.
File 6-314. May 20, 1953, customs agents at Port Bolivar (Galveston, Tex.)
arrested Frank Dolcimascolo, merchant seaman from the SS. Longview Victory
and seized approximately five pounds of hashish from him.
he had secured the hashish in Casa Blanca, Africa. The arrest came after undercover investigation by the officers, during which Dolcimascolo sold the hashish
to the officers for $300. An indictment against subject was returned by the Federal grand jury in Galveston on June 1, 1953, and on June 4, 1953, he was found
guilty and sentenced to serve 2 years and fined $50.
File 6-323. May 23, 1953, customs agents, acting on information, seized 108Y2
pounds of "manicured" marihuana which was moving from McAllen, Tex., to
New York City in 2 trunks checked as personal baggage on a one-way coach
ticket. A small amount of marihuana was left in each trunk which went forward
to New York and customs agents at the port of New York arrested Elvira Lopez
and-Aida Irma of 304 West 27th Street, New York, when they presented baggage
checks covering the baggage at the Pennsylvania Railroad Station in New York
City.
Files 6-320, 6-321, 6-322.
2938
cured" marihuana. On September 16, 1953, the following persons were convicted: Leocardio Herrera, 4 years to serve; Ester Herrera 3 years to serve;
Reuben Domingo Reyes 2 years to serve; Timoteo Esparza 6 months to serve
and 3 years suspended for 5 years; Hesquio Herrera 2 years suspended; Benito
Cerliss 2 years suspended. In addition all of the above defendants were fined
$100 each.
Alfredo Reyes Montoya got 2 years to serve and a $1 fine, Enrique Garza got
2 years to serve and $1 fine, and Ezequiel Saldana got 3 years to serve and a $1
fine on November 6, 1953.
File 6-343. December 4, 1953, immigration patrol inspectors while on duty
in the vicinity of Alice, Tex., arrested Jose Tena-Albor, Mexican national who
had entered the United States illegally. Eighteen grains of marihuana were
found in his right shoe. The marihuana and Jose Tena-Albor were turned over
to customs agents and he was arraigned before the United States Commissioner
at Corpus Christi, Tex., on December 16, 1953. January 15, 1954, subject was
convicted at Corpus Christi and was sentenced to serve 6 months. This is a
good example of the cooperation received from the Immigration Service in this
field.
File 6-344. December 26, 1953, customs agents at Brownsville, Tex., telephoned the customs agents at Houston Tex., that they had arrested J. A. Owens
and John E. Sanford of New Orleans La., for smuggling 7 pounds of marihuana
and 1 gram of heroin from Mexico. keys found in the possession of these people
were to Cabins 17 and 18 of the Como Motel, Bay City, Tex. Customs agents
from Houston went to Bay City and searched Cabin 17 and found 690 grains of
marihuana concealed in the personal effects of E. K. Williams, alias George Huffman, and Madeline Durden. This case was prosecuted in Brownsville, Tex. I
do not have the results of the prosecution.
File 6-341. November 6, 1953, in Riviera, Tex., immigration patrol inspectors
stopped and searched George Drury, Mary Ann Schofield, and a Mexican who
gave his name as Epifanio Mendez Moreno, Jr., all of Houston Tex No narcotic
drugs were found, but sweepings from the automobile in which they were driving
were turned over to the customs agents and submitted to the U. S. Customs
chemist at New Orleans, who found therein fragments of marihuana. The immigration officers had been alerted by the customs officers at Brownsville to be on
the alert for these people as information had been received that George Drury
was smuggling large quantities of drugs to the United States from Mexico. Subsequently, George Drury was arrested in Houston by the Narcotic Service with
a large quantity of heroin. Customs agents determined later that the Mexican
who had given his name as Epifanio Mendez Moreno, Jr. at Riviera to the Immigration officers was in fact Roberto Gil Moreno, a cousin of Epifanio. The
automobile in which Drury and his two companions were traveling on November
6 was seized in Houston and forfeited to the Government.
File 6-347. January 12, 1954, in cooperation with the morals division of the
Houston Police Department, customs agents arrested Alma Mouton Terrell Eva
Lee Caradine, and Henrietta McCarty as they alighted from a Greyhound bus at
Houston, Tex. Search of these women in the office of the customs agent in
charge disclosed 3 ounces of heroin concealed on the Mouton woman and 3 ounces
on the Caradine woman. Later in the day the same officers arrested Arthur
James Pegues in this case. Information had been received that these four people
would go to Mexico with $4,000 which had been given them by the notorious
narcotic smuggler, Earl Voice, and that they would buy heroin for the money
and smuggle it back to Houston and deliver it to Voice. When it was found that
the point of delivery would be in Earl Voice's night club the customs agent in
charge d cided that there was too much danger of losing the heroin before the
officers could secure entrance to the night club; therefore, the arrest was made at
the bus station. Customs agents followed in automobile and on the bus these
people from Laredo, Tex., to Houston, and at no time were any of them out of
view of the agents.
On February 24, 1954, Pegues, Mouton, and Caradine were indicted by a
Federal grand jury. They were tried by jury on March 15, 1954, and found
guilty. March 17, 1954, Pegues was sentenced to 5 years to serve and fined $10
generally; 'Mouton received 5 years to serve and a fine of $10 generally; and Caradine was sentenced to 5 years to serve and was fined $10 generally. Henrietta
McCarty was our informer in this case and was not prosecuted.
File 6-348. January 12, 1954 while the customs agents were trailing Arthur
James Pegues on the bus, Laredo to Houston, they observed him in conversation with a man who later proved to be Junius Harris. The officers became
suspicious and when he arrived in Houston he was detained and 40 grains of
2939
38
2940
the 60 pounds of marihuana to that address. Involved in this case was also Man.
fredo B. Martinez and both Manfredo Martinez and Juan Cantu were considered
"tough boys" in the racket at that time. Also involved were Eduardo Flores and
Roberto Pacheco. After a lengthy investigation these men were successfully
prosecuted and Jaun Cantu was deported to Mexico and immediately after arriving there entered into the wholesale business of selling marihuana and heroin.
Subsequent to his conviction Rodolfo de la Cruz Salas told us that, prior to his
arrest in September, he had in June 1954, smuggled 50 pounds of marihuana from
Mexico to Houston and delivered 25 pounds of this marihuana to Lionel Herrera.
File 6-377. October 1954. Working jointly with agents of the Narcotic Service 25 pounds of marihuana were seized from Lionel Herrera and Juan Garcia in
Houston. A 1953 DeSoto automobile belonging to Herrera was also seized.
When information was received that Lionel Herrera was smuggling heroin that
had been smuggled to him from Mexico, the matter was reported to the Narcotic
Service and that Service joined in our investigation. Over a period of several
weeks the Narcotic Service made numerous purchases of heroin through a confidential informer furnished by customs agents. Lionel Herrera is a brother of Ernesto
Herrera, who has been a fugitive in Mexico since his arrest with Rodolfo de la
Cruz in 1950. Lionel Herrera at that time owned two restaurants in Houston,
Tex.
Juan Garcia was released on a $1,000 bond. Lionel Herrera was released on
bond of $15,000 and he shortly thereafter fled to Mexico, where he is presently
residing, according to my information.
File 6-368. As has been stated, in June 1954, a pound of marihuana was purchased by an undercover operator from Manuel Cruz, who subsequently gave this
office information, some of which was of no value. During the month of January
1955, agents of the Narcotic Service in Houston purchased a quantity of marihuana
from Manuel Cruz, who was at that time still working for the city of Houston.
In March 1955, after I discussed with the Narcotic Service the case made by customs agents in June 1954, against Manuel Cruz, it was decided to permit Manuel
Cruz to plead guilty to the case made by the Narcotic Service in January 1955, for
which offense he received sentence to serve 10 years in La Tuna Penitentiary, after
which the customs case was dismissed.
File 6-386. October, 1954. The sheriff of Wharton County, Tex., and the
constable in Louise, Tex., apprehended Julio Arroyo Garcia a Cuban longshoreman residing in Houston, Tex., and Jose R. Rodriguez, an American citizen also
residing in Houston, and seized 63 pounds of marihuana and two Chevrolet automobiles. Information with reference to the arrest and seizure was transmitted
to this office, customs agents immediately proceeded to Wharton, Tex., and
adopted the case. Both persons denied knowing each other. Inasmuch as the
arrests were effected some 30 miles removed from each other, it seemed for a time
that it would be difficult to connect the two men; however, persistent work on the
part of the customs agents definitely tied the two men together in Houston and
evidence was secured that proved to the jury's satisfaction that Jose Rodriguez
had purchased the automobile in which Julio A. Garcia was riding at the time the
constable at Louise, Tex., found Garcia in possession of the 63 pounds of marihuana. The automobile in which Jose Rodriguez was riding at the time of his
arrest was also tied to the case because of a hole in the right front door of the car
which witnesses identified, relating instances in which Jose Rodriguez andJulio
Garcia had been seen together in this automobile in Houston. In addition, evidence in the form of transfer of documents before a notary public by both persons
of one of the automobiles was secured. To prove that the marihuana had been
smuggled by Jose Rodriguez and delivered to Julio Garcia, a pair of wet, muddy
shoes and a pair of wet, muddy trousers which were found in Rodriguez's automobile were furnished the United States Attorney, aloug with samples of mud
and silt secured on the banks of the Rio Grande where Julio Garcia said he smuggled the marihuana.
When brought to trial, Julio Garcia pleaded guilty to the second count of the
indictment and not guilty to conspiracy and smuggling counts. The case took
2 days to try and the jury returned a verdict against both persons as follows:
Guilty of conspiracy to smuggle and smuggling. They were sentenced to serve
4 years and fined $10 each, the fine being remitted by the court.
In this case there was close cooperation between customs agents, narcotic
agents, the sheriff at Wharton, and the constable at Louise, Tex.
File 6-383. January 2, 1955, one of the most important cases developed in this
district in several years was successfully concluded.
Acting on information received in the office in September 1954, customs agents,
working undercover, finally reached the supplier of heroin which one organization
2941
Seized frorm-
6-399
,-413
6-416
6-420
t,423
,;-427
6-430
6-429
G-431
6-431
Fred O'Neal Haynes -----------------Octavio Chavez Rivea ----------------Abel Lopez ------------------------------David Navarro ----------------------Johnny Bright ----------------------Robert M. Gonzales ------------------William McKinley -------------------Miles J. Galmiche -------------------Pete Locascio -----------------------Pete Lopez -------------------------------
6-433
6-443
G-444
6-451
6-452
6-458
Dallas Moore -----------------------Felix Villegas -----------------------Steveson Benjamin -------------------Eddie Lee Mantooth -----------------Alfred John Reyna -------------------Dawn Sanders -----------------------
Description of auto
1952 Ford coupe ---------------------------1950 Chevrolet truck ----------------------1951 Chevrolet coupe ----------------------1954 Chevrolet ----------------------------1954 Mercury coupe -----------------------1949 Chevrolet sedan -----------------------1950 Chevrolet sedan ----------------------1955 Ford sedan --------------------------1955 Oldsmobile ------------------------1953 Chevrolet l -ton truck used with
wrecker equipment.
1949 Pontiac sedan ------------------------1950 Buick sedan -------------------------1953 Chevrolet sedan ----------------------1953 Mercury coupe ---------------------1955 Pontiac sedan ----------------------1954 Oldsmobile sedan ----------------------
Value
$950
350
475
1,095
1,600
200
375
1, 850
2. 800
800
250
550
750
850
1,950
2, 750
Before these vehicles are accepted for seizure by Customs the facts and circumstances leading up to and involved in the arrest of the persons concerned are
ascertained in order to determine that there are proper grounds for seizure.
Several of the automobiles have been found serviceable and have been assigned by
the Bureau of Customs to official use. Those not found suitable have been sold
at public auction by the collector of customs. All of the automobiles are forfeited according to the laws and regulations of the Customs Service.
File 6-456. A case of considerable importance was terminated on the night of
September 30, 1955, at Sugar Land, Tex. Customs agents followed a man from
Laredo, Tex., to Sugar Land and arrested Willie E. Mapp, a Houston automobile
2942
dealer, as he received about an ounce of heroin. Mapp is a used car dealer and
has no past criminal record, his family is highly respected in Houston, and he made
a bond of $5,000 pending his indictment. His 1952 Mercury automobile valued
at $550, was seized. The man who brought the heroin from Laredo to Houstoln
was not apprehended.
Files 6-446 and 6-447. Since the latter part of August 1955, two men well
versed in the narcotic traffic in and around Corpus Christi were employed on a
subsistence basis in Corpus Christi to determine, if possible whether or not narcotic drugs are being smuggled at that port from ships. 6 n September 8 they
were withdrawn and have been assigned to work on the Mexican frontier. The
information secured by them in Corpus Christi was of a general nature and sufficient to satisfy me that there have been occasions recently when quantities of
heroin have been landed at Corpus Christi and presumably consumed there. It
is understood that results from a survey of this nature would be slow and I had
intended to continue this operation for at least another 30 days before taking
stock of the situation; however, it seemed not advisable to do so and I am yet
unable to say positively whether or not there is systematic smuggling of narcotic
drugs via ships into the Corpus Christi area. The vast majority of the drugs we
hear about or encounter apparently are coming from Mexico and if drugs axe being smuggled at Corpus Christi via ships regularly in any quantity, the drugs
move out of that area promptly, as we never hear about them.
With this same thought in mind a man of considerable experience was assigned
to work in Galveston. Some of the information this man secured was interesting,
but did not prove or disprove that drugs in any quantity are being smuggled via
ships from foreign ports into the port of Galveston. He did uncover information
indicating that drugs smuggled from Matamoros, Mexico, to Brownsville Tex.,
had been brought by one coastwise vessel in recent weeks to Galveston for local
consumption. We also have information that at least one individual is transporting drugs from the vicinity of New York to Texas gulf ports on vessels operating coastwise.
I have another undercover operation at the present time, trying to determine
whether crew members of Asiatic origin arriving in the port of Houston from far
eastern ports are engaged in smuggling opium and narcotic drugs. So far the
information this man has been able to secure has been negligible and inconclusive.
There is no question but that the marihuana which is sold in this alea is smuggled from Mexico and our experience proves that marihuana in 100-pounds lot
has in the past moved rather frequently from Mexico to New York and other
eastern and northern cities in the United States through Houston. For several
years Houston was used as a transfer point for New York narcotic traffickers and
we are told that heroin was being brought from New York and exchanged for
marihuana at rendezvous in Texas.
I have been in the customs agency service for more than 37 years. I am the
agent with the longest period of service, and I am convinced that we are only as
our information insofar as apprehending smugglers is concerned.
good asRespectively,
A. F. SCHARFF,
Customs Agent in Charoe
2943
I I I
2944
I see no difference.
Senator DANIEL. You don't think the Mexican Government j;
living up to their agreement to stop raising poppies?
Mr. SCHARFF. I suppose so far as the Mexican Government is concerned they feel that they are doing their part. They wish they
could stop it. Some of the men who are responsible for the law enforcement there would like to, I think, very much. But their hands
are sort of tied. They don't have the money, and they don't have
the personnel.
I know in 1935 when we first started this project, before I went. to
Europe, I learned that poppies were being grown on the west coast
of Mexico in the States of Sinaloa and Sonora. I went over to take
a look. I found some crops being hidden by corn and flax, and again
I found patches of 1 acre, 3 acres, 5 acres, that were grown just openly,
without any hiding whatsoever.
And then I took it up with the Mexican Government, and the Mexican Government sent soldiers, and those crops were destroyed and
burned. And some men were put in jail. And the next time that
for some reason we would have to go back we would see those same
people on the street.
And the next year the same thing happened. And periodically
since that time the Mexican Government has been destroying those
opium crops. So far as I see, they have not stopped.
Senator DANIEL. All right, thank you very much, Mr. Scharff.
Now you have Mr. Ellis. What is his position, assistant agent?
Mr. SCHARFF. He is a customs agent.
Senator DANIEL. Here in Houston?
Mr. SCHARFF. Yes.
Senator DANIEL. All right, we will hear from Mr. Ellis.
Mr. SCHARFF.
States. On the border, New York, El PasoSenator DANIEL. Do you have anything to add to what Mr.
Scharff and Mr. McLeaish have said about the situation on the
Mexican border?
Mr. ELLIS. I believe I was originally invited here to possibly help
you with the identity of some of the people who are still active in that
area, particularly on the Mexican side.
Among those people are Henry, Enrico Trevinio, and Poncho
Trevinio who have been mentioned. I call him Henry. The Mexican
name of course is Enrico.
Senator DANIEL. Go right ahead.
Mr. ELLIS. I also know the background of the Trevinios in con-
2945
You will have to understand something about the way they handle
those things in Mexico to appreciate how that can be done. Those
people over there do not believe in restricting a man's activities as
we do in this country here.
Senator DANIEL. Are those two men pretty high politically across
there?
Mr. ELLIS. I have heard the statement made from well placed
police officers that Poncho's payoff went to Mexico City. And all
other operators in Nuevo Laredo enjoyed his license, including his
two sons, Raol and Arturo. My informers tell me that when he was
put in jail finally there was much competition in Nuevo Laredo and
the surrounding country for the beautiful traffic that he had. And he
enjoyed that because of the fact that he was a businessman. He
guaranteed quality, he guaranteed quantity, and he guaranteed
delivery. He guaranteed delivery in the United States. And if you
didn't like the grade or the quantity you could bring it back and get
your money back.
Senator DANIEL. You mean Poncho Trevinio would make that
kind of deal with smugglers?
Mr. ELLIS. He certainly did.
But today the Trevinios do not enjoy all the traffic. Across the
river you hear other names.
Senator DANIEL. You recall that Mr. McLeaish made mention of
some names.
Mr. ELLIS. I didn't hear him.
DANIEL.
Heroin is
his speciality. He will sell either. His source is from the Trevinios.
They furnish most of the narcotics in this country.
Senator DANIEL. Is he a fugitive from this country?
Mr. ELLIS. Not to my knowledge, because I have seen him in the
United States.
Senator DANIEL. Does he have any official position over across the
border that you know of?
Mr. ELLIS. He is the owner of one of the most prosperous bars in
the zone in Nuevo Laredo.
Senator DANIEL. All right, in addition to him, what others do you
have?
Mr. ELLIS. Rogelio Pena is the owner of the "1-2-3" bar in the zone.
And a fellow by the name of Juan Conde, Preteo Angel, black angel.
I mention those people because they are people we know, that we
have come to know about. The Trevinios are not the only ones, but
they are by far the largest.
Mr. GASQUE. How would you size up the traffic down in Nuevo
Laredo?
2946
Mr. ELLIS. I would say that we have it more under control than we
did following the end of World War II; that we know more about wlat
goes on.
Senator DANIEL. Would you be willing to confirm the statement
Nuevo Laredo.
Senator DANIEL. Nuevo Laredo is not in the United States, of
course.
Mr. ELLIS. Nuevo Laredo enjoys, along with Monterrey and
Mexico City-those three, I think, supply more into the United States.
From a port of entry into the United States I dare say there is more
marihuana crosses in a 10-mile area on each side of Laredo, 'Tex.
than all of the rest of the United States put together. And we have
5 men there, 5 customs agents.
Senator DANIEL. And they come from Nuevo Laredo, Monterrey,
and what other place?
Mr. ELLIS. Mexico City.
Laredo, Tex.
Joe Gerrera, he was selling a thousand pounds a month.
Senator DANIEL. You don't have the traffic on the Laredo side, on
the Texas side of the border?
Mr. ELLIS. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Just like Houston was port of entry for $2% million
worth of cocaine this year?
Mr. ELLIS. Transfer point, receiving point.
Senator DANIEL. Joe said the customs agents probably knew what
they were doing because they pointed them out to the Narcotics
Bureau people in New York.
Mr. GASQUE. From your experience what would you say was the
extent of cooperation on the Mexican side? That is not a very good
question because you can't pin it down. I am wondering what kind
of cooperation you get in the way of getting a person in jail?
Mr. ELLIS. You can get it if you have got the money to spend.
I went there with $500 of a bondsman's money and got a man kicked
back to this side. I did that just as an accommodation to the United
States Attorney. I had that man in jail in Nuevo Laredo and on his
way back when the Trevinio fix was put in there.
Senator DANIEL. Do you know any other fugitives over across the
border who were engaged in the narcotics business other than those
who have been named so far?
Mr. ELLIS. I have heard a story of some in a place called San Pedro
de Roma. It is an isolated place and is not accessible to any well
traveled highway. That is Cuidad La Aman or San Pedro de Roma.
I understand there are fugitives there from Houston, Texas.
Senator DANIEL. Are they engaged in narcotics traffic?
Mr. ELLIS. They certainly are.
2947
'Mmi
'M
f,-7
J I
.....
Photo of Juan M. Cantu, Customs agent file 7-1-91, Exhibit "F"Hair: black; eyes: brown; height: 5'9"; weight: 170 lbs; age: 35 in 1945;
build: medium.
I I I I
2948
Hair: black; eyes: brown; height: 5'6"; weight: 145 pounds; age: 28 in 1945;
build: short.
DANIEL.
2949
Senator
DANIEL.
Mr. ELLIS. He goes back and forth between this town and
Monterrey.
Senator
DANIEL.
from this country operating now across the border in Mexico, that is,
narcotics fugitives?
Mr. ELLIS. The name Lionel Herrera strikes me, but I do not recall
the circumstances.
DANIEL. Mr. Scharff do you have any information
SCHARFF. There was a joint case between my office
Senator
on him?
and the
Mr.
local narcotics office involving him, and he jumped $20,000 bond here
I think overnight.
Senator DANIEL. $15,000 bond, I am informed.
Mr. SCHARFF. $15,000. Some reduction.
RODRIQUEZ.
Senator DANIEL.
Pura Rodriquez.
Senator DANIEL.
Mrs. RODRIQUEZ.
Senator DANIEL.
Mrs. RODRIQUEZ.
Senator DANIEL.
Mrs.
RODRIQUEZ.
Senator DANIEL. How long have you been engaged in selling heroin
in Houston?
Mrs.
RODRIQUEZ.
Senator
DANIEL.
2950
Senator
DANIEL.
RODRIQUEZ.
Mrs.
Yes.
Senator DANIEL. And that you could be sent to the penitentiary
for it if a jury found you had lied under oath?
Mrs. RODRIQUEZ. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Do you understand that?
Mrs. RODRIQUEZ. Yes.
Senator DANIEL. You realize if you give untruthful answers vou
Yes, sir.
You understand fully?
Yes, sir.
RODRIQUEZ.
Senator DANIEL. Are you the same Pura Rodriquez Perez who on
April 1, I believe, was given 4 years Federal sentence for the sale
of heroin?
Mrs. RODRIQUEZ. That is right.
Senator DANIEL. Are you the same person?
Mrs. RODRIQUEZ. I am the same person.
Senator DANIEL. And you appealed from that sentence, did you
not?
Mrs. RODRIQUEZ. Yes.
Senator DANIEL. Isn't it true that after you got out on a $10,000
bond that you were arrested with 11 papers of heroin in your possession?
Mrs. RODRIQUEZ. They were not in my possession.
Senator DANIEL. Where were they?
Mrs. RODRIQUEZ. They found them in the toilet.
Senator DANIEL. In theMrs. RODRIQUEZ. In the toilet.
Senator DANIEL. Who threw them there?
Mrs. RODRIQUEZ. I don't know. There were two or three men
there in the house.
Senator DANIEL. Was it in your house?
Mrs. RODRIQUEZ. It was in my house.
1111111111
Senator DANIEL.
Mrs. RODRIQUEZ.
Senator DANIEL.
Mrs. RODRIQUEZ.
Senator
2951
6908 Avenue N.
And that was June of this year?
Yes, sir.
What was this heroin doing in your house?
DANIEL.
RODRIQUEZ. I
RODRIQUEZ.
Senator
DANIEL.
No, sir.
RODRIQUEZ.
Senator DANIEL.
No, sir.
DANIEL.
Mrs. RODRIQUEZ.
Senator DANIEL.
What?
No, sir.
You didn't see the heroin that was in the toilet
in your house?
Mrs.
RODRIQUEZ.
sion?
M[rs.
RODRIQUEZ.
No, sir.
RODRIQUEZ.
Senator
DANIEL.
No, sir.
-our lifetime?
Mrs. RODRIQUEZ. No, sir; I haven't.
Senator DANIEL. And you never sold any in your lifetime?
Mrs. RODRIQUEZ. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Have you ever given any heroin or marihuana
or delivered it to anybody?
Mrs.
RODRIQUEZ.
No, sir.
Senator
DANIEL.
2952
papers of heroin, and you were selling heroin again, and you were
picked up on a State charge filed for possession of heroin, and that was
in June of this year. Is that right?
Mrs. RODRIQUEZ.
Senator DANIEL.
Mrs.
RODRIQUEZ.
That is right.
Senator
DANIEL.
$2,500.
it from you.
In view of what you have just told me, do you still want
to say to this committee that you have not sold any heroin to anyone
since you were convicted on April 1, 1955?
Mrs. RODRIQUEZ. I still say that.
Senator DANIEL. You still want to say that?
Mrs. RODRIQUEZ. Yes.
Senator DANIEL. And that is a truthful answer?
Mrs. RODRIQUEZ. Yes, sir.
Mr. GASQUE. In view of the fact that this witness has been indicted
and convicted for selling heroin, I cannot conceive that she would
want to continue with this type of testimony.
Apparently you didn't understand the chairman when he asked
did you ever in your life sell heroin?
Mrs. RODRIQUEZ. I never have.
Senator DANIEL. Have you ever agreed with anybody that they
should sell heroin for you?
Mrs. RODRIQUEZ. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Have you ever been in any business here in
Houston?
Mrs. RODRIQUEZ. I had a business.
Senator DANIEL. What kind?
Mrs. RODRIQUEZ. I had a beer tavern.
Senator DANIEL. A beer tavern?
Mrs. RODRIQUEZ. Yes, sir.
Mr. GASQUE. Would you give us the facts that led up to your conviction February 25, 1955, and sentenced to 4 years in the Federal
penitentiary? What did they charge you with?
I I
lII
II
2953
GASQUE.
a statement to them and tell them where you got your heroin? Didn't
you tell them you went to Monterrey to purchase your heroin?
Mrs. RODRIQUEZ. No, sir; I didn't tell them I went to Monterrey
to purchase my heroin.
Mr. GASQUE. Have you ever been to Monterrey?
Mrs. RODRIQUEZ. No, sir.
Mr. GASQUE. In your life?
Mrs. RODRIQUEZ. Never.
Mr. GASQUE. Do you know Simon Rodriquez?
I1III11
2954
Mr. GASQUE. You have talked to Mr. Ellis about heroin, haven't
you?
Mrs. RODRIQUEZ. Yes; I talked to him.
Mr. GASQUE. Do you want to change your testimony that you gave
a minute ago?
Mrs. RODRIQUEZ. Which?
Mr. GASQUE. Do you want to correct it?
Mrs. RODRIQUEZ. Yes.
Mr. GASQUE. Don't you want to correct some of the rest?
Mrs. RODRIQUEZ. That is the only one I want to correct.
Mr. GASQUE. That is the only thing you want to correct?
Mrs. RODRIQUEZ. Yes, sir.
Mr. Gasque. You now admit having talked to Mr. Ellis about
heroin?
Mrs. RODRIQUEZ. Yes.
Mr. GASQUE. Did you want to sell him some?
Mrs. RODRIQUEZ. No, sir.
RODRIQUEZ.
Yes, sir.
2955'
Mr. GASQUE. At the time you were arrested on December 29, 1954.
Mrs. RODRIQUEZ. I didn't make any statement.
Mr. GASQUE. You didn't make a statement?
Mrs. RODRIQUEZ. No, sir.
Mr. GASQUE. Do you know J. A. Perez?
Mr.
is he?
home.
Mr. GASQUE. Has he ever served time in the Federal penitentiary?
Mrs. RODRIQUEZ. Yes.
Mr. GASQUE. For what charge?
Mrs.
RODRIQUEZ.
Mr. GASQUE. At that time did you tell him to wait out on the
street, that you didn't have it with you?
Mrs. RODRIQUEZ.
Mr. GASQUE. And did you come along a few minutes later and
meet him out in the street driving your automobile?
Mrs. RODRIQUEZ. I went along with Johnny, but I didn't talk to
him.
Mr. GASQUE. Johnny who?
Mrs. RODRIQUEZ. Johnny Lopez.
71515-56--pt. 7-39
2956
Mrs.
RODRIQUEZ.
Mrs.
RODRIQUEZ.
Selling heroin.
Mr.
GASQUE.
stopped, and that there was an exchange of money at that time for
heroin. Did Johnny pay you $40 for heroin at that time?
Mrs. RODRIQUEZ. He didn't pay me nothing. I never did get
anything from anybody.
GASQUE. That is all, Mr. Chairman.
Senator DANIEL. How much time was your husband given.-pn the
Mr.
heroin charge?
RODRIQUEZ.
Senator
DANIEL.
No, sir.
Two years.
What charge?
He is my brother.
I I I I
ICIT
NARCOTICS TRAFFIC
2957
Narcotics?
Mr. TOLLENGER. Twelve years.
Senator DANIEL. How have you found the situation here in Houston
with reference to cooperation from State, county and city law enforcement officers?
Mr.
present time.
differences have
existed here in Houston between certain officers. Have those differences all about been forgotten now?
Mr. TOLLENGER. Yes, everything is cleared up.
Senator DANIEL. Are you getting along perfectly well with the
police?
I I I I
2958-:
_14"dii
cls
'Senator DANIEL. Are you 'in turn giving them all the cooperation
possible?
Mr. TOLLENGER. We certainly are.
Senator DANIEL." I believe that was evidenced in the recent roundup
of addicts. Did, you work with the local officers and the State officer,
Mr. Taylor, on that?
Mr. TOLLENGER. Yes, sir, we did.
Senator DANIEL. I would like for you to give us any information
and recommendations that you think would be helpful to the committee as we come'to the closing minutes of this hearing in Houston.
You know the purpose of it.
Mr. TOLLENGER. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. This is the first nationwide investigation of the
2959
Mr.
TOLLENGER.
Senator
district?
DANIEL.
Yes.
In which you give figures on convictions for this
Houston, Tex.
Statistics and information for hearings of Daniel's committee on October 17
and 18, 1955; in Houston, Tex.
1. Addicts
Files show the following number of addicts recorded in 1953, 1954, and from
January to September, inclusive, 1955:
1953, 37; 1954, 36; 1955, 35.
1955 Statistical breakdown
White------------------------
23 Under 21 -----------------------
15
1
19
Total --------------------
35
12
7
3
6
0
7
Total --------------------
35
35
Narcotic
Arrests:
1953 --------------------------------------1954 ---------------------------------------1955 ---------------------------------------Convictions:
1953 ---------------------------------------1954 ---------------------------------------1955 ----------------------------------------
Marihuana
Under 21
years
Total
56
59
21
56
38
13
112
97
34
0
0
)
45
44
15
54
29
9
99
73
24
0
0
2960
had there?
2961
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
I have a barbershop.
Senator DANIEL. Anything else?
Mr.
QUEVES.
at all?
Mr. QuEVES. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. You never did sell any marihuana or heroin
2962
, Senator DANIEL. Did you ever deliver any marihuana -to them
to sell for you?
Mr. QUEVES. No, sir.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Mr. QuEVES. No, sir. I had 4 years and 4 months on parole, and
I never was in any trouble since 17 years.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator DANIEL. And you still insist that you have not been
eng.ed in any kind of selling or buying or trading or dealing in
marihuana or heroin, is that correct?
Mr. QUEVES. That is correct.
Senator DANIEL. Did you bring your income-tax report?
Mr. QUEVES. Yes.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
In 1953?
I filed 4 years and 1 paid 2.
How much did you make in 1953?
Senator DANIEL.
Mr. QuEvEs. Not much. I don't remember how much.
Senator DANIEL. In 1953?
Mr. QuEvEs. I don't know.
Senator DANIEL. Was it over a thousand dollars?
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
2963
TRAFFIC
1954?
STATEMENT
ODEM.
Brian S. Odem.
Brownsville, Tex.
Senator DANIEL. And your present official position?
Mr. ODEM.
Mr. ODEM.
now?
Mr. ODEM.
Yes.
Senator DANIEL. We will make this a part of the record at this time.
(The statistical report of Mr. Odem is as follows:)
STATISTICAL
REPORT
OF
CASES
IN
THE
BROWNSVILLE,
CORPUS
CHRISTI,
AND
The following statistical summary and case tabulation has been compiled by
Assistant United States Attorney Brian S. Odem from the original filed of the
United States attorney's office at Brownsville, Tex.:
295
Defendants formally filed on by indictment or criminal information ------
Defendants have cases pending to date------------------------------Cases have had final disposition ---------------------------------1 For the list of cases tried and disposed of, see "Corpus Christi and Brownsville Divisions, July
30
265
16, 1953
to October 11, 1955," and "Laredo Division, July 1, 1953 to October 11, 1955," prepared by assistant United
States Attorney Brian S. Odem, in the statement of Malcolm R. Wilkey, United States attorney, Southern
District of Texas, on pp. 2758 and 2763, respectively.
2964
Of the 265 cases disposed of, 55 defendants were tried by the United States
attorney.
Of the 55 defendants actually tried, 31 were found guilty and 24 were acquitted.
Of the remainder of cases not tried:
163
Plead guilty ---------------------------------------------------15
Cases dismissed by Government -----------------------------------4
------------------------------------------Cases dismissed by court
22
Number of defendants acquitted by the court ------------------------Number of defendants acquitted by the jury -------------------------2
2965
Mr. Scharff, Mr. McLeaish, and Mr. Ellis. I have worked with
them, some of them for a good number of years, and I want to say
for the record that they are doing a wonderful job. I think they are
handicapped in manpower and equipment. I think they should be
provided with additional personnel and equipment to enable them to
control the traffic, because it is still coming in in large quantities.
Senator DANIEL. We will get those sentences and they will be made
a part of the record.
The time has come to close the hearing. We want to thank Mr.
Wilkey, his staff, and the officers who lave assisted us; and the
press, radio, and television, and especially Station KGUL which has
been broadcasting our proceedings. In my judgment that is a great
public service, so the people can know what is going on with reference to the narcotics traffic and be aware of what the law-enforcement officers and this committee are trying to do in regard to it.
I only wish I could be in Houston longer, because it is close to
Liberty, and close to home.
The committee will recess, however, at this time, and begin its
hearing again in Dallas tomorrow morning in the Federal Court
Building, at 10 o'clock.
(Whereupon, at 5:15 p. m., the subcommittee adjourned, to meet
in Dallas at 10 a. m., Wednesday, October 19, 1955.)
IlIII
Dallas, Tex.
The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 10 a. m. in tho
United States Post Office and Courthouse, Dallas, Tex., Senator
Price Daniel (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding.
Present: Senators Daniel and James 0. Eastland (member of the
committee).
Also present: C. Aubrey Gasque, subcommittee counsel; W. Lee
Speer, committee investigator; and Hon. Bruce Alger, Congressman
EASTLAND. Just
2968
eople today. In fact, it is not being controlled, and in all probaility additional legislation will be necessary, and I know that you will
come out with that proposed legislation.
In addition to the use of narcotics by Red China in furtherance of
their foreign policy, the proof that we have shows that they have
pushed narcotics around American army camps in Asia and in the
United States, in an attempt to make addicts of the American servicemen, and I am proud that drive has not been successful.
Senator DANIEL. Thank you very much, Senator. We are happy
to have you here in Texas for these hearings.
Our first witness is chief of police Carl F. Hanssen. Chief Hanssen.
Also, if Lt. Gannaway will come forward, we will swear both these
witnesses at the same time.
All right. Do you and each of you solemnly swear that the testimony you are about to give to this subcommittee of the Senate
Judiciary Committee will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing
but the truth, so help you God?
Mr. HANSSEN. I do.
Lt. GANNAWAY. I do.
TESTIMONY OF CARL F. HANSSEN, CHIEF OF POLICE, DALLAS,
TEX.
Senator DANIEL. You may be seated, Chief Hanssen.
Chief, it is a pleasure to be back working with you. When I was
attorney general of Texas, we worked together on several crime
conferences and investigations. We are happy to have you before us
today. You, of course, know the purpose of this investigation.
For the record, will you give your name in full?
Mr. HANSSEN. Carl F. Hanssen, chief of police, Dallas, Tex.
Senator DANIEL. How long have you been chief of police here in
Dallas?
Mr. HANSSEN. About 10% years, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Chief, do you consider the narcotics problem here
in Dallas of serious nature?
Mr. HANSSEN. Yes, sir, I do.
Senator DANIEL. Would you like to just tell the committee exactly
why you say that?
Mr. HANSSEN. Because of the amount of crime that we can attribute directly to the users of narcotics; thefts, burglaries, and I remember a few years ago one particular instance of homicide that is outstanding in that connection.
Senator DANIEL. Well, have you ever tried to estimate about how
much of the total crime in Dallas could be attributed to narcotic addiction and traffic?
Mr. HANSSEN. It is impossible to get an absolutely accurate figure,
I1I II1
2969
HANSSEN.
every metropolitan city. Either the police are not informed, or the
doctors who advance the suggestion that addicts be given free drugs
have not been fully informed.
Senator DANIEL. Now, do you have a narcotics bureau?
Mr. HANSSEN. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. And who is the head of that bureau?
Mr. HANSSEN. Lieutenant Gannaway.
Senator DANIEL. I believe that he is here and will go into detail
on these various cases; is that correct?
Mr. HANSSEN. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Now, chief, do you have any suggestions, any
other information to give the committee, so that we might have a
I I IIIII
2970
smuggler of narcotics?
Mr. HANSSEN. The death penalty, you mean?
Senator EASTLAND. Yes, sir.
Mr. HANSSEN. No, sir, I don't believe that would stop it, either.
Senator EASTLAND. Well, I certainly disagree with you.
Mr. HANSSEN. Well, sir, that's a matter of opinion.
Senator
DANIEL.
Now, some of us firmly believe that those who are smugglers and those
who sell to juveniles are committing murder on the installment plan.
I would rather someone would shoot my child with a gun than shoot
him with a needle of heroin; wouldn't you?
HANSSEN. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Because
Mr.
2971
2972
we find in our State courts. And this is no criticism of Mr. Wade and
our local courts, either, because of the tremendous load they have to
carry.
Senator
DANIEL. Well,
increase in Dallas?
Mr. HANSSEN. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. In the last 3 years?
Mr. HANSSEN. Of course, Dallas is a larger city, it is growing all
the time. But we have just about doubled the number of cases filed
the first 9 months of this year, as compared to the first 9 months of
last year.
Senator DANIEL. Well, would that indicate to you that there has
been that much of an increase in the traffic?
Mr. HANSSEN. Yes, sir; we have found an increase in the amount
of traffic in heroin and morphine, amongst the Negroes particularly.
The ones who used marihuana to a large extent a few years ago today
are using heroin, morphine, and cocaine- and that may be due partly
to the better economic position of the Negro.
Senator DANIEL. Well, of course, we found one Negro in New York
who had used it a good while ago here in Dallas. At the age of 10,
George Hall-you have heard of him-began using marihuana in
Dallas, and be became the biggest marihuana wholesaler in New York
City. We had his evidence in New York, and he now has turned over
all of his information to this committee. We began right here in
Dallas.
Mr. HANSSEN. Well, many of our marihuana smokers have graduated into the heroin and morphine category now.
Senator DANIEL. In addition to marihuana being a very dangerous
drug itself, it does cause them, then, to go into heroin?
Mr. HANSSEN. That's right.
Senator DANIEL. Eventually, in many cases, doesn't it?
Mr. HANSSEN. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Now, would you say that this increase in the
drug traffic in Dallas is about double over last year?
Mr. HANSSEN. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Well, Chief, I am surprised at that estimate,
and regret it, but I guess we ought to know about it, because this is
only the fourth city we have found in the country in which there
has been an increase in the drug traffic in the last few years. In most
places there was a decrease, I am glad to say. Only New York City,
os Angeles, Washington, D. C., and now Dallas have we heard that
there is an increase in the traffic this year over recent years.
Senator Eastland, do you have any further questions?
Senator EASTLAND. Chief, what is the average sentence in your
State courts here for peddling?
Mr. HANSSEN. Well, recently there were several sentences of 10
years for peddling.
Senator EASTLAND. Is that an average?
Mr. HANSSEN. I would say 5 years was an average.
Senator EASTLAND. Five years?
Mr. HANSSEN. Yes, sir.
IIIIIIIIIIII
2973
Senator EASTLAND. Yes, sir. Now, about what was the average
Federal sentence?
Mr. HANSSEN. This is purely a guess, Senator.
Senator
EASTLAND.
Yes, sir.
Mr. HANSSEN. First violation, probably 18 months, 2 years. Subsequent violations, 5 years. And I think a few years ago there was
1 sentence of 50 years here in Dallas County.
Senator EASTLAND. Now, what would you think about giving the
Federal agents, and also you, the right to wire tap?
Mr. HANSSEN. I would be highly in favor of it, sir. You are
referring to wire tapping of narcotics cases?
Senator EASTLAND. Certainly.
Mr. HANSSEN. Yes, sir.
Senator EASTLAND. That's all.
Senator DANIEL. Mr. Counsel, do you have any questions?
Mr. GASQUE. Chief, do you feel that bonds are set high enough in
narcotics cases, both in Federal courts and in State courts?
Mr. HANSSEN. No, sir.
Mr. GASQUE. I wonder if you would tell us something about that.
Mr. HANSSEN. The theory in Texas is that no bond should be set
that the person charged can't make. Consequently, bonds are rather
low in our State courts. In Federal court, the bonds in some instances,
too-and this is purely an opinion-are rather too low for the violation charged.
Mr. GASQUE. Have you had cases where people made bonds, then
went out on the street and peddled narcotics again?
Mr. HANSSEN. Yes, sir; that is standard operating procedure.
Mr. GASQUE. Why do they do it?
Mr. HANSSEN. Who? Set the bonds and let them go out on the
street, or why do they go out and peddle again? Peddling is the
business of the person we have charged with the violation. That is
his principal source of income.
Mr. GASQUE. The reason I asked that, in some instances we have
had evidence that they did it in order to raise their attorney's fees to
defend them for the first narcotic case.
Mr. HANSSEN. Well, yes. As I say, that is their principal source
of income, and that is how they make their money to pay the bondsman fee and the attorney's fee. And then too, usually subsequent
charges, they will plead guilty to subsequent charges if they are caught
again, and the second penalty will be allowed to run concurrently with
the first one. So he has nothing to lose; he feels that he will not get
any more time for five charges filed against him than just one charge.
Mr. GASQUE. Now, in order to properly understand the responsibilities between the State and the Federal officers, which cases do you
feel should go to the State court and which cases do you feel should go
to the Federal court?
Mr. HANSSEN. Well, there is one type of case that should go nowhere
except the Federal court, and that is the use of heroin, because heroin
cannot be legally manufactured in the United States or be legally
introduced into the United States. Therefore any heroin here is
naturally contraband, and should be heard in a Federal court.
Mr. GASQUE. We have had evidence that perhaps the local and
State officers should handle the peddling on the streets, and the addiction problem, and that the Federal officers should restrict their activities to the movement in interstate traffic and smuggling of narcotics.
2974
Mr. HANSSEN. Well, very often the man who is peddling on the
street, as you are referring to it, is also engaged in smuggling of narcotics. The man who will peddle narcotics here to the user will also
go across the border in Mexico and bring it up here. Now, of course
he may bring with him only a few capsules or a few sticks, as they
refer to it, a few sticks of marihuana. The peddler doesn't carry his
whole source with him; he will have it hidden somewhere else, and carry
with him only what he will use for immediate sale.
Mr.
GASQUE.
2975
recently, and I think the killing can be traced directly to the narcotic
traffic. Olin Alvey, Mack Barnes, and I think Mr. Decker has one
man down there as a guest, Massengill, a few years ago journeyed up
here to Madison, Wis., hijacked a druggist, tied him up, and I think
Lt. Gannaway can tell you more about that; he worked on the case
himself.
But then we have had Clyde James and others going to Florida and
elsewhere, committing burglaries and bringing the narcotics back here
to Dallas. We know that to be true, because we have apprehended
them in possession of narcotics.
Senator DANIEL. Senator Eastland, do you have any further questions?
Senator EASTLA ND. No questions.
Senator DANIEL. Thank you, Chief. I understand you will be
with us in case we need to call you back later in the day?
Mr.
HANSSEN.
Senator
Yes, sir.
DANIEL.
Thank you.
Lt. Gannaway.
GANNAWAY.
Yes, sir.
2976
GANNAWAY.
Yes, sir.
2977
Senator
2978
Dallas area a number of people that have gone down into Mexico and
bought heroin and brought it back into the United States. I know
that here a few weeks ago, we had a man here out of Dallas named
William Gus Noble, and Fred Piper and Charlotte Harris, that were
caught down at Laredo bringing heroin back into the United States,
and I understand they are under charge there now. Those people
came from Dallas; they left Dallas and went down there after heroin,
and were caught bringing it back. Howard Perkins, Herbert Perkins,
another well-known Dallas narcotic handler, was caught down in
Austin recently in possession of some heroin.
Senator DANIEL. Was he on his way back from Mexico, or from
San Antonio?
Lieutenant GANNAWAY. That I don't know, sir. Now, we have
other people that have gone down there from time to time. For
instance, we have another man that is under charge now, Thomas
Odell Hicks, that was supposed to have gone down in the southern part
of the State, obtained heroin, and brought it back here to Dallas, and
he in turn would wholesale it to another character here we know as
Luke Murray Wallace, alias Bouchie; and Bouchie in turn would
peddle it out to various people, including the colored people, and the
colored people includes Blackshear and Tommie Jean Dawson and
Walter B. Taylor, and others among the colored people.
Senator DANIEL. Are those the parties that are in the ring of heroin
users that you think might illustrate exactly how the traffic operates
here?
Lieutenant GANNAWAY. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Let me see how many of these people are in the
courtroom. Is Tommy Hicks in the courtroom? Stand up if I call
your name.
(Thomas Odell Hicks stood up.)
Senator DANIEL. All right. Luke Wallace. 0. B. Blackshear.
A voice. He is back there.
Senator DANIEL. 0. B. Blackshear. Walter B. Taylor. He is out
here in the hall. Tommie Jean Dawson.
The MARSHALL. She is right back there.
Senator DANIEL. All right. Well, I see that these witnesses are
here. We will get to them.
Do you wish to tell us anything more about that operation, before
these witnesses come on, or shall we hear from them first?
Lieutenant GANNAWAY. Well
Senator DANIEL. Is Tommie Jean Dawson a girl?
Lieutenant GANNAWAY. Yes, sir, Tommie Jean Dawson is a girl.
She is under a probated sentence now in State court, for violation of
the State narcotic law, and she is also under charge now for illegal
possession of heroin. She was
Senator DANIEL. Well, suppose we hear these witnesses that have
been subpenaed on the case that you say is an example of how the
traffic operates here, and get their story, and then we will come back
to you.
Lieutenant GANNAWAY. All right, sir.
Senator DANIEL. If you will, just stand aside or come up here and
2979
Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you are about to give to
,this subcommittee of the Senate Judiciary Committee will be the
truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?
Miss DAWSON. I do.
TESTIMONY OF TOMMIE JEAN DAWSON
Senator DANIEL. You may be seated. State your full name.
Miss DAWSON. Tommie Jean Dawson.
Senator DANIEL. Where do you live?
Miss DAWSON. 2516 Pine.
Senator DANIEL. Here in Dallas?
Miss DAWSON. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. How old are you?
Miss DAWSON. Twenty-one.
Senator DANIEL. When did you first start using heroin?
Miss DAWSON. Last year.
Senator
DANIEL.
Where?
Miss
time?
Miss DAWSON. Well, they said it would make me feel good, and
I just wanted to try it and see how it would make me feel.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
or how?
Miss DAWSON. Yes, sir.
Senator
DANIEL.
Miss
DANIEL.
DAWSON.
Yes, sir.
2980
Senator DANIEL. Then did you finally have to start buying the
heroin for yourself?
Miss DAWSON. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. How much did it get to where your habit was
costing you a day?
Miss D AWSON. Oh, I have spent about $14 a day.
Senator DANIEL. Yes; did you have a job?
Miss DAWSON. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. What kind of work?
Miss
DAWSON.
Senator DANIEL. Were you able to hold that job after you got to
using this heroin?
Miss
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator DANIEL. And it took about two capsules a day for you?
Miss DAWSON. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. NOW, how many people do you know using heroin
in your neighborhood?
Miss DAWSON. Oh, lots of them.
Senator
DANIEL.
What?
Miss
I am not asking you for thatMiss DAWSON. Just about the amount?
111111
2981
Senator DANIEL. Yes, just about how many people do you know
where you live, do you have a lot of those people, or are they scattered over North Dallas, or where are they?
Miss DAWSON. Most of them is in North Dallas.
Senator DANIEL. And you would say you know at least 50 of them
personally?
Miss DAWSON. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Do you know where Cecil got his heroin?
Miss DAWSON. No, sir.
Senator
Miss
DANIEL.
DAWSON.
No, sir.
Miss
Senator
DANIEL.
2982
ILIT
NARCOTICS TRAYFFC
Miss
DAWSON.
No, sir.
Miss
DANIEL.
DAWSON.
No, sir.
to use the heroin after your friends taught you how to use it?
Miss
DAWSON.
Senator
Senator
Yes, sir.
Miss
DAWSON.
Yes, sir.
Mr. GASQUE. I see. Now, you say that you have quit; did you
quit after you went to jail?
Mr.
GASQUE.
Miss
Mr.
DAWSON.
GASQUE.
No, sir.
I know two.
Two?
Mr.
GASQUE.
2983
Mr.
GASQUE.
Mr. GASQUE. You said you knew 50 at the present time; how
many have you known over the period since you have been on drugs?
Miss DAWSON. How many have I known to shoot? Fifty.
Mr. GASQUE. Yes?
Miss DAWSON. Yes, sir.
Mr. GASQUE. That's all.
Mr. SPEER. Now, you say you know one peddler?
Miss DAWSON. Yes, sir.
Mr.
SPEER.
DANIEL.
2984
Senator
heroin?
Senator DANIEL. Did you see other people coming and going there,
buying heroin?
Miss DAWSON. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. You just went there by yourself, when you bought
yours?
Miss DAWSON. Yes, sir.
I live there.
DANIEL.
Senator DANIEL. And did both of you buy from Freddie Hall?
Miss DAWSON. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Did 0. B. also sell some heroin for Freddie Hall?
Miss
drive-in?
Miss DAWSON. No, sir.
Miss
DAWSON. I
Senator DANIEL.
don't know.
Didn't Freddie Hall ever tell you where he was
Senator DANIEL. Now, where did Freddie Hall cap up his heroin?
Miss DAWSON. At home.
Senator DANIEL. He would buy it in bulk, wouldn't he?
Miss DAWSON. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. And he would put it in capsules where?
Miss DAWSON. At home.
Senator DANIEL. At home; you mean this apartment where you
lived with him?
'''IIIIIII
2985
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
heroin?
DANIEL.
Senator DANIEL. But you do know how much he was selling it for,
don't you?
Miss DAWSON. To us; to me.
Senator DANIEL. Yes. How much?
people for?
Miss DAWSON. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Now, who was living with Freddie Lee Hall during
this time?
Miss DAWSON. Jessie Louise Clifton.
Senator DANIEL. Jessie Louise Clifton; is she your sister?
Miss DAWSON. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Are they living together there?
Miss DAWSON. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Does your sister use heroin, too?
Miss DAWSON. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Does Freddie Lee Hall use it?
Miss DAWSON. Not as I know about.
Senator DANIEL. And you are pretty sure Freddie Lee Hall never
from whom you ever bought narcotics; did I understand you correctly?
Miss DAWSON. No, sir. Cecil Cotton.
Senator EASTLAND. What?
Miss DAWSON. I got it from Cecil Cotton, too.
Senator
EASTLAND.
-'--
--
.c,,~..
2986
--
Miss
DANIEL.
DAWSON.
Senator
Miss
Senator
Yes, sir.
DANIEL.
DAWSON.
Yes, sir.
DANIEL.
Freddie Hall?
Miss DAWSON. Well, I would get the money from 0. B., and he
would give it-and give it to Freddie.
Senator
DANIEL.
and then how much of the money did you give to Freddie Hall?
MIiss DAWSON. Twenty-0. B. would give him $20.
Senator
DANIEL.
DA\NIEL.
Seven capsules?
Senator
DANIEL.
when you got, it from Freddie Hall, or would he pay for it a little bit'
later, after you sold it?
DANIEL.
All right.
0. B. Black-
shear.
Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you are about to give
to this subcommittee of the Senate Judiciary Committee will be the
truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?
0. B.
BLACKSHEAR.
I do.
TESTIMONY OF 0. B. BLACKSHEAR
Senator
DANIEL.
BLACKSHEAR.
Senator
DANIEL.
Yes, sir.
Dawson?
Mr. BLACKSHEAR. Yes, sir.
2987
Senator DANIEL. Was it true and correct, as far as any part relating
to you was concerned?
Mr. BLACKSHEAR. Some parts was true, and some parts were false.
Senator DANIEL. Do you use heroin yourself?
Mr. BLACKSHEAR. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. How long have you used heroin?
Mr. BLACKSHEAR. Well, for the last-I mean just about-about a
month, since I have been back in Dallas.
Senator DANIEL. Well, you mean it's a been a month since you
used it?
Mr. BLACKSHEAR. Since I started reusing it again.
Senator DANIEL. All right. When did you first start using it, I
mean?
Mr. BLACKSHEAR. I started using heroin in Houston, in aboutabout 1953.
Senator DANIEL. And what age were you?
Mr. BLACKSHEAR. I was about-about 24 or 25.
Senator DANIEL. And then did you break the habit?
Mr. BLACKSHEAR. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. How did you do that?
.Mr. BLACKSHEAR. Well, I went to an institution and broke it.
Senator DANIEL. What institution?
Mr.
BLACKSHEAR.
Seagoville.
BLACKSHEAR.
We would split, me
and
Tommie Jean would fix one and split it together. We would fix it
together.
Senator DANIEL. You would use two capsules between you a day?
Mr. BLACKSHEAR. Yes, sir. That would be about one apiece.
71515-56-pt. 7-1
2988
Senator DANIEL. All right. When did you start selling heroin?
Mr. BLACKSHEAR. Well, I didn't actually make-make no sale of
heroin, but I had-I owed Freddie some money, where I was getting
it on credit.
Senator DANIEL. Is that Freddie Hall?
Mr. BLACKSHEAR. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. You were getting heroin from him on credit?
Mr. BLACKSHEAR. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. All right; go on and tell us all about it, how you
started to sell it.
Mr. BLACKSHEAR. And I was working, and I couldn't-I could
pay him, but I couldn't pay and keep buying at the same time. So he
made a little proposition that I could buy 7 for $20. So I bought 7
for $20 but I didn't have time to sell it, because I was working.
So Tommie Jean would have it in the daytime, I would give it to
her in the daytime, and then she would sell it in the daytime, and
that's how she got the money, but the money was mine and hers, and
I took the money and I worked in order to pay Freddie.
Senator DANIEL. In other words, you say you and Tommie Jean
would get the heroin from Freddie?
Mr. BLACKSHEAR. I would get it from him.
Senator
DANIEL.
BLACKSHEAR.
BLACKSHEAR.
Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. And then did you and Tommie Jean split the
profit off of the sales?
Mr.
BLACKSHEAR.
BLACKSHEAR.
getting from him was for me and her, so-of course, she was entitled
to it.
Senator DANIEL. About how much heroin were you and Tommie
Jean Dawson selling per day?
Mr. BLACKSHEAR. Per day?
2989
going with Tommie Jean-I knew him in Dallas before, but I didn't
know he was connected with the narcotics. I knew he drove a taxi,
but I didn't know he was connected with the narcotics until I started
staying with Tommie Jean. This I got from him, I didn't see him
cap it up or nothing; he wouldn't let me in on his business.
Senator DANIEL. You didn't see him cap it up?
Mr. BLACKSHEAR. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. What did you see him do?
Mr. BLACKSHEAR. Nothing.
Senator DANIEL. Well, you saw him give you the heroin, didn't you?
Mr. BLACKSHEAR. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. That you would get from him every day?
Mr. BLACKSHEAR. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. And you would pay him the money?
Mr. BLACKSHEAR. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Do you know where he is now?
Mr. BLACKSHEAR. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Do you kiow whether he has been arrested?
Mr. BLACKSHEAR. No, sir; I don't.
Senator DANIEL. Any questions, Senator Eastland?
Senator EASTLAND. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Mr. Counsel?
Mr. GASQUE. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Mr. Speer?
Mr. SPEER. Do you know Luke Wallace?
Mr. BLACKSHEAR. No, sir.
Mr. SPEER. Do you know Bouchie?
Mr.
of Bouchie?
Mr.
Mr.
Dallas.
Mr.
SPEER.
him?
Mr.
BLACKSHEAR.
2990
Mr. SPEER.
Mr.
BLACKSHEAR.
stayed
in Dallas-this is my home.
I left
BLACKSHEAR.
Yes, sir.
All right.
narcotics in Dallas?
Mr. BLACKSHEAR. I have taken narcotics in Dallas about a month.
Senator
About a month?
Mr.
EASTLAND.
BLACKSHEAR.
Mr.
BLACKSHEAR. Oh,
Yes, sir.
Senator EASTLAND. Now, you just got that from one source?
Mr. BLACKSHEAR. Yes, sir.
Senator EASTLAND. How many peddlers did you purchase narcotics
from in Houston?
about-about 2 or 3.
You know
EASTLAND.
Mr.
EASTLAND.
BLACKSHEAR.
Bertha who?
Mr.
EASTLAND.
BLACKSHEAR.
Richard Shaw?
Yes, sir.
Senator
one?
if you purchased it from
2991
Mr. BLACKSHEAR.
Two or three.
Senator EASTLAND.
Mr. BLACKSHEAR.
Senator EASTLAND.
Mr.
BLACKSHEAR.
Senator EASTLAND.
How many?
Now
2992
Senator DANIEL. You didn't stop after the first 1 or 2, did you?
Mr. BLACKSHEAR. Yes, sir; I didn't get the habit right then.
Senator DANIEL. You finally were hooked, though; weren't you?
BLACKSHEAR. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Till where
Mr.
BLACKSHEAR.
Yes, sir.
Senator
Senator
Mr.
EASTLAND.
BLACKSHEAR.
Yes?
Mr. SPEER.
Mr. BLACKSHEAR. No, sir.
Mr. SPEER. Do you know Si
Brooks?
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
No, sir.
about Little Charley?
No, sir.
Randy?
BLACKSHEAR.
SPEER. How
BLACKSHEAR.
Mr. SPEER.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
sure of his last name. He was with Randy all the time.
Mr. SPEER. That's all.
Senator DANIEL. Do you mean to tell this committee you didn't
have but two customers buying heroin from you personally?
Mr. BLACKSHEAR. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. And you say Tommie Jean had the other customers?
Mr. BLACKSHEAR. She would sell most of the stuff while I would be
working in the daytime.
Senator DANIEL. Well, how many customers did she have?
Mr. BLACKSHEAR. I don't know, sir. She would go out by herself
and do that.
Senator DANIEL. Well, wouldn't she bring the money back to you,
and you look it over?
Mr. BLACKSLEAR. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. You were partners, weren't you?
111111111111
2993
EASTLAND.
EASTLAND.
Senator
DANIEL.
No, sir.
All right.
witness 0. B. Blackshear?
Miss DAWSON. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Talking about you having sold heroin during that
time and the both of you being partners.
Now, the committee wants to know if you would correct your
testimony on that point, and tell us the information about your sales
of heroin.
Miss DAWSON. Well, my-he was lying.
Senator DANIEL. Speak loud.
Miss DAWSON. He is lying.
Senator DANIEL. What?
Miss DAWSON. He was lying.
Senator DANIEL. He was lying?
Miss DAWSON. Yes, sir.
2994
Senator DANIEL. Well, who was doing the selling of this heroin?
Miss DAWSON. He was.
Senator DANIEL. You were dividing the profits?
Miss DAWSON. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. And you kept the books, or kept the money, did
you?
Miss DAWSON. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. And what else did you do for half of the money,
anything?
Miss DAWSON. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Nothing else. Senator Eastland?
Senator EASTLAND. Do you know who his customers were?
IIIIIIIIIIII
2995
2996
Miss
DAWSON.
Mr. SPEER.
I guess so.
Miss
DAWSON. Yes,
Mr. SPEER. And he
Miss DAwsoN. Yes,
sir.
was getting $7 a capsule?
sir.
Mr. SPEER.
Miss
Not in a week.
What was the largest amount you recall he sold in
DAWSON.
Mr. SPEER.
one week?
Miss DAwsoN. I really don't know. You will have to-Mr. SPEER. Maybe $500?
Miss DAWSON. No, sir; not that much.
Mr. SPEER. Of course, he had to buy his heroin and then sell it,
and you used it and he used it, and what was left over he sold?
Miss
DAWSON.
Yes, sir.
Miss
DAWSON.
Mr. SPEER.
No, sir.
Who were you living with when you first started using
it?
Miss
Mr.
Miss DAwsoN. Yes, sir.
Mr. Speer. And how much older was he than you are?
Miss DAWSON. I think he is 27, I am not sure.
Mr. SPEER. Twenty-seven?
Miss
DAWSON.
Mr. SPEER.
Yes, sir.
Miss
Mr.
around Thomas and Hall?
Miss
DAWSON. Yes,
SPEER. Most of
Mr.
Miss DAWSON. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. You mean the part of North Dallas you are talking
about; right?
Miss DAWSON. Yes, sir.
Mr. SPEER. Did you ever use heroin with Walter B. Taylor?
Miss DAWSON. No, sir.
111111
2997
Mr.
Senator
DANIEL.
Mr. TAYLOR. Well, I would'just say off and on, not just say I am
a user or an addict.
Senator
DANIEL.
Mr.
TAYLOR.
2998
Senator DANIEL. Well, did you buy your heroin here in Dallas?
Mr. TAYLOR. Yes, sir; I have bought heroin here.
Senator DANIEL. From more than one person?
Mr. TAYLOR. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Well, from how many persons?
Mr. TAYLOR. Well, oh, 5 or 6 persons.
Senator DANIEL. Well, since a year ago when you started using it,
have you bought here in Dallas from 5 or 6 persons?
Mr.
TAYLOR.
Mr.
TAYLOR.
No, sir.
stayed there about a week, and I got tangled up with some fellows
that I was shooting what you call coke there.
Senator DANIEL. Shooting cocaine?
Mr. TAYLOR. Yes, sir.
Mr.
TAYLOR.
One name
is Roland Edwards.
Mr.
TAYLOR.
Yes, sir.
Mr.
TAYLOR.
Mr.
TAYLOR.
No, sir.
Did you
2999
TAYLOR.
Senator
made?
Senator DANIEL. how much did you say she paid him for them?
Mr. TAYLOR. Seven dollars.
Senator DANIEL. Is he still out on the street?
Mr. TAYLOR. I imagine he is yet. I don't think he is arrested.
Senator DANIEL. All right. How long have you known of him
being in the heroin racket?
3600
Mr. TAYLOR. Not long. I don't think he has been there over,
probably, maybe 6 months or a year or so.
Senator DANIEL. All right. N ow, name us some more of these
people, nicknames or whatever you can think of, of these people you
bought from here in Dallas. We want to see if there are any more
of them that are out on the street.
Mr. TAYLOR. That is on the street?
Senator DANIEL. That's right.
Mr. TAYLOR. I don't think so.
Senator DANIEL. What?
Mr. TAYLOR. Seems like all of them in jail, all the guys that were
selling is in jail.
Senator DANIEL. All of them except Freddie Lee Hall?
Mr.
TAYLOR.
Yes, sir.
I1III1
3001
Senator
DANIEL.
TAYLOR. On
Senator DANIEL.
Mr. TAYLOR. On
Allen.
What?
Mr.
TAYLOR.
No, sir.
TAYLOR.
Senator
DANIEL.
Where?
Mr. TAYLOR. The last time I seen her was yesterday, yesterday
evening.
Senator DANIEL. Well, did you spend the night there last night?
Mr. TAYLOR. Yes, sir-I haven't seen her since yesterday evening.
Senator DANIEL. Well, you all spent the night together last night?
Mr. TAYLOR. No, sir.
Senator
Mr.
DANIEL.
TAYLOR.
Senator
she?
Mr.
She uses mostly
about once, maybe twice a week. But mostly she does it, she slips
off from me, you know, and use it.
3002
Senator DANIEL. Well, she has used it once or twice, maybe tilreo
times a week clear on up, or hasn't she?
Mr. TAYLOR. Yes, sir, about once a week, to my knowing. Onoe
in a while, you know, she feels bad, and wants to go and have a taste.
I tell her to go ahead.
Senator DANIEL. Does she have any trouble buying it over there
in North Dallas?
Mr. TAYLOR. I don't think she do, because most of the time she
goes and comes right back.
Mr. SPEER. Have you ever talked to Bouchie about buying heroin?
Mr. TAYLOR. Have I ever talked to Bouchie about buying heroin?
Mr. SPEER. Yes.
Mr. TAYLOR. If it is in order, I would like to submit that question
on the grounds that it might incriminate me.
Senator DANIEL. All right; you have a right to claim the fifth
amendment on any question you think might tend to incriminate
you. And the question, as I understand, was if you had ever talked
to Bouchie, that is, Luke Wallace, about buying heroin; is that right?
Mr. TAYLOR. No, sir-yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. All right. Now, do you want to answer the
question, or do you want to claim the fifth amendment?
Mr. TAYLOR. I would like to claim the fifth amendment, please,
sir.
Senator DANIEL. Well, you can claim it whenever you honestly
think it would tend to incriminate you.
Mr. TAYLOR. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. But from all the answers you have given this
committee today, you have shown that you never sold heroin.
Mr. TAYLOR. No, sir, I never sold heroin, no, sir.
Senator DANIEL. In other words, you must feel in your mind that
a truthful answer might tend to incriminate you before you claim the
fifth amendment. Now, are you going to do that?
Mr. TAYLOR. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Because this committee is not going to allow you
to claim the fifth amendment just to avoid answering an embarrassing
question.
Mr. TAYLOR. Yes, sir, I understand, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Do you still want to claim the fifth amendment
to that question about whether you talked to Luke Wallace about
buying heroin?
Mr. TAYLOR. Well, yes, sir, your honor, it might incriminate me
later on, you know; something might happen.
Senator DANIEL. All right. You have got the same right to claim
the fifth amendment as a man sitting there with a good lawyer. The
committee is going to respect your right to do it, as long as it feels
like you haven't waived the right, or as long as it feels like that you
truthfully believe it might incriminate you.
All right. Anything else, Mr. Speer?
Mr. SPEER. Were you afraid to use this heroin that Helen bought
from Freddie Hall?
Mr. TAYLOR. Was I afraid?
Mr. SPEER. Afraid to use it.
Mr. TAYLOR. Well, I guess I shouldn't do it, but she would buy a
cap of stuff, you, know, and she would, you know, shoot herself, and
3003
if I wanted some, you know, she would save me what you call a
couple of drops, you know.
Mr. SPEER. So you did shoot some from Freddie Hall?
Mr. TAYLOR. Sir?
Mr. SPEER. So you did shoot some heroin she got from Freddie
Hall?
Mr. TAYLOR. I did shoot some?
Mr. SPEER. Yes.
when she would buy some and cook it up, you know, put it in a
spoon, you know, I might tell her to save me a taste. But that's the
only way I would shoot some. But just going out and buying it, I
didn't like to spend my money like that.
Mr. SPEER. But you did use some of Freddie Lee Hall's?
Mr. TAYLOR. I believe so; yes, sir.
Mr. SPEER. Now, in Chicago, when you were using this cocaine,
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
3004
not.
I don't--
M1r.
SPEER.
Mr.
TAYLOR.
I was in Chicago.
Senator EASTLAND. Now, you know the address; where was that
house?
Mr.
TAYLOR.
Mr.
EASTLAND.
TAYLOR.
Who else?
She was staying in a hotel at that time, she was staying at the Ritz
Hotel when I got there.
Mr. SPEER. Would you say cocaine is more plentiful in Chicago
than it is in Dallas?
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
TRAFFIC
3005
Mr. TAYLOR. No, they just had it in a bowl, you know, poured it
out in a bowl, and you just help yourself.
Mr. SPEER. Just use what you wanted?
Mr. TAYLOR. Yes, sir.
Mr. SPEER. They had a plentiful supply,
then?
into Mexico?
Mr. TAYLOR. I was in the Army in '43, when I crossed the border
in Mexico.
Senator DANIEL. I asked you a minute ago, didn't I, if you had
ever crossed the border into Mexico? Remember that?
Mr. TAYLOR. Well, I probably didn't understand you. You
asked me had I crossed it?
Senator DANIEL. I asked you had you ever crossed the border into
Mexico.
Mr. TAYLOR. Oh, yes, sir. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. About how many times?
3006
you know, have a little fun, that's what we went over there for.
Senator DANIEL. And none of the 3 of you used marihuana?
Mr. TAYLOR. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Or herion?
Mr. TAYLOR. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Well, I asked you about both of them. Now, I
am going back to marihuana.
Mr. TAYLOR. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Did you ever smoke a marihuana cigarette?
Mr. TAYLOR. No, sir, I never have smoked a marihuana cigarette.
Senator DANIEL. And none of the 3 of you all used marihuana or
heroin when you went across the border into Juarez?
Mr. TAYLOR. Not that I know of. Not that I know of; the other
guys, now, there was about 4 of us.
Senator DANIEL. What did the Customs Service pick you up for:
Mr. TAYLOR. They picked us up for marihuana.
Senator DANIEL. That was when you were coming back across the
bridge?
Mr. TAYLOR. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. It is pretty easy for servicemen to cross that
Mr. TAYLOR. No, I didn't hear anything about that. I never heard
anything about that. But I mean, just to my imagination, you know.
I imagine that is happening over there to soldiers, you know.
Senator DANIEL. You found out when you were over there it wa
plentiful, didn't you?
Senator DANIEL. I am not saying you used it, but, it was plentiful
3007
Senator DANIEL. All right. You can stand aside. Luke Wallace
Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you are about to give
before this subcommittee of the Senate Judiciary Committee will be
the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but, the truth, so help you God?
Mr. WALLACE. Yes, sir.
DANIEL.
Senator DANIEL. Where did you stick the needle in, the times that
you used heroin, in your vein orMr. WALLACE. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. You know what they call a mainliner?
Senator
DANIEL.
3008
cluding marihuana?
Mr.
WALLACE.
No, sir.
3009
DANIEL. You have done nothing but buy it, is that right?
WALLACE. Well, no, sir; I haven't-I haven't had any con-
Senator
Mr.
s010
Sit down.
Do you know
Mr. WALLACE. I don't-I don't know how they did spell it.
Senator DANIEL. Well, you pronounce it Bouchie, is that right?
Mr. WALLACE.
Senator
II I I I .
3011
Senator
Mr.
DANIEL.
DECKER.
Senator
DANIEL.
this investigation?
3012
Mr.
DECKER. That. is
Senator DANIEL. You
DECKER.
Yes, sir.
DECKER.
heroin. They will even go for heroin rather than drugstore narcotics.
Our drugstore burglaries, of course, are down in this local vicinity,
but out in other parts of the State and over in Louisiana and some
others, they have had enormous drugstore burglaries, where narcotics
and money both were taken at the same time. But we have been
very fortunate here, maybe due to the good enforcement work of
your agencies, or maybe we have just been lucky.
Senator DANIEL. What percentage of the overall crime would you
think might be attributed to narcotics here?
Mr. DECKER. I think between 60 and 70 percent.
Senator DANIEL. That is, within your county?
Mfr. DECKER. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Well, we have the same situation here in Dallas
County we found in Harris County, then, the other day. The sheriff,
in each instance; attributes the larger percentage of the crime to
narcotics than the police do within the cities.
I I I I 1L
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
TRAFFIC
3013
Senator DANIEL. About how many addicts would you estimate you
have in Dallas County?
Mr. DECKER. Between 150 and 170 are catalogued in our office.
Senator
DANIEL. That
DECKER. Yes, sir.
Mr.
Of course, we pick up some of the city as
we go along, and naturally don't pass up anybody that has been
handled by our department even though he was arrested by the police
department and transferred to our custody; we still carry him as a
narcotic addict in our records.
Senator DANIEL. Now, do you send in the record of your addicts
to the Bureau of Narcotics in Washington?
Mr. DECKER. I do; yes, sir.
3014
Mr.
DECKER.
Yes, sir.
Senator
DANIEL.
I1 Ik,
3015
Mr. DECKER. I have always felt that a narcotic addict would try
to have somebody go along with him, to help him carry the load,
yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Sort of like a contagious disease?
Mr. DECKER. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. So, as long as you have these 226 narcotic addicts
on the streets of Dallas and in Dallas County, there is a danger
that they are going to spread the addiction to other people who are
not now addicts?
Mr.
DECKER.
Senator
DANIEL.
Mr.
DECKER.
our major burglaries and some of our major homicides have led from
narcotics.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Mr. DECKER. Yes, sir. Yes, sir, three of them raped her.
Senator DANIEL. Three men?
Mr. DECKER. Yes, sir, over 21 years of age.
Senator DANIEL. And all over 21?
Mr. DECKER. Yes.
Senator DANIEL. And smoking marihuana?
Mr. DECKER. Yes, sir. Two of them raped her; the third one did
not. He just stood by.
That is a fair example of what it can lead to, sir.
Senator DANIEL. How about some of these robberies of drugstores?
Mr. DECKER. Well, robberies of drugstores, we have had one series
of robberies here where drgustores were preyed upon, a few years ago,
where it was all narcotics, and each man who was committing the
offense was a narcotic user. They have since been apprehended and
sent to the penitentiary, but they took only drugstores, both safe
burglaries and armed robberies.
It is true that the person who is the user of a drug will go to any
extreme to obtain possession of that drug; and I feel that no mainline
shooter can work and keep up a habit. He must steal. That is why
3016
drugs.
You see, a cap of morphine--a cap of heroin which has been cut
some 3 or 4 times with sugar costs 6 dollars, 7 dollars in our county,
and many of them will shoot 2 or 3 of them a day, and it takes-lie
has to work pretty hard to furnish the 21 dollars.
Senator DANIEL. If you had the free clinics, that would stop that
kind of crime, but it would not stop the rape cases and crimes of that
character which you have mentioned; is that true?
don't, either.
But I said, would it, stop that kind of crime, if an addict could go
to a clinic and get a shot; he wouldn't have to steal it to get it then,
he wouldn't have to rob a drugstore; would it tend to stop that kind
of crime?
Mr.
DECKER.
Senator
DANIEL.
Let me put out this suggestion: Isn't it possible that even if they
had a cheap supply or free supply, the clinics, that the addicts who
really wanted to get more, wanted to get high, would go out on the
black market or rob or steal to get the additional drug they want?
Mr. DECKER. He would.
Senator DANIEL. Would he ever be satisfied with what the doctors
would give him at a clinic?
Mr. DECKER. And number two, we have found instances here
where an addict is allowed a prescription to obtain drugs, because the
doctors felt that it was a necessity, and he would take the prescription
from one doctor and from the second doctor and obtain additional
drugs, because even though he was obtaining it on this prescription
at a very nominal cost, but he would obtain more than would be
allowable to him.
Senator DANIEL. I might say in that connection that Sheriff
Kilday in Bexar County told me yesterday he used to think well of
the clinic idea, but he changed his mind when he found one man, a
filling station operator, who was selling heroin and injected it into
40 or 50 young people in San An]tonio.
He said he figured anyone who wanted to peddle the drug wouldn't
work, if we had a clinic, wouldn't work, of course, may be on some of
these people who were getting it free, but would go out and make
new addicts; and now he is a strong opponent of clinics for that
reason.
Mr. DECKER. That's right; if it is easier to obtain, it would be
easier to pass on to somebody whom they were associating with.
Senator DANIEL. Senator Eastland, do you have any further
questions?
I I IIIII
3017
Mr. GASQUE. Sheriff, along the lines of the questions that the
Senator asked you about crime, do you feel that addiction leads to
crime, or do you feel that most addicts are criminals first and then
turn to the use of drugs?
In other words, which comes first, the addict or the criminal?
Mr. DECKER. Well, I am sure, being an operator of a penal institution, that some people start out as criminals that's not addicted.
Naturally, after they become criminals, their associates are of the
criminal world, and we have more addicts in the criminal world than
we do otherwise.
So naturally, they could start out as just a burglar, but by their
continual association with people in the same field-and after all,
if you are an insurance man, you go to an insurance man when you
want to talk business, and if you are a criminal, you go to a criminal
to discuss your business. Naturally, the criminal would have more
access and more encouragement to become an addict, and I think
probably he becomes an addict after his criminal operation.
Mr. GASQUE. Well, the evidence we have taken in other cities seems
I hope that some of you officers or the marshall or the sheriff will let.
us know if this witness, Tommy Hicks, comes in.
The MARSHALL. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Do you
IIIIIII
3018
Senator
DANIEL.
Now, this is another official that the chairman has had the pleasure
of working with in crime conferences in law enforcement throughout
the years, but for the record I will let you state your name.
Mr. WADE. Henry Wade.
Senator
3019
20-year penalty, and I followed, during the trial, much of the evidence,
and his statement was that he was using and the others were using
barbituates pretty heavily.
Senator DANIEL. All right, sir. What crime did he commit?
Mr. WADE. Murder.
year. Both of those cases were tried within the last month, or all
three of them were tried.
Senator DANIEL. Do you have any other examples of violent crimes
being committed by those under the influence of narcotics?
Mr. WADE. I know of a lot of others.
Mr. WADE. I am not too familiar with the Federal laws, but I know
the most you can give them is 5 years for a first. offense.
Senator DANIEL. And what is the maximum under our State law?
Mr. WADE. For a first offense it is 10 years, unless a juvenile is
involved; and where it is a sale to a juvenile, you can get life or 99
years; that's the maximum under the State law.
I think that the juries will give considerably more punishment than
has been the practice in the past; it is my experience, anyway.
Senator EASTLAND. Does the jury set the penalty in Texas?
71515-56--pt. 7-43
3020
Yes, sir; the jury passes on the findings of guilt oinnocence, and then sets the punishment. And in my experien(,e,
for instance, we tried a case last, week where it was a marihuana case,
Where the jury gave a man the maximum, 10 years, without nu,.li
considering it. And there wasn't a lot of marihuana involve(;
1 think it was tree cigarettes or something like that.
Senator DANIEL. Well, I will tell you what the evidence has heel)
before this committee, from experts in the field.
Mr. WADE.
They say that anywhere the courts will met(, out tough sentelice:y
better heeled thanl the ordinary criminal, and they get out quicker.
and
Senator E.\STLAND. Are the bonds fixed high enough?
Mr. WADI. It is fixed as high as the court allows it, I mean un(del
our laws.
Senator EASTLAND. What is your procedure?
Mi'. VADE. The procedure is that when a man is indicted, the
trial judge sets the bond, hut lie sets it, in line with decisions of the
higher court.
For instance, we lhave set higl bonds in some c(ases-I say "we";
the judges have and they lhave said that was a denial of their colstitutional right, the bond was too high.
So in that, they give a. little leeway, but I thinkl the bon(ls--l
doi't think thev stall(l.
are high enough.
But I am afraid they are a)o<ut
could
as
high
as
\ly t leory is tlat ill narcotic cases, of all cases, there should 1w)
some discretion ini tle trail (ourt in granting bail, not only because
tlev go out and commit. other offenses, but I think that a.time i
jail has a better effect on them, probably, than an ordinary criinimul,
as far as checking the liabit or doing some other things. And I t hik
tliat the bail bond statutes, I have always thought that they shoildl
be revised.
tI1
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
TRAFFIC
3021
I I II I
302 2
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
TRAFFIC
But these were tried before a jury, and they did range from 2 to 5
years, I believe I have that here somewhere. Two to five years;
two 5-year terms and three 2-year terms. There is an addition
made to that report.
Mr. GASQJE. Do you have some of your State Judges that are especially tough on narcotics cases, on the sentences handed down?
I think they are-they are tough enough on
Mr. WADE. Yes.
them.
Usually, though, there is a little, some type of general agreement
worked out as to what really will be recommended to them.
Senator DANIEL. Now, I notice you have had 58 convictions during
this year, during the first 9 months of this year, under the barbiturate
statute.
Mr, WADE. That is a. misdemeanor under our present law, the first
offense of possession of barbiturates is a misdemeanor under ou'
present law.
Senator DANIEL. These barbiturate drugs not only are bad in them.
selves when they are used wrongfully and without doctors' prescriptions, but they do lead into use of heroin later on, do they not?
Mr. WADE. I am not-that is my understanding, that they start
out with those and use marihuana, and go on into heroin, generally,
or in a lot of cases.
Now, I don't know a great deal about that.
Senator DANIEL. Now, Mr. Wade, all of your recommendations in
your entire statement, and the statistics, will be made a part of the
record.
Do you have any other recommendations that you want to call our
attention to orally at this time?
Mr. WADE. Well, I might mention one that has been hinted at.
There is always a problem, in law enforcement agencies, of having
enough money to pay for informers, and also to pay for purchases.
Now, that is both on the Federal level and the State level. It is a
necessary thing. The most important element there is the possession.
We have a terrible time; they will arrest five people in a car, and one
will have a pocketfull of marihuana or heroin, and then you get the
situation where one claims it all, and it is difficult to try the others,
under our State law. Now, I don't know what the Federal law is. I
think you ought to change that law.
Senator DANIEL. Senator Eastland, do you have any questions?
Senator EASTLAND. In what respect should it be changed?
Mr. WADE. I think it ought to make it a prima facie case, as far as
possession, if you are in a room where narcotics are found, if you are
in an automobile where narcotics are found, or if you are with someone that has narcotics in his pocket, I think it ought to be a rebuttable
presumption, because a fellow-of course, you could just be talking
to someone and know nothing about it, but that is not the case that
we are talking about.
Senator DANIEL. Anything further, Mr. Counsel?
Mr. GASQUE. No.
Mr. DANIEL. Senator Eastland?
Senator EASTLAND. No questions.
Senator DANIEL. Mr. Speer?
Mr. SPEER. No, sir.
Senator
DANIEL.
3023
COUNTY,
DALLAS
TEX.
Narcotic cases as such have been a problem to the Dallas County district attorney's office only since 1954. During the first 3 years of my tenure in office, from
January 1, 1951 until 1954, only 5 narcotic cases were handled by the State courts
in Dallas County, and those were cases where the complaint had been refused by
the United States attorney's office, or were cases incidental to other crimes. Prior
to 1954 narcotics cases as a matter of policy or agreement among law enforcement
agencies were filed in the Federal courts and handled as a Federal problem to the
exclusion of State courts.
Commencing with 1954 a change of policy in the Federal district attorney's
office prompted by some Federal court rulings was made regarding the accepting
of complaints filed by local law enforcement agencies, resulting in the filing of all
narcotics cases in the State courts to be prosecuted by my office. From 5 cases
handled in 3 years, the caseload jumped to 31 cases in 1954, to a record of 38 convictions during the first 9 months of 1955, 9 of which were jury trials. All of
the jury trials resulted in convictions, and the average punishment meted out by
juries was a little in excess of 5 years.
While percentagewise narcotics cases constitute a small part of our caseload
(54 narcotic indictments pending of approximately 3,500 indictments on file in
the 3 criminal district courts) the prosecution problem in these cases is out
of proportion to the number involved. Narcotics offenders must be given special
attention in order to get them out of circulation as quickly as possible. Our
experience has shown that narcotics offenders are almost without exception
involved in some other criminal activity in order to support the narcotic habit.
Conversely, most of our habitual theft offenders (safe burglars, hijackers, shoplifters, pickpockets), pimps and prostitutes are hooked with the narcotics habit.
You all know the sordid pattern too well for me to take up your time giving
examples of crimes committed under the influence of narcotics, or offenses committed to get money to support a narcotics habit. Our office has noted narcotics
involved in every type of crime from vagrancy to rape and murder. Only
last month we tried two horrible rape cases committed under most aggravating
circumstances by one Flaudell Fite and Timothy Pierce, Jr., in which the evidence
showed that they were under the influence of marihuana and beer at the time of
the commission of the crime.
Both of them received the death penalty by jury verdict.
I could name many other similar crimes, and I do know that in a very high
percentage of our ordinary criminal cases, particularly those of a horrible nature,
involve the use of narcotics or barbiturates.
While my office is not an investigating agency, we have observed a striking
parallel between certain types of cases. Most of our drug store burglaries are
for the sake of narcotics. Many of our robberies are for the purpose of obtaining
narcotics and many others are committed by persons under the influence of
narcotics. Most of the prostitutes are supporting their own habit as well as a
pimp who is also a thief and narcotic addict.
We like handling narcotics cases on the local level by State courts. By intensifying our drive against the prostitution racket in Dallas, we have been able to
make narcotics cases on prostitutes and pimps, and thus rid our metropolitan
area of addicts who participate in all types of crimes. It is a saying among our
law enforcement agencies, "Show me a prostitute and I will show you that she is
Supporting a habit, a pimp who is an addict and burglar, and a narcotic peddler
who lives off the corruption of the community."
The war by law enforcement agencies against sin and corruption from narcotics
is never ending, with no truces, and the pressure must be maintained. The
special servioe bureau of our Dallas Police Department is the front line of defense
against all types of crimes, because that squad of officers is our eyes and ears in
the underworld. At no time can they rest and look back at cases made and convictions obtained. The arrest and conviction in one case is merely the starting
point for another case to be made from leads obtained in the first. Often our
officers will obtain enough information in working one case to keep busy for months
3024
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
TRAFFIC
running down leads to other criminal activity. We might liken our criminals to
a can of worms. Where one starts and another ends in crime cannot be told
by looking in the top of the container.
Knowing that a particular person is engaged in narcotics traffic and being able
to prove it in court are two entirely different things, since all of our laws, for
better or for worse, are written to protect every safeguard and rights of the
accused. Narcotics dealers are like ships that pass in the night. Two criminals
meet in a public street for a brief moment. One hands the other a package. The
contact is made and broken in an instant. Unless our officers are at the right place
at the right time, no case can be made that will stand up in court. A premature
arrest that fails to find a suspect in possession of narcotics may ruin the careful
work of months. Considering the man hours involved, narcotic cases are expensive, and for that reason our narcotics and vice officers must be the best of our
law enforcement agencies. We are fortunate in having capable officers of the
highest caliber handling the narcotic problem in Dallas at this time.
Good as our officers are, they cannot work without information from the
underworld. No proper provision has been made for money with which to make
purchases or for the paying of informers, which is absolutely necessary in this
type of police work. Therefore, narcotics officers must depend on putting pressure
in the form of constant arrest for vagrancy of known characters for information.
Often after conviction a criminal will offer to divulge information regarding other
offenders and offenses in return for being placed on a particular type of job in the
penitentiary or getting a recommendation for a lighter sentence. Constant
pressure on known or suspected criminals is the only type of enforcement that
brings results. Speedy trials and the certainty of punishment seems to be the
greatest deterrent to all type of crime, and especially narcotics offenders, in
Dallas County. With the creation of a third criminal district court and the fact
that our criminal dockets are in better shape than they have been in in recent
years, we are now able to give the defendant his constitutional right to a speedy
trial, which has resulted in his conviction in all cases tried during 1955, there
being no acquittals.
Our experience has shown that narcotics offenders more than any other type
offender are likely to commit offenses while out on bond awaiting trial. It seems
imperative that the trial judge be given some discretion in the denial of bail in
this type of offense, due to this fact, and the further fact that the narcotic habit
may be broken during the period of incarceration. This also makes it imperative
that priority be given to trial of the narcotics offenders, and this we are going in
Dallas County. This was not possible some years ago, when it was necessary to
wait for the Federal laboratory man from New Orleans to be in Dallas. Now
we have a chemist employed by the city of Dallas to make the analysis of the
drug involved and are also in the process of setting up a Dallas County crime
laboratory where the chemist will be available at any time to testify.
A problem of great concern that faces us at all times in narcotics prosecution
is that of being able to prove that a certain person is "in possession of" narcotics.
For example, where five known addicts are arrested in a house or room and narcotics are found on the floor or concealed in the house. Who is in possession?
As another example, when five people are riding in a car in which narcotics are
found, who has possession of the narcotics? As a practical matter usually one
of the persons will claim the whole quantity and all of the others will deny any
knowledge that the drug was present; the one taking the full responsibility on
himself and in the absence of other proof as to ownership and possession, make the
prosecution of the others almost impossible under our present law. This was
true in the Eddie Foy Crowell case. Ex-convict and known addict who was
arrested with four other addicts, Crowell claimed all the narcotics and pleaded
guilty and was sentenced to 10 years, the maximum penalty. Our records reflect
some 40 no-bills this year resulting from this situation, known legally as "lack of
sufficient evidence." These no-bills do not reflect a lack of police work, but
merely that the law requires that possession must be proved beyond a reasonable
doubt, the law making no provision for punishing one in company with another
who has narcotics in his possession. This is a difficult problem in law enforcement. It is apparent the law should be changed to make it a crime to be in a
house where narcotics are found or in an automobile or in company with one who
has possession of narcotics, or at least prima facie evidence of guilt the fact one iS
found present where narcotics are found. From the standpoint of statistics this
has resulted in a poor record of convictions compared to the number of cases
filed, but actually it is just a part of law enforcement, since this is not peculiar to
narcotics cases. Merely the arrest of an offender is good law enforcement. It
3025
part of the "heat" and "pressure" treatment. Having to make bond and hire
an attorney is expensive and runs up the overhead of crime. Anything that
keeps the pressure on criminals is good law enforcement, resulting in much inforiation and will lead eventually to conviction.
I feel that our situation is under control in Dallas. Bad as the picture is, we
know our problem and face it realistically. Our local vigorous enforcement
policy does not materially affect the nationwide drug traffic, but we think it at
least has kept the local area free of "big dealers." I have no evidence of a syndicate operation either in gambling, vice, or narcotics in Dallas. We feel that, our
agencies know who our criminals are, and that this knowledge is a large part of
the battle. However, at the present time our statutes provide that any person
sent to the penitentiary is eligible for parole after getting credit for one-third of
his time, and many of them, including narcotic addicts, are being released from
the penitentiary under these laws. It appears to me that the narcotic offender
is in a class apart from other criminals and that the law should be changed with
reference to his early parole, since the problem is either to cure him of his addiction or to keep him our of circulation for as long as possible.
I feel that our present narcotic law has been unjustly criticized at times, since
I know that at the time of its recent revision every effort was made to include
all of the various contingencies that might arise. For instance, under the most
recent law we have seized and confiscated five automobiles where narcotics were
found, and I feel, by and large, that. it is a good law. There is a tendency among
elected officials to blame the law for lax law enforcement and a poor record of
convictions. The same problem and difficulty of proof is presented in other
types of criminal cases as well as in narcotics. All of our laws are based on the
theory that it is more important to protect the innocent than to convict the
guilty. A good example of this is the difficulty of prosecuting a burglary case
based on recent possession of stolen property. If the jury believes that the
person came into possession of the stolen property either innocently or by purchase, a not guilty verdict results. Receiving and concealing stolen property
cases have always been a problem insofar as proving the guilty intent of the
accused. The robber presents his alibi, and difficulty of proof of identity casts
doubts in the minds of the jury.
Remember that in all cases, no matter what the law is, the State has the burden
of proving the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Experience has
shown that juries will not impose extreme penalties on a young offender, and therefore a workable law must have a wide latitude of penalty. If the minimum
penalty is too high, juries may not convict even though guilt is proved, if the
defendant is a young first offender. This is what happend under the old "driving while intoxicated" prosecution, which was a felony. Much difficulty was experienced in getting juries to send these persons to the penitentiary. Better law
enforcement has resulted from the reduction of the minimum sentence possible.
It appears to me that our accomplices find accessories law could be written so
that one who furnishes narcotics to a criminal who commits another crime while
under the influence of the said narcotics would be hold liable as if he committed
the crime hiniself. In caes such as this, where the crime committed was that of
robbery with firearms, rape or murder, the narcotic peddler would be liable for
the death penalty.
Our recently enacted amendment to the narcotics law is unrealistic in one
particular. It provides probation for addicts conditioned on the addict receiving
treatment at a hospital. So far as I know, we have only the United States Public
Health Service hospital in Fort Worth available in this area to addicts. So far
as I know, at the present time there is no public hospital in Texas available for the
treatment of female narcotic addicts.
A growing problem in law enforcement in the Dallas area is that of goof balls
or barbiturate drugs. "Yellow jackets," "Red birds" and "Bennies" constantly
figure in our cases, probably to a much greater extent than narcotics, particularly
in cases involving juveniles and strangely enough those cases involving prostitution. We recently tried two murder cases in Dallas County involving teen-aVer
parties. The defendants, Charles Robbins and Ted Bell were both convicted-of
murder, Robbins getting 50 years and Bell 20 years in the pen. There was much
evidence of the use of barbiturate drugs and alcohol preceding the commission of
the murders. The use of this drug is complicated by the fact that one or more
disreputable doctors in Dallas furnish an unlimited source of supply of these drugs
with legal prescriptions. This situation led to the recent conviction of a doctor
for dispensing barbiturates in improperly labeled containers. The doctor was
3026
found guilty on 7 counts but was fined only $10 and costs in each count. And,
I imagine he is still operating from the same office, in the same manner, but probably is trying to label his containers properly. There is nothing in our barbiturate
law that I have been able to find that prevents doctors from giving a legal prescription for all the goof balls they want to on the spot.
Public complacency regarding goof balls is a large factor in our jury verdicts
for this type of offense. A prostitute was arrested with one of these drugs in
her possession and given a year in jail by a jury. Many good citizens were up
in arms because they did not know the background of the case, and the dangers
involved in the use of these drugs.
We recently convicted the operator of a bawdy house in Dallas County and
the jury assessed her a fine of $3,800 and 380 days in jail, and there was much
evidence concerning the use of barbiturates and narcotics among the prostitutes
who worked in this bawdy house.
During the first 9 months of 1955 my office convicted 58 persons for unlawful
possession of barbiturates for a total of $3,553 in fines and costs, and 721 days
in jail assessed. This indicates a terrific increase in the use of this drug from 1951
when we had no barbiturates cases, 1952 with 11 cases and 1953 with 14 cases
of this type. Goof pills, plus liquor, this year has caused teen-agers to commit
offenses ranging from prostitution to murder.
RECOMMENDATIONS
TO THE COMMITTEE
1. The revision of our criminal laws so as to make any person guilty of possession of narcotics when they are present where narcotics are found, whether in a
house, in an automobile, or in company with the person in whose actual possession
it is found.
2. A revision of our laws so as to make the seller of narcotics guilty of any
crime committed by the purchaser while under their influence. This would carry
the death penalty where the crime resulted in rape, robbery or murder under our
present laws.
3. Our present law allows evidence of intoxication or use of narcotics to be
introduced as a mitigating circumstance. This law should be repealed.
4. The statutes that provide for parole eligibility after one-third of a penitentiary sentence should be taken away from the narcotic offender.
5. Judges should be allowed the right to deny bail to persons charged under
the narcotic act so as to keep them from getting out and committing other offenses
and also give them a period of time for treatment to check the narcotic habit.
6. Narcotic cases should be given priority over other cases in the State courts
because they contribute much to the commission of other crimes and should their
trials be delayed, they undoubtedly will still be committing other crimes with
reference to narcotics. In this connection it is my feeling that the certainty of
punishment is more important than the severity of punishment as a deterrent to
those who are committing crimes.
7. That some provision be made under our State or Federal laws for the providing of money for police officers to pay informers and be be used in making purchases of narcotics, which are necessary for the proper prosecution of these cases.
3027
Name
I
Action I
INo acquittals.
Narcotics case dispositions to Oct. 15, 1955, Dallas criminal district courts
No bills
Convictions
TSP
Years
0
0
2
17
40
0
1
2
14
38
0
1
1
9
23
0
5
3
28
103
Total ------------------------------------
59
65
35
139
Summary
Jury trials, 1955
Years in penitentiaryAverage jury verdictIndictments pending
Complaints pending before the grand juryNot guilty--
10
51
5. 1
54
25
0
3028
Fines
Days in jail
Costs
Quashed or
dismissed
(-)(-)-)---2--(-
11
14
41
$226
360
1,285
2,237
180
245
705
721
258.50
329.00
940.00
1,316.00
1
4
12
124
4,108
1,851
2,843.50
42
-58
Senator DANIEL. You understand the rules of the Senate, that the
witness is permitted to counsel with you at any time?
Mr. FOWLER. Thank you.
Senator DANIEL. So long as you do not volunteer any counsel or
advice.
TESTIMONY OF NEIL AEBY
Senator
your name?
I I I I I
3029
Mr.
AEBY.
Senator
Mr.
Mr.
DANIEL.
AEBY.
Senator
I believe so.
I believe so.
DANIEL.
AEBY.
No, I don't.
Senator
Mr.
DANIEL.
AEBY.
No, sir.
AEBY.
Senator
No, sir.
DANIEL.
with you concerning the penalty for giving any untruthful statement
to this committee?
Mr. AEBY. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. That is no insinuation that you have done that;
it is simply a reminder to you and to your attorney, who will advise
you that you would not be called before this committee if this committee did not have what it considered ample evidence that you had
some knowledge of the narcotic traffic here in Dallas.
Have you counseled with your attorney concerning the admonition
that I am giving you? I am sure that he has told you, if you talked
with him, that if you give an answer, that it be a truthful answer?
Mr.
AEBY.
Senator
heroin?
Yes, sir.
DANIEL.
Mr. AEBY. Not that I remember. I might have seen it. I don't
even know what it is.
Senator DANIEL. Did you ever hear anybody talk about heroin?
Mr. AEBY. Well, yes, sir, I heard some people talk about heroin.
Senator
DANIEL.
DANIEL.
AEBY. Not
Mr.
just offhand.
know what they do, though.
I II I I
'3030
Senator
DANIEL.
AEBY.
was thrown in front of a police car which was following you and those
two men recently?
Senator DANIEL. You claim your right under the fifth amendment?
Mr. AEBY. Yes.
Senator
DANIEL.
Dude Tacker?
Mr. FOWLER. May I counsel with him just a minute?
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
All right.
Senator
DANIEL.
would you?
3031
Senator
DANIEL.
have told us you didn't know what heroin was, you didn't have any
possession of heroin. You have waived any right under the fifth
amendment, or under any other grounds, in your testimony about
heroin, and I just asked you whether or not it wasn't true that you
were in possession of heroin with William Schoultze when you were
recently arrested after this bomb incident.
Mr. AEBY. You are asking me did I have possession of any narcotic?
Senator
DANIEL.
Mr.
AEBY.
No, sir.
AEBY.
Senator
No, sir.
DANIEL.
GANNAWAY.
That's correct.
Senator DANIEL. And you are testifying under oath that you did
not tell him that you recently kicked the heroin habit?
Mr. AEBY. I hadn't told him that.
Senator
Mr.
DANIEL. What?
AEBY. I hadn't told
Senator
DANIEL.
him that.
have made it, that you have never pushed or used any heroin?
Mr.
AEBY.
Senator
Mr.
Mr.
DANIEL.
AEBY.
Senator
Yes, sir.
DANIEL.
AEBY.
Senator
Yes, sir.
No, sir.
DANIEL.
3032
Senator DANIEL. Have you ever in your lifetime ever had posses-
Senator
DANIEL.
huana?
Mr. AEBY. Well, I might have seen a picture of it, or something
like that, bp t I
Senator DANIEL. Well, have you ever in your lifetime had possession of any marihuana?
Mr. AEBY. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Have you ever in your lifetime had possession of
heroin, or any other type of narcotic drug?
Mr.
AEBY.
Senator
No, sir.
DANIEL.
narcotics with?
Mr.
AEBY.
No, sir.
for you?
Mr. AEBY. No, sir.
Senator EASTLAND. Ever got any money of any kind out of the
narcotics trade?
Mr. AEBY. No.
Senator DANIEL. Well, you want all these answers to stand as you
other narcotic?
3033
-to see him, I have stayed out to his house maybe a day or two, something like that. He is my brother. I have never kept track of just
exactly how many days I have stayed there; I never thought I would
have to answer that question.
Mr. SPEER. How long ago was that? How long ago was that day
or two?
Mr. AEBY. Well, I went to the penitentiary in 1951, or 1950, and
he went to the penitentiary since I got out. I haven't seen him since
1950.
Mr. SPEER. Did you see him after you got out, before he went to
AEBY.
Mr. SPEER.
1950.
Along in 1950?
Mr. AEBY. Yes, sir; 1949, 1950, somewhere along in there.
Mr. SPEER. Where was this place?
Mr. AEBY. Well, he owns a home out here on Ledbetter.
Mr. SPEER. How big a house is this?
Mr. ABEY. Oh, it has got a couple of bedrooms, and a living room
;and dining room and kitchen.
Mr. SPEER. And you shared-you lived in one of the bedrooms,
stayed in one of the bedrooms?
Mr. AEBY. No, I never lived in it in my life.
M'lr. SPEER. Did you ever see your brother cook up heroin?
I I I I
3034
Mr.
No.
addict.
Mr. SPEER. I didn't ask you if you believed he was a narcotic ad-
then?
Mr.
type of conviction?
Mr.
AEBY.
Burglary.
AEBY.
Yes.
Mr.
AEBY.
Yes, sir.
3035
DANIEL.
some time.
Senator DANIEL. Since he got out of the penitentiary?
Lieutenant GANNAWAY. Yes, sir. I have known him for many
years.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
GANNAWAY.
DANIEL.
Yes, sir.
Senator
DANIEL.
remember it.
Lieutenant
7-44
3036
I asked him how much he was using a day, and he said that he
wasn't using anything, that he had kicked his habit.
That was about the extent of the conversation.
Senator DANIEL. Now, who had the possession of this heroin?
LIEUTENANT GANNAWAY.
3037
and give us the facts, simply for this reason: It is not important to
this congressional hearing except for this one reason, and that is to
show whether or not narcotic addicts and users can be dangerous
people or not.
Lieutenant GANNAWAY. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. I believe you have testified you think that they
can be; right?
Lieutenant GANNAWAY. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. All right. We will let you testify later about
quite a few others, if you will step aside again; and if, sometime this
afternoon or tomorrow, you will have one of the officers who knows
the facts concerning this bomb.
Lieutenant GANNAWAY. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Tommy Hicks.
Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you are about to give
to this subcommittee of the Senate Judiciary Committee will be the
truth, the whole
truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?
do.
I
HICKS.
Mr.
TESTIMONY OF THOMAS ODELL HICKS
Senator DANIEL. What is your name?
Senator
Mr. HICKS. Well, could I ask you a question before I answer that?
Senator DANIEL. Well, you may.
Mr. HICKS. The State has got a law now that if you are an addict,
3038
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Now, there are some questions that I am going to ask you that I
hope you will not feel that they would incriminate you, and that you
will give truthful answers to this committee on.
I might say this to you, Mr. Hicks: It could be that truthful
answers, even though they would tend to incriminate you, are not
going to make matters any worse for you, if the evidence that this
committee has is correct. We would not have called you in here
had we not had evidence sufficient in our minds to warrant us to ask
you to come in here and give us this information.
Mr. HICKS. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. We wouldn't call you in and ask you if you had
ever sold heroin
Senator DANIEL. They might be used against you, too, you see,
but you have already told the law some of the questions I will ask
you here.
Ih'.
HICKS.
All right.
3039
Senator
DANIEL.
Mr. HICKS. Well, I have been under a doctor's care for 2 years,
and I don't know who sent them there and I don't care, they came in
to my place sick, and I have given away more narcotics than I ever
what you would call sell.
Senator DANIEL. You have given away more than you have sold?
Mr. HICKs. Yes, sir; because they were sick.
Senator DANIEL. What kind of narcotics did you give?
Mr. HICKS. Dilaudid.
Senator DANIEL. And were you getting the dilaudid from a doctor
here in town?
Mr. HICKS. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Did he know what was wrong with you?
Mr. HICKS. Yes, sir.
Senator
DANIEL.
the 18th of last month, and I have proof here to show for it. A man
don't have blood transfusions unless there is something wrong with
them, do they?
Senator DANIEL. What did you have wrong?
Mr. HICKS. A blood transfusion from the loss of blood from vomiting blood, and hemorrhaging.
Senator DANIEL. And your doctor gave you dilaudid for it?
Mr. HICKS. Well, for the pain; yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Did the doctor know that you had been addicted
to drugs before?
Mr. IIICKS. I don't think so.
Senaitr DANIEL. Did you tell him?
Mr. HICKS. No, sir.
Senator
you not?
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
Mr.
DANIEL.
HICKS.
Yes.
Senator DANIEL. How many dilaudid capsules did you use a day?
Mr. HICKS. Well, that would depend. They wasn't no certain
amount, it was just different amounts.
Senator DANIEL. You just used whatever you wanted to?
Mr. HICKS. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Did he prescribe it
Mr. HICKS. I just used what I figured was necessary for my con-
dition.
Senator
Mr.
DANIEL.
HICKS.
3040
Senator DANIEL. How long ago was that, when you got sick?
Mr. HICKS. It's been right at 2 years now.
Senator DANIEL. This same doctor has been prescribing dilaudid
for you?
Mr. HICKS. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. For
Mr. HICKS. No, sir.
2 years?
DANIEL.
Mr. HICKS. Anywhere from-I don't-I just don't know how many
What?
Mr. HicKs, Well, out at the Parkland Hospital, they told me that
I-there wasn't any actual proof of what I had, but from all the
symptoms, I might have a malignant stomach and liver.
They wanted to cut a hole in me and take out part of my liver and
analyze it, and then tell me what was wrong with me.
Senator DANIEL. Well, did this doctor finally quit writing prescriptions for you for dilaudid?
Mr. HICKS. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. When did he quit?
Mr. HICKS. The 17th of last month, I believe it was.
Senator DANIEL. And then did you get another doctor to write them
for you?
Mr. HICKS. Not-I have got some since then; yes, sir.
Mr. HICKS. I just showed him what the Parkland people told me,
and what I had been told in the past.
Senator DANIEL. Now, you say that you took this dilaudid yourself?
Mr. HicKs. Yes, sir.
3041
Senator
DANIEL.
dilaudid, but what I really called you here for was to tell us about
the heroin.
Mr. HICKS. I can sure tell you that.
Senator DANIEL. Well, tell us what you know about it.
Mr. HICKS. Well, on the 17th day of last month, I had a brand
new Bel Air Chevrolet, and I had a $4,000 trailer; I was apaying on
it. That was the most I have ever had in these 55 years that I have
been on this earth.
I went to the drugstore and gave the druggist a prescription covering my medicine, and the doctor that was prescribing for me was
stricken with a stroke, a light stroke, to where he couldn't prescribe
any more.
So he told me: "Thomas," he said, "You better save this and make
it go as far as you can, because I cannot continue. I will probably
beat you to the grave."
So I gave it to the druggist, and the druggist prescribed, filled it,
and I left part of the medicine there, and in a 2 or 3 weeks' period I
went back to get the rest of my medicine, and Lt. Pat Gannaway
arrested me and my wife as she sat down in my car, and took a bottle
of dolophine from her and confiscated my car.
I have lost my home; I haven't even got enough to eat on right
now. That throwed me back to using heroin. I was already under
the doctor's care for medicine, so what was I to do but to try to
obtain it through illegal channels?
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
3042
Senator
dilaudid?
DANIEL.
years when I couldn't get other medicine, I would have to fall onto
that, you know, like today, maybe next week or next month, once or
twice, you know.
Senator DANIEL. When is the last time you got any heroin; used
it for yourself?
Mr. HICKS. Well, it hasn't been very long.
Senator
heroin.
DANIEL.
About 2 or 3 weeks.
Mr. HICKS. See, during the First World War, right after the First
World War, I was in the Balboa Base Hospital in San Diego, Calif.,
under treatment and became what you would call addicted to narcotics through the Federal doctors.
That's been 35 years ago, and now, then, they are trying to shoot
me or hang me or throw me in the penitentiary for the rest of my
life for something that I couldn't help.
Senator DANIEL. And you became addicted, then; did you try to
get treatment for it?
Mr. HICKS. There wasn't any treatment, no more than-not as
DANIEL. Well,
DANIEL. Well,
Senator Daniel.
Mvr. HICKS. Well, because if you was-if your body was craving
food, what would you do, go to it, or just stay where you was at?
Senator DANIEL. Was your body craving heroin?
I wouldn't say heroin; it was something.
Senator DANIEL. Well, what had you been on?
Mr. HICKS. No; I had been using morphine at that time.
Mr. HICKS. Yes.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator DANIEL. So rather than stay for the treatment, you left
to get the drug?
Mr. HICKS. That's right.
DANIEL.
3043
Mr.
HICKS.
That's right.
Senator
DANIEL.
does not want to stay and will not stay, certainly will not help him
much, will it?
Mr. HICKS. Well no But if you really made up your mind and
went over there and stayed, it would be good.
Senator
DANIEL.
All right.
hospitals?
Mr.
HICKS.
Senator
No, sir.
DANIEL.
For treatment?
HICKS.
Senator
DANIEL.
Sir?
Senator
Senator
DANIEL.
3044
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
TRAFFIC
HEDDENS.
Senator
Yes, sir.
DANIEL.
DANIEL.
here.
Mr. HICKS. Yes.
Senator DANIEL. Didn't you tell them that you had been buying
heroin from Samona Cavassos?
Mr. HICKS. No. Sure didn't.
Senator DANIEL. Well, what about Samona?
Mr. HICKS. We discussed the case with her.
Senator DANIEL. All right. What did you tell them about where
you got your heroin in San Antonio?
Mr. HICKS. Well, it wasn't just brought up-they didn't ask me
exactly where I got it. They just-we were just talking, the day I
made bond, and they said-I said, "Where you got Samona, in jail?"
They said, "Yes, we found so much of this and that," and asked me
if I knew her, and I said yes.
Senator DANIEL. A little bit louder.
MAr. HICKS. They asked me if I knew her, and I told them yes, I
knew her, and I had been down there to her place. She has a beer
place.
Senator DANIEL. What is the name of her beer place?
Mr. HICKS. I never noticed that. It is just a place to go and sit
down and drink.
Senator DANIEL. All right. What did you tell him? What else
did you tell him?
Mr. HICKS. I don't know what I told him, what else. That's been
a long time ago. If it happened over yesterday, that's history, to me.
Senator DANIEL. Well, how did you know that was Samona's
place?
Mr. HicKS. Well, from all the indications,
what people told me.
3045
rSamona?
Mr. HICKS. Because the people around there, in the front of the
Antonio?
Mr. HICKS. Who?
Senator DANIEL. Yes, sir.
I could have went to a friend of mine, and had him to have went
-and got it, and he could have told me who he got it from, couldn't he?
Senator DANIEL. Yes, you sure could have done it that way.
But, what I am asldng you for is to tell this committee under oath
how you did do it, how you did get your heroin from San Antonio
which you brought back to Dallas.
Mr. HICKS. Well, I am not going to sit here and just flat snitch on
somebody, if that's what you want me to do.
My life wouldn't be worth 15 cents after that.
There's people in
this courtroom that hears this, and all over this air and everywhere.
couldn't do that.
Senator DANIEL. You say some people here in the courtroom that
I ain't going to
Senator DANIEL. Have you had any threats on your life or on your
body?
Mr. HICKS. No.
Senator DANIEL. If you told on anybody, here before this committee?
Mr. HICKS. No.
Senator DANIEL. Sir?
3046
Mr. HICKS. You don't have to have a threat on you, Mr. Daniels.
They don't have to-they wouldn't warn you ahead of time.
Senator DANIEL. Well, you just don't want to name the people you
bought from?
Mr. HICKS. Well, that's right.
Senator DANIEL. Is that right?
Mr. HIcKS. That wouldn't do me any good, or you.
Senator DANIEL. Because you feelMr. HICKS. Because you already know them.
Senator DANIEL. Because you feel it might endanger your own life?
Mr. HICKS. That's right.
Senator DANIEL. Well, I am not going to press you any further to
name them, then, under those circumstances.
I am going to ask you to tell us about it without the names. Is it
pretty easy to buy heroin in San Antonio?
Mr. HICKS. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Well, just tell us how easy it is.
Mr. HICKS. Well, it is easy enough, if you got $25.
Senator DANIEL. How much do you have to pay for your heroin iii
San Antonio?
Mr. HICKS. Twenty-five to twenty-eight a gram.
Senator DANIEL. And how many grams would you buy on each
trip?
Mr. HICKS. All I could get at once.
Senator
DANIEL.
grams.
Senator
Yes, sir.
Semator DANIEL. Well, you would be in contempt of this.-'mmittee if you don't tell us without any reason. We can't just take
"because."
Mr. HICKS. All right, I will give you a reason.
Senator DANIEL. All right.
Mr. HICKS. The State has got a law that they will send that boy
3047
Well, I am not going to be the cause of him going down there, and
have other people jumping on me about it. That would incriminate
my life.
Senator DANIEL. Well, you are not being the cause of it, Mr.
Hicks.
Mr. HICKS. Well, that's the way I look at it.
Senator DANIEL. This committee is being the cause of it. You
didn't come in here voluntarily, did you?
Mr. HICKS. No, sir.
DAN IEL.
committee, Mr. Hicks, things were worse back there when narcotics
were easier to get.
3048
Senator DANIEL. Things were lots worse; we had a lot, more addict,
a lot more lives were destroyedd by drug addiction before we had the
present narcotic act. We have fewer today, even though we have
too many.
Frankly, after hearing you testify, I think you can give us ibore
information about the drug traffic in this country than a lot of officers,
a dozen officer,. put togeth ,r, because you have experienced the
horrors of drugs. haven't you-?
Mr. HICKS. That's right.
Senator DANIEL. And you wouldn't want nniy boy of yours, or
anybody's, ever to go through what you have gone through, would
you?
Mr. HICKS. Never: never.
Senator DANIEL. You say you have taken 6 prison raps on it?
Mr. HICKS. That's right.
Senator DAX1 IEL. Is that right?
law?
Mr. HICKS. That's right.
Senator DANIEL. To go buy dope?
Mr. HICKS. And the most violent crime I ever committed was steal-
ing a car.
Mr. GASQUE. Now, you understand that, the question which tli
Chair has asked you, you cannot take the fifth amendment on and
you cannot refuse to answer?
Mr. HICKS. No, I don't understand.
sir, in fact, because I have always been able to obtain what I use
through a doctor. ' But Senator DANIEL. Now, isn't it true that you were supplying this
harm.
but Bouchie is here in the courtroom while you are telling this, and I
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
3049
TRAFFIC
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
SELMAN.
I do.
Aeby.
Senator DANIEL. Just relate exactly how you happened to be
trying to arrest them, and what happened in the way of a chase.
3050
Mr. SELMAN. They approached the circle out on the north end of
town from the west direction, came around the circle, and headed
north on 77.
We recognized their car, pulled up alongside them, and Neil Aeby
was driving.
He looked over his shoulder at us and rolled his window up, and
increased his speed to 101-105 miles per hour, all the way up to Lewisville.
Senator DANIEL. One hundred and 105 miles an hour?
Mr. SELMAN. Yes, sir.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
what happened.
Lewisville, I guess about
Mr.
10% miles outside of or away from the circle where we had first started
trying to apprehend them, they threw a paper sack out of the car,
and the contents of the sack went all over the car and alongside the
road, and part of it was on the windshield of the car, and the other
car.
Senator DANIEL. Your car?
Mr. SELMAN. Yes, sir. Part of it was left inside of their car as it
went out the side vent; it was on the dash of the car.
Senator
DANIEL.
Mr.
SELMAN.
60-40.
Yes, sir.
DANIEL.
users of heroin?
Mr. SELMAN. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. You were brought here simply to show what some
users of heroin will do.
Do you think, there, that if that bomb had been properly handled,
that it could have destroyed your life and that of the man who was
with you?
Mr. SELMAN. I have heard it said it could.
Senator DANIEL. Is that what the chemist told you after checking
it?
3051
Yes, sir.
What date?
Mr. SCHOULTZE. February the 9th, 1918.
Mr. GASQUE. Where are you presently residing?
Mr. SCHOULTZE. Well, I am in jail presently.
.Mr. GASQUE.
with you?
Mr. SCHOULTZE. I think the records show that Neil Aeby was with
Me.
Yes, sir.
Mr. GASQUE. When was the last time you used heroin?
Mr. SCHOULTZE. Well, I got a 2-year probated sentence June 2d of
1954. I had to go to the hospital to be cured.
Mr.
GASQUE.
Which hospital?
3052
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
TRAFFIC
Mr.
7 months?
Mr. SCHOULTZE. And they pronounced me cured; yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. They pronounced you cured, and then you were
Yes.
How long ago was that, that you came back to
Dallas?
ment.
Senator
DANIEL. On what-under
Mr. SCHOULTZE. Yes, sir.
Fifth amend-
Mr. GASQUE. In order that we can determine how effective was the
cure at, Fort Worth, you see.
Mr. SCHOTTLTZ Well, I haven't-they have an addict law now too,
you see, that carries 3 years. I refuse to answer under the fifth
amendment.
Mr. GASQUE. The chairman didn't direct the question to whether
or not you were using heroin at the present time or until recently;
rather the question is how long after you left the Fort Worth hospital
was it before you used heroin again.
Mr. .SCHOULTZE. I refuse to,
Senator DANIEL. Now, wait just a minute before you answer.
Do you understand what Counsel Gasque is trying to ask you?
Mr. SCHOULTZE. Yes, sir; I understand.
Senator. DANIEL. Under this new law, they have to prove you are
an addict,'or have to have evidence, you know, that you are a habitual
addict or under the influence, using it.
Mr. D. B. Naylor is sitting right back there behind you.
Is that correct, Mr. Naylor?
Mr. NAYLOR. Yes, sir; that's correct at the present time.
Senator DANIEL. In other words, under the evidence, if this man
tells you he used some heroin a year ago when he got out of the hospital, that one use of it, he couldn't be convicted of it., could he?
Mr. NAYLOR. No, sir; he cannot. He has to be an addict at the
present time.
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
TRAFFIC
3053
Mr. SCHOULTZE
Senator DANIEL.
All right.
Mr. GASQUE. Where did you get the heroin you used?
MNfr. SCHOULTZE. Well, I refuse to answer that on the fifth amend-
inent.
How many peddlers (to you know here in Dallas?
Mr. SCHOULTZE. I don't know any.
Mr. GASQU-E. Did you purchase heroin here in Dallas?
M.1r. SCHOITLTZE. I refuse to answer on the fifth amendment.
Mr.
GASQUE.
3054
Senator
Mr. SCHOULTZE.
I have not.
Senator
DANIEL.
1\1'. SCHOULTZE.
Mr.
be an addict?
Mr. GASQUE. I believe our evidence here today was it would cost
about six or seven dollars.
MI. SCHOULTZE. Well, I have been out of circulation awhile, you
know.
3055
Senator
DANIEL.
SCHOULTZE.
Senator DANIEL.
Mr.
GASQUE.
Antonio?
No, sir.
Mr. GASQUE. Did you ever buy marihuana in San Antonio?
Mr. SCIOULTZE. No, sir.
Mr. GASQUE. Were you using heroin at the time you were in San
Antonio?
Mr. SCHOULTZE. I don't think I had a habit at the time I was in
San Antonio.
Mr. GASQUE. Now, what year was that?
Mr. SCHOULTZE. Oh, I don't know; '49, '50, something like that.
Mr. SCHOULTZE.
Mr.
3056
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
TRAFFIC
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
GASQUE.
3057
Mr. GASQUE. Now, is your testimony also that you do not know the
name of that person?
Mr. SCHOULTZE. I do not know.
Mr. GASQUE. Do you know of any other peddlers in Dallas?
M'. SCHOULTZE. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Have you ever crossed the Mlexican border?
Mr. SCHOULTZE. Not lately.
Senator DANIEL. How long ago?
Mr. SCHOULTZE. Oh, 10 years ago.
Senator DANIEL. Never in the last 10 years have you crossed the
No, sir.
Senator
DANIEL.
3058
found it on you?
Mr. SCHOULTZE. I don't know. I imagine it was.
Senator DANIEL. You hadn't showed it to him?
Mr. SCHOULTZE. I had not.
Senator
DANIEL.
Mr. SCttOULTZE.
you up?
Mr. SCHOULTZE. I was just starting up to see some friends.
Senator DANIEL. And he didn't know where to meet you?
Mr. SCHOULTZE. He did not.
Senator DANIEL. He just happened to see you walking along?
Mr. SCHOULTZE. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. And picked you up?
Mr. SCHOULTZE. That's right.
Mr. GASQUE. And how much did you use per day?
Mr. SCHOULTZE. Oh, I don't know. A couple of caps, three.
Mr. GASQcE. And you were able to buy a week's supply at a time
from a person whom you did not know, is that correct?
Mr. SCHOULTZE. That's right.
Mr. GASQUE., Do you own the house at 1616 Baylor Street?
3059
Mlr.
He works at
Mr. GASQUE. Were you visiting there? At the time the officers
arrested you?
Mr. SCHOULTZE. I was seeing a party; yes, sir.
Mr. GASQUE. You were in a party; who all was in that party?
Mr. SCHOULTZE. Well, Mr. Stringfellow and Mr. Frazier is all I saw.
Mr. GASQUE. You were alone, other than those two gentlemen?
Mr. SCHOULTZE. They were there; yes, sir.
Mr. GASQUE. You are not willing to tell this committee the names
of any peddlers on the streets in Dallas who may be operating at the
present time?
Mr. SCHOULTZE. I don't know no peddlers.
Mr. GASQUE. Do you know any pushers?
Mr. SCHOULTZE. No, sir.
Mr. GASQUE. Do you know any people in possession of narcotics?
Mr. SCHOULTZE. I do not.
Senator DANIEL. Did you see any finger stalls for heroin in the
glove compartment of Neil Aeby's car that night?
Mr. SCHOULTZE. I did not.
Senator DANIEL. Did you ever put any there?
Mr. SCHOULTZE. No, Sir.
Senator DANIEL. Do you know what they were doing in there?
Mr. SCHOULTZE. I do not.
Senator DANIEL. You know those people who lived in this house
you were going to; didn't you?
Mr. SCHOULTZE. I knew a girl, yes.
Senator DANIEL. What was her name?
Mr. SCHOULTZE. Kathryn.
Senator DANIEL. Kathryn who?
Mr. SCHOULTZE. It was Ulster. I don't know what it is now.
Senator DANIEL. And the other people there?
Mr. SCHOULTZE. I knew them casually.
Senator DANIEL. Knew them casually?
Mr. SCHOULTZE. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. You knew they used heroin, didn't you?
You understand that when you take an oath to give us the truth
Mr. SCHOULTZE. I understand.
Senator DANIEL. You understand if you give us untruthful answers,
you could be charged with an offense for doing that, don't you?
Mr. SCHOULTZE. Yes, sir, I understand that.
Senator DANIEL. Well, now, I will ask you the question again.
Did you know that those people lived there were drug addicts?
Mr. SCHOULTZE. I had heard it said they was drug addicts.
Senator DANIEL. Did you know that they used heroin?
Mr. SCHOULTZE. No, I didn't know that.
Senator DANIEL. Hadn't you used heroin with one or more of them?
Mr. SCHOULTZE. I will stand on the fifth amendment.
Senator DANIEL. Well, I don't know but what we might have
waived your right to claim the fifth amendment there, but I won't
be technical with you on it.
3060
I will just ask you the question another way: Haven't you used
heroin in the presence of one of the three people who were in that
house that day?
Mr. SCHOULTZE.
Senator
DANIEL.
Mr. SCHOULTZE.
Senator
DANIEL.
Mr. SCHOULTZE.
Senator
DANIEL.
Mr. SCHOULTZE.
Senator
DANIEL.
Not to my knowledge.
Did one of them use heroin in your presence?
Not to my knowledge.
You don't remember it if they ever did?
No, sir; I don't remember if they did.
All right. Do you know Dude Tacker?
No, sir.
Do you know Roy Sistrunk?
Casually.
Senator DANIEL. Have you ever used heroin with Roy Sistrunk?
Mr. SCHOULTZE.
Or Dude Tacker?
No.
All right, Mr. Speer; any questions?
Mr. SPEER. This soap selling work, how much money did you
make per week out of that?
Mr. SCHOULTZE. Oh, I don't know. Just a living.
Mr. SPEER. Well, how much would a living be?
Mr. SCHOULTZE. Fifty or sixty dollars a week, something like that.
Mr. SPEER. Fifty or sixty dollars a week?
Mr. SCHOULTZE. Yes, sir.
Senator
DANIEL.
Mr. SCHOULTZE.
Senator DANIEL.
Mr. SPEER. And you were paying $112 a week for your heroin,
is that right?
Mr. SCHOULTZE. I don't know.
DANIEL.
Mr. SCHOULTZE.
Senator DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Mr. SCHOULTZE.
Senator DANIEL.
Mr. SCHOULTZE.
Senator DANIEL.
in 1954?
3061
DANIEL.
is a truthful answer?
Yes.
Senator DANIEL. Any further questions?
Mr. GASQUE. No, sir.
Mr. SPEER. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. All right. You may stand aside.
You will remain under subpena of this committee.
Now, the next witness may not be photographed and her name will
not be used, so I would like for those who have been taking pictures
here to respect the wishes of this witness and the wishes of the
committee.
I know you will understand that there are such witnesses once in
a while, that we will have to have. This is our first today.
But there will be no pictures taken of this witness, and the witness'
name will not be used at this time. I am sure the press and photographers, TV and radio will cooperate in that respect.
May we have the witness brought in, please?
The MARSHAL. Miss X, Senator?
Senator DANIEL. Yes, we will refer to this witness as Witness B.
We had a witness X in Houston; maybe we ought not to get confused
here.
Will you ask her to come in?
This lady has a small baby, and I am not sure whether we are
going to get the lady in here or not.
Well, we will have about a 2-minute recess.
(Short recess.)
Senator DANIEL. Gentlemen, you are going to have to cut these
lights off, please. No pictures of anyone during this testimony.
Now, as I said heretofore, there will be no filming of anyone during
this interview.
You can raise your right hand.
Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you will give to this subcommittee of the Senate Judiciary Committee will be the truth, the
whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?
WITNESS B. I do.
Mr. SCHOULTZE.
3062
Senator DANIEL. Mr. Speer, who has interviewed you, will ask you
the questions and tell you exactly what the committee would like to
know from you, having heard about the unfortunate experience that
you have been through, and I will tell you now that I have already
told the press not to use your name. As a matter of fact, it will not
even go in this committee record, and I am sure that the press would
not in any way, or anyone in this room who might know you, would
not in any way want to attempt to identify you. So I think you can
feel perfectly free, as far as that is concerned.
Mr. Speer.
TESTIMONY OF WITNESS B
Mr. SPEER.
one time?
B. Well, at that time I would only take just a normal
injection of 2 cc.
Mr. SPEER. Just 2 cc.?
WITNESS B. Yes, sir.
Mr. SPEER. That was at first?
WITNESS B. Yes, sir.
WITNESS
Mr. SPEER. And then, as time went on, you increased the amount
demarol a day?
WITNESS B. No, sir, that was just-that was just in 1954.
Mr. SPEER. It was that much in 1954?
WITNESS B. It was that far.
Mr. SPEER. You got up to
Mfr.
SPEER.
WITNESS
3063
B. Yes, sir.
WITNESS
B. Yes, sir.
WITNESS B. Yes.
Mr. SPEER. About
B. Yes.
3064
B. The druggist.
Mr. SPEER. The doctor, at first, before you started forging the
WITNESS
prescriptions?
WITNESS B. Oh, yes. Yes, sir.
Mr. SPEER. Did the doctor know that you were acquiring a narcotic
habit?
WITNESS B. Well, I don't know whether he knew it or not. He
told me that it was very dangerous, and talked to me about it.
Mr. SPEER. But he kept giving the prescriptions to you more
frequently, as time went on?
WITNESS B. No, not as frequently.
Mr. SPEER. Not as frequently?
WITNEsS B. No.
Mr. SPEER. Is that when you started forging the prescriptions?
WITNESS B. Yes, sir.
Mr. SPEER. What was the most you ever forged a prescription for,
SPEER.
SPEER.
SPEER.
WITNESS B.
SPEER.
3065
WITNESS B.
Mr. SPEER.
go somewhere?
WITNESS B. In my home.
Mr. SPEER. At your home?
WITNESS B. Yes, sir.
Mfr. SPEER. How much did the druggist charge you for each
prescription?
I just don't
Mr. SPEER. Do you remember how much he charged you for the
30?
WITNESS B.
Mr. SPEER.
No, sir.
But you realize it is very dangerous, that sort of
On doctors-
3066
Mr.
Did you just take the first shot, and then wait 2 or 3
weeks?
WITNESS B. A long time.
Mr. SPEER. Or did you
WITNESS B. I waited a long time.
Yes, sir.
Mr. SPEER.
WITNESS B.
Mr. SPEER.
Yes, sir.
WITNESS B.
Mr. SPEER.
Yes, sir.
Then later on, did you get it. from the doctor who did
WITNESS B.
Mr. SPEER.
WITNESS B.
Mr. SPEER.
WITNESS B.
No, sir.
No, sir.
Mri'. SPEER. You were just a practical nurse?
WITNESS B. Just a practical nurse.
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
IVITNESS
TRAFFIC
3067
it was, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Then did he tell you that you must quit, and
that he was not going to let you (1o it anymore, or did he get sick?
WITNESS
B. He got sick, and then lie-he quit and I quit, too, for
a long time.
Senator DANIEL. And is that wlien you started-\MITNESS B. The only time 1 ever had any, then, was just my
inedical needs, when I told him---Senator DANIEL. And is that when you started forging the pres.riptions?
WITNESS B. No. I quit, for a long time, an(d then when I-I moved
out to live with my mother, well, I started to work in Seagoville, and
that's when I started taking it again.
You just think, well, just one won't hurt a thing, just to settle my
nerves; then you go back and you get another one if you can.
Senator DANIEL. Was that when you started forging the prescriptions?
WITNEss
te prescriptions.
Senator DANIEL. A little before?
WITNESS B. When I started forging the prescriptions, it was when
I was trying to quit.
Senator DANIEL. Well, when you were forging these prescriptions,
do you have any reason to believe that the druggist who filled the
forged prescriptions knew at that time that they were not really a
doctor's prescriptions?
WITNESS B. I don't know, sir.
7-46
3068
Mr. SPEER.
in the office there with someone who was using it, which probably
suggested it to you, that you might do the same thing? Do you think
that sort of pushed you over?
WITNESS B. Oh, no, no, sir.
No, sir.
Mr. SPEER. You don't feel-you said the doctor was using it him-
Most doctors are. They are very well trained, and they know about
that stuff.
Senator DANIEL. All right. We will not ask you any further questions this afternoon. The druggist is under subpena of this committee, and may appear before the committee, at which time there
may be some further identity as far as the druggist is concerned.
But I believe that is all we will need from you at this time. Thank
you very much.
The committee will stand in recess till 10 a. m. tomorrow morning.
(Whereupon, an adjournment was taken at 5 p. m., until 10 a. m.,
United States Post Office and Courthouse, Dallas, Tex., Senator Price
Daniel (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding.
Senator DANIEL. The committee will come to order.
Mr. William M. Steger. Come right through here, Mr. Steger.
Do you solemnly swear that the testimony that you will give to this
subcommittee of the Senate Judiciary Committee will be the truth,
the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?
Mr. STEGER. I do.
TESTIMONY OF WILLIAM M. STEGER, UNITED STATES DISTRICT
ATTORNEY, EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
Senator
3069
3070
Mr. STEGER. In
that you would make on how we might work toward drying up the
narcotics traffic?
Mr. STEGER. Yes, sir. As to sentences, Senator, I believe that
under the Boggs Act, I think it should be amended to provide a
penalty on a first offense of a minimum of 2 years, which is the way
it presently is, and have a maximum of 10 years, with the right of
the court to suspend the execution of that sentence.
Senator DANIEL. That would be increasing the present maximum?
Mr. STEGER. Yes, sir, from 5 to 10 years, and it would be in line
with the State penalties.
As to the second offense, I believe that the committee should consider recommending legislation to make the second offense carry a
minimum of 5 years and a maximum of at least 20 years, which would
Senator
DANIEL.
3071
mittee say that in some cases he feels that the death penalty would
be justified, as long as you are going to have a death penalty for murder
in this country.
Mr. STEGER. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. It seems
But the very fact that that threat would be over the head of any
foreigner who comes into this country smuggling dope, or any American
citizen, it seems to me might be a deterrent.
Mr. STEGER. I agree absolutely with you, because I believe, as we
all know, that is where our narcotics peddling begins, with the largescale importations of it into this country.
Senator DANIEL. Did you know that there are over 300 aliens in
this country, citizens of other countries, who are now being deported,
who are now subject to deportation because they have dealt in the
narcotics traffic?
Mr. STEGER. I do know the Justice Department has had a number
of them.
Senator DANIEL. There are over 300 citizens of other countries in
this country today that the Justice Department is trying to deport
because they have been convicted of dealing in narcotics. And over
200 were deported last fiscal year. Now, there are over 500 people,
citizens of other countries over here in our borders, who either had
smuggled narcotics over here or have been dealing in narcotics in our
country, and it does seem to me that we need to stiffen up in some way
in this country, to keep these foreigners from coming in here with the
narcotics.
Mr. STEGER. I agree with you.
STEGER.
committee: As you will recall, recently Congress passed a law, title 18,
section 3146, making it a felony for a defendant to jump bond. Now,
that law was one which, of course, was most needed to provide for an
orderly prosecution of criminals under the Federal jurisdiction. However, the penalty on it, the maximum is 5 years, and it still, in my
3072
opinion, does not supply a particular need that we have with reference
to narcotic violators.
Now, I would like to illustrate it by giving you, shortly, two cases
that we have had in the eastern district of Texas.
Senator
DANIEL.
Yes,
sir.
3073
3074
STATEMENT
WILLIAM
M.
STEGER,
UNITED
EASTERN DISTRICT OF
STATES
ATTORNEY
FOR
THE
TEXAS
The eastern district of Texas, due to its geographical location and lack of large
metropolitan cities, has not had a serious law-enforcement problem with illegal
traffic in narcotics; however, during the past 3 years several large scale narcotic
offenders have been apprehended and prosecuted in the eastern district of Texas.
Statistics for the period 1951 through 1953 reveal that 25 narcotic cases were
prosecuted in this district. Statistics for the period 1954 through 1955 reveal
that only one narcotic case was prosecuted in this district. The number of narcotic cases prosecuted in the eastern district has always been small compared to
the number prosecuted in the other three districts in Texas, and during the past
2 years there has been a still further sharp decrease in the number of cases prosecuted. As a Federal prosecuting attorney, I have sought some plausible explanation for the unusually small number of narcotic cases prosecuted in this district in the past 2 years, and I am convinced that the reason is to be found in the
attitude of the Federal district judges in this district relative to the sentences
imposed in those cases prosecuted. For example, within the last 2 years Judge
Joe W. Sheehy has had before him two narcotic peddlers, both of whom had long
prior records of dealing in narcotics and in one case one defendant was sentenced
to 20 years in the penitentiary and in the other case the defendant was sentenced
to 25 years in the penitentiary. Both of these defendants were approximately
55 years old, and the effect of each sentence was comparable to a life sentence.
Narcotic agents have discussed with me the decrease in cases arising in this district, and it is their general consensus of opinion that narcotic peddlers in this
area are well aware of the long sentences imposed in the eastern district of Texas
by the judges and purposely avoid making illicit narcotic transactions in this
district.
The Boggs Act is no doubt, in part, responsible for longer sentences in narcotic cases being imposed; however, I would like to make this observation to the
committee and that is that in the two aforementioned cases the sentencing judge
in one case imposed the maximum sentence of 20 years allowed under the Boggs
Act and in the other case exceeded the maximum sentence of 20 years under the
Boggs Act by 5 years in sentencing the defendant to two consecutive sentences
totaling 25 years. This action by the court is indicative that perhaps the Boggs
Act is insufficient as to the maximum penalties assessable in narcotic cases.
I am of the opinion that the Boggs Act should be amended to provide that
second offenders could receive a minimum sentence of 5 years and a maximum
sentence of 25 years and that third offenders could receive a minimum sentence
of 10 years and a maximum sentence of life imprisonment. As to first offenders,
I believe the minimum sentence of 2 years should remain the same and the maximum. sentence should be increased from 5 years to 10 years with the right of the
court to suspend the sentence. These minimum and maximum sentences as
recommended by me would be similar to the sentences as provided under the
State laws of Texas and I believe that the penalties under the Federal laws should
at least equal the penalties provided under the State law.
Recently Congress passed a law, title 18, sec. 3146, making it a felony for any
defendant to jump bond on a criminal case pending against him. This law was
one which was most needed to aid in the orderly prosecution of violations of the
Federal laws; however, I am not at all certain that this law will aid in a problem
confronting successful Federal prosecutions relative to narcotic cases primarily
brought about by the mandatory provisions of the Boggs Act. Narcotic law
violators, when apprehended, are treated just like any other defendant who has
been arrested and often are released on small bonds of $1,500 to $2,500. If a
second or third narcotic offender is confronted with having to serve a long mandatory sentence, it has been observed that this type of defendant often does not
appear when his case is called for trial or, if he is a habitual offender, often commits further narcotic violations while he is free on bond. To illustrate my point,
I would like to briefly mention to the committee two cases involving habitual
narcotic violators in this district.
The first case involved a habitual narcotic violator by the name of Johnny
4 or 5
Hinton who in the summer of 1952 had been previously convicted on
Tex.,
narcotic cases. On July 22, 1952, Hinton was arrested at Mount Pleasant,
and
filed
was
complaint
A
and charged with concealing 288 grains of heroin.
Hinton
Hinton was released on $1,000 bond. On August 1, 1952, 10 days later, Hintol
was arrested in Kilgore, Tex., for selling opium to narcotic investigators.
was arrested on this charge and later released after making a bond of $2,500.
in
On October 21, 1952, approximately 2% months later Hinton was arrested
3075
Beaumont, Tex., and charged with selling 726 grains of heroin to a narcotic agent.
As to this charge, a bond of $20,000 was set which defendant was unable to make.
Subsequently the defendant, through his attorneys, successfully got his bond
reduced to $10,000 which he was able to make. In November 1952, Hinton
was indicted by the grand jury on all 3 cases. In December 1952, Hinton, with
his attorney, held a conference with the United States attorney at which time
the mandatory provisions of the Boggs Act were explained to him. Subsequently,
in February 1953, at the regular term of court in Tyler, Tex., the cases pending
against Hinton were duly called for trial and Hinton failed to appear. It was
subsequently learned that Hinton was hiding out in Mexico and he remained a
fugitive in Mexico until October 1954, at which time he was deported to the
United States, arrested by the FBI and subsequently brought to Tyler, Tex.,
where he entered pleas of guilty in 2 of the cases pending against him.
The second case involved another habitual narcotic violator named Lee Siglar
who had been convicted 3 times for violations of narcotic laws prior to January
1953. In November 1952, Siglar was arrested and charged with violations of the
marihuana tax laws and was subsequently, in February 1953, convicted and
sentenced to serve 10 years in the penitentiary. Siglar appealed his case to the
Fifth Circuit Court of A appeals and remained free on a $1,000 bond. During the
pendency of the appeal, Siglar, on August 3, 1953, was again arrested by narcotic
agents and charged with the selling of marihuana. Siglar was subsequently
indicted for this offense to which he pled guilty and received a sentence of 20
years to serve in the penitentiary.
I believe that these 2 cases illustrate the fact that narcotic violators are dangerous to society and cannot be trusted while free on bail. Perhaps Congress could
remedy this situation by enacting legislation whereby a minimum bond of a
substantial sum would especially be applicable to narcotic laws violators, or perhaps legislation could be enacted whereby narcotic cases could be placed in a
category in which no bond is allowed such as those cases involving offenses punishable by death.
The matter pertaining to search and seizure has not been a problem in the
eastern district and, therefore, I do not have any constructive comments on this
subject to make to the committee.
With reference to enacting legislation pertaining to "wiretapping" to aid in
the prosecution of narcotic cases, I believe the Federal Government should be
allowed to tap telephone wires where there is good reason to believe that in doing
so evidence would be obtained. It is possible that legislation could be enacted
along the lines of our search warrant procedure of obtaining a court order which
would tend to prevent any abuses of such a procedure.
Lieutenant Gannaway.
TESTIMONY OF WILLIAM P. GANNAWAY, LIEUTENANT OF DETECTIVES, POLICE DEPARTMENT, DALLAS, TEX.-Continued
Senator DANIEL. Lieutenant Gannaway, yesterday we left you on
the stand just long enough to give us an example of how the heroin
traffic operates here in Dallas. You stepped aside in order that we
might call a girl who had been using heroin, and the man with whom
she lived had been using heroin, and then we brought in 2 or 3 others
who had been buying and using heroin here in Dallas.
We brought forth a man named Bouchie, I believe.
Lieutenant GANNA
WAY.
Yes, sir.
3076
Hicks was dealing in heroin from several sources, and that he was
delivering this heroin to Bouchie Wallace. Consequently, we set up a
surveillance on Bouchie Wallace, and also on Tommy Hicks. At
that time he was living over on Cornell Street.
During this surveillance, we were able to make two purchases from
Bouchie Wallace of heroin, by the use of an undercover agent. Shortly
after that, we obtained information that Tommy Hicks was living over
on South Beckley. We sent a surveillance up there, where he was
living in a trailer court, and followed him over on Jefferson where he
went in a drug store and obtained illegally one bottle, 20 c. c.'s, of
dolophine.
Senator DANIEL. Dolophine is an opiate drug?
Lieutenant GANNAWAY. Yes, it is.
At that time he was arrested, he and his wife. Then later on, some
2 or 3 weeks later, we received information that he was living over on
Garland Road, at another trailer court. We set up a surveillance
there, and observed him for quite some time, several days.
We observed him one morning leaving there with a well-known
shoplifter, Allen Myden. They left there in Allen's car and left about
6 o'clock in the morning. They stayed gone all day, and returned that
night about 9:30 or 10 o'clock, at which time we observed them taking
stolen articles, shoplifted articles, apparently, from the back end of the
automobile, some $500 worth of expensive ladies suits and men's suits
that we learned later came from the city of Austin, Tex.
We executed a search warrant at that time, and found Tommy
Hicks in possession of approximately 20 grains of heroin in what is
known as a bindle of heroin or a paper of heroin, in his pocket, at
the time he was arrested. He also had a spoon sitting there in the
trailer, that he apparently was about to fix him a shot of narcotics,
as it had about 2 grains in it.
He was arrested and taken to city hall and placed in jail. Then I
asked him about his dealing in heroin. I asked him how much money
he had made. He said very little. He said that he had a little bit
of heroin. I then accused him of furnishing heroin to Bouchie
Wallace to peddle for him. He stated that he had given Bouchie
Wallace very little, and he further stated that he was still addicted
to narcotoc drugs. Now, at the time that we arrested Bouchie
Wallace, he stated that he had been in Dallas for some time, but refused to give us any information pertaining to his source of supply.
We learned from informants that Bouchie Wallace was selling this
same narcotic drug that he was obtaining from Tommy Hicks up in
the colored section, and they in turn were selling it to other colored
males and females in the Hall and Thomas area and around on Guillot
Street. These addicts run all the way from 18 years on up to 40 and
50 years old, male and female, among the colored race. Bouchie
Wallace also was selling to the white addict population here in the
city of Dallas.
Senator
DANIEL.
Lieutenant
Senator
GANNAWAY.
DANIEL.
3077
should not be revealed in detail at this time but do you have any
evidence as to where Tommy Hicks was getting his heroin?
Lieutenant GANNAWAY. Yes, sir, we have evidence that he was
obtaining this heroin from San Antonio, Tex.
Senator DANIEL. And bringing it back here into the Dallas market?
Lieutenant
GANN AWAY.
Yes, sir.
given this committee. From the evidence you have at hand, is there
any doubt that Tommy Hicks, in addition to being an addict, also
has been bringing heroin into Dallas for peddling, at least to the people
you have named here to the committee?
Lieutenant G. NNAWAY. There is no doubt in my mind that he is a
wholesaler, he is what we would term a wholesaler in heroin.
Senator DANIEL. All right, sir. Anything else, Mr. Counsel?
Mr. GASQUE. It
committee, from the evidence which you have which you cannot bring
to light at this time, that Tommy Hicks, from the narcotic point of
view. may be a serious cancer in the life of this community, in spreading
addiction to other people. He is a likeable sort of fellow, so other
3078
there was apparently stolen during that one day; it was probably in
excess of $500 worth.
Mr.
GASQUE.
Hicks can support his heroin habit without stealing goods and peddling
narcotics?
Lieutenant GANNAWAY. I don't believe that he could.
Mr. GASQUE. And he has been an addict or a cancer in the life of
this community for 35 years?
Lieutenant GANNAWAY. He has been addicted for many years.
I have known him for many years.
Mr. GASQUE. Have you known him to be addicted all of these
years?
Lieutenant GANNAWAY. Yes, sir.
Mr. GASQUE. That's all, Mr. Chairman.
Senator DANIEL. Well, now, on the charges that you bring, he says
that he has been to the penitentiary 6 times already, on the charges
that are brought against this man now, isn't tbere some possibility
that he can be sent to a Federal hospital for treatment and for some
type of cure for his addiction? He stayed only 3 days the only time
he has been to the hospital, and even though he has been selling drugs,
it would seem to me that the man should be given some type of
treatment at a Federal hospital and then allowed to go on and serve
out whatever prison sentence is assessed against him on the new
charges.
What is your opinion of that?
Lt. GANNAWAY. I am not familiar with that procedure, Senator.
I do know that the State doen't have a hospital where they send
addicts to be cured. Now, what provision that they make with the
Federal Government to send them to a Federal hospital, I am not
familiar with that.
Senator DANIEL. Are all these new charges State charges?
Lieutenant GANNAWAY. Yes, sir, they are all State charges.
Senator DANIEL. Well, is there any possibility that in cases like
this, that you could go into the Federal court with this evidence and
have the man sent to a Federal penitentiary, with an intermediate time
at the narcotics hospital?
Lieutenant GANNAWAY. If the Federal Narcotics Bureau would
adopt our cases, or the United States attorney would adopt the cases
and let them be prosecuted in Federal court, they could be, yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Do you think there is any hope for treatment of
confirmed narcotic addicts who have been addicts over a long period
of time?
Lieutenant
GANNAWAY.
Senator
DANIEL.
3079
gotton out and sold narcotics. Some of it might have gotten into the
hands of young people, juveniles.
Lieutenant GANNAWAY. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. And older people for the first time. So, for the
good of society, addicts of that nature and traffickers of that nature
ought to be removed from the streets and from the opportunity to
spread this addiction to other people; don't you think so?
Lieutenant
GANNAWAY.
GANNAWAY.
Lieutenant
GANNAWAY.
GANNAWAY.
The first one I have here on my list is a boy named Herbie Franklin
Fairis. He is commonly known as Ducky Fairis. He is awaiting
electrocution in Oklahoma State for the murder of a city detective
in Oklahoma City. He was caught in the act of robbing a supermarket there, with a boy named Price and another one named Stringer.
In company with them was a girl named Peggy Fry. Now, Herbie
Franklin Fairis has been arrested by our office, at one time was
arrested over in Oak Cliff, where there was a girl in his apartment
arrested with several capsules of heroin.
Senator
DANIEL.
any evidence that he was tied into the narcotics racket, or that he
was himself a user of narcotics?
Lieutenant
GANNAWAY.
ment that night, when he was arrested, was to catch him in possession
of heroin.
Senator DANIEL. And did you find him in possession of heroin?
3080
DANIEL. All
right.
Lieutenant GANNAWAY.
3081
been solved.
Senator DANIEL. Where was he found? Do you remember the
circumstances of his death?
Lieutenant GANNAWAY. I don't-I remember reading the circumstances. Tincey Eggleston and Cecil Green were ambushed by unknown persons, and Cecil Green was killed.
Senator DANIEL. Tincey Eggleston?
Lieutenant
Yes, Sir.
Is lie the one who was recently found in the bot-
GANNAWAY.
Senator DANIEL.
toin of a well?
Lieutenant GANNAWAY. Yes, sir; he was recently murdered and
found in the bottom of a well there in Tarrant County.
Senator DANIEL. Have you ever obtained any evidence, concerning
Tincey Eggleston's use of narcotics drugs?
Lieutenant GANNAWAY. Yes, sir; I have obtained evidence that he
was also a user of narcotic drugs.
left, we executed a search warrant and opened the cabin and were
inside, and shortly after we got inside the place, Harry Huggins came
into the place, and at that time he was armed with, I believe it was a
.38 automatic.
However, none of the rest returned that night.
Senator DANIEL. Is this the same Harry Huggins who was charged
with Tincey Eggleston and Cecil Green in the recent murder in Fort
Worth of a man named Clark?
Lieutenant GANNAWAY. Yes, sir; that's the same Harry Huggins.
Senator DANIEL. Do you know whether or not Harry Huggins
has been a user of narcotics?
3082
Lieutenant
GANNAWAY.
Senator
DANIEL.
All right.
Go ahead.
[Laughter.]
last week.
Senator DANIEL. Do you know anything, since the matter you
huana.
DANIEL.
Yes, sir.
Nick Cascio?
Senator DANIEL. Where is he?
Lieutenant GANNAWAY. He is in the Dallas area.
Lieutenant GANNAWAY.
Senator
Senator DANIEL. All right; what do you know about him, his
activities?
Lieutenant GANNAWAY.
3083
You have just come forward so that Mr. Gannaway can recognize
you.
Is this the man you are speaking of?
Lieutenant GANNAWAY. Yes, sir; that's the Cascio that I know.
I have known him for many years.
Senator DANIEL. All right. You may be seated. Go ahead,
Lieutenant.
Lieutenant GANNAWAY. Nick Cascio and Jetty Bass and another
man named Tommy Pate were convicted, I believe, in Alabama.
They were caught in the act of burglarizing a place there, and Nick
Cascio was shot, and so was Jetty Bass. That was a few years ago.
They are-two of them are out of the penitentiary at this time, Jetty
Bass and Nick Cascio.
Senator DANIEL. What type of robbery was that?
Lieutenant GANNAWAY. I believe that that was a safe burglary, if
my information was correct on it, or maybe it was an attempted safe
burglary. I don't think they actually got any money out of it; the
officers arrested them before the burglary was completed.
Senator DANIEL. Now, you say that those two men have been
associated in the years gone by with Cecil Green and others who did
use narcotics?
Lieutenant GANNAWAY. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Do you have any information concerning their
use of narcotics?
Lieutenant GANNAWAY. As far as Nick Cascio, I have no information pertaining to his use of narcotics.
Senator DANIEL. What about Jetty Bass?
Lieutenant GANNAWAY. Jetty Bass, I have been told by several
people, uses cocaine. Now, the cocaine, I understand his use of
cocaine is not that of an addict.
Senator DANIEL. What type of use is it, from what you have
heard from informants?
Lieutenant GANNAWAY. The informants state that he uses cocaine,
as they say, to get high on it.
Senator DANIEL. All right. Is Jetty Bass in the courtroom?
Jetty Bass?
The MARSHALL. He was here yesterday.
Senator DANIEL. Is this the man you are speaking of?
Lieutenant GANNAWAY. Yes, sir, that's Jetty Bass that I know.
I have known him for many years.
Senator DANIEL. All right; proceed. You say that Roy Sistrunk
was with Nick Cascio and Jack Todd and Cecil Green in this, when
they were arrested with heroin in Alabama? Where is Roy Sistrunk?
Lieutenant GANNAWAY. Well, Roy Sistrunk is in the Dallas area.
Senator DANIEL. Is he in the courtroom?
Lieutenant GANNAWAY. He was here yesterday.
Senator DANIEL. Is Roy Sistrunk here? Roy Sistrunk?
Well, he is under subpena, and he was here yesterday. I am sure he
will be here later today.
Lieutenant GANNAWAY. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. All right. Is he a narcotic addict?
71515--50--pt. 7
-47
3084
use of narcotics?
Lieutenant
GANNAWAY.
Yes, sir.
3085
Dallas?
took the rap for it, and was sent to the Federal penitentiary; and
Olin Tyler was released. Ange Casteen is back in the Dallas area
now. He has finished his term in the penitentiary, and is back.
Senator DANIEL. Where is Olin Ray Tyler?
Lieutenant GANNAWAY. He was here yesterday.
Senator DANIEL. Does he use narcotic drugs?
Lieutenant GANNAWAY.
Yes, sir.
Yes, sir.
that offense.
Senator
Tyler?
DANIEL.
Lieutenant
GANNAWAY.
Yes, sir.
DANIEL. Well,
3086
3087
3088
Senator
DANIEL.
GANNAWAY.
Yes,
Lieutenant
GANNAWAY.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
GANNAWAY.
DANIEL.
from all these examples that you are giving us, that you are not one
of those who believes that heroin users are docile persons.
Lieutenant
GANNAWAY.
No, sir.
Senator
GANNAWAY.
DANIEL.
Heroin.
Lois Green?
Senator
DANIEL.
3089
Lieutenant
GANNAWAY.
Bass. They lived at, I believe it was 1816 Park Row. At this
time, when she lived down in that place, although we were unable to
make a case against them, we had information that they were selling
narcotics out of this house there. We never were able to make a
case against either Gladys or Jetty. As far as her use of narcotics,
it is my understanding that she uses marihauna occasionally, and
that is all.
Now, she was involved in a fight with one Ruby Russell, another
well-known prostitute here in the Dallas area, and during this fight,
she killed this Ruby Russell.
Senator DANIEL. Yes, sir
Lieutenant
GANNAWAY.
a known associate with the various police characters for many years.
Senator DANIEL. Is Gladys Harvey in the courtroom?
Lieutenant. GANNAWAY. I saw her yesterday.
Senator
Senator
DANIEL.
DANIEL.
Lieutenant
All right.
GANNAWAY.
Proceed, sir.
3090
Mr.
SPEER.
3091
committed?
Lieutenant GANNAWAY. Yes, sir.
Lieutenant
GANNAWAY.
that's the Herbert Noble who, I believe, met a violent death in this
area.
Lieutenant GANNAWAY. Herbert Noble was a gambler here in the
Dallas area, and he, again, is an unsolved murder here in the-we
might call it the Dallas area; I believe it was actually in Denton
County. Actually, who murdered him I don't know. It was the
common gossip among the underworld that he had a feud, that
3092
there was a feud between Herbert Noble and another gambler that
formerly lived here, Bennie Binion, who is now in the penitentiary,
for income-tax violation I believe.
Now, whether or not actually Bennie Binion had anything to do
with Herbert Noble being killed or being shot at several times, I
don't know. Herbert Noble told ine that he did, that he was responsible for it. He also told me that the first time that he got shot,
that Lois Green and Johnny Gusafi, another well-known hoodlum
here in the Dallas area, were the ones who shot him.
Mr. SPEER. This Lois Green, that is the brother of the Cecil
Green you were talking about?
Lieutenant GANNAWAY. Yes, sir; he is the one who was shot out
here in West Dallas a few years ago and killed.
Mr. SPEER. Now, this entire group you have described here this
morning are commonly known as knob-knockers, hijackers, burglars,
addicts
Lieutenant GANNAWAY. Well, with the exception of Herbert Noble;
I never knew him to do anything but run a gambling joint of some
kind, and as far as being a robber or a safe burglar or a narcotic
addict, if he was I don't know anything about it.
Senator DANIEL. I imagine the same thing might be true of several
others. You have named so many, I doubt that it would be possible
for you to classify everybody you have named in that category; isn't
that correct?
Lieutenant GANNAWAY. That's true.
Senator DANIEL. In other words, you have had so many names
here this morning.
What Mr. Speer is after, I am sure, is that many of those you have
named, and so indicated as you named them, are connected with safecracking, burglaries, narcotics, and things of that kind.
Lieutenant
GANNAWAY.
Yes, sir.
Go ahead.
Mr. SPEER. During this period of time, did you have occasion to
know a Eugene McCroskey, from Kansas City?
Lieutenant GANNAWAY. Yes, sir; I knew Eugene McCroskey.
Mr. SPEER. Who was he associated with in this area?
Lieutenant GANNAWAY. He was associated at that time with a mai
named Rudolph Trombino, I believe his name was, and Nick Cascio,
and Nick's associates. I believe that McCroskey and Trombino
were arrested out at a place where Nick was living. I believe it was
the corner of Myrtle and Pennsylvania or Myrtle and Peabody.
Senator
DANIEL.
Mr. SPEER.
Peabody?
3093
robbed or, as they call it, case the place, and then that they notify
some out-of-State person, known safe burglars and so forth, to come
in and pull the job, and then leave.
That way, they stand a lesser risk of being caught and tied up with
a job.
Consequently, other people in other States do the same thing for
the safe burglars and the hijackers here in the Dallas area.
Mr. SPEER. That might account for your statement awhile ago
that they didn't pull any of these jobs in Texas themselves?
Lieutenant GANNAWAY. Yes, sir.
Mr. SPEER [handing the witness a photograph]. I would like to
show you a photograph here, and see if you can identify one or all
of these people.
Lieutenant GANNAWAY. The man here [indicating] is the man I
know as McCroskey, and the man in the center is the man I know as
Cecil Green.
I don't know the other man.
Mr. SPEER. Thank you very much.
Senator DANIEL. All right. This picture will be offered in the
record as exhibit A of the Dallas hearings.
(Exhibit A of the Dallas hearings appears on p. 3094.)
Anything further?
Mr. SPEER. That's all.
Senator DANIEL. All right. Thank you very much, Lieutenant
Gannaway. We will be hearing from you again, I am sure.
Lieutenant GANNAWAY. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. I appreciate this information you have brought
before the committee, and all your cooperation with the staff of this
committee in preparing for these hearings.
Lieutenant GANNAWAY. Thank you, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Now we are going to have a 5-minute recess.
(Short recess.)
Senator DANIEL. The committee will come to order.
Mr. Warren Heddens.
Just a moment. Let me say to the press and television cameras
that this witness is with the Bureau of Narcotics, and cannot be
photographed. You will understand why, I am sure. No photographs of this witness.
Mr. Warren Heddens.
Will you be sworn, Mr. Heddens? Do you solemnly swear that the
testimony you will give to this subcommittee of the Senate Judiciary
Committee will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the
truth, so help you God?
Mr. HEDDENS. I do.
3094
No. 24269
Photograph of Michael Ergovich, 36 years, 5' 8", weight: 155; Cecil Green,
No. 75952, 36 years, 5' 11", weight: 175; Eugene McCroskey, No. 21016,
35 years, 5' 7"; weight: 160.
3095
Mr. SPEER. During that period of time, have you made investigations of large-scale narcotic burglaries, hijackings, and robberies?
Mr. HEDDENS. I have.
Mr. SPEER. Would you start back with, say, 1943, and mention a
few of those; describe the method of operation and just what happened?
Mr. HEDDENS. Yes, sir.
Mr. SPEER. This Lois Green that you mentioned, according to your
information was he a narcotics addict?
Mr. HEDDENS. He was a marihuana smoker and a cocaine sniffer.
Mr. SPEER. And this Gusafi?
Mr. REDDENS. I don't believe heused narcotics. I never heard
that he did.
3096
right.
Yes, sir.
REDDENS.
Senator
cotics?
Yes, Sir.
DANIEL.
Mr. REDDENS
SPEER.
All right.
3097
3098
Mr. SPEER.
HEDDENS. That's
Mr. SPEER. But it is
right.
Narcotic Act?
Mr. HEDDENS. That's right; yes, sir.
3099
Mr. HEDDENS. He was arrested in Las Vegas, Nev., with sixtysome $1,000 bills on his person. There were no narcotics recovered.
Mr. SPEER. You mean these were all $1,000 bills?
Mr. HEDDENS. Yes, sir.
Mr. SPEER. How long after the burglary was be arrested?
Mr. HEDDENS. Within a very short time after the burglary.
Mr. SPEER. So he had already fenced the narcotics and obtained
71
515-56--pt. 7
-48
3100
GENTRY. Yes, I
do.
OF
ERNEST
M. GENTRY,
NARCOTICS,
DISTRICT SUPERVISOR,
TREASURY
BUREAU
OF
DEPARTMENT
We who are engaged in narcotic law enforcement are aware of the extent of
the committee's search for the facts related to the narcotic problem. The results
of the committee's efforts can and will be of considerable interest and assistance
not only to those of us concerned with the administration of narcotic laws, but
to every peace officer and citizen in the Nation.
The area to which my remarks relate primarily is identified as the Tenth
District of the Bureau of Narcotics, comprised of the States of Texas, Louisiana,
and Mississippi, with headquarters at Dallas, Texas.
ADDICTION
The principal drug of addiction throughout the three States is heroin. The
addiction found to morphine or other opium derivatives is considerably less than
the heroin addiction encountered, and the usage of other opium derivatives is
generally a sustaining procedure for the addict due to his inability for various
reasons to secure heroin.
Cocaine usage is uncommon and generally involves diversion by persons in the
medical or allied profession.
Addiction to synthetic narcotic drugs has increased during the past few years.
The increase of cases of addiction to these drugs has occurred principally in the
medical or allied professional groups. Addiction to synthetic narcotic drugs in
nonmedical or professional groups has been encountered frequently. These
cases result from the thefts or diversions from legitimate stocks usually when the
heroin addict's supply is eliminated.
Opiim smoking is not prevalent but is encountered periodically among Chinese.
Marihuana usage has increased considerably during the past few years.
3101
The Bureau of Narcotics maintains records showing the number and distribution by name and address of every addict encountered and reported by Federal,
State and local authorities throughout the United States. The number of addicts
reported in Texas, Louisiana, and Mississippi since January 1, 1953, are as follows:
TExAs
Addicts reported during 1953
Houston -------------------------------------------------------San Antonio ---------------------------------------------------Dallas --------------------------------------------------------Other ----------------------------------------------------------
37
213
43
96
Total ----------------------------------------------------
389
LOUISIANA
28
19
Total -----------------------------------------------------
47
Mississippi
6
56
Total -----------------------------------------------------
62
TEXAS
Addicts reported during 1954
Houston- ------------------------------------------------------San Antonio ---------------------------------------------------Dallas --------------------------------------------------------Other ---------------------------------------------------------
36
44
56
106
Total ----------------------------------------------------
242
LOUISIANA
30
18
48
Mississippi
42
Total -----------------------------------------------------
56
TEXAS
Addicts reported during 1955 to Oct. 15, 1955
Houston-------------------------------------------------------39
San Antonio ---------------------------------------------------Dallas -------------------------------------------------------Fort Worth -----------------------------------------------------Other ----------------------------------------------------------
122
385
5
70
654
Total ---------------------------------------------------NoT.-38 of the total addicts reported during 1955 were under 21 years of age.
3102
74
10
Total ---------------------------------------------------- 84
NOTE.-14 of the total addicts reported during 1955 were under 21 years of age.
Mississippi
Addicts reported during 1955
Jackson --------------------------------------------------------Other ----------------------------------------------------------
3
92
95
Total ---------------------------------------------------NOTE.-None of the total addicts reported during 1955 were under 21 years of
age.
Total addicts reported under 21 years of age in the States of Texas, Louisiana and
Mississippi
80
1953 ----------------------------------------------------------11
1954 ----------------------------------------------------------52
1955 (To Oct. 15) -----------------------------------------------The increase in the number of addicts reported for the year 1955 does not
necessarily indicate an increase in addiction during the period. The increased
total for this year is the result of efforts to encourage the reporting of addicts by
state and local authorities. For instance, the total of 385 addicts reported in
Dallas for the year 1955 does not mean that this total was encountered during
the year 1955. The increased total is the result of the excellent cooperation
received from the Dallas Police Department bringing addict reports up to date
for the period since January 1953. With the growing cooperation in this program
more accurate statistics on the extent of the problem will be compiled.
EXTENT OF THE TRAFFIC
The principal drugs encountered in the traffic in this District are heroin and
marihuana. The majority of the heroin is of Mexican origin and has been found
to range from 5 percent to 75 percent in purity. A portion of the heroin supply
is available through the interstate traffic. This is believed to have been smuggled
at Eastern ports and distributed through dealers in New York and the Middle
West to retail peddlers in this area. Practically all of the marihuana is of Mexican
origin.
The heroin market is principally retail, with dealers distributing small quantities
for consumption to addicts throughout the area. Supplies are maintained by
dealers through frequent trips to border points or through occasional deliveries
from out-of-State dealers.
Evidence of wholesale distribution from the State of Texas to other States is
being developed from time to time, and an example of this type of operation was
the case of Milton Abramson, alias Milton Bennett who, after having operated as
an interstate dealer from San Antonio for several years, was arrested on November
23, 1954, in Los Angeles, Calif., at which time 27 ounces of heroin of Mexican
origin was seized.
An example of wholesale distribution within the State of Texas was the case of
Rogelio Chapa Lozano of Hitchcock. Following two purchases of heroin of
approximately 1 ounce each, Lozano was arrested in Galveston, Tex., on April 30.
1955, and approximately 6 ounces of heroin were seized.
In Louisiana, principally the New Orleans area, heroin for the past 3 years or so
Although small quantities of
has been available in retail quantities generally.
heroin of Mexican origin have been present, the source for the majority has beef'
interstate traffickers dealing in heroin smuggled through the port of New York.
During the past 2 years approximately 20 retail peddlers of heroin have been
arrested in New Orleans, and investigation disclosed their source of supply to be
an important trafficker, J. C. Saddler of Chicago, Ill. The investigation of
Saddler's activities in Chicago resulted in the seizure on September 10, 1955, of
approximately 40 ounces of heroin and the arrest of Clotelle Saddler, his wife, and
Annie Clay, his mother. Latest reports indicate that Saddler is a fugitive.
3103
The scope of the traffic to and from Texas in marihuana and heroin is clearly
indicated in the case of John E. Sutton and nine other convicted in United States
District Court at Houston, Tex., in May 1955. The investigation completed
in April 1955, established that this group was responsible for the interstate
trafficking of over 1,200 pounds of marihuana smuggled from Mexico to New
York, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and other Eastern cities, in addition to that
distributed locally in the Houston area during the past 3 years. This same group
of dealers secured heroin supplies in New York which were returned to Houston
and distributed to dealers and addicts there during this period.
The smoking opium traffic is believed to be at a minimum throughout the
district. No large seizures have been made during the years, 1953, 1954, and 1955.
Following several purchases in ounce lots, investigators of this traffic in Houston
during 1955 culminated in the arrest of 4 persons, all Chinese, and the elimination
of 3 commercial opium smoking establishments.
Thefts and diversions of morphine and other addiction sustaining drugs from
legitimate stocks add to the supply of illicit drugs throughout the district. The
total thefts for the past 3 years and the quantities lost are as follows:
TEXAS
72
10%
79%
LOUISIANA
3
265
4%
Mississippi
Thefts reported from July 1, 1953, to Dec. 81, 1953
Total number ---------------------------------------------------ounces-..
Morphine-------------------------------------------do ....
Other narcotic drugs -------------------------------------
7
2
3%
TEXAS
11
2.
14%
Mississippi
17
1%
15%
TEXAS
Thefts reported during 1955 to Sept. 30, 1955
68
-------------------------------------------------Total number
8
ounces- Morphine -------------------------------------------119
do
Other narcotic drugs ----------------------------------------
3104
30
11 Y2
84Y
Mississippi
8
3Y
10%
pounds-.
ounces-_
do-...
gallons- ounces-_-
3651
11
1
32
2
LOUISIANA
None
None
None
None
8
TEXAS
211
35
5
11
6
3105
None
None
None
None
90.5
TEXAS
pounds-_
152
ounces-38
-.--------------57
gallons- .
5
grains- 15
LOUISIANA
None
None
None
None
2
The Bureau of Narcotics maintains five branch offices in the three-State area of
Texas, Louisiana, and Mississippi. With district headquarters and an enforcement office located at Dallas, other offices are located at Houston, San Antonio,
and El Paso, Tex., and New Orleans, La. There are 22 agents, including the
district supervisor, assigned to the area. These agents, consistently working overtime, are charged not only with the responsibility of enforcing the Federai laws
relating to the illicit domestic traffic in narcotic drugs and marihuana, but with
the responsibility of investigating all matters essential to the control and regulation of legitimate production and distribution of narcotic drugs through manufacturers, wholesalers, physicians, pharmacists, and hospitals.
Results of the enforcement activities of agents of this Bureau were referred to
above in the seizure statistics and are reported in the arrest and conviction statistics below:
3106
Narcotic
Total
Place
State and
local
Federal
State and
local
Federal
56
13
64
29
68
75
44
16
2
71
56
44
49
12
216
97
50
13
1
464
Total -------------------------------
230
208
377
625
284
151
142
44
819
1,440
Narcotic
Total
Year
and
State
local
Federal
41
26
1953 --------------------------------------
State
localand
Federal
247
124
56
LOUISIANA
Narcotic
Place
State and
Federal
State and
Federal
Total
local
local
New Orleans -----------------------------Other -------------------------------------
41
2
305
4
46
12
109
10
501
28
Total --------------------------------
43
309
58
119
529
1953
_ __
_e___
___
30
62
---------------------------------------
and
State
local
Federal
State
localand
Federal
Total
102
Mississippi
Total actual narcotic arrests during 1953
Marihuana
Narcotic
Place
_____
State and
Federal
--
______Total
State and
Federal
local
local
Jackson ----------------------------------Other -------------------------------------
2
5
2
15
0
0
1
5
5
25
Total --------------------------------
17
30
3107
TEXAS
Place
State and
local
Federal
Marihuana
State and
local
Federal
Total
59
18
8
6
72
130
66
49
8
61
38
17
6
7
257
136
49
34
4
389
363
150
97
25
779
Total -------------------------------
163
314
325
612
1,414
Total actual narcotic arrests of persons under 21 years of age during 1954
Narcotic
Marihuana
Place
Total
State and
local
Federal
Houston ---------------------------------San Antonio .------------------------------Dallas -----------------------------------Fort Worth ------------------------------Other -----------------------------------Total -------------------------------
State and
local
Federal
6
2
1
1
3
2
13
0
0
4
2
2
0
1
36
9
9
0
0
141
19
26
1
2
184
13
19
41
159
232
LOUISIANA
Marihuana
State and
local
Federal
Federal
State and
local
Total
9
1
101
10
15
2
87
18
212
31
Total -------------------------------
10
111
17
105
243
Total actual narcotic arrests of persons under 21 years of age during 1954
Narcotic
Marihuana
Place
Total
and
State
local
Federal
State
and
local
Federal
14
25
Other -------------------------------------
Total --------------------------------
17
28
3108
Marihuana
Place
Total
State and
local
Federal
State and
local
Federal
2
1
1
2
0
0
0
1
Total --------------------------------
3
4
7
Total actual narcotic arrests of persons under 21 years of age during 1954
Narcotic
Mlarlhuana
Place
Total
State and
local
Federal
State and
local
Federal
0
1
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
3
Total--------------------------------
TEXAs
Total arrests by federal narcotic agents during 1955 to Sept. 30, 1955
Place
Narcotic
Under 21
Marihuana
Under 21
11
22
9
1
21
0
1
1
0
1
9
5
17
0
9
0
0
5
64
40
LOUISIANA
Total arrests by Federal narcotic agents during 1955 to Sept. 30, 1955
Under 21
Marihuana
7
3
0
0
8
0
10
Narcotic
Place
New Orleans -----------------------------------------Other
------------------------------------------------Total -----------------------------------------
Under 21
0
Mississippi
Total arrests by Federal narcotic agents during 1955 to Sept. 30, 1955
Place
Narcotic
Jackson ---------------------------------------------
Under 21
Marihuana
Under 21
0
1
0
0
0
0
3109
Narcotic
Total
Place
Federal
Federal
State and
local
45
8
54
21
66
12
1
10
2
10
54
31
49
9
204
35
2
9
1
189
146
42
122
33
459
184
35
347
236
802
State and
local
Marihuana
Total
Federal
State and
local
Federal
State and
local
20
30
37
96
LOUISIANA
Marihuana
Place
Narcotic
Federal
State and
local
Federal
Total
State and
local
Marihuana
Place
State and
local
Federal
State and
local
Federal
Total
Jackson ----------------------------------
Other
15
17
------------------------------------Total
--------------------------------
~I
III
3110
Narcotic:
Federal ----------------------------------------------------State and local ----------------------------------------------Marihuana:
Federal
--------------------------------------------------State and local -----------------------------------------------
Total
0
0
----------------------------------------------------TFxAs
Marihuana
Place
Houston
San Antonio .................
D allas .............
Fort Worth--O ther ------------------------------------Total_-
Federal
Marihuana
State and
local
Federal
State and
local
Total
4
5
0
1
3
2
13
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
26
9
7
0
1
21
15
20
1
3
50
13
15
29
381
LOUISIANA
Marihuana
Place
Total
State and
local
Federal
State and
local
Federal
25
12
39
85
Other ------------------------------------
10
19
Total ------------------------------
10
30
15
49
104
3111
Narcotio
Total
Place
State and
local
Federal
State and
local
Federal
1
0
4
2
1
0
4
1
10
3
Total ---------------------------------
13
Mississippi
Total narcotic convictions during 1954
Marihuana
Narcotic
Place
State and
local
Federal
Jackson ---------------------------------Other --------------------------------Total -------------------------------
State and
local
Federal
Total
0
4
1
4
0
0
0
0
1
8
Narcotic
Total
Place
State and
local
Federal
State and
local
Federal
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Total -----------------------------
TEXAS
Total convictions during 1955, to Sept. 80, for violations reported by Federal narcotic
agents
Place
Narcotic
Under 21
Marihuana
Under 21
10
24
6
0
21
0
2
0
0
0
25
4
9
1
20
0
0
1
0
0
Total -------------------------------------------
61
59
3112
Total convictions during 1955, to Sept. 30, for violations reported by Federal narcotic
agents
Under 21
Marihuana
1
0
0
0
3
1
Narcotic
Place
New Orleans -----------------------------------------Other ---------------------------------------------Total ------------------------------------------
Under 21
0
Mississippi
Total convictions during 1955, to Sept. 30, for violations reported by Federal narcotic
agents
Narcotic
Place
--------------------------------------------------------------------
0
3
Total ---------------------------------------
Jackson
Other
Under 21
0
1
Marihuana
0
0
Under 21
0
0
10
The State and local arrest and conviction totals were compiled for the years
1953 and 1954 from information furnished by State and local law enforcement
agencies and county attorneys. The total arrests and convictions for the year
1955, to September 30, are those reported by the Bureau of Narcotics only.
In the performance of their duties there has been close mutual cooperation
between agents of this Bureau, the Customs Agency Service, other Federal
investigative agencies, including the military, and State and local enforcement
officers. The States of Texas and Louisiana maintain separate narcotic enforcement units and several of the cities in the district, including Dallas, Houston,
Austin, Corpus Christi, San Antonio, and New Orleans, have narcotic squads or
officers specifically assigned who are doing commendable work. The narcotic
squads of Dallas, Corpus Christi, and New Orleans have been particularly active
and effective in their efforts to suppress the traffic.
In the regulation and control of the legitimate trade mutual cooperation exists
between this Bureau and the licensing boards that have their responsibility fixed
by the laws of each of the three States to determine eligibility to engage in
legitimate narcotic business.
CONCLUSION
The two principal factors in drug addiction and trafficking are the individual's
desire to use or traffic in narcotic drugs, and the availability of the drug. The
increase in addication and in trafficking since 1946 is a reflection of the international oversupply produced in excess of recognized legitimate medical needs
and produced in countries other than the United States. With drugs available
and trafficking but one facet of the general crime condition, the increase in addiction and trafficking are consistent with the general increase in crimes of all types
as reflected by arrest statistics for the past few years.
The statistics on addiction and narcotic arrests in this district, and particularly
in Texas, are proportionate to statistics from other sections of the United States
which reflect that there are higher percentages in those regions surrounding
centers for the sources of supply.
The seriousness of the situation requires proper and active enforcement at all
levels. There must be vigorous prosecution and stiff sentences without unnecessary delay.
The penalty provisions of the Federal law and all State laws should be amended
to provide for mandatory increased punishment of offenders having prior convictions for violations of either the Federal or State narcotic laws, or both. In
addition there should be uniform compulsory confinement of addicts with supervised control during the postrelease period following treatment.
3113
the Texas, Louisiana, and Mississippi area, that is, the regular heroin
traffic and then a diversion traffic?
Mr. GENTRY. Yes, sir. The traffic in this particular area, I believe, is a little bit different, from that ordinarily encountered in other
sections of the country.
We have, in this particular district, these three States, the threepronged source of supply. Principally the drug of addiction is heroin, heroin that originates in Mexico. We do have, however, in
Louisiana and in the Texas area, sources of supply, as a result of
smuggling through the port of New York and distributors from there
wholesaling to retail distributors in this particular area. Now, in
addition to that, we have, under the Federal narcotic law, certain
legitimate dealers, who are licensed to deal in narcotic drugs, and
through their-in some instances through their unethical and unlawful practices, a quantity of drugs are diverted to the illicit channels.
Mr. SPEER. That does constitute, of course, a small minority, but
it doesMr. GENTRY. It does add to the problem.
Mr. SPEER. It is a problem.
Mr. GENTRY. However, as you will notice in the report I prepared
there, diversions as a result of thefts and burglaries constitute a very
great portion of the drug supply in this area, probably greater than
in most other sections of the country.
Mr. SPEER. Could you break that down for us, to show the volume? Do you have that down so you could show the volume?
Mr. GENTRY. That is beginning on page 7 of the statement.
For instance, in 1953 there were a total of 72 thefts reported in the
State of Texas, involving 10% ounces of morphine and 79Y2 ounces of
other narcotic drugs.
Mr. SPEER. Well, now, do you have a rule of thumb whereby we
can convert that into, say, doses, so we would have some idea of what
it might mean?
Mr. GENTRY. Well, the therapeutic dose of morphine is one-sixth
of a grain. There are 437Y2 grains in an ounce; then we had 10%
ounces of morphine.
The other narcotic drugs totaled, there, 79Y2 ounces, which would
include codiene, pantapon, dilaudid, and other addiction forming
drugs under the jurisdiction of the Federal narcotic law.
Mr. SPEER. Certainly the average dose would not be over a
quarter of a grain; is that right?
Mr. GENTRY. That's correct.
Mr. SPEER. And there are 437 grains to the ounce?
Mr. GENTRY. Yes, sir.
Mr. SPEER. So you would have something like 1,700 or 1,800 doses
to the ounce?
Mr. GENTRY. There would be thousands of doses represented by
the quantity involved there, yes, sir.
Mr. SPEER. Go right ahead.
Mr. GENTRY. In Louisiana, for instance, in 1953, there were three
thefts, burglaries reported, and approximately 265 grains of morphine,
4 ounces of other narcotic drugs. In Mississippi, it was proportionately smaller there.
3114
However, in 1954, you will note that there were 147 such thefts
and burglaries in the State of Texas, 32y ounces of morphine involved,
and 224 ounces of other narcotic drugs.
Mr. SPEER. That 32 ounces, that represents 2 pounds of morphine,
and that is a sizable quantity of morphine, is it not?
Mr. GENTRY. Considering the fact that it would be of 99 percent
purity.
Senator DANIEL. What would that be worth on the retail market?
Mr. GENTRY. In the illicit traffic, in its pure state, it would probably
wholesale for $500 to $700 per ounce, perhaps as high as $1,000 per
ounce, wholesale. But if it were adulterated, it could be reduced to
10 times-adulterated to increase the quantity to 10 times that
amount, and increase proportionately in that value.
Mr. SPEER. It would be worth, on the retail market, from $1,000
to $10,000 per ounce?
Mr. GENTRY. Yes, sir. During 1954, however, there were 224%
ounces of other narcotic or addiction sustaining drugs.
Mr. SPEER. You mention these other drugs; there is dilaudid and
demarolMr. GENTRY. Powdered opium, and other narcotic drugs without
relation to opium.
Mr. SPEER. All of which are equally if not more addicting than
morphine?
Mr. GENTRY. Both are addiction forming and addiction sustaining.
In the event, for instance, if heroin is not available, and the addict
has to maintain his habit, which he does have to, unless he undergoes
withdrawal symptoms, why, the other narcotic drugs would sustain
his habit without any trouble whatsoever, prevent his withdrawal.
Mr. SPEER. Go right ahead, sir.
Mr. GENTRY. These thefts in 1955, to date, have involved a total of
68 thefts in the State of Texas, 8 ounces of morphine involved, 119%
ounces of other narcotic drugs. Louisiana has had 30 thefts, involving
11% ounces of morphine, 84% ounces of other narcotic drugs. And
Mississippi has had a total of 8 thefts, 33 ounces of morphine and 10%
ounces of other narcotic drugs. I might add that Mississippi does not
enjoy the prevalence of heroin traffic that the State of Texas and the
State of Louisiana do.
Senator DANIEL. We don't enjoy it, either.
Mr. GENTRY. I said enjoyed, sir, because of certain situations that
have existed in the past, that seemed to indicate to an enforcement
officer that someone enjoyed it down here.
Senator DANIEL. Yes, sir. In other words, when you said enjoyed,
3115
heroin?
will range anywhere from 5 to 75 percent, I
About 69 to 70 percent is about the highest purity that we
Mr. GENTRY. It
believe.
get.
Mr. SPEER. That is about average, that is, for wholesale quantities?
Mr. GENTRY. Yes, sir.
Mr. SPEER. Now, this heroin in the former case you mentioned,
that was being transported from San Antonio back to the West
Coast?
Mr.
GENTRY.
Yes, sir.
3116
GENTRY.
3117
DANIEL.
town?
Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. You think about it and submit it to us in writing,
will you?
Mr. GENTRY. Very good, sir.
Senator DANIEL. I would like to have you study just a moment
on the matter of how many men you could properly make use of to
try to help lick this traffic in these three States.
All right, Mr. Speer, do you have any further questions? Mr. Speer
wants to call you back before he presents evidence on another case
this afternoon.
Mr. Counsel, do you have any further questions?
Mr. GASQUE. Yes, sir, I have 1 or 2 questions, Mr. Chairman.
Answer them, if you will, very briefly.
Mr. GENTRY. Very well, sir.
Mr. GASQUE. First, I would like your opinion on wiretapping;
are you in favor of it in narcotics cases?
Mr. GENTRY. I believe that wiretapping would be an investigative
aid if properly controlled, which would be invaluable to any and all
law enforcement, and particularly to such a transitory interstate
traffic as the narcotics traffic.
M1[r. GASQUE. Thank you. Now, what is your greatest concern in
handling narcotics in the Dallas area? Can you put, your finger on the
thing that is of most concern to you at this time?
Mr. GENTRY. The biggest problem we have is the frequency with
which violators, addicts, and retail traffickers may acquire heroin
and marihuana for retail distribution in this area. That is our biggest
problem, the problem that causes us the most difficulty.
Mr. GASQUE. The biggest problem, then, you have is getting back
at the source from which they obtain these narcotics?
Mr. GENTRY. Yes, sir.
Mr. GASQUE. Now, what is your program over the next 6 months,
without divulging any of your investigations, what is your program
over the next 6 months for getting these violators, and particularly
these bigtime violators who have spread out to other States?
Mr.
GENTRY.
3118
3119
DANIEL.
Mr. SISTRUNK.
various offenses?
Senator
of the Internal
Revenue Act, on whisky, and 1 of them was for possession of narcotics,
and the other was conspiracy of narcotics; and I think the last time
was for possessing and giving away narcotics.
Senator DANIEL. When was the last time that you were convicted
for a narcotics offense?
Mr. SISTRUNK.
1946-47.
Mr. SISTRUNK.
Mr. SISTRUNK.
Senator
Yes, sir.
DANIEL.
Senator DANIEL. Have you used any type of narcotic drug, such as
heroin or anything else, since you got out of prison in 1952?
Mr. SISTRUNK. No, sir.
3120
Senator DANIEL. You have used narcotic drugs, though, before you
went to prison, haven't you?
Mr. SISTRUNK. That's right.
Senator DANIEL. Before 1952?
Mr. SISTRUNK. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. What did you use?
I used heroin when I couldn't
Mr. SISTRUNK. Morphine, mostly.
get morphine, but I was mostly always using morphine.
Senator DANIEL. How long did you use heroin and morphine?
Mr. SISTRUNK. Well, I'd say about three years that I was addicted.
Senator DANIEL. And how did you happen to start?
Mr. SISTRUNK. Well, I just started.
Senator DANIEL. Did somebody give you the first dose?
Mr. SISTRUNK. Well, I don't remember.
Senator DANIEL. Did you start using morphine or heroin?
Mr. SISTRUNK. Morphine.
Senator DANIEL. You don't know why you started?
Mr. SISTRUNK. NO, sir, just
Senator DANIEL. Were some of your associates using it?
Mr. SISTRUNK. Well, we were just-at the time, well, we were just
No, sir.
3121
I knew
him.
Senator DANIEL. You knew that Cecil Green used heroin and
other narcotics, too, didn't you?
Mr. SISTRUNK. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. You mean to say you never saw Cecil Green use
any type of narcotic drug?
Mr. SISTRUNK. I never saw Cecil Green use any kind of narcotics
in my life.
Senator DANIEL. What about Tincey Eggleston?
Mr. SISTRUNK. I never seen Tincey, either.
Senator DANIEL. Was he a friend of yours?
Mr. SISTRUNK. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Did you associate with him?
Mr. SISTRUNK. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. What about Edell Evans?
Mr. SISTRUNK. I don't know him.
Senator DANIEL. Buster Vincent?
Mr. SISTRUNK. I knew Buster Vincent, yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Was he a friend and associate of yours?
Mr. SISTRUNK. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Jetty Bass?
Mr. SISTRUNK. I know Jetty, yes, sir.
Senator
DANIEL.
I know
who he is; I have never been associated with him.
Senator DANIEL. Have you ever been in any kind of dealings with
him?
Mr. SISTRUNK. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Nick Cascio?
Mr. SISTRUNK. I know him, yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. How long have you known him?
Mr. SISTRUNK. About the same period of time.
Senator DANIEL. Have you been in any kind of dealings with him?
Mr. SISTRUNK. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Were you in a car with Neil Aeby and Dude
Tacker recently, when there was a certain amount of dynamite thrown
out in a paper sack?
Mr. SISTRUNK. I refuse to answer that, on the grounds that it
might degrade and incriminate me.
Senator
DANIEL.
you, this committee doesn't recognize that as any reason for refusal
to answer.
Mr. SISTRUNK. All right.
Senator DANIEL. The committee, of course, does recognize and
abide by the constitutional provision contained in the fifth amendment
and is that what you want to claim at this time?
Mr. SISTRUNK. That's right.
Senator DANIEL. You fear that a truthful answer to that question
might tend to incriminate you?
Mr. SISTRUNK. Yes, sir.
3122
Mr. SISTRUNK. I have known him off and on for, I guess, 4 or 5 years.
Senator DANIEL. Were you here when Neil Aeby testified?
Mr. SISTRUNK. I was in the hall, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Did you hear the officer testifying about this
Senator
construction work every day. A man can't work on the type of work
that I do and use narcotics, because the work is too hard, and he
can't-he doesn't have time to get out and hustle the narcotics and
stuff, and work.
Senator DANIEL. Well, tell us something about the business of
hustling narcotics. When you were in the business, where did you
get the drugs?
Mr. SISTRUNK. Well, you have to buy it from wherever you can,
or get it any way-
3123
Senator DANIEL.
associated with you in that activity.
Mr. SISTRUNK. Well, I don't-that's too long ago; I don't remember.
Senator DANIEL. Have you forgotten who they were?
Mr. SISTRUNK. Yes, sir.
Green?
Mr. SISTRUNK. No, sir.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Jetty Bass?
Senator DANIEL. I am asking you the same question about each one
of them, whether you ever committed any b urglaries of any type
with any one of these men. Jetty Bass?
Mr.
SISTRUNK.
Senator
No, sir.
DANIEL.
James B. Smith?
Senator
DANIEL.
Nick Cascio?
Senator DANIEL. Well, back in the time when you were burglarizing
drugstores and hospitals to get narcotics, did you have much trouble
selling those narcotics on the market?
Mr. SISTRUNK.
Senator
Well,
DANIEL.
Mr. SISTRUNK.
Senator DANIEL. Well, I thought a minute ago you said you also
engaged in selling narcotics, years ago.
Mr. SISTRUNK. I did, but that was-that was quite a few years
ago.
Senator DANIEL. Well, that is what I am asking you about. I
want to know how the traffic ran.
When you were getting narcotics for sale, did you have any trouble
disposing of them here in Dallas?
Mr. SISTRUNK.
Well,
of them.
Senator DANIEL. Did you have some pushers that would go out
and sell them for you?
Mr. SISTRUNK. No, sir.
3124
Senator
DANIEL.
penitentiary?
1952.
Mr. SPEER. 1952? Since that time, have you been on parole?
Mr. SISTRUNK. No, sir; I haven't been on parole.
Mr. SPEER. When was your time up?
Mr. SISTRUNK.
Mr. SISTRUNK.
first of 1953.
Mr. SPEER.
The first?
that you have made it a point not to associate with drug traffickers?
Mr. SISTRUNK. That's right; yes, sir.
Mr. SPEER. Have you associated with drug traffickers since
January 1, 1953?
Mr.
SISTRUNK.
No, sir.
wouldn't you?
that came around or something, that were messing with it, that
I didn't know anything about. But to my knowledge I haven't.
Mr. SPEER. You mean someone that you didn't know very well
could have been around you?
Mr. SISTRUNK. That's right; yes, sir.
Mr. SPEER. How long did you use heroin?
Mr. SISTRUNK.
I used it-I
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
penitentiary in
1952, you have not had any contact with drugs; is that your statement?
Mr. SISTRUNK. No, sir; that's right.
3125
Mr. SPEER. And you have not associated with any drug traffickers?
Mr. SISTRUNK. That's right.
Mr. SPEER. I want you to consider that answer, now, in the light
Louisiana in 1954?
Mr. SISTRUNK. No, sir.
Mr. SPEER. In company with Nick Cascio?
Mr. SISTRUNK. No, sir.
Mr. SPEER. Were you stopped in an automobile in Louisiana in
1954?
Mr. SISTRUNK. No, sir.
Mr. SPEER. At that time, in 1948, when you were stopped with
Mr. SPEER. What were you doing over in Louisiana with it?
Mr.
or since
you were out of the penitentiary, have you ever used cocaine?
Mr. SISTRUNK.
No, sir.
3126
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
ILJLICIT
NARCOTICS TRAFFIC
sir; it is a powder.
Mr. SPEER. Now, what occasion did you have to see an ounce bottle
Mr. SPEER. And the bottle you described is a bottle that is ordinarily sold to big drugstores or hospitals with a great demand for
cocaine. Certainly no doctor or small drugstore would have an ounce
of cocaine.
So that the cocaine you are describing is of that nature; do you
recall when it was you saw this cocaine?
Mr. SISTRUNK. Well, it's been some time ago.
Mr. SPEER. As a matter of fact, those cocaine bottles were quite
common around here at one time, were they not?
Mr. SISTRUNK. Well, I wouldn't know.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Mr.
31-27
Senator DANIEL. At
Senator DANIEL. You haven't had any other business on the side?
Mr. SISTRUNK. That's right; no business.
Senator DANIEL. About how much did you make in 1953?
Senator DANIEL. That's all right. The staff will look them over,
and we will give them back to you.
You brought those in accordance with our subpena?
Mr. SISTRUNK. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. And when was the last year that you were performing these burglaries and safe cracking jobs around here?
Mr. SISTRUNK. That was at-1947, whenever I went to the penitentiary.
Senator DANIEL. Did you file an income-tax return for that year?
Mr. SISTRUNK. I don't know if I did or not, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Do you know how much your income was when
Senator DANIEL. YOu don't remember how much you made a year?
Mr. SISTRUNK. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. And during what years did you do that? 1947;
what other years?
Mr. SISTRUNK. About 1946, 1947.
3128
Senator DANIEL. And you don't know whether you filed income
or not, and that is the question I asked you previously, and one I
would like to see you clear up for the record, so you won't leave this
record saying that you haven't used any heroin since 1952.
How many times do you think you have used it since 1952?
I don't know.
3129
it.
I am his counsel.
record?
3130
.Mr. T
though.
Senator DANIEL. You were given 25 years?
Mr. TYLER. That's true.
Senator DANIEL. And how long did you serve?
Mr. TYLER. Oh, I don't remember. Eight or nine years.
Senator DANIEL. What?
Mr. TYLER. Eight or 9 years, something.
Senator DANIEL. How long have you been out?
Mr. TYLER. Since July the 1st, 1940, '41, something; I don't recall
exactly.
Senator DANIEL. Since about July, 1940 or '41?
Mr. TYLER. Something like that, yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. The record shows July 4, 1940; do you think
that is about right?
Mr. TYLER. That's approximately right, yes, sir. It's been quite
some time ago; I don't remember.
Senator DANIEL. Before that time, were you using heroin?
Mr. TYLER. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Since that time have you ever used heroin?
Mr. TYLER. I want to make a statement, Mr. Chairman.
Senator DANIEL. Well, now, I am going to ask questions.
Mr. TYLER. I have a-well, yes, sir, I understand.
Senator DANIEL. Then later on, you will have a chance.
3131
TYLER.
No.
Senator
right.
50
3132
3133
will be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, so help
you God?
Mr. BASS. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. You may be seated.
And your name?
Mr. PAYNE., My name is Robert Payne, of the Dallas bar.
Senator DANIEL. Mr. Robert Payne of the Dallas bar; you are
counsel for Jetty Bass?
Mr. PAYNE. Yes.
Senator
DANIEL.
Mr.
BASS.
Senator
Mr.
DANIEL.
BASS.
Senator
Right.
Or Y; J-e-t-t-y?
Yes, sir.
DANIEL.
Mr.
BASS.
I don't remember.
Mr. GASQUE. All right. Are you the same Jetty Bass who was
convicted November 25, 1933, of felony theft, and sentenced on
December 28, 1933, to 5 years?
Mr. BASS. Suspended.
Mr. GASQUE. Suspended sentence.
Now, are you the same Jetty Bass that was arrested and convicted
of burglary in September 1937, and sentenced to 3 years, 2 to 3 years
in the penitentiary?
Mr. WASS. Yes.
Mr. GASQUE. Are you the same Jetty Bass listed here as George
W. Bass, convicted on February 3, 1944-I think the actual conviction was on May 17, 1944-under the OPA Gas Ration Act, and
sentenced to 2 years and a $2,000 fine?
BASS. Yes.
Mr. GASQUE. Are
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
BASS. Kilburg.
GASQUE. To Kilburg
State Penitentiary?
3134
Mr. GASQUE. You have never injected heroin into your arms?
Mr. BASS. No.
3135
Senator DANIEL. Can you be positive whether or not you ever saw
any maxihuana?
Mr. BASS. I don't recall ever seeing any.
Senator DANIEL. Well, can you be positive you never saw any
heroin?
Mr. BASS. I am positive.
Senator DANIEL. And are you positive that you never had in your
hands or in your possession any cocaine, marihuana or heroin?
Mr. BASS. Never have.
Senator DANIEL. Have you ever had in your possession any
narcotic drug?
Mr. BASS. Never.
Senator DANIEL. All right, Mr. Gasque.
Mr. GASQUE. Now, are you familiar with the so-called Dallas
knob-knockers?
Mr. BASS. Well, I have kind of read about them.
Mr. GASQUE. You have read about them?
Mr. BASS. Yes, sir.
Mr. GASQUE. Are you a member of the knob-knockers?
Mr. BASS. I don't think so.
Senator DANIEL. Now, what was your answer?
Mr. BASS. I said I didn't think so.
Mr. GASQUE. Who have you read were the members of the knobknockers?
Mr. BASS. Well, I don't recall right now. It was in the paper.
Mr. GASQUE. Well, when you have read them in the paper, you
don't recall any of the names?
Mr. BASS. Well, I-some things I don't remember, I can't remember, on account of I was hurt whenever-in Alabama.
Mr. GASQUE. On account of what?
Mr. BAss. Whenever I was shot in Alabama.
Mr. GASQUE. Now, when were you shot in Alabama?
Mr. BASS. Whenever I got arrested up there.
Mr. GASQUE. Who shot you?
Mr. BASS. The police.
Mr. GASQUE. Why did he shoot you?
Mr. BASS. Well, I just thought maybe he tried to kill me.
Mr. GASQUE. Had you done anything to cause him to feel that way
about you?
Mr. BASS. Well, they convicted me for burglary.
Mr. GASQUE. Were you shooting?
Mr. BASS. No.
Mr. GASQUE. Did you have a gun on you?
Mr. BASS. No.
Mr. GASQUE. Now, were you in an automobile?
Mr. BASS. No.
Mr.
GASQUE.
In a house?
3136
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
you know, he cannot get the nod of a head, so speak out loudly.
GASQUE.
Senator
DANIEL.
3137
Mr. BASS. Everybody has heard about it, but I didn't know them
to be a member of a gang.
Senator DANIEL. Well, didn't you ever go with them on any
burglary job?
Mr. BASS. No.
Senator DANIEL. What about the trip to Alabama?
Mr. BASS. I didn't go with them.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Who?
DANIEL.
Mr. BASS.
Senator DANIEL. Have you ever been associated with her in any
way?
Mr. BASS. Yes.
Senator DANIEL. In what way?
Mr. BASS. Well, we lived together.
Senator Daniel. How long?
M. BASS. Oh, 2 or 3, 4 or 5 years, somewhere along in there.
3138
Senator DANIEL. Is that the only answer you can give us to that?
Mr. BASS. That's right.
Senator DANIEL. Did you ever see her smoke marihuana?
Mr. BAss. Never have.
Senator DANIEL. Did you ever see her use any kind of narcotic
drugs?
Mr. BASS. Never.
Senator DANIEL. Well, what business have you been in the last few
years, since you got out of the Alabama prison?
Mr. BASS. I haven't been in any.
Senator DNAIEL. What have you been doing?
Mr. BASS. Nothing.
Senator DANIEL. What?
Mr. BASS. I haven't done anything.
Mr. GASQUE. You are about the best dressed man, not to have
done anything, that I have ever seen.
Mr. BASS. These clothes was bought some few years ago, before
I went to the penitentiary.
Senator DANIEL. Well, you say you have not done anything since
you got out of the penitentiary?
Mr. BASS. No.
Mr. GASQUE. What about Cascio, was he a member of the knobknockers?
Mr. BASS. I told you I didn't know of any knob-knocker gang.
Mr. GASQUE. What about Pate, was he a member of the knobknockers?
Mr. BASS. I didn't know of any knob-knocker gang.
Senator DANIEL. Well, Pate and Cascio went with you to Alabama
when this burglary occurred over there, didn't they?
Mr. BASS. That's right.
Senator DANIEL. How many other trips had they made with you on
burglary jobs?
Mr. BASS. That's the only one.
Senator DANIEL. Did you ever see either one of them use narcotics?
Mr. BASS. Never.
Senator DANIEL. Neither one?
Mr. BASS. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Well, what have you done for a living since
1952-wait a minute; when did you get out of the penitentiary?
Mr. BASS. 1953.
Senator DANIEL. 1953; what time?
Mr. BASS. Well, the money that I have accumulated is people that
let me have it, because I am not able to do any work, any manual
work.
Senator DANIEL. You are not able to work?
Mr. BASS. That's right.
Senator DANIEL. And other people have let you have money?
Mr. BASS. That's right.
Senator DANIEL. And you have not had any type of income of your
own?
Mr. BASS. That's right.
Senator DANIEL. Well, what have these other people done, loaned
you money or something?
3139
Mr.
BASS.
Senator
No.
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Name one of
them.
Mr. BASS. Well, just different ones. Like I told you, somebody
might let me have it, then 2 or 3, 4 days later, I might not remember
who I got it from.
Senator
DANIEL.
with him?
Mr.
BASS.
Senator
DANIEL.
human being who has given you money so you yourself did not have to
work since 1953?
3140
Mr. BASS. No. Like I told you, anything that happened a week or
2, 3 weeks back, I don't remember it.
Senator DANIEL. You don't remember anything that happened
more than 3 weeks back?
Mr. BASS. Not much longer than that. At times.
Senator DANIEL. Well, has anybody given you any money in the
last 3 weeks?
Mr.
BASS.
What?
Mr. BASS. No, sir.
Mr. GASQUE. I think you can remember things that happened
farther back than that. You remembered that you were the same
Jetty Bass who had been convicted in 1953.
Senator
Mr.
DANIEL.
BASS.
Mr.
BASS.
Yes.
Mr.
BASS.
Mr. GASQUE. The evidence is that you stated that you were going
out of the State to pull a job.
3141
Mr. GASQUE. Did you state at the time that you were going out of
the State to pull a job, because you were not going to steal in Dallas?
Mr. BAss. Well, I [Mr. Bass shook his head]-it might have
been something like that.
Mr. GASQUE. Why don't you steal in Dallas?
Mr. BASS. Well, I haven't stolen, in Dallas or anywhere, in a long
tine.
Senator DANIEL. How long ago has it been?
Mr. BASS. It's since I went to the penitentiary, a long time ago.
Senator DANIEL. In Alabama?
Mr. BASS. Yes, sir.
Mr. GASQUE. Now, do you own an automobile?
(Mr. Bass shook his head.)
Mr. GASQUE. You do not own an automobile?
(Mr. Bass shook his head.)
Mr. GASQUE. Do you drive a 1954 Pontiac?
Mr. BASS. No.
Mr. GASQUE. Do you drive a 1955 Pontiac?
Mr. BASS. No.
Mr. GASQUE. All right. Now, I believe you told the chairman
that you are not currently employed?
Mr. BASS. That's right.
Mr. GASQUE. Who pays your bills by the day?
Mr. BASS. I live at home. I live in the-with my wife.
Mr. GASQUE. Does your wife support you?
Mr. BAss. And I live in my mother-in-law's home.
GASQUE.
Mr.
BASS. Oklahoma.
GASQUE. What did you go to Oklahoma
BASS. I went up to the carnival.
GASQUE. Where was the carnival held?
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
for?
3142
Mr. BASS. In-I don't know, just right across the State line. I
can't recall the name of the town.
Mr. GASQUE. You can't recall the name of the town? Well,
all right.
Now, did you take over with you, when you went to Oklahoma,
some of this nitroglycerin?
Mr.
BASS. No.
Mr. GASQUE. And pistols?
Mr. BASS. No.
Mr. GASQUE. Did you leave them behind?
Mr. BASS. I don't carry them.
Senator DANIEL. When did you quit carrying
those?
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Mr.
BASS.
Senator
No.
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
What?
Senator
DANIEL.
at all?
Mr.
Mr.
Pope?
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
BASS.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
BASS.
Mr.
Senator
fight?
DANIEL.
DANIEL.
Mr.
BASS.
No.
3143
Mr.
BASS. No.
Senator DANIEL.
Did
Mr.
I am sure he
has.
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime,
unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in
the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war
or public danger; * * * nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a
witness against himself.
Mr.
BASS.
Yes.
3144
Senator DANIEL. All right. What did you fight with in this fight?
Mr. BASS. Nothing.
Senator DANIEL. Did you hit him with an ashtray?
Mr. BASS. No.
Senator DANIEL. What did you hit the man with?
(Conference between Mr. Bass and Mr. Payne.)
Mr. BASS. I refuse to answer that on the same grounds.
Senator DANIEL. How long have you known Harry Pope?
Mr. BASS. Oh, I have knew him for quite some time.
Senator DANIEL. Well, has he been a good friend of yours?
Mr. BASS. I think so.
Senator DANIEL. Did you all work together in any kind of business?
Mr. BASS. No.
Senator DANIEL. You know that he has used morphine, do you not?
(Mr. Bass shook his head.)
Senator DANIEL. Isn't it true that he was using morphine the
night of this fight?
Mr. BASS. I don't know.
Senator DANIEL. You don't know whether he ever used any
morphine?
Mr. BASS. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. You are telling this committee you never saw
him use morphine?
TNIr.
DANIEL.
BASS.
Senator
DANIEL.
Yes.
Mr.
BASS.
I am pretty sure.
Senator DANIEL. Well, you say you are pretty sure; are you posi.
tive, or are you just pretty sure?
Mr. BASS. I am pretty sure.
Senator DANIEL. You are not positive?
3145
Mr. GASQUE. Let's go back to this question you were asked: Were
you and Harry Pope using cocaine?
(Conference between Mr. Bass and Mr. Payne.)
Mr. BASS. No, I have never; no.
Mr. GASQUE. Was he using cocaine?
Mr. BASS. I don't know. I never seen him.
Mr. GASQUE. Was there any cocaine in your possession at that
time?
1948?
Mr. BASS. As I said, I probably went by his house.
Mr. SPEER. Very often, I said.
Mr. BASS. Well, I wouldn't know how often.
Mr. SPEER. He was a good friend of yours?
Mr. BASS. Yes, sir.
Mr. SPEER.
3146
Mr. BASS. I am pretty sure I have never met him or seen him or
anything.
Mr. SPEER. Well, you are sure you didn't see him in 1948, at Nick
Cascio's house?
Mr. BASS. I am pretty sure.
Mr. SPEER. Well, now, just a minute ago you said you couldn't
amendment on this, because he said that he did not have any income,
it was just money that people gave him.
Let me go at it this way: Was your wife, was Dollie Bass doing any
work during that time?
Mr. BAss. No.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
3147
I am a practic-
Mr.
of there?
Mr. CAsCIo. Burglary.
Senator DANNIEL. Burglary with firearms?
Mr. CAsCoO. No
Senator DANIEL.
N1r. CAscoO. No
Senator DANIEL.
dlere?
firearms.
No firearms involved?
firearms.
Did you resist the officers at the time of arrest
3148
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
TRAFFIC
Senator DANIEL. What was the off ense for which you served before ,
that?
Did you serve in Louisiana?
(Conference between N\r. Cascio and Mfr. Allen.)
Mr. CASClO. Arkansas.
Senator DANIEL. In Arkansas?
Mr. CASCIO. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. What year was that?
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL. How
convicted of there?
Mr. CAscio. Burglary tools.
DANIEL.
What?
M1r. Cuscio. Well, I had a pair of pliers and a chisel and a pailr of
vise grips in my car, and two title tools, one under the back seat ati(l
one under the tool chest.
Senator DANIEL. Tlat's all you had in the car-?
Mr. C.ksci. That's all that was in my car.
Senator DANIEL. At the time they arrested you?
Nir. CASCIO.
Si'?
Louisiana?
(Conference between Mr. Cascio aiid Mfr. Allen.)
MIr. CASCIO. Louisialla.; yes, sir.
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
3149
TRAFFIC
sir.
Of narcotic drug?
sir.
Senator DANIEL. Did you ever have in your possession any cocaine?
Mr. CASCIO. Not thatI know of.
Senator DANIEL. How about marihuana?
Mr. CAscIo. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Did you ever have in your possession any heroin?
MV. CAsCoO. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Did you ever have in your possession
any
morphine?
Mr. CAscIo. Not that I know of.
DANIEL.
morphine?
Mr. CAScIo. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. And you did not ever have in your possession
or in your hands any of these narcotic drugs I have asked you about?
Mr.CASCIO. If I have, I don't remember it.
Senator DANIEL. Did you ever see any morphine?
Mr. CAsCoO. I probably have.
Senator DANIEL. Where was that?
Mr. CAscIo. In the penitentiary.
Senator DANIEL. What?
Mr. CAscIo. In the penitentiary.
Senator DANIEL. In the penitentiary?
I worked in the
Senator DANIEL. Did you ever use any morphine yourself, in the
penitentiary?
Mr. CAscIo. Did I ever
Senator DANIEL. Yes.
use any?
Senator
3150
Never?
that I know of. I don't think so.
Well, you would remember it if you had ever
worked with Roy Sistrunk in performing a burglary or robbery,
wouldn't you?
Senator
DANIEL.
Mr. CASCIO. Not
Senator DANIEL.
now.
Did you ever work in a holdup or robbery with Jetty Bass?
Mr. CAscIo. No; I have never robbed nobody.
Senator DANIEL. What?
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator DANIEL. Well, now, actually, all this committee is interested in, as far as this hearing is concerned, is the narcotics traffic
and how it ties in to robberies and burglaries and things of that
kind.
3151
I want you to think back and answer without calling any names
do you know of anybody engaged in robberies or burglaries that used
anykind of dope?
Mr. CAscIO. Did I know of anybody?
Senator DANIEL. Yes.
Mr. CASCIO. That done what, now?
Senator DANIEL. That were engaged in any robberies or burglaries,
Senator
drugs?
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
and robberies?
burglaries
I went to the
Senator
Mr.
3152
Senator DANIEL. Did you ever know anybody who did use them?
Mr. CAscIo. No, sir; not to my knowledge.
Senator DANIEL. You never did know anybody who used them?
Mr. CAscIo. I have never seen nobody take a shot of morphine, or
whatever you call it.
Senator DANIEL. Heroin?
Mr. CAscIo. Heroin.
Senator DANIEL. Did you ever see anybody sniff it?
Mr. CASCIO. No. sir.
narcotics?
Mr. CAsCoO. Well, I don't know. You asked me did I ever know
any.
Mr. SPEER. Well, have you known anyone that did use narcotics?
Mr. CAsCoO. No.
Mr. SPEER. Do you think you would know if one of your associates
was using narcotics?
Mr. CAscIO. I wouldn't even know nothing about narcotics. I
don't know how to answer; I don't know.
Mr.
SPEER.
3153
Senator DANIEL. It, is news to you that Johnny Miller was in the
heroin traffic?
MNr. CAscoO. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. You never heard of that before?
traffic?
3154
Senator
DANIEL.
Or where?
Senator
DANIEL.
What?
Senator
DANIEL.
3155
No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Was your wife employed?
Mr. CASCIO. I wasn't married then.
Senator DANIEL. You what?
Mr. CAscIo. I wasn't married then.
Senator DANIEL. Were you married any time during 1954?
Mr. CASCIO. No, sir.
Mr. CAscIo.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator DANIEL. This income tax return shows that it was filed
for you yourself, individually; and an income of $4,100 from "selfemployed speculator."
Mr. CASCIo. That's right. [Laughter.]
Senator DANIEL. What did you mean by that?
Mr. CASClO. Sir?
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Mr. CASCIO. No,
Senator DANIEL.
incriminate me.
,Senator DANIEL. Did you get it gambling?
Mr. CASClO. No, sir.
Senator
DANIEL.
Mr. CAscIo. No,
Senator DANIEL.
What?
sir.
You are not a gambler?
Senator
3156
Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you will give to this
subcommittee of the Senate Judiciary Committee will be the truth,
the whole truth, and nothing but, the truth, so help you God?
Miss HARVEY. I do.
Senator DANIEL. You may be seated.
liss HARVEY. I have an attorney here some place.
Senator
DANIEL.
All right.
DANIEL.
Harvey.
Senator
Senator
before that?
3157
Senator DANIEL. He is the same man, though, that you heard was
in that fight?
Miss HARVEY. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. How long did you know Harry Pope?
Miss HARVEY. Oh, I haven't known him over 2-2 years, if that
long.
Senator DANIEL. Has he been to your home in Irving?
Miss HARVEY. Oh, not in the past 2 or 3 months; no, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Before
Miss HARVEY. Well, now, Senator Daniels, let me go on.
I have been out of Dallas since last May, and he could have come
when I was out of town, because some of my people lived in my house
when I was on the show, and I was all up in the Western States,
ail(l lie could have been there and I not seen him.
Senator DANIEL. What kind of show?
Miss HARVEY. Carnival.
Senator DANEL. Do you travel with a caroival?
Miss HARVEY. Quite frequently.
Senator DANIEL. What type work do you do?
Miss HARVEY. Entertainment.
Senator DANIEL. What type entertainment?
Miss HARVEY. Well, in the carnival I was a dancing girl.
Senator DANIEL. Have you seen Harry Pope at your house in
Irving, when you personally visited with him?
Miss HARVEY. Since I have been home; yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Well, at any time?
IMiss HARVEY. Oh, yes, before I left; yes, sir, I saw him.
Senator DANIEL. And he had associated there with you at, your
house for several occasions, had he not?
Miss HARVEY. Yes, sir.
Senator
Miss
DANIEL.
HARVEY.
Senator
No, sir.
3158
Senator DANIEL. You know that I would not ask you that question
if this committee had not been furnished evidence that it felt reliable
that you had used marihuana?
Miss HARVEY. I still have never messed with it.
Senator DANIEL. I wanted to mention that to you.
Miss HARVEY. I still give the same answer there; I still say I never
messed with it.
Senator DANIEL. You still make that answer?
Miss HARVEY. Yes, sir.
Senator
DANIEL.
cigarette?
Miss HARVEY. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Did you ever see anyone else use it?
Miss HARVEY. No, sir.
Senator
DANIEL.
Miss HARVEY. If
Senator DANIEL.
Miss
HARVEY.
Senator
No, sir.
DANIEL.
DANIEL.
Senator DANIEL. Did you ever know anybody that used it?
Miss HARVEY. If they used it, I didn't know it, because I don't
know anything about it, and I don't know how it affects people.
I don't know what it would look like, if they were using it.
Senator
DANIEL.
you?
3159
Miss HARVEY. I think that I saw him once after he came back from
company
several times on different occasions, at different parties, different night
clubs.
Senator DANIEL. Did you ever see either one of those men use any
type of narcotic drugs?
Miss HARVEY. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Do you know Olin Ray Tyler?
Miss HARVEY. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. How long have you known Olin Ray Tyler?
Miss HARVEY. I have known him by sight for quite some time. I
just know him when I see him.
Senator DANIEL. How long-how well do you know him?
Miss HARVEY. I don't know him too well. I know him well enough
to speak to him, that's all.
Senator DANIEL. Did you ever go with him?
Miss HARVEY. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Did you ever see him use any type of narcotic
drug?
Miss HARVEY. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. You have heard of the knob-knocker gang here
in Dallas, have you not?
Miss HARVEY. I heard what they called the gang; I have read
about it.
Senator DANIEL. Yes; you know the members of it, do you not?
Miss HARVEY. I never knew there was really a gang around here.
I have heard of it, read in the paper about it. But truthfully, to
know the people, I have never really known the gang.
Senator DANIEL. Well, do you know Jetty Bass?
Senator DANIEL. Did you ever hear of him doing any work?
Miss HARVEY. I read the papers, things that they accused him of
I know they sent him to the penitentiary in Alabama.
Senator DANIEL. Did you give him any money?
doing.
3160
Mr.
time?
GASQUE.
Mr. GASQUE. Isn't it rather unusual to live in the same house with
it.
Miss HAR VEY. No; I didn't pay any attention to his telephone calls.
IMr. GASQUE. Who were his associates during this period?
xMiss
3161
saw mec.
Mr. GASQIE. Why'?
Miss HARVEY. Well, tilev always either citv vagge(d me or county
bagged me.
Senator DANIEL. For prostitution?
Miss HARVEY. It, says o! their record for prostitution.
Senator DA \IEL. Well, have you engaged in prostitution?
Miss HARVEY. I have, yes, sir; in past times.
Senator DANIEL. How long?
Miss HARVEY. Well, it's been a couple, 3 years ago.
Senator DANIEL. Over how long a period of time?
Miss HARVEY. Well, the past 10 years.
Mr. GASQUE. Well, now, let's go back a little further.
Miss HARVEY. It doesn't go back any further.
Mr. GASQUE. Over how long--
there were some people moved in there that, he was assistant manager
of a Safeway or a Piggly-Wiggly, one of those grocery stores over there
on Forest Avenue. But the police informed me he was with a bunch
of gangsters, and he moved out without even paying any rent. So I
didn't engage in renting the place any longer.
Mr. GASQUE. Did you have any trouble with the police about. that?
Miss
HARVEY.
you?
Miss HARVEY. No, sir.
Mr. GASQUE. No other women?
Miss HARVEY. No, sir.
Mr. GASQUE. During this period, where did you get the money to
3162
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
TRAFFIC
Miss
HARVEY.
Senator
DANIEL.
\ I elvin A-v-e-r-i-t-t?
Senator
Miss
DA.NIEL.
HARVEY.
Senator
In Waco or Dallas?
No. in Dallas.
DANIEL.
house?
Miss
HARVEY.
No, sir.
Senator DAx NIEL. Did you see the narcotic drugs after the officers
took it?
Miss HARVEY. NO sir I have never seen them. I didn't see the,
in my house, or I have never seen them at all. They just told me tiey
found them there.
3163
Senator DANIEL. You don't know what any of these drugs would
look like?
Miss HARVEY. No, sir; I don't know that. J was
Senator DANIEL. And you don't know that any of your associates
eN-er used any of these drugs?
Miss HARVEY. If they did, I don't know anything about it.
Senator D.ANIEL. That is true of Cecil Green?
Miss
Miss
Senator
DANIEL.
Mr. SPEER. You
what you said, but you said your income was used up on account, of
your arrests.
You mean you paid numerous fines?
Miss HARVEY. Well, yes, sir; they used to fine us $30, and pick me
up every time they saw me.
Mr. SPEER. How many times do you estimate that happened, over
this period of time you were talking about?
Miss HARVEY. Well, I don't know. They have a record of it over
there. I don't have any idea how much it was, but I know it took all
I could get hold of to stay out of jail.
Mr. SPEER. $30 a fine?
Miss HARVEY. They use to fine us that; yes, sir.
Mr. SPEER. How much do they fine you now?
Miss HARVEY. Well, they just put us in jail, and we have to get a
lawyer to get out, and then they fine us, in court.
Senator DANIEL. Did you ever go to Kansas City?
Miss HARVEY. I have been through Kansas City. I used to live
iii East St. Louis; I have lived all over the country and run all over the
country. I don't-I never stopped in Kansas City; I have been
through it.
Senator DANIEL. What type of entertainment do you do in your
dances?
Miss HARVEY. Well, I am a dancer.
Senator DANIEL. What type of dancing?
Miss HARVEY. Well, this year I had a Hawaiian show, I danced in
a Hawaiian show.
Senator DANIEL. Well,
7-
52
3164
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
TRAFFIC
Senator DANIEL. How much income did you pay tax on last year?
Miss HARVEY. I didn't.
Senator DANIEL. What?
No, sir.
Miss
HARVEY.
file it.
do you have?
I thought I had a place, blut
it turned out I don't even have a clear title to it, so I guess I don't
have any kind right now.
Senator DANIEL. I mean was it your own home?
Iiss HARVEY. I was paying for it, paid like rent. I didn't even
have a downpayment; I just paid it like rent. I just took up a fellow's
note.
Senator DANIEL. A brick home?
Miss HARVEY. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. What kind of home?
Miss HARVEY. It is frame, with a front of brick.
Senator DANIEL. Trimmed in brick?
Miss HARVEY. Trimmed in brick; yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Do you have a car?
Senator DANIEL. What kind of home
Miss HARVEY. Well, I live in Irving.
Senator
Miss
anything.
Senator DANIEL. Have you got any idea about what your income
would average a month?
Miss HARVEY. No, sir; I have no idea.
Senator DANIEL. This year?
Miss HARVEY. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. No, idea?
Miss HARVEY. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Well, how much were you getting paid from these
shows you were working for?
Miss HARVEY. Very little. It is just according to what they take
in on the front. If they don't take in but $5, I don't get but i0 percent. That's 50 cents.
Senator DANIEL. Well, did you do anything else on these shows,
besides
fiss
have
HARVEY.
3165
in any way?
Miss HARVEY. No, sir; I have never had anything to do with that,
no, sir.
Senator DANIEL. In any of these carnivals?
Miss HARVEY. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Did you file an income-tax return for 1953?
Miss HARVEY. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Did you file an income-tax return for 1952?
Miss HARVEY. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Did you file an income-tax return for 1951?
Miss HARVEY. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Were you in Alabama at the time that Jetty Bass
and Mick Cascio were shot in a robbery?
Miss HARVEY. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Where were you at the time?
Miss HARVEY. I was in Irving.
Senator DANIEL. Did you go over there?
Miss HARVEY. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. After the shooting?
Miss HARVEY. After he was in the hospital.
Senator DANIEL. After who was?
Miss HARVEY. After Jetty was operated on. I got there after he
was already operated on.
Senator DANIEL. Were you living with him at that time?
Miss HARVEY. Yes, sir.
Senator
DANIEL.
State?
No; I leftSenator DANIEL. At any time?
Miss HARVEY'. I left Dallas after Jetty was already operated on in
the hospital, in Birmingham, Ala.
Senator DANIEL. And you were not out of the State at any time
just preceding that robbery?
Miss HARVEY.
3166
Senator DANIEL. Did you ever hear of a man from Kansas City
named Eugene McCrosky?
Miss
DANIEL.
used narcotics?
Miss HARVEY. No, sir; he doesn't.
Senator
DANIEL. You
Miss HARVEY. Well, I
ALLEN.
DANIEL.
Miss
DANIEL.
William Niess.
Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you will give to this subcommittee of the Senate Judiciary Committee will be the truth, the
whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?
Mr. NEISS. Yes, sir.
Mr.
DANIEL.
NEISS.
Laredo Bridge you have made various trips over into Mexico during
1954 and 1955.
3167
Senator
DANIEL.
DANIEL.
You what?
NIESS.
I think 5 or 6.
Senator DANIEL. Have you served time for these narcotic cases?
Mr. NIESS. I sure have.
Senator DANIEL. I believe you got a 2-year sentence for smuggling
narcotics across at Laredo?
Mr. NIESS. That's right.
Senator DANIEL. In 1946, didn't you?
.Mr. NIESS. That's right, January the 1st.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
3168
Senator
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
DANIEL.
TRAFFIC
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator DANIEL. Well, didn't you just tell us you brought some
back in 1946?
Senator DANIEL.
Well,
Senator
then?
DANIEL.
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
TRAFFIC
3169
DANIEL.
weren't you?
Mr. NIESS. Yes, and they-they told me that had to stop, and I
just stayed over there.
Senator DANIEL. Stayed over on the Mexican side?
Mr. NIESS. That's right.
Senator DANIEL. Well, you also started using another bridge, too,
didn't you?
Mr. NIEss. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. When you came back on this side?
Senator DANIEL. Well, you said you had been across the river all up
first-the last, part, of last year. I think I was down there around
Thanksgiving. I have been all up and down there in the winter time;
I go down in the valley. I am fixing to leave pretty soon.
Senator DANIEL. You figuring on going again now, soon?
Mr. NIESS. Pretty soon, yes. [Laughter.]
Senator DANIEL. Now, Mr. NiessMr. NIESS. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. For this record here, I am sure that the chairman
3170
this room, including the chairman, and we might smile about them,
but we realize it is no laughing matter, and I know you realize that,
do you not?
NIEss. That's right. A man who has used narcotics as long
as Mr.
I have,
if he can use them and use them within reason, and give
him leeway, he is going to do it. I would sure rather be that than a
drunkard laying on the street.
Senator DANIEL. Well, the only thing about using narcotics, those
you it wasn't?
Mr. NIEss. Well, that could have happened to me, Your Honor.
I wouldn'tSenator DANIEL. That has happened to doctors.
Mr. NIESs. That's right.
Senator DANIEL. We had a doctor before this committee in Philadelphia who was fooled; people told him they were addicts, and he
examined them and thought they were addicts, but when they stood
in the courtroom and identified themselves as undercover men,
three of them, he realized he had been fooled. And you could be
fooled, too, couldn't you?
Mir. NIESs. That's right.
Senator DANIEL. So you could have given some of these drugs
to people for the first time, couldn't you?
Mr. NIEss. It is possible, yes.
Senator DANIEL. So it is a dangerous thing to give away or sell
narcotics.
Mr. NIEss. That's right. I wouldn't give it to my own brother,
or sell my own brother a shot, anymore. I stopped to realize what
the laws of the United States mean, and I don't-my life is short
now, and I don't think I could do 10 years and come out a man, and
that's the least I could get.
Senator DANIEL. Well, the record here shows that you have had
13 convictions.
Mr. NIEss. The record is wrong there, Your Honor.
Senator DANIEL. About 12.
You were
one time I was given 90 days in the Waxahachie, Ellis County, jail.
3171
Senator DANIEL. And all the other times you went to the penitentiary?
Mr. NiEss. That's right.
Senator DANIEL. And that was either for possession or selling
narcotics?
Mr. NI~ss. That's right.
Senator DANIEL. Mr. Speer, now, has counted narcotics separately,
and finds it is five times, that you were correct, sir.
Mr. NIEss. Thank you.
Senator
DANIEL.
Mr. NIEss. I haven't sold none in, oh, I'll guess the last time I
sold any was in 1940. Somewhere like that.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
Mr.
from.
DANIEL.
NIESS. Yes,
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Mr. NiEss. I knew Lois when he was a little boy, going to City
Park School, him and his brother Cecil both.
Senator
DANIEL.
Mr. NIEss. Well, good, when they was little boys going to school.
Later on in their years, I never even seen them, to know nothing about
them.
Senator
DANIEL.
narcotic drugs?
Mr.
NIESS.
Senator DANIEL. Well, now, the main reason we called you before
this committee was to show the ease with which narcotic addicts can
cross the border, Mexican border.
Mr. NIEss. Yes.
Senator
Mr.
yes, sir.
3172
As long as I wasn't known. But if you had the finger put on you,
they would carry you out there and take fluoroscopes and X-rays of
you, anyhow. So if I come across, I might as well come across with
it just in my pocket. So I had the finger put oil me, and I had it
loose in my pocket.
Senator DANIEL. Well, on these other trips, you just bought
enough heroin over across the border for yourself?
Mr. NIESS. That's right; took it over there.
Senator DANIEL. What?
Mr. NIESS. I took it over there, and didn't bring none back.
Senator DANIEL. You mean you had the shots given to you over
on the Mexican side?
Mr. NIEss. That's right.
Senator DANIEL. Did you ever do that at Matamoros?
Mr. NIEss. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. The heroin at M\atamoros is not too good, is it'!
Mr. NIESS. I don't know. I never had a shot in Matamoros:
didn't
do nothing
but drink.
Senator
DANIEL. Well, what. are some of the
Mexican towns in
which you had heroin shots?
Mr. NIESS. No other towns.
Senator DANIEL. No other town except Nuevo Laredo?
Mr. NIESS. That's right.
Senator DANIEL. Is it pretty easy to get heroin across the river in
MIexico?
Mr. NIESS. If you know the way.
Senator DANIEL. Who did you buy your heroin from?
Mr. NIESS. I refuse to testify to that, Your Honor.
I have answered truthfully all the way; I am not trying to lie to you.
3173
Mr. NIESs. That's right. At one time I knew his cousins, or some
kin to him. That was years ago. That was back in 1945, when I
was going over there.
Senator DANIEL. You are not telling us this; we were told in Houston and San Antonio by others who have been across the bridge.
Mr. NIESS. That's right. Well, I
Senator DANIEL. That Pancho Trevino and Enrique Trevino, his
brother, were in the narcotic business in a big way in Nuevo Laredo.
Mr. NIESS. Years ago, there was 2 of them, the Trevinos, run that
Deluxe Bar back then. I knew them as Charley and Henry. But
that was back in 1945, 1946. I have been back there since then, and
have never located them, or know anything about them. I heard
later that one of them is in jail in Mexico City now, that is, while I
was there.
Senator DANIEL. But he didn't, stay in jail very long; he is back
selling heroin, according to the evidence before this committee.
Mr. NIESS. I don't know, Your Honor.
Senator DANIEL. Well, in December of last year, where did you
1)uy your heroin?
i am not going to ask you to name the people, but in view of what
you have told me about fearing for your own life, did you buy it
from the Trevinos?
Mr. NIESS. No, sir, it wasn't.
Senator DANIEL. You bought it from others?
Mr. NIESS. Others, yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Several different other people, or just one other
dealer?
Mr. NIESS. I just went one other place there.
Senator DANIEL. All right. Then these trips in 1955, did you
buy from a different dealer, or from the same one you bought from in
1954?
Mr. NIESS. Same one.
Senator DANIEL. Are there several dealers in heroin across the
river at Nuevo Laredo?
Mr. NIESS. From what I understand, yes.
Senator DANIEL. How many have you bought from?
Mr. NIESS. One.
Senator DANIEL. Well, in all your lifetime, now, I am asking you,
how many have you bought from?
Mr. NIESS. Over there, orSenator DANIEL. Over there, across in Nuevo Laredo.
Mr. NIEss. I have never bought but from 3 people in my life over
there.
Senator DANIEL. Three?
Mr. NIESS. That's all.
Senator DANIEL. All right. Now, as to the heroin you handled
over on the American side, how many people did you buy from?
Mr. NIESS. I haven't bought from none that way, over here.
Senator DANIEL. Have you been across the river at Juarez?
Mr. NIESS. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Where else yave you been across the river into
3174
Senator DANIEL. Did you cross at all those places in the last 2
years?
Mr. NIESS. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Well, do you think that if this country wants to
stop the narcotics traffic, it ought to forbid addicts from leaving the
country and crossing the Mexican border, where heroin is so plentiful'?
Mr. NIESS. Well, people who have used narcotics as long as I have
your honor, they-now, I don't see why, as long as they are not
bringing it back in this country and trafficking in it, where they are
hurting anyone besides theirselves.
Senator DANIEL. Well, you know some people have brought it
back, though.
Mr. NIEss. Yes. Yes, I agree with that.
Senator DANIEL. You did, on some occasions.
Mr. NIESS. Some, one time there.
Senator DANIEL. Well, you did yourself.
Mr. NIEss. Before that, yes.
Senator DANIEL. And many other addicts; we have found there
are 40 to 50 addicts a day cross the bridges over into Mexico.
Mr. NIESS. That I understand.
Senator DANIEL. And you know many of them are bringing the
narcotics back into this country, don't you?
Mr. NIESS. Yes, I guess they are; I couldn't say for myself.
Senator DANIEL. Don't you think that would be one good way to
stop this traffic from Mexico, would be to keep known addicts or
known smugglers, or at least those who have been convicted of
smuggling, from crossing that river so easily?
Mr. NIEss. Well
Senator DANIEL. It would be a pretty good idea, wouldn't it?
Mr. NIEss. Yes, known peddlers, I guess it would.
DANIEL.
addicts to get the money to keep up their habit unless they steal or
unless they sell drugs: isn't that right?
Mr. NiEss. Well, yes, it is that way in this-on this side, yes.
Senator DANIEL. That is true, isn't it?
Mr. NIEss. That is the reason I wouldn't-Don't even mess with
it over here.
3175
Senator DANIEL. But that is true, what I just said, isn't it?
Senator DANIEL. Well, have you ever tried taking treatment at one
once.
Senator DANIEL. Were those treatments of benefit?
youMr.
in NIEss.
any way?
Well, I couldn't really say that they do. An addict
is
just like a drunkard; it is in their mind, more-] figure it is more of a
mind disease than anything. Because you can take a man and send
him there for 5 years, and if he is an addict and it is on his mind, when
he comes out, there isn't nobody going to stop him from using it.
Senator DANIEL. How long was it after you got out of the hospital
each time before you went back to heroin?
Mr. NIESS. As soon as I could find some.
Senator DANIEL. I believe that's all.
Mr. NIESS. 0. K., sir. Thank you.
Senator DANIEL. Thank you.
I do.
mittee appreciates the cooperation that you have given us, both
before and during the hearings. We are glad to have you before us
this afternoon.
Now, for the record, will you state your name and your present
position?
Mr. REYNOLDS. Daniel G. Reynolds, managing director of the
Dallas Crime Commission.
Senator DANIEL. How long have you served in that capacity?
Mr. REYNOLDS. Since May 1951.
Senator DANIEL. Just give a little information about the Dallas
3176
Senator DANIEL. Had you previously worked for a crime coimmission in one of the other cities?
Mr. REYNOLDS. No, sir.
,y background is law enforcement work,
16 years in the city of Nfiami, Fla., from patrolman to director of public
safety, and 10 years for the International Association of Chiefs of
Police.
Senator DANIEL. And you came to Dallas from the International
Association of Chiefs of Police, or from Florida?
Mfr. REYNOLDS. From the International Association of Chiefs of
Police.
Senator DANIEL. NOW, have you, in your work here in Dallas,
made a particular study, along with other criminal activities, of the
natcotics traffic?
Mr.
REYNOLDS.
We have felt that the narcotic problem here in Dallas has had a
considerable impact on the whole, total crime situation here in the
Dallas area. By that I mean it has had an impact on the organized
crime phase of it; it has had an impact on the crimes situation in the
local area, and it is also having an impact on the up and coming
juvenile violator.
As you know, the United States figures and figures here in Dallas,
in this Dallas area, indicate an increasing amount of crimes committed
by juveniles, and also the fact that these crimes are of more serious
nature.
Just lately, we had a murder here at a tavern, in which some testimony was given that these young boys involved in it were indulging
in barbiturates or some kind of narcotics.
Senator DANIEL. Do you think that there is an increase in the use
of narcotics or barbiturates by juveniles in Dallas?
Mr. REYNOLDS. I can't prove it, sir. I think so.
Senator DANIEL. You have no figures by which you could prove it,
but you feel that that is true?
Mr. REYNOLDS. I think there is some reason behind the fact that
the crimes being committed by juveniles are of a more serious nature.
After hearing some of the testimony in this hearing, I am convinced
that some of these youngsters are probably dealing in barbiturates or
cocaine or something, marihuana, something to release the inhibitions
to where they get more of a brutal nature, and so forth, in the various
things that they do.
Senator DANIEL. Do you agree that some of these narcotic drugs
and barbiturates can assist persons in having the nerve that it takes
to commit terrible crimes?
Mr. REYNOLDS.
I think so.
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
TRAFFIC
3177
us concerning the situation here in Dallas, and also any recommendations that you might have that we could pass along to the Congress.
Mr. REYNOLDS. Well, I don't think that I could add a great deal
here, Senator; it would be an anticlimax, I think, after what I have
heard here.
I do feel, and I think that probably your committee has felt, that
there are many different aspects of this problem, some of it, of an international character, some of it of a Federal character, and a great many
parts of it of a more or less local nature.
I am not one of those that believe that the Federal Government
should be charged with everything or blamed for everything. I do
think, in this particular instance, that. they have some primary
responsibility, such as the smuggling, such as interstate commerce,
and to a very limited degree on local enforcement.
I think from there on that it falls back on some of the local people,
like your State officials, your county officials, and your city officials.
I hope that some of the collateral benefits of this hearing will be to
educate the public, so that, they will give their chiefs of police more
manpower, and the sheriff and your State police, so that they can
attack this problem, also along with the suggestions that I heard
given here that your committee would probably also recommend
additional help on the Federal level.
Senator DANIEL. Right there, now, as far as public support behind
law enforcement officers, and the effect these hearings might have,
I want to say to you that I am hopeful, too, that the hearhigs will
have that incidental effect of causing the people to know more about
the narcotics traffic, and to therefore givb greater support to their
law enforcement officers.
Of course, the primary purpose of this nationwide investigation is
to see what Congress can do. But if incidentally we can also help
law enforcement officers by letting the public see what the traffic is
all about, I think it, will serve a dual purpose. In that connection
I want to say now that I think the press, radio and television have
served a good purpose. These hearings would not, be known about
so well by the people; they would not have all the facts that you and
I have heard throughout these hearings, if it were not, for the coverage
that has been given the hearings by the press, the radio, and the
television stations.
I believe we ought to let the people see and hear and know as much
about their business in government as possible. And I certainly feel
that way about these investigations. And so 1 just, want to say a
word of thanks to all of those who have made it possible that the
publicc could know about the evidence that has come out before this
Committee, because I agree with you that that might. cause you and
the law enforcement officers to have more support.
Then there, again, in Congress, wo. will need support in order to get
piore money for the Federal officers, and in order t.o pass any needed
legislation that we might recommend. So I thank you very much for
bringing that up and stressing that point.
MIr. REYNOLDS. I had a couple of other thoughts, Senator, and one
was the International situation.
I know that probably you and your committee have thought of it,
but there are some -the framework of the United Nations, for example,
3178
Mr.
REYNOLDS.
crime commission, for bringing this hearing here; I know it has done
a world of good already, and I am sure it will have a lot of collateral
benefits after you leave.
Senator
DANIEL.
3179
Senator
DANIEL.
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
Senator
so much of that.
Senator DANIEL. When did you first start using narcotic drugs?
Miss PAUL. It was about 28 years ago, I guess.
Senator DANIEL. Have you been using them off and on since then?
Miss PAUL. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Who first told you about the use of narcotic
drugs, or asked you to use them?
Miss PAUL. Well, I used to have headaches a lot, and I just took
it myself, after the doctor gave me several.shots, you know, for asthma;
I had asthma and headaches awfully bad. So that's how come me
to start on drugs, I guess.
Senator DANIEL. Did any of your associates or friends use any
kind of drugs?
Miss PAUL. Yes, sir; one of the boys that I went with at the time
did. He is dead now.
Senator DANIEL. One of the boys you went with what?
Miss PAUL. At the time.
Senator DANIEL. He used what, what type of drug?
Miss PAUL. Morphine.
Senator DANIEL. And did he give you some?
Miss PAUL. Yes; I took some of it; yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. And did you and he use it together?
Miss PAUL. Yes, sir.
Senator
DANIEL.
Quite a bit?
Senator
16.
Senator DANIEL. Well, had you ever used it before this boy friend
gave it to you?
Miss PAUL. No, sir; not only just when the doctor gave it to me.
Senator DANIEL. And how long did you use morphine?
Miss PAUL. Well, off and on ever since.
71515-56---pt. 7.-
53
3180
Senator
heroin?
Miss PAUL. Yes, sir; but just when I can't get morphine.
DANIEL. Well,
of the habit, when you could not get it through doctors or through
writing prescriptions and forging them yourself?
Miss PAUL. Yes, sir; it cost quite a bit.
DANIEL.
DANIEL.
3181:
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator DANIEL. Did you ever have to turn to anything else to get
the money to keep up this drug habit?
Miss PAUL. No.
Senator
asking you if you found it necessary to violate other laws, other than
the narcotics laws, to keep up your drug habit.
Miss PAUL. No.
I am cured
Senator
DANIEL.
Lexington?
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Miss PAUL. I stayed there 9 months the last time I was there, and
3182
Senator DANIELI.Ir.
3183
$peer?
Yes, sir.
Miss PAUL.
That's right.
3184
Senator
DANIEL.
In the office?
\r.
M ALEXANDER. Yes, sir.
Senator, the one recommendation I have is something that hasn't
come up before the committee yet, in Dallas, and that is that both the
Federal and the State parole law should be changed.
At the present time, it is hardly worth our trouble to send a man to
the penitentiary on a term less than 5 years. In Texas, as well as
3185
under the Federal law, they will actually be coming back from the
penitentiary, on a 2-year sentence, in about 8 to 9 months. In
Texas, a man can throw 21 years in 4 years and 15 days, if he behaves
himself.
Now, the worse the criminal, ordinarily the better prisoner he makes.
They know that their parole will come quicker by being a good
prisoner; and under our law, the man is eligible for parole when he has
done one-third of his time; that is, when he has credit for one-third
of his time. He accumulates good time at the rate of 20 days good
time for each 30 days straight time that he does.
In all narcotics cases, the parole should be eliminated, both Federal
and State. It just isn't worth the trouble of sending a man down for
2 years; they are coming back faster than we can send them down.
Senator DANIEL. You may be interested to know that the New
York probation officers appeared before us a few weeks ago, and made
the same recommendation-and their social workers and people who
like to try to make probation work. But they told us it is an absolute
failure in narcotics cases, both in addicts and traffickers.
Mr. ALEXANDER. We haven't yet seen anyone rehabilitated upon
parole.
Senator DANIEL. You are speaking of narcotics cases?
Mr. ALEXANDER. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. All right, sir; I am glad to have this recommendation from you as a State attorney, prosecutor.
Now, also tomorrow in Fort Worth we will hear more about the
policy of filing narcotics cases in State courts exclusively when they
are made by State officers. Do you have anything to add on that?
Are you happy to have these narcotics cases in your office, or do you
feel that the Federal courts should have more of them?
Mr. ALEXANDER. Well, we feel that local narcotics cases should
be held on a local level.
Of course, if certain officers make an interstate case or a large case
out of smuggling activities, that properly belongs in Federal court.
But we feel that we know our own characters, and as long as the
Dallas Police Department and sheriff's office can stay right on them,
why, we like to prosecute our cases. It is one way of maintaining
local control; if there is something wrong with our law enforcement,
we are the ones who should be able to correct that.
Senator DANIEL. Chief Hanssen, I believe, said that he felt the
narcotics violators feared the Federal courts and the Federal laws a
little more than the State laws.
What is your viewpoint on that?
Mr. ALEXANDER. I don't agree with him. I have never yet heard
a habitual criminal or a character tell me that he would rather go to
the Texas State Penitentiary than to the Federal pen. Practically
in every case I know of, they will try to plead guilty in Federal court,
rather than risk a trial in State court.
Senator DANIEL. A lot of times, if they can plead, they are addicts,
they will be sent over to Fort Worth Narcotics Hospital or Lexington
Narcotics Hospital, to serve their time; isn't that true?
Mr. ALEXANDER. Yes, sir; that is true; from Federal court.
Senator DANIEL. It is a pretty convenient place to go, and we
have had evidence that some people who commit other crimes not
dealing with narcotics, have pled that they are narcotic addicts and
3186
have in some cases misrepresented the facts and fooled the officers,
in order to go to these hospitals instead of the prison.
Mr. ALEXANDER. Yes; I have heard of that. However, that
doesn't happen in our local cases.
Senator DANIEL. Well, do you know if your State courts do hand
out heavy sentences, these violators will be just as afraid of your
State courts as the Federal courts, in my opinion.
Mr. ALEXANDER. This has been a new problem with us, Senator.
We have only handled narcotics cases in our office since the first of
1954, and our average penalty has averaged a little bit heavier than
it has in Federal courts.
Senator DANIEL. I see. All right, sir.
Mr. ALEXANDER. Now, the juries, the juries will hand down a
heavy penalty, if you will just take the case to the jury; they will
hand it out.
Senator DANIEL. Well, I appreciate your appearing before us, and
if you have any other suggestions at any time, we will be working
until the 1st of January on our report, and be glad to hear from you
further.
Mr. ALEXANDER. Thank you, sir.
Senator DANIEL. IS Mr. Brackline, the assistant United States
attorney, here in the courtroom?
The MARSHAL. Bill Brackline? Mr. Brackline is not here right
now.
Senator DANIEL. I want to express my appreciation to Mr. Brackline, and to Judge Davidson, Judge Atwell, Judge Estes, and all of
the judges and the officers of the court.
Thank you, Mr. Marshal, for taking care of us here so well. We
want your full name in the record.
The MARSHAL. Goss; E. R. Goss.
Senator DANIEL. Mr. Goss.
The MARSHAL. Glad to have you, Senator, and I feel like you
have been doing a great work, and the more and the better work you
do will make our work less, maybe.
Senator DANIEL. Thank you, sir.
We want to express our appreciation again to the press and to the
television and radio, who have been here working with us in order
that the public might know about what the situation is, and to our
staff, especially to all the law-enforcement officers who have helped
us in arranging the hearings and who have been with us all the way
through these hearings.
Lieutenant Gannaway, I expected to get you back on the stand,
but I guess we have about covered the situation. To Mr. Gentry
and Mr. Heddens and to all the Federal and State officers, we express
our sincere appreciation for your help on these hearings.
Mr. Brackline?
The MARSHAL. Mr. Brackline is here now.
Senator DANIEL. I just called you to express our appreciation to
you, sir. I believe we are to hear from Mr. Floore tomorrow.
Now, tomorrow we will be in Fort Worth, and the following is the
list of official witnesses. We will hear only from witnesses whose
names will be announced.
There will be United States Attorney Heard Floore, District Attorney Howard Fender, Chief of Police Cato Hightower, Sheriff Harlan
3187
ment officers and others who have assisted us in preparing for this
one day hearing in Forth Worth today.
This is a continuation of
We are
I am glad to say that Fort Worth ranks very low in the top 45, but
of course, any narcotics traffic is bad, and we are here to see exactly
what the situation is, and especially to get the recommendations of
State, Federal, and city officers here as to what Congress may do to
help lick this cancer in our society.
The first witness will be Chief of Police Cato Hightower.
Mr. HIGHTOWER. Senator, I have prepared a written statement.
Senator DANIEL. All right. We will take care of distributing those.
Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you will give to this
subcommittee of the Senate Judiciary Committee will be the truth,
the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?
Mr. HIGHTOWER. I do.
TESTIMONY OF CATO HIGHTOWER, CHIEF OF POLICE, FORT
WORTH, TEX.
Senator DANIEL. Will you state your name?
Mr. HIGHTOWER. Cato S. Hightower.
Mr.
HIGHTOWER.
3190
Senator DANIEL. Chief, have you had occasion to give special at-
HIGHTOWER.
Yes, sir.
at any time, they are not committed there, they can leave at any tune.
Of course, the hospital tries to get them to stay, but they are not
compelled to stay, and if they leave before their habit is cured, then
they do linger here.
hosSenator DANIEL. Does this location of the Federal narcotics
problem?
3191
Very little.
They are usually brought into the hospital by
officers?
Mr. HIGHTOWER.
Senator DANIEL.
Mr.
HIGHTOWER.
Yes, sir.
And they are usually escorted away, is that true?
That's right, or they are cured before they leave.
Senator
Mr.
Yes, sir.
DANIEL.
Mr. HIGHTOWER.
Senator DANIEL.
HIGHTOWER.
Senator DANIEL. Now, the difference, then, between these mandatory patients and the volunteer patients is that these volunteer
patients can enter the hospital when they are told that there is a bed
or place for them and then they can leave when they so desire; is that
right?
Mr. HIGHTOWER. That is the way I understand it; yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. What recommendation do you have, if any, to
this committee, concerning the voluntary patient policy at the
U. S. Narcotics Hospital?
Mr. HIGHTOWER. I would say this, that the-it is against the policy
or the law to give these names out to local officers, and I think that
those names of voluntary patients should be made available to local
enforcement officers. I also recommend that Federal narcotic agents
be stationed here, which they were up until the spring of 1954, when
they closed down the local office here.
Senator DANIEL. Now, in the spring of 1954, the local Federal
Narcotics Bureau Office here was closed?
Mr. HIGHTOWER. Yes, sir; that's right.
Senator DANIEL. And is there an office or any personnel stationed
permanently here?
Mr.
HIGHTOWER.
Dallas. We receive 100 percent cooperation from the Federal narcotics officers, but they are not handy enough, in other words, they
are not stationed here, and they can't get joint information with our
officers, and it works a hardship on us.
Senator
DANIEL.
DANIEL.
All right.
3192
Mr. HIGHTOWER. I don't think he should be let out before his treat-
be some binding agreement or some arrangement whereby they would stay long enough until
a doctor said that they were in shape enough to be separated from the
hospital?
Mr. HIGHTOWER. That's right; yes. sir.
Senator DANIEL. Your main trouble is with those addicts who go
out here to the hospital and leave in a few days, or before Dr. Tratitman and his men say they are in any shape to leave?
Mr. HIGHTOVER. That's right.
Senator DANIEL. Now, let's go back to these home-grown addicts,
or at least home-resident addicts.
I am not going to say anything, you know, on this, to reflect on
Fort Worth any more than you are; this is my home town, too. I
finished both grammar school and high school here, and I look on Fort
Worth as at least one of my home towns, and I think it is fine that
Forth Worth does not have more drug addiction than it does have.
But, on the other hand, it is bad enough, as you say, to where it is
a serious problem here, or in any city that has as much of the traffic
as we find here. You agree with that?
Mr. HIGHTOWER. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. And your estimate is that you have around 50?
Mr. HIGHTOWER. Forty to 50.
Senator DANIEL. Forty to 50 addicts living here, within the city
limits?
Mr. HIGHTOWER. Yes, sir. That includes
all forms of addiction,
the paregoric, what we call the paregoric hounds, the morphine main
liners, and all.
Senator DANIEL. And do you report the addicts to the Federal
Bureau of Narcotics?
Mr.
HIGHTOWER.
Senator DANIEL.
that come to your
Mr. HIGHTOWER.
Senator DANIEL.
Senator DANIEL.
Mr. HIGHTOWER.
Senator DANIEL.
agencies concerned
Mr.
HIGHTOWER.
Senator DANIEL.
of them over here permanently, so you could get together quicker?
Mr. HIGHTOWER. They are a whole lot handier when they are
stationed here, yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Now, you have prepared some statistics here,
several of which look very interesting.
3193
Senator DANIEL. Have you had any trouble in Fort Worth with
druggists or doctors giving out drugs?
Mr. HIGHTOWER. We have had quite a bit of trouble with drug
stores selling paregoric and nonexempt-I mean exempt narcotics.
Senator DANIEL. All right.
Mr. HIGHTOWER. It is recommended that the class five permit be
HIGHTOWER.
Yes, sir.
went into that a little while ago, the records of volunteer patients in
the hospitals should be available to local enforcement officers.
Senator DANIEL. Now, Chief, your reason for making that recommendation is what?
Mr. HIGHTOWER. So that we may know who these people are when
they come in here, and also, in case they decide to leave, we could
get a fingerprint record of them, and mug shots of them. And if
you will notice, in some of these tables over here, we have quite a
few drugstore burglaries, hospital prowls, and all that, that we attribute to these people. If we could have a record of them, where we
could get their fingerprints, and so forth
Senator DANIEL. That is, of all of the patients that enter the
Federal hospital here for narcotics?
Mr. HIGHTOWER. The volunteer patients, yes, sir.
3194
Well, I suppose you know, chief, that other agencies are wanting that information, too. Now, under the law, this
hospital out here can't even send the list of addicts in the hospital
to the Bureau of Narcotics, a Federal bureau which is trying to
combine all the names of the drug addicts in the country. You say
you are sending in the report of all the addicts who come to your
attention, and you do not have to; under the law it is strictly a
cooperative matter with the Federal Bureau of Narcotics.
But there is Dr. Trautman back there, sitting in this courtroom,
the head of the hospital here, who under the law is forbidden to send
in the names of addicts who come into his hospital to the Federal
agency which is trying to compile this list. So I will certainly say
to you that is one recommendation you have made that the chairman of this committee is going to try to follow, and that is to try to
change the law so that certain people, such as you here in this city,
and the sheriff and the Bureau of Narcotics and the agencies that
send those patients to the hospital, will know about them, when
they arrived and when they left. As I understand it now, the hospital is forbidden from giving information out even to the lawenforcement agencies that might have sent the volunteer patient to
the hospital
Mr. HIGHTOWER. That's right, yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Is that true?
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator DANIEL. All right. Now, do you have any other recommendations to make, so far as the Congress is concerned?
I see you have one here, that is a recommendation that is probably
focused more on our State laws and our State courts; your fourth
recommendation is to speed up the prosecution of narcotics cases filed
in State court.
Mr. HIGHTOWER. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Do you have a delay now?
Mr. HIGHTOWER. Yes, sir; those courts up there, which try all forms
of criminal cases, are overloaded, they are overtaxed, and it necessitates a delay of several months, and in those months you can lose contact with a State's witness, some of the State's witnesses can back
out, and so forth. It works a hardship.
Senator DANIEL. Do you know of any way that you can speed up
the trial of these narcotics cases?
Mr. HIGHTOWER. No, sir. The only thing is to have more courts.
Senator DANIEL. Have more State courts?
Mr. HIGHTOWER. More State courts.
Senator DANIEL. Well, Chief, have you found from your experience
that narcotics violators, when they get out on bond, either appeal bond
or their original bond awaiting trial, that they go right back into the
traffic?
Mr. HIGHTOWER. Yes, sir; that is true of any form of law violation,
if they are out on bond, they go right ahead and do whatever they
did before they were arrested.
Senator DANIEL. We have heard testimony from about 10 cities in
which the officers told us that was especially true on narcotics violators, that they find their business so lucrative that while they are
out on bond, they just consider themselves to have a license to go
right back into business, and that they repeat and continue their
violations. Now, you say you have found similar cases?
3195
Mr.
Yes,
HIGHTOWER.
Mr.
HIGHTOWER.
Senator
DANIEL.
having to file your cases in the State court unless we can change the
Federal laws on searches and seizures.
Could you use that evidence in the State courts?
Mr. HIGHTOWER. Yes, sir.
Senator
DANIEL.
DANIEL.
courts.
Senator DANIEL. Twenty cases this last year?
Mr. HIGHTOWER. I believe that's right. Fifteen in 1954, in State
courts.
Senator DANIEL. Chief, is your narcotics traffic here in Fort Worth
centered in any particular locality, as is true in most of our larger
cities?
Mr. HIGHTOWER. No, sir, it doesn't show a pattern, except it is in
the-where the population is more dense.
Senator DANIEL. Well, could you-do you have a map or anything,
that shows about where yourMr. HIGHTOWER. Yes, sir; I have a map over there, if Mr. Nichols
will get it for me.
Senator DANIEL. If you will, just put it over here on the desk.
Mr. HIGHTOWER. Right here?
71515-56-pt. 7-54
3196
Senator DANIEL. No, on your desk, and speak from it, then all of
us here can see it.
Mr. HIGHTOWER. These are cases filed, and in some cases there were
two or more arrests.
Senator DANIEL. Now, excuse me. The reporter here is having to
take down all of this, and when you refer to "these" or point to something, let's identify it.
Mr. HIGHTOWER. These pins on the map are where the cases
originated. In some cases, there might be two or more arrests where
each pin is in the map.
Now, the red pins indicate marihuana, the yellow pins indicate
heroin, the blue pins indicate morphine, and the green pins indicate
codeine and paregoric and the minor narcotics.
Senator DANIEL. Is this map based on arrests during the last year?
Mr. HIGHTOWER. On cases filed during the last year, in 1954 and
1955.
Now, the pins that have circles around them were arrests in 1954;
the pins without the circles around them were 1955 arrests.
Senator DANIEL. And that represents a total of how many arrests
and cases filed on those arrests for the years of 1954-is that, you say,
for 1954?
Mr. HIGHTOWER. This is for 1954 and 1955.
Senator DANIEL. And 1955?
Mr. HIGHTOWER. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. How many cases, total, do you have that figure?
Mr. HIGHTOWER. I don't have it on the map here, but I can get it
off of my report.
In 1954 there were 15 State cases filed, and 10 Federal cases. In
1955, to date, there were 16 State cases filed and 1 Federal case.
Senator DANIEL. That is based on arrests made by your office or
the sheriff's office?
Mr. HIGHTOWER. Well, that is arrests that we figured in. In some
cases the sheriff's men figured in that, and the Federal narcotics
agents assisted us in some of them.
Senator DANIEL. I see. Well, now, these pins all seem to be, most
of them at least, centered right in the heart of the city; is that correct?
Mr. HIGHTOWER. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Right around in the more thickly settled part of
the city?
Mr. HIGHTOWER.
Senator DANIEL.
Yes, sir.
district?
Mr. HIGHTOWER. This is business, this is the heart ofSenator DANIEL. Now, you are pointing now to the thickness of
pins, where the pins almost touch each other?
Mr. HIGHTOWER. Yes, sir.
3197
Senator DANIEL. All right. And then you seem to have a little
concentration to the south there; what neighborhood would that be
in?
Mr. HIGHTOWER. That would be the colored district round Rosedale and the southeastern district there.
Senator
DANIEL.
HIGHTOWER.
Senator DANIEL.
Mr.
Mr.
north?
HIGHTOWER.
Senator DANIEL.
That's right.
Well, whatever the reason is, I am glad to see it.
Senator
Thank you.
Mr.
3198
Mr.
Senator
Mr.
DANIEL.
In 1 year.
Senator DANIEL. Now, how many of those burglaries were conmitted by narcotic addicts?
3199
I am sure that more
HIGHTOWER.
Senator
DANIEL.
work and hold down a job that will pay him enough money to buy the
Is
Mr.
well known wholesale narcotic burglaries in the entire country was the
Renfro drugstore here in 1943, in which I believe some 1,500 packages
of narcotic drugs were stolen. Yesterday in Dallas, before this
committee, one of the knob-knockers state that the cocaine he was
familiar with came in a bottle of large dimensions, probably an ounce
of cocaine, which the average person would never see, and which
would have to come from a wholesale registered dealer in narcotics
that supplies hospitals and drugstores.
There was one other question about getting joint information with
]Federal officers and police. You mean in the actual beginning of the
investigation?
Mr. HIGITOWER. Yes, sir, that's right.
officers and the city officers could start to work on a case from the
first.
Mr. SPEER. Well, then, you have a feeling that some of these
3200
coming from?
Mr. HIGHTOWER.
of them came from Dallas, some of them from Denver, and some of
them from cities on the coast and border towns.
Senator DANIEL. What about San Antonio?
Mr. HIGHTOWER. Quite a bit of marihuana comes through San
Antonio.
Senator DANIEL. Have you ever found any heroin that came in
from New York?
Mr. HIGHTOWER. I understand that most of the white heroin does
come from the east and the west coasts.
Senator DANIEL. What about Johnny Miller, was he a trafficker
that was bringing in narcotics here from the east coast?
Mr. HIGHTOWER. I don't know where he was obtaining his narcotics,
but he was bringing in a lot to this area.
Senator DANIEL. Now, Chief, I notice here that you have only 4
narcotics cases involving people under 20 years of age in your State
and Federal courts in 1954.
Mr. HIGHTOWER. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. And then the next group, 20 to 25, you only have
4 violators. It would appear from that that probably you are not
having too much trouble among juveniles, in your narcotics cases.
Is that right?
Mr. HIGHTOWER. That's right.
Senator DANIEL. It is mostly in your barbiturates and amphetamine drugs where you find the juveniles getting in trouble, is that
correct?
Mr. HIGHTOWER. I believe that's right, yes.
Senator DANI FL. Mr. Counsel, any other questions?
Mr. GASQUE. Chief, have you had occasion to arrest any people
and sent them to court for violation of the addict law in Texas?
Senator DANIEL. You are speaking of this new addict law, Mr.
Counsel, that was just passed by the last legislature?
Mr. GASQIE. Yes, sir.
Mr. HIGHTOWER. It is pretty difficult to get evidence in that case.
I understand that Mr. Nichols and Mr. glass have made several
arrests on that, and I don't know what the outcome of the cases were,
I'm sorry. They could probably tell you.
Senator DANIEL. Chief, I thank you again for helping this committee, for bringing us this testimony, and if you think of anything else
that you would recommend to us between now and January 1, when
we hope to complete our report, we would appreciate hearing from you.
Mr. HIGHTOWER. Thank you, sir. I certainly will.
Senator DANIEL. Mr. Reporter, you will make his prepared statement and all the statistics a part of the record at this place.
(The document referred to follows:)
3201
21, 1955.
Subject: Statistics pertaining to the enforcement of narcotic laws by the police
department of Fort Worth, Tex., and recommendations.
OCOTBER
Hon.
PRICE DANIEL,
Age
Sex
Race
19
30
69
Ramona Gonzales ------Richard A. Hawkins ----- 21
F
M
M
N
36
19
M
M
W
M
Fletcher M. Massey
James L. McQueen ------
49
21
M
M
W
W
49
19
24
29
38
34
31
Date
Charges filed
Illegal possession of
marihuana.
Obtaining narcoticsfraud.
Illegal sale of narcotics.
Illegal possession ei
marihuana.
----- do -----------------Illegal possession of
narcotics.
----- do -----------------Illegal possession of
marihuana.
Illegal possessionbarbiturates.
Illegal possession of
narcotics.
Illegal possessionbarbiturates.
Obtaining
narcotics--
fraud.
Illegal possession of
narcotics.
Obtaining narcoticsfraud.
Illegal possessionbarbiturates.
Apr.
8, 1954
Disposition
Dismissed.
Pending.
Do.
No bill.
Pending.
2 years suspended.
Pending.
2 years.
Nov. 12,1954
Dec. 22, 1954
Apr.
8,1954
do----------
No bill.
2 years suspended.
Dismissed.
Do.
Pending.
Do.
Oct. 25,1954
$25 fine.
3202
Race
Date
Charges filed
Disposition
I.
Violation, Marihuana
Tax Act.
Illegal sale of narcotics-do............
-----
.....
-do
5 years.
do ------Mar. 20,1954
2 years.
2 years (suspend.
ed).
10 years (hospi.
talized).
2 years.
Mar. 3, 1954
Illegal possession of
narcotics.
Violation, Marihuana
Tax Act.
Illegal possession of
marihuana.
Violation, Marihuana
Tax Act.
Illegal sale-exempt
narcotic.
Violation, Marihuana
Tax Act.
Do.
2 years (suspend.
ed), $50.
5 years.
$500 fine.
5 years.
do-------
Statistics on cases filed in State and Federal courts during the year of 1954:
Total white males ---------81
Total Negro females -------2
Total white females3
Total Mexican males -----3
Total Negro males --.....
8
Total Mexican females- - ---1
Statistics on age groups of defendants in cases filed in State and Federal courts
during the year of 1954:
Under 20 -----------------4
30 to 40 ------------------7
20 to 25 ------------------4
40 to 50------------------2
25 to 30 ------------------5
Over 50 ------------------3
Submitted below is the total number of arrests from January 1, 1954 to January
1, 1955 including defendants in cases filed, and also those arrested for investigation
of narcotics:
Race
Sex
Male --------------------------------------------White
Female ---------------------------------------Do
Male ---------Negro --------------------------------------------Female------Do-... . . . . . . . ..-------------------------------Male
Mexican ---------------------------------------------Female ------Do ------------------------------------------------
57
9
24
2
6
0
Total ----------------------------------------------------------
98
5
9
30
17
23
14
98
.-----------------
Submitted below are the figures on arrests pertaining to narcotics from January
1, 1955 to October 1, 1955:
97
Total arrests ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------court
Cases filed in State
1
Cases filed in Federal court ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Totai cases filed
8
Cases filed involving marihuana ------------------------------------Cases filed involving heroin -----4
3
Cases filed involving morphine ---------------------------------1
Cases filed involving codeine ---------------------------------------1
Cases filed involving barbiturates --------------------------------
3203
Age
Sex
26
21
37
31
M
M
M
M
25
36
F
M
43
55
M
M
Win. E. MeLemore-......
27
56
Geo. R. Murchinson ..
Luther D. Reed ---------
63
24
M
M
24
32
M
M
22
Race
Charges filed
Date
Sept.
Possession of narcotics
N
Possession of marihuana- Aug.
N
July
W ----- do ----------------N
Illegal possession of nar- Apr.
cotics.
N ----- do --------------- do
W
Illegal possession of mar- Sept.
ihuana.
Feb.
N ----- do ----------------Illegal sale of barbitur- Feb.
W
ates.
W
Illegal possession of nar- Mar.
cotics.
N
Illegal possession of mar- May
ihuana.
W
Illegal sale of narcotics_
July
N
Illegal possession of mar- July
ihuana.
N ----- do ----------------Mar.
N
Illegal posse&qion of nar- July
cotics.
W
Illegal possession of mar- Feb.
ihuana.
-
Disposition
25, 1955
14,1955
31,1955
6, 1955
Pending.
Do.
Do.
No billed.
2, 1955
Pending.
26, 1955
18,1955
Do.
Do.
5, 1955
18, 1955
Discharged
hospital.
Pending.
11, 1955
9, 1955
No billed.
5 years.
16,1955
27, 1955
2 years.
Pending.
13, 1955
Dismissed.
to
Age
Sex
Race
58
47
---
Charges filed
Date
Disposition
Feb.
5. 1955
Pending.
Oct.
1, 1955
5 years.
Statistics on cases filed in State and Federal courts during the year of 1955:
Total white males ------------------------------------------------8
Total white females ----------------------------------------------0
Total Negro males -----------------------------------------------8
Total Negro females ----------------------------------------------1
Total Mexican males---------------------------------------------0
Total Mexican females0
Statistics on age groups of defendants in cases filed in State and Federal court
during the year of 1955:
Under 20 -------------------------------------------------------0
20 to 25 --------------------------------------------------------4
25 to 30 --------------------------------------------------------3
30 to 40 --------------------------------------------------------4
40 to 50 --------------------------------------------------------2
Over 50 --------------------------------------------------------4
Submitted below is the total number of arrests from January 1, 1955, to October
1, 1955, including defendants in cases filed and also those arrested for investigation
of narcotics:
Race
White
-----------------------------------
Neo ...-------------------------------------------
------------------------------Negro ------------------------------------------------Mexican
--------------------------------Mexican --------------------------------------------Total
Sel
Number
of
arrests
Males .....
57
Under 20-------
34
2
0
0
Females -------
-----------------------------------------------
97
20 to 25 ---------
16
18
23
24
14
97
3204
Until March 1954, two Federal narcotic agents were stationed in Fort Worth.
Although we receive 100-percent cooperation from Federal Narcotic Bureau in
Dallas, the removal of these two agents formerly stationed in Fort Worth has
worked a severe handicap on the police department of the city of Fort Worth.
The city of Fort Worth is in a unique position since 1 of the 2 Federal
narcotic hospitals in the United States (where addicts may volunteer as patients)
is located here. There is a steady stream of addicts to and from this hospital.
These volunteer patients may leave this hospital at any time. There are minerous addicts who come to Fort Worth to enter this hospital, and while waiting
to enter, must obtain narcotics in any way possible. Our city narcotic officers
are not permitted to obtain records from the United States Public Health hospital
regarding volunteer patients. We attribute a major percentage of our burglaries
wherein narcotics are obtained to these patients who have left the hospital against
medical advice or who are awaiting admittance.
During 1954 there were 14 burglaries wherein narcotics were obtained. To
date during 1955 there have been 5 burglaries wherein narcotics were obtained.
During 1954 the total number of burglaries amounted to a total of 2,196. To
date during 1955 we have had a total of 1,682 burglaries.
Our records fail to reveal that there is any evidence of a tie-in between prostitution and narcotic traffic in Fort Worth other than that prostitutes are a fertile
field for narcotics and any other type of violation.
Informants have told our city narcotic officers that the major portion of narcotics
are obtained from wholesalers who live outside of Fort Worth and Tarrant County.
Recommendations for more efficient handling of narcotics cases in Fort Worth
and Tarrant County:
1. Reopen the Federal narcotics office and assign resident agents to Fort
Worth. This is needed because:
(a) The Federal agents boundaries are unlimited.
(b) The location of the United States Public Health hospital is located in
Forth Worth.
(c) The metropolitan area has approximately one-half million population.
(d) The Federal and local officers would have closer cooperation because
they could compile joint information and discuss course of action taken in
each particular case.
(e) The Federal narcotics officers have more money available to make
"buys."
(f) Federal officers could adopt cases which are now filed in the overloaded
State court.
(g) The low city budget limits the number of full-time city narcotic officers
to two.
2. Stricter regulations pertaining to the issuance of narcotic permits and the
handling of narcotics.
(a) It is recommended that the class 5 permit be limited to a drug store
where a regular pharmacist is employed.
(b) Stricter regulations pertaining to the sale of exempt narcotics for
addiction purposes (paragoric, elixir of terpin hydrate, and codeine).
(c) Require all persons dispensing narcotics to keep records of narcotics
administered by them in their office.
3. Amend the rules regarding the giving of information of addicted patients in
the United States Public Health hospital to officers.
(a) Records of volunteer patients in the hospital should be available to
all local officers.
(b) Names and information regarding patients leaving the hospital against
medical advice.
(c) Stricter regulations on patients leaving the hospital against medical
advice.
4. Speed up prosecution of narcotics cases filed in State court.
(a) This is necessary to prevent losing contact with State witnesses.
(b) This will prevent informers from disappearing and attempting to back
out before the case is brought to trial.
(c) Speedier analysis of evidence. This evidence must now be sent to
Austin for analysis and the experts making said analysis must be available
to testify at the trial of the case.
(d) Thorough discussion of all narcotics cases between the prosecutor and
witnesses in all cases prior to the trial.
5. Relaxing of rules of the Federal court regarding the adoption of narcotics
cases originating by city and State officers.
3205
Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you are about to give
to this subcommittee of the Senate Judiciary Committee will be the
truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help voU God?
Mr.
WRIGHT.
I do.
Senator DANIEL. But do you cooperate with them and have good
cooperation between them and your office?
Mr. WRIGHT. Yes, sir; very good cooperation. If we get on a
case in the county, we go to the city police department to get help.
Senator DANIEL. What about the cooperation with the Federal
agencies?
Mr. WRIGHT. The cooperation with the Federal narcotic agents is
very good.
Senator DANIEL. Do you agree with the chief that we ought to
have a Federal Bureau of Narcotics agent stationed here, as we used
to have?
Mr. WRIGHT. Yes, your honor; I think a population, a city or a
county of the population that we have here, of approximately 500,000
people, as estimated by our chamber of commerce, that we should
3206
To me that is one of the most serious crimes that a person can get
involved with, narcotics using and addiction or peddling it, or what
have you. It is serious; it is very serious.
Senator DANIEL. Do you feel that a considerable part of all the
crime in the county is attributable to narcotic addiction or narcotics
traffic?
Mr. WRIGHT. You say all of the crime?
Senator DANIEL. No; any considerable portion.
Mr. WRIGHT. Yes, sir; I do. I figure that approximately 50 per-
Senator
Mr.
Senator DANIEL. Have you ever stopped to estimate how much
the drug traffic here in Tarrant County might be costing the people
of this county, by way of these burglaries and robberies, shoplifting,
and so forth?
Mr. WRIGHT. No, Senator; I haven't. The percentage would run
high, though; I mean it would
Senator DANIEL. Run into considerable money?
Mr. WRIGHT. Yes, sir. Yes, sir; it would.
Senator DANIEL. Because an addict has to steal property worth a
lot more than the actual money cost of his heroin?
3207
Senator
facts and recommendations that I feel are needed in Tan ant County in regard
to the narcotic problem.
I would like to start by stating that Tarrant County has a population in excess
of 500,000, and that 85 percent of this population is located within the corporate
city limits of Greater Fort Worth. Our next largest city is Arlington, Tex., and
Arlington and the balance of Tarrant County make up the remaining 15 percent
of our population.
Since taking office some 3 years ago I have increased my patrol cars from 1 to 4
cars, which is an increase of 300 percent, and patrol personnel from 2 to 13. These
cars have the responsibility of covering all of Tarrant County. Assigned to
my staff are four criminal investigators, the main position of their time is spent
in the investigation of the numerous crimes that normally occur in a county
of this size. These men work around the clock; therefore, it becomes necessary
for complete cooperation between my office and the city of Fort Worth police
department-the city of Fort Worth having two men assigned exclusively to the
narcotic detail.
The personnel of the Fort Worth Police Department is in excess of 425 members.
My staff has only 61 members. This figure includes all jail personnel, process
servers and bailiffs; thereby making it impossible, due to the lack of personnel,
to assign a narcotic investigator to my staff.
By way of statistics there have been 42 narcotic cases filed in Tarrant County
within the last 2 years. This figure includes both city and county filings. Of the
above figure, my office assisted in a fair percentage of these cases; however, my
department filed only two cases. Of these 42 cases filed, there were 35 convictions
(these convictions were under the old law and suspended sentences given in many
cases).
The percent of crimes committed in our county motivated for narcotics is
somewhere in the neighborhood of 5 percent. This 5 percent includes breaking
and entering of safes of medical laboratories and drugstores.
By way of comparison, our narcotic juvenile problem is rather negligible, consisting mostly of young Negro boys who have smoked a marihuana cigarette.
There are 17 officers assigned in the city of Fort Worth who are assigned to the
juvenile youth division. These officers funnel their youthful offenders to the
juvenile probation office in Tarrant County which is composed of only four
investigators.
The repetition of experienced narcotic users in connection with crimes that
they will commit time and time again for narcotics in connection with narcotics
is around 50 percent.
The easiest known narcotic to obtain in Tarrant County is the exempt preparation paregoric. Perhaps the best single way of preventing the widespread use
of narcotics is to stop the sale of paregoric to unauthorized dispensers. By this
is meant that only drugstores that have licensed registered pharmacists on duty
at all times and who are licensed in dispensing preparations containing narcotics.
3208
This would keep the small drug departments in stores which do not sell prescrip.
tions, but merely sundry drugs from having any form of narcotic in their respective
places of business.
CONCLUSION
As stated above the lack of personnel both in my office and in the police department and the nature of the narcotic user by virtue of his craving and cunning,
necessitates the need for trained narcotic investigators, especially men to work
under cover, for th- following reasons. It is necessary that in order to sustain
a conviction that the evidence obtained in a narcotic case be of such nature
that the person making the sale and the prospective purchaser be unknown to each
other in order that there will be confidence between these two so that there can
be not only a direct sale but an exchange of money or some other consideration
to show that there has actually been a sale.
Among experienced narcotic users the local law enforcement officers who are
dealing with this problem are well known to these agents and pushers, and it
therefore becomes necessary that undercover men are constantly changing locations to make these purchases and prepare cases for trial. On a great majority
of these occasions vast sums of money are needed to make these purchases of
narcotic drugs. This office regrets, and I am sure I might speak for the city police
department, to say that these funds are unavailable for us to use in such a manner.
Texas being a bordering State to a foreign country and so easily accessible by
virtue of the narrow river between our two countries it is not too difficult for
dope smugglers to bring vast narcotics to and through texas and throughout the
States.
Tarrant County is the fourth largest county in the State of Texas and yet we
are without a Federal or State narcotic investigator within our boundaries. If it
is found by this honorable committee that the situation in Tarrant County is
not too serious in that we do not need Federal investigators, then this information
within itself could be a license to the smugglers to use Fort Worth as their headquarters, since it has been shown that there is a need in Houston, San Antonio, and
Dallas for such investigators.
I cannot urge too strongly the need for Federal and State narcotic agents to be
located in Tarrant County and that sufficient personnel and finances be available
so that we might deter any organized narcotic group from using Tarrant County
as its headquarters.
Since the main purpose of law enforcement is to suppress crime let us warn these
unscrupulous characters who deal with narcotics that our county will not be their
haven.
Respectively submitted.
HARLON WRIGHT,
Sheriff, Tarrant County.
Mr. WRIGHT. Well, Senator, the main thing that I would like to
recommend
Hightower,
emphasized
voluntarily
so easy for
Senator DANIEL. You are talking, now, about the Federal narcotic
hospitals?
Mr. WRIGHT. That's right.
Senator DANIEL. Located here?
3209
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Do you
Senator
DANIEL.
Mr.
WRIGHT.
They are.
I think, my
3210
3211
Mr. SPEER.
addict there led a riot, Jose Escobado led a riot in the county jail
there, and also he had led a riot when he was in Cook County jail,
lending further support to the fact that these people are dangerous
law violators.
Mr. VRIGHT. No, sir, we haven't had that trouble.
Senator DANIEL. Well, now, you have had violent crimes here, and
Mr.
7 5 15-56-pt.
7-55
3212
Senator
of the others?
Cecil Green?
Harry Huggins.
However, I didn't work on that case none whatsoever. It was in
the city limits, and the city police department and our criminal
departments that worked that case up. I worked on it none whatsoever.
Senator DANIEL. All right; we will ask them about those cases.
But you have, through different grapevines in the underworld, understood that some of these characters who committed violent crimes
here in Tarrant County were users of various types of drugs?
Mr. WRIGHT. That's correct, yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Well, Sheriff, we thank you very much for appearing before us, and be sure to send us any other recommendations
you might have.
Harry Wood.
Mr. Wood, you may come right over here. Will you stand and be
sworn, please, sir?
Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you are about to give
to this subcommittee of the Senate Judiciary Committee will be the
truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?
Mr. WOOD. Yes, sir.
Senator
full name?
live?
Mr. WooD. 1 live in the Mayfair Hotel, at 1115/ Main Street.
Senator DANIEL. Here in Fort Worth?
Mr. WOOD. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. That address is 1115% Main Street?
Mr. WOOD. Main Street, that's right.
DANIEL. At
WOOD. Mayfair
Senator
what hotel?
Hotel.
Mr.
Senator DANIEL. And what business are you engaged in?
Mr. WOOD. Well, I am an entertainer, I-a musician.
Senator DANIEL. Musician?
Mr. WOOD. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. And entertainer?
Mr. WOOD. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. How long have you been in the entertainlmelnt
field?
Mr. WOOD.
About 25 years.
Senator DANIEL. Now, Mr. Wood, I believe you have had the
unfortunate experience of having been addicted to drugs?
Mr. WOOD. Yes, sir; I was.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
huana?
DANIEL.
3213
Senator
Senator
opium?
DANIEL.
Senator DANIEL. That the use of marihuana does not help you
play any better music?
Mr. WOOD. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. But back there when you were youngMr. WOOD. I thought I was smart.
Senator
DANIEL.
Mr. WOOD. Yes.
Senator DANIEL.
3214
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator DANIEL. But actually, if they are a drug addict, they are
not in a position to do a good job in the music field, are they?
Mr. WOOD. No, sir; nothing.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL. Sir?
Mr. WOOD. Dope ruins anyone.
Senator DANIEL. And your advice,
musicians?
3215
Senator
to help you?
Senator DANIEL. You have also had to go and serve several sentences in prison?
Mr. WOOD. That's right, sir.
Senator DANIEL. How many times were you sent to prison on account of your narcotics habit?
Mr. WOOD. Four times.
some young person keep from making the mistake you did.
Mr. WOOD. That's right.
Senator
DANIEL.
DANIEL.
Opium?
3216
Senator
Senator
cerned?
DANIEL.
But a
Mr. WooD. Yes, sir; I did. I paid four different times, went to the
penitentiary for that.
Senator DANIEL. Did you go to the penitentiary all four times for
burglaries or thefts?
Mr. WooD. Thefts, narcotics.
Senator
DANIEL.
Thefts of narcotics?
3217
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator DANIEL. A total of how many years have you spent in the
penitentiary on account of your drug habit?
Mr. WOOD. Oh, it was so long I can't even-I would have to figure
it out. It is actually on account of drugs; I never was in jail in my
life till I got on dope; I mean I never was put in prison excepting on
account of dope.
Senator DANIEL. In 1931, I believe that you went to prison for
about the second time, and that was at the Spadra Narcotic Farm?
Mr. WOOD. Spadra Narcotic Farm.
Senator
DANIEL.
S-p-a-d-r-a?
Senator
DANIEL.
microscopes?
Mr. WOOD. That's right, sir. I don't know how you found that out,
but that's right.
Senator DANIEL. And you traded them for 5% grains of morphine?
Mr. WOOD. That's right.
Senator
Mr.
Senator DANIEL. Was there a movie star committed also?
Mr. WOOD. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. What was her name?
Mr. WOOD. Alma Reubens.
Senator DANIEL. Did you have some experience with her there at
the narcotic farm?
Mr. WOOD. Yes, sir. She got up on a water tower, and she got
full of cocaine, and I was the only one thatSenator DANIEL. You say she got full of cocaine?
Mr. WOOD. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. While at the narcotic farm?
Mr. WOOD. Yes, sir. But it wasn't theSenator DANIEL. How did she get the cocaine at the narcotic farm?
Mr. WOOD. It wasn't the officials' fault, but she got it.
Senator DANIEL. Who brought it in?
Mr. WOOD. I couldn't tell you, sir.
Senator
DANIEL. Wasn't it
WOOD. I couldn't say.
her chauffeur?
Mr.
I didn't know it, and I couldn't tell
you.
Senator DANIEL. Well, anyway, she got somebody to bring her an
ounce of cocaine while there on the farm, and what did she do?
Mr. WOOD. Well, she got what is called the bull horrors, that is
what they called it; she got scared, she got up on the tank, and I am
the only one who could bring her down.
Senator
DANIEL.
On a water tower?
Mr. WOOD. Yes, sir. They were afraid she would jump off, so the
doctors sent me up after her.
Senator DANIEL. The doctor was afraid she would jump off, and
sent you up for her?
Mr. WooD. Yes, sir.
3218
Senator
DANIEL.
That's the program there; they give you a little job. So I was a
waiter, and the doctor told me to wait on her.
Senator DANIEL. In that instance, was that morphine or cocaine?
Mr. WOOD. Cocaine; almost caused this person to commit'sui~ide,
the line with some, and they put her in jail, and she was supposed to
have died with pneumonia, and that was what it was; she had so
much money she just got an overdose of that stuff, and it killed her.
Senator DANIEL. Do you know some of the famous people in the
movie business who have used narcotics?
Mr. WOOD. Yes, sir; Wallace Reid and them; all of you people
Senator
Leeds.
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
world.
DANIEL.
Senator
Mr.
DANIEL. What
WOOD. I think this
3219
narcotic drugs?
Mr. WOOD. That's right, even if I had to pay the penalty.
Senator DANIEL. I don't suppose, then, you would mind the State
or Federal Government doing it?
Mr. WOOD. No. I won't advocate that, though.
Senator DANIEL. You won't advocate that to the committee?
Mr. WooD. No; but I am just telling you my own personal feeling.
Anyone that would get anyone on that stuff-I don't know what to
say about it. It ruined my whole life. I mean I did it myself, nobody
did it but myself. I never harmed nobody excepting myself.
Senator DANIEL. Well, you say you did it all yourself?
Mr. WOOD. I did.
Senator DANIEL. Actually, didn't you get in association, as a young
boy, with boys using marihuana?
Mr. WooD. Yes, sir.
Senator
DANIEL.
Mr. WooD. Yes,
Senator DANIEL.
hasn't got the nerve or heart to get some other person, to ruin their
life.
Senator DANIEL. On the other hand, friends and associates got
you started, didn't they?
Mr. WOOD. Yes, sir. I mean I just thought I was smart; I was
a young kid, and didn't know more better.
Senator DANIEL. And today we hear on every hand that there axe
addicts who are spreading the disease through members of their
families. In New York, we had three young people before us; one
a young man 23 years of age, who started on heroin, talked his wife
into using it while she was pregnant-she came before us with a baby
in her arms-she is 20 years old, and she spread it on to her 17-yearold brother. All three of them sat before us and told us their story.
So you see, there are many instances like that.
Mr. WooD. That's right.
Senator DANIEL. And you have heard of them, haven't you?
3220
Senator DANIEL. NOW, the author of the poem you quoted for the
record here, you said you thought that when he wrote that, he must
have been on the drug, a while ago?
Mr. WOOD. Yes, sir; he sure did.
De Quincey in England.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
were there?
Mr. WOOD. Well, you know that they did have a big scandal in
San Quentin at one time; I mean they had plenty of drugs in there
at one time; it was in all the papers, and they stopped it.
It's just like the counterfeit money they had in there. They made
some of the best money that was ever turned out; you remember
reading about that. It was very good.
But as far as me actually knowing that, I actually don't, excepting
like you, I read about it. I was an inmate in San Quentin, and also
an inmate in Folsom Prison.
Senator DANIEL. Mr. Wood, after you got out of San Quentin,
how long was it before you went back to heroin?
Mr. WOOD. About 3 years. I actually went to work-Mister,
Warden Duffle was a very good warden, one of the best that ever
came into the United States, I suppose. He was what you would call a
humanitarian.
3221
During the war, they couldn't get men to work, and he told them
that he would train men and send them to the shipyards. He did,
and I was one of those men.
That is why I got my parole out of there. He trained us to be
sheet-metal workers, sheet-metal men, to go to work at the shipyards
right across the bay, and he sent 200 of us over there.
Senator DANIEL. And you got a parole out of Folsom?
Mr. WOOD. Yes, sir.
DANIEL. To work in sheet-metal
Mr. WOOD. No; out of San Quentin.
Senator DANIEL. San Quentin?
Senator
Senator
DANIEL.
I did.
Have
you know, when I did go back in there, and they would be waiting
for me, and I would be the same way with them, sometimes I would
be waiting for them. That's the way-it was that way for years.
That's why I said I hate drugs.
Senator DANIEL. Have you ever tried to take a cure at either of the
Federal hospitals?
Mr. WooD. Yes, sir, I did, and I went under voluntary treatment,
and one day I got disgusted, and somebody told me, "All you have to
do is go. You have got the keys in your pocket."
I said, "I know it."
"Well, why not go, if you don't like it?"
Well, I thought for 2 or 3 days and nights, and I thought of goingSenator DANIEL. And you left?
Mr. WooD. I left, but I stayed well. I was well; they cured me.
Senator DANIEL. What hospital did you go to?
Mr. WOOD. Out here to the Fort Worth hospital.
Must have
Senator DANIEL. Didn't the doctor tell you that wasn't long enough
to do any good?
Mr. WOOD. They begged me, the doctor-I used to play the piano
for the doctors. They come in-they had some fine doctors-the
doctors and nurses used to come in, and I have even begged them for
my medicine, my 10 o'clock medicine, I would tell them I could play
better if they would give me my 10 o'clock medicine, and they would
say, "See how you can play without it."
Well, I would play, and then I would get my 10 o'clock medicine,
but I wouldn't get it until 10 o'clock. I had the finest treatment I
ever had in my life.
111111
3222
Senator
DANIEL.
Mr. WOOD. Yes,
Senator DANIEL.
Mr.
WOOD.
Senator
DANIEL.
Mr. WooD.
Mr. WooD. I would have then, if I would have went back 2 days
later, I would have been back in there, and got fat and well again.
Senator DANIEL. You went out after 13 days and went back to
heroin, didn't you?
Mr. WooD. No, sir, I didn't go back to it.
stuff. I had to fight it out, but it was hard on me; I could have
stayed there and got fat and cured.
Senator DANIEL. Well, how long before you went back to some
form of opiate?
Mr.
WooD.
since.
Senator DANIEL. You have been having a little help with paregoric,
haven't you?
Mr. WOOD. A little help, sir?
Senator DANIEL. With a little paregoric, haven't you?
What
kind of drug?
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
the hospital.
3223
Some addicts, you can give them a shot as high as every 3 hours,
5 shots of morphine, and it won't satisfy them. They are that way.
After you once get on that addiction, you know what I mean, something is wrong up here [indicating forehead], I guess.
Senator DANIELS. IS something wrong with the minds of those
who get addicted?
Mr. WOOD. Must have been mine.
but must have been with mine, as silly as I was. I have had some
wonderful chances, and I have got some wonderful friends, right even
today.
Senator DANIEL. Mr. Wood, I suppose, since you feel that a person
is worse off when he is on the drug, that you wouldn't recommend
these free clinics, would you?
Mr. WOOD. I couldn't recommend them, because I would go right
back, I guess.
Senator DANIEL. If you had a free clinic here, where you could
get the drug, you are afraid you would go back on the drug?
Mr. WOOD. I wouldn't know.
But I
it, you won't use it, I mean as long as you got a little bit of will power
left. Like me; I can't get it, I don't look for it. I have my friends,
I love my music, I have a lot of friends that don't use it, and hate for
me to use it. All my friends fight for me every day, pray for me,
I mean my real friends, and whether I am going to do it or else,
I don't like to say that.
Senator DANIEL. Well, are you afraid these free clinics would keep
other addicts, make them either go back to the habit or keep them
sustained, and therefore, through the rest of their life, it would just
be a hopeless proposition?
Mr. WOOD. Well, sir, this is one thing, I could say this, if we had
free clinics for the oldtimers like me, now, I wouldn't get nobody
on that stuff, but if those fellows could be pensioned off, I don't mean
to run the streets, if they were somewhere where they could work and
produce, they will work if they get their amount of drugs; they can
work, not good, not as good as they could if they was men without
the addiction, and they would not-I don't think then, if the Government was nice enough to pension them off till they die, well, all the
oldtimers would finally die off; then the young ones wouldn't have
that; they wouldn't be nobody to get them on it.
Senator DANIEL. You are talking about if they were all like that,
and would do what you say you would do? But isn't it true that a
lot of addicts, if they got free drugs at a clinic, they would want more?
Mr. WooD. Yes, sir, you are right.
Senator DANIEL. And would go out and buy them on the black
market?
Mr. WOOD. You are right.
Senator
DANIEL.
That's right.
Mr. WOOD. I can't say you are wrong; you are right.
Senator DANIEL. Isn't it also true that the black market would
advance, because those men who are dirty enought to go out and sell
drugs, they would go to the young people and make new addicts out
of them, wouldn't they?
3224
Let me give you a case: Sheriff Warren Kilday used to be for the
free drug clinic. He is the sheriff of Bexar County. He told us the
other day he used to be for it, until he found 1 man in San Antonio
who started off some 40 to 50 young people on drugs.
Mr. WOOD. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. And he said that convinced him that free clinics
wouldn't be the thing, because if the old addicts got theirs at free
clinics, the narcotic dealer who wants to make money is going to start
off young people.
Mr. WOOD. They would get them on it, just like they got me on it.
Senator DANIEL. Well, thank you very much for appearing before
US.
Mr. GASQUE. Mr. Chairman, I understood the witness to say the
old time addict should not be allowed to roam the streets, but should
be pensioned off somewhere and given his drugs until he dies out.
Now it occurs to me that he may be talking about a narcotic farm
or some other establishment where they would be removed from
society. I wonder if he would care to clear that point up.
Senator DANIEL. Mr. Wood, did you have in mind some kind of
farm or something, to send any of the old time addicts, as you call
them, who cannot stay off of the drug?
Mr. WOOD. That's right.
Senator
Mr.
DANIEL. Is
WooD. Well, if
drugs now, and I am not going on it; if I do-well, I won't say. But
I don't want on it. I fought it and I am fighting it now, and I will
fight it.
But if the oldtimers were put somewhere, they will be happy,
you can give them their little 2 grains or 3 grains, and let a doctor
be there to look after them and watch after them, and finally they
are all going to die off; then, if you catch somebody peddling it to the
young ones again, that is up to you people; you know what to do.
Senator DANIEL. Let me ask you this: If you were put anywhere
on 2 or 3 shots of heroin or morphine or any kind of drug a day,
wouldn't you be worse off than if you didn't have the drug?
Mr. WOOD. I would this way, because I still want to go back to
Maybe
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
3225
Senator
th I.
DANIEL.
WOOD.
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
above us all?
Mr. WooD. Have a little entertainment. Here is the trouble with
most addicts: Once we are branded as an addict, nobody wants to
have nothing to do witb us, we are an outcast. It makes it hard on us;
then you say, "Oh, what the heck is the use? What's the use, nobody
will give us a job."
You see what I am getting at?
Senator
DANIEL.
WOOD. We
Yes, I do.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
here and given all this information to this committee will show a lot
of young people they ought to stay away from drugs. We appreciate
it, and thank you very much.
Mr. WOOD. Thank you.
We will have a 3-minute recess.
(Short recess.)
Senator DANIEL. The committee will come to order.
Dr. Trautman.
Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you will give to this
subcommittee of the Senate Judiciary Committee will be the truth,
the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
3226
36LICIT
NARCOTICS TRAFFIC
I am the
medical officer in charge of the U. S. Public Health Service hospital
in Fort Worth, Tex.
Senator DANIEL. Dr. Trautman, you have heard of the criticism
that has been given here this morning by the sheriff and chief of
police of the way in which the Federal laws permit volunteer patients
to come and go from the Federal hospital which you supervise here
in Fort Worth?
Dr. TRAUTMAN. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. You were sitting here in the courtroom?
Dr. TRAUTMAN. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. I just want to know what your reaction is to
that criticism, and whether or not you feel that there should be a
change made in our present laws with respect to the voluntary admission of patients.
Dr. TR&UTMAN. Well, I feel very much that we need a change
in the law which will permit us to have a detention of patients at the
hospital for a period of time which will be sufficient to bring these
patients back to a situation whereby they would be able to return to
their communities.
Senator DANIEL. How would you estimate that your volunteer
patients compare with your regular committals under the law?
Dr. TRAUTMAN. In what regard, Senator Daniel?
Senator DANIEL. In percentage of each.
TRAUTMAN.
time?
Dr. TRAUTMAN. Our beds; yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Which means that they stay very short periods of
time?
Dr. TRAUTMAN. For instance, in fiscal year 1954, if my memory
serves me correct, our average daily hospital load of voluntary patients
3227
was on the order of about 73, and in fiscal year 1955, the year that
ended on June 30, I think our average hospital day or average hospital
load per day of voluntary addicts was about 83. And at that same
time, we were running on the order of a little bit more than 200
prisoners. Our average daily patient load of prisoners in 1954 was
on the order of 222, and this past fiscal year it was on the order of
about 196 or 198.
Senator DANIEL. Now, on these voluntary patients, are there a lot
of them repeaters who come back for the second, third, fourth, or
fifth time?
Dr. TRAUTMAN. Well, going through these past two fiscal years, of
these 1,133 admissions, there were about 60 percent of the patients
who came to our hospital once. There were about 19 percent who came
on a second admission, or about 7% percent that came on a third
admission, or about 4 percent who came on a fourth admission; and I
think that there were about 4 percent who came on more than a fifth
admission.
Now, during the year, or during those 2 years, we had one patient
who showed up for his 19th time, we had another who showed up for
his 13th time, a couple who showed up for their 12th time, and it
gradually went on down to the group of about the 6th time committers, who were about 20 in number during these 2 fiscal years.
Senator DANIEL. Do you happen to have any breakdown showing
how long these voluntary patients stayed, how many stayed for a
certain length of time, and how many were there a shorter period of
time?
Dr. TRAUTMAN. Yes, sir; I have that.
Senator DANIEL. Do you have those figures?
Dr. TRAUTMAN. Yes, sir; I do.
Senator DANIEL. Would you bring those figures after lunch?
Dr. TRAUTMAN. I will.
Senator DANIEL. That means, then, that during the last 2 years,
1,133 addicts have passed through Fort Worth to the hospital?
Dr. TRATMA.N. There have been that many admissions; yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Then they have left the hospital?
Dr. TRAUTMAN. They have; yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. So, then, you realize that these officers may have
something in their complaint that this country, the Congress, leaves
Fort Worth in a peculiarly bad situation because of this traffic in
addicts?
Dr. TRAUTMAN. Well, we are not happy about the situation, I want
to emphasize, too, because I think that we have a very excellent staff;
we have a number of people who have dedicated their lives, actually,
to the care of our patients out here. They have been here a long time
as employees, and we have one of the finest staffs of employees any
71515-56---pt. 7-56
3228
BY
H.
S.
IN CHARGE,
U. S.
TEX.
3229
with tile roof. The arthitectural style lends itself to the atmosphere of the Southwest. The total area of all structures amounts to 700,600 square feet of space.
Approximately 150 acres of the hospital grounds contain buildings for direct treatment of patients and for service functions and provide ample recreational areas
such as baseball diamonds, parks, tennis courts, etc. The remaining 1,200 acres
are utilized in the operation of an agricultural activity offering vocational and
therapeutic opportunities for patients as a part of the treatment program. At
the present time there are 985 beds available for the treatment of patients.
The Fort Worth Hospital is 1 of 16 hospitals provided by the Public Health
Service for the care and treatment of beneficiaries (other than Indians) of the
United States Government. The percent organization is the Department of
Health, Education, and Welfare, with general management and policy authorities
3230
admitted to the hospital. Shortly after the conclusion of active military operations
of World War II, the admission rate of drug addicts increased. As an example,
admissions of such cases increased from 40 in fiscal year 1946 to 376 in 1947, and
to 768 in 1948. The majority of these patients came to us on a voluntary basis.
From the time of the opening of the hospital until June 30, 1955, there have been
8,727 admissions for the treatment of drug addiction. Of the addicts admitted,
56.4 percent were voluntary admissions and the remainder were sent here through
Federal courts. About two-thirds of our admissions during the last three fiscal
years have been patients who entered the hospital for drug addiction.
Specifically the admissions for fiscal years 1954 and 1955 were as follows:
Fiscal year
1954
Fiscal year
1955
Total 2
years
174
164
338
519
614
1,133
12
17
288
294
582
986
1,084
2 070
3231
Addict patients from 40 States, Hawaii, and Puerto Rico, were admitted during
the fiscal years 1954 and 1955. The States with the greatest numbers were:
Texas, 557; California, 344; Oklahoma, 65; Missouri, 65; Louisiana, 64; Arkansas,
39; and New York, 29. (Table 6. State of Residence-Addicts, fiscal years
1953-54-55.)
With regard to admission of Federal prisoners during fiscal years 1954 and 1955
76-plus percent had sentences of under 5 years and 23-plus percent had sentences of
5 years or more. The admission of these prisoner addicts by length of sentence
was as follows:
Sentence
Sentence
Sentence
Sentence
Sentence
Sentence
Sentence
Sentence
Sentence
Sentence
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
1 year -----------------------------------------------1 to 2 years -----------------------------------------2 to 3 years ------------------------------------------3 to 4 years ------------------------------------------4 to 5 years ------------------------------------------5 to 6 years -------------------------------------------6 to 7 years -------------------------------------------7 to 8 years -------------------------------------------8 to 10 years ------------------------------------------10 to 12 years ------------------------------------------
Total ----------------------------------------------------
25
139
71
25
56
8
2
2
9
1
338
The length of hospital stay of prisoner patients is not completely and accurately
reflected by the length of sentence in that prisoners are discharged from further
hospitalization by parole consideration, conditional release, and transfer to penal
institutions. As contrasted to the above length of sentence of prisoner patients
admitted during the fiscal years 1954 and 1955, is the actual length of hospitalization of patients who are now in the hospital and under treatment. A recent
review of this length of hospitalization of the 202 prisoner patients who are in
the hospital revealed that 122 had been here for less than 1 year, 58 less than 2
years, 15 less than 3 years, and 7 less than 4 years. There are no prisoner patients
hospitalized over the 4-year period.
There is no single cause for drug addiction and consequently no universal
applicable method of treatment. Our treatment of the addict patient encompasses withdrawal treatment, rehabilitation, and psychiatric treatment. Physical dependence, i. e., withdrawal treatment, is readily accomplished and rarely
necessitates longer than a 10-day period until the patient can be managed off
narcotics with minimal residual discomfort. Specifically, our withdrawal treatment involves substituting methadone, a synthetic narcotic, for the narcotic
being used by the patient and then rap idly reducing the dosage of the methadone
over the drug withdrawal period. AUl patients receive an initial physical examination and evaluation and are followed medically as well as psychiatrically
throughout the withdrawal period. Rehabilitation therapy, both physical and
social, is initiated during the withdrawal treatment by having the patient enter
into ward group activities and by interviews by the staff.
Out staff treatment team consists of not only our psychiatrists and psychologists but social workers, nurses, psychiatric aides, and the staff of the ancillary
services, which include vocational, occupational, recreation and athletic therapies,
plus educational and work supervisors.
After actual withdrawal from the drug, an intermediate convalescent period of
approximately two weeks is usually necessary for the patient to attain a physical
and emotional state that will permit him to enter into further therapy on a more
active basis. After this intermediate convalescent period the patient enters
another ward environment and is given an actual work assignment.
The initial work assignment is a tentative one, a period during which the patient
is counseled by a vocational therapist with the object of a subsequent assignment
which will meet the ]patient's desires and goals, as well as his other individual
therapy needs. In view of the oft repeated histories of poor or unstable work
adjustments in our patients, the staff feels that our vocational-work therapy is
an important rehabilitative measure. Upwards of 90 percent of our patients
have no physical limitations that prevent general vocational assignments. The
remaining less than 10 percent group present varying degrees of physical handicaps and limitations and require a more individualized type of vocational assignInent in keeping with their physical limitations as well as their social and psychiatric needs. The general vocational therapy program includes "on-the-job"
training programs developed by work supervisors in the following areas: The
farm area consisting of a dairy, greenhouse and general farm activities; shoe
3232
repair, utility sewing machine operators, cutter and tailor, X-ray technician,
barbering, watch repair, radio and television technician, bookkeeping, accounting,
typing, salesmanship, and commercial art. Many of these training programs
include formal classroom instruction as well as on the job training. Our educational program includes not only the formal classroom instruction associated with
the vocational area but also elementary school and language education ul to
and including courses at the college level through Texas Christian University.
We have tailored our work therapy assignments to be realistic ones approaching
as near as possible the working situations which will confront our patients after
leaving the hospital. We further attempt to limit the training and formal education to the patient's capabilities and the practical possibilities of future application.
Concomitant with the work therapy as outlined above, the patient is offered
psychiatric therapy as well as social rehabilitative therapies in other than the
vocational field. Our main emphasis here in psychiatric therapy is with group
therapy and group therapeutic activities. A limited number of patients are seen
in individual therapy by the psychiatrists and psychologists. Other social rehabilitative services, such as our programs in occupational therapy, recreation, athletics,
music, and bibliotherapy, provide further opportunities for socialization and
development of healthy interests, attitudes and goals. For example, occupational
therapy classes are conducted daily on the admission-withdrawal wards. Shop
therapy classes in the arts and crafts are conducted for our other addict patients
in the hours that they are not on vocational assignment.
Our social service department plays an active part in our treatment program
interviewing patients individually. They provide patient counseling, and relate
our treatment program within the hospital to community resources and patient
needs. Whenever possible the families of the patients are likewise interviewed so
that insofar as possible interpersonal difficulties within the family situation can
be considered in our definition of the patient's therapy problem; and whenever
possible appropriate referral to local agencies within the patient's community
is made both for the family and for the patient. However, our present law governing the release of information on voluntary patients markedly limits us in providing such information even if the information would be beneficial to the patient.
Social service also conducts for our patients a group activity on postdischarge
planning.
During the fiscal years 1954 and 1955, there were 1,438 discharges of addict
patients, representing 15 Federal probationers, 351 prisoner patients, and 1,072
voluntary addict patients. (See table 7. Length of stay by class of beneficiary,
fiscal years 1953, 1954, 1955.)
Of the 15 probationers, 87 percent were considered as having received sufficient
emotional and social rehabilitation and therapy, and to have benefited sufficiently
from our treatment resources, to be ready for reentering community life; 13
percent were withdrawn from drugs but after more complete evaluation were
considered to be unlikely to benefit from our treatment resources and were transferred to other institutions.
Of the 351 prisoners discharged, 70 percent were considered to have benefited
from our rehabilitation therapy and other treatment resources to the extent that
they were ready to reenter community life; 30 percent were withdrawn from
drugs but after complete evaluation and trial therapy efforts were considered to
be the type of patients who were unlikely to benefit significantly from our treatment resources, and therefore were transferred to penal institutions.
Of 1,072 volunteer addict discharges in the fiscal years 1954 and 1955, 77
percent were benefited by their hospital treatment in varying degrees of improvement. A little over half of the 77 percent received significant emotional and
social rehabilitation in addition to actual drug withdrawal therapy. Of the
group, the following was their condition at the time of discharge:
Twenty-three percent demanded their release from the hospital before withdrawal from drugs could be completed.
Thirty-eight percent remained hospitalized until withdrawal was completed
but demanded release before any significant degree of rehabilitation could be
accomplished.
Twenty-three percent remained under treatment for longer periods, accomplishing withdrawal from drugs and receiving significant emotional and social rehabilitation. They insisted, however, on leaving the hospital before the staff felt they
should leave and before they had fully benefited from our treatment resources.
Sixteen percent remained under treatment until the staff felt that they were
ready to reenter their community, and that with further assistance and rehabilitation efforts from, the community, had a reasonably good prognosis for refraining from the further use of narcotics.
3233
HISTORY
OF PATIENT ADMITTED
ON MULTIPLE
OCCASIONS
This 50-year-old white male was readmitted to the hospital for the sixth time
with a history of the episodic use of opiates since 1926 and the chronic use of
alcohol. The patient related conflicting facts surrounding his addiction, at one
time stating that he had used narcotics in order to recover from alcoholic hangovers and at other times stating that he had begun to use narcotics many years
ago simply for "kicks."
He has a criminal record dating back to 1920, including
several jail sentences, one State prison sentence, a parole violation, probationary
sentence and a number of fines. In 1928 he served a 2-year sentence at the Fort
Leavenworth penitentiary for illegal possession and sale of narcotics and in 1932
a 3-year sentence in the Michigan State penitentiary for burglary. He had
served a year and a day sentence at the Texarkana Federal penitentiary for
forgery in 1946 and in 1948 was given a 5-year sentence for possession and sale
of narcotics and hospitalized at the Fort Worth Public Health Service Hospital.
He stated that his habit cost him about $8 a day and that he supported it by
petty thievery and very seldom was employed. He stated he preferred dilaudid
but that his second choice was heroin. He had never married, by his own admission had never been without drugs outside an institution for more than 2 or 3
days at a time. Within an institution patient always made a good adjustment,
conforming to the institutional rules and doing his prescribed work assignment
in an adequate manner.
2.
HISTORY
OF TEEN-AGE
ADDICT
This 17-year-old single Negro male was admitted to the Fort Worth hospital
on February 9, 1954, having received a 2-year sentence on a commitment as a
juvenile delinquent. The patient had never been hospitalized before for treatment of drug addiction and never had previously been incarcerated. Three years
prior to his admission he had been placed on probation on the charge of stealing
a Treasury check, and this probation was later violated after the pateient was
arrested on the charge of possession of heroin.
This patient stated that he began to use heroin and marihuana around the age
of 13. He said he wanted to see what it was like, that he wanted to be like the
older boys that he was going with. He said that he got a "good feeling" from
the use of the drug but when he was admitted to the hospital he said that he
would never use it again, because he felt it would wreck his life and that he would
lose his older friends, who are nonusers. He also stated that he had not used
drugs regularly and denied that he had ever stolen in order to support his addiction.
This patient was a product of New Orleans, La., and soon after his birth his
mother and father separated and both remarried. The patient had lived with
his mother and grandmother until he was 4 and then had lived with his father
for about a year. There apparently had been several changes of homes for the
patient. It would appear that the patient had "been a good boy" up to the age
of 9, at which time a penny arcade was opened across the street from his home.
At this time he began to stay away from home longer than his father desired,
began to have difficulty in school, and began to go around with an older group
who were getting into minor delinquent difficulty. This eventually led to the
use of marihuana through these associates and to the use of heroin. The patient
left school in the 9th grade, had held no steady job, had worked erratically
washing cars.
When he was interviewed he looked several years older than his stated age
was passive but this passivity appeared to be a facade. Basically he appeared
3234
to be quite impulsive, restless and felt in great need of approval from his own
group. On the other hand when he was admitted to the hospital he expressed
interest in furthering his education, learning a vocation, and entering the group
therapy program.
3. CASE HISTORY OF TEEN-AGE ADDICT
This 17-year-old white male machinist assistant was admitted to the Fort
Worth Public Health Service Hospital in February 1953 as a voluntary patient
who was advised to seek admission to the hospital by the' California Youth
Authority. The patient had been placed on probation by the youth authority
after having been adjudged a juvenile delinquent.
The patient stated that he was first introduced to the use of marihuana and
heroin about 4 years ago when he was 13. He states he was first offered drugs
by a friend and that in view of the fact that they were very expensive he did not
use them very often. He stated however that he likes its sensation and did
not feel that it was wrong for him to use drugs. He added that he did not
actually become addicted to drugs until about 8 months before his admission
to the hospital when again the same friend who had introduced him to drugs
began giving him large quantities of morphine and dilaudid, which he had obtained
by robbing drugstores. With this supply of drugs the patient quickly became
addicted and in the 6 months prior to the admission to the hospital was afraid to
attempt to "kick his habit."
Past history
The patient was born in Arizona and was the fourth of four sons. The patient's
parents were divorced when he was 8 years old and for 4 years he lived alternately
with the two parents and their new spouses. Finally about 5 years ago his mother
and her husband settled in a town in California and he went to live with them.
Here he completed the 10th grade of school and at the age of 16 left school to
take a job in a machine shop.
The patient's mother was interviewd by youth authority personnel and she
described a difficult life. that she had had an unhappy marriage and was the only
parent to care for her children. She stated that her first husband, a construction
worker, wandered from job to job and much of the time she did not know where
he was. A year after their divorce when the patient was 9, the mother married
an alcoholic who did not support the family regularly and who was abusive to
the mother. At that time the mother also was drinking to excess and she described much dissension in the home with both parents having the other sent to
jail occasionally. The mother married a third time when the patient was almost
15 and this stepfather was described as a passive man who took no part in the
discipline of the children and for whom the children had no respect.
Of significance is the fact that the patient gave the history of a birth injury
which resulted in the tearing loose of several of the muscles of the right eye. He
had had several operations of a corrective nature on this eye, the pupil has
remained dilated and the patient has strabismus at the present time. He denied
that his surgery had anything to do with his addiction, which appeared to be
accurate.
Psychological testing revealed that the patient had an I. Q. of 118 which
placed him in the high average range. Testing also revealed that he was a withdrawn, somewhat suspicious person who tended to feel that other people were
going to harm him. Testing also revealed that he had very strong feelings of
being inadequate and that he was going to be harmed by people who represented
parents to him. It was also evidenced that his eye deformity was a source of
anxiety to him. When he was interviewed he showed real interest in improving
himself educationally but had little concept about psychiatric treatment or his
need for it.
Diagnosis
The diagnosis was that of drug addiction to heroin and an immature personality.
4.
This 60-year old white male was readmitted to the hospital in March 1952
having received a 10-year sentence on the charge of unlawfully receiving ana
concealing narcotics. He has an extremely long and extensive history of narcotic uses and criminality extending back to 1917. He had been given four State
penitentiary sentences for violation of the narcotic laws and five Federal penitentiary sentences for violation of Federal narcotic laws. He had been hospitalized
3235
with a 2-year Federal sentence at the USPHS hospital in 1945 for unlawfully
importing narcotic drugs and again at the same institution in 1949 on a similar
charge.
Throughout the past 30 years the patient had used narcotics, he had never been
able to get along without narcotics except when incarcerated and it appeared that
much of his criminal behavior had been directly related to and a consequence to
his need for narcotics. It is noted however that prior to his initial use of narcotics
there had been several entries in his criminal record. He related his early criminal
activity to disturbed relationships in his family after the death of his mother and
after he had left home at a relatively early age to wander and drift around on his
own. He was an individual of superior intelligence who, although he expressed
some resentment about receiving a 10-year sentence, feeling that it was comparable
to receiving a life sentence and felt that the hospital was "home" and that it was
really a relief for him to be admitted to the hospital. Although it was felt that
the prognosis was poor, it was expected that the patient would make a very good
adjustment in the hospital although it was unlikely that anything could be accomplished in terms of rehabilitation.
5.
This 30-year old married white male physician was admitted to the hospital
in order to serve a 3-year sentence on the charge of forging narcotic prescriptions.
This man had no previous criminal record but had been previously hospitalized
at the USPHS hospital in Lexington, Ky., as a voluntary patient in 1949 for a
4-month period, and also had voluntarily entered a State hospital in Oregon in
1951 for a 5-month period for treatment of drug addiction.
This patient stated that he first began to use narcotics when he was interning
in 1946, but claimed that he did not become addicted until around June 1947.
He said that he felt he talked himself into believing he was under a great strain,
was fatigued and that he needed the added lift that narcotics gave him. Actually,
however, it was not until he was in private practice for about 6 months at a time
when his practice was "booming" that he began to use narcotics steadily. He
obtained his narcotics primarily by falsifying prescriptions. After his hospitalization at the Lexington, Ky. hospital in 1949, he did not return to the use of
narcotics for about a year, but it was again while he was in private practice where
he was quite successful in a financial way that he began to return to the use of
narcotics. After his hospitalization in the State hospital in June 1951, he apparently again did not return to the use of narcotics for several months.
This man was the oldest of three children, his younger sister and brother had
never used narcotics. His father was an agricultural agent who spent most of his
time when the patient was a child traveling around the State pursuing his work.
He was apparently a very busy preoccupied man with little time to be with his
children. The patient expressed some resentment because his father was not at
home. He also described his mother as a person the children could not talk with
because she tended to be "emotional."
It is interesting to note that in view of the patient's difficulty in using narcotics
at the point when he was becoming successful, that he was first in his class in high
school, graduated at the top of his class from medical school, and although he was
considered to be the best student of the three children, he was also, he felt, the
greatest disappointment to his family. He also expressed some guilt that he was
not called up for military service because of a cyst which was later repaired.
The patient married in 1944 to a nurse he felt was a very understanding person.
His wife had had several miscarriages and both he and his wife had sought medical
advice in the hope that they might have children, but to no avail.
When interviewed, this physician appeared to be a person who was struggling
for success and social recognition, but on the other hand he yearned to be dependent upon other people. He appeared to be depressed but the depression was
related to his incarceration. He expressed interest in rehabilitating himself in the
hospital and in receiving psychiatric treatment.
3236
TABLE
Year
Total
Total
Prisoner
432
839
1941 ---------------757
1942 .........
1,275
1943
1,083
1944
2,045
1945 _
2, 748
1946 ---------------- 2, 518
1947_
1,939
1948 ---------------- 2, 565
1949 ---------------- 2, 157
1950 ---------------- 2,304
1951
1,332
1952 ---------------- 1,053
1953 ---------------963
1954 ---------------986
1955 ---------------- 1,084
432
839
757
772
382
134
46
40
376
768
459
552
636
513
533
698
790
311
26,060
8, 727
3,611
1939
---------------1940
Total --------
Other Patients
ProbaVoluntionary teers
11
23
14
21
11
590
424
362
158
2
4
13
14
23
24
8
11
5
12
132
192
190
377
249
175
174
164
194
Total
VA
110
226
319
389
213
132
46
40
261
623
253
339
235
256
347
519
614
1503
1 701
1,911
2, 702
2, 478
1,563
1,797
1,698
1,752
696
540
430
288
294
413
563
1,094
1, 528
508
287
278
152
159
4,922
17, 353
4,982
De-
sense
21, 832
22,511
22,304
2964
90
425
1
1
15
1
8,954
pHs
8 66
3 179
3169
2 158
268
150
203
165
218
145
128
129
1,977
Other
1503
1701
4 13
415
12
428
'66
'29
420
22
20
6
8
7
1,440
TABLE 2-Average daily load U. S. Public Health Service Hospital, Fort Worth, Tex.,
fiscal years 1939-55
Addicts
Year
Total
Total
1939 -
1940'
19411
19421
19431
1944 .......
1945
1946
1947
1948 ---------------1949
1950-----------1951
1952
1953 ---------------1954 ---------------1955
180
409
714
588
848
874
906
886
675
878
888
915
951
776
815
815
809
Other Patients
I
180
409
714
549
230
46
9
8
53
158
174
193
230
338
308
297
285
Prisoner
Total
13
6
6
22
36
26
34
25
32
45
73
81
618
828
897
878
622
720
714
722
721
438
507
518
524
Defense
PHS
39
33
3
2
30
118
145
150
193
301
259
222
198
4
3
9
12
5
4
2
6
77
230
366
554
553
234
268
268
268
2 703
2 780
2772
2 444
373
218
5
5
10
18
15
14
'81
'93
389
'84
98
110
149
159
187
218
232
238
Other
39
618
444
424
417
417
4 19
420
414
4
7
3
3
4
3237
1953
1955
539
686
752
-------------------------------------
475
629
705
10
70
345
105
47
1
22
11
7
91
396
133
57
3
27
18
19
52
31
30
37
16
15
16
14
22
15
26
0
7
15
I
5
0
5
Opiates
242
-----------------------------------Heroin
M
orphine
--------------.....
......................
102
Dilaudid_
38
Pantopon.......................................
Diaudid --------------------------------------Paregoric...
9
C
odeinee------..
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..---------------------------------. . . . .
Opium
4
Unspecified derivatives.
Synthetics ...............................................
Demerol_
Dolophine..
Other
.....................................
M arihuana ------------------------------------Cocaine group ------------------------------------------U nspecified -----------------------------------------------
11
TABLE 4.-Age addicts dischargedfrom Fort Worth, Tex., fiscal years 1953-55
1953
1954
1955
Age
Number
All ages ----------------------Under 21 ---------------21 to 24- ------------------25 to 29 -----------------30 to 34 ------------------35 to 39 ------------------40 to 4445 to 54- ------------------55 to 64 ------------------65 and over --------------Median age
TABLE
Cumulative
percentage
Number
Cumulative
percentage
Number
Cumnlative
percentage
539 -------------
686 -------------
752
- 34
6.3
84
21.9
93
39.1
70
52.1
68
64.7
,------------------58
75.5
89
92.0
38
99.1
5
100.0
54
114
130
61
62
71
118
63
13
)1
135
136
80
66
78
122
64
10
------------------
34.1
7.9
24.5
43.4
52.3
61.4
71.7
88.9
98.1
100.0
33.7
8.1
26.1
44.1
54.8
63.6
73.9
90.2
98.7
100.0
32.8
5.-Occupation addicts discharged from Fort Worth, Tex., fiscal years 1953,
19547, 1955
Fiscal year
Fiscal year
Occupation
Occupation
1953
Total -------------Doctor ------------------Nurse -------------------Dentist-----------------Other health workers - Other professionals ------Entertainer -------------Salesman ................
Service worker_-98
539
1954
686
1955
752
15
21
8
1
2 --------2-------- -------9
12
23
11
7
22
29
23
29
34
53
68
123
128
1953
Proprietary, managerial,
and white collar ------Agricultural ------------Skilled -----------------Semiskilled -------------Unskilled ---------------Housewife ........................
None -------------------Other and unspecified..--
1954
1955
38
14
111
62
57
47
13
111
98
99
55
16
137
89
113
12
46
13
64
10
54
3238
TABLE 6.-State of residence, addicts dischargedfrom Fort Worth, Tex., fiscal year
1953, 1954, 1955
Fiscal year
Fiscal year
State
State
1953
Total --------------
539
1954
686
1955
752
5
14
4
Alabama ----------------11
14
11
Arizona -----------------18
28
12
Arkansas ---------------170
174
114
California ---------------3
9
8
Colorado ---------------Connecticut -------------------------------Delaware ----------------------------------1
6
7
District of Columbia ----2
2
3
Florida -----------------3
1
4
Georgia -----------------2
1
2
Idaho-------------------16
9
7
Illinois ------------------2
4
Indiana ..-----------------------I
--1
------------- Iowa .14
9
10
Kansas -----------------1 --------1
Rentucky --------------24
40
39
Louisiana ---------------Maine ------------------------------------2 ---------------Maryland --------------2 ---------------Massachusetts ----------1
3 -Michigan --------------1
2
4
Minnesota --------------7
10
4
Mississippi -------------40
25
33
Missouri -----------------
1953
1954
1951
3
1
1
Montana ---------------2
5
Nebraska ---------------4
5
4
Nevada.-----------------New Hampshire --------.----------------------1
1
3
New Jersey -------------4
4
New Mexico ------------6
23
17
New York --------------2
1
1
North Carolina ---------I
North Dakota --------------------------1
6
6
Ohio --------------------18
27
20
Oklahoma --------------3
6
3
Oregon -----------------2
I
Pennsylvania -----------Rhode Island ......................................
4
2 -------South Carolina ----------1
South Dakota ------------------8
2
1
Tennessee --------------294
263
189
Texas -----------------2
1
1
Utah ----------------------------------------Vermont ------3
2
Virginia ------------------------6
8
3
Washington -------------1 ------------West Virginia -----------1
2
Wisconsin ----------------------1 -------2
Wyoming ---------------i2
15
7
Outside United States...
TABLE 7.--Length of stay by class of beneficiary addicts dischargedfrom Fort Worth, Tem., fiscal years 1953, 1954, 1955
1953
Length of stay
Total ----------------------------------------
,|..
1954
All
Volun-
Proba-
patients
tary
ionary
Ppatients
209
539
321
All
686
1955
Voluntary
Probationary
Prisoners
All
patients
485
195
752
Under 3 months
295
262
1
32
416
379
37
3 months-under 4 months --------------------------10
8 2
16
15
1
4 months-under 5 months --------------------------57
43
8
6
89
78
5
6
5 months-under 6 months --------------------------7
2 _5
9
4
65
6 months-under 12 months -------------------------53
5 _48
50
8
1
41
1 year-under 2 years -----------------------------91
1
._.
90
58 ---------- ----------58
2 years-under 3 years ----------------------------25 ---------- ---------25
41
------- ---------41
3 years-under
4 years ------------------------------1-------------------1
6 ---------- ----------6
years-under 65 years
4 years-under
years---------------------------------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- -----6 years-under 7 years ....... -------------------------------------------------7 years and over--------------------------------------------------
-----
Voluntary
587
Probationary
9
520
400
2
29
25
1
33
29
2
19
11
1
55
31
3
68 ---------- ----------21
1 - .
6 ---------- ---------1---1 ---------- ----------
158
28
3
2
7
21
68
20
-6
1
1...............-------.----------,------..........................
C43
C43
3240
TABLE
Year
Other patients
Total
1941 --------------1942'1-------1943 --------------1944 ---------------1945 ---------------1946 ---------------1947 ---------------1948 ---------------1949 ---------------1950 ---------------1951 ---------------1952---------------1953 ---------------1954---------------1955----------------
152
178
Total
Prisoner
152
178
........
........
Total
344
168
286
156
120
128
127
125
150
145
261
270
309
302
272
125
69
73
51
75
139
128
132
241
211
155
132
6,064
76
1,091 -------730 ------97
93
326
125
276
77
288
147
186
180
442
243
541
114
465
147
440
190
34
45
54
31
21
37
36
39
45
47
51
48
VA
Defense
........ ........
........ ........
PHS
........
........-- .......
2113
122
2168
151
187
(5)
(5)
(5)
(5)
(6)
(5)
Other
'190
3192
3195
133
263
268
351
314
548
661
678
3
'1,258
731
d 1,301
'227
4 110
4247
4256
91
128
189
109
195
3 Includes American Seamen and Coast Guard personnel eligible for care under Executive Order 9079.
4 Includes Immigration and Naturalization Service patients, U. S. prisoners, Canadian insane and Indians
3241
RI5"I
..
),
3242
3243
hearings, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Well, it escaped me if it was.
Senator DANIEL. This is the first I have known about it, or the
first I have realized the effect of what was said there.
Dr. TRAUTMAN. Well, I think that is correct. I think I was there.
Senator DANIEL. I certainly hope that it is, because we have had a
waiting list of people who have been wanting to get in the narcotics
hospital; that list has been running about 500 for a good period of time,
up until just recently, isn't that true?
Dr. TRAUTMAN. That is true, Senator Daniel, and as a matter of
fact Dr. Lowery, who is the medical officer in charge up at Lexington,
and I worked very closely together on trying to keep this waiting list
reduced; and many times the applications that Dr. Lowery may have
which are in excess of what he can handle will be sent down; we contact the patient to see whether or not he would like to come to Fort
Worth, and during the past fiscal year, as a matter of fact, we took a
sizable number of such admissions, and that helped balance out some
of the problems that they were having with regard to that large
waiting list.
Senator DANIEL. Well, Dr. Trautman, I believe that there was a
waiting list of about 500 addicts when we wrote to Undersecretary
Rose and asked that something be done to try to admit these people.
Senator DANIEL. And I think within a very short time you all were
able to cut that waiting list down to where it is almost on a current
basis; is that right?
Dr. TRAUTMAN. That's right. At the present time, we actually,
I think, with very few exceptions-I don't know as of this morning,
but as of yesterday, with very few exceptions we had scheduled
practically everyone who had made an application for admission.
Senator DANIEL. Well, I think that you have done an excellent job
on that, and I am certainly glad to get this news that there will be
another 100 beds made available in the Fort Worth Hospital soon.
Of course, I have my doubts about the value of the treatment for
many of these patients, as long as they can leave whenever they
desire.
Dr. TRAUTMAN. That's right, sir.
Senator DANIEL. And I know that we all hope that we will be able
to do something in Congress about that soon after the first of the year.
Dr.
TRAUTMAN.
of fact thus far this year we are running a little bit in excess of that.
Our actual volunteers in the hospital as of this moment, or for the
past 3 months, has been running at about the rate of 99 or a 100
average daily load, and which was practically 19 more than we carrieJ
as an average daily load last year.
Senator DANIEL. You are carrying around 100 voluntary patients
today, now?
Dr. TRAUTMAN. Yes, as an average daily load.
151&--5(;--pt. 7-57
3244
Senator DANIEL. Now, on this average daily load, you say, of 809,
how many patients are addicts, narcotic addicts?
Dr. TRAUTMAN. Of that number, about three-eighths are, sir, in
round numbers five-eighths are neuro-psychiatric patients, and about
three-eighths will run on the order of the addicts.
Senator DANIEL. In other words, this hospital, originally authorized
to treat narcotic drug addicts, is actually using about five-eighths of its
space for the treatment of psychiatric cases?
Dr. TRAUTMAN. That is correct, sir.
Senator DANIEL. That do not involve drug addiction?
Dr. TRAUTMAN. That is correct, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Now, what are the principal addicting drugs for
which patients are treated in your hospital?
Dr. TRAUTMAN. Well, the principal ones are heroin, which is about
52 percent, and morphine, vhich is about 17 to 18 percent, and
dilaudid at about 7Y2 percent.
I have a table in the file which lists all of the primary addicting
drugs. In other words, that is the principal drug that the man said he
came to the hospital for; and in some instances there may be others
ill say, morphine and heroin off and on,
where they have used, we N%
and they are not listed on this.
I have also submitted a couple of photographs there for you,
Senator.
Senator DANIEL. Now, we have included in this record your
written statement, all of your exhibits, and the two photographs of
the hospital. I certainly appreciate the way in which you have
compiled this information.
Dr. TRAUTMAN. Senator, if I may add, on table 3 is the one that
contains the drug of choice. I am sorry I don't have those tables
marked with a tab, so that you can locate them easily.
Senator DANIEL. Yes, this table shows the percentages.
Dr. TRAUTMAN. That's right.
Senator DANIEL. That you were giving us a moment ago.
Dr. Trautman. Yes, sir; and it includes 3 fiscal years, the last 3
fiscal years.
Senator DANIEL. So heroin is the drug that is giving us the most
trouble?
Dr. Trautman. That's right.
Senator DANIEL. And is the most dangerous of the drugs?
Dr. TRAUTMAN. Well, it is-it is a drug that the addict likes best.
And the one that gets the greatest amount of trade, certainly.
Senator DANIEL. And it is the most illicit, if you could express a
comparative choice there. In other words, hasn't nearly every
country in the world today outlawed heroin?
Dr. TRAUTMAN. Yes; morphine takes care of the medical purposes.
Senator DANIEL. Yes. In other words, you don't need heroin for
any legitimate medical purpose any more, do you?
Dr. TRAUTMAN. No. No, we get along with the others very well.
Senator DANIEL. And as I recall it, most of the countries of the
world-today have outlawed heroin?
Dr. TRAUTMAN. I think there has been a really fine effort, from an
international standpoint.
Senator DANIEL. Yes.
Dr. TRAUTMAN. And that is extremely significant.
3245
years, that those under 21 have run 6.3 percent in 1953, 7.9 percent
in 1954, and 8.1 percent in 1955.
Senator DANIEL. And in number, let's read those into the record,
too.
Dr. TRAUTMAN. The number in 1953 was 34.
Senator DANIEL. Under 21?
Dr. TRAUTMAN. Yes, sir, and in 1954 they were 54, and in 1955 they
were 61.
You might be interested, too, if I may add this, Senator: I took a
look the other day, I think it was the first week in October, to see
how many youngsters we had of this age group in the hospital, compared with a year ago.
We had 14 in the hospital on that particular week, and that same
week a year ago we had 31. I don't know that that is of any particular significance, because these things do vary as we go along through
the year.
Senator DANIEL. Well, it would look as if your admissions have been
increasing each year since 1953. You had 34 in 1953, 54 in 1954, and
61 in 1955.
There is one thing, I believe, that we might say, and I am not completely sure of this because I haven't examined that part of the record
completely, but there is a possibility that some of this addiction may
be through the Mexican-American population.
Senator DANIEL. Have you had an increase on Latin-American
patients?
3246
axe white, with a few Chinese, not very many, and that is about the
picture with regard to race and nationality, and so on.
Senator DANIEL. Let's get those percentages again, to be sure that
we have them correctly.
Dr.
TRAUTMAN.
Senator DANIEL.
TRAUTMAN.
I I IL
3247
we felt were not doing well, or for whom we could not do very much
in our setting. So that, of that original number, 30 percent have
been transferred, and each one of these individuals has had a reasonably good trial and treatment; so that we, after they come here, we
do send some back.
Now, of those who remain, we feel that they are doing very well,
and a number of those people may be paroled, Senator; they become
eligible for parole. They have indicated in every way that they
appear to be ready to go back into society, and some pretty good plans
are being made for these folks to get back and get a job and get to
work.
Senator DANIEL. Well, do you have pretty good follow up programs
in most states, or is it true that there is just not much being done in
the way of follow up, after the patient leaves your hospital?
Dr. TRAUTMAN. Senator, as far as we are concerned, our followup is not good.
Senator DANIEL. That is one of the worst handicaps, isn't it?
Dr. TRAUTMAN. Yes, sir. We feel that the treatment that is
given at our hospital is only a part of the total matter of this man's,
and individual man's treatment.
Now, within our facilities, we can go only so far. You always
eventually get to the place where an individual must gey back into
society.
At that point, there must be proper community facilities which
will help this man to keep him going. It is not only a matter of
medical rehabilitation, but it is a matter of job rehabilitation and
all of those things.
So we feel that the mental health resources the country certainly
are the best possible ways for these folks to be followed up, and I
think that is extremely important to stress, that our hospital cannot
possibly do the total job, and, the same as any other disease, all
treatment is not carried on in the hospital. Some of it must be carried out in the community, and this is no different.
Senator DANIEL. Doctor, you have heard of this proposal that we
have free narcotic drugs, or drugs at a small cost, at clinics. You
were at the New York hearing when that was proposed?
Doctor TRAUTMAN. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. I believe you expressed yourself on it there. For
this record, though, since it has been brought up at this hearing, too,
I would like to ask you whether or not you think that would be a
proper way of solving the problem of drug addiction.
Doctor TRAUTMAN. AS I said then, and as I say now, I do not
think that it would.
Senator DANIEL. Well, now, I believe we have the reasons already
TRAUTMAN.
Yes, sir.
3248
have any additional ones, but I would just like to emphasize very
strongly the way I feel about some of them.
I certainly believe it is desirable to have a commitment procedure
where, by voluntary admission, narcotic addict patients could be
detained in the hospital for a sufficient length of time to accomplish
the treatment.
I think that every effort should be made to improve community
health facilities, especially mental health facilities, with the viewpoint
to following through on the treatment that we are accomplishing,
and to get into the business of prevention of illness.
Now, there may be a lot of problems that addicts are getting into
which, if we knew more about them or if the individual was seen
through some of these mental health resources, might keep him out
of this narcotic traffic and prevent him from becoming an addict.
And thirdly-which is actually a part of the first part of it that I
mentioned-it would serve, possibly, as a strong element in preventing
a relapse into addiction.
And another thing is that I think we should remove this current
statutory restriction which now prevents us from revealing the presence of a voluntary patient undergoing treatment in our hospital.
That is a pretty hard law, and it just says no.
Senator DANIEL. I am glad to hear you make that recommendation.
Dr. TRAUTMAN. And my staff and I personally feel very, very
strongly that we could do a much better job if we even had the normal
communication that we have with regard to other illnesses.
I don't think we need a whole lot more than that, and that if we
could do it, it certainly would be a wonderful thing.
It is rather difficult for us to say no to some very fine people, when
ordinarily we would say yes and we would cooperate in handling this
proposition, with a physician or with most anyone.
Senator DANIEL. Well, is it true that anyone, a physician or a
3249
quired to pay for his subsistence, care, and treatment at rates fixed by the Surgeon
General and amounts so paid shall be covered into the Treasury of the United
States to the credit of the appropriation from which the expenditure for his
subsistence, care, and treatment was made. Appropriations available tor the care
and treatment of addicts admitted to a hospital of the Service under this
section shall be available, subject to regulations, for paying the cost of transportation to any place within the continental United States, including subsistence
allowance while traveling, for any indigent addict who is discharged as cured.
(c) Any addict admitted for treatment under this section, including any addict,
not convicted of an offense, who voluntarily submits himself for treatment, may
be confined in a hospital of the Service for a period not exceeding the maximum
amount of time estimated by the Surgeon General as necessary to effect a cure
of the addiction or until such time as he ceases to be an addict.
(d) Any addict admitted for treatment under this section shall not thereby
forfeit or abridge any of his rights as a citizen of the United States; nor shall
such admission or treatment be used against him in any proceeding in any court;
and the record of his voluntary commitment shall be confidential and shall not
be divulged. (July 1, 1944, c. 373, title III, 344, 58 Stat. 701; June 25, 1948,
c. 654, 5, 62 Stat. 1018.)
HISTORICAL NOTE
Any addict admitted for treatment under this section shall not thereby forfeit
or abridge any of his rights as a citizen of the United States, nor shall such admission or treatment be used against him in any proceeding in any court: and the
record of his voluntary commitment shall be confidential and shall not be
divulged.
stay of prisoners?
Dr. TRAUTMAN. Well, the average length of stay in fiscal year
1954 was about 440 days.
them, Senator.
Of the 202 patients we had in the hospital just a short time ago,
122 had been here for less than 1 year; 58 were here from 1 to 2 years;
15 for less than 3 years; and 7 less than 4 years.
Now, not too long ago, just a little bit before that, we had a patient
who had been here a little bit longer than 4 years, and he was discharged.
Senator DANIEL. Well, doctor, what is the average length of stay
of your voluntary patients?
Dr. TRAUTMAN. The average length of stay last year was 48 days.
Senator DANIEL. Forty-eight days for voluntary patients, as compared with 440 days for your prisoner patients, right?
Dr. TRAUTMAN. Yes, sir. There is another interesting angle, if I
might take the liberty of mentioning that.
Senator DANIEL. Yes, sir.
Dr. TRAUTMAN. Awhile back, we had a law in Texas which made
it possible for a man to go to the court and plead guilty, and then
that went out, and another new law has been passed.
3250
During that time when this Texas commitment was on, we had
110 such patients come in the hospital, and of that number 89 percent
were considered to have remained for a period of time which was
reasonably good, and about half were in such a situation that they
could go back to the community and, with proper help, stood a reasonable chance of remaining well.
Now, under that law, those patients stayed an average of 104 days,
approximately 104 days.
Senator DANIEL. All right.
Mr. Counsel,
questions.
Mr. GASQUE. Now, Doctor Trautman, could you tell us, could
you give us an estimation of how many people you think are cured
when they go through your hospital?
Dr. TRAUTMAN. Well, I can give you this kind of a figure: We
felt that there were 16Y2 percent of our total group during this past
2 years who were completely ready to go back to the community, and
with help and rehabilitation continued, could get along.
Now, of the Texas group, in other words this 110 that I was talking
about, there were 48 percent of such we felt could do a good job.
Now, in our total group we had 23 percent, about 246 patients,
who did not stay longer than 10 days and were not actually withdrawn
from the drug.
Mr. GASQUE. They only stayed, 16 and-what is that percentage?
Dr. TRAUTMAN. Well, that 16% percent.
Mr. GASQUE. 16y percent?
Dr. TRAUTMAN. They were the active, I mean this is what we
were looking for, and we did have another group of 23 percent that
did a pretty good job and were certainly by no means a total loss as
far as their treatment; we felt that there was a fairly good chance
that, with assistance, they could get along in the community.
However, there were about 60 percent whose results were very,
very questionable.
Mr. GASQUE. Now, 60 percent, you say, the results were very,
very questionable?
Dr. TRAUTMAN. These were of the voluntary admission patients.
Mr. GASQUE. And 23 percent, you think, could go along pretty
well if they were given some help in the community?
Dr. TRAUTMAN. Well, a portion; a portion of those. I won't say
the 23 percent, but in that 23 percent maybe half of them. It is one
of the things that we don't have any followup on.
Mr. GASQUE. Then, you have got 83 percent there, then, that would
need some community help if they were going to get over drug addiction?
Dr. TRAUTMAN. Let's see, now, whether-well, it is more thanthere are about 77 percent of this total group who had some benefit,
I mean they had withdrawal of the drug and they had a little of the
rehabilitation and psychiatric work up, through what we considered
our best possible end result.
Mr. GASQUE. But if they go back to the community and don't
get some support from social agencies, from job agencies, and don't
get some type of probationary assistance, the possibility of their
getting off drugs is very remote, isn't it?
Dr. TRAUTMAN. Well, that is a hard question for me to really
answer, from a scientific standpoint, because I really don't know what
would happen out there.
I I I --
3251
Mr. GASQUE. You are not permitted to tell the social agencies, so
that they can give them any sort of assistance or welfare or help them
get a job, or help them get located, so that they might try to repair
their lives?
Dr. TRAUTMAN. Well, that is our understanding of the law as
written.
Mr. GASQUE. It is your understanding of the law, and I believe
you comply with that understanding?
Dr. TRAUTMAN. Pretty well, yes, sir.
Mr. GASQUE. And so consequently, when an addict returns to his
community, he has in effect little or no assistance in trying to repair
his life?
Dr. TRAUTMAN. Well, that-that is true, and it is certainly true
of the people who move out very quickly, I mean there is absolutely
no time, even if you had time with those folks, you couldn't arrange
something.
But there is this about the Federal prisoners, as I mentioned, on the
parole, that a good many of those do have situations worked out for
them, job situations worked out. As a matter of fact, the parole
board wouldn't consider parole, I don't believe, unless they had a
pretty goxd situation worked out.
I I I
3252
SPEER.
No questions, Senator.
DANIEL.
CORNELIUS.
Sea&r
DANIEL.
3253
DANIEL.
Yes, sir.
What drug did you use?
Heroin.
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Mr. CORNELIUS.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Mr. CORNELIUS.
Senator
DANIEL.
DANIEL.
3254
Mr. CORNELIUS.
We were
CORNELIUS.
Senator
DANIEL.
Mr. CORNELIUS.
Senator DANIEL.
Mr. CORNELIUS.
Senator DANIEL.
Mr. CORNELIUS.
Senator
Mr.
DANIEL.
CORNELIUS.
Yes.
happened.
Senator DANIEL. Have you ever crossed the Mexican border
anywhere else?
Mr. CORNELIUS. No, sir; I haven't.
Senator DANIEL. That's your only time?
Mr. CORNELIUS. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. After you started using heroin, where were you
living then, in California or Fort Worth?
Mr. CORNELIUS. Well, I was living in Fork Worth when I started
using heroin.
Senator
DANIEL.
Mr. CORNELIUS. It was last year when I started using heroin, yes,
sir.
Senator
DANIEL.
CORNELIUS.
Mr.
at his house, and they were using it, and so they asked me did I
want to try it, and so I tried it.
Senator
DANIEL.
Mr. CORNELIUS.
Senator
DANIEL.
Mr. CORNELIUS.
Senator DANIEL.
Mr. CORNELIUS.
quite awhile.
Senator
DANIEL.
3255
Senator
heroin?
DANIEL.
much later?
Mr. CORNELIUS.
Senator DANIEL. Did anyone there give you heroin after the first
time?
Mr. CORNELIUS. No. I could, when I-after that, I could go there
and get it, and he would let me have it and I would pay him
later, and like that.
Senator DANIEL. You started buying the heroin from one of these
boys that told you how to use it?
Mr. CORNELIUS. That's right.
Senator
DANIELS.
Senator DANIEL.
it in your veins, or
Mr. CORNELIUS.
Senator DANIEL.
vein?
Senator
how they did it, and saw how it went, and then I did it myself.
Senator DANIEL. Did this fellow that later sold you some of the
heroin help show you how to shoot it?
Mr. CORNELIUS. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. What is his name?
Mr. CORNELIUS. Well, I-
Senator DANIEL. Well, wait just a minute. What did you start
to say about it? Before you call his name, say whatever you were
going to say.
Mr. CORNELIUS. Well, I was going to say that I would rather not
call his name, because I wouldn't want to-you know, I have got to
be among these people again, and you can understand that.
Senator DANIEL. You have a charge filed against you now in connection with narcotics, don't you?
Mr. CORNELIUS. Yes, sir, I do.
Senator
Mr. CORNELIUS.
Senator
DANIEL.
3256
Senator
DANIEL.
Is that right?
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
Mr.
know.
DANIEL.
CORNELIUS.
Senator
DANIEL.
Mr. CORNELIUS.
Senator DANIEL.
Senator
Yes, sir.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
CORNELIUS.
Mr.
Most of them are boosters. In other words,
boosters are shoplifters, and that is how we get our money, mostly.
Senator DANIEL. In other words, like other people who are on
heroin, you shoplift. And what else?
Mr. CORNELIUS. And the guys-well, just any number of things,
you know, to acquire the money to buy it.
Senator DANIEL. Do you also have a charge filed against you for
shoplifting or theft, or anything like that?
Mr. CORNELIUS. I have a theft charge.
Senator DANIEL. Filed against you?
Mr. CORNELIUS. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. In addition
Mr. CORNELIIS. Yes, sir.
to a narcotics charge?
3257
concerning your case on which charges have been filed against you,
and nothing that I have asked you thus far is intended to relate to
those charges, you understand.
Now, with reference to any acts for which you now stand charged,
did you, before that time, engage in shoplifting and things of that
kind, in order to satisfy your habit?
Mr. CORNELIUS.
Senator
DANIEL.
Mr. CORNELIUS.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
people did you know in Fort Worth that you could have bought
heroin from, and that you had bought from?
Mr. CORNELIUS. Oh, I'd say approximately 4 or 5.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Yes.
Were they carrying on a pretty good-sized heroin
business here?
Mr. CORNELIUS. Well, I wouldn't say too big. None of themnone of them was dealing too big. In other words, the highest I have
known any of them to have at one time was what they call a $50
paper, and you get approximately 35 or 40 capsules out of that.
Senator
DANIEL.
Mr. CORNELIUS.
I only heard that some of the guys were getting it out of San Antonio
and Houston and Dallas.
Senator
DANIEL.
3258
Mr. CORNELIUS.
Senator
DANIEL.
Mr. CORNELIUS.
Yes, sir.
Did you buy white heroin or yellow heroin?
Well, some of it was white and some of it was
yellow.
Senator DANIEL. Did you have to pay the same price for the white
heroin as you did for the yellow heroin?
Mr. CORNELIUS.Yes, sir; I did.
Senator DANIEL. Do you know where the yellow heroin is supposed
to be coming from?
Mr. CORNELIUS. Well, no, I don't know.
Senator DANIEL. Did you ever hear it called Mexican heroin?
Mr. CORNELIUS. Yes, sir; I have heard it.
Senator DANIEL. And where do they say the white heroin here in
Fort Worth comes from?
Mr. CORNELIUS. Well, I didn't know that, either.
3259
Now, did any of the 4 or 5 people you were with originally, who
taught you to use these drugs, ever attempt to sell you any drugs
at a later time?
Mr. CORNELIUS. Yes, sir; they did.
Mr. GASQUE. They did?
Mr. CORNELIUS. Yes, sir.
Mr. GASQUE. Do you believe that they helped you get on drugs
in order to develop a customer?
Mr. CORNELIUS. Well, I don't know, sir. I couldn't say, because
no one forced me to do it. I did it on my own.
Mr. GASQUE. But they weren't your usual friends?
Air. CORNELIUS. No, they wasn't just what I'd say close friends;
they were just some fellows that I knew and associated with sometimes.
Mr. GASQUE. I see. Now, about the goods you get in your-in
the boosting activities, which I believe you spoke of, where do you
send these goods, or where do you sell them, how do you get rid of
them? Do you get rid of them in Fort Worth or some other city?
Mr. CORNELIUS. Well, usually we get rid of them here.
MNr. GASQUE. In Fort Worth?
Mr. CORNELIUS. Yes, sir.
Mr. GASQUE. To individuals, or shop owners, orMr. CORNELIUS. To the individuals or shop owners, either one.
Mr. GASQUE. I see. That's all, Mr. Chairman.
Senator DANIEL. Mr. Speer?
Mr. SPEER. The people you bought from in Dallas, perhaps if I
asked you some of their names you wouldn't mind answering that, if
I tell you they are people we have already had identified as selling
heroin, and who have admitted selling heroin.
Would you still be reluctant to admit that?
Mr. CORNELIUS. Well, yes, I would be, I believe, for the simple
reason because I don't know. And then, just, like I explained at
first, you see, however it goes, well, I am going to have to meet these
people sometime or another in the future.
Mr. SPEER. Well, would you say these-the distribution system here
in Fort Worth and in Dallas is made up of small groups that supply,
say, maybe twenty people in each group, through one or the other?
Mr. CORNELIUS. Yes, sir; that, I would say so.
Mr. SPEER. Is that the general system?
Mr. CORNELIUS.
Mr.
SPEER.
Yes, sir.
Mr. SPEER. And you say there are about five dealers that you know?
Mr.
CORNELIUS.
That's right.
3260
Mr.
Senator
Well,
Mr. CORNELIUS.
Senator DANIEL.
CORNELIUS.
Senator
Mr.
DANIEL.
CORNELIUS.
Senator
DANIEL.
Mr. CORNELIUS.
Senator
DANIEL.
Dallas?
Mr. CORNELIUS.
Senator DANIEL.
DANIEL
HUGGINS.
3261
Senator DANIEL. I'm sorry, but you are going to have to speak out
just a little louder.
Mr. HUGGINS. I was born and raised there.
Senator DANIEL. Are you the same Harry Huggins who served a 15.ear sentence for murder?
-'Jr.HUGGINS. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Did you also serve other sentences, Mr. Huggins?
A/fr. HUGGINS. Yes.
Senator DANIEL. Have you had the unfortunate experience of
It
not asking you whether or not you are an addict now, or anything else
that could incriminate you if you gave a truthful answer to that
question.
In other words, I am not asking you what you are doing now, or
about any specific event. I just want to know whether or not you
have, at various times in your life, used narcotic drugs.
Mr. HUGGINS. Occasionally, yes.
Senator DANIEL. Do they include cocaine?
Mr. HUGGINS. Yes.
Senator DANIEL. And morphine?
Mr. HUGGINS. Yes.
Senator DANIEL. Have those drugs led to your getting into trouble?
MNr. HUGGINS. I wasn't using them when I got into trouble; no, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Well, I mean have they caused you any worry or
trouble in your life?
Senator DANIEL. I am not asking you to name them at this particular time, but I just asked you, did you know some people who
engaged in violent crimes, such as burglary, hijacking, murder, and
things like that, of that kind, who at various times used cocaine and
morphine?
Mr. HUGGINS. I believe they did, yes, sir; some of them.
Senator DANIEL. Well, I am just asking you if it isn't true that
you know they did.
Mr. HUGGINS. Some of them; yes, sir.
3262
Senator DANIEL. Would you name some of these people who used
not?
Mr. HUGGINS. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Now, the three of you were associated together,
I believe in a murder case here in this county of a Mr. William Clark,
is that correct?
Mr. HUGGINS. Yes, sir; I was indicted for it.
Senator DANIEL. You are under indictment for that?
Mr. HUGGINS. That's right.
Senator DANIEL. I believe that both Eggleston and Cecil Green are
dead, is that correct?
Mr. HUGGINS. Yes, sir; I believe so.
Senator DANIEL. Were they associated with you in this murder?
Mr. HUGGINS. Yes, sir; they were indicted for it.
IrCIT NAIRCOTI
TAFTIC3263
3263
Senator DANIEL. What did they tell you they wanted you to help
them do?
Mr. HUGGINS. Senator, I am under indictment for that case myself,
and have a trial coming up. I would rather not answer that; it might
incriminate me.
Senator DANIEL. Well, you have already given all the information
concerning this matter to the district attorney, have you not?
Mr. HUGGINS. That's right.
Senator DANIEL. I am not going to ask you to go into any details,
but did they tell you they wanted you to come and help them murder
Mr. Clark?
Mr. HUGGINS. No.
Senator DANIEL. What did they tell you they wanted you to do?
Mr. HUGGINS. I would rather not answer it, Senator, because I
am under indictment myself.
Senator DANIEL. Well, didn't they tell you they wanted-that
they had a woman who wanted her husband robbed, and wanted you
to help them do it?
Mr. HUGGINS. I would rather not answer, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Well, do you decline to answer on the grounds
that it might tend to incriminate you?
Mr. HUGGINS. Yes, sir; I am under indictment, and I have a trial
coming up myself.
Senator
DANIEL.
amendment?
Mr. HUGGINS. Yes, sir.
Mr.
Mr.
HUGGINS.
reason.
Senator DANIEL. You would rather not answer; do you decline to
answer on the grounds that a truthful answer to the question might
tend to incriminate you?
3264
Senator DANIEL. Well, he was not only convicted of it, but you
know from what you saw and heard that he was engaged in the drug
traffic, don't you?
Mr. HUGGINS. No, sir; I don't know it.
Senator DANIEL. Well, you know he was convicted.
Mr. HUGGINS. Yes, sir.
3265
Senator DANIEL. And you saw that he was shot through the head?
Mr. HUGGINS. Yes, sir.
Senator
DANIEL.
Mr. HUGGINS. I
account--
on
Senator
DANIEL.
rights under the fifth amendment, not to answer on the grounds that
it might tend to incriminate you?
Mr. HUGGINS. Yes, sir.
DANIEL.
mit violent crimes who also had been users or were users of cocaine
and other narcotic drugs, have you not?
Mr.
there?
Mr.
HUGGINS.
Mr.
HUGGINS.
Senator
Mr. FLOOR.
I do.
3266
fine job.
3267
Senator
DANIEL.
Mr.
GASQUE.
FLOORE.
case?
Mr.
Mr.
GASQUE.
3268
GASQUE.
FLOORE.
to obtaining evidence.
3269
Mr. FLOORE. All right. The next problem with reference to obtaining evidence in these cases is the people through whom we must
deal, that is, the class of people.
You cannot get evidence of a narcotic violation from the president
of the First National Bank; you can't get evidence of a narcotic
violation from a preacher; you must go to a user of narcotics. In
other words, you must go to a man that can actually purchase narcotics. Such a person ordinarily has a criminal record.
Now, it is difficult to protect those people. They subject themselves, when they become Government informers, to all the dangers
of the underworld. We can prosecute anybody who goes after these
people for interfering with a Government witness, but that is of very
little aid and assistance to a Government witness who has been assaulted, injured, or killed.
Now, there is one way that we go about protecting them, and it is
kind of hard on our witnesses; we put them in jail. They receive pay
of $1 a day while they are in jail. I have had to hold a witness in
jail as long as 120 days before the trial of a case, to insure that that
man would be alive when the case was tried.
That meant that he was completely out of society, and it further
meant that while he was in jail, he was frequently very close to the
actual people that he was intended to testify against.
Then, after they finish testifying for the Government, you lave an
additional problem, because they are marked characters after they
testify. It is not safe for those people to stay around in the same
vicinity; yet the Government has no provision to take care of them.
Mr. GASQUE. Well, now, I understand that the one thing an
addict informer dreads most of all is getting a hot shot when he goes
back on the streets.
Have you had any experience with that?
Mr. FLOORE. No, sir; I have had no experience with that.
Senator DANIEL. Do you understand what a "hot shot" is?
Mr. FLOORE. No, I don't believe I understand it, Senator.
Senator DANIE L. I understand it to be an overdose of heroin or
something else like that; is that right?
Mr. GASQUE. That's right, or poison.
Mr. FLOORE. Well, I can tell you, we had some pretty close experience with that.
There was one of our informers whom an underworld suspect was
about to inform, and the narcotics were delivered to him, that is, purported narcotics. But when those narcotics were analyzed, it was a
very deadly poison.
Mr. GASQUE. Well, what about wiretapping in obtaining evidence?
3270
3271
the law was 5 years, and even though the United States Government
had worked this case in its entirety, we declined to prosecute in
favor of State prosecution, so that a more adequate penalty could be
imposed upon the offender.
Senator DANIEL. Was he prosecuted m the State court?
Mr. FLOORE. Yes, sir; it is my understanding that he has been so
prosecuted.
Senator DANIEL. Do you know how much of a sentence was given?
Mr.
FLOORE.
Senator
DANIEL.
Now, in other words, you would recommend that the Boggs Act,
which sets up the sentences on narcotics cases, should have the maximum penalty raised on first offenses?
Mr. FLOORE. Yes, sir. And on second or third offenses, I would
give more discretion to trial judges, and pin more faith upon selecting
and obtaining good trial judges who would administer justice.
Senator DANIEL. Well, I agree with you, and in fact I will go
Senator
DANIEL.
A dis-
tinguished Federal judge, the other day when I told him that I was
thinking along those lines, said, "Price, don't be an extremist." He
said, "We just give capital punishment in murder cases and rape
cases, and kidnapping and things of that kind."
Well, I told him my view was that this selling of narcotics and
smuggling of narcotics is murder on the installment plan, because
these people that start using them, are like the living dead, in my
opinion, and their lives are destroyed, and they destroy the lives of
other people.
Mr. FLOORE. That is the whole point; they destroy their families'
lives, and those that they come in contact with.
3272
OF HEARD
L.
FLOORE,
UNITED
STATES
ATTORNEY,
NORTHERN
DISTRICT OF TEXAS
3273
3274
If the defendant is linked with the narcotic trade in any reasonable manner by the
evidence, the jury is likely to return a guilty verdict. Ordinarily the prosecutor's
biggest trial problem is not with the jury; it is to convince the trial court, then the
appellate court, that the evidence introduced by the Government is sufficient to
discharge the burden of proof imposed upon the Government by law.
It would seem that in the actual prosecution of these cases no legislative assistance is needed. The prosecutor, with his abhorrence of the narcotic traffic,
must fight a tendency to go into court with insufficient evidence to sustain a jury
verdict. Knowing the damage done to the public by narcotic peddlers, it is
difficult for a prosecutor to decline prosecution when there is any reasonable
evidence even though such evidence may be extremely thin.
The third phase of handling the narcotic case is the imposition of sentence.
This duty devolves upon the judge. The mandatory provisions of the Boggs
Act are well known to this subcommittee. In this connection, I express my
view that such mandatory provisions might defeat justice in many cases. Recently, my office declined prosecution with reference to an incident involving a
sale to a Federal narcotic agent of some 35 pounds of marihuana. The peddler
had no prior convictions, and under the Boggs Act the maximum penalty which
could have been imposed was a fine of $2,000.00 and a term of 5 years in jail.
Feeling that the penalty was entirely inadequate in this case we declined prosecution in favor of State prosecution. There was no such limitation upon the
power to impose sentence in the State law. Yet this was a case made and developed by United States narcotic agents. Likewise, the mandatory minimum
provisions made in many instances work injustice. Addicts may have been
convicted of acquiring narcotics at times when the United States Government's
policy was to prosecute all in any way connected with narcotics, without making
the slightest distinction between sources of supply, their lieutenants, peddlers,
pushers, or addicts. A small time peddler may have been convicted twice before
his prior offenses being limited to merely having acquired narcotics or marihuana.
Catching such a person with narcotics improperly on their person a third time
results in a mandatory 10-year sentence, which seems out of proportion to the
crime they have actually committed. Likewise, the maximum 20-year sentence
for those convicted a third time or more may in many instances be insufficient.
A man who is actually proven to be a source of supply of narcotics or marihuana,
whether or not he may have had any prior convictions, should receive such a
sentence as to permanently from society such a menace. It is respectfully
recommended that this committee carefully consider allowing the trial judges
more discretion with respect to minimum sentences and further carefully consider
substantially raising maximum sentences. Further, a $2,000 fine is merely a
slap on the wrist in the case of a source of supply; the maximum fine should be
materially increased.
With reference to narcotic and marihuana cases handled by my office since I
have been United States attorney I submit the following information, to wit:
At the time I took office (Sept. 5, 1953), there were 28 narcotic cases on the
docket involving a total of 38 defendants. Since I took office, a total of 144
narcotic cases have been filed involving 178 defendants. Thus the total number
of cases for me to handle were 172 and the total number of defendants to be
handled were 216. At this time, there are only five narcotic cases pending on the
dockets of the northern district of Texas. There of these cases are cases which
we tried, obtaining convictions which were reversed by the Fifth Circuit and
which are merely awaiting retrial. Of the remaining two cases which have not
been tried, the Government announced ready for trial in one of these cases in
February and in June and in each case the defendant obtained a continuance.
The defendant has been incarcerated in jail awaiting trial some 10 months. The
other case which we have not tried is a case wherein there is simply not enough
evidence to sustain a conviction and we have authority from the Attorney General
to dismiss this case. It can thus be seen that some 214 defendants have been
tried. At least 5 of these have been tried and convicted 2 times. The disposition of these 214 defendants is as follows, to wit:
Disposition:
101
Number of pleas of guilty ------------------------------------71
Number of contests (conviction, 63; acquittals, 8) ------------------3
Number of nolo pleas -----------------------------------------2
Number of transfers-Rule 20 ----------------------------------36
Number of dismissals ----------------------------------------1
Number of removals ------------------------------------------214
3275
The statistics hereinabove given pertain to both narcotic cases and marihiiana
eases, and are given as of October 1, 1955. In addition, six of the cases wherein
convictions were obtained are now on appeal.
With reference to sentences imposed, the longest sentence was a 10-year term
and the shortest sentence was a 15-months term. (I am aware of the fact that
this is shorter than the minimum term imposed by the Boggs Act and so adivsed
the court.) The average sentence was 3.49 years. A total of $6,904 has been
imposed in fines, and I believe that all of these fines have been collected.
Before concluding my statement, I would like to call to the attention of the
committee a further need. While the local police of Fort Worth, Dallas, Lubbock
and other cities within the northern district of Texas, the various sheriffs, and
the State officers have very willingly cooperated with my office in narcotic cases
and in other cases, it is nevertheless our experience that by far the best cases are
roade by the United States narcotic agents. The only cases wherein large suppliers have actually been reached were cases wherein the investigation was directed
by United States narcotic agents. For too long a period of time I found myself
in the position of having only four narcotic agents in the entire northern half of
Texas. These same agents also had to cover the western part of the northern
half of Louisiana. While the situation is better at this time, we still do not have
enough United States narcotic agents to do as good a job of making cases as can
be done. For example, the narcotic office in Fort Worth was closed in 1954,
and the 2 agents formerly stationed here were removed. Since Fort Worth is
my headquarters, and has been the headquarters of the United States attorney
for approximately 42 years, it is felt that there should be some narcotic agents
stationed in Fort Worth. Further, the number covering the territory above
described should be substantially increased. United States narcotic agents make
the best cases, preserve the evidence more carefully, and are not limited by
extremely confining territorial bounds within which they can operate.
I wish to make it clear that I do not in any way criticize the work of the various
local officers. On the contrary I compliment highly the work of the Dallas
Police Department in the field of narcotics, and I have received very efficient
help from the Fort Worth Police Department and from the Lubbock Police
Department in this field.
in the statement that you have not called particular attention to,
that you would want to emphasize, so that we might discuss them
with you or question you about them?
Mr. FLOORE. I would like to reemphasize the fact that we badly
need another narcotics office in Fort Worth. I have asked the
Commissioner of Narcotics, in his discretion, to exercise due discretion
by returning to us the agents that he took away from us, and I have
repeated that request several times, and I now repeat it to you.
Senator DANIEL. You began your testimony with that recommendation, and now you conclude your testimony with that recommendation?
Mr. FLOORE. I certainly do.
Senator DANIEL. I certainly will show my cooperation in every
way. I will recommend it to the Commissioner of Narcotics, and I
hope this committee will follow in that recommendation.
Thank you very much for all of your assistance, and especially for
sitting in with us through these proceedings.
Mr. FLOORE. Thank you for the opportunity to do so, Senator.
Senator DANIEL. Now, Mr. Fender.
Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you will give to this
7151-.56--pt. 7-59
3276
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
That is on convictions?
Mr.
FENDER.
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
TRAFFIC
3277
It was drawn up, essentially, in 1835, between 1835 and 1837, when
the Republic of Texas was established.
Senator DANIEL. You are speaking now of the criminal code?
Mir. FENDER. The criminal code of the State was drawn up first for
the Republic of Texas, and with minor variations to include a few
things like automobiles and radios, which didn't exist then, we are
still operating under the same code drawn up under that, Republic.
It was probably a very fine thing in those days; I don't question
that. But the system that was applicable in the days of the stagecoach and the horse and buggy, the pony express, is not applicable to
a modern age of television, in communications your telegraph, your
telephone and TWX.
We are therefore handicapped by a bonding procedure established
in those days, which remains virtually unchanged today, that anybody who will go out here and get him a vacant lot which he can
swear is worth $10,000 is in a position to make all the $5,000 bonds
he wants to, and the only indemnity the State of Texas has is that one
vacant lot.
We have professional bondsmen carrying bonds that I would say
are worth in the aggregate a hundred times the property they own
which is subject to execution, but each individual bond is less than
the security that he puts up in the form of a vacant lot.
Mr. GASQUE. You mean that a man who owns a $10,000 lot might
be able to put up bonds of $1 million?
Mr. FENDER. Conceivably, yes.
Senator
Mr.
exceeded the amount
of $5,000 that is possible.
Now, of course, that is the law on the subject. As a practical
matter, the sheriff does everything he can to discourage any of them
from becoming too overloaded, with too little security. But if he
carries that too far, he has got the right to go into court, and the judge
will then order the sheriff to accept the bond, in which case he has no
recourse.
Senator DANIEL. Well, now, in these narcotics cases, do you find
that some of your defendants go to selling narcotics again after they
get out on bond?
Mr. FENDER. Oh, immediately; immediately.
In the narcotics field, you have people who are dealing on short
time. You see, a burglar or a robber, after he is arrested, he can
usually afford to wait a little while before he goes back into business.
But a dope peddler or a pusher must retain his clients if he is going
to keep his business up, so the minute he gets his feet back on the
groun, he goes right back into business, so that he won't lose his
clientele; and as a consequence, they get right back in and stay with
it as long as they can, and make as much as they can out of it.
In addition to that, he has a particular incentive, because he needs
to make a legal fee. So he goes right out and stays in business right
lip until he goes to trial.
Senator DANIEL. Of course, you have trouble with the State
bonds; we have the same trouble with the Federal bonds. Some of
the biggest narcotic traffickers in this country have been trafficking
while out on bond, between arrest and trial or conviction and determnination of their appeal.
3278
I think I mentioned to you the George Hall case, this Dallas Negro
who became the biggest marihuana trafficker in New York; he built
up his business between his conviction and the determination of his
appeal, while he was out on bond.
Mr. FENDER. That's right.
3279
It is something in which I take no pride, but it is a matter of expediency to which we must turn in order to get our dockets cleared
up.
My recommendation to you, Senator, is one which may not be
palatable to a few hundred people, those folks who have to run for
election every few years, but I think our legislature of this State has
the definite obligation to revamp our criminal laws, just as you in the
Congress are attempting in this hearing to revamp the Federal laws,
so that we may have the tools in this community to do our share of
the job in stopping the dope traffic.
Senator DANIEL. Well, I certainly agree with you.
Now, both the chief of police and the sheriff testified that they
thought that the location of the public health hospital here in Fort
Worth and the voluntary system of treating patients, letting them
come and go as they desire, was a detriment to you here in your
narcotics enforcement.
Mr. FENDER. Yes, sir.
3280
should report to this office, where they could plead guilty so they could
report out here to the hospital. We had to finally write letters saying
that we had more than we could say grace over, and that they would
have to wait 6 months here before we could take them in the court.
But if we had an orderly way to finance it, we would be able to
handle virtually all of them as they came in here, in an orderly process,
without strain, and be able to accomplish a great deal.
Mr. GASQUE. In other words, in the absence of a Federal law requiring mandatory treatment, these addicts who want to be confined
to be cured must resort to your State courts?
Mr. FENDER. That's correct.
Mr. GASQUE. And with this law, you are afraid they may flock to
Texas from the surrounding States?
Mr. FENDER. They were doing that under the misdemeanor law
that was in effect before; and when that law became unconstitutional,
the traffic ceased; the remedy no longer was available.
We have a felony law now, which we feel pretty sure is constitutional; it hasn't been passed on; we just processed our first one today.
We have a means whereby we will be processing 10 to 15 men a week.
But that process builds up to the point where it is quite a burden
to this community, that is, taking care of people from Wyoming,
3281
California, Arizona, New Mexico, all over your western area of the
United States; and it does seem a little unfair to me to require the
people of Tarrant County to bear the financial burden of a system
serving the entire western half of the United States of America.
Senator DANIEL. You don't mind bearing the expense of Tarrant
County addicts; you just don't want to bear the expense of others
coming in here?
Mr. FENDER. That's the idea, Senator.
Senator DANIEL. I understand you now on that; and if we change
the law, as I certainly hope we will, on these voluntary patients, and
provide that States may send patients in on certain types of commitments, provided that they will pay the expenses of the patients at
the Federal hospital-that is what has been proposed by the National
Association of Attorneys General-then also, in that, we should provide that the States pay the court costs of commitments, or should
make their own commitments.
Mr.
FENDER.
Yes, sir.
Mr. FENDER. I think the matter has been pretty well covered today, Senator. I think that I have expressed my views thoroughly on
the matter.
Senator DANIEL. We certainly appreciate your appearance and the
excellent assistance that you have given this committee throughout
our hearings.
Mr. FENDER. Thank you for the opportunity to be here, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Thank you, sir.
We will have a 5 minute recess.
(Short recess.)
Senator DANIEL. The committee will come to order.
Johnny Lott.
Do you solemnly swear that the testimony that you will give to
this subcommittee of the Senate Judiciary Committee will be the
truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, so help you God?
Mr. LOTT. Yes, sir.
DANIEL. Will
LOTT. J. T. Lott.
Senator
Thomas Lott?
3282
Senator
to
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL. Have
Mr. LOTT. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Have
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
of narcotic drug?
Mr. LOTT. No, sir.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
3283
been engaged in the narcotics traffic, we would not have called you
before us; you understand that?
Mr. LOTT.
Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. And you further know that, having testifiedhaving sworn to give this committee the truth, that if you should give
an untruthful answer, that you would be subject to a charge of perjury?
Mr. LOTT. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. And in view of that reminder, do you still want
the answers to stand?
Mr. LOTT. I do.
Senator DANIEL. That you have given?
Mr. LOTT. I do.
Senator DANIEL. What type of business have you been engaged in
during the past 2 years?
Mr. LOTT. Switchman for the Texas and Pacific Railroad.
Senator DANIEL. Continuously?
Mr. LOTT. Continuously.
Senator DANIEL. Over the past 2 years?
Mr. LOTT. Over the past 13 years.
Senator DANIEL. Is that all from the job that you hold?
Mr. LOTT. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Is that the only income you have had during the
last 2 years?
Mr. LOTT. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Are you married?
Mr. LOTT. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Do you have your income tax returns, a copy
that we asked for, for last year?
Mr. LOTT (conference between Mr. Lott and Mr. Green). I refuse
to discuss that, because it might tend to incriminate me.
Senator DANIEL. Well, we have served a subpena on'you, asking
for the copy of your income tax return for last year.
Mr. LOTT. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. And the chair is going to order you to produce
that. Have you brought it with you?
Mr. LOTT. I was served this subpena at 3 p. m. today, the 21st,
and I haven't had time to get anything that was asked in it, any of
the information.
Senator DANIEL. Mr. Counsel, you understand, under the rules of
the Senate and these committees, that your client may counsel with
you anytime he wishes to do so, so long as you do not interrupt him.
All right; did you file a 1954 income tax return?
Mr. LOTT. I did, yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Do you have a copy of it with you or at home?
(Conference between Mr. Lott and Mr. Green.)
3284
tax return that you refuse to answer on the grounds it might tend to
incriminate you, do you remember?
Mr. LOTT. No, I don't remember just exactly what you might have
asked.
Mr. GASQUE. The Chairman asked you your income for the year
1954.
(Conference between Mr. Lott and Mr. Green.)
Mr. LOTT. I believe I did repeat awhile ago that it was around
$5,000.
Senator DANIEL. Didn't I ask you whether or not that was the
only income you had for that year?
3285
TESTIMONY OF WARREN A. HEDDENS, NARCOTICS AGENT, BUREAU OF NARCOTICS, DALLAS, TEX., DEPARTMENT OF THE
TREASURY-Resumed
Senator DANIEL. State your name.
Mr. HEDDENS. Warren Heddens.
Senator DANIEL. And your position.
Mr. HEDDENS. Narcotic agent for the Bureau of Narcotics, United
States Treasury Department.
3286
Mr.
Senator
Senator DANIEL. Now, I would like to ask you if, in your experience
here, you have noticed that narcotic addicts spread their addiction to
their friends and families.
Mr. HEDDENS. They do.
Senator DANIEL. In some instances, do they also spread their
business of pushing narcotics to friends and family?
es, sir.
Mr. HEDDENS.
Senator DANIEL. Do you
So often we are told that the only people who do the spreading of
addiction are those, who are traffickers, and we know, of course, that
traffickers do start people at some times on narcotics.
3287
Mr.
HEDDENS.
3288
Senator
DANIEL. Did
Mr. HEDDENS. What
From information.
Senator DANIEL. Only from information?
Mr.
HEDDENS. Yes,
sir.
HEDDENS.
Senator DANIEL. All right. Of course, I suppose that is an unusually large number in a family to become addicted and to be using
and spreading the narcotics traffic; but do you find other instances
like that in your experience over the country?
Mr. HEDDENS. Some few, Senator Daniel, but nothing in comparison to the number as this one.
Senator
Mr.
DANIEL.
HEDDENS.
Senator
No, sir.
DANIEL.
Senator DANIEL. Now, one other thing I would like to ask you
about: Have you had some other violations of the narcotics laws with
respect to legal drugs, that is, otherwise legal drugs which were held
by drugstores or by doctors?
Mr. HEDDENS. Yes, sir.
Senator
DANIEL.
I think we should point out the very first thing, and that is that
only a few doctors, a few exceptions, engage in the illicit distribution
of narcotic drugs, and only a few druggists; would you say that's right?
Mr. HEDDENS. That is correct, a very small minority.
Senator
DANIEL.
3289
HEDDENS.
Senator DANIEL. Now, have you had a recent case, without calling
the name involved, have you had a recent case of a druggist who
apparently was selling narcotics to known addicts?
Mr. HEDDENS. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. How did that compare, in a town the size he was
in, how did that compare with other druggists?
Mr. HEDDENS. That is an exceptionally large amount of drugs.
The town he was in was a population of 2,761 people.
Senator DANIE L. How many morphine tablets?
Mr. HEDDENS. He had 5,927 h-grain morphine tablets, and 1,607
%-grainmorphine tablets.
Senator DANIEL. That is two morphine tablets for every person in
the town?
Mr. HEDDENS. That's correct, yes, sir; over a period of a year.
Senator DANIEL. All right.
Mr. HEDDENS. Methadon, which is a synthetic drug, however, it
comes under the Harrison Act, he sold 43,200 tablets on prescription,
forged prescriptions and prescriptions under fictitious names. That
was methadon.
Senator DANIEL. Now, wait a minute. You say that many he has
sold under forged prescriptions and prescriptions under fictitious
names?
Mr. HEDDENS. Yes, sir; 43,200 tablets.
DANIEL. Now, those were all on bad prescriptions?
Mr. HEDDENS. Bad prescriptions, yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. How about these other figures you have
Senator
given,
3290
their own, and the doctor would prescribe narcotics for them by issuing
1111
3291
Mr.
The circuit court knocked out the acquisition count on the basis
that the agents had failed to obtain a search warrant, and that therefore the pound of marihuana found in his garage was illegally obtained evidence, and could not be admitted.
As to the conspiracy count, he was reconvicted when we tried him
3292
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
TRAFFIC
3293
Mr. IHowerton, do you solemnly swear that the testimony you are
about to give this subcommittee of the Senate Judiciary Committee
will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help
you God?
Mr. HOWERTON. I do.
Senator DANIEL. You may l)e
seat(,.
Police Association?
Mr. HOWERTON. I am president, of the Texas Police Association
for this ear.
Mr. GASQUE. Mr. Howerton, I believe you have a prepared state-
ment.
Senator DANIEL. If you will, give the press copies of your state-
ment, and we will place the statement in the record in full. (See p.
3294.)
Now, Mr. Howerton, your appearance today is as president of the
Texas Police Association?
Mr. HOWERTON. Yes, sir.
mittee, and as I have said, your statement will be p aced in the record
in full, and if you would care to emphasize any particular portion of
your statement, or call any particular matter to our attention orally,
we would be glad to hear from you.
Mr. HOWERTON. Well, at this one point, Senator Daniel, I would
like to stress the fact that in our report, we did not have time to
have an executive committee meeting, at, which time we plan on
presenting to you some recommendations from the Texas Police
Association. (See p. 3295.)
We will have that executive meeting before you open Congress
again in January, and we hope to have some copies of it before you
then.
With this one thought in mind: We do deplore the fact that we do
not have enough Federal narcotic agents working in this northern
part of Texas, particularly to assist in this problem. 'We realize
that where 1 addict or where 1 salesman or pusher, as they might
call him, exists, that that is too much narcotics. That is the way
we feel about it in the Texas Police Association, and we are doing
3294
3295
In line with the objectives set out above, we have a training committee, a
legislative committee, a major crime committee, and a public relations committee
among others. These are all active committees. Under the major crimes committee we have a narcotics subcommittee. Through regional conferences and our
publication, the Texas Police Journal this committee as kept the membership
informed of the narcotics situation in Wlexas and steps being taken to combat it.
Many Federal officers are members of our association, including Federal
narcotics officers, and through our annual and regional meetings we insure cooperation with these agencies. Federal, State and city narcotics officers appear on our
programs regularly and the pages of our official publication are open to all of them.
Tbrouiout the years members of our association have cooperated fully with the
Federal narcotics agents, in many cases working paired off with them in narcotics
I
investigations, one city officer and one narcotics officer.
We have had every cooperation from the Federal narcotics officers assigned to
Texas, and as president of the Texas Police Association, I wish to commend this
bureau highly for the cooperation extended our members. It is regrettable and a
matter of extreme concern to all of us that shortage of personnel in the Narcotics
Bureau has curtailed their activities to such a degree that we feel it to be impossible
that they fulfill their mission properly.
The new State bureau under Col. Homer Garrison, Jr., is also to be commended
for the start they have made, their activity, and their cooperation. Chief W. E.
Naylor of this bureau is an active member of our association and last year appeared as principal speaker at tree of our regional conferences.
Chief Naylor, who heads our narcotics committee, is well informed on the
narcotics situation throughout the State, the enforcement problem, the weaknesses
in our State laws, and the methods of handling violations in various jurisdictions.
I have here a copy of the Texas Police Journal for November 1954, and I refer
you to page 3, "Huge Texas Narcotic Problem Cited." This is only one of many
articles in our police journal, which has a distribution of approximately 3,200
copies in Texas, which discusses the narcotics problem. I have a copy of this
magazine for each of you and I offer it to be used as an exhibit for your information, as you choose.
We are making progress in curbing the narcotics evil in Texas. We of the Texas
Police Association are proud that we have been taking a leading role in curbing
violations of the law and pointing out the dangers inherent in the illegal distribution of narcotics.
We hope that your efforts are successful and know that your hearings will bring
to the people of Texas information about narcotics conditions and will help to
awaken the average citizen to this great evil.
Best wishes and my sincere thanks for this opportunity.
ROLAND R. HOWERTON, President,
1. Make a change in the law, or procedure (or both if necessary) which now
permits addicts who volunteer for treatment in public health hospitals, to leave
at will, to allow them to leave only when discharged by the hospital staff.
The system of accepting patients from far and near for treatment of the
narcotics habit and then when they wish, permitting them, uncured, to walk out
3296
at will to pursue their life of crime, cannot be defended. The people of the
entire Dallas-Fort Worth area are the victims of this unwise and incomprehensible
procedure. In effect, it invites to Fort Worth the addicts, most of whom are
thieves, from everywhere. An example:
Some time ago one of the prescription laboratories in Dallas was held up and
narcotics taken in the robbery. The perpetrator, when arrested, proved to be a
walkaway from the hospital at Fort Worth, and was identified as an out-of-State
hoodlum.
2. Records of addicts in the United States public health hospitals to be made
available to law enforcement officers; addicts to be finger printed and a copy of
such prints, in the case of the Fort Worth hospital, be sent to the Texas Department of Public Safety and the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Escapes and
releases should be reported, as soon as they occur, to each of the above law
enforc&nent organizations.
3. Reopening of narcotics offices in Texas which have recently been closed and
new offices opened to permit the reduction in the size of districts.
It is not possible for Federal authorities to do much in curbing narcotics violations under the present setup. A district from the Louisiana border to Amarillo
is a large district and when you put Dallas and Fort Worth in the middle of such a
district and expect a couple of agents to handle it you have given them a task of
such magnitude that the results obtained in comparison to the size of the problem
are negligible.
4. That judges and United States Commissioners be allowed the right to deny
bail to persons charged under the narcotics acts.
5. That the statutes which provide for parole eligibility after one-third of a
penitentiary sentence should be taken away from the narcotic offender.
6. That a special law covering heroin only be enacted with a penalty of 10 years
for first offense and 10 years to life for any subsequent offense. Heroin is the
principal source of our narcotics troubles. Unlike other narcotics there is no
way in which it can be possessed legally. It is all smuggled in. The profits
from heroin are fabulous. Heroin should be given special consideration and a
special law passed covering the offense of smuggling, transporting, selling, or
possessing heroin.
7. A law prohibiting any person to buy more than 1 ounce of paregoric in any
24-hour period, 'or having more than 1 ounce of paregoric in his possession and
prohibiting the druggist from selling more than 1 ounce in any 24-hour period.
STATE
LAW
3297
POLICY
1. Law enforcement has been dealt a crippling blow by the present policy
regarding the adoption of cases by the Federal Government. We recommend
that the Attorney General of the United States instruct United States attorneys
in a policy of vigorous prosecution of all Federal narcotics violations. The
policy, now in effect, should be thoroughly reviewed. At present there actually
exists a situation where the Government adopts the big cases from city, county,
and State officers, but refuses to adopt the small ones. The police officer then
must go to State courts for prosecution and the result is overcrowded dockets
and less certainty of punishment. The peace officers of Texas believe that a
violation of Federal narcotics laws should be prosecuted and the amount involved
should not be the determining factor.
GENERAL RECOMMENDATIONS
R.
HOwVERTON,
Mr. Howerton.
Now, this about brings to a close, not only the Fort Worth hearing
but our hearings in the State of Texas, except possibly 1 day in San
Antonio before January 1.
Senator DANIEL. Thank you very much,
officers who have appeared here and who have helped in organizing
these hearings, to my staff, to the reporter-this court reporter over
here had to take every word of this; we have certainly kept him busy
throughout this week.
I want to express my appreciation also to the members of the press
3298
stop it before it hurts more of our young people and more of our adult
citizens, and destroys more of our property and lives in this country.
I think that the radio and television have certainly served a good public
service, not only to this committee and to the law-enforcement officers,
but to the public in general.
I believe when the public knows about this narcotics problem, they
will help the law-enforcement officers and those of us in the legislative
halls in shaping laws, and seeing that those laws are properly enforced.
So I express my appreciation to all of you who have made these
hearings possible, and especially to those who have made it possible
for the public to know about this problem, and thereby to help us in
licking it.
The committee will stand adjourned.
(Thereupon, at the hour of 5 p. m., the hearing was adjourned.)
3300
C. AUBREY GASQUE,
Go
Senator DANML. Will you state your name and your present oc-
cupation?
TESTIMONY OF CHARLES HERRING, ATTORNEY, AUSTIN, TEX.,
Mr. HERRING. My name is Oharles Herring.
I am an attorney,
district attorney for the western district of Texas from about the
middle of 1951 until about the 1st of February of 1955.
Senator DANIEL. During that period of time, about 4 years, when
great deal of interest. I was alarmed when I first took office to learn
of the extent of the narcotics traffic in Texas. I spent a lot of my
time trying to determine the reasons why and what could be done
about it. In going back over the records of the Treasury Department
for a number of years I found that from about 1950 on through 1953,
3301
the chairman in this problem began with the report of a grand jury
from the Houston and Galveston District from Texas, tnat is, the
southern district, and from this hearing as to the traffic through our
State' I doubt that I would be here as chairman of this subcommittee, not only do I doubt that the chairman would be here in this
capacity, but I doubt that there would be an investigating committee
of the Congress making a nationwide study of this matter if it had
not been for the witness now on the stand andfor the grand jury report
3302
that we received from Texas. I know that your information that you
gave the Congress, gave Congressman Thornberry from Austin, and
the information you gave to me is what caused us to introduce resolutions for this investigation.
Now, we found, after we started and got along in this investigation,
that it is a nationwide problem, and not a problem just in Texas. We
do appreciate the fact that you did something about it as United
States District Attorney.
Now, how do you hink that we can do something in the Congress
toward stopping this traffic?
Mr. HERRING. Of course, about the only way we can stop it is first
to adequately man your customs agencies and narcotic agencies, give
them proper personnel and enough money to operate on.
Senator DANIEL. From your experience do you think that they are
properly manned now or not?
Mr. HERRING. I do not think so.
Senator DANIEL. You think both the narcotics agents and the customs agents are too few?
Mr. HERRING, I think they are decidedly undermanned on the narcotic investigation side. I also think that it might do some good to
strengthen the penalties which are now provided by law particularly
for the sale and trafficking in narcotic drugs. When I say narcotic
drugs, I include marihuana; I think that may not be technically correct, but I think it is one of the drugs or one of the things that is very
detrimental.
Senator DANIEL. Actually marijuana can cause as much damage,
as much crime as any drug?
Mr. HERRING. I think so, maybe more so even.
Senator DANIEL. Now, do you think penalties should be increased,
minimum penalties as well as the maximum penalties?
If we
had judges such as we had in this district I served, I would say do not
have a minimum penalty for the first offense. Unfortunately, I don't
think the country is that blessed. I believe the only solution to have
uniformity throughout the country, is to have a substantial minimum
penaly for even the first offense.
Senator DANIEL. If the judges are not awake to the seriousness of the
narcotic traffic, what it has done in this country, if they are not awake
to the fact, that we have 60,000 addicts and Great Britain has only 500
addicts, if they are not awake to the fact that drug addicts are causing
a third of the crime in the country, if they treat the smugglers anR
peddlers with leniency and do not assess any penalties, how are we
going to stop it?
Mr. HERRING. I don't think we can.
Senator DANIEL. We happen to be sitting in the courtroom of Judge
Ben Rice. I want to thank you for loaning us the courtroom for these
hearings and all your kindnesses. As I understand it, he really gives
heavy penalties in narcotic cases ?
Mr. HERRING. He understands the problem.
Senator DANIEL. Now, do you find that true of other State and Federal judges in Texas? I know you wouldn't want to criticize them
and neither do I, for failing to understand the problem. What has
been your experience with respect to other court sentences ?
3303
Mr. HERRING. The information I have is that the sentences are not
such as I would have given had I been on the bench. I think probably
the reason is because they do not understand the problem, and the
seriousness of it, as you say.
Senator DANIEL. I had a Federal judge tell me not so long ago, "Do
not go out on a limb and be an extremist and advocate the death penalty
for smuggling narcotics." I thought there should be a maximum, not
to be the only penalty, but, say, from 5 years to death; in the extreme
case the death penalty could be meted out. He said, "Don't be an extremist on it because," he said, "you wouldn't have many cases where
the death penalty would be justified." I told him about a case in San
Antonio where one man started 40 to 50 high school students on heroin.
I said that man is as guilty of murder as the man who goes out and
shoots those boys. It is murder on the installment plan. We have
witnesses today who will testify it has killed some people after taking a
shot. So I think we ought to classify this crime of smuggling narcotics a little nearer to murder, don't you?
Mr. HERRING. I think that is the only way you will ever stop it.
Senator DANIEL. And we should have maximum penalties that are
really high enough to frighten these smugglers out of our country. Do
you know about 370 aliens today who are in deportation proceedings
because they violated our narcotics laws?
Mr. -IERRING. I didn't realize there were that many.
Senator DANIEL. And there were over 300 deported last year. So
they are not afraid of our laws, not afraid of the sentences they get
over here if they bring in narcotics.
Mr. IERING. I think that is evident from the number of repeaters
we have in the narcotic traffic business. You will find a lot of people
tried over and over again for narcotic violations. They don't fear
it a lot and some of them, bigtime operators, feel like it is a small price
to pay for the returns they can get from the trade.
Senator DANIEL. Well, can you take the profit out of the business,
such a lucrative business, with a 2-or 3-year sentence?
Mr. HEmNG. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. IS that why you recommend the sentences be
higher, say 10 years or 25-year sentences, would that do it?
Mr. HERRING. They would be out of circulation, I think they would
find it unprofitable, because in the penitentiary they couldn't spend the
money they had made.
Senator DANIEL. Now, do you have any other recommendations to
make to this committee?
Mr. HEING. I recommend the Congress, members like you of the
Senate, keep your eye on the problem and see whether or not the
recommendations you do make are carried out and, if they are carried
out whether or not they do the job. It is a serious problem and one
that the country has been fighting a long time.
Whether the things that you recommend will actually accomplish
the purpose, I don't know and, of course, no one knows. I think
Congress should be alert at all times until the matter is under control.
I think you could do something probably through negotiations with
the government of Mexico in an effort to urge them, more strongly
than has been done before to cooperate in helping clean up the border
situation. I think that would get to the real meat of the coconut right
there.
3304
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
TRAFFIC
Mr. HERRING. I don't know how practical that would be. It sounds
Senator
thank you on
behalf of the committee for your assistance to us in getting our work
started. I will say this, I offered the place of General Counsel on this
committee to you. I have a good counsel but I want the record to show
I would have been pleased for you to work with us all the way. Thank
you for all you have done and for your testimony today.
Mr. HERRING. I want to express my persona] appreciation as a citizen to you for what you are doing. I think it is going to do a lot of
good. I also would like to pay tribute, if I may, to a man who helped
me get started, helped me bring to the attention of the public the
problem you are dealing in, Mr. Bill Joines of the American Statesman. I tried to get people interested, and he finally became interested
and helped me get it on the road.
Senator DANIEL. That is fine, I want to pay tribute to your successor, Mr. Russell Wine. We have already heard from him. He is
in the courtroom today and after being in office a short while after
you left, he certainly understands the things you have said about this
problem, the seriousness of it. While you are paying tribute to a newspaperman, I want to pay tribute to all the press and radio and television who have been covering these hearings in San Antonio. They
have furnished, I think, the best coverage in the entire nation. We
have now been through about a dozen cities, and nearly that many
states, and I think that wherever we have the media of reaching the
people of the country, really putting this problem to the people, they
will help law enforcement and legislators to do something about it.
The next witness I am going to call is a newspaperman. Thank you
very much.
Mr. HERRING. Thank you.
Senator DANIEL. Mr. Ruben Salazar.
(Mr. Ruben Salazar duly sworn by Senator Daniel.)
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Mr.
SALAZAR.
R-u-b-e-n S-a-l-a-z-a-r.
3305
Paso Herald-Post.
El Paso and Juarez that she has been selling heroin or has been
responsible for selling heroin and marihuana for at least 23 years.
Senator DANIEL. So that our record will be clear, so that everybody
on the committee and those in the courtroom may know, Juarez is
simply across the bridge from the city limits of El Paso?
Mr. SALAZAR. That's right.
Senator DANIEL. The city limits of Juarez begin right immediately,
at the center of the bridge, I suppose?
Mr. SALAZAR. Right.
Senator DANIEL. It is just a matter of crossing a short bridge from
El Paso Tex , to Juarez, Mexico?
Mr. 9ALAZAR. Right.
Senator DANIEL. And you say this woman
Mr. SALAZAR. La, L-a ;Nacha, N-a-c-h-a.
Senator DANIEL. Has been selling dope over in Juarez how long?
Mr. SALAZAR. At least 23 years.
Senator DANIEL. All right, tell us something about her operations,
what you did to see how she was dispensing the dope.
Mr. SALAZAR. Well, as I said, I had heard she was selling a long
time and the problem never really interested me until I became a newspaperman, and I started when I heard they were smuggling dope into
the El Paso city jail. I had myself arrested so I could go in there and
see if it were true. I was in there in the city jail, I witnessed a dope
3306
arty, mostly "goof balls" that were smuggled in. Then I got to
now some heroin addicts in there who talked about La Nacha to me.
I had heard La Nacha was not selling any more because during the
war, World War II, the Mexican Government sent her to a penal
colony because the United States pressured them to take her out of
the border because we feared she would sell narcotics to our soldiers.
Senator DANITEL. Our soldiers across the bridge?
Mr. SALAZAR. At Fort Bliss.
Senator DANIEL. The testimony in San Antonio indicated that some
of them had been buying dope across the border. During the war
you say she was in prison?
Mr. SALAZAR. That's right.
Senator DANIEL. I see you call her the dope queen of the border.
3307
Senator
Senator
Senator
Mr.
DANIEL.
SALAZAR.
Mr. SALAZAR. Yes, sir; that is VioletasSenator DANIEL. Spell that out loud so that everyone can get it.
1.[r. SALAZAR. V-i-o-l-e-t-a-s. M-e-r-c-u-r-i-o.
Senator DANIEL. You made two purchases before you wrote this
story about La Nacha ?
Mr. SALAZAR. Right, sir.
Senator
DANTEL.
you ?
Yes, sir, the one that appeared in the newspaper.
Senator DANIEL. That has already been made a part of the record.
Mr. SALAZAR.
7151ti--50--pt. 7-61
3308
By Ruben Salazar
La Nacha is the dope queen of the border. She's big stuff. But she will sell
you one "papel" (paper) of heroin just like any "pusher" on a street corner.
I bought one from her for $5.
If you aren't too far gone, the dirty looking stuff in the folded paper is good
for two shots. But that's true only for those who are beginning.
A dope addict, whom I will call Hypo, buys the $10 size. It has more than two
of the $5 papers, Hypo said. One lasts him a day-most days.
HE MET THE QUEEN
La Nacha-right name Ignacia Jasso-lives in a good house in a bad neighborhood. She's fat, dark, cynical, and around 60. She deals out misery from her
comfortable home.
She sells usually what is called a "dirty load," which is one that is not white
as heroin should be, but a dirty, dusty color.
Her prices are in American money. She does business with many American
addicts. She's as casual about it as if she were selling tortillas.
Hypo took me to La Nacha's home and introduced me to the dope queen. I
visited her twice. The first time, Hypo and I bought a $5 paper of heroin. The
second time we bought the large economy $10 size.
The papers contained dope all right. I saw Hypo, an El Paso married man of
24 whose 19-year-old wife has a 3 months old baby, inject himself with the
"carga" (load).
HEE'S GOT
TO HAVE IT
Hypo, who says he wants to be cured, cannot now live without heroin. It
costs him about $10 a day-or hours of excruciating pain. Hypo prefers heroin
to pain and gets the $10 a day any way he can. He sold all his furniture for
heroin. He was evicted from his apartment for not paying rent. He has
stolen, borrowed, and now has given me his story for $15 which he spent on heroin.
Hypo and I went to visit La Nacha in the afternoon. We parked the car a
few blocks from her house. She lives in Bellavista district, which means beautiful view. It is far from beautiful. The streets are unpaved and most of the
houses are adobe. Naked kids were running about the streets.
We turned on Mercniro alley and walked toward La Nacha's house, which is
on the corner of the alley and Violetax (Violets) Street. Hers is the only (ecent-looking house in the neighborhood. It is yellow and has fancy iron grillework on the windows.
SHE HAS A TV SET
Hypo and I walked in through the nicely kept green patio. Inside, the house
has all the conveniences of a modern home; gas stove, nice living room furniture,
TV, and a saint's statue on the wall.
I had been to Hypo's El Paso apartment and couldn't help thinking about his
bare rooms after he had sold the furniture for heroin. The last time I had been
in Hypo's apartment, I had seen the baby on the floor on a blanket and HypO'S
wife sitting in a corner watching the baby. There was a sad, vacant look in
her eyes.
Once inside the house, which Hypo knows so well that he doesn't even bother
to knock, we met Nacha's daughter. She was sitting on a bed talking to another
woman. Hypo told her he was going away and wanted to introduce me So I
could buy the stuff myself.
"You'll have to ask Mother," Nacha's daughter said.
Then I was introduced to Nacha's son. He is heavy set, wears a mustache
and had on an expensive watch.
I noticed a stool nearby which had white strips of paper neatly arranged on top.
3309
Then La Nacha came in. I remembered Hypo's advice that I should be polite
to her. She gave me the once over, I was introduced. She sat in front of the
stool and started working the strips. They were the heroin papers.
Hypo told La Nacha that I was a musician working in a dancehall in El Paso
and wanted to start buying "loads."
La Nacha glanced at my arms. Hypo explained that I wasn't a "mainliner."
That I just liked to "jornear"-breathe the heroin. A "mainliner" is one who
injects himself with a hypodermic needle.
La Nacha said, "All right, any time."
"At night we sell it across the street," La Nachas' daughter said. Hypo asked
La Nacha for "a nickel's worth." She handed me a paper of heroin. (She
wanted to know if I would handle the stuff, Hypo told me later.) Hypo gave
her $5 and we left.
QUICKER AND BETTER
After we bought the load we went to a cheap hotel in Juarez. There I saw
Hypo, who is a "mainliner," inject himself with heroin. "You feel better quicker
that way," Hypo said.
"Mainliners" need a cup of water, a syringe with a needle, an eye dropper,
a bottle cap and the expensive heroin to make them feel, in Hypo's word,
"normal."
"A man who is hooked (that Is, one who has the habit bad) never feels "normal"
unless he's had at least two shots a day," Hypo said.
I watched Hypo go through the process of injecting himself with heroin.
First be carefully placed half a paper of heroin in the bottle cap with a knife.
Then with an eye dropper he placed a few drops of water in the cap. He took
a match and placed it underneath the cap while holding it with the other hand.
After it was heated Hypo dropped a tiny ball of cotton in the cap. "This is so
the hypodermic can suck all the heroin out of the cap," Hypo explained. The
cotton works like a filter.
WILD EYES GLEAM
Hypo then placed the hypodermic syringe in the cap and the brownish substance
could be seen running up into the syringe.
Hypo's wild eyes gleamed with excitement.
Hypo crouched on the floor balanced on the front of his shoes. He injected the
heroin in his vein. His vein was swollen from so many punctures.
Almost as soon as the heroin had gone into his vein he started rocking back
and forth. I asked him how he felt.
"Muy suave, ese," he said. "Real good."
Before long he passed out. His stomach sounded like a washing machine.
He snored loudly and uncomfortably. I tried to wake him. I couldn't, so I
went home.
TOOK AN OVERDOSE
Later he explained that he had taken an overdose. "The load was real clean
and I misjudged the amount I should have taken," Hypo said. "I could have
died."
The second time I saw Hypo we must have bought a load not as clean or he
judged the right amount. For the reaction was much different.
Before he injected himself he looked worse than I had ever seen him. His
eyes looked like two huge dull buttons. He complained of pains all over his
body. Hypo couldn't even hold a cigarette because of his shaking hands.
We went to La Nacha's and bought some heroin. We only stayed a minute.
Hypo needed to be "cured" quick.
After he injected himself this time he actually looked better than before,
talked better and acted better. He was only half dead-instead of three quarters.
He stopped shaking. He smoked almost calmly and was talkative. "I've got
to quit this habit," he said, "For my little daughter's sake. I love her very
much. God, I wish I could stop it."
I, too, hope he can.
3310
F.
..
....
W1
I.
,:"
..
V~
No. 3
"La Nacha" siempre ha estado vigilada por la policia local y hasta el momento
no se ha tenido conocimiento de que se dedique al trdfico de drogas, como asegura
un reporter de El Paso." Tal declaraci6n nos fu6 hecha ayer por el Gen. Pablo
Cano Martinez, inspector de policia, quien agrego que ninguna denuncia al
respecto le ha sido presentada.
Un peri6dico de El Paso public en dias pasados una alarmante informaci~f
en la que se aseguraba que la celebdrrima traficante de drogas heroicas, que una
ocasi6n estuvo internada en el penal de las Islas Marfas, sigue dedicfindose al
nefasto negocio en su casa que tiene en la esquina de las calles Violetas y Mercurio
de esta ciudad.
Sin embargo, como asentamos al principio, el general Cano Martfnez nos dijo
que no sabe nada al respecto.
[El Continental-El Paso, Tex.-Miercoles 17 de Agoste de 1955]
MOVILIZA A LA POLICfA DE JUAREZ UN
REPORTAGE
SOBRE
LA NACHA-AL FIN
, ,.
v.
I '
3311
Sin duda los cambios de jefes de oficina que recientemente hizo el Gobernador,
Dr. Jesfis Lozoya Solls, obligaron a esa dependencia a hacer la consignacifn del
sonado caso, pero con el antecedente de que esper6 el acta notarial del C6nsul
General de Mexico, Ernesto Lavega que certifica el acta de nacimiento de Patricia,
para comprobar su minorla de edad.
Todo hace sospechar que el departamento de Investigaciones Previas estaba
fraguando un nuevo trinquete en el caso de la norteamericana, que constituiria el
postrer bofet6n a la ya desprestigiada administracifn de justicia.
Se sospecha que la lentitud con que Previas estuvo ventilh1ndo el procedimiento,
estaba encaminada a ver que ventaja sacaban por filtimo, porque ya vefan la
escritura en la pared.
Previas dispone de un tdrmino constitucional de 72 horas para consignar sus
actuaciones en cual quier expediente ante el Agente del Ministerio Piblico del
Estado; sin embargo, transcurrieron diez dfas desde que la Inspeccifn de Policia
puso en sus manos el asunto relativo al homicidio cometido por la norteamericana
en la persona del patrullero Roberto Arreola, y en las diligenclas realizadas pudo
entreverse una serie de manio bras ilegales en convivencia con los encargaUos ae la
defensa.
Investigaciones Previas tenia la obligacl6n de haber hecho la consignaci6n
dentro del tdrmino constitucional, sin esperar la aportaci6n de pruebas en favor
de Patricia Arthur.
La prueba documental relativa a la minorfa de edad de la acusada tendria que
haber sido presentada por los defensores ante el juez penal y ningfin precepto
legal faculta al departamento de Investigaciones Previas para excederse en el
tdrmino de que dispone para reci bir evidencia.
Desde el momento en que Previas recibi6 el certificado de autopsia rendido por
el Hospital General de El Paso y ratificado por los Mddicos legistas de Ciudad
Jufirez, dedi hacer la consignacifn inmediata.
3312
SALAZAR.
Right, sir.
F-11% : Calle Francisco I Madero y Bordo del Rio Bravo Felipe (A) El Pato
Expendio de marihuana
Expendio de marihuana.
F-11: Ramon Cornona y Bordo del Rio Bravo. Tanilo. Expendio de marilana.
D-1-5/ 2 : Dalias y Niquel. Jose (A) El Cucho-Expendio de marihuana.
D-E--6: Estano y Bordo del Rio Bravo Guadalupe Zapata Corredor de marihuanfl.
F-6: Bronce 1352 Expendio de marihuana, papiros y case de asignacion cla-
destina.
EXHIJJIT
67
IQUL.R
IA
No. 4
16
16
17
17
18w
20
20
21
21
26
25
______
25
26
27
wmmwmmwmaua
EL PASO, TEXAS
CORTE DE
CORDOVA
- MEXICO m
A7
24
23-M. 24
22
22
8
:1
A
1
AUTOTRANSPOTES URBANOS
.0
LAZ
"I/
O
* ARN-6
00
'D
AA.'O
A
pLI '
- DAAWIUI
(lQCVWAL*CIO~l
(fnLOWAOS'.8VI'
(r O.IA cftcIoo
caOVA OWCOA
CSCIL
"rULIVUACt0#
fAAUVI LIONC
SAW,ou P~A~Oe
*
*~*.
L:.
44,A'
~T"T~2
3f
t&UIADOOUCS
OIL *WTI
144S
'(IIt
SIMBOLOS0
!0
p19m)CAORILES11
3.4*5 0ORA&fOOWQs *34403
&C-A S
0',
Q("ftA Comills
VOA''6S
*IS of 10
DE
_______INDICE
I P6
Lit
v
L '..4AC
LI
IP
6OPL.Wo.'
22
I
-1
26
DE
INDICE
CALLES
-
25
24
,fAS*IA
CALLED
LA
U 66
UP?,tATO
0
t
U1 ua3(.A
up30~iA
alP9f
i AU(LI44
6?
360is
30
.0
AGPA
Is
0s
1AWAI.
f. f*. 4
1&
VVI
on
,-
4 6 044
10-
.~pgss
a"bo
c-1,
l.hAj
44
.1
e*468OA
,
-1
7-,-
0A
6 00
LA
PAZ
A:A *Maf
613A
1AL
!) ;.,e
0KP 44
'*
0-09
VCAsA
OIAOALU,1
Va! 1?A
4',..0VIAL.
80
669.10
so
6P ,
6 to,du
1
N CA
A. %'A
&-A..E
28
v"
is
&AONC&LO
*
27
-. 1
It
-OPTar~fts'as.
-b,
W'0 1.ohm$PV
w
L
,.(Po.
AA 4!A
1503 0f%4fZaOlAS
OA
AZL
'[.4s
6.13
ISAA K
3.
' I Ma.3 04
Q.,
fS
&PACo.kIAtAV
AA
51934 *
Jo.6W
'
Z~ 5041W6
"IAA
(O7 '
1 0DTIRLAD1S
4-
0A
w4'.
4h16AX A.00
i. I
s
;A
Pot o,'A
N44
'OW
41
Of GOADA4'~34f5ftM
't4'A.
,
4,
c
.,t
v oj0
, 1
aat,
IA~
IAA.MIA%
foo(
0^.h
A.
CM
uts
,~
ILW.:
'%
Ps, LIT
.
(414.414.0
w Lettr3Q
f L
WC$4COVINA3*4vA093i.9
.cSIIALIU AMOAW
wN
44VA4'A AL1.
;RAFIAoo
WOW
A:4
'.4 , 444
C. &,(atIAA ftde
6utSA06.1
0.4*35(40
ooVAIN&TI
CAN
(*8CC.
(4T
'I*IC
* 0s00
FEDlAS0JAM
i
)w tmAIysAIowoofts Ia~..i
CUMP'.Cb'
El.01
3-4
-CIP~jAS
aftCoast
'4
.. PIN
'jtw
&
c s 6vt.0s
-34900C
I-
'JCI*4
t04.14
HO
(1CP.6OfC11
4A
C A
. MZ A3
I.MEu*"
Adew
'h4
Q.coo.
34SAN
C44
PA1A 3
t.t,
NoI
'C
-4
CASOIT4j1.A.C.44L00
RPa 4
4WI
3.6o'(
A*l
o.aA.,AilodoI
IA
WA L a
DEAM4o&4344011
I
5171
1,4
(A.A 1
woo. at IoA7
is '
CAfP4gv1AA
SjAA
;Av
1 ic
( 40,
MA~5
53*(640i
3W
ku"a.*.
2f L
614
buAt A14.
SOLVIS$RN
OACALOL
.
___owI~J
ml @*Itaulu
mm-
mopowdom"Nomom
10
14'50
-I
20~
21
EDICIONN
DIC. 1954
I -
3313
3314
Senator DANIEL. Well, now, we will have the picture of his place
there, the baths, make that exhibit No. 6. And then the picture of
Nativadad as exhibit No. 7.
(Exhibit No. 6 follows:)
EXHIBIT NO. 6
-<- ..
'
3315
Senator DANIEL. Will you exhibit that picture to us? The picture
you now have in your hand is exhibit No. 6 and shows the picture of
the place where you bought heroin?
Mr. SALAZAR. I did not buy it, sir.
DANIEL.
3316
Senator DANIEL. And he came back and delivered it to her for how
much?
Mr. SALAZAR. Ten dollars.
$10 papers.
Senator DANIEL. Was the amount larger than you had bought in
a paper for $5?
Mr. SALAZAR. I think so, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Do you feel it was twice the amount?
In other
words, has the price gone up over there since August and September?
Mr. SALAZAR. I don't think it has gone up. It is just that they don't
sell cheap papers, they even used to have a two dollar and a half one,
they don't do it any more, they don't want to risk such a small amount.
Senator DANIEL. Did you go back on Monday?
Mr. SALAZAR. Right, sir.
Senator
of several children who turned to prostitution to take care of her drugs, to buy them?
Mr. SALAZAR. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Did you take her back over there Monday night
and contact the same pusher or how did you do that?
Mr. SALAZAR. Well, we went to the La Baflos again. I told her to
try to get it without the pusher. She tried and couldn't do it, so we
had to go back to the bar I mentioned before and get a pusher.
Senator DANIEL. Was the pusher at this same bar?
Mr. SALAZAR. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Well, in view of the fact this pusher hangs
out at the bar would you mind putting in the record or do you still
want to insist on not giving that location?
Mr. SALAZAR. Yes, sir, I would because it is not a dump, it is not
one of the honky-tonks. It is a pretty good bar.
Senator DANIELL. It is not the type of place where a pusher would
only during the day, the baths, that is, but apparently somebody lives
there, probably La Nacha's son or daughter lives there.
Senator DANIEL. And somebody opened the door and let the man
go in?
Mr. SALAZAR. Yes, sir.
3317
in operation today, other than La Nacha's son? What about her, is she
operating today ?
Mr. SALAZAR. No, sir; as a matter of fact Saturday my informer
went to La Nacha's house, since this, and La Nacha told her, according
to my informer, I did not hear this, but La Nacha told her she would
not sell any more at her house and apparently she is not.
Senator DANIEL. Did she say anything else as to when she was going
to get back in business?
Mr. SALAZAR. No, sir.
Senator
DANIEL.
anything from a statement concerning her to the effect that she wasn't
going to open up again until January 1; have you heard anything
in that regard?
Mr. SALAZAR. No, sir.
Mr.
SALAZAR.
Right, sir.
3318
Mr. SALAZAR.
torney in Juarez. And he told me when I told him what I was going
to do, he told me he would like to release something to me, he says
through the President of Mexico, orders of the President of Mexico,
he is conducting an investigation of his own, that agents have been
sent from Mexico City to help this district attorney investigate the
narcotics situation in Juarez.
Senator DANIEL. Did he authorize you to make that known today?
Mr. SALAZAR. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. I am sure this has probably been going on in
then f These people were able to operate 23 years just across the
bridge except during wartime. Didn't our officials threaten to take
Juarez off limits and not let American soldiers cross that bridge if they
didn't shut up their dope dives?
Mr. SALAzA . That's right, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Do you know any other way we can stop this
thing?
Mr. SAZAR. Well, sir, I have discovered
3319
3320
Senator DAIFEL. He would also hear time and again we have said
of Mexico, that there wouldn't be any smuggling into America if you
didn't have Americans who were violating our laws and going over
there.
Mr. SALAZAR. At $10 a paper very few Mexicans on the Mexican
that Juarez officials are trying to do something about it. They arrested the man who ran the shooting gallery, he's now held in jail
without bond.
Senator DANIEL. It is too bad that an American citizen, an exparatrooper of our country, had to die to get this done. Let's put these
articles in the record as Exhibit No. 8.
(Exhibit No. 8 follows:)
EXHIBIT No. 8
[From the El Paso Herald-Post, September 1, 1955]
Two ARRESTED IN MYSTERY DEATH OF EL PASOAN. PRISONER SAYS MAN WAS
SLASHED AFTR TAKING DOPE.
Juarez police today arrested a dope peddler and a known woman dope addict
in the death of David Mares Barrera, 22, of 3914 Kemp Street, El Paso.
Barrera, an ex-paratrooper, was found dead in a dried-up Irrigation canalli
across the Rio Grande from Ysleta, August 25.
Antonio Tavares, Juarez dope pusher, told Juarez police that Barrera died
at his (Tavares') home from an overdose of heroin.
Tavares told police: "On August 23, Barrera and two women who are known
drug addicts, came to my house, I sold them a $10 paper of heroin. The three
injected themselves with the heroin In my home." Tavares said that Barrera
had been drinking excessively before taking the shot and became extremely 1l
3321
following the injection. "Barrera passed out," Tavares said. "His women
companions and I thought that he had just passed out and let him sleep."
Tavares said he discovered that Barrera was dead the following morning when
he failed to awaken. "I was scared that police would find out that Barrera
died from an overdose of heroin, so I decided to do something," Tavares told
police. "I hired a cab driver and another man to take Barrera to the canal
area where they were instructed to cut his throat and his arms." Tavares explained that he wanted the arms cut so that fresh needle marks would not
be detected on them. Chief of Detectives Salvador Navarro Gardea was credited
with breaking the case. He said that there was not enough blood in the area
where Barrera was found to justify murder. "I suspected that Barrera was a
dope addict and contacted one of his brothers," Navarro said. "His brother
confirmed that David was an addict."
During the investigation, Tavares and one of the women who entered the
house with Barrera were arrested. They are being held for investigation. A
woman, 20, of Juarez is also being detained by Juarez police. She went to
Tavares' house to get a shot and saw Barrera dead in the house. She told police
she left after that. Tavares, when arrested, had five $10 papers of heroin in
his possession.
[From the El Paso Herald-Post, September 2, 1955]
FIVE HELD IN DEATH INQUIRY
A dope peddler, 2 chauffeurs and 2 women are being held in the Juarez jail
in the death of David Mares Barrera, who Juarez police say died of an overdose
of heroin on August 23.
An El Paso woman dope addict was questioned by El Paso Detective Lieutenant
Art Islas. She told him Barrera was a dope addict and that she was with
Barrera when he took the overdose. Islas said the woman's statement helped
break the case.
Those held in the Juarez jail are: Antonio Tavarez Rodriguez, known drug
pusher, who told Juarez police he sold heroin to Barrera. Tavarez also said
he decided to dump Barrera's body in the dried-up irrigation ditch, where it
was found, and slit Barrera's throat and arms so police would not suspect he
died of an overdose of heroin.
Antonio Garcia Aguilar and Jose Fernandez Corral, Juarez taxi drivers, who
told Juarez police they helped Tavarez get rid of Barrera's body after he died
in Tavarez' home.
Flora Ruiz, El Paso dope addict, who went to Tavarez' home with Barrera
and saw him inject his arm with heroin.
Elena Mireles Gonzalez, Juarez woman, who was at Tavarez' home getting
a shot at the same time Barrera was there.
Two women dope addicts, a narcotic peddler and two taxi drivers, were being
held in the Juarez jail Friday on charges of attempting to cover up the death
of David M. Barrera of El Paso.
The 22-year-old ex-Army paratrooper died in a dope den reportedly from an
overdose of heroin. At first police believed he had been murdered.
The dope pusher and operator of the dope den (known as a shooting gallery)
identified by Gen. Jose Ruiz, Juarez police inspector, as Antonio Tavarez, may
be charged with injecting the fatal overdose of the heroin.
Barrera's body was found in a farm ditch east of Juarez August 25. His throat
had been cut, and his arms slashed with a sharp knife.
A break in the case resulted with the arrest of an El Paso woman dope addict
who told police she and 1 of the 2 women in the Juarez jail accompanied
Barrera to Juarez Sunday night to "get a shot."
Acting on the woman's information, chief of detectives Salvador Navarro
arrested Tavarez in his Bellavista home and later took into custody the two
taxi drivers. A third taxi driver is being sought. The women declared
Barrera died in Tavarez' place the night of August 22.
3322
Antonio Tabares Rodriguez, Juarez dope peddler, was indicted today in the
death of David Mares Barrera, El Paso ex-paratrooper, who died of an overdose
of heroin in Tabares' home where Barrera bought the heroin.
Antonio Garcia Aguilar and Jose Fernandez, Juarez taxi drivers, who admitted
helping Tabares throw Barrera's body in a dried-up irrigation canal, also were
indicted as accomplices.
TWO RELEASED
Flora Ruiz Castello and Elena Mirelas,- dope addicts, who were with Barrera
at the time of his death, were released from jail.
Tabares told Judge Jesus Maria Frias Espinosa de los Monteros yesterday
that he sold Barrera heroin, but denied that he slit Barrera's throat and arms.
Barrera's body was found with large knife cuts on its throat and arms.
Tabares contradicted his testimony to Judge Espinosa de los Monteros when
he said he wasn't sure whether Barrera was dead at the time Tabares and the
two taxi drivers threw the body in the canal. Previously Tabares had said
Barrera died in his (Tabares) house.
CAN'T THINK STRAIGHT
When asked why he changed his story Tabares said, "I haven't had a shot of
heroin for days and I can't think straight without it."
Tabares' contradiction might force Judge Espinosa to order an autopsy for
dope on Barrera's body now buried in Evergreen Cemetery.
Antonio Garcia Aguilar told the judge that he thinks Barrera was alive when
they threw Barrera in the canal. He said there were no knife wounds oi
Barrera's body when he last saw.
Jose Fernandez Corral, the other taxi driver, told the judge he knows nothing
about the knife wounds on Barrera's body.
Juarez police think Tabares and the two taxi drivers cut Barrera's throat and
arms after he died of an overdose of heroin so police would think he was murdered
by other persons near the dried-up canal.
While evidence in the Barrera case was being taken by Judge Espinosa, the
slain man's sister, Mrs. Maria Jesus Torres of 2250 East San Antonio Street,
stood just outside the judge's room and tearfully read and re-read a letter
written by the exparatrooper's chaplain in Japan.
The letter was addressed to Mrs. Jesuete Barrera, David's mother, who lives
at 3914 Kemp Avenue. It was signed by Father J. Rowan, a chaplain of the
11th Airborne Division, at Beppeo, Japan.
"David Barrera is a good man, a devoted Catholic," Chaplain Rowan wrote
under date of last October 13. "He attended services regularly, rain or shine.
He is held in the highest esteem by those who know him."
The Chaplain went on to cite examples of David's devotion to duty. He said
he wrote the letter so David's mother could know or her son's exemplary conduct
while on foreign military duty.
"Everyone who knew David knew him as a young man of excellent character,"
Mrs. Torres said, "I never heard of his being interested in narcotics of any kind.
These reports that he was a dope user are entirely false. David was murdered,
robbed.
"He did not have much money with him. He bought $25 of groceries for
mother, then gave her $80, and took $20 with him when he went across the
river-to his death."
Mrs. Torres sobbed silently as she declared that "unjustified reports in the
case have done an injustice to David and to all of us." She said the reports
from Juarez saying David used heroin are false and wholly without foundation."
3323
Judge Jesus Maria Frias Espinosa de los Monteros, of the Juarez third penal
court, said today he will try to have the body of David Mares Barrera exhumed
if it will help clear up the mystery death of the El Paso ex-paratrooper who is
said to have died either from an overdose of heroin or from a large cut at the
throat.
The official autopsy report, made by Juarez physicians, reads that Barrera
died from a hemorrhage caused by the cuts on Barrera's throat.
Antonio Taberes Rodriguez, dope peddler and 1 of 4 held for investigation
in the death, said that Barrera died from an overdose of heroin which Barrera
took in Taberes' house. Barrera was found dead in a dried-up irrigation canal.
Taberes still admits selling Barrera heroin and throwing him in the canal. He
now denies that Barrera was dead at the time Taberes and two other men threw
the ex-paratrooper in the canal. All four prisoners deny that they knifed
Barrera.
"Barrera's body is buried in Evergreen Cemetery in El Paso. I have no authority to order Barrera's body exhumed in a foreign cemetery," Judge Espinosa de
los Monteros said, "but I will ask for the cooperation of El Paso authorities."
his name?
Mr. SALAZAR. David Barrera.
Senator DANIELS. B-a-r-r-e-r-a?
Mr. SALAZAR. Right, sir.
Senator DANrIEL. And he was an American citizen and ar ex-para-
Juarez is concerned?
Mr. SALAZAR. Well, sir, I do have a suggestion. I wish the commit-
tee would come down to El Paso and perhaps consult with this district
attorney I told you about, to see how his investigation is progressing.
At any rate, I would like to see you in El Paso.
Senator DANIEL. Well, I appreciate that. Our Juvenile Delinquency Committee of the Senate Judiciary Committee, of which I am
also a member, held a hearing in El Paso last year in which they went
into the narcotic problem, and we had hoped we could use that plus
what we are developing here in San Antonio, but we will see. And we
appreciate your wanting us to be there. I certainly want to thank you
for the actual assistance you have given to this committee.
Mr. SALAZAR. Thank you, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Now, I want to call three 17-year-old boys that
have been reported to this committee to have gone to Mexico for heroin
across the bridge at Nuevo Laredo, and if any one of these people
wants his name called separately and objects to coming forward together, simply say so. In the first place, the three witnesses we have
called from Houston, 17-year-old witnesses; will you stand? All
right; I'll call you by name; I will call these witnesses by name: Edward Keith Love. Is Edward Keith Love in the courtroom? Please
stand up and answer out. Julian Ray Madeley, James E. Parrott,
James Edward Parrott. Mr. Marshal, will you see if you can locate
7
1515-56--pt. 7-62
3324
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator DANIEL. How recently have you crossed the border to get
heroin in Mexico?
Mr. ScoTT. About a week ago.
Senator
DANIEL.
3325
Laxedo and other towns on the Mexican side to violate some laws, to
vet some odd jobs to buy your heroin back on the Mexican side; is
Nat right?
Mr. ScoT. Yes, sir.
Seantor DANIEL. All right; what kind of law violations did you do
in order to yet your money for the heroin ?
Mr. ScoTT. Well, do you have to answer everything up here?
Senator DANIEL. Well, yes, sir, unless you want to claim the fifth
amendment. If you fear any answer, any truthful answer, to a question might tend to incriminate you, you can say that, you will not have
to answer.
Mr. ScoTT. Well, I am not very well educated, sir, I don't know how
to match my wits up here, you know, like I say, I can't explain myself,
Senator DANIEL. It isn't a question of matching your wits against
us. We will help you to explain. You asked whether or not you
have to answer every question, and I have explained to you that you
do have to give a truthful answer to the questions, unless you honestly
believe a truthful answer to one of these questions might tend to incriminate you, cause you to be prosecuted for some other offense.
Mr. ScoTT. Naturally, that's what I'm saying.
Senator
DANIEL.
Where?
Mexican side, coming back on the American side, where did you
shoplift?
Mr. ScoTT. In Laredo, Tex.
Senator
DANIEL. You
Senator DANIEL. How long have you been shoplifting to pay for
your heroin?
Mr. Scor'r. Oh, 10 years, 8 years, 8 years I guess.
Senator
DANIEL.
3326
you have to supplement your job with stealing or some kind of law
violation to pay for it?
Mr. ScoTT. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Have you ever been convicted of any of those
violations?
Mr. ScoTT. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. You have never been to prison?
Mr. ScoTT. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. On what type of violation?
Mr. SCOTT. You mean what I did go to the penitentiary for?
Senator DANIEL. Yes.
Mr. ScoTT. I went for robbery, for passing counterfeit money.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
drugs?
DANIEL.
Senator DANIEL. You mean you started a career of crime before you
got on heroin?
Mr. ScoTT. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Have you found a lot of other people who do the
same?
Mr. SCoTT. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Well, actually, in your case you were running with
the wrong people and getting into a career of crime that got you into
the heroin habit, weren't you?
Mr. ScoTT. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. That got you into the use of it?
Mr. ScoTT. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Then after you once got hooked you had to keep
using dope, if they knew what I knew they sure wouldn't do it.
Senator DANIEL. It has ruined your life, hasn't it?
Mr. ScoTT. Yes, si r.
3327
Senator DANIL. You were picked up when you crossed the border
and subpenaed to come before this committee. What had you been
over there for, when was the last time you were over in Laredo?
Mr. ScoTT. I went last Wednesday.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
In Mexico?
DANIEL.
Yes.
Senator
ell,
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator DANIEL. When is the last shot of heroin you have had?
Mr. ScoT. About 8 days ago.
Senator DANIEL. You have been in jail since then?
Mr. ScoTr. Yes, sir.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Mr. ScoTT. Well, it was just a private house, sort of a farm like a
farmer. This woman had pigs and chickens and things like tlat.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
woman?
Mr. ScoTw. A woman.
Senator DA NIEL. What was her name?
Mr. ScoTT. I don't know her name. I aways called her Sefora,
that's all.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
ie
3328
Senator
DANIEL.
Mr. ScoT. Yes, sir, there was always somebody there, always some-
Senator
DANIEL.
Mr. ScoTr. I was only paying 41 cents for a little, a little deck.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator DANIEL. Did you take the shot there or go back to your
room?
Mr. Scorr. No, I took it right there.
Senator DANIEL. Was it what you call a shooting gallery?
Mr. ScOr. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Did they help you?
Mr. ScoTT. No, sir, they don't help you.
Senator DANIEL. They have a place you can take the shot yourself?
Mr. ScOrr. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Do they furnish the needle?
Mr. ScoTT. Yes, sir.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
thing?
DANIEL.
old.
Senator
DANIEL.
3329
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
In Nuevo Laredo?
Senator
Mr. ScoTT. Well, it was, it was a beer joint and hotel, I believe, combined.
Mr. SooTT. Hotel is back, had some kind of little rooms in the back.
Senator DANIEL. What was the name of that place?
Mr. ScoTT. I don't know the name of it, I don't remember the name
of it.
Senator
DANIEL.
3330
Senator
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator DANIEL. Do you know whether that place is still operating, did you go by there during your recent trips?
Mr. ScoTr. Yes, sir, I went by there and asked somebody. He said
Mr. GASQuE. Could you tell the chairman how you happened to
make contact with the place where you had been buying your heroin
recently?
Mr. ScoTr. Well, I met these people about 4 or 5 years ago.
Mr. GASQUE. You were buying from them in Mexico 4 or 5 years
ago ?
Mr. ScOT. Yes, sir.
Mr. GASQUE. And you continued buying all through the intervening years ?
Mr. ScoTT. Yes, sir.
Mr. GASQUF. What are some of the other cities in Mexico where you
have bought heroin?
Mr. Scorr. That is the only city I have been to.
Mr. GASQUE. Now, you must know a number of other places there,
other than this house where narcotics have been sold at that time?
Mr. ScoTT. No, sir; that's the only place I know.
Mr. GASQLE. You said a moment ago you bought only heroin at this
place 3 months?
Mr. ScoTT. What's that?
Mr. GASQUE. Didn't you say a moment ago you bought from this last
woman and her son only the last 3 months .
Mr. ScOTT. Yes, sir.
Mr. ScoTT. Well, that's the idea I got. They didn't tell me that.
They didn't tell me that but that's what I figured for myself.
3331
Mr. GASQUE. Now, when you were in that house were customers generally coming and going?
Mr. ScoTT. No, sir.
Mr. GASQUE. Weren't there other addicts at times?
Mr. Scour. Occasionally, yes; it wasn't just like a grocery store or
something.
Mr. GASQUE. NOW, would you consider the price you paid for the
heroin in this shooting gallery or filling station over there in Mexico
much cheaper than you buy it here in the United States?
Mr. SCOTT. Definitely.
Mr. GASQUE. How much cheaper would you say?
Mr. Scorr. Well, 40 cents to $7, that's quite a difference.
Mr. GASQUE. Over here the same amount would cost you $7?
Mr. ScoTT. Well, I would say pretty close, some cities like Houston.
Mr. GASQTE. Some $6.60 diference in saving, if you want to put it
Mr.
GASQUE.
Senator
DANrEL.
3332
Mr. Scorr. The only ones I know are Mexican drug addicts. Mexican citizens.
Mr. GASQUE. Now, do you know any taxicab drivers over there
drivers do.
Mr. GASQUE. Mr. Chairman, that's all the questions I have.
Senator DANIEL. And what business are you following here in San
Antonio?
Mrs. KUCKER. I am not in business down here.
I wasn't, I am a housewife.
3333
Mrs. KOucKER. I have never used either one that I knew exactly
what it was.
Senator DANIEL. How old were you when you first smoked
marihuana or took a shot of heroin?
Mrs. KUCKER. I have never smoked any marihuana.
Senator DANIEL. How old were you when you first used marihuana?
Mrs. KucKFm. I have never used any.
Senator DANIEL. Why were you in possession of this marihuana
this month?
Mrs. KUCKER. Why was I in possession?
It was in a room in a
put the question to you once more, whether or not you ever smoked
a marihuana cigarette?
Mrs. KUCKER. No, sir.
-t.---a_
-__
o-
3334
..
Senator DANIEL. And did you know the marihuana was in your
room?
Mrs. K-uCKER. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Who was renting that room?
Senator
DANIEL.
you didn't pay double for it. Tell us exactly, you say both of you
paid for the room you were renting here in San Antonio, tell us
whether he paid it one day and you paid the next, just how was it?
Mrs. KucKEa. Golly, I don't remember. We paid it. I don't know
which one of us paid it.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator DANIEL. For possession of marihuana and also for possession of narcotic paraphernalia and also possession of barbituates?
Mrs. KUCKER. All I know, I was filed on for possession of marihuana.
Senator DANIEL. Well, you are out on how many bonds?
Mrs. KUCKER. One.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator DANIEL. When did you find out that he had some marihuana in the room?
Mrs. KUCKER. He didn't have any marihuana in the room. I don't
know that he did.
Senator DANIEL. Well, you just told us you didn't know about the
marihuana being there, what do you mean?
Mrs. KUCKER. I didn't know it was there.
3335
Senator DANIEL. You have never seen the marihuana in the room?
Mrs. KUCKER. Yes, sir, the police officers showed it to me. I didn't
know it was there.
Senator DANIEL. You saw it after the officers came in and found it,
is that right?
Mrs. KICKER. Yes.
Senator DANIEL. Had you ever seen any marihuana before?
Mrs. KUCKER. Not to my knowledge.
Senator DANIEL. Did you ever see Robert Kennedy smoke, use
marihuana, or sell it?
Mrs. KUCKER. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Who had possession of this narcotic needle para-
phernalia?
Mrs. KUCKER. I don't know.
Senator DANIEL. Well, you have used heroin, haven't you?
Mrs. KUCKER. Not to my knowledge; 1 haven't used any heroin.
Senator DANIEL. Well, you said a long time ago you used some kind
of narcotics?
Mrs. KuCKFER. Yes.
Senator DANIEL. What kind?
Mrs. KUCKER. I don't know, a doctor gave it to me.
Senator DANIEL. You mean to tell this committee you never have
used any type of narcotic drugs except what a doctor gave you?
Mrs. KUCKER. That's right.
Senator DANIEL. Whose narcotics paraphernalia was it that the
officer picked up in your room?
Mrs. KUCKER. I don't know.
Senator DANIEL. Did you see it?
Mrs. KUCKER. They picked up something and showed it to me,
whether narcoticsSenator DANIELS. Just describe to the committee what it was.
Mrs. KUCKER. All they did, they picked up something behind the
heater, and said, what is this- that's all I saw, had something in their
hands.
Senator DANIEL. What was it?
Mrs. KUCKER. Looked like a washcloth to me.
3336
Senator DANIEL. The doctor gave them to you for some illness?
Mrs. KucKER. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Have you ever been across the Mexican border?
Mrs. KUCKER. Oh, I think I was a long time ago but I don't, I was
across in Juarez with my husband a long time ago.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Houston, Tex.?
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator DANIEL. How long has it been since you have been in school?
Mr. LoVE. Been about half a year. I went about 3 weeks in this
semester.
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator DANIEL. When was it that you first took any narcotics?
Mr. LoVE. It was a pretty good while ago.
3337
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Mr. LOVE. It was
Senator DANIEL.
to school?
Senator
DANIEL.
Mr. LovE. No, sir, they found them somewhere and give it to me.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
narcotics?
Mr. LovE. Yes, sir.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
against that kind of advice why in the world you would try morphine
at the age of sixteen. Were you on the football team?
Mr. LovE. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Were you doing good on the team?
Mr. LovE. Pretty good.
Senator DANIE,. Were you interested in school at the time?
Mr. LovE. Pretty well.
3338
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
TRAFFIC
Senator DANIEL. And how many other friends have you that you
have seen around?
Mr. LovE. I haven't seen any of them since I quit school.
Senator DANIEL. Well, I mean, at the time you first took a shot of
Senator
DANIEL.
The time you took your first shot, where was it?
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
Mr.
DANIEL. Had he
LoVE. No, sir, he was
Senator DANIEL.
today?
Mr. LovE. No, sir, the boy that give it to us, he didn't even know
what it was, some boy told him it was morphine, so we tried it to
experiment.
Senator DANIEL. You all experimented. Where did you get the
needle you used?
Mr. LovE. Bought it at the drug store.
Senator DANIEL. Did the druggist hesitate at all about selling you
a hypodermic needle?
Mr. LovE. No, sir.
Senator DANIIEL. What drug store did you buy it from?
Mr. LOvE. I don't rember, they went and got it.
Senator DANIEL. Did you buy it?
Mr. LovE. No, sir, one boy went to his drug store and bought the
3339
Mr. LoVE. Well, I had some money saved up. I decided I was going
to take me a vacation so I went over there.
Senator DANIEL. With whom did you go?
Hr.
VMr. Lov.
Senator DANIEL.
Senator DANIEL. And you told them you had taken three shots of
1515-56-pt. 7-63
3340
Senator DANIEL. And you also told them that you had taken one
shot today, the day that you crossed the border?
Mr. LovE. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. And that you paid 75 cents for each shot?
Mr. LovE-. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Is that all true?
That is the truth.
Mr. Lov.
over there this guy was standing there, in Mexico, he was standing
there, kind of, he could speak English, he hit us up for 15 cents for
something.to get something to drink. We gave him the 15 cents, he
ke!t on going with us, he kept on talking.
Senator DANIEL. Who got to talking about what ?
Mr. LovE. He got to hinting around, you know, he could get some
stuff.
Senator DANIEL. You mean the first Mexican citizen you talked to
over there?
Mr. LOVE.
First one.
coming?
Senator DANIEL. Just tell us then what happened from there on?
Mr. LovE. Well, he said he could get some. We gave him the money,
and he went and got it. We waited in a cafe. He said his name was
Johnnie or something; he said his name was Johnnie. We waited at
this cafe for him. We didn't thirtk he was coming back; finally he
come back.
Senator DANIEL. 'What did he come back with?
Mr. Lov. Had it wrapped up in a little piece of paper.
Senator DANIEL. What?
Mr. LovE. Heroin.
Senator DANIEL. How much money did you give this Johnnie?
Mr.
LOVE.
Senator DANIEL. And was it the first heroin you had ever bought?
Mr. LOVE. Yes, sir.
Senator
DANIEL.
3341
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
DANIEL.
Mr. LovE. Who boiled it, this guy held a match under it.
Senator
Parrott.
Senator
DANIEL.
I I I I
3342
him.
Senator DANIEL. Where did you all get your next shot of heroin?
Mr. LovE. Bought it all at one time.
Senator DANIEL. Three shots apiece?
Mr. LovE. Yes, sir. No, sir, two shots apiece.
Senator DANIEL. All right, that is just this last Monday?
Mr. LovE. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. And then you said you bought some marihuaiia
le
and a half ?
Mr. LovE. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. About how many?
Mr. LovE. About 6 or 7.
Senator DANIEL. About what?
Mr. LovE. 6or7.
Senator DANIEL. Cigarettes?
Senator DANIEL. Had you ever smoked marihuana before you went
to Nuevo Laredo?
Mr. LovE. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. You never used heroin-you understand you are
under oath?
Mr. LovE. No, yes sir.
Senator DANIEL. And that, by all means, you must either tell the
truth or claim any rights you have, if you think any of this tends to
incriminate you, claim your rights under the constitution not to
testify?
Mr. LoVE. I am telling the truth.
Senator DANIEL. That's fine. I think it is even more serious, as far
Senator DANIEL. Then when you came back across the bridge, oh.
I want to ask you about how you took your second shot, who gave you
the needle?
Mr. Love. I did.
Senator DANIEL. What?
Mr. LOVE. I did myself.
I I I
II
3343
Senator DANIEL. Well, I know, but where did you get the needle?
Mr. LovE. He gave it to us.
Senator
DANIEL.
Mr. LoVE. Under a tin can on the bayou near the river.
Senator
day?
DANIEL.
Mr. LOVE. One day and that night and come back the next morning.
Senator
can side?
Mr. LOVE. Yes, sir.
Senator
hone.
DANIEL.
Senator
driving?
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
A 1949 Plymouth?
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator DANIEL. Do you think that you are going to be able to stay
off of heroin and marihuana?
Mr. LOVE. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Do you think you will be able to keep other boys
off of it?
Mr. LOVE. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. I certainly hope so.
All right, James Edward Parrott.
(James Edward Parrott was duly sworn by Senator Daniel.)
Senator DANIEL. You may be seated. You have heard the testimony
of your friend, Edward Keith Love?
TESTIMONY OF JAMES EDWARD PARROTT
Mr. PARROTT. Yes, sir.
3344
Senator DANIEL. How many times had you been to Mexico before?
Mr. PARROTT. Once before that.
Senator DANIEL. Where did you cross the river?
Mr. PARROTT. At Laredo.
Senator DANIEL. Were you dressed about like you are now?
Mr. PARRO-1T. Yes, sir; I believe so.
Senator
are you?
Senator DANIEL. Did you buy any heroin the first time you went
over there?
Mr. PARROTT. No, sir.
Senator DANTEL. Any marihuana?
Mr. PARROTT. No, sir.
Senator
there?
DANIEL.
time?
Senator DANIEL. You did not ever smoke marihuana on this side
of the border before?
Mr. PARRoT. No, sir.
Senator
DANIEL.
of the border?
Mr. PARROTT. A couple of times, twice before.
Senator DANIEL. Twice before?
Mr. PARROTT. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Were you going to school at the time?
Mr. PARROTT. No, sir, I don't believe I was.
Senator DANIEL. Had you used morphine or any other type of
narcotic drug-here in our own country?
3345
Senator DANIEL. How old were you when you had your first shot
of heroin?
Mr. PAROTT. Sixteen, I believe.
DANIEL.
Mr. PARRO',T. Well, I knew this boy a couple of weeks, his name
was Sonny, I don't know his last name, just Sonny, and he give it to
me, you know, both of them.
Senator DANIEL. Was Sonny using heroin, too?
Mr. PARROTT. I don't know, I never seen him.
Senator DANIEL. Did he ever come back and give you any heroin?
Mr. PA oTT. No, sir, not after the first two times.
Senator DANIEL. The first two times, did he ever sell you any
heroin ?
Mr. PARROTT. No, sir.
Sentaor DANIEL. Did you know there are some people going around
over the country today giving away heroin, trying to get young people
sir.
M1r. PARROTT. Yes,
Senator DANIEL. He didn't charge you a. thing?
Mr. PARROTT. No, sir.
3346
Senator
I don't know
I haven't seen
Thlt's
Senator
DANIEL. He gave vou the shots but didn't take any himself?
Mr. PARROTT. No, sir, he didn't. He just give them to me.
Senator DANIEL. Well, did you use any more heroin before you went
to Mexico?
Mr. PARROTT. No, sir; I didn't.
Senator DANIEL. How did you happen to get with these other t wo
17-year-old boys and go to Mexico and get heroin and have a good
time, did you call it a good time?
Mr. PARROTT. Yes, that's what we went down there for.
DANIEL. It didn't
Mr. PARROTT. No, sir.
Senator
Senator DANrr,. Do you think you ever want another trip like that?
Mr. PAR]Rorr. No, sir. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Did anyone other than you three 17-year-old boys
suggest that you make the trip?
Mr. PARROTT. No, sir. we just started up between us.
Senator DANIEL. You just decided to go down and have a tri) to
Nuevo Laredo?
Mr. PARROTT. Yes. sir.
3347
Senator DANIEL. Has your friend told about the situation about as
you remember it, the first Mexican citizen you talked to fixed you up
with marihuana and heroin?
Mr. PARROTT. Well, yes, sir; I guess that's the way it was. You
know, we seen some more but, see, he just started talking to us for 20
or 30 minutes, 15, just telling us about the town and then, you know,
we somehow got to talking to him about the heroin. That's how it
happened.
Senator DANIEL. He came up to you?
Mr. PARROTT. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. How long had you been across the bridge before
he came up and started talking?
Mr. PARROTTI. Just a few minutes, we just walked across.
Senator DANIEL. Just a few minutes?
Mr. PARROTT. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Have you bought any heroin since you have been
back across the border?
Mr. PARROTT1. No, sir; I haven't.
Senator DANIEL. Do you know where you can buy it in Houston?
Mr. PARROTT. No, sir; I don't know any place.
Senator DANIEL. What kind of work are you doing ?
Mr. PARROTT. I am out of a job right now, I'm not working.
Senator DANIEL. You have not bought any kind of drug since you
came back from Mexico, October 22?
Mr. PARROTT. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Do you think you are going to stay off of it from
now on?
Mr. PARROTT. Yes, sir,
3348
Mr. PARROrr. No, sir, I don't know no place where you can buy it.
Senator
DANIEL.
Let me call the names ofa few witnesses here before we recess. Has
Julian Ray Madeley come in the courtroom yet? Is Charles Nathan
Hubbard in the courtroom? Stand up and answer "Present," just
stand up and answer "Present." Charles Nathan Hubbard?
Mr. HUBBARD. Present.
Senator DANIEL. Gloria Jene Kerley.
Mr. KERiEY. She's present, outside in the restroom.
Senator DANIEL. And Harry Kerley?
Mr. KERLEY. Present.
Senator
DANIEL.
Vandeburg Griffin.
Senator
Shirley Orlowski?
Mrs. ORLowsKi. Present.
Senator DANIEL. Maria Moreno, Maria Moreno, Rudy Moreno,
Rudy Moreno. Felix Ortiz.
Mr. ORTIZ. Here.
Senator DANIEL. Gilbert Litterio.
Mr. LrrTERo. Here.
Senator DANIEL. Simona Cavazos, Simona Cavazos.
Mrs. CAVAZOS. Present.
Senator DANIEL. Leo Bustamente. All right, did another witness
come in whose name I called? Maria Moreno.
Mr.
DANIEL.
VILLAREALL.
She is here.
We have several officer witnesses we will be ready for after lunch. I see-Mr.
Dub Naylor is here, and the officer witnesses, Mr. Richards of ElPaso,
customs agent, Mr. Fleishman. The officer witnesses we had planned
to use this morning we will try to use after a few of these other witnesses who have been across the border this afternoon.
3349
this investigation.
In February at the Attorney General's Law Enforcement Conference we charged 90 percent of the narcotics coming to and through
Texas originated in Mexico. On March 3 a protest was made in
Colonel Garrison's office by Mr. Castillo, who is the Mexican Consul
in Austin, stating those charges were not true. In AprilSenator DANIEL. Now, that was 90 percent of the marihuana or
heroin?
Mr. NAYLOR. The heroin.
Senator DANIEL. Yes, I believe those are the same figures you gave
our committee?
3350
set for the 11th of April, and we were informed on or about that date
that they would have to postpone the meeting and might be able to
get to it around the 22d of April. And at that time Mr. Castillo advised us-I believe that is his name, he was the Mexican Consul in
Austin-advised us that the members who were going to attend the
conference were on their way to Washington and would not have time
to meet with Colonel and us at that time. We have heard nothing
since.
When we testified before your committee a newspaper article was
printed stating more or less that our figures might be wrong. So I
called my boys together, and we talked this thing over. We decided
just to go down there and see ourselves just what that situation was in
the border towns across the Rio Grande. We did; we took a special
employee and put him across the border. I would like not to use
his name or put him before television cameras, for we will continue to
use him. We took an agent of the narcotics division of the department of public safety who has some information for the committee,
and he will testify. You may use television on him, but we would
prefer that you don't. I, myself, went to El Paso and, although I am
a little out of training on undercover work, I went over into Juarez.
The second man I approached sold me two decks of it.
Senator DANIEL. When was that?
Mr. NAYLOR. That was last Sunday.
Senator DANIEL. This past Sunday?
Mr. NAYLOR. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. What was the purpose of your sending men over
to Mexico, to see whether or not the charges you had previously made
still stood, whether or not you could still buy heroin readily across
the border?
Mr. NAYLOR. That's right, yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. You sent men across in Laredo?
Mr. NAYLOR. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. You went over yourself at El Paso; to Juarez?
Mr. NAYLOR. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Just explain exactly how you got this heroin from
the second man you saw.
Mr. NAYLOR. Well, the first man I approached didn't know too much
about what I was talking about, he evidently didn't want to do business. The second man I approached, I told him I was sick. He wanted
to know if he could help me with anything, came up to him.
Senator DANIEL. Did you approach him or did he approach youl
Mr. NAYLOR. I approached him. You can tell a character pretty
well. I judged him to be a character, so I approached him. As I
walked up we spoke. He said, "What are you hunting for?" I said,
"I'm sick, I need some heroin." He said, "Well, wait here." He went
around the corner. When he came back he sold me two decks.
Senator DANIEL. For how much?
Mr. NAYT.OR. Five dollars a deck.
Senator DANIEL. What did you do with it?
Mr. NAYLOR. I disposed of it in Mexico.
Senator DANIFL. How much was it, $5 a pack?
Mr. NAYLOR. Five dollars a deck, it takes about three of the so-called
decks to make a capsule.
3351
Laredo?
Mr. NAYLOR. Yes, sir, it is quite a bit higher, it is a dollar a deck
in Nuevo Laredo.
Senator DANIELS. A dollar a deck compared to $5 a deck in Juarez?
Mr. NAYLOR. Dope is higher in El Paso than it is in San Antonio.
Senator DANIEL. Higher in Juarez?
Mr. NAYLOR. No, sir, cheaper, I mean it is higher in Juarez than it
is in San Antonio and a little bit cheaper in Laredo, in Nuevo Laredo
than it is in San Antonio.
Senator DANIEL. Well, as far as El Paso is concerned, this increase
you cross the bridge and the second man you talk to sells the heroin?
Mr. NAYLOR. But the price is high.
Senator DANIEL. It costs more?
Mr. NAYLOR. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. And how long were you over across the bridge
in Juarez before you got yourself some heroin?
Mr. NAYLOR. About 30 minutes.
Senator DANIEL. Now then, I guess your men will give their reports on what they found in Nuevo Laredo?
Mr. NAYLOR. Yes, sir, I would rather they give it to you first hand.
Senator DANIEL. Do you have anything else up to date to bring us
since your last testimony?
Mr. NAYLOR. No, other than I would like to say the department of
public safety, Colonel Garrison and my division stand ready to work
with the Mexican Government and are glad to furnish the information
we have in the files, if they want to use our manpower we will be glad
to help any way we can.
3352
Senator DANIEL. Have you ever had this meeting that you and
Colonel Garrison asked for with the Mexican officials?
Mr. NAYLOR. No, sir, we told them we would be glad to come to
Monterrey or Mexico City or for them to come to Austin, we left it
to them to set the time, place, and date.
Senator DANIEL. What do you think about cooperating and exchanging information, each agency south across the border, your
agents and the Federal agents of the United States and the Mexican
local officers in Mexico? Do you think you would be able to do a lot
more toward licking this problem?
Mr. NAYLOR. I think it should be a joint undertaking between the
two agencies.
Senator DANIEL. All right, sir. Well, I certainly thank you, Mr.
Naylor, for your continued help and assistance to this committee,
and especially I want to commend you for having made a recheck
on the situation since the committee was here last.
Mr. NAYLOR. Yes, sir, would you like to talk to the special employees?
Senator DANrM. We would like to hear from your special employees. Please do not show the picture over television on this next
man who is working undercover still. Refer to this witness as witness A of this date.
(Witness
A of the hearing of December 14, 1955, was duly sworn by
Senator
Daniel.)
Senator DAnieL. Now without giving
your name or any other
identification, without your picture being taken, I will simply ask
you if you have been doing certain work for Mr. Naylor and the department of public safety?
TESTIMONY OF WITNESS A
Witness A. I have.
3353
Witness A: No, it had been about 3 years since the last time I was
over there prior to Thursday night.
Senator DANIEL. Not calling any names, did some narcotic addicts
accompany you?
Witness A: Yes, there were two.
Senator DANIEL. Mlan and woman?
Witness A: Yes.
Senator DANIEL. All right, how long were you finding whether or
not you could buy heroin?
Witness A: Well, they went over there before I d id apl)roxinmately
30 minutes, and I followed behind them ini a cab ad they were wandering around town up there so I told them the place that I knew where
they might be able to buy soime. So they joined me and we went up
there and were there approximately 10 minutes waiting on this cabdriver and when lie caine up we got in his cab, went and bought the
heroin.
Senator DANIEL. Did you know that cabdriver before?
Witness A: No, I didn't.
Senator DANIEL. How long did it take you to find this man who
could take you to the heroin?
Witness A: After we arrived at the cabstand, it only took about
10 minutes.
Senator D.ANIEL. Did you know for whom to ask?
Senator
DANIEL.
happens to be the house you went to? I'll send it down to you.
Witness A. This is it.
Senator DANIEL. All right, now the picture, that will be exhibit No.
9 of today's hearing.
(Exhibit No. 9 follows:)
3354
A'
A ' .
- '~
4S
-'S
R~I
-.
'4W
Senator DANIEL. Now, will you hold that picture up, just exactly
3355
.4
.
. .,
Auother view of the house where Witness A bought dope in Nuevo Laredo, Mexico.
64
3356
Witness A. Well, when he came back with this heroin, this boy and
girl that were there with me were over there busy cooking this dope up
and fixing it and, while they were doing so, I was over there holding
a little conference with this Juan, this man who went and got this
heroin for us.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
3357
Senator DANIEL. Did you go with the special employee who just
left the stand, Witness A?
Witness B. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Witness A, having made the contact with Juan
Alvarez, who had told him he would deliver large lots and deliver to
the Texas side; is that correct?
Witness B. That's correct.
Senator DANIEL. Tell us what you did, not in great detail, simply
the basic facts about how you made the contact to purchase.
Witness B. When we first got over there, got in the same cab we
had been in the night before and we were taken to Juan Alvarez'
home; at this home we met Juan and there was some conversation
there as to how long it would be before he would be ready to make a
deal, and he told us it would be about an hour.
Senator DANIEL. Was it the same house that has been identified by
these pictures ?
Witness B. No, sir; it was not.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
E-n-r-i-q-u-e T-r-i-v-e-n-o?
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Alvarez had been dealing with I want to ask you-we don't want to
get ahead of your story-Did this Juan Alvarez deliver heroin over
to the United States side?
3358
Senator DANIEL. All right, you got George and Bill Drury; whG
else?
Witness B. Wanda Guy from Dallas.
Senator DANIEL. How do you spell it?
Witness B. W-a-n-d-a. Guy, G-u-y. Reginald Sharpe from Dallas; Eugene Traunsley from Dallas; Johnnie Rays from Houston;
Fred Haynes from Houston who is now dead, I believe; Luther Messer from Houston. There were several other names that he mentioned
that I didn't recognize. I didn't really try to remember all of them.
And also during this conversation he told me, we were talking about
the police situation down there in the event we might get arrested and
all that sort of thing, he said that everything was all right down there,
that the policemen down there were selling dope themselves.
Senator DANIEL. I beg your pardon?
Witness B. He told me, sir, the policemen down there were selling
narcotics themselves.
Senator DANIEL. In Nuevo Laredo?
Witness B. Yes, sir; and he also said, they, he didn't say who, they
were waiting for an American customs agent to come across the river,
that they were going to do him in, I believe the way he put it. I later
learned this was because the agent was involved in the killing of the
son of a Mexican customs agent. This son, as I understand it, was
delivering some marihuana to the American side and upon arrest he
tried to escape and was killed.
Senator DANIEL. Well, now, the son of the Mexican customs official
wasWitness B. 'Was delivering marihuana in the United States.
Senator DAkNIEL. And was caught?
3359
Senator DANIEL. You say Juan Alvarez said lie was going to do
something?
Witness B. Going to do him in. What he had in mind was to kill
him if they could get him on that side of the river.
Senator DANIEL. What was his name?
Witness B. It is Mr. Richards, sir, Mr. A. D. Richards.
Senator DANIEL. Mr. Albert D. Richards sitting here?
Witness B. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Did you ever talk any more to him about that
threat to kill Mr. Richards?
Witness B. No, sir. No, sir, he just mentioned it that one time.
Later on, right after that we left, drove around in his taxicab. He
took us where we could view the truck that was going to deliver the
dope to us. We didn't get to talk to the man, but he showed us the
truck. He instructed us to wait in our hotel room until about 7 o'clock
and he would come and get us, make the plans of where the delivery
was to be made. We did that. At 7: 15 in the morning he woke us up,
told us a cab was waiting outside, the delivery would be between
Encinal and Cotulla on United States Highway No. 81, to go right
then, cross and get our car, go straight out, our load would be there.
Senator DANIEL. In the meantime you had been shown the truck
your heroin would be delivered in?
Witness B. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. How much heroin?
Witness B. Ten grams the first time.
Senator DANIEL. How much?
Witness B. It was $200 worth of heroin and $60 for the delivery,
all to be paid to Juan.
Senator DANIEL. All to be paid to Juan Alvarez?
Witness B. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Was anything said about guaranteeing delivery?
Witness B. Actually there wasn't anything said about any guaranty
at all. We believed he would come through. We paid him the money
ahead of time.
Senator DANIEL. You paid all the money to Juan Alvarez?
Witness B. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. All right, at the appointed time did you meet the
truck?
Witness B. Yes, sir, we did.
Senator DANIEL. What happened?
Witness B. An unknown Mexican male got out of the truck, walked
over to us, handed me the heroin.
Senator DANIEL. Did you get his license, the number?
Witness B. 2B3750.
Senator DANIEL. Have you checked to see whose car that is?
Witness B. That is in the process, sir. Also this same Mexican
transporter has two more trucks. They are actually pick-ups. This
one was a bob-tailed truck. I was told by Juan he uses all three in his
business.
Senator DANIEL. Do you have the numbers of those trucks?
Witness B. No, sir, I don't, I have never seen them. Then later, in
fact Monday night we went back over there.
Senator DANIEL. This past Monday night?
3360
Witness B. The past Monday night, we went back over there, bought
15 grams of heroin and made a similar agreement to have it delivered
in a similar manner. Only this time we got the heroin about a quarter
to five in the morning, got us out about 4 o'clock so we could cross
the river. This time delivered by Raul Velasquez.
Senator DANIEL. Now, wait just a minute before you get ahead of
this story. Was this Witness A still with you?
Witness B. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. This was all part of the arrangements when Alvarez was proposing to sell larger lots of heroin.
Witness B. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Did you pay Juan Alvarez for this latest delivery,
this Monday night delivery?
Witness B. Yes, sir, paid him on Monday night.
Senator DANIEL. How much did you pay him?
Witness B. $360, 300 for the narcotics, 60 for the delivery.
Senator DANIEL. Did he tell you where to meet the man delivering
to you?
Witness B. Yes, sir, along a similar place, between Encinal and
Cotulla, he was in a black and white 1952 Ford with Illinois license
plates and we were to drive up behind him, pass him and honk the
horn twice pull off the road and stop and he would deliver the narcotics to us.
Senator DANIEL. Did you do that?
Witness B. Somehow we got ahead of him, we made our meeting,
we came back he had the narcotics "stashed" in the ditch. He was
parked. When I identified myself by honking my horn like I was
instructed he went over to the ditch, got the narcotics and brought it
to me. We then arrested this man, impounded his car, and filed charges
against him in State court in La Salle County.
Senator DANIEL. What is the name of this man who delivered the
heroin?
Witness B. Raul Velasquez.
Senator DANiEL. Was a subpena served on him later to appear before this committee?
Witness B. Yes, sir, it was.
Senator DANIEL. Is he here in this courtroom?
Witness B. Yes, sir, he is.
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
TRAFFIC
3361
quantities?
Witness B. He told me he could supply any amount of narcotics
that I could get money enough to buy.
Senator DANIEL. Have you later found out in talking with Federal
agents he is one of the big operators on the Mexican side?
Witness B. When I first got his'name I contacted Mr. Richards,
agent in charge of customs. He advised us the man was a fairly
notorious person and they had been trying to catch him.
Senator DANIEL. All right, sir. Anything else in connection with
Juan Alvarez in this particular purchase? Let me ask you, about
how many hours did you stay over there?
Witness B. All together almost one complete afternoon and night;
the other time probably all night.
Senator DANIEL. During that time did you make any effort to determine from Juan or anyone else as to where else they were selling
heroin
Witness B. I have a small list of bars and clubs and things where
it can be obtained. I don't know what quantity, but they do push out
of these places.
Senator DANIEL. Will you give us a list of those places?
Witness B. Yes, sir. The One, Two, Three Bar; the Regis Bar and
Hotel; the Rhumba Casino.
Senator DANIEL. The R-h-u-m-b-a?
Witness B. Yes, sir, I think that's it. Ophelia's Place; Plaza Hotel.
There is a bar just across the street from the One, Two, Three Bar.
The agent observed a bartender there who had a capsule, appeared
to be a capsule of heroin carrying it over his ear like somebody would
carry a pencil. We don't know ifit was heroin but a capsule similar to
what heroin is dispensed in.
Senator DANIEL. Have you finished your list?
Witness B. Yes, sir; that's all.
Senator DANIEL. What leads you to believe they are selling?
Witness B. From the conversation from narcotic addicts and Juan
Alvarez.
Senator DANIEL. From the seller, Juan, and narcotic addicts who
had been to these places and bought heroin?
Witness B. Yes, sir. I understand there are a lot more but this is
all I can testify of my own knowledge.
Senator DANIEL. What about the Trevino brothers, did you check
on them ?
Witness B. I was told one of them, Enrique Trevino, was doing 4
months in jail, is still doing business. He gets to come home on weekends.
Senator DANIEL. He is still in business?
Witness B. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. What business?
Witness B. In the narcotic smuggling business, still boss of his business, even though in jail. Hie gets to come home every weekend.
Senator DANIEL. All right, thank you very much.
11r. Richards.
(Mr. Albert D. Richards was duly sworn by Senator Daniel.)
Senator DANIEL. You have been before this committee before. I
will ask you to restate your name and position and title.
3362
Laredo, Tex.
Senator DANIEL. Mr. Richards, is this the first you have ever heard
about the threat to take care of you if you crossed the Mexican border
Mr. RIcII\RDS. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. What else have you heard?
Mr. Ricii.RDS. Shortly after the time that this boy was killed iii
Laredo I had a call from a confidential informant who advised me that
there was a price on my head and that they were going to try to take
care of me.
Senator DANIEL. Did you know the person who called, this informant ?
Mr. RICHARDS. No, sir, I did not.
Senator D.ANIL. What?
Mr. RICHARDS. It was an
3363
that since
we were here 2 months ago there might have been 500 a(ldicts cross
there ?
Mr. RiciDuus. They may be repeaters. We have a number. We
have logged them 10 and 12 times crossing the river. Now, the 51 that
I named, Senator, are 51 new names that were not in the previous list.
Senator DANIEL. No repetition there, in the 51 new names?
Mr. RIcIARDS. That's correct; yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. In the last 2 months
make it (clear in the record that there is no law now on the books that
would keep these addicts, known addicts, from crossing o the bridge and
going over and getting the narcotics in Nuevo Laredo F
Mr. RICHARDS. There is absolutely no law to prevent them from going to Mexico and obtaining narcotics.
Senator DANIFL. Has it been your experience, as long as addicts are
allowed to do that, they are going to smuggle some back?
Mr. RICHARDS. Yes, sir, they are going to try to bring back enough
to take care of their habit and enough to sell for their next shot.
Senator DANIEL. Are you able to catch all of them?
Mr. RICHARDS. No, sir.
Senator Daniel. Why?
Mr. RICHARDS. We do not have the personnel. for one thing.
It
would take a continuous tailing job of all these addicts. It would just
be, an impossibility. The narcotics may be smuggrled by the addict,
may be smuggled by another carrier. As Mr. Naylor's undercover
agent testified, we kow maybe the character is going to buy it, to be
delivered at Cotulla, Freer, or somewhere else. IWe have no idea who
is bringing it.
Senator DANiEL. In the case just talked about, the delivery was actNally made way up 60 miles north of the border.
Mr. RICHARDS. In addition, we kept Mr. Naylor's undercover man
covered until after the narcotics got across, even though it may have
3364
Senator
of seizures.
Senator DANIEL. You say your doctor bill is about $150 a month
Senator
DANIEL.
3365
Mr. RICHARDS. That doesn't include the 23 ounces that Mr. Naylor's
RICHARDS.
all of the crossings by known addicts that are shown on your records
since we were last here in San Antonio in October?
Mr. RICHARDS. No, sir; I did not.
Senator DANIEL. You have the records that will show that?
Mr. RICHARDS. Mr. Speer has the records, yes, sir, of all those
logged.
Senator DANIEL. Of all these crossings?
Mr. RICHARDS. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. I would like to get in the record at this place the
total number of crossings, assuming we can total it up, will they run
into a hundred or more ?
Mr. RICHARDS. I believe they will probably run close to a hundred.
We have 2 witnesses, I heard you call their names under subpena, one
of them, I have him logged for 12 times in the lastSenator DANIEL. What is his name?
Mr. RICHARDS. Kerley.
Senator DANIEL. Kerley who?
RICHARDS.
That's correct.
3366
job, I wish you would tell us, think back over this, if that is true, the
majority of the smugglers you are catching and know about, are
they American citizens or Mexicans?
Mr. RICHARDS. Let me put it this way. On the large seizures of
marihuana, too large to conceal under the hood of a car, that are
smuggled across are being smuggled by Mexican nationalists and delivered to the American citizens on the United States side. I believe
the great majority of the heroin that is coming into the United States
is being smuggled by American citizens.
Senator DANIEL. You think the Mexicans are smuggling the marihuana?
Mr. RICHARDS. The large quantities.
Senator DANIEL. And the American citizens the heroin?
Mr. RICHARDS. That's correct, yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Now, do you have anything else to add to this particular phase of the hearing right now ?
Mr. RICHARDS. I don't believe I have, no, sir.
Senator DANIEL. All right, you may stand aside, sir.
Raul Velasquez.
(Mr. Raul Velasquez was duly sworn by Senator Daniel.)
Senator DANIEL. Will you state your name and residence?
TESTIMONY OF RAUL VELASQUEZ
Mr. VELASQUEZ. Yes.
Senator
DANIEL.
Mr. VELASQUEZ.
Chicago, Ill.?
Near Chicago.
Mr.
Senator DANIEL. Near Chicago, at what place?
Mr. VELASQUEZ. Argo.
Senator DANEL. A-r-g-o?
Senator
DANIEL.
VELASQUEZ.
3367
Senator
Mr.
DANIEL.
VELASQUEZ.
No.
Senator
school?
in Mexico before moving
to Argo, Ill.?
Senator
Senator
DANIEL.
Without any pictures of this man will the two special employees and
undercover aoent of the department of public safety please stand
up? Do youlnow these two men?
Mr. VELASQUEZ. I know this man and that one.
Senator DANIEL. You have seen them before, haven't you?
Mr. VELASQUEZ. I seen them Monday, I mean Tuesday, yesterday
morning.
Senator DANIEL. Yesterday morning?
Mr. VELASQUEZ. Yes.
Senator
DANIEL.
or night before?
Mr. VELASQUEZ. Yesterday morning from Johnnie.
DANIEL. Where did you deliver the heroin to them?
Mr. VELASQUEZ. Was delivered to Encinal.
Senator DANIEL. Delivered to Encinal, just on the highway there
Mr. VELASQUEZ. Yes.
Senator DANIEL. Who gave you that heroin?
Mr. VELASQUEZ. Johnnie Alvarez, Juan Alvarez.
Senator
Senator
DANIEL.
ran before?
Mr. VELASQUEZ. No, sir.
Senator
DANIEL.
3368
Mr.
VELASQUEZ.
Senator DANIEL.
couple of times, but I wasn't there. I wasn't in town and he find me,
I think about 1 o'clock in the morning. He says want to make a
favor, little job with him. I said, I don't know, what kind of job you
want to give me. He said, I tell you later, wait for me in Laredo, Tex..
I meet you. So I came on to Laredo, Tex. After 3 o'clock when
AlbertSenator DANIEL. You went on over to Laredo, Tex.
Mr. VELASQUEZ. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. At what time in the morning?
Mr. VELASQUEZ. A little after 3. I don't remember exactly.
Senator DANIEL. Was that yesterday morning?
Yes.
Senator DANIEL. Did he give you the heroin on the Mexican side or
American side?
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
DANIEL.
Senator DANIEL. You didn't have any idea that there might be
some dope in there?
Mr. VELASQUEZ. No, because I never do it before, I don't even know
what it is.
3369
Senator DANIEL. You never did. How long had you known Juan?
Mr. VFLASQUEZ. The first time I know him, in 1952, since I was
Senator DANIEL. Do you also understand that if you fear that any
answer that you have given or that you might give might tend to
incriminate you, you have a right to claim the fifth amendment and
not answer, you understand that?
Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Are you an American citizen?
Mr. VELASQUEZ. Not yet.
Senator DANIEL. You are not yet an American citizen, do you
Mr.
VELASQUEZ.
realize smuggling this across the border might keep you from being
an American citizen?
Mr. GAsQuE. Do you realize smuggling this across might keep you
from becoming an American citizen?
Senator DANIEL. Whether you realize or not-let me explain this
to you. Under our laws, no person can become an American citizen who has violated our narcotics laws, if I am correct. I know
3370
RICHARDS. Yes,
sir.
Mr.
we do.
Mr.
RICIHARDS.
1,5
a. M.
DANIEL.
contraband, the deal had been set up, the delivery to be made in
La Salle County, above Encinal. Had we attempted and he not had
the narcotic, he probably would have gone back and stopped.
Senator DANIEL. Do you know any others, whose places have not
been identified or whose names have not been identified in tliis
hearing?
Mr. RICIARDS. There are a number.
Senator DANIEL. Others?
Mr. RICHARDS. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Would you name them?
Mr. RICHARDS. Some I would rather not. There are 1 or 2 famous
places, one is the Bailey Hotel; the other is the Dos Laredos.
Mr. RICHARDS. D-o-s, meaning two, Laredos. The Bailey Hotel has
been operated by the Trevinos ?or years; you could go and buy aIii
narcotics vou wanted.
3371
Mr. RICHARDS. I
you
Senator DANIEL. Let's have him come forward a minute. Are
undercover?
Mr. WEILBACHER. No, sir.
(Mr. William Weilbacher was duly sworn by Senator Daniel.) Mr.
Senator DANIEL. Have you heard the testimony concerning
Richards, the threat to Mr. Richards' life if he should cross the Mexican
border ?
TESTIMONY OF WILLIAM WEILBACHER, POLICE DEPARTMENT,
CITY OF SAN ANTONIO, TEX.
Mr. WEILBACHER. Yes, sir I have.
Senator DANIEL. You understand the threat grew out of the arrest
of the customs agent's son and his death?
Mr. WEILBACHER. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. I believe you were the one who had the unfortunate
experience of having shot this boy?
Ir. WEILBACHER. Yes, sir; that's right.
Senator DANIEL. How did it happen?
Mr. WEILBACHER. We were trying to rearrest the man. He escaped
after delivering a pound of marihuana to me on the American side.
agents?
Senator
partient?
DANIEL.
He had
3372
Senator
DANIEL.
on it?
Mr. WEILBACHER. That's right, sir.
Senator
tacted Mr. Richards in Laredo and worked out a plan for the informer
to go over and make the contact with the peddler known as Black
Angel or Indian. His name is Angel Ramon.
Senator
DANIEL. Angel
Mr. WEILBACHER. Angel Ramon.
Senator DANIEL. R-a-m-o-n?
That's right.
Mr. WEILBACHER.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
LANrEL.
WEILBACHER.
Senator
Mr.
assistant.
Senator
DANIEL.
Did he tell you then that the one who was to de-
sir.
He told you he was going to make delivery by
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
for the delivery, we went back to the United States and contacted
Mr. Richards; well, I contacted Mr. Cummings and Mr. Richards.
We set up a trap to try and catch the boys when they came over to
deliver the marihuana to me. There is something I would like to
say about the situation over in Mexico, though. While I was there
the connection that we were at is a 2-room shack. It had a bed in
each room and under the mattress in the front room this fellow had
many, many rolls of marihuana cigarettes, all wrapped in white
paper, rolled in white paper, and under the bed in the backroom I
was sitting on most of the time, he had grass sacks of marihuana.
Senator DANIEL. He had what?
Mr. WEILBACTIER. He had grass sacks.
Senator
DANIEL.
3373
Senator DANIEL. They call them feed sacks when buying feed for
cattle, is that what you mean?
Mr. WEILBACHER. That's right, sir. On the table he had a small
red jar, more or less a vase, which was filled with papers of heroin.
I assumed that it was heroin, it looked like it.
Senator DANIEL. But you asked if they sold heroin?
Mr. NVEILBACHER. Yes, sir.
DANiEL.
DANIEL.
son's name?
Mr. WEILBACHER. Felix. F-e-l-i-x. De Ando Lindares.
Senator DANIEL. Would you spell that out loud, please, sir?
Mr. VEILBACHER. Felix. F-e-l-i-x, Capital D-e. Capital A-n-d-o.
Capital L-i-n-d-a-r-e-s.
Mr. RICHARDS. He was the customs inspector's son rather than the
agent's son.
Senator DANIEL. And did you know he was any relation of the
3374
Senator
DANIEL.
WEILBACHER.
Mr.
the ground. The man fell. He was about, I would say about 90 feet
away from me at the time.
Senator
DANIEL.
had been the man who had smuggled marihuana across the border,
that he did actually do it?
Mr. WEILBACHER. Yes, sir.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator DANIEL. That is what caused this threat against Mr. Richards which has just been reiterated again this week, is that right?
Mr. WEILBACHER. Yes, sir; that's right.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
answer out if he is in the courtroom. Julian Ray Madeley. Mr. Marshal, do you know whether or not he has been out there?
The MALSHAL. He hasn't answered yet.
Senator
DANIEL.
Hope Baca.
Senator
DANIEL.
Mr. SPEER. Will you identify yourself by giving your name and
address?
TESTIMONY OF HOPE BACA
Mrs.
BACA.
Mr. SPEER.
Mrs. BACA.
Mr. SPEER.
Mrs. BACA.
3375
cost you?
name?
Yes.
And together your habit costs you $10?
Yes.
Where did you get this heroin?
Juarez, Mexico.
Mr. SPEER. Have you always gotten it in Juarez, Mexico?
Mrs. BACA. Yes. [Indicated by nodding her head.]
Mr. SPEER. You yourself go over and pick up the heroin or how do
Mrs. BACA.
Mr. SPEER.
Mrs. BACA.
Mr. SPEER.
Mrs. BACA.
there?
Mrs. BACA. Yes, sir.
Mr. SPEER.
Mrs. BACA.
Mr. SPERM.
Mrs. BACA.
Mr. SPEER.
Mrs. BACA.
Mr. SPEEi.
Mrs. BACA.
Mr. SPEER.
Mrs. BACA.
Mr. SPEER.
himself ?
Mrs. BACA. How's that?
Mr. SPEER. One shot or how many shots did she offer you?
Mrs. BACA. For about a week.
Mr. SPEER. And then what happened?
3376
Yes.
When was that?
It was in 1951.
And where was that?
It was in Calexico.
do you know?
Mrs. BACA. I don't know too many.
heroin?
Mrs. BACA. Well, one 'of them is Mi Ranchito Bar.
Senator DANIEL. Will you spell it?
Mrs. BACA. M-i R-a-n-c-h-i-t-o.
Mr. SPEER. All right, what others?
Senator DANIEL. Is that a bar?
Mrs. BACA. That is a bar. And the other one is the Legal Tender.
Senator DANIEL. Legal Tender Bar?
Mrs. BACA. Yes. [Indicated by nodding her head.]
Mr. SPEER. When you say you can buy heroin what do you mean?
Mrs. BACA. Well, they usually hang around the bars.
Mr. SPEER. How long does it usually take you to make a connection?
Mrs. BACA. Sometimes it takes us from 4 to 6 or 8 hours, sometimes
3377
Mr. SPEER. If it took you from 4 to 8 hours you spend all your time
in Juarez ?
Mrs. BACA. We have to wait.
Mr. SPEER. How many addicts do you know going over to Juarez
to get fixed?
Mrs. BACA. Oh, I'll say about, about 15 to 20.
Mr. SPEER. Fifteen to twenty. How often do they go?
Mrs. BACA. Huh?
Mr. SPEER. How often do they go over?
Mrs. BACA. I don't know. All depends on how hooked they are.
Mr. SPEER. You mean how much they have to have?
Mrs. BACA. Yes. [Indicated by nodding her head.]
Mr. SPEER. Some of them bring some back or manage to get it back
across the border, do they not?
Mrs. BACA. I couldn't tell you that. With the majority of them I
guess they get fixed over there.
Mr. SPEER. Are you familiar with the Can-Can Bar in Juarez?
Mrs. BACA. I have never been in there.
Mr. SPEER. You know where it is?
Mrs. BACA. I have got an idea.
Senator DANIEL. Do you call these places shooting galleries where
you go over across the bridge in Juarez?
Mrs. BACA. I wouldn't say that.
Senator DANIEL. Well, do you get the injection given by the person
DANIEL.
3378
Senator DANIEL. And your habit has been costing you ten dollars
a day between you?
Mrs. BACA. Yes. [Indicated by nodding her head.]
Senator DANIEL. Speak out.
Mrs. BACA. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIE. Where have you been getting the money to pay
for this heroin?
Mrs. BACA. Well, my husband works.
Senator DANIEL. Well, that wouldn't pay enough to take care of
your habit. Do ou have any children?
Mrs. BACA. My husband has three from his first wife.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
sources?
Senator
DANIEL.
make a month?
Mrs. BACA. I couldn't answer that.
Senator
DANML.
your husband together have been averaging over $400 a month for
the last few years ?
Mrs. BACA. 'Does that average to four hundred?
3379
Senator DANIEL. Did you bring copies of your income tax return
for lastsear ?
Mrs. BACA. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Did you file an income tax return last year?
Mrs. BACA. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Did you file one for the year before?
Mrs. BACA. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Have you ever filed an income tax return?
Mrs. BACA. I have never worked.
Senator DANIEL. Has your husband ever filed one?
Mrs. BACA. Yes, he has.
Senator DANIEL. Now, I would just like for you to tell us any other
kind of work you do or your husband does through which you get
money enough to buy this heroin.
Mrs. BACA. Well, like I say, I can always get ahold of some money,
a few friends.
Senator DANIEL. Well, how do you get ahold of it?
Mrs.
BACA.
Senator
DANIEL.
3380
Mrs. BACA. Well, if you call prostitution going out with a friend
of yours and he gives you, you know, $5 or $6 or $7 or $10, well, I
I was just asking you generally, did you find that heroin led you to
commit other crimes, other acts against the law and I said, such
as prostitution, burglary, robbery, stealing, shoplifting, anything
like that?
Mrs. BACA. Yes, I have.
Senator DANIEL. All right, that's what I wanted to know, and you
know that it also leads other people to do that, don't you?
Mrs. BACA. I imagine so.
Senator DANIEL. How many people do you know, how many women
do you know that are having to prostitute their bodies or go out with
Lhe illustraboy friends as you call it, for how much did you say?
tion you gave.
Mrs. BACA. Oh, I get $5, $6. $7 or $10.
Senator DANIEL. $5, $6, $7 or $10; they go out with boy friends
and charge that amount, or boy friends give them that amount. Do
you know other girls who are addicted to heroin who do that?
Mrs. BACA. Yes, I do.
Senator DANIEL. Isn't it true that prostitution and drug addiction
go hand in hand, you have seen it, haven't you?
Mrs. BACA. Well, not exactly. I have seen a lot of girls.
Senator DANIEL. I believe you told Mr. Speer a minute ago two
out of five?
Mrs. BACA. That wasn't the same question you asked me.
Senator DANIEL. He asked you how many prostitutes you knew.
3381
Frank Baca.
(Mr. Frank Baca was duly sworn by Senator Daniel.)
Senator DANIEL. You may be seated. Are you the husband of the
witness who just left the stand?
TESTIMONY OF FRANK BACA
Mr. BACA. I am.
Senator DANIEL. How long have you been married?
Mr. BACA. Well, been together for the past 10 years.
Senator DANIEL. Are you married?
Mr. BACA. No, she is my common-law wife.
In El Paso?
Mr. BACA. In El Paso.
Mr. SPEER.
Mr. SPEER. How long have you been addicted to the use of heroin?
Mr. BACA. For about 8 or 9 years.
Mr. SPEER. Will you tell us just how you did become addicted to
heroin, did your wife send you over to get some narcotics for her and
you started yourself, or how did that happen?
Mr. BACA. I got addicted to heroin back in California when they
started giving her some heroin, then I started taking it myself.
Mr. SPEER. Why did you do that?
Mr.
I don't know.
Mr.
How old were you then?
Mr.
I was about 24.
Mr. SPEER. Did your wife ask you to do it?
BACA.
SPEER.
BACA.
Mr. BACA. No, she didn't ask me, nobody asked me to do it. I done
it on my own will.
Mr. ZSPEER. Did she ask you not to do it?
Mr. BACA. She didn't say a thing about it.
Mr. SPEER. Are you still using heroin right up to this time?
Mr. BACA. I am.
Mr. SPEER. How many children do you have?
Mr. BACA. I have three of them by my first wife.
Mr. SPEER. What are the ages?
3382
Mr. SFrER.
Mr. SPER.
Mr. SPER. On this street would you name the places where you can
get heroin?
Mr. BACA. Like I said before, it is not the places, it is where you can
find the fellow in the places.
Mr. SPEER. Where would you look?
Mr. BACA. Might find at the Legal Tender or Mi Ranchita or Two
X's or down at the Gold Palace or someplace around there, quite a
few of them up there.
Mr. SPEER. Two X's one of the places?
Mr. BACA. Yes, one of the places.
Senator DANIEL. Have you ever been to a shooting gallery where
you would get the shot over there?
Senator DANIEL. Your wife a minute ago was testifying about going over twice a day and not carrying any needles over.
Mr. BACA. We got our needle stashed out someplace.
Senator DANIEL. That's what I failed to clear up with her, I knew
I missed something before she left.
Mr. BACA. We got our needle someplace up there.
Senator DANIEL. That's right, we'll give her an opportunity to explain it so there's no question of perjury involved. Tell us exactly
how you make these trips twice a day without
Mr. BACA. We got our needle some place up there.
Senator DANIEL. You have it hidden?
Mr. BACA. We have it hid.
Senator DANIEL. I want to know exactly where you keep these
needles.
Mr. BACA. We might keep itSenator DANIEL. No, I want to know where the needle is now.
3383
Mr. BACA. The needle is now under the sink in the toilet in the
men's bar room.
there?
Well, I change it around places.
Senator DANIEL. How long have you been keeping your needle
there?
Mr.
BACA.
Mr.
BACA.
Yes.
Senator DANIEL. Where did you have it hid in the El Paso Bar?
3384
Mr. SPEER. Since about July or August has the price gone up some?
Mr. BACA. No, just the same.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
SPER.
Mr. BACA. Well, some big shots that control the traffic.
Mr. SPEER. Who are the%i shots?
Mr. BACA. I don't know wo they are, but I heard, what I heard
the paper-they say La Nacha is. I never got in contact. I seen her
on the paper, seen her on the street, but I can't get in contact with her.
Mr. SPEER. Too big?
Mr. BACA. She's too big a dealer for me.
Mr. SPEER. Now, have you ever been to a Federal hospital to try
Mr.
BACA.
About 21 days.
Mr.
BACA.
Operates in what?
3385
Mr.
BACA.
Mr. SPEER.
Mr. BACA.
Mr. SPEER.
Mr. BACA.
Mr. SPEER.
I heard that.
Do you know many young addicts going over to Juarez?
I don't know many young addicts going up there.
Mr.
Mr.
BACA.
young ones.
SPEER.
Mr. SPEER. Do you know of them? Do you know that there are a
goodly number of young addicts who are going to Juarez?
Mr. BACA. That's what they say, quite a few of them young kids
getting started on that.
Mr. SPEER. I didn't hear you.
Mr. BACA. Quite Wfew young kids getting started on it joy popping.
Mr. SPEER. Young kids joy popping, going over to Juarez?
Mr. BACA. I guess going up there, no heroin in El Paso.
Mr. SPEER. Is that the common information in Juarez?
Mr. BACA. AVhat's that?
ir.
SPEER.
there?
Mr. BACA. I don't know about the information, just what I think
myself.
Mir.
Mr.
SPEER.
BACA.
Your information?
My way of thinking.
Senator DANIEL. Where do you get the money to take care of this
habit? I believe you figure the habit of yourself and your wife costs
more than $10 a day?
DANIEL.
Mr. BACA. On the tips that I get and commission besides, I think I
average about that much.
Senator
DANIEL.
years?
Senator
with money.
it?
3386
3387
purposes ?
Senator DANIEL. You heard your wife say she had to violate some
laws in order to help?
Mr. BACA. I did.
Senator DANIEL. You know that's true, don't you?
Mr. BACA. I claim myself under the fifth amendment.
Senator DANIEL. You mean you want to refuse to answer that because it might incriminate you?
Mr. BACA. That's right.
Mr. GASQUE. Are you an American citizen?
1515-5
-pt.
7-
66
3388
Mr. GASQUE. Now, how much do you usually buy over in Mexico?
Mr. BACA. About $10 a day.
Mr. GASQUE. In what quantity?
Mr. BACA. I wouldn't know the quantity.
Mr. GASQUE. Is it an ounce?
Mr. BACA. We call that a quarter of a gram.
Mr. GASQUE. All right, when were you last over in Mexico?
Mr. BACA. About a couple of hours before I boarded the plane.
Mr. GASQUEZ. You were over in Mexico about a couple of hours
before you boarded the plane?
Mr. BACA. Yes. [Indicated by nodding his head.]
Mr. GASQUE. To come to this committee hearing?
Mr. BACA. Yes. [Indicated by nodding his head.]
Mr. GASQUE. Was that because of the fact you wanted to get a
supply of heroin to tide you over?
Mr. BACA. I didn't get any with me.
Mr. GASQUE. Did you take a shot?
Mr. BACA. I took a shot up there.
Mr. GASQUE. A bior shot?
Mr. BACA. Yes. rIndicated by nodding his head.]
Senator DANIEL. Speak out.
3389
Senator DANIEL. I hope you can. I like the frankness that you have
used here on most of your answers and I just wish you could get some
kind of help to get off of it. It seems a shame for people to be addicted
as long as you and your wife have been.
Mr. Gasque, excuse me, go ahead.
Mr. GAsQuE,. Mr. Chairman, there are no other questions other than
to observe that 2 trips a day to Mexico to buy heroin does not seem to
be in line with his testimony that it only cost him $10 a day.
Senator DANIEL. Well, I agree with that. I say you have been
quite frank in some of your testimony, but on some of it I don't think
you have been frank.
Mr. BACA. I have been true as I can, as far as I remember.
Senator DANIEL. You know it cost you more than $10 a day, don't
you?
Mr. BACA. Do I know it's costing more than $10 a day?
Senator DANIEL. You and your wife together.
Mr. BACA. No. [Indicated by shaking his head.]
Mr. SPEER. Didn't you tell me $15 a day?
Mr. BACA. Maybe 15, not all the time.
Senator
Will you state your name and address for the record?
Mr. SPEER. How much does your heroin habit cost you a day?
3390
Mrs. LooK. Well, I don't bring it from over there. I don't go over
there very much. It comes from Juarez, yes, sir.
Mr. SPEER. It comes from Juarez, that is what you pay for it?
Mrs. LooK. Yes, sir.
Mr. SPEER. And how many of these papers do you use?
Mrs. LooK. Well, not under two and more if I can get it.
Mr. SPEER. It costs you anywhere from $6 to $15 a day?
Mrs. LooK. Well, something like that, about $9 or $10.
Mr. SPEER. Now, do you have any trouble in Juarez buying heroin?
Mrs. LooK. Well, they have had lately since they have had that new
administration over there.
Mr. SPEER. About how many months ago?
Mrs. LOOK. Oh, it has been going on for about 3 months now.
Mr. SPEER. Since that time, if you go over with money, have you been
able to buy all the heroin you could finance?
Mrs. LooK. Yes, sir, you can get all you want on either side.
Mr. SPEER. For all the money you have, you can obtain it in Juarez?
Senator DANIEL. No, she said on either side. Wasn't that your
answer?
Mrs. LOOK. Yes.
a roundtable with water and you have your own hypodermic needle
and your dropper or whatever you use, you kmow, and you fix your own
and take it.
Mr. SPEER. Fix it right there in the place?
Mrs. LooK. Yes, sir.
Mr. SPEER. What is the most number of people you have ever been
with in one of the places at the same time?
Mrs. LooK. I'm sorry, sir, I never counted them but I imagine there
have been as high as 12 or 14 at a time.
Mr. SPEER. Did you ever lose any money in one of the places?
Mrs. LoOK. I certainly have, lots of it.
Mr. SPEER. How did that happen?
Mrs. LOOK. Well, sometimes you go in and there will be maybe I
or 2 men sitting looking like they need a shave, sometimes clean shaven.
sometimes their clothes are clean, sometimes dirty. They sit and the
person who sells it doesn't say anything. Whenever you ask, show
that they are the law and then they talk among themselves a while
and then they ask you how much money you got. And then they
usually take your pocketbook and look and see what you got.
Mr. SPEER. Did that ever happen to you?
3391
to be Mexican officers ?
Mrs. LOOK. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Would they show you a badge?
Mrs. LOOK. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. And what would they ask you for the money for?
Mrs. LOOK. To keep from taking me to jail.
Senator DANIEL. How many times has that happened
September.
Mr. SPEER.
Mrs. LOOK.
Mr. SPEER.
Mrs. LOOK.
Mr. SPEER.
Mrs. LOOK.
Mr. SPEER.
the heroin?
Mrs. LOOK. All of them, I guess.
Mr. SPEER. How many do you know?
Mrs. LOOK. Well, I just know the son and daughter and her.
Mr. SPEER. The mother, son, and daughter?
Mrs. LOOK. Yes, sir.
Mr. SPEER.
they fix it, made papers, you give the money, they hand you the
papers. Most of the time you are in a hurry, want to get out as fast
as you can, so you don't really pay much attention.
Mr. SPEER. Do you know any other name of a shooting gallery over
there?
Mrs. LOOK. Not at this particular time. I think they are pretty
hot over there.
Mr. SPEER. What was that last?
Mrs. LOOK. I said not right now; I don't think they have any, unless
Mr. SPEER. What was the last one you know about ?
Mrs. LOOK. Empira.
Mr. SPEER. Where was that?
3392
Mr. SPEER.
Mrs. LOOK. It wasn't too far; about four blocks from town.
Mr. SPEER. In a place of business?
Mrs. LOOK. No; she owned her own home.
Mr. SPEER. Did members of her family work there, too?
Mrs. LOOK. I imagine so.
Mr. SPEER. Do you know any of the members of her family?
Mrs. LooK. I knew her husband and her son.
Mr. SPEER. Her son?
Senator
DANIEL.
before he died?
Mrs. LooK. On the last, sir, he was terribly-see, we have property;
we get money from Mexico, and then my husband had lots of money
at one time and my brother helped, too, on the last.
Senator
DANIEL.
Mrs. LOOK. Well, you see, I was getting prescriptions on the last.
Senator DANIEL. I'm talking about before his last illness; buying
on the illicit market, what did it cost?
Mrs. LOOK. Cost us around, around $20 a day.
3393
Senator
Mrs.
DANIEL.
LOOK.
Senator
He had can-
else.
Senator DANIEL. Tell us what all you have lost because of your
heroin habit?
a large hotel. We have lost
lost this?
Mrs. LooK. Well, we havewas
Where
DANIEL.
Senator
Mrs. LOOK. Two or three Buicks. The Fisher Hotel.
Senator DANIEL. Where is this; in El Paso?
for income tax because we got to buying junk instead of paying it.
Senator DANIEL. In other words, instead of paying income tax; is
that right?
Mrs. LOOK. That's right.
Senator DANIEL. Lost your home to the Federal Government for
income tax; is that right?
Mrs. LooK. I guess so; we lost it. Then I sold my home on Louisville Street.
Senator DANIEL. What did you do with the money on that home?
3394
Senator
Mrs.
worst.
DANIEL. Does it
LOOK. Oh, all over,
Senator
DANIEL.
Mrs. LooK. The worst in the world and you vomit at the same time.
Senator DANIEL. How long does it take before you can eat anything
or hold anything on your stomach?
Mrs. LOOK. About 25 or 30 days.
3395
Mrs. LOOK. About 25 or 30 days, they say. I never have taken the
cure.
Senator DAIFL. You never have gotten out long enough?
Mrs. LooK. I've been off long enough to get awfully sick.
Senator DANIEL. You have been off long enough to get awfully sick,
but you have always been able to get some to pull you back?
Mrs. LOOK. Yes, sir, my husband always managed to get a doctor
to me some way.
Senator DANIEL. Have any doctors ever sold you drugs for yourself,
knowing you were a drug addict?
Mrs. LOOK. Yes, sir, but they knew I was a sick woman also.
Senator DANIEL. Any other sickness other than withdrawal?
Mrs. LOOK. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Has any doctor ever given you drugs when you
didn't have any sickness other than withdrawal of dope?
Mrs. LOOK. No, sir-yes, sir, that one Japanese doctor did, the one
that gave me the tablet.
SENATOR DANIEL. Gave you what?
Mrs. LOOK. Gave me tablets through the mouth.
Senator DANIEL. He knew he was giving them to you as a dope
addict?
Mrs. LOOK. I wasn't, that's when I first started.
Senator DANIEL. You mean a Japanese doctor gave you some and
that started you on your habit?
Mrs. LOOK. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. What was he treating you for?
Mrs. LOOK. For asthma and heart trouble. I have X-rays showing
I have an awful bad heart.
Senator DANIEL. Well, we appreciate your coming here and giving
us this information. You say you are going to Lexington trying to
take the cure, have you ever been there before?
Mrs. LooK. I took my husband there.
Senator DANIEL. I hope your cure will be successful. As you
know, only about 15 percent are. The doctors at the hospitals tell us
that it all depends on the individual.
Mrs. LOOK. I think so, too, sir.
Senatro DANIEL. We certainly hope you will have the strength that
will help you after all these many years.
Mrs. LOOK. Thank you, sir.
Senator DANIEL. The main thing in calling you was to find out
about the traffic. Let's not have any more pictures in the witness'
face, please. We want to know about the trafficking in drugs out of
Juarez. You told us. You say you can also buy it in El Paso. How
do you get it in El Paso?
Mrs. UmOK. Well, if you know the people like in Juarez, if you
know the people, I don't, I have always, I don't know them so, therefore, I don't have to tell a story.
Senator DANIEL. You buy from Juarez?
Mrs. LooK. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. And do you ever send someone to get it in Juarez?
Mrs. LooK. I always do, that's why I don't get in trouble over it,
I have never gone.
Senator DANIEL. You have just heard you can buy it in El Paso?
3396
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
TRAFFIC
Senator
DANIEL.
VELASQUEZ.
Mr.
VELASQUEZ.
Yes.
Senator DANIEL. Now, the thing that I was worried about was your
saying that you agreed to smuggle this heroin or this package across
the border, you were going to meet this Juan Alvarez at 3 o'clock in
the morning, take a package 60 miles up the road deliver it without
him agreeing how much he would pay you. I want to ask you again.
I want to ask you again how much did he agree to pay you for taking
that package, delivering it?
Mr. VELASQUEZ. He didn't pay me nothing. He didn't promise he
was going to pay me.
Senator DANIEL. He didn't pay you anything?
Mr. VELASQUEZ. No.
Senator DANIEL. You never got back to him, did you? You never
got back to see?
Mr. VELASQUEZ. No.
Senator DANIEL. I hope you will see him in jail. But the thing
is, what did he agree to pay?
Mr. SALAZAR. Do you want me to tell his story, the one he told
me? I don't think he understands you, what you are asking.
Senator DANIEL. Well, that's all right. If _you have talked with
him. and you think you can explain what he says about that, the
arrangements, that will be all right. I want you, Mr. Velasquez, to
listen, be sure you understand the explanation. Go ahead.
Mr. SALAZAR. He says he did not smuggle the package, sir, from
Nuevo Laredo to Laredo, he did not, that he has been in Argo,
Ill., since 1952, 1954 in Illinois, and the reason for returning is because he is going to marry a girl from Nuevo Laredo and he has
known this Juan Alvarez since 1952. Now, he came to Nuevo Laredo
to arrange for his wedding and he went, he went to a bar and had
a couple of drinks-well, le got drunk. Just feeling good, got to
feeling good, sir. He met this old friend, Juan Alvarez, and after
Juan Alvarez had been looking for him at his girl's home twice,
then you met him in a tavern, in a bar and then you accepted, right?
And then you met him again on the other side. And that is when
3397
be got the package, he said. When he met him again on this side,
on the American side.
Senator DANIEL. Is that right, Juan Alvarez took the heroin across
himself, he brought it to you, didn't he?
Mr.
VELASQUEZ.
Yes.
Senator DANIEL. Before that, had you ever delivered any package
of any kind across at any place for Juan Alvarez?
Mr. VELASQUEZ. No. [Indicated by shaking his head.]
Senator DANIEL. Your answer is no?
Mr. VELASQUEZ. No.
Senator DANIEL. All right, you may stand aside. Thank you.
Shirley Orlowski.
(Mrs. Shirley Orlowski Reese was duly sworn by Senator Daniel.)
Mr. GILLESPIm. I am representing this young lady.
Senator DANIEL. Will you identify yourself ?
Mr. GILLESPIE. My name is James R. Gillespie, attorney in this
State.
Senator DANEL. In the San Antonio bar?
Mr. GILLESPIE. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. All right, you may sit by your client and she may
advise with you or counsel with you at any time.
State your name, please.
TESTIMONY OF SHIRLEY ANN ORLOWSKI REESE
Mrs. REESE. Shirley Ann Orlowski.
Senator DANIEL. That is S-h-i-r-l-e-y?
Mrs. REESE. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. And your last name?
Mrs. REESE. O-r-l-o-w-s-k-i. That was my maiden name.
Senator DANIEL. Have you ever been married?
Mrs. REESE. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. And what was your married name?
Mrs. REESE. Reese.
3398
Senator
R-e-e?
Senator
DANIEL. S-e?
Mrs. REESE. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. What is your husband's full
Mrs. REESE. Marion Odell Reese.
Senator DANIEL. M-a-r-i-o-n Odell Reese?
Mrs. REESE. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Where does he live?
name?
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DAmEL.
You may.
3399
7 months before that and got married and I left my husband and
started going with another boy and that is how I got started.
Senator DANIEL. Was that a previous husband? Have you been
married more than once?
Mrs. REESE. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. You quit school, you left your husband and started
going with another man?
Mrs. REESE. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. And that is when you started using narcotics?
Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. That was at the age of 15?
Mrs. REESE.
REESE.
name as just the description of the person. You may consult the
attorney.
(Witness consulted her attorney.)
Mrs. REEsE. Senator, I will describe him to you but I prefer not to
use his name. Is that all right?
REESE.
Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. And a boy friend you started going with after you
separated temporarily from your husband?
irs. REESE. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. All right, what did he start you off on? Did he
smoke marihuana?
Mrs. REESE. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Had you smoked marihuana before that?
Mrs. REESE. No, sir, I didn't know anything about it. I didn't even
know such things existed.
Senator DANIEL. You started going with this boy here in San
Antonio. How old was he.
Mrs. REESE. I think he was around, I don't know how old he was,
around 25, about 24 now, I guess he was about 21 or 22, something like
that.
Senator DANIEL. Considerably older than you?
Mrs. REESE. Yes, sir.
Senator
DANIEL. Was
he married?
3400
Senator DANIEL. And just tell us how you first decided to try
marihuana?
Mrs. REESE. Well, it wasn't my idea.
Senator DANIEL. Whose idea was it?
Mrs. REESE. It was his.
Senator DANIEL. All right, where was it?
Mrs. REESE. It was in San Antonio.
Senator DANIEL. I mean in what place, his home, your home, or
where?
Mrs. RFESE. No, we were at a night club dancing. He asked me
to come outside with him and he just insisted that I get high.
Senator DANIEL. He called it getting high?
Mrs.
REESE.
Yes.
didn't care for it and I tried it again about 3 or 4 days after that
and then I did just occasionally, you know. I didn't, not every
night or every day, just every now and then when I would go out
with him.
Senator DANIEL. When with this boy?
Mrs. REESE. Not every time I went out, just certain nights.
Senator DANIEL. Did you all meet with other young people doing
that?
Mrs. REESE. Well, no, we mostly stayed by ourselves.
Senator DANIEL. And how long would you stay out at night?
Mrs. REESE. You mean how late?
Senator DANIEL. Yes.
Mrs. REESE. Oh, 12, 1, sometimes 2.
Senator DANTEL. Where were you living at the time?
Mrs. REESE. I was living with my mother.
Senator DANIEL. Flow long was it after that before you tried heroin ?
Mrs. REESE. May I consult my attorney?
Senator DANIEL. You may.
(Witness consulted her attorney.)
Mrs. REESE. I refuse to answer that on the grounds it might tend
to incriminate me.
Senator DANIEL. Well, you did start to use heroin, didn't you?
Mrs. REESE.
I guess it was about 4 months, I don't really know how long it was,
it has been so long ago.
Senator DANEL. A few months?
3401
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Mrs.
REESE.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
Mrs.
DANIEL.
REESE.
Senator
No, sir.
DANIEL.
Mrs.
REESE.
Senator
3402
Senator DANIEL. Has Charlie Flint made any threats against you?
He has made threats against this committee which I will read in a
moment. Has he made any threat against your life if you tell anything to this committee?
Mrs. REEBSE. No, sir.
Senator
DANIEL.
advised by the local office that they have arrested Charlie Flint on a
charge of having made threats against this committee and its staff or
the person responsible for issuing a subpena for you to appear before
this committee. The clerk in the narcotics office, Mr. H. A. Gray, advises the committee as follows: About 1: 30 p. m. Tuesday, December
13-that is yesterday-I, Narcotics Clerk H. A. Gray, answered the
'phone Capitol-51692 identifying the office as the Bureau of Narcotics.
Immediately a person who later identified himself as Charlie Flint
started talking to the effect he wanted to know what they had on his
wife, Shirley Orlowski, also known as Reese, that he, Charlie Flint,
had instructed her to say nothing when she got on the stand and she,
Shirley Orlowski, didn't know anything about the stuff. I, Narcotics
Clerk Gray, asked if he would like to speak to the agent serving the
subpena. He, Charlie Flint, wanted to know who sent those things,
meaning the subpenas, down here. Flint then stating, I'll kill that
,and about that time hung up on me.
I have just been sent that with the notation that this man has been
arrested for making threats against those responsible for serving this
subpena. We have also subpenaed Charlie Flint and will hear from
him in the morning.
Now, do you know anything about this?
Mrs. REESE. No, sir, I don't. I have heard about it.
Senator
DANIEL.
Mrs. REESE. Well, I have heard about it down here and he has told
me about it.
Senator
Mrs.
what it was all about.
about it?
called down here, wanted to know
Senator
DANIEL.
Mrs. REESE. Yes,
Senator DANIEL.
Mrs. REESE. Yes,
Senator DANIEL.
this committee?
Mrs. REESE. Yes, sir.
3403
3404
fifth amendment and not answer. If you think it might tend to incriminate him you do not have that right, so think that over again and talk
with your attorney again.
(Witness consulted her attorney.)
Mrs. REEsE. Senator, now would you explain that question to me
again?
Senator DANIEL. The question is if you truthfully think a truthful
answer to this question might tend to incriminate you, you have a right
to decline to answer. If you think it might tend to incriminate
Charlie Flint you do not have that right, you see. So the question is
whether or not he uses heroin or marihuana.
Mrs. REESE. Well, now, I tell you truthfully I don't know if he uses
heroin or marihuana.
Senator DANIEL. You know he uses some kind of dope?
Mrs. REEsE. But I don't know what it is. That is the truth.
Senator DANIEL You know he uses some kind of dope?
Mrs. REEsE. Yes, sir.
Senator
DANIEL.
And is he?
Senator DANIEL. Up until when? Well, let me just ask you this
Is he selling dope in San Antonio?
Mrs. RE:EsE. o, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Has he been selling dope in San Antonio?
Mrs. RE:ESE. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Let's return in the morning at 10 o'clock, recess
until 10 in the morning.
(Whereupon at 5 p. m. the subcommittee recessed to reconvene at
10 a. m., December 15, 1955.)
I will ask the witness who was on the stand yesterday afternoon to
return.
Mr. GmL SPiE. Senator, I will see if she is here.
right now.
Senator DANIEL. All right. Mr. Attorney, you let us know just as
soon as she arrives, will you please, sir?
Mr. GmrasPIE. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Jeanine Kucker. Jeanine K-u-c-k-e-r.
Rudy Moreno. Is Rudy Moreno in the courtroom? Now, Rudy
Moreno is the witness that was here at the hearing in San Antonio
in October. He was among those who were told to be back at this
hearing on December 14; he is still under subpena of the committee.
I would like to ask if any of the officers know anything about the
whereabouts of Rudy Moreno, as soon as possible, anyone in the courtroom?
Mr. VILLAREALL.
3406
Lieutenant
JACKSON.
Senator DANIEL. Do you know who is the largest seller of the heroin
and marihuana that comes into Corpus Christi ?
Lieutenant JACKSON. Yes, sir.
Senator
DANIEL.
Who is it?
Lieutenant
He owns the
3407
JACKSON.
No, sir.
3408
Senator
DANIEL.
of Nuevo Laredo?
Lieutenant JACKSON. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. What did you term him, his right-hand man?
Lieutenant JACKSON. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Have you recently picked up anyone who bought
heroin through this connection?
Lieutenant JACKSON. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Who?
Senator
DANIEL.
Is he here today?
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
him for?
Lieutenant JACKSON. Possession of 10 grams of heroin.
Senator DANIEL. Where did you arrest him I
Lieutenant
JACKSON.
Christi.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
The same
3409
place probably 30 minutes and collect half the money and leave, then
a short time later a girl from Mexico who is employed by Salvadore de Hoyas would appear, deliver the heroin and collect the balance of the money, then Salvadore and the girl would leave together.
Senator DANIEL. Have you ever been able to arrest Salvadore
de
Hoyas?
Lieutenant JACKSON. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. What about Chicos Patos?
Lieutenant JACKSON. I have searched him but never caught him with
anything.
Senator
him?
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator DANIEL. You may stand aside. Oh, why do you think there
was an increase in the narcotic traffic in Corpus Christi a while and
more recently a decrease?
Lieutenant JACKSON. We started a narcotics squad in December of
1953 and at that time we didn't have anyone working narcotics and we
made our cases without any effort. Since that time we have made
a lot of cases and most of the peddlers have been sent to the hospital or
have left town and the addicts have all left. When the source of
supply dried up most of the addicts left. Up to now it's small
operations.
Mr. SPEER. Are these people, the narcotic violators you arrest, tried
in the State court or Federal court.
Lieutenant JACKSON. All of my cases I file in the State court.
Mr. SPEER. Do you ever file any in Federal court?
Lieutenant JACKSON. Yes, sir, I used to.
Mr. SPEER. When did you quit and why did you quit ?
Lieutenant JACKSON. The reason I quit, the Federal laws are not
sufficient. I couldn't get enough time on the convicted peddlers, so
in the State court, the State laws are much better and our sentences
run from 2 to 10 years where in the Federal court most of them were
suspensions, and I don't approve of a neddler being put on suspended
sentence or probation.
Senator DANIEL. You are saying something very interesting to the
committee. You say the Federal laws are not sufficient?
Lieutenant JACKSON. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. We have Federal laws that could allow on first
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator DANIEL. What about under the Federal law we've had all
these years, you say in the cases you took to the Federal court most of
them received suspended or light sentences?
Lieutenant JACKSON. Yes, Sir.
Senator DANIEL. In other words, the judges just didn't give them
3410
Senator DANIEL. I'll agree with you that the laws are too light on
first sentence, I agree with you. We need to have higher sentences, but
as long as you have'Federal laws that would permit higher penalties
and the judges give the lesser sentences, that is not the fault of the law
but of the judge, isn't it?
Lieutenant JACKSON. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Well, now, is it commonly true in your district
there, in your Federal court that lighter sentences are given for narcotic peddlers than the State courts give?
Lieutenant JACKSON. Very much lighter, sir.
Senator
DANIEL.
Lieutenant
JACKSON.
business.
Senator
DANIEL.
It's big
States than any nation in the world. I think if you will send a list
of those cases in, I'll appreciate it. Evidently you must really feel
like the Federal courts let you down in the cases you brought there.
Lieutenant
JACKSON.
courts or the laws. It's just that I have had much better luck by filing
in the State courts. We have a State district attorney and his assistants, they are very conscientious and we have got a vigorous law
enforcement and had vigorous prosecution in the past 2 years. We
have only lost two cases in the State court.
Senator DANIEL. Well, won't the Federal attorney for your district
prosecute?
3411
are filed on that I have had anything to do with are given suspended
sentences.
Senator DANIEL. In the Federal court?
lieutenant JACKSON. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. That is the Southern District of Texas?
Lieuenant JACKSON. Yes, sir.
Datentenced
Nov. 6, 1953
Nov. 3, 1953
April 15, 1955
Sept. 5, 1954
Amount sentenced
2 years; suspended for 5 years.
2 years; suspended for 3 years.
5 years; 2 previous narcotid convictions; 1 conviction for
burglary.
5 years; 1 previous narcotic conviction.
5 years, I pteviou's narcotic conviction; 1 conviction manslaughter; 1 conviction assault with intent.
5 years; 1 previous narcotic conviction.
5 years; 1 previous narcotic conviction.
3 years; 3 years to rUn concurrent with Laredo case; 1 State
case pending.
3 years suspended sentence.
I This list does not include the 11 defendants who were tried in the spring of 19M3 in Victoria, who were
brought to trial with the following rbultt: 7 defendants received suspended sentences and of the remaining
4, 2 of them reeiVed 5-year Sentences under the mandatory floggs Act schedule of 1 previous conviction
for narcotic violation; 1 received a 3-year sentence although he had 2 prpvious felony convictions; and 1
received a 2-year sentence even though he was a previous State narcoti, offender.
stations; and,
Whereas in particular, it was reported in the newspapers of December 15 and
16, 1955, that a local lieutenant of police of Corpus Christi, Tex., had criticized
ion. James V. Allred, United States District Judge for the Southern District of
testified, in substance, that because heavy sentences were not there imposed, he
was no longer filing cases in the Federal district court, but preferred to file them
in the State court; and,
Whereas the Constitution and laws of the United States require a United States
district Judge to have the highest qualifications as to legal training, experience,
and character, and that he be appointed by the President of the Unitedl States and
3412
confirmed by the United States Senate; while, on the other hand, in most iustanees
local enforcement officers are not learned in the law, and in many instances lack
extensive investigative training; and,
Whereas it is the feeling of members of the bar and the public generally that
defendants in all cases are entitled to be judged by a fair and Impartial judge,
uninfluenced by what some local enforcement officer might consider to be a correct
sentence; and,
Whereas it is the feeling of this board of directors that the testimony and hearing above referred to constitute an unjust criticism and an unwarranted and
unfounded attack on the United States )istrict Court for the Southern District of
Texas and the judge thereof; and,
Whereas the canons of ethics of the State bar of Texas provide, in part, as
follows: "Judges shall receive the support of inembers against unjust criticism
and clamor."
Now, therefore, be it resolved:
(1) That proceedings and testimony of the type hereinabove mentioned, in
which local enforcement officers take the view that their judgment is superior
to that of a United States district judge, are to be deplored and censured.
(2) That our Constitution and laws properly place in the United States district judge, lawful discretion as to cases pending in the United States district
court, and that our system of justice, our freedom and liberties will be better
preserved by continuing to entrust to our Federal judges the decisions of cases
and the sentences to be imposed; rather than entrusting such matters to enforcement officers, investigative officers, or to congressional committees.
(3) That the record of Hon. James V. Allred, United States district judge
for the southern district of Texas, is outstanding in law enforcement, and at the
same time for the understanding and fairness displayed by him toward all law.
enforcement agencies, defendants, and the public; that we here and now reaffirm
our trust and confidence in our judicial system and in the law enforcement
policies, judgment and fairness of Hon. James V. Allred and the United States
district court for the Southern District of Texas.
(4) That this resolution be spread upon the minutes of this bar association,
and that copies thereof be sent to the following persons:
Hon. Maurice R. Bullock, president, State Bar of Texas, Fort Stockton, Tex.
Hon. Newton Gresham, vice president, State Bar of Texas, Houston, Tex.
Hon. William R. Pool, secretary, State Bar of Texas, Austin, Tex.
Hon. James V. Allred, United States district judge, Corpus Christi, Tex.
Hon. T. M. Kennerly, United States district judge, Houston, Tex.
Hon. Allen B. Hannay, United States district judge, Houston, Tex.
Hon. Ben Connally, United States district judge, Houston, Tex.
Hon. Joe McDonald Ingraham, United States district Judge, Houston, Tex.
Hon. Malcolm R. Wilkey, United States attorney, southern district of Texas,
Houston, Tex.
Hon. Price Daniel, United States Senator, Liberty, Tex.
Hon. James S. Graham, judge, 103d district court, Brownsville, Tex.
Hon. Hawthorne Phillips, judge, 107th district court, Brownsville, Tex.
Hon. H. A. Garcia, judge, 138th district court, Brownsville, Tex.
Hon.. Clarence S. Bennett, judge, Cameron County Court at Law, Brownsville,
Tex.
Hon. S. N. McWhorter, judge, 92d district court, Edinburg, Tex.
Hon. W. R. Blalock, judge, 93d district court, Mission, Tex.
Hon. Fidencio Guerra, judge, 139th district court, McAllen, Tex.
Hon. Tom L. Hartley, judge, Hidalgo County Court at Law, Pharr, Tex.
Hon. F. T. Graham, criminal district attorney, Cameron County, Brownsville,
Tex.
Hon. Jim Bates, district attorney, Hidalgo County, Edinburg, Tex.
Hon. Carl 0. Conley, district attorney, Willacy County, Raymondville, Tex.
Hon. Felix McDonald, president, Hildalgo County Bar Association, Edinburg, Tex.
, president, Nueces County Bar Association, Corpus Christi,
Hon.
Tex.
W. T. Jackson, police department, Corpus Christi, Tex.
Unanimously approved this 17th day of December 1955:
E. Wayne Wilson, director, Cameron County Bar Association, Brownsville, Tex.
Marshall Graham, director, Cameron County Bar Association, Harlingen, Tex.
Arthur A. Klein, director, Cameron County Bar Association, Harlingen, Tex.
Gene McCullough, director, Cameron County Bar Association, Harlingen, Tex.
3413
22, 1955.
"Whereas for the past few days, newspapers in San Antonio, Corpus Christi,
the Rio Grande Valley, and elsewhere in Texas, have published reports of a
Senate subcommittee hearing being conducted by the junior Senator from Texas,
at San Antonio, Tex., which said hearings have also been televised by San
Antonio stations; and,
"Whereas in particular, it was reported in the newspapers of December 15 and
16, 1955, that a local lieutenant of police of Corpus Christi, Tex., had criticized
Hon. James V. Allred, United States district judge for the southern district of
Texas, in connection with sentences imposed upon defendants in narcotics cases
in the said Federal court; and in which hearing the said local enforcement officer
testified, in substance, that because heavy sentences were not there imposed, he
was no longer filing cases in the Federal district court, but preferred to file
them in the State court: and.
"Whereas the Constitution and laws of the United States require a United
States district judge to have the highest qualifications as to legal training,
experience, and character, and that he be appointed by the President of the
United States and confirmed by the United States Senate; while, on the other
hand, in most instances local enforcement officers are not learned in the law,
and in many instances lack extensive investigative training; and,
"Whereas it is the feeling of members of the bar and the public generally that
defendants in all cases are entitled to be judged by a fair and impartial judge,
uninfluenced by what some local enforcement officer might consider to be a correct
sentence; and
"Whereas it is the feeling of this association that the testimony and hearing
above referred to constitute an unjust criticism and an unwarranted and unfounded attack on the United States District Court for the Southern District of
Texas and the judge thereof ; and
"Whereas the Canons of Ethics of the State Bar of Texas provide, in part, as
follows: 'Judges shall receive the support of members against unjust criticism
and clamor'; and
"Whereas the Cameron County Bar Association, of the State of Texas, has
heretofore adopted a resolution similar to this, and it is the feeling of the members of this association that the position of the members of the Cameron County
Bar Association is correct and should be approved and followed by the bar
throughout Texas.
"Now, therefore, be it resolved"(1) That proceedings and testimony of the type hereinabove mentioned, in
which local enforcement officers take the view that their judgment is superior
to that of a United States district judge, are to be deplored and censured.
"(2) That our Constitution and laws properly place in the United States district judge, lawful discretion as to cases pending in the United States district
court, and that our system of justice, our freedom and liberties will be better
lPreserved by continuing to entrust to our Federal judges the decisions of cases
and the sentences to be imposed; rather than entrusting such matters to enforcement officers, investigative officers, or to congressional committees.
"(3) That the record of Hon. James V. Allred, United States district judge
for the southern district of Texas, is outstanding in law enforcement, and at
the same time for the understanding and fairness displayed by him toward all
law-enforcement agencies, defendants, and the public; that we here and now
reaffirm our trust and confidence in our judicial system and in the law-enforce-
3414
ment policies, judgment, and fairness of Hon. James V. Allred and the United
States district court for the southern district of Texas.
"(4) That this resolution be spread upon the minutes of this bar association,
and that copies thereof be sent to the following:
Hon. Maurice R. Bullock, president, State Bar of Texas, Fort Stockton, Tex.
Hon. Newton Gresham, vice president, State Bar of Texas, Houston, Tex.
Hon. William R. Pool, secretary, State Bar of Texas, Austin, Tex.
Hon. James V. Allred, United States district judge, Corpus Christi, Tex.
Hon. T. M. Kennerly, United States district judge, Houston, Tex.
Hon. Allen B. Hannay, United States district judge, Houston, Tex.
Hon. Ben Connally, United States district judge, Houston, Tex.
Hon. Joe McDonald Ingraham, United States district judge, Houston, Tex.
Hon. Malcolm R. Wilkey, United States attorney, southern district of Texas,
Houston, Tex.
HEon. R. E. Thomasson, United States district Judge, El Paso, Tex.
Hon. Ben H. Rice, Jr., United States district judge, Waco, Tex.
Hon. Russell B. Wine, United States district attorney, San Antonio, Tex.
Hon. Price Daniel, United States Senator, Liberty, Tex.
Hon. president, Nueces County Bar Association, Corpus Christi, Tex.
W. T. Jackson, police department, Corpus Christi, Tex.
Laredo Daily Times, Laredo, Tex.
Hon. R. D. Wright, judge, 49th Judicial District Court, Laredo, Tex.
Hon. E. D. Salinas, judge, 111th Judicial District Court, Laredo, Tex.
Hon. Roger Thurmond, judge, 68d Judicial District Court, Del Rio, Tex.
Hon. Ross Doughty, judge, 38th Judicial District Court, Uvalde, Tex.
Hon. H. D. Barrow, judge, 81st Judicial District Court, Jourdanton, Tex.
Hon. C. Woodrow Laughlin, 79th Judicial District Court, Alice, Tex.
Hon. E. James Kazen, district attorney, Laredo, Tex.
Heon. John F. May, district attorney, Karnes City, Tex.
Hon. Francis C. Richter, district attorney, Hondo, Tex.
Hon. D. A. Newton, district attorney, Del Rio, Tex."
Presented to the Laredo Bar Association for action on this the 12th day of
January, A. D. 1956.
BISMARK POPE,
HORACE C. HALL,
JOHN E. FrTZGBRnON.
The foregoing resolution having been presented to the Laredo Bar Association
for action by Bismark Pope, Horace C. Hall, and John U. Fitzgibbon, members
of the association as sponsors at a regular meeting of the association held on the
12th day of January, A. D. 1956, and having been submitted to a board of the
members of the association, the same was forthwith adopted.
C. H. KAZEN,
H. C. HALI III,
Secretary, Laredo Bar Association.
3415
recently?
Senator DANIEL. Have you been doing any other kind of work?
Mr. GARCIA. Well, truck driver once in a while, my own.
Senator DANIEL. Anything else?
Mr. GARCIA. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Have you been selling any heroin?
(Witness consulted his lawyer.)
Mr. GARCIA. I refuse to answer the question.
Senator DANIEL. On what grounds?
Mr. GARCIA. I refuse to answer-I can't hardly talk good English.
Senator DANIEL. I think you're doing quite well. Vou refuse to
answer on the grounds that a truthful answer to that question might
the question out, then you can talk with your lawyer if you want to,
when you feel like you need to counsel with him. Do you want to withdraw the previous answer when I asked you what other work you
had been doing, you said nothing, you want to withdraw that? In
other words, you have waived any right in this chairman's opinion
to claim the fifth amendment to the question when I asked if you
had been selling heroin, the question before, you said you weren't
doing anything else, any other kind of work other than what you had
described. Now, let me ask you that question over again. Have you
recently been engaged in any other kind of work or business, other
than what you named here to us?
Mr. GARCIA. No sir.
Senator DANIEL. Your answer is no?
Mr. GARCIA. Yes, sir.
Senator DANUe. All right, now then I am going to ask you have
3416
Senator
Senator DANIEL. Well, I'll tell you what we'll do, make it short,
you claim the fifth amendment, you understand every time you say
that you refuse to answer under the fifth amendment, it will be understood just as much as if you said the whole thing, is it that you fear a
truthful answer might tend to incriminate you, is that it?
(Witness consulted his attorney.)
Mr. GARCIA. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Now, you heard Lieutenant Jackson of the police
force of Corpus Christi talk about arresting you with some heroin
recently, you heard him testify, didn't you?
Mr. GARCIA. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Now wait, Mr. Counsel, don't punch your client.
If he wants to ask you for any kind of advice, you are a guest of this
committee, he is entitled to do it, but don't interrupt him, let him
seek the advice. That is no reprimand. I know you unconsciously
did it but let's not do it again. Do you want to advise with your
lawyer?
(Witness consulted his attorney.)
Mr. LoPEz. Senator, could we have the question repeated?
Senator DANIEL. Let me give it to save time, I'll restate the question.
You heard Lieutenant Jackson testify, you said, about arresting you
with some heroin in your possession. I asked you if that is true.
(Witness consulted his attorney.)
Mr. GARCIA. Yes, sir, I was arrested but I refuse to answer the rest
of the question.
Senator DANIEL Well, you have already answered the q uestion,
whether you were arrested with the heroin, that is the question, that
is the only question, is that what your answer is?
(Witness consulted his attorney.)
Mr. GARcIA. I only answered the facts.
IIIII III
3417
body knows that. I want to know if you were arrested with some
heroin on you.
(Witness consulted his attorney.)
Mr. GARCIA. I refuse to answer that part.
Senator DANIEL. Do a little more than refuse, at least say "fifth
amendment" or something. I'm not going to let you refuse to answer,
after explaining to you an easy way to do it. Do you want to claim
the fifth amendment?
(Witness consulted his attorney.)
Mr. GARCIA. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Just say so.
Mr. GARCIA. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. You heard Lieutenant Jackson testify you told him
you got this heroin from Chicos Patos, also known as Joe Rodriguez,
is that true?
(Witness consulted his attorney.)
Mr. GARCIA. I refuse to answer.
Senator DANIEL. On what grounds? You fear it might tend to
incriminate you if you gave a truthful answer?
(Witness consulted his attorney.)
Mr. GARCIA. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Do you know Chicos Patos?
(Witness consulted his attorney.)
Mr. GARCIA. I refuse to answer on fifth amendment.
Senator DANIEL. Do you know Joe Rodriguez?
(Witness consulted his attorney.)
Senator DANIEL. Now, wait a minute, you counsel with your counsel
and claim the fifth amendment on everything you told Lieutenant
Jackson here and everything you told our investigator, Mr. Speer, concerning this, are you going to claim the fifth amendment and not tell
the facts you told these two men, is that your intention?
(Witness consulted his attorney.)
Mr. GARCIA. Yes, sir, I am under indictment and I couldn't answer
them questions.
Senator DANIEL. Under indictment for what?
(Witness consulted his attorney.)
Mr. GARCIA. Narcotics.
Senator DANIEL. All right, you step aside.
Mr. Speer, take the stand.
(Mr. Wayland Lee Speer had previously been sworn by Senator
Daniel.)
TESTIMONY OF WAYLAND LEE SPEER, INVESTIGATOR FOR THE
SUBCOMMITTEE-Resumed
Senator DANIEL. Mr. Speer, while serving as investigator for this
committee yesterday did you interview the witness who just left the
stand, Jessie Garcia?
Mr. SPEER. Yes, sir, I did.
Senator DANIEL. Did you go over with him the case about which
111111111
3418
Mr. SPEER. I
A substantial
quantity.
Senator DANIEL. It was a substantial quantity of heroin?
Mr. SPEER. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. He admitted he had it in his possession?
Mr. SPEER. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Did you ask from whom he got it?
Mr. SPEER. He said it came from Chicos Patos, Joe Rodriguez.
Senator DANIEL. Did he tell you the name as Joe Rodriguez?
Mr. SPEER. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Did he tell you where he lives?
Mr. SPEER. San Diego, and he spends a lot of time in Alice, Tex.
Senator DANIEL. And did he tell you where Chicos Patos got the
heroin?
Mr. SPEER. He said the heroin and marihuana comes from Salvadoire
de Hoyas in Nuevo Laredo.
Senator DANIEL. Did he tell you about the same thing that Lieutenant Jackson said the witness testified to him about?
Mr. SPEER. Yes, Sir.
Senator DANIEL. Did you also go into the case with him of Manuel
Cantu which happened several years ago?
Mr. SrEE1I. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Did you ask him whether or not Manuel Cantu,
C-a-n-t-u, had delivered any marihuana to Garcia?
Mr. SPEER. He said that he had talked to the brother of Manuel
Cantu, and this brother is known as Pete Cantu and has a bar at
Roma, Tex. and through this connection set up a process by which
Jessie Garcia received 96 pounds of the marihuana from Manuel (1 antu
to take to the oil fields.
Senator DANIEL. Here in Texas?
Mr. SIEER. He didn't say which oilfield.
Senator
DANIEL.
Cantu was an official in Mexico back at that time, I believe about 3 years
ago when this happened?
Mr. SPEER. lie said he was a police detective in Monterrey.
Senator DANIEL. Did he say this Manuel Cantu had set up the deal
for marihuana ?
Mr. SPEER. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. All right, you may stand aside.
Now, Shirley Orlowski, the witness who was on the stand yesterday,
will she return, please.
You may be seated.
FURTHER TESTIMONY OF SHIRLEY ORLOWSKI REESE
Senator DANIEL. Now, in your testimony yesterday I believe you said
that your husband is in prison serving a narcotics charge, is that
correct ?
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
Mrs.
TRAFFIC
3419
REESE.
Senator
session?
NO, sir,
I didn't.
Mrs.
SeiialREESE.
or 1).INEL.
And
will you identify his name again?
1Mr'S. RESE. Marion Odell Reese.
Senator DANiEL. I believe you say more recently you have been
Senator
Mrs. REESE.
sir.
And where have you been living with him?
102 Quinn.
Senator DANIEL. Isn't there any other address where you all have
stayed together?
Mrs. REESE. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. And is he a married man?
REESE.
No, sir.
When you
do so, though, remember you said you had never had heroin in your
possession.
(Witness consulted her attorney.)
71515-56-pt. 7-68
3420
Mrs. REESE. No, sir, I haven't ever used it-look, yesterday you all
asked me if I had used narcotics. I told you yes. But I didn't say
that it was heroin.
Senator DANIEL. Well, have you ever used any heroin to your
knowledge?
Mrs. REESE. No, sir.
Mrs. REESE. Well, just like I told you yesterday, I used it when
1 was 15, before I went to Gainesville and after I came back from
3421
Gainesville I did just a couple of times after that, since then I haven't.
Senator DANIEL. Is that the Girls' School there ?
Mrs. REESE. Yes, sir.
Senator
DANIEL.
Mrs. REESE. Yes,
Senator DANIEL.
something?
Mrs. REESE. No, they wouldn't tell me nothing.
Senator DANIEL. I beg your pardon?
Mrs. REESE. They didn't tell me anything.
Senator DANIEL. Were your parents living?
Senator DANIEL. Well, did they take you away from your parents?
Mrs. REESE. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. What did they say the reasons were they were
sending you up there?
Mrs. REESE. They didn't say.
Senator DANIEL. Well, did they tell you they knew about your using
the druos 2
Mrs. 'EESE.
me anything.
Senator DANIEL. Well, you had been using the drug before they
sent you up there, hadn't you?
Mrs. REESE. Yes, a couple of times.
3422
here in town?
Mrs.
REESE. No,
sir.
Senator DANIEL. Think about the question clearly; Have you ever
bought any kind of drugs, either morphine or any other drugs used
as a substitute for heroin, from any doctor here in town?
Mrs. REESE. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Did a doctor ever give you any type of narcotic
drugs here in San Antonio'?
Mrs. REESE. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. A doctor never has?
'rS. REESE. Never has.
Senator DANIELs.S.hat
kind of narcotic drugs has Clarence Flint
been using?
MUrs. REESE. I don't know that he uses any.
Senator DANIEL. Have you ever crossed the Mexican border?
Mrs. REESE. Yes, I have.
Senator DANIEL. Where?
Mrs. REESE. Laredo.
Senator DANIEL. When was the last time?
lhen my brother got married. He went over there
Mrs. REESE.
for his honeymoon. I went with him.
Senator DANIEL. When was that?
M[rs. REESE. I can't remember what month it was.
Senator DANIEL. Well, have you crossed the border there at Laredo
more than once?
Mrs. REESE. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. About how many times would you say that you
have crossed the border in the last 5 or 10 years?
Mrs. REESE. Just about 3 times, 3 or 4 times.
Senator DANIEL. Have you ever been stopped and searched?
Mrs. REEsE. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Have you ever bought any type of narcotic drugs
Senator
DANIEL.
3423
Yes.
to incriminate me.
Senator DANIEL. In my opinion one of the most despicable uses
Senator
,ou?
DANIEL.
to incriminate me.
Senator DANIEL. You actually feel a truthful answer to that question might tend to incriminate you rather than someone else?
Mrs. REESE. May I consult my attorney?
Senator
DANIEL.
Yes.
3424
Senator
Just come back to the witness stand just a moment. You may be
seated there. Do you know Paul Ellis?
Mrs. REESE. Yes, sir, I know him.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator DANiEL. Well, did you ever receive any money from Paul
Ellis? Have you ever received any money from Paul Ellis?
Mrs. REESE. No, sir.
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
TRAFFIC
3425
Senator DANIEL. Have you ever received any type of narcotic drug
from Paul Ellis?
Mrs. REESE. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Did you ever give him any money?
Mrs. REESE. May I consult my attorneys?
to incriminate me.
Senator DANIEL. Now, to the question I asked, whether you had ever
given Paul Ellis any money you refuse to answer on the grounds it
might tend to incriminate you?
Mrs. REESE. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Well, have you ever given any money to Clarence
Flint?
Mrs. REESE. May I consult my attorneys?
Senator DANIEL. You may.
Senator DANIEL. Right, I saw you this time. Let the record show
that Mr. Herman G. Nami and the counsel, Mr. Gillespie, are sitting
with the witness.
Now, Mr. Flint, you understand you have the right to consult your
counsel at any time you feel you need to?
TESTIMONY OF CLARENCE CECIL FLINT
Mr. FLINr. Yes. sir, I (10.
Senator DANIBL. Will you state your name and residence?
MAr. NAMI. Just a moment, please, sir.
(Witness consulting with his attorneys.)
3426
Senator
DANIEL.
Mr.
Mr.
FLINT.
SPEER.
1083816.
You say you were convicted of selling narcotics in
Japan?
Mr. FLINT. Yes, sir.
Mr. SPEER. While you were in the service?
3427
iN'-r.
FLINT.
SPEER.
Mr.
Mr. FLIxr. No, they were in merchant marines, come into our
base.
Mr. SPEER.
Senator
DANIEL.
Mr.
FLINT.
SPEER.
No, sir.
Did you sell what the Japanese sell?
Mr.
Mr. FLINT. No, sir, I didn't. The way I got messed up with stuff
over there, I was going down the street one evening, you know, and
I was just walking down the street. I didn't know anything about
anything really, you know, and I was 18 years old and I stopped by a
shine boy and this shine boy shined my shoes and he stopped and while
he was shining my shoes, he stopped and he fixed.
Mr. SPEER. What do you mean, the shine boy?
Mr. FLINT. He got a shot of dope right there, you know.
Mr. SPEER. On the street he fixed?
Mr. FLINT.
Mr. SPEER.
Mr. FLINT.
Mr. SPEER.
Mr. FLINT.
In Yokosuka?
Yes, sir.
I don't
Mr. SPEER. How does the traffic on that street compare to the traffic
out here?
Mr. FLINT. Different kind of traffic, have rickshaws, as many people
as on this street. Yokosuka is almost as big in population as San
Antonio and a lot smaller in area. So I would say as many people
went down that street as this. In fact, it was called black market alley
where all the soldiers and everybody went, you know.
Mr. SPEER. I am familiar with the fact.
Mr. FLINT. Yes, sir.
Mr. SPEER. Now, this other drug, did you say you used this ahen
yourself ?
Mr. FLINT. No, I never used ahen.
Mr. SPEER. A-h-e-n, the name of the drug.
Mr. SPEER. Did you ever smoke any powder or any cigarettes?
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
1mean,
111111111
Yes, sir.
Was that ahen?
Yes, sir, I guess it was.
It was heroin?
No, it wasn't in no white powder, it was in a black ball,
you know, the 'gooey' brown ball.
FLINT.
SPEER.
FLINT.
SPEER.
FLINT.
3428
Mr. FLINT. Well, I mean, I didn't use them too much, you know, I
just got to messing with this guy and that night he was fixing this
stuff, I forget, 'phetopone,' I believe.
Mr. SPEER. Amphetamine? That keeps you awake.
Mr. FLINT. Well, it might have been 'neotole' or something like that.
Mr. SPEER. They have about a dozen different names for it.
Mr. FLINT. Yes, I know they do. Well, the first one, when they
got a-hold of me that morning, you know they had 25 witnesses against
me. They went upstairs and looked in my locker and they found a
syringe and had some stuff that was used just like benzedrine except
it wasn't quite as strong as benzedrine.
Mr. SPER. When did you come back to the United States?
Mr. FLINT. June, oh, around June 1 of 1950.
Mr. SPER. Were you in custody?
Mr. FLINT. Yes, sir.
Mr. SPEER. How long were you in custody?
Mr. FLINT. Well, I had been in custody for a year almost.
Mr. SPEER. You got back in June, 1950; when -we-te you relea te
FLINT. I
come in and
Mr. SPEER. You transferred to YVI, what is that?
Mr. FLINT. That is an institution in military prison, I guess, in San
Francisco, right off of Treasure Island.
Mr. SPEER. Upon your release did you come directly to San
Antonio?
Mr. FLINT. No, sir, I didn't come to San Antonio at all.
Mr. SPEFR. How long have you been in San Antonio?
Mr. FLINT. Well, I have been here several times.
Mr SPEFR. This last time how long?
Mr. FLINT. Since January of 1955.
Mr. SPEER. During this time, since your release in June of 1950 how
long were you on narcotics?
Mr. FLINT. Well, when I got out of the service I wasn't on narcotics
FLINT.
11111119
3429
Mr. FLINT. Yes, sir, I didn't mess with it for quite some time since I
got out of the service.
Mr. Spmi. Since the first of this year have you supplied heroin to
anybody in San Antonio, either for money or otherwise'.
(Witness consulted his attorneys.)
Mr. FLINT. No, sir.
Mr. SP=R. What is your business?
Mr. FLINT. I am a professional boxer and I work out here. I have
worked at the Barn this year, I own half of the Barn out here, the first
of the ear and
Mr. SPmR. What is this Barn?
Mr. FLINT. A place of business out here on the Austin Highway, I
mean the Seguin Highway.
Mr. SPEAR. What sort of place is that?
Mr. FLINT. Night club.
Mr. SPF.R. You own half of a night club?
Mr. FLINT. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Where did you make your money with which to
invest in the Barn?
Mr. FLINT. Beg pardon?
Senator DANIEL. Where did you get the money?
Mr. FLINT. I boxed and I worked for my father.
Senator DANIEL. Did you ever sell any heroin anywhere?
Mr. FLINT. No, sir.
Senator DAmN.
In this country?
Senator DANIEL. Did you ever sell any other narcotic drug in this
country?
Mr -"LInT. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Did you ever give any narcotic drugs, heroin, stuff,
or anything else to any person in this country?
Mr. FLINT. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Did you ever see any heroin in this country?
Mr. FLINT. Yes, sir; I have seen it.
Senator DANIEL. Where?
Mr. FLINT. Well
3430
Senator DANIEL. Don't you have some friends who use heroin here
in San Antonio?
Mr. FLINT. No, sir.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
Mr.
earth.
Senator
DANIEL.
the Army ?
Mr. FLINT. Well, one time I ran away from home when I was 13
years old. They gave me a pill, a red bird, barbiturate, nembutal.
Senator
DANIEL.
Mr. FLINT. That was the only time I ever did it. I run away from
I was 13 years old.
home. That was the only time I ever did it,
Senator DAWNIL. Now, your use of heroin or whatever use of druo's
you used after you got back home, caused you to be arrested, at
least ].guess it has lea to it, 21 times, is that about right?
Mr. FLINT. Well, I imagine I have been more times than that.
Senator DANML. More than 21 times?
Mr. FLINT. But not through narcotics.
Senator DANIEL. Well, wouldn't you say that your use of narcotics
contributed to your getting into these arrests?
Mr. FLINT. I guess some of them but in Houston, Tex., they put
for anything.
you
in jail DANIEL.
Senator
That's
Senator
3431
Mr.
Mr.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Shirley Orlowski?
Mr. NAMI. May I make a statement that he has requested me to
make, sir, in this meeting?
Senator DANIAL. All statements come from the witness. You may
counsel with him, he may counsel with you and make any statements
he wishes to make.
Mr. NAMI. I can't have him make this statement to you at this time.
Senator DANIEL. That is something all the congressional committees have found in allowing counsel to be here. If you let the counsel
do the talking we will be forever in the committee room. We have a
rule against it which we can't violate. This counsel happens to be a
counsel I would be very happy to have make it, if it wasn't for the rule.
Mr. NAMI. Senator, this is outside of the import of your meeting,
3432
what you are inquiring about and that is why I thought under the circumstances I might be permitted to make the statement.
Senator DANIEL. Well, we will see as soon as I finish the examination.
Did you make this call to the narcotics office Tuesday afternoon?
(Witness consulted his attorneys.)
Mr. FLINT. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Did you ask them in a loud, excited voice, were you
pretty excited?
Mr. FLINT. No, sir; I wasn't excited.
Senator DANIEL. Pretty mad?
Mr. FLINT. I might have been pretty mad. I wasn't excited.
Senator DANIEL. Did you'ask who subpenaed your wife, or Shirley?
(Witness consulted his attorneys.)
Mr. FLINT. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. And did you tell them you would like to speak to
the agent serving the subpena?
Mr. FLINT. No, sir; I told them I had already spoke to the agent that
served the subpena.
Senator DANIEL. Did you say you wanted to know who sent those
things, meaning the subpena?
(Witness consulted his attorneys.)
Mr. FLINT. Mr. MacDaniel, there was, the way I looked at it I just
wanted to find out who was sending it, I figured some stool pigeon
sent it, I wanted to know who it was, not any point to the committee
or the hearing or anything like that. I made noSenator DANIEL. Well, did you go on and say anything about a
stool pigeon to this narcotics agent?
Mr. FLINT. No, sir; I hung the phone up.
Senator DANIAL. Didn't you before hanging up, didn't you say, I'll
kill that s. o. b., what those initials stand for?
Mr. FLINT. I did not make that statement.
Senator DANIAL. Are you positive?
Mr. FLINT. I am positive.
Senator DANIEL. Are you positively swearing under oath that you
did not say to the man on the other end of the telephone, who happened to be Mr. H. H. Gray, that and I quote, I'll kill that so. b., the
only thing different is using the full words that s. o. b. stand for?
Mr. FLINT. If I did I don't remember it.
Senator DANIEL. Well, a minute ago you said you did not say that.
I I I it
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
TRAFFIC
3433
Senator DANIEL. You did talk to a man. Did he tell you his name
was Gray ?
Mr. FuNT. Didn't tell me his name. I wanted to talk to Mr. Speer,
Senator
DANIEL.
not tell the Federal Bureau of Narcotics man on the telephone you
wanted to know who sent those things and Ill kill the s. o. b.?
Mr. FLINT. No, sir; I did not make that statement.
Senator DANIeL. And you are positive, you say under oath you never
threatened to kill anyone?
Mr. FLN' [standing]. If I did anything wrong, Senator MacDaniel, I'm sorry but I made no accusations in any way or said I was
going to kill anybody. If I have done anything wrong I apologize to
you.
Senator DANIEL. I appreciate your apology and the only question
now,,you see, is down to telling the truth. When you get under oath
to te tify before a committee, it is very important that you tell the
truth.
Senator DANIEL. The only reason I go into this, the officers say you
said one thing, you say another thing, that's the only reason I am going
over it. As a matter of fact, there are two complaints in here you
threatened to kill someone else. I'll ask you if on December 2 ol this
year-you better listen to the question.
Mr. FLINT. I am listening.
Senator DANIEL. Then you can talk to your attorneys. If on December 2 of this year that you broke in the glass of a rear door of a house
with the butt of a .257-caliber rifle, entered that house, stating you
were going to kill a woman there?
Mr. FLINT. No, sir; I did not, I did not enter the house.
3434
Senator
DANIEL.
Did you
see a girl there on that day when you went in the back door of that
house.
Mr. FLINT. 415 Fair Avenue?
Senator DANIEL. No; that's your address, I didn't mean that. I
mean 1005 Avenue B?
(Witness consulted his attorneys.)
Mr. FLINT. I refuse to answer that question on the grounds it may
tend to incriminate me.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
me.I
Senator DA IEL. Well, I order you to answer the question.
Mr. FLINT. I refuse to answer because it might tend to incriminate
me.
Senator
DANIEL.
3435
FLINT.
Senator
Yes, sir.
DANIEL.
FLINT.
Yes, sir.
3436
Mr. FLINT. No, sir; I have never bought any heroin in Mexico.
Senator DANIEL. I didn't ask you that. Have you ever seen any
heroin in Mexico?
Mr. FLINT. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Have you ever talked about buying any ?
Mr. FuiNr. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Now, you have been a user of it during this time
and you mean to say you never even asked whether it was available in
Mexico, if it was cheaper than in San Antonio?
Mr. FLINT. No, sir; I wasn't trying to buy any.
Senator DANIEL. Didn't you even ask about it?
Mr. F i T. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Well, where did you go over in Mexico?
1111111
3437
Mr. GRAY. No, sir. He did after he talked for about half a minute.
Senator DANIEL. And what did he say his name was?
Senator
DANIEL.
that?
Mr. GRAY. Yes, sir, he started off saying he wanted to know who
sent those things, what they had on his wife, and that he had instructed
her to tell us nothing on the grounds it might incriminate her and that
she did not know nothing about that stuff.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
those things?
Mr. GRAY. That's right, sir.
Senator DANIEL. And then you have written down here, Flint then
stated that I will kill that so and so.
Senator DANIEL. Is that what he told you except for so and so?
Mr. GRAY. He said S-O-B.
Senator DANIEL. Did he say S-O-B or did he say those words out in
full?
Mr. GRAY. Out in full.
Senator DANIEL. You know what those letters stand for, don't you
Mr. GRAY. Yes, sir.
'II
III
3438
Mr. MURRAY. I may be mistaken about those dates. The first one
occurred on October 1, the second one on October 4, the third one, the
fourth one on October 27.
Senator DANIEL. Two on one day?
Mr. MURRAY. Did I miss the third one?
Senator DANIEL. Let's see, the first you said was on October 1.
Let's take them separately, the first, Victor G. Morgan?
Mr. MURRAY. I was wrong, that was the second. We have had
six altogether and the first was in January.
Senator DANIEL. January 17th?
Mr. MURRAY. That's correct.
Senator DANIEL. That was Leon Marion Oliver?
Mr. MURRAY. Yes, sir, and the other five through the month of
October.
Senator DANIEL. The other 5, the most recent, 5 dead people you
found with heroin in their urine or in the tests that were made?
Mr. MURRAY. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. All 5 died in 1 month?
Mr. MURRAY. That's true.
Senator DANIEL. That is the month of October?
Mr. MURRAY. Yes, sir.
3439
Senator
year?
DANImEL.
Senator DANIEL. Now, did you in your official duties examine the
bodies of these people or paraphernalia found on the bodies?
Mr. MURRAY. I believe not personally.
Senator
DANIEL.
DEATHS
UNDER
HOUSTON
3440
3441
Senator DANIEL. Also the article from the Houston paper concerning these deaths will be made a part of the record as exhibit No. 12.
(Exhibit No. 12 follows:)
EXHIBIT No.
12
YOUNG
WIFE
The tragic story of Shirley Ann McKoy's schoolgirl romance and the bitter
lesson she learned from a dope addict husband unfolded today in the impersonal
files of a homicide investigation.
She learned the lesson at the cost of her life.
TELLTALE MARKS
JAILED
Police took Pat Dan McKoy, a 22-year-old carpenter, of 4307 Feagan, and 39year-old Ruth Harris, of 6412 Calder, into custody for questioning, but no charge
has been filed against them.
In jail this morning, the husband told this tragic story:
"I am to blame for everything. Shirley Ann came from a nice family, not rich
but respectable. Her father is a painter and she has five sisters and brothers.
"Shirley and I met when we were in high school. Both of us were 17. She
had paid her way through school by working in the afternoons as a salesgirl at a
downtown store.
BEGS FOR A FIX
"She didn't know I was on dope until after we were married. She was terribly
upset the first time she saw me all pilled up. But she loved me * * * and that
wrecked her life.
"I took her to a party once and she begged me to give her a fix. I was so high
I did it, and then she was hooked."
McKoy said Shirley Ann was sent to prison in 1953 on a charge of possessing
dope, and he went up a few months later on the same charge. Both were released
last summer.
In a written statement to homicide detectives. McKoy denied he knew where
his wife got the dope that claimed her life yesterday.
"She told me to meet her at a Washington Avenue cafe about 2 p. m.," he said.
"When I got there she was sitting in her car and she was sick. I knew from the
way she talked she had an overfix.
"I dragged her out of the car and tried to make her walk. That was the only
thing to do. Her shoes came off, but I kept dragging her.
"Then a man drove by that I knew and I asked him to take us to Joe Dick
harris' house. I thought we might do something for Shirley there."
Mrs. Harris said the young woman was unconscious when she was carried into
the house at 6412 Calder. Mrs. Harris applied cold towels, but the girl did not
revive.
"I felt she was dying." McKoy said. "We got her to the hospital as fast as we
could."
Homicide Capt. Frank Murray said he is convinced that Mrs. McKoy's deathand probably the other four similar deaths this year-are the result of heroin
fixing by dope pushers who don't know how to cut the narcotic with milk sugar.
11111111
3442
Senator DANIEL. Now, do you have-will you tell us briefly, without going into each of the cases, tell us the general things that applied to each of these cases which show that the same type of heroin
must be involved and that it was heroin that killed these people?
Mr. MURRAY. Yes, sir; according to the pathologist's report.
Senator DANIEL. In each case the pathologist reported findings that
caused you to believe that?
Mr. MURRAY. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. In addition you found most of the people in tourist courts, motels, or cheap hotels; didn't you?
Mr. MURRAY. Would you repeat that?
Senator DANIEL. Did you find most of these bodies in tourist courts,
motels, or cheap hotels?
Mr. MURRAY. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. And did you, beside the bodies, findieither needles
or cooking spoons or paraphernalia used for administering heroin?
Mr. MURRAY. Not beside all of them but a part of them. In some
instances that evidence had been either carried away with whoever
registered in with them or had been destroyed in some manner before we found out about it. We do have some pictures here for this
committee.
Senator DANIEL. Yes, sir. I would like you to identify the pictures and let us make them a part of the record. What is the first
picture you have?
Mr. MURRAY. The first one I have here on the complainant or victim, you might call it, Victor G. Morgan, a white male, 36 years of
age, found dead in a tourist court on October 1, 1955. I have here a
photo of him. Then I have
Mr. MURRAY. And I also have a picture of the syringe and spoon,
the paraphernalia that was used.
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
TRAFFIC
3443
EXHIBIT No. 13
Dead man (narcotics) Victor G. Morgan (win), 36, Houston, Tex. Found dead
in tourist court, Houston, Tex., October 1, 1955. As shown in photos, usual
cooking spoon and improvised syringe (medicine-dropper type) was found on
the dresser. (Chemist report heroin.)
EXHIBIT No.
14
Accidental death (narcotics) -Victor G. Morgan, age 36; found dead, tourist
court, Houston, Tex., October 1, 1955. Note cooking spoon and medicine droptype syringe.
3444
4,A
.,
,0"<
1,-
,.2N
....
. ..
,"
,,.
. .
...,,.
. ,. , .
i,',
,".
'"' "" ' ...
..
*'o'
4~~~~~..
... * . ..
"'2
t",""
.:
'"."...
.'
Dead man (narcotics)-Wilburn Mundine, age 23, Houston, Tex. Found dead
in tourist court, Houston, Tex., October 4, 1955. As shown in photos, the
improvised syringe and cooking spoon found on the dresser, also one cap of
white powder in green cellophane wrapper. (Chemist reported 0.2 gram
heroin.)
Senator
DANIEL. What
I I
3445
EXHIBIT No. 16
Accidental death (narcotics) -Wilburn Mundine, age 23, found dead at 1617
McCarty (tourist court). Note cooking spoon and improvised syringe (joint)
on dresser.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
heroin, any heroin users or addicts are bringing about their death,
3446
Senator DANIEL. It is a living death and it destroys the mind and the
soul and all moral inhibitions?
Mr. MURRAY. Yes, sir, that's correct.
Senator DANIEL. So, either way you take it, you would agree that
the statutes dealing with narcotic drugs ought to deal with the
smuggling and selling as more like murder offenses and offenses
of that kind?
Mr. MURRAY. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. You agree with me they are selling murder?
Mr. MURRAY. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Thank you very much for appearing before our
committee.
Charles Hubbard. Let me see if any witnesses have an objection
to being sworn together.
We want to bring the hearing to a close at 12 if we can.
Charles Hubbard, Gloria Jene Kerley, and Vandeburg Griffin,
Horace Grice, John Bonnee, and Harry Kerley. Do any of you
object to being sworn together? Those who do not object come on
and I will swear you together.
(All of the foregoing named witnesses were duly sworn by Senator
Daniel.)
3447
Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Where did you get the money to buy heroin?
Mr. HUBBARD. Worked.
Senator DANIEL. Now, did you get enough money to buy it or did
you get in any other trouble?
Mr. HUBBARD. Well, I did get in a little other trouble while using it.
Mr.
HUBBARD.
When
Senator
DANIEL.
3448
HUBBARD.
Mr.
HUBBARD.
I I
3449
Senator DANIEL. Didn't you ever see him use the drugI
Mr. HUBBARD. I don't know.
Senator DANIEL. Anyway, you all crossed the bridge on October 23
coming from Mexico?
Mr. HUBBARD. I guess that was the date; I don't know.
Senator DANIEL. You had gotten some heroin?
Mr. HUBBARD. I don't always get heroin.
Senator DANIEL. All this committee wants to prove, not wanting
to quibble about what trip you got, what bridge, but that you have
crossed the bridge and gotten heroin?
Mr. HUBBARD. Yes; I have gotten some.
Senator DANIEL. And you know others who have?
Senator DANIEL. I say, they checked each time you came back
across from Mexico?
Mr. GRIFFIn. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. On the bridge at Nuevo Laredo?
Mr. GRFNw. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. And you are a narcotic addict, aren't you, you
have been ?
Mr. GRIFFIN. No, sir; I am not, I never have been. I just used it
off and on.
Senator DANIEL. Off and on I-
3450
Mr. GRIFFIN. I can't, I can't just describe, I just can't name the
places, it's not but one source over there that I was, that is the boys
around the pool hall, some of them over there and
Senator DANIEL. Well, how many places, how many people have
you bought heroin from in nuevo Laredo?
Mr. GRIFFIN. I imagine, I imagine just one social club.
Senator DANIEL. I don't want any imaginings. Have you bought
from more than one source?
Mr. GRIFFIN. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Well, who is the source then?
Mr. GRIFFIN. I don't know, sir.
Senator DANIEL. How did you find him each time you go over?
Mr. GRIFFIN. The boy be hanging around the pool hall.
Senator DANIEL. What is his name?
Mr. GRIFFIN. I don't know that.
Senator DANIEL. Would you know him if you saw him again?
Mr. GRIFFIN. I don't know, sir.
Senator DANIEL. When is the last time you went across the border
to get heroin?
Mr. GRIFFIN. The last time I was over there, sir, was last, last Saturday a week ago, I believe, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Now, wait a minute. Are you using heroin now?
Mr. GRIFFIN. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. How long has it been since you had a shot of
heroin? You understand you are supposed to tell the committee the
truth. I am not implying you haven't, but I am concerned about the
difference between some of your testimony and what is down here
from this investigation. I am just wondering if you know you are
liable to be prosecuted if you don't tell us the truth. Do you understand that you could be prosecuted if you tell this committee an untruthful statement under oath, do you understand that?
Mr. GRIFFIN. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Well, now with that in mind I just want to ask you
about how long was it since you were across the border at Laredo to
buy heroin?
3451
70
3452
Senator DANIEL. Did you ever bring any heroin back with you?
Mr. G FIwN. No, sir.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Christi?
Mr. GRirI N. No, sir; I don't, sir.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
border?
DANIEL.
IIIIIII
3453
Senator DANIEL. You were with your husband, were you not?
Mrs. KERLEY. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. And you gave your husband's occupation as a
waiter at the Country Club in Corpus Christi?
Mrs. KERLEY. Yes, sir. He works there part time.
Senator DANIEL. You talked there at that time with the customs
officers, didn't you?
Mrs. KIERLEY. Yes, sir.
Senator
DANIEL.
Laredo?
Mrs. KEiRuY. Well, I have been approximately 3 or 4 times, might
have been 5.
Senator
DANIEL.
Mrs. I amY.
E
Yes, sir.
Corpus.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator DANIEL. Did you see him get any heroin there?
Mrs. KERLEY . No, sir; I didn't.
Senator DANIEL. Did you carry any money for him?
Mrs. KERLEY. Not for him.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
IIIIIII
week.
3454
Senator
Where?
Over, what was it, Matamoros, from Kingsville.
Senator DANIEL. Did you get any heroin?
Mr.
DANIEL.
KERLEY.
Mr. KERLEY. No, sir; went right to a liquor store and come right
back.
Senator DANIEL. Well, I have down here these days, that between
November 18 and 23 that you made 10 crossings. I am sorry, I stated
that wrong, that you went across to Nuevo Laredo on November 18
and on November 23; is that right?
Mr. KERLEY. I can't recall the exact date but it could be right.
Senator
DANIEL
the week and the end of the week, all depends on when I might be able
to &et a ride over there.
Senator DANIEL. You have been going over more than once a week ?
Mr. KERLEY. Some weeks. Like I said, all depends on how many
rides I can get over there.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
3455
times these records from the customs international bridge show you
having crossed back from Nuevo Laredo since June of this year. On
June 13, 1955, accompanied by your wife, has tattoo mark over needle
marks, drug addict. On August 5, 1955, August 11, 1955, September
13, 1955, October 11, 1955, October 19, 1955, October 3, 1955, October
11, 1955-I mean November 11, 1955-November 18, 1955, November
23, 1955. Do those sound about right, is that about the usual frequency
of your crossings?
Mr. KERLEY. I can't deny that, deny the customs there because I
never keep up with the dates at the time I was crossing. They could
be right, I know I was over there quite a number of times.
Senator DANIEL. Do you buy heroin every time you go?
Mr. KERLEY. No, sir; I don't buy heroin every time I go over.
Senator DANIEL. Most of the time?
Mr. KERLEY. At times I get knocked out. I haven't bothered with
it yet.
Senator DANIEL. Tell us what places you bought in Nuevo Laredo?
Mr. KERLEY. There's a little restaurant, supposed to be a jive spot.
Senator DANIEL. I didn't understand you.
Mr. KERLEY. A jive spot, I don't know how to tell you how to get
to the place, anything like that, have American music, American
bop, and you could just about make a contact just about any time you
want to.
Senator DANIEL. What is the name?
Mr. KERLEY. I don't know, I don't know the name of the place.
Senator DANIEL. You go to this American bop place, find somebody there to sell to you?
Mr. KERLEY. Practically every time that you would want it.
Senator DANIEL. Do you take your own needle across?
Mr. KERLEY. No, sir; they furnish the needle and everything.
3456
Senator DANIEL. How did you miss that? When I went in-you
went in as a GI?
Mr. KERLEY. I went in as a volunteer GI.
Senator DANIEL. That is the way I went in. They gave us pictures
and lectures on a lot of different things. You didn't get any of that?
Mr. KERLEY. No, sir, I didn't. Only thing, when I went in the
service, asked if you are a narcotic addict, have you ever used drugs,
that was in Corpus Christi they asked, only thing they quizzed me
about.
Senator DANIEL. You said you were not?
Mr. KERLEY. I wasn't at that time.
selling it?
Mr. KERLEY. Like I say, Gifu, Japan, there, what you call prostitutino, house.
Senator DANIEL. They tell me it is the worst place in Japan.
Mr. KERLEY. I think you're talking about Kobe.
Senator DANIEL. I think it is the worst place where he was stationed
eral Hospital.
Senator DANIEL. What was that year ?
Mr. KELEY. 1951, 1952.
Senator DANIEL. Two years after you started using heroin?
and after I got hit and got some shots of morphine and felt all right.
Senator DANIEL. Then you got shot with heroin?
Mr. KrnmzY. After I got back to Tokyo Hospital I got a shot of
morphine and heroin.
3457
Senator DANIEL. Your platoon sergeant knew you were using the
drug?
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
KERLEY.
No, sir.
3458
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
TRAFFIC
Senator
DANIEL.
and clothes?
Mr.
KERLEY.
different hotels, so forth and so on, also receive a disability from the
Government.
Senator DANIEL. What kind of disability?
Mr. KERLEY. I got wounded in Korea there, disabled, disabled
veteran.
Senator
DANIEL.
heroin with?
Mr. KERLEY. No, sir; I have too many bills to pay to get heroin at
the present.
Senator
DANIEL.
Mr. KERLEY. Heroin money, I play "chunk" and dominoes and shoot
take care of your habit and all your fine clothes and all your other
obligations you have to violate some laws other than gambling laws?
Mr. KERLEY. I tell you, sir, I never have violated any laws, but I
felt sometimes like doing it, and if I had enough nerve to do it I would
have, but I have never violated any other law to get narcotics. I have
always managed enough, gambled to get it.
Senator DANIEL. You don't always win, do you?
Mr.
KERLEY.
Senator
DANIEL.
I I I I
3459
simply to show how a known addict at least with respect to you, could
cross the border without any trouble to buy heroin over in Nuevo
Laredo. Do you think that is right?
Mr. KERLEY. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. That is easy; isn't it?
Mr. KERLEY. What's that?
Senator DANIEL. You can go over to Laredo, cross the bridge right
in front of American officials, go over there and buy your heroin in
Nuevo Laredo; that is pretty easy to do, isn't it?
Mr. KERLEY. Yes, sir; it is.
Senator DANIEL. You don't
11111
3460
Senator
DANIEL.
Mr. G~i E. And, anyway, the next time I went over there
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
The next
time I didn't go to that bar, I went to another bar. I was over there
three times and
Senator DANIEL. All that was this year?
Mr. GRICE. All that been this year, three times. And he asked
me, another one asked me did I want anything. I said, yes, give
me a shot of "coke."
Senator DANIEL. What?
Mr. GltiCE. "Coke."
Senator 1)ANMi. Cocaine?
Mr. GricE. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. The last trip did you buy a shot of cocaine?
Mr. GrcE. The last time I got a shot of it.
Senator DAML. How much did it cost you?
Mr. GRicF. A dollar and a half..
Senator DANIEL. And the last time you were over there you really
went to Nuevo Laredo to take a man who wanted to make a connection?
Mr. GirE. You would say that. Another man.
111111111
3461
DANIEL.
He has what?
111111111
3462
Senator DANIEL. Well, now, didn't you put some in a finger stall,
Senator DANIEL. You know if you do give this committee any false
testimony you would be subject to being tried on perjury charge?
Mr. BONNEB. That I know, sir.
Senator DANIEL. So don't take any chance on that because there are
witnesses who told this committee or at least people told this committee you did do that, that you brought some back by putting it in a rubber finger stall and swallowing it. At least you tried to do that, didn't
you?
Mr. BONNEE. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. You didn't do that?
Mr. BONNEE. I didn't do that.
Senator DANIEL. Have you ever done that?
Mr. BONNEE. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. You do know of some who have brought it back
that way, don't you?
Mr. BONNEE. No, sir, to be frank, sir, it's the first time I was ever
familiar with any narcotics being brought across any border.
Senator DANIEL. Didn't you buy four grams to be brought with
you?
Mr. BONNEE. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Did you have any delivered back to you?
Mr. BONNEE. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Now, referring back to you, Horace Grice, didn't
you tell the officers Bonnee swallowed 4 grams of heroin?
Mr. GRICE. No, sir; no, sir. I didn't tell him about any 4 grams.
3463
Mr.
GASQUE.
To your knowledge.
drugs?
Mrs.
Mr.
your arm, about the top of your
arm down to your fingertips you have needle marks?
3464
Mr. GAsQuE. The police officer stated that it was one-eighth full,
behind the radiator, it would have evaporated had it been there any
length of time. Who else had access to that room?
Mrs. K-ucKF. Robert Kennedy and I were there. All the maids and
housekeepers in the hotel had access to the room.
Mr. GASQUE. What about the barbiturates found in your room?
Mrs. KUCKER. They were like everything else, I did not know they
were there. It is a transient hotel room. I had no idea they were
there.
Mr. GASQUE. You know that eight, what is called so-called redbird
capsules were found?
Mrs. KUcKF. The officers showed them to me.
Mr. GASQUE. Now, on Friday, December 9, at the county jail did you
have a conversation with the detectives, Phil Baker and Buckaloo?
Mrs.
KUCKER.
Yes, sir.
Mr. GASQUIE. What occurred during that conversation, what did you
talk about?
Mrs. KUCKER. I asked them if, in the event they were going to prosecute this case, if I could take the charge off the boy with me and take it
myself.
Mr. GASQUE. You told the officers you were willing to plead guilty?
Mrs. KUCKER. Yes, sir.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIML.
3465
Senator DANIEL. How long have you been in charge of the narcotics detail?
Mr. -IUTTON. For the past year, sir.
Senator DANnEL. How many men do you have on the detail ?
Mr. HUTTON. We have 10 men.
Senator DANIEL. I wonder if you could bring us up to date on the
testimony of Captain Bichsel, who testified last time. I wonder if
you could bring us up to date on what has happened in San Antonio
since our committee was here about 60 days ago. The committee has
heard some things through newspapers. Would you give us some
idea as to arrests or whatever has occurred, to bring us up to date?
Mr. HUTTON. All right, sir. At that time we were conducting an
undercover investigation with Mr. Naylor of the department of public
safety and Mr. Tom Bromley of the Federal Narcotics Agency.
Through the result of that we were able to make a total of 78 arrests
on 54 different individuals and seize large quantities of drugs.
Senator DANIEL. That is within the last 60 days?
Mr. HUTTON. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. I believe that we heard you had made the largest
seizure of heroin that has ever been made in San Antonio during that
time.
Mr. HUTTON. That was shortly after the raid, sir, approximately
a week after.
Senator DANIEL. Was that part of the same raids or separate?
Mr. HUTTON. That was a separate investigation that Mr. Bromley
initiated.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
someone who had been selling barbiturates at junior high school since
we were here last. Has there been quite a few sales to students at the
high schools?
Mr.
HUTTON.
Senator
DANIEL.
3466
Senator
DAN IEL.
she was still operating, somebody living at 514 Ashby Street here in
San Antonio. Have you had any investigation there to see if any
drugs are still being sold in her place?
Mr. HuTTON. We conducted approximately a 2-week investigation
there and we were able to find nothing to support those charges.
Senator
DANIEL.
3467
Plans were laid Wednesday for the organization of the Narcotics Education
Committee of San Antonio, which seeks to wipe out dope traffic through education
of youth and adults.
High school student leaders, school officials, youth workers, and representatives
of women's civic and religious groups expressed their views on narcotics.
COMMITTEES
NAMED
Ten committees were named to deal with various aspects of the narcotics prob-
Police Juvenile officer Capt. G. E. Matheny said he and other officers had been
giving talks on narcotics to high school students through physiology and physical
education departments.
He declared:
"The response of the students really has been something to hear. They have
partial knowledge of the narcotics situation. We must be sure they have the
right knowledge and not just that found on the streets."
Direct questions were put to students present.
When asked where they had obtained knowledge of how heroin is used most
of them said they had learned from Matheny's talks. Several said they had
read it in the newspapers.
FULL STORY
The young people emphasized importance of their knowing the full story, not
Just a partial one. They said merely partial knowledge tends to incite curiosity
and do a lot more harm than a presentation of all the facts.
Several students told how Matheny had illustrated his talks with actual
apparatus used to give narcotics injections.
This satisfied normal curiosity and enabled young people to recognize the
apparatus, they said.
Asked when in what grade it was desirable to begin narcotics instruction,
several said it should be initiated in the seventh grade, when students first enter
junior school.
Next executive committee meeting will be held February 7.
3468
uct of these hearings where the local press, radio and television let
the people know what is going on?
Mr. HUTTON. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. The purpose of these hearings is: we want to
get evidence so we can recommend to Congress.
Mr. HUTTON. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. But do you feel that the byproduct of these hearinos has been to interest people and get support from people in the
fight against narcotics?
Mr. HUTTON. Yes, sir, it has, that has been mentioned several times
by the various parties contacting this office.
Senator DANIEL. I'll say this, we can hold these hearings week after
week and the public would never know about it, this court room only
holds a limited number of people, the public would never have become awakened to the subject as much as they have been here in San
Antonio, I agree with you, had it not been for the newspapers of San
Antonio, radio stations and television stations like WOAI which
has carried every minute of our hearings and KENS having rebroadcasts, and I want to commend as a public service the work that they
have done in making this evidence, these hearings available to the
people of San Antonio and this area of the State of Texas. I think
it is a splendid public service. I am glad to hear you say that you
have seen results from it.
You know when the people in our country really know that something like this is wrong and wake up to it, we can get something done
about it, in my opinion. And I want to express this word of appreciation to those that have made it possible for the people in this community to know about the seriousness of the narcotics problem. I
want to thank you for all of your cooperation with this committee.
Now, at the end of Lieutenant Hutton's testimony this report from
the San Antonio Police Department concerning the arrests on narcotic
cases will be included.
(Exhibit No. 20 follows:)
EXHIBIT No. 20
SAN ANTONIO POLICE DEPARTMENT
1
Age group
17 to 20
-----------------
21 to30 -------------------
Marihuana
33
68
18
10
129
68.04
Colored
White
Latin
Heroin
Marihuana
Heroin
Marihuana
Heroin
35
110
29
10
2
9
8
5
2
11
5
3
7
42
20
8
2
16
6
1
184
24
9+
21
77
22+
25
Results of the following listed raids which were conducted on November 26,
1955, in cooperation with the State, Federal, and local narcotics division; are
included in the above figures.
Is
3469
White
Heroin
Marlhuana
Colored
Heroin
Marihuana
17 to 20----------------------------------5
21 to 30 ----------------------------------7
31 to 40 ------------------------------------------41 to 50 ----------------------------------------------
6 ------------1
17 ------------1
-------------------11.
2
6
1
1
2
2
26 ------------3.7
9
25.74
12
70.37
1
Possession and/or sale arrests for 1953 -------------------------------Possession and/or sale arrests for 1954-------------------------------Possession and/or sale arrests for 1955 (to Dec. 12) --------------------
138
138
206
Senator
DANIEL.
position ?
Mr. FLEISHMAN. Lawrence Fleishman, supervising customs agent
of the 10th Customs Agency District. That comprises all of the State
of Arizona, New Mexico, Texas, and a small portion of the State of
Louisiana.
Senator DANIEL. Mr. Flieshman, since we are going to set a final
deadline on this hearing at this time, 1 o'clock, and we have several
other witnesses, in a few minutes will you sum up any additional information that has occurred, any change in the situation since our
last hearing here about 60 days ago?
Mr. FLEISHMAN. Yes, sir. Within recent weeks, since the last hearing that was held here in San Antonio, I was visited in my office in
El Paso, which is the headquarters office of this district, by two Mexican officials. They were Federal officers from Mexico City. They
told me that they had been sent to Juarez to work on narcotic problems,
among other things, and I understood from them that other Federal
police had been sent, I believe by the Attorney General's office in
Mexico City to other points along the border. They requested our
cooperation and assistance, and I assured them it would be forthcoming at any time. I also told them that if they run into any difficulties
in any kind of a narcotic smuggling or marihuana smuggling case
that if we could develop for them we would be glad to do so, even to
the point of paying informers.
Senator DANIEL. Now, have you noticed any results from this work
or any recent work on the part of the Mexican officials? Several
things have been said in this hearing, where it looked as if some of the
local Mexican officials at least weren't fighting this problem in accordance with their own laws. I understand you have some instances in
which the Mexican Government has been doing certain things?
Mr. FLEISHMAN. Yes, sir; I think I have.
Senator DANIEL. Would you cite those?
Mr. FLEISHMAN. I would say at the present
3470
as they have ever been. I don't think there's a so-called shooting gallery in actual operation at the present time. We can't get an informer
to point out one actually operating at the present time.
Senator DANML. When were things tightened up?
Mr. FLEISHmAN. I would say within the past 2 or 3 months. Also
3471
all the local officers and Federal officers who have assisted us throughout these hearings.
Now, what is your name?
TESTIMONY OF RUDY FLORES
Mr. FLORES. Rudy G. Flores.
Senator DANIEL. F-l-o-r-e-s ?
Mr. FLORES. Yes.
Senator DANiEL. All right, who else, you have Mike Georges, he
is his brother?
Mr. FLORES. Yes, sir, brother of George Georges.
sion.
I will send you his picture and see if you can identify it.
picture of George Georges will be the next exhibit, Exhibit No. 18.
(Exhibit No. 18 follows:)
EXHIBIT No.
18
George Georges
The
3472
19
Simon Rodriguez
1111111111
3473
us what you know, tell us why you believe someone owns it, not
just what you think.
Mr. FLORES. Well, all, I know that.
Senator DANIEL. Did you ever hear this nephew say anything about
owning it?
Mr. FLORES. Well, Julio said that this was his nephew's place.
Senator DANIEL. When you were over there in Mexico?
Mr. FLORES. Yes, sir.
Senator
DANIEL.
heroin ?
Mr. FLOmS. Heroin.
Senator DANIEL. How was it being smuggled back here in San
Antonio?
Mr. FLORES. Either taxicab driven across the border or by people
unknown to the customs agents, Julio's friends, and people from here
Unknown also to the customs agents, sent out by Simon Rodriguez
who has been over there several times for heroin which he has
brought back himself.
Senator DANIEL. Well, did you ever see any of this smuggling take
1111111111
3474
Mr. FLORES. No, sir, I never did go but one time, that was with Mike
Georges.
Senator DANIEL. Did you see him make arrangements ?
Mr. FLORES. He made arrangements.
Senator DANIEL. Did you see the heroin after it was brought back
over?
Mr. FLORES. Yes, sir; I did.
Senator DANIEL. Did you help sell it?
Mr. FLORES. Yes, Idid sell some.
Senator DANIEL. You sold for him?
Mr. FLORES. I sold to an agent of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics.
Senator DANIEL. You were arrested?
Mr. FLORES. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. You have been convicted; is that true?
Mr. FLORES. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. How many of these men have not been convicted
in this narcotic ring who were operating in 1954?
Mr. FLORES. George Georges was acquitted, and Simon Rodriguez
has not been arrested, Frank Bazan.
Senator DANIEL. They are still here in San Antonio?
Mr. FILoREs. Yes, sir.
court?
Mr. FLORES. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Or to a committee before?
Mr. FLORES. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. And you say that two of the men are under subpena.
Is Simon Rodriguez in the courtroom? Will he stand up?
Well, I thank you for this testimony. I may want to talk with you
again in a moment, but this committee will stand in recess subject to
the call of the chair.
(Committee recessed for a few minutes.)
Senator DANIEL. The committee will come back to order. Mr.
Speer, do you have any further questions of the witness?
Mr. SPEER. Did you actually make deliveries of heroin for indi-
vidual members of this group orMr. FLORES. Repeat the question, I did not hear you.
Mr. SPREER. Did you make deliveries of heroin, did you sell heroin
me.
3475
Mr SPEER. How about the money you received, who got it?
Georges.
Mr. SPEER. Did you ever see them divide any money?
Mr. FLORES. Simon Rodriguez and Frank Bazan and Mike Georges.
Mr. SPEER. You got heroin fTom each of those individuals?
Mr. FLORES. Yes, sir.
Mr. SPEER. Did you always turn the money over to the man who
gave you the heroin?
Mr. FLORES. George Georges.
Mr. SiPER. In each case?
Mr. FLOR.ES. Yes, sir.
Mr. SPEER. How did you happen to know the connection at Laredo,
who furnished, who introduced you so you could take-George
Georges?
Mr. FLORES. Well, the man, let me remember, been quite a while ago,
that that place is still operating, that individual is still there. Now,
we came back to clear up this matter, one or two other little items,
then to recess this hearing for good, except for one or two things we
want to place in the record. I think, yes, this witness may be excused.
I want to say I appreciated your coming before this committee even
though there is, or at least was, a fear in your mind about testifying
when one of these men was tried, there have been some threats around
here in San Antonio. I am glad to say it is the only place where any
have come to our knowledge and where something might be done to
witnesses. I just want you to know this: If anything should happen
to you or any member of your family we are going to have the whole
weight of the whole force of this Nation, as well as locally, on the
lookout for those who might be responsible for it.
Mr. FLORES. I appreciate that. Thank you.
Senator DANIEL. We want it to be where people can come and testify before committees and courts freely and without intimidation or
fear, so that we might do our duty without any fear of such thing
as that. I assure you the worst thing that could happen to anybody
whose names you have called here would be for something to happen
to you or some of your family. Thank you very much.
3476
No. 21
MEDICAL CENTER BuILDING
DEAR. SIR: This is to certify that Arturo Goytia Castillo of 1117 S. Tays Street
at present is under my care. He presented himself for hospital admission on
December 13 for treatment of drug heroin addiction. He was hospitalized in
St. Joseph's Sanatorium.
His physical condition was such, that he could not make his appearance in
San Antonio on December 14 in accordance with your subpena. It would have
been inhuman to expect him to make this trip without being furnished narcotics.
Furnishing him narcotics would have been unwise and contrary to sound medical
Judgment.
I am anticipating that he will recover from his drug addiction. He will be
able to appear before your committee at some later date.
I will be happy to cooperate with your committee in any way possible.
Sincerely,
ARLIN B. CooPER, M. D.
Senator DANIEL. Did you file an income tax return for 1954?
Mr. MORENO. Is it necessary to have the television cameras?
Senator DANIEL. No, it isn't necessary to keep them. I asked if you
filed an income tax return for 1954.
Mr. MORENO. I would like to have them focused off me because I
can't hardly talk.
Senator DANIEL. What did you say?
Mr. MORENO. I said television cameras make me nervous, I can't
hardly talk.
Senator DANIEL. I don't believe any television camera is on. I
II 1
3477
Mr. MORENO. No, sir, I did not have a sufficient income to file income
tax.
Senator DANIEL. All right, did you file one in 1953?
Mr. MORENO. In 1953, it was the same way.
Senator DANIEL. Well, have you brought us copies of any income
tax return called for in your subpena?
M[r. MoRENo. I have no copies at all.
Senator
DANIEL,.
Senator
hardly.
Senator
DANIEL.
Horseshoe.
Mr.
MORENO.
No interest whatever.
Senator DANIEL. Have you ever seen juveniles hanging out there,
young people under 21?
Mr. MORENO. Like to consult the attorney.
(Witness consulted his attorney.)
Senator DANIEL. The question is whether you have ever seen juveniles, young people hanging out around that bar?
Mr. MORENO. No, sir, not to my knowledge I haven't seen juveniles.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator
DANIEL.
Senator DANrEL. Well, has anybody else at the bar been charged
with that to your knowledge?
Mr. MORENO. The bartender.
Senator DANIEL. Now, you told us when we were here last, you had
not sold any heroin recently here in San Antonio. How long ago
since you sold heroin here in San Antonio?
I I I
3478
anybody.
(Witness consulted his attorney.)
Mr. MORENO. Not since I have been out of prison.
Senator DANIEL. Well, you were once convicted for selling mari-
Mr. MORENO.
prison?
Mr. MORENO. In, I think in 1952,1 think it was.
Senator DANIEL. How many times have you been convicted of selling
Mr. MORENO. I haven't been convicted of selling.
Senator DANIEL. And since you got out the last time in 1952 you are
telling this committee you never sold any marihuana or heroin, is that
right.
Mr. MoRENo. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Have
since 1952?
Mr. MORENO. Since 1952, no, sir.
Mr. MORENO. Well, I don't understand why you consider the family.
Senator DANIEL. Well, you better ask me why I consider the family.
Are you married?
Mr. MORENO. Yes, sir.
3479
The house is
partly my sister's.
Senator DANIEL. Do you pay her any rent?
Mr. MORENO. No, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Do you live there free?
Mr. MORENO. Well, I have never had a job since I have been here.
Senator DANIEL. Since 1952 you never had a job?
Mr. MORENO. With the exception of the time I went to work at
rent at home.
Senator DANIEL. I say were you paid anything?
Mr. MORENO. Salary, no, sir; no salary.
Senator DANIEL. What did you get?
Mr. MORENO. Well, I have a home to share.
Senator DANIEL. No, no, why would you work down at the Horse
Shoe, you own no interest?
Mr. MORENO. Because the place belongs to my sister and she has
been losing a lot of money at the place. I figured if anybody could
take care of her interest I could do it.
Senator DANIEL. You have been working free?
Mr. MORENO. Not exactly free, because f live with her and share her
home.
Senator DANIEL. She gives you a home and something to eat?
Mr. MORENO. Yes, sir.
Senator DANIEL. Has she cut you off since the hearings?
Mr. MoRENO. It's not she has cut me off, people been coming there
and telling all the time about the television performance an a lot
of people didn't know about my background. Now they know, they
gIo me a cold shoulder. I feel I am not wanted around, therefore I
don't like to stay around.
Senator DANIEL. You think it hurts you to be down around the
Horse Shoe?
I iI
3480
more people?
Mr. MORENO. Yes, sir.
Senator
DANEL.
out of prison.
Senator DANIEL. I want you to know we wouldn't have called for
you to testify before 1952, you know that, don't you, you know some
officers and people think you have been engaged in narcotic traffic since
1952?
Mr. MORENO. Well, naturally that is, it would be that way, if a man
you have not, what about delivering narcotics, have you ever delivered
any marihuana or heroin?
Mr. MoRENO. No, sir; I have not delivered any narcotics.
Senator DANIEL. All right, stand aside.
1 0-
APPENDIX
Contents: Exhibits 1-7, inclusive
EXHIBIT No. 1
(The following laws were enacted at the Regular Session of the 54th Legislature in 1955 and are taken from the General Laws as published under the
authority of the State of Texas:)
CONTRABAND
NARCOTICS--TRANSPORTATION
OR POSSESSION
CHAPTER 300
3481
3482
SEC. 4. The seizing officer shall immediately file in the name of the State of
Texas with the Clerk of the District Court of the county in which the seizure
is made a notice of said seizure and intended forfeiture. Certified copies of
such notice shall be served upon the following persons as provided for the
serving of process by citation as in other civil cases:
(a) The owner of said vessel, vehicle or aircraft, if address is known.
(b) Upon any registered lienholder as provided by law.
(c) If the subject matter sought to be forfeited in such suit is a motor vehicle
susceptible of registration under the motor vehicle registration laws of this
State and if there is any reasonable cause to believe that such motor vehicle has
been registered under the laws of this State, the officer in charge of flUng suit
for forfeiture thereof shall first make inquiry of the Highway Department of
this State as to what the records of such Department show as to who is the
record owner of such motor vehicle and who, if any holds any lien or liens against
such vehicle, such inquiry to be answered in writing by the Highway Department. In the event such answer states that the record owner of such motor
vehicle is any person other than the person who was in possession of it when
seized or states that any person or persons holds any lien or liens against such
vehicle, the officer in charge of filing such suit shall cause such record owner
and also any such record lien holders to be named as parties defendant in such
suit and to be served with citation of the pendency thereof in accordance with
Rule 108 or Rule 109, as the applicable rule may be, of the Texas Rules of Civil
Procedure as same now read or as hereafter amended. If the automobile or
motor vehicle shall not be registered in Texas, then said Attorney General, District Attorney and County Attorney, or any of them, shall ascertain the name
and address of the person in whom said vehicle is licensed, and if said vehicle
is licensed in a state which has in effect a certificate of title law, he shall also
ascertain the registered owner and any leinholder of record who shall be made
parties to the suit and shall be served with process as provided for in other
civil suits.
(d) If a person was in possession of the subject matter sought to be forfeited
at the time that it was seized, such person shall likewise be made a party defendant to such suit. If no person was in possession of the subject matter sought to
be forfeited at the time that it was seized and if the owner thereof is unknown,
the officer in charge of filing such suit shall file with the Clerk of the Court In
which such suit is filed an affidavit to such effect, whereupon the Clerk of such
Court shall issue a citation for service by publication addressed to "the Unknown
Owner of --------- ," filling in the indicated blank space with a reasonably
detailed description of the subject matter sought to be forfeited and shall contain
the other requisites prescribed in Rules 114 and 115 and shall be served as provided by Rule 116 of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure as same now provide
or as same may be hereafter amended.
(e) No suit instituted pursuant to the provisions of this section of this Act
shall proceed to trial unless the judge hearing said suit shall be satisfied that
all of the foregoing provisions of subsections (c) and (d) of this section have
been complied with, and the officer in charge of such suit shall first introduce
into evidence at the trial thereof the answer received from the Highway Department in compliance with subsection (c) of this section or prove to the satisfaction
of the judge hearing such suit that such subsection (c) is not applicable.
ANSWER
SEC. 5. An owner of a seized vessel, vehicle or aircraft may file a verified
answer within twenty (20 ) days of the mailing or publication of notice of seizure.
If no such answer is filed, the court shall hear evidence of violation of this
Act and shall upon motion forfeit such vessel, vehicle, or aircraft to the Texas
Department of Public Safety, Narcotics Section. If such answer is filed, a time
for hearing on forfeiture shall be set within thirty (30) days of the date of filing
the answer and notice of such hearing shall be sent to all owners as prescribed
in Section 4 of this Act.
HEARING
3483
been filed by the owner of said vessel, vehicle, or aircraft, the notice of seizure
may be introduced into evidence and shall be prima facie evidence of said
violation.
At the hearing, any claimant of any right, title, or interest in the vessel,
vehicle, or aircraft may prove his lien, mortgage, or conditional sales contract,
to be bona fide and created without knowledge that the vessel, vehicle, or
aircraft was to be used in violation of this Act.
RELEASE OR FORFEITURE
proof at the hearing shall disclose that the interest of any bona
fide lien holder, mortgagee, or conditional vendor is greater than the present
value of the vessel, vehicle, or aircraft, the court shall order such vessel, vehicle,
or aircraft released to him. If such interest is less than the present value,
and upon proof of violation of this Act, the court shall order the vessel, vehicle,
or aircraft forfeited to the State.
SEC. 7. If
SALE
3484
life or for any terms of years not less than ten (10), and the benefits of the
suspended sentence law shall not be available to a defendant convicted for a violation of the provisions of this Act shall be entitled to the benefits of probation
under the Adult Probation and Parole Law, as provided therein.
"(2) Any adult person who hires, employs, or uses a minor under nineteen
(19) years of age in unlawfully transporting, carrying, selling, giving away,
preparing for sale, or peddling any narcotic drug, or who unlawfully sells,
gives, furnishes, administers, or offers to sell, furnish, give, administer any
narcotic drug to a minor under nineteen (19) years of age shall, upon conviction, be punished by confinement in the penitentiary for not less than five (5)
years nor more than life, and upon the second conviction therefor shall be
punished by confinement in the penitentiary for life or for any term of years
not less than ten (10), and the benefits of the suspended sentence law shall iiot
be available to a defendant convicted for a violation of the provisions of this
Act."
SEC. 2. The fact that violators of the Uniform Narcotic Drug Act are not
sufficiently punished, thus allowing Texas to be termed "the drug gateway for
the United States," and the fact that the protection of the welfare, health,
peace, and safety of the people of Texas requires the Texas Legislature to provide more exacting punishments for the commission of such a heinous erinle as
dope peddling, creates an emergency and an imperative public necessity that
the Constitutional Rule requiring Bills to be read on three several days in each
House be suspended, and this Rule is hereby suspended, and that this Act take
effect and be in force from and after its passage, and it is so enacted.
Passed the House, March 28, 1955, by a viva-voce vote; passed the Senate
May 11, 1955, by a viva-voce vote.
Approved May 25, 1955.
Effective 90 days after June 7, 1955, date of adjournment.
NARCOTIC
385
3485
or confined in Jail for a period of not less than thirty (30) days nor more than
two (2) years, or by such fine and imprisonment. For any second or subsequent
violation of this Act, any person so violating the same shall be confined in the
penitentiary not less than two (2) years nor more than ten (10) years; provided
that upon any second or subsequent conviction the benefits of the suspended
sentence law shall not be available to a defendant convicted for a violation of
the provisions of this Act; provided further that any person convicted of any
second or subsequent violation of this Act shall be entitled to the benefits of probation under the Adult Probation and Parole Law, as provided therein."
SEC. 3. Section 2, of Chapter 490, Acts of the Fifty-first Legislature, 1949 (sec.
2 of art. 726b, Vernon's Texas Penal Code), is amended 21 to read as follows:
"SEc. 2. Any person, firm or corporation violating any of the provisions of this
Act shall be fined any amount not exceeding Three Thousand Dollars ($3,000) or
confined in jail for a period of not less than thirty (30) days nor more than two
(2) years, or by both such fine and imprisonment. For any second or subsequent
violation of this Act, any person so violating the same shall be confined in the
penitentiary not less than two (2) years nor more than ten (10) years; provided
that upon any second or subsequent conviction the benefits of the suspended
sentence law shall not be available to a defendant convicted for a violation of the
provisions of this Act; provided further that any person convicted of any second
or subsequent violation of this Act shall be entitled to the benefits of probation
under the Adult Probation and Parole Law, as provided therein."
SEC. 4. If any provision of this Act or the application thereof to any person or
circumstance is held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect other provisions or
applications of the Act which can be given effect without the invalid provision or
application, and to this end the provisions of this Act are declared to be severable.
SEC. 5. The fact that the unlawful sale and distribution of narcotics and barbiturates is a menace to society and is undermining the youth of this State creates
an emergency and an imperative public necessity that the Constitutional Rule
requiring bills to be read on three several days in each House be suspended, and
said Rule is hereby suspended, and that this Act shall take effect and be in force
from and after its passage, and it is so enacted.
Passed the House, April 29, 1955: Yeas 137, Nays 1; House concurred in Senate
amendments, May 17, 1955: Yeas 131, Nays 0; passed the Senate, as amended,
May 11, 1955: Yeas 28, Nays 0.
Approved June 1, 1955.
Effective June 1, 1955.
NARCOTIC DRUGS-PARAPHERNALIA
CHAPTER 386
AN ACT Amending Sections 2 and 2A of Chapter 169 of the Acts of the Forty-fifth Legis-
lature, 1937, being Sections 2 and 2A of Article 725b of Vernon's Penal Code, to define
additional offenses to possess paraphernalia for smoking narcotic drugs, or possess certain paraphernalia for using narcotic drugs ; providing certain exceptions ; and declaring
an emergency
3486
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
3487
TRAFFIC
SEC. 3. Section 3, paragraph (2), Subsection (b) of Chapter 413, Acts of the
52nd Legislature, 1951, (codified under art. 726c, Vernon's Penal Code) is
amended " to read as follows:
"The refilling of any prescription for a barbiturate, unless and as designated
on the prescription by the practitioner, or through authorization by the practitioner at the time of refilling."
SEC. 4. That Section 3, paragraph (2), Subsection (d), Acts of the 52nd Legislature, 1951, (codified under art. 726c, Vernon's Penal Code), be, and the
same is hereby repealed,"9
SEC. 5. Section 6, paragraph (a), of Chapter 413, Acts of the 52d Legislature,
1951, (codified under art. 726c, Vernon's Penal Code), is amended d to read as
follows:
"Persons (other than carriers) to whom the provisions of Section 5 are applicable shall: (1) make a complete record of all stocks of barbiturates on hand
on the effective date of this Act and retain such record for not less than two
calendar years immediately following such date; and
(2)
or applications of the Act which can be given effect without the invalid provision or application; and to this end the provisions of this Act are declared
to be severable.
SEC. 8. All amendments made by this Act shall become operative upon its
effective date.
SEC. 9. The fact that there should be no impediment to the lawful sale and
professional distribution of narcotics and barbiturates to the citizens of this
State in need of such medication for reasons of health, creates an emergency,
and an imperative public necessity that the Constitutional Rule requiring bills
to be read on three several days in each House be suspended; and said Rule
is hereby suspended, and this Act shall take effect and be in force from and
after its passage, and it is so enacted.
Passed the Senate, April 5, 1955: Yeas 27, Nays 0; passed the House, May 26,
1955: Yeas 131, Nays 2.
Approved June 22, 1955.
Effective June 22, 1955.
EXHIBIT No. 2
TESTImONY OF LAWRENCE FLEISHMAN, SUPERVISING CUSTOMS AGENT, 10TH CUSTOMS AGENCY DISTRICT, ACCOMPANIED BY JOHN J. GIVENS, ASSISTANT SUPERVISING CusToMs AGENT
(Before the Subcommittee To Investigate Juvenile Delinquency of the Committee on the Judiciary, United States Senate, 83d Cong. 2d sess., pursuant to
Ann.
Ann.
Ann.
Ann.
3488
My background, I have little better than 37 years of Government service, including 9 active years of military service.
I was originally a customs inspection agent in 1938. Prior to that time I had
been in the collectors force in Rochester, N. Y.
I have been in a supervisory capacity since 1936. I have been in the Bureau
of Customs in a supervisory capacity and I have been a supervising customs
agent in 4 out of 9 customs agency districts.
Mr. BOBo. Mr. Givens, would you give your address, name, and background
and your position, also?
Mr. GIVENS. My name is John J. Givens, assistant supervising customs agent.
I entered the customs in Tampa, Fla., in 1938, as a clerk; 2 years later I went to
Miami as inspector for 6Y2 years.
I was made a customs agent and in 1942 was transferred to Savannah, Ga., as
agent in charge.
In October 1946, I was transferred to Laredo, Tex., as agent in charge there and
remained there until August of 1952, when I was made assistant supervising customs agent in El Paso and have been here since.
Mr. BoBo. Your agency is charged with the enforcement?
Mr. FLEISHMAN. With the enforcement and investigation of any violation of
customs laws and other laws enforced by customs, of which there are a great
many.
Mr. BoBO. Would you go through some of the various laws which you are responsible for?
Mr. FLEISHMAN. We assist in the enforcement of the Gold Reserve Act, various
public health laws. One of those is the prevention of the introduction in the
United States of psittacean birds; the embargoes that might be placed from time
to time, such as the hoof-and-mouth disease, which is presently being applied
along the Mexican border.
Incidentally, that so-called Charlie Cattle case originated in this office here.
It has been investigated by an agent out of this office.
Smuggling of all sort; any frauds upon the customs revenue; many technical
investigations which we also make, such as drawback, under valuation, foreign
market value; personnel investigations and character investigations; security investigations, and one thing or another. I could go through maybe a hundred of
them.
Mr. BoBo. What percentage of your investigations would you say were concerned directly with narcotics, the smuggling of narcotics and marihuana?
Mr.
FLEISHMAN.
of our enforcement activities involve the smuggling of marihuana and opium and
other forms of narcotic drugs.
The biggest problem in volume in the handling of marihuana is in the eastern
end of this district. That would be in the area surrounding Laredo and Brownsville, although we do have some marihuana here around El Paso and some to
the west of it.
Chairman LANGE& I wonder, Judge Ford, you being a judge of the Customs
Court, if you would mind sitting up here and possibly interrogating the customs
men.
3489
I understand it is the resinous sap that gives it the desired strength for
marihuana smokers.
In certain areas of the country, or in northern Mexico, the climatic conditions or soil are ideal for growing what they call good marihuana. A good
marihuana smoker can probably tell good marihuana from bad, the same way a
whisky drinker can tell bonded whisky from poor-grade whisky.
Mr. BoBo. Do you have any figures there as to the seizures your office might
have made in the district?
Mr. FLEISHMAN. Yes, sir. During the fiscal year-I would like to give you
these on a comparative basis-during the fiscal year 1952 within the district we
seized 1,156.9 pounds of bulk marihuana.
In the fiscal year 1953, we only got 282.6 pounds. That went up in the fiscal
year 1954 to 612.67 pounds.
On semiprepared marihuana, in fiscal year 1952 and 1953, our agents didn't
seize any, but in 1954 we got 131.8 pounds, of semiprepared marihuana.
In fiscal year 1952 we seized prepared marihuana, 226.4 pounds.
In 1953, 703.1 pounds, and in 1954, 428.7 pounds.
I might add that bulk marihuana reduced to seiniprepared would probably
be a pound and three-quarters to make a pound of semiprepared, and to get down
to your prepared marihuana I would say the figures would vary from 214 pounds
to 21/ pounds of bulk to make a pound of prepared.
By prepared, I mean screened, or so-called manicured marihuana, which is
ready for rolling in cigarettes.
Mr. BOBO. Do you have any estimates offhand as to the number of cigarettes
that might be in your seizures?
Mr. FLEISHMAN. No, sir. I believe 5 to 6 grains of marihuana in a cigarette
would be a very potent cigarette. These weights that I am giving you, by the
way, are in avoirdupois points.
Mr. BOBO. That would account for many thousands of cigarettes, the seizures
that you made there, if it had gone through it would be many thousands?
Mr. FLEISIMAN. Hundreds of thousands. We don't encounter too many cigarettes actually being smuggled, but I have a few figures here on it.
In fiscal year 1952 there were only 962 seized actually crossing the border or
seized for having been smuggled.
In 1953 we got 1,199.
In 1954, 1,734.
In other words, it is consistently increasing.
Now, when we come into opium or crude opium, in the fiscal year 1952 we
didn't get any, but in fiscal year 1953 we had a total of 13 major seizures.
We got 130.2 avoirdupois pounds of crude opium.
In the fiscal year 1954 we got 3 pounds and 10 ounces.
Mr. BoBo. Now, this crude opium is not for smoking; it needs to be manufactured in some other form before it can be used?
Mr.
FLEISHMAN.
Yes, sir.
3490
Mr. FLEISHMAN. No, sir; I would say that the seizures In the cases that we
make, we try to concentrate on major cases, and that is major distributors,
and a great deal, if not all of our stuff, is consigned to the larger cities.
We try to stop it here on the border, but a great deal of the seizures that we
make, and we have made seizures, single seizures, by the way, in years gone by,
running up into hundreds of pounds-I think the largest seizure we made was 379
pounds of manicured marihuana. That was all destined for the northern
markets.
You will find in the eastern end of this district around Laredo and Browns.
ville, that the traffic comes down from bigger cities, such as Houston, Dallas,
Fi ort Worth, San Antonio, even New York, Chicago, Philadelphia, Baltimore,
Washington.
In fact, we have chased cases right into New York. I would say that our
seizures definitely are not consigned over here for the purpose of use by teenagers, especially along this border.
Mr. BoBo. Teen-agers would be more likely to be the ultimate consumer of
marihuana than adults would.
I was asking that merely as a matter of opinion.
Mr. FLEISHMAN. If you want an opinion, I would say I don't believe so. I
believe, however, where marihuana is available there is certainly going to be a
certain percentage of it come into the hands of teen-agers.
I don't think anybody can successfully deny that.
This is a picture of various marihuana leaves and flowering tops.
These are opium poppy seeds.
These are opium poppies.
That is smaller, a smaller part of the growth, and there is an exceptionally
large one.
This was smoking opium originally, but it is hardened now. It looks like a
gum opium.
This is so-called Mexican brown heroin, cocaine, morphine.
This is morphine in tubes.
This board here was put out by the California State Board of Pharmacy. It
was for the purpose of acquainting enforcement agencies with the so-called
goof balls, various forms of barbiturates that are used, I would say there,
almost exclusively by teenagers.
Mr. BOBO. Thank you very much, Mr. Fleishman, for that board.
Mr. GEORGE DENTON (citizen of El Paso, Tex., retired). Is that the same as
loco weed?
Mr. FLEISHMAN. No, sir.
Chairman LANGER. Does anybody else want to ask any questions?
How about you, Father? Do you want to ask any questions?
Father RAHM. NO, sir.
Chairman LANGER. We expect you to testify later on, but if there are any
questions you want to ask any witness, you may do so.
Father RAHM. I am in a rough district of town and I can't say that I have
ever had 1 day pass that I haven't seen 4 or 5 boys under the influence of
marihuana in our parish. It is no compliment to us at all. Maybe I am not up
on it enough to know the percentage of adults.
Mr. FLEISHMAN. I have no doubt what you say is absolutely correct. I have
no doubt as to what the source of marihuana might be.
But quite some time ago, with the assistance of the E1 Paso Police Department,
we worked together on it. We had a peddler here, we knew he was a consistent
smuggler, and it was his practice to roll them and carry them around in an
ordinary tin lunchbox. He was peddling them out in small quantities to anybody
he could sell them to.
We believe that most of his customers were teen-agers.
Now, when we finally took him into custody, we got, I think, a couple hundred
or a little more of marihuana cigarettes he was carting around in that bucket.
We tried, of course, to get his supply. He claimed he had no supply. He
explained that by saying, "Why put a lot of food in an icebox when I can go to
the corner grocer ?" He meant that he was having it smuggled over as he needed
it, because in that way he didn't have a lot of money involved, and if he got
caught he only had a small supply.
In spite of the fact that he only had a couple hundred cigarettes, we considered
it important to take him and put him out of circulation because of the persistent
manner in which he had been violating.
3491
While we only had a small quantity and we like to get volume if we can get
it, in his case over a period of years you can imagine the volume he got rid of.
I have no doubt practically all of his customers might have been teen-agers.
Chairman LANGER. Is the United States attorney here?
Mr. BOBO. I don't think he is now. He is in Federal court now.
Now, will you go ahead with your other seizures, Mr. Fleishman?
Mr. FLEISHMAN. Now, in 1953 we had 130.2 pounds avoirdupois of crude
opium. That included, I believe, 13 major seizures. One of those was 48 pounds
of opium which we took at Moffett, Tex. There is probably not a more likely
place in the United States to make an opium case than Moffett, Tex. We know
it came through or near the border of Presidio, Tex.
We had anticipated making several arrests in that case, but because of weather
conditions, when the case was finally made, we only got one man, and he was
the man that had it in his truck; he was the delivery man. He was a Chihuahua
police officer of some sort.
There are a couple other indictments we have in that case, but we have never
had the defendants. They are still in Mexico so far as we know.
Mr. BoBO. Do you know the particular territory where that gum opium was
going?
Mr. FLEISHMAN. Well, the seller of the opium who ran afoul of a customs undercover agent thought it was going to Los Angeles; we were pretty sure it was
going into the hands of the Government all the time.
Mr. BOBO. He really thought he was sending it to Los Angeles?
Mr. FLEISHMAN. Yes, sir.
3492
course, that is strictly wide-open spaces and we don't have any agents, but, of
course, we have customs officers, customs inspectors. We have a very good immigration patrol, and the BAI men and other agents working.
We are very fortunate in getting excellent cooperation from any police de.
partment we have ever called upon from sheriffs' offices-in fact, from all enforcement agencies. That is one thing in this entire district we are very
fortunate in because we have excellent cooperation from all enforcement agencies.
I would say that probably because I know them better, but in Tucson, Ariz.,
the police department and sheriffs' offices are just like our own. I could say
the same thing about the detective offices here in El Paso. We can walk in and
out of there any time and they give us anything and everything they have. I
think it is a wonderful organization.
Mr. BoBo. The recruiting of your agents is a rather difficult thing. It requires
a rather specialized person to handle this type of case, would you say?
Mr. FLEISHMAN. Mr. Bobo, you can't take a clerk out of an office and pin
a badge on him and make him an agent and expect him to go out here and
develop informers, which is one of the prime assets of a good agent in this
district, and develop the type of cases that I am speaking about.
You have to have a man in the first place who likes the work, and why
anybody would like it is a mystery to me because it is hard, arduous work,
requiring very long hours.
You have to be able to get along with people. You have to inspire confidence in people, especially in other law-enforcement officers. You have to have
a man who at all costs will keep his word. If he promises anything, he
has to come through with it; if it is to an informer or another officer, he has
to establish a reputation for being absolutely scrupulous in his dealings.
Mr. BOBO. It is rather difficult to pick men like that off the civil-service list,
I imagine.
Mr.
FLEISHMAN.
Mr.
FLEISHMAN.
Yes, sir.
number of agents we have had during the past 4 years since I have been here,
and I think we have approximately 20 percent less on a gradually declining
basis over that time I would like to give you the figures from fiscal 1948 to
date. These are for the entire district.
In fiscal year 1948 we had 276 arrests.
In fiscal year 1949, 293.
Fiscal year 1950, 194.
I came here in 1951. In fiscal year 1951 we had 283.
In fiscal year 1952, 399.
In fiscal year 1953, 355.
And in fiscal year 1954, we had 388.
In other words, in the past 4 fiscal years we averaged well in excess of
100 arrests a year more than we had in previous fiscal years, despite the declining number of agents we had doing the work.
In the current fiscal year, the first 2 months of this year we have had 86
arrests.
Mr. Bono. You have 10 months to go in this year.
Mr.
FLEISHMAN.
Yes, sir.
Mr.
FLESH MAN.
Yes, sir.
Mr. Bono. All these figures represent by and large major movers of narcotics?
Mr. BoBo. Every once in a while you would pick up a minor mover?
Mr. FLEISHMAN. We pick up minor mover cases, but the majority of our
cases are important ones. I can cite you three here we made in El Paso within
recent months.
We seized-it was 2 weeks ago this past Saturday-a Mexican doctor from
Juarez who operated a so-called alcoholic clinic, with 10 ounces which he
was in the act of delivering to an undercover customs agent. He had his scales
all set up when we cracked him and took him.
Prior to that, a couple months, we had 43 pounds of semiprepared marihuana
we took out here from 2 Mexican drivers. One, by the way, was the former heavyweight champion of Mexico.
3493
Not too long before that we had another case involving about 17 pounds of
mnarihuana, a small quantity of heroin, and a small quantity of opium, which was
being used for sample purposes.
We got two defendants in that case. I would say in each of these they can be
definitely termed major cases and major violators, because of the quantities
which they were pushing and in the case of this doctor he even suggested that
our agent, who was posing as a buyer, might want to hold off until he got hold of an
additional 22 ounces which he expected very shortly.
But we decided we had better not wait because something might go wrong.
So we took him.
Mr. BOBO. Do you know the retail value of 10 ounces of heroin?
Mr. FLEISHMAN. No, sir. Of course, the press likes the big figures, but I know
that this doctor wanted, he was selling it for $700, the quantity he had. He was
selling it for $700 for an apothecary ounce. They figure a gram as a level teaspoonful.
In the narcotic traffic they take a teaspoonful and level it off with a knife but
they like to get a curved blade so that they can scoop a little extra out of it.
Another thing in that narcotic traffic, as you can well imagine, everybody in
it is trying to trim everybody else. They cut it every time it is turned over;
they expect to double their money or more.
By the time it gets out to the poor addict it is cut and reduced until the percentage of actual heroin in the deck that he is buying is comparatively small. It
might start out as pure, but every time anybody touches it it is cut 50 percent or
more.
Mr. BoBo. Would you have any opinion as to what you think the extent of
the narcotic traffic or marihuana traffic in the United States is?
Mr. FLEISHMAN. No, sir; I have not, but I can tell you this: that consistently
In this customs agency district we account for, on a conservative figure, at least
50 percent of all customs arrests made in the United States.
Mr. Bono. That includes New York ports, San Francisco?
Mr. FLEISHMAN. Yes, sir. We have 9 customs agency districts and in this
agency district we account for over 50 percent of all customs arrests and convictions.
Mr. BoBo. Would you say that is true of seizures?
Mr. FLEISHMAN. I would say it is true of volume, and I would say it is probably
true of the number of seizures, especially narcotics because the greatest, the
biggest percentage of arrests are narcotic smuggling cases.
Mr. BoBo. Is it Mexican heroin, or heroin produced in Europe or the Far East?
Mr. FLEISHMAN. I believe it is Mexican heroin because they grow opium in the
western part of the country. Of course, it is a clandestine operation.
I do believe that the Mexican Government is making a sincere effort to eliminate the traffic, to eradicate it entirely.
As far as the national administration is concerned, and their Attorney General's Office and their Department of Public Health and Welfare, and on the
higher levels, I am absolutely convinced of their sincerity in an effort to eradicate
the traffic, but I do believe that there are clandestine heroin plants in Mexico.
As a matter of fact, I am confident that that is where this doctor got his supply, this Dr. Cedillo.
Incidentally, he attempted a jail break the other day.
Mr. BoBo. In the enforcement of your particular narcotic and customs laws,
would the legalizing of wiretrapping evidence aid you in any way?
Mr. FL,,IsHMAN. Yes, sir; it would. I wouldn't care to see-I would like to be
able to use it for evidence, of course. Even if we were only permitted to tap for
the purpose of gaining information, it would be of untold benefit to us.
As it is, we don't do any tapping; that I can assure you.
Mr. Bono. I would help you to get leads into the big pushers and peddlers of
narcotics?
Mr. FLEISHMAN. Yes, sir; it would.
There is one thing more I would like to state here.
We have this so-called Boggs account. That law, I believe, is a little bit faulty
in one respect. That section 3230 (a) title 26, United States Code Annotated
provides:
"LIABILITY AND TIME FOR PAYMENT OF TAX
3494
"2. Thereafter, on or before July 1 of each year, pay the following special taxes,
respectively."
It has been held faulty in connection with just the smuggling of marihuana.
I think an attorney might look into that thing better than we have been able
to do so because we have not been able to get certain of our cases within the
meaning of the Boggs Act. We have discussed this with Washington.
Chairman LANGER. Have you taken that up with Attorney General Brownell?
Mr. FLEISHMAN. I am sure they have this in the Department of Justice.
Chairman LANGER. Section 3230 (a), title 26, United States Code Annotated,
and section 3234 (a) (1), will be placed in the record at this point.
Sec. 3230 (a), title 26, United States Code Annotated, and sec. 3234 (a) (1), are
as follows:)
"Section 3230 (a), title 26, United States Code Annotated provides:
"'Liability and time for payment of tax: Every person who imports, manufactures, produces, compounds, sells, deals in, dispenses, prescribes, administers,
or gives away marihuana shall (1) before engaging in any of the above-mentioned
activities and (2) thereafter, on or before July 1 of each year, pay the following
special taxes, respectively.'
"Sectiou 3234 (a) (1) of title 26 United States Code Annotated provides:
" 'It shall be unlawful for any person required to register and pay the special
tax under the provisions of section 3230 and 3231 to import, manufacture, produce, compound, sell, deal in, dispense, distribute, prescribe, administer or
give away marihuana without having so registered and paid such tax.'
"Penalties for such violations are prescribed in section 2557 (b) of title 26
United States Code Annotated (Boggs bill).
"Following United States Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit, U. S. v. Horton
(190 F. 2d 427), it has been ruled that sections 3230 and 3234 of title 26 did not
contemplate single importations."
Mr. FLEISHMAN. With regard to minors, there is another thing that occurred
to me after talking to you. They move at will back and forth across this border ;
that is, civilian juveniles and minors, as well as military. There is nothing in
the law to prevent a Juvenile from taking advantage of the liquor exemption,
for example. He can bring his quart of liquor back just the same as anybody
else under the law and under the law there is nothing to permit a customs officer
to preventMr. BoBo. You are speaking of the Federal law now?
Mr. FILEISHMAN. Yes, sir.
However, under the State law where they are supposed to go in and pay their
tax, I imagine there is a restriction there.
Now, whether there are minors that come over and bring a quart of
liquor-even a gallon if they claim out-of-State residence, I have never gone into
it because insofar as we are concerned there is nothing illegal about it.
But I know I wouldn't want my son carting quarts of liquor over from Juarez,
or any other place, or from Canada, for that matter, if he was a minor.
Mr. BOBO. Do you have any figures as to the amount of traffic back and forth
across that bridge per day?
Mr. FLEisHMAN. No, sir; but the collector of customs would. I know it is
tremendous.
Mr. Bono. It would be almost impossible to enforce anything, if they went
over to buy five marihuana cigarettes, without a tip?
Mr. FLEISHMAN. We have found that our method of investigation and our use
of informants to be the best way of enforcing the law insofar as marihuana
smuggling and narcotic smuggling.
Mr. BoBo. How about traffic in barbiturate drugs and benzedrines?
Mr. FLuSHMAN. Occasionally, you will get someone coming over with a quantity of those, but not to a great extent. You don't find any volume in that type
of traffic.
Mr. Bono. How about the importation of this so-called Spanish fly?
Mr. FLETRHUMAN. There have been some importations of that or some yohimbine tablets.
Occasionally you will find some jerk bringing that sort of thing over. That is a
comparatively minor traffic, too.
Mr. BORO. Would you have any recommendation, based on your years of experience, to deal with the narcotic traffic, either through more laws, or stricter
laws, or more personnel, or anything along that line?
Mr. FrFISHMAN. Years ago I made a survey in the Philippine Islands. The
first thin, everybody told us was that we need more men and we need more
money. I suppose you people run Into that same thing.
3495
I don't know if we had more men if we would make more cases. Money,
while it is tight and has been for a long time, yet with the exercise of care in
the spending of it and the economies, I don't believe we need too much more
money.
We have never been held down. I have never had any trouble getting any
money I needed for the purchase of information, for example, and they have
given me an allotment and 1 have never yet had to go over that allotment for
that purpose.
In fact, each year I have always turned some back. I have been told by my
bureau that if the time ever arises when we need a little more for that purpose,
that is available.
I think that If we did have more agents, I think if they were the right type of
men, I think possibly we would make more cases. We don't think we get everybody by any means.
Of course, every time we get a violator, if he has never been caught before, to
us he always screams that is the first time, but we do believe if they keep at it
Iong enough we will get them.
Mr. Bono. Mr. Givens, you cited some figures to me the other day as to your
estimate of what you think the narcotic traffic is in the United States.
Mr. GIVENs. There are two angles to it. One is the traffic in marihuana, and
the other is traffic in derivatives of opium, the principal of which is heroin.
I have no way of knowing, and I have not been able to find anybody that does
know, or has a reasonable estimate of the number of narcotic addicts in the
United States.
But if you took the figure of 50,000 for the entire United States and figured
that each 1 of them used 2 grains of heroin per day, 365 days out of the year,
which they do. that would amount to about 5,000 pounds of heroin to be consumned by those 50,000 narcotic addicts.
Judging by the average price paid for a deck in the larger cities, it is about
$3 a deck, that runs into $100 million a year.
However, when it comes to marihuana, that is an entirely different problem.
To my waiy of thinking. marihuana is the more serious problem. It is more
serious for this reason:
A juvenile will start on marihuana and move from marihuana into the derivatives of opium. One idea of the volume of marihuana traffic on this border,
during the past 6 years customs agency service has accounted for 9,298 pounds
of marilhnan.
That is crude and prepared as well.
Perhaps 40 percent of that is prepared. That is about 9 million cigarettes.
Now. that is quite a lot of marihuana to take out of the illegal traffic, but it does
not seem to have affected the price or the availability of cigarettes in the big
cities.
Mr. BOBO. The price and availability is still the same now as it was prior to
seizure?
Mr. GIVENS. Yes. sir.
Mr. BoBo. Meaning that we have quite a bit of marihuana in this country?
Mr. GIVENS. The law of supply and demand governs price in everything unless
it is controlled, and this not controlled. There is no evidence whatsoever to
indicate that there is any controlling organization in the traffic of marihuana,
or any national controlling organization in the traffic of heroin; none that I
know of.
Mr. Bono. By taking 5 tons of marihuana out of the traffic, you have found in
making your purchases and so forth the price of marihuana has not increased
at all?
Mr. GIVENS. No, sir; it varies according to the availability below; in Meico,
the price does.
I have been on the border 8 years in an administrative capacity. I have been
in charge in Laredo for 6 years, which is the center of this marihuana traffic.
The price in Mexico to a smart dealer is just about the same, around $10 or $12
a pound today, as it was in 1946.
Mr. BoBo. I think you mentioned u case the other day of a smuggler that you
picked up that you knew had been operating and he bragged about operating
for 15 years. Is that right?
Mr. GTVENS. Yes, sir; that is true. We arrested in Laredo a man by the name
of Sam Paredo with 329 pounds of marihuana.
After he knew that his jig was up and he had to go to the penitentiary, he
came to me to try to make some sort of a deal and confided in me that he had
been in the business 15 years.
3496
Mr. BOBO. And had been making regular movements across? What was his
city?
Mr. GIVENS. He was taking it into the northern cities. He took stuff into
New Orleans, St. Louis, Chicago, and Detroit.
Mr. Bono. I think you also made a recent case involving someone in New York
City?
Mr. GIvENS. Yes, sir; we (lid.
Mr. FLEISHMAN. That was a case that originated in Laredo by a customs
agent by the name of 1)ave Ellis. We knew of this movement and it was going
into New York City. There was a man by the name of Stanley Halperin an
Stanley Halperin-you may recall the Micky Jelke case in New
Marty Snyder.
York; Halperin got some publicity in that case. They were coming down to
Laredo to get their loads and were shipping it out railway express, a truckload
at a time.
We missed one load. The second time we were able to keep a surveillance
on the truck and Ellis was able to follow it right into New York City, where
we were able to witness delivery and take it right in and pick up Halperin and
Snyder and work the case back into Laredo where we brought in a man by the
name of Gomero, which Mr. Givens had arrested before on another case and a
man by the name of Taureene.
That certainly is evidence that it is moving into New York.
Just recently we had the so-called Norrell Williams and Rebecca Young case.
We had five defendants in that.
Mr. Givens was agent in charge from Laredo when that case was made and
that case went right up to the Supreme Court.
The Government was sustained all along the line, so we didn't have any difficulty there.
At Laredo, and I have no doubt that the same condition exists here In El Paso,
especially addicts coming down from nearby cities, going over to get a small
personal supply of narcotics, for example, heroin. The problem there is both
men and women in bringing it back concealing it in their purses, and in body
cavities.
We occasionally make a case that way. We have to have them taken to a
doctor and have them examined and so far we have had no difficulty with those
cases in Laredo, but it does not take much imagination to realize the trouble
we would be in if we ever made a mistake.
Mr. Bono. False arrest?
Mr. FLEISHMAN. False arrest and everything else.
However, we do have the right of search on everybody coming across the border, when necessary.
Chairman LANGER. Judge Ford, do you want to come up here? Are there any
questions you want to ask? You are welcome to ask them.
Let the record show that Mr. Ford is a Federal judge in a Court of Customs
in New York City.
You may proceed, Mr. Bobo.
Mr. BoBo. If an addict comes back across the bridge under the influence of
narcotics, there is nothing that a customs agent can do with him; is there?
Mr.
FLEISHMAN.
Mr.
FLEISHMAN.
is an addict if we find needle marks in his arm or other parts of his body, or
certain little pus sores that certain types of injections may give him. You are
reasonably sure you have an addict, but on the other hand it might be some diabetic taking insulin.
3497
OF FIREARM MS IN
NARcOTIC
LAW VIOLATORS
"Section 3611, title 18, contemplates use of threats, force, or violence or crime
perpetrated in whole or in part by the use of firearms--forfeiture.
"Section 3173 (c), title 26, provides for possession or control when violating
Internal Revenue laws-forfeiture."
Mr. GIVENS. We would like to have a law where the mere possession or control of a gun on a violator, I mean near a violator-for instance, we find a lot
of them in glove compartments, or lying on the seat of the car. We can't forfeit
those. If they reach for the gun we can put it under that law.
Mr. BoBo. I think that is all.
Chairman LANGER. Are there any questions, Judge Ford?
Judge FORD. No.
Mr. FLEISH-rMAN. I have a couple more things.
A couple of years ago the Texas State police chiefs and, I believe, the Texas
State Sheriffs Association, each in their conventions, passed a motion, they
were going to request the Customs to check out every car leaving the State of
Texas in an effort to stop stolen cars going out of the country.
That would have required an investigation at the point of exit from the United
States, which would have been impossible, particularly under the present State
law which does not require anyone in the State of Texas to carry their car
registration with them in the vehicle they are driving.
Now, if they ever wanted to stop that it would seem to me that there is a
suggestion for the State of Texas, which is out of my province, and probably
3498
out of yours, but it is one of the few, if not the only State in the country, that
does not require the carrying of the car's registration while it Is being driven.
Mr. BoBo. I think that is interesting from everyone's viewpoint, mainly as
the Dyer Act violations come under the Federal Government.
I think in the National Training School in Washington, 85 percent of the
Juveniles there are in there for Dyer Act violations, and in Inglewood, 80 percent of the juveniles are there for Dyer Act violations.
Mr. FLEISHMAN. In that case we had to decline Investigating cars leaving
the country. There was nothing we could do about it, especially because of
that lack of requirement for the registration.
Of course, he has to have a driver's license.
Chairman LANGER. Texas is the only State that does not have it?
Mr. FLEISHMAN. So far as I know.
Judge FORD. Is there any reason for that, within your knowledge?
Mr. FLEISHMAN. I don't know why. It may be something that has not been
enacted into law. I think it even applies in the State of Texas for out-of-State
cars because of lack of the law they would not be required to carry their own
registrations in the car.
I would like to give you a few figures on El Paso here. I have them readily
available here for fiscal year 1954. The number of arrests, going into the fiscal
year 1954, we had awaiting, or under indictment, 18 arrest cases. We made 67
arrest cases in El Paso in this general area during that fiscal year, 67.
However, we had 70 convictions. That was a carryover of some from the
previous year, plus the ones we got that year.
At the end of the year we only had 9 cases awaiting Indictment and during
the whole year we only had 6 defendants not indicted.
Judge FORD. What area does this involve?
Mr. FLEISHMAN, I would say the immediate area around El Paso.
FORD. What does that include?
Mr. FLEISHMAN. In the western judicial district of Texas, west of the Pecos
Judge
River. Probably all of these are in the general area either in El Paso or immediately surrounding El Paso.
The number of our arrests is when you get outside of El Paso and east of
the Pecos River, we wouldn't have very many of them.
I would say practically all of them are local.
A great many of our cases when we pick up 4 or 5 or 6 people all in 1 car, if it
is a bridge case, when you work it down sometimes, why, you have to dismiss a
couple of them because they are women or 1 thing or another.
In this particular year we didn't lose many of them.
I would also say that probably our greatest asset is a very vigorous and
competent United States attorney. In fact, that is your best asset any place you
work. And we have that.
Mr. BOBO. You have obtained a great number of convictions of those you
picked up?
Mr. FLEISHMAN. Yes, sir. I would say when you balance this thing out, we
dismissed only four. One was released to city authorities. One was released to
county authorities.
Now, there are a number in there who don't appear that we may have picked
up and merely turned over to military authorities. We have a number of those
each year.
Obviously we have had several cases, particularly in the eastern end of this
district. We had one case recently at Brownsville where there were 5 juvenile
sailors from 1 of the naval bases nearby. We released all of them to military
authorities.
We had another case, there were 5 juvenile soldiers at Laredo; we released
them to military authorities.
We had another case in which there were 5 juvenile civilians down from
Houston to Laredo to do a little bit of carousing on the other side. They came
back and I believe the figure was 144 marihuana cigarettes they had hidden in
one of the hub caps of the car.
The boy who was driving the car took all the blame in that case, so we do have
some juveniles, but not an appreciable amount.
Now, here in El Paso some time ago, for a 5-calendar-year period, we had to
make up a summary and, for that 5-calendar-year period, 359 arrests of which 89
were Juveniles under the age of 21. We don't have it broken down below that
figure, but 89 of them were below the age of 21, and practically all of them for
smuggling, either mariliuana or forms of narcotic goods.
3499
Mr. GIVENS. Mr. Bobo, Mr. Fleishman mentioned a man's name a while ago that
might be of some interest to the Senator. He mentioned Norrell Williams that
we arrested in San Antonio with 140 pounds of prepared marihuana.
Williams was in Mexico City about 4 weeks that we had him under surveillance
down there through an informer. He purchased on that trip 810 pounds of prepared marihuana and when we caught him he had 140. The rest of it he hid in
Nuevo Laredo.
After his arrest someone stole that 670 pounds and it got back in the traffic. I
questioned Williams at length on three different occasions. He told me during
the period of 5 years he had smuggled in from Mexico and transported to New
York 5,000 pounds of screened marihuana.
Mr. BOBO. It was very heavy traffic.
Mr. GIVENS. The largest I have ever experienced.
Mr. BOBO. Over a period of 5 years?
Mr. GIVENS. Over a period of 5 years.
Chairman LANGER. Thank you very much, gentleman.
EXHIBIT No. 3
POST OFFICE DEPARTMENT,
INSPECTION SERVICE,
OFFICE OF INSPECTOR,
personal observations concerning the relationship between thefts of mail, particularly letters containing checks, and the use of narcotics by the persons responsible
for these thefts. Statistics for the city of San Antonio for the years 1953, 1954,
and 1955 follow:
Mail thieves
Year
apprehended
and
convicted
Percentage
of addicts
Number
addicted
8
6
7
17
12
14
47
50
50
In many instances we have found the addict-mail thief has a long record
of arrests and is frequently well known to the local police. He usually is
arrested after having repeated his thefts several times, largely due to the lapse
of time in our Service receiving reports of the loss of the mail, and invariably
uses the proceeds of his thefts to purchase narcotics. There have been several
instances where, upon being released from prison, the addict immediately resumed his thefts of mail.
Frequently, two or more of these addict-thieves operated as a semiorganized
gang. On several occasions one or two of the members of such a gang accepted
full responsibility for the thefts in order that other members, particularly those
with previous records, would be able to avoid prosecution due to lack of evidence. Had it been possible to make cases against these members of the gangs
during the 3 years in question, the percentage of users of narcotics among convicted mail thieves would be considerably higher.
There is a definite relationship between the use of narcotics and the theft of
mail, as those areas of San Antonio in which addicts are known to live are the
principal areas of the city in which mail thefts occur.
If I can be of further assistance to you in this matter, please feel free to call
on me.
Sincerely yours,.
J. H.
OSBORN,
Postal Inspector.
71515--56--pt. 7-73
3500
(Additional list of known addicts and their associates who crossed the bridge at
Laredo, Tex., into or from Mexico, submitted by Bureau of Customs, Laredo,
Tex.:)
LAREDO, TEX.,
November 8, 1955.
I I I I I I
3501
it. Occupation: Porter at Lackland AFB, San Antonio, Tex. Race: Negro;
height: 5 feet 10 inches; weight: 176 pounds; eyes: brown; hair: black; has
an initial tattoo mark on left forearm "Jack/SMJ." Has served 10 months for
marihuana charges. Arrested 1945 in San Antonio, Tex. (on airbase). Had
$125. He is not a heroin addict, but admits smoking marihuana.
Kennedy, E. H., 4004 Airbase Squadron, MatagordaIsland, Tew., October 23, 1955
Arrived from Mexico by car in company of Charles Nathan Hubbard (addict),
and Howard Butler (suspected addict), Ida Mae Butler, and Benjamin F. Bowzer
(not known to be addicts). Given personal search by Customs PPO Inspector
H. H. Munoz, witnessed by Customs Inspector F. Chamberlain. Nothing found on
person. Age: 35. Occupation: Staff sergeant Matagorda Island Airbase.
Love, Edward Keith, 526 Maple Wood, Houston, Tex., October 23, 1955
Arrived from Mexico by car, accompanied by James Edward Parrott, and Julian
Ray Madeley (addicts). Given personal search by Customs Inspector A. C.
Munoz, witnessed by Inspector C. T. Stone. No contraband found. Occupation:
Floor finisher; Age: 17; height: 5 feet 10 inches; weight: 155 lbs; Hair: brown.
Had fresh fix marks. Admits took fix in Houston for first time 2 weeks ago.
Took 3 shots in Nuevo Laredo, Mexico, October 22, 1955, and 1 shot today. Paid
75 cents for each shot. Been arrested for burglary and theft (7 months ago,
Houston). Bought a 1948 Plymouth, license N/H-7714, last Friday, October 21,
1955. Gave $75 down, cost him $195. Car parked one block from bridge, searched
by Inspector Munoz, nothing found. He is an addict.
Madclcy, JulianRay, 526 Maple Wood, Houston, Tex., October 23, 1955
Arrived from Mexico by car, accompanied by Edward Keith Love (addict).
Given personal search by Customs Inspector A. C. Munoz, witnessed by Inspector
C. T. Stone, no contraband found. Occupation: Floor finisher; age 17; height:
5 feet 91/, inches; weight: 140 pounds; eyes: blue; hair: brown. Had first shot
about a month ago-had about 10 shots so far. Had three shots yesterday at
Nuevo Laredo, Mexico. Paid $1 for each.
Mon es, Francisco (did not give any address; stated he had none), October 31,
1955
Arrived from Mexico walking and alone. He stated that he had been living
in Mexico for about 2 months, that he had no address anywhere, as he just went
from place to place. Admitted that he had smoked a couple of cigarettes everyday. (Marihuana user.) Born in New York City, N. Y., on April 13, 1922, is a
United States citizen; race: Negro (Cuban) ; height: 6 feet 1 inch; weight: 190
pounds; eyes: black; hair: black. Has curly hair and a mustache. Occupation:
Millwright and part-time musician, at present he is unemployed. Had 60 cents
in his pocket, and had a bus ticket to Fort Worth, Tex. Was given personal
search by Customs Inspector Fierros, witnessed by Inspector Botello. Nothing
found on person. Customs Agent Richards was notified, as this man admits he
is a marihuana smoker.
Parrott,James Edward,403 Threkeld, Houston, Tex., October 23, 1955
Arrived from Mexico on foot alone. Given personal search by Immigration
Inspector C. T. Stone, witnessed by Inspector Chamberlain. No contraband
found. Had a knife. Occupation: Helper in oil wells; age: 17. Keith Love
and Ray Madeley (addicts) are traveling with him but stayed in Mexico. Has
been an addict since age of 15. Later, this same day arrived from Mexico by car,
accompanied by Edward Keith Love and Julian R. M:Ldeley (addicts). Given
personal search by Customs Inspector F. W. Robinson, witnessed by Inspector
A. C. Munoz. Had pocketknife about 3 inches long. Stated he had a shot in
Nuevo Laredo, Mexico, last night, paid 75 cents for it. Is 6 feet in height, 145
Pounds weight, blond hair, hazel eyes. Has tattoo on right arm, hearts and
diamonds tattooed on knees. Makes $1.30 an hour (5 days a week).
Roberts, Samuel Lee, 1510 East 21st Street, Austin, Tex., October 26, 1955
Arrived from Mexico in car, accompanied by Gillis Hygh (not an addict).
Later, Emmett Thomas (who claims he is not an addict and has not had a shot
since 1953) arrived in a taxi, investigation revealed that he is a friend and
traveling companion of Roberts and Gillis Hygh. (See seizure No. 116-L for
71/2 packets of heroin found in this cab that Emmett Thomas was traveling in).
Roberts given personal search by Customs Inspector L. A. Marks, witnessed by
IBEPQ Inspector Reuthinger, nothing found on this person. Not an addict, but
in the company of a possible addict and a transporter of heroin.
I1I
III
3502
3503
3504
3505
tattoo on upper right arm. Many needle marks on both arms. Took shot this
morning. Taken in custody by State Narcotic Agent Hendricks.
Martivez, Marcclino General Delivery, Cotuila, Tex., December 7, 1955.
Arrived from Mexico as a pedestrian, alone. Given personal search by Insp.
G. Eo. Villarreal, witnessed by Insp. J. E. Cisneros. No contraband found. He
is not an addict but is suspected of being a transporter. Customs Agent Richards
was notified.
Martinez was born in Cotulla, Tex., November 11, 1936, United States citizen,
white race, 5 feet 6 inches in height, 136 pounds weight, brown eyes, black hair,
single, has tattoo, "M. M. I love you with heart" left hand. Had $536.55 in cash on
his person. He drives a 1955 Chevrolet pickup, blue color. Occupation: laborer,
at present unemployed.
Nata, Tomas (sometirncs known as Tomas Sanchez Mata or Juan Martinez),
1707 South Jacinto, San Antonio, Tcx., Decenibcr 9, 1955
Arrived from Mexico as a pdestrian, accompanied by Hermina Martinez
(an addict) claimed by Tonms 1lata as his common-law wife, and her small son.
lie was recognized by State Narcotic Agent Hlendricks, was given personal search
by Insp. J. E. Worley, witnessed by Insp. G. E. Villarreal. No contraband found
on person. Born in San Antonio, Tex., January 12, 1929, United States citizen,
white race, 5 feet 6 inches in height, 115 pounds weight, brown hair, brown and
black hair. Marital status: single, has common-law wiet.
Has long needle
marks left underarm and right underarm, right-hand tattoo-eagle, dagger, and
flower; left hand-dagger and flower, Indian head; chest-wolf and crown, cross
and devil. Criminal record: two times in State pen for narcotics. Was taken
in custody by State Narcotic Agent Hendricks.
,IMurphy, Charles, 1628 Corpus Christi, lhouston, Tex., December 8, 1955.
Arrived from Mexico as a pedestrain. Given personal search by Insp. J. T.
Gonzalez, witnessed by Insp. J. E. Biggio. He is an addict on whom a lookout
had been posted by State narcotic agents. He is an unemployed sheet metal
worker. Born in Dallas, Tex., November 9, 1931, United States citizen, white
race, 5 feet 10 inches in height, 155 pounds weight, blue eyes, brown hair, single,
tattoos-"P" on right hand between thumb and finger, letter "M" on left hand
same location. Criminal record: Served 9 months in Huntsville for burglary,
arrested for petty offenses and suspicion, 9 possessions of narcotics. Was in
the Army for 6 months, received a minority discharge. Had a shot on this date.
Murphy, Lois Gene Bloomberg, 10202 Rumar Lane, Houston 15, Tex., December
8, 1955
Arrived from Mexico as a pedestrian, accompanied by John Thomas Harris
(sometimes known as Thomas It. Murphy, Jr., according to the above-named),
her husband (an addict), and Charles Murphy (an addict), brother-in-law of
Lois. Given personal search by Customs Insp. Maedell J. Pearson. No contraband
found. Born in Houston, Tex., October 10, 1930, United States citizen, white
race, 5 feet 4 inches in height, 114 pounds weight, green eyes, brown hair, married
to Thomas R. Murphy, Jr., "Tommie" tattooed on left leg, "T. M." on left third
limger, and a crow's foot between thumb and index finger. Criminal record:
Has had numerous arrests for narcotics and thefts. She and her two companions
turned over to State Narcotic Captain Naylor.
H. P.
BARNES,
3506
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
TRAFFIC
3507
3508
November 19, 1955 arrived from Mexico in 1951 Ford, blue, Texas license H/D)
6693, accompanied by Hamilton Butler Williams (addict) and Albert Kellough,
Jr. Given personal search by Customs Inspector Botello witnessed by Air Police
Reimas, no contraband found, released. Sometimes gives his name as Grifain
Vendenburg.
Guerra, Eusebio, 1820 East 6th Street, Austin, Tem., November 19, 1955
Arrived from Mexico in 1951 Mercury, dark blue, Texas license A/H-6496,
accompanied by Felix M. Ocha and Eduardo Arreola. Given personal search by
Customs Inspector A. C. Munoz, witnessed by Inspector Worley, no contraband
found. Has been in the pen for 4 months for possession of 18 marihuana cig.
arettes. Is believed that he is not an addict, given search because appeared to be
questionable. Born at Liftensprings, Tex., December 16, 1926, United States
citizen, White race, 5 feet 6 inches height, 135 pounds weight, Brown eyes, black
hair, married to Lorenza Ocha, has tattoo left arm of woman's face. Occupation:
truck driver.
Hubbard, Charles (Negro), 1505 Sam Rankin, Corpus Christi, Tex., November
18, 1955
Arrived from Mexico in 1955 Plymouth, green two-tone, Texas license R/S-1585,
accompanied by Kerley, Griffin (addicts) and Stevens. Given personal search
by Customs Inspector Botello, witnessed by Air Police Taylor, no contraband
found, released. Is an addict, previous reports give full information on this
party.
Kellough, Jr., Albert (Negro), 1921 Xavier, Corpus Christi, Tew., November
19, 1955
Arrived from Mexico in 1951 Ford, blue, Texas license H/D-6693, accompanied by Van Griffin and Hamilton Butler Williams (addicts). Given personal search because he was traveling with recognized addicts. No contraband
found, released. Search was made by Customs Inspector Botello, witnessed by
Air Police Remias. Is not known to be an addict. Had a small knife. Born
at Bastrop, Tex., November 20, 1925, United States citizen, Negro race, 5 feet
6 inches height, 135 pounds, black eyes, brown hair, married to Adella Kellough,
has scar over right eye. Occupation: Soda jerk for Lichtensteins'. Is a merchant seaman with card No. Z-829 253.
Kerley, Harry,1012 Chipito Street, Corpus Christi,Tex., November 18, 1955
Arrived from Mexico in 1955 Plymouth, green two-tone, Texas license R/S1585, accompanied by Hubbard, Van Griffin (addicts) and Stevens. Given personal search by Customs Inspector Botello, nothing found on person, released.
Full report given on previous list, as he is a regular crosser. Is an addict.
November 20, 1955 arrived from Mexico in 1950 Chevrolet, green, accompanied
by his wife, Gloria Jean Kerley (an addict). Given personal search by Customs Inspector W. C. Pena, witnessed by Inspector Sanders. No contraband
found. Customs Agent Richards came to the bridge and took these persons in
custody. No new information obtained. See previous reports.
Ochoa, Felix M., 806 Nile, Austin, Tex., November 19, 1955
Arrived from Mexico in 1951 Mercury, dark blue, Texas license A/H-6496,
accompanied by Edward Arreola (who has served time for marihuana) and
Eusebio Cruz Guerra. Personal search by Customs Inspector Worley and A. C.
Munoz. Nothing found. Not an addict. Occupation: Plumber for city of Austin,
Texas.
Picazzo,Juan M., 524 Josephine, Corpus Christi,Tex., November 17, 1955
Arrived from Mexico in 1947 Pontiac, black, Texas license No. H/F-2013, accompanied by his brother, Seferrino Picazzo. Given personal search by Customs
Inspector Botello, witnessed by Air Police Renke, no contraband found on his
person. Among some medicines in his suitcase a paper was found, containing
a white powder which when given the acid test turned purple. Customs Agent
Richards was called, after investigation, released this man. He is a laborer for a
furniture company. Born at Camaron, Tamps., Mexico, May 23, 1934; Mexican
citizen, apparently an addict, white race; 5 feet 6 inches height; 180 pounds; black
eyes, black hair; married to Maria Eulalin de la Garza.
Picazzo, Seferino, 524 Josephine, Corpus Christi,Tex., November 17, 1955
acArrived from Mexico in 1947 Pontiac, black, Texas license No. H/F-2013,perGiven
addict).
an
(apparently
companied by his brother, Juan M. Picazzo
Renke, no
sonal search by Customs Inspector Botello, witnessed by Air Police
3509
contraband found on his person. Among some medicines in his suitcase a paper
was found, containing a white powder which when given the acid test turned
purple. Customs Agent Richards was called, after investigation, released this
man. He is a dishwasher at Chen-Chen Restaurant. Was born in Corpus Christi,
Tex., November 17, 1926; United States citizen; suspected of being an addict;
white race; 5 feet 6 inches height; 150 pounds weight; black eyes, black hair,
single, wears a mustache, and has wavy hair.
Shelman, Lewis Thomas, 514 21st St., Corpus Christi, Tex., November 17, 1955
Arrived from Mexico in 1954 Oldsmobile, tan, Texas license F/T-3470, accompanied by his brother, Tom Shelman (sentenced 1 year and 1 day, served
sentence at Texarkana, selling marihuana to Federal agent), searched by Customs Inspector Winters because this man and his brother appeared questionable,
witnessed by Inspector Jones. No contraband found on person.
November 18, 1955, arrived from Mexico in above-described car, accompanied
by his brother, Tom Shelman. Given personal search because of lookout posted
for 1951 Oldsmobile, tan, Texas license F/T-3470. Searched by Customs Inspector Scherr, witnessed by Inspector Cisneros, no contraband found on person.
Occupation: Masonery helper, Jones Masonery Co., Corpus Christi, Tex. Born
at Hempstead, Tex., May 25, 1925; United States citizen; Negro race; 5 feet 9
inches height; 159 pounds; brown eyes, black hair, single; left cheekbone small
scar. Has several arrests for drunkenness, disturbing peace, and concealed
weapons. Customs Agent Kenney was called. After investigation man released.
Shelman, Tom, 514, 21st Street, Corpss Christi, Tex., November 17, 1955
Arrived from Mexico in car described above, accompanied by his brother,
Lewis Thomas Shelman, not known to be an addict or transporter of narcotics,
suspicion. Searched by Customs Inspector Winters because this man and his
brother appeared questionable, witnessed by Inspector Jones. No contraband
found on person.
November 18, 1955, arrived from Mexico in above-described car, accompanied
by his brother, Lewis Thomas Shelman, not known to be an addict or transporter
or narcotics, suspicion. Has been sentenced 1 year and 1 day, served sentence
at Texarkana, selling marihuana to Federal agents. Born at Hempstead, Tex.,
July 7, 1907; United States citizen: Negro race; 5 feet 7 inches height; 157
pounds weight; brown eyes, gray hair; married to Florence Davis, has wound
scar on left arm made with shot gun and knife cuts, shot on right cheek. Customs Agent Kenny called, after investigation, man released. Personal search
made by Customs Inspector Scherr, witnessed by Inspector Cisneros.
Spark, Thernban E., 204 Lenox, Houston, Tem., November 17, 1955
Arrived from Mexico on foot and alone. Given personal search by Customs
Inspector Botello, witnessed by Air Police Ranke, on suspicion. Is not an addict,
but had 369 benzedrine tablets on his person. 791 benzedrine tablets in his suitcase, 19 yohimbina tablets, and 2 obscene books. (See seizure #131-L.)
Had
$250 on his person. Occupation: Washateria operator, owns establishment.
Born in Pike County, Ark., February 16, 1910; United States citizen; white race;
5 foot 7 inches height: 145 pounds weight; blue eyes, brown hair, married to
Pearl L. Spark. States that he has no criminal record. Was held for
investigation.
Stevens, Aaron, 1218 North Staples, Corpus Christi, Tem., November 18, 1955
Arrived from Mexico in 1955 Plymouth, green two-tone, Texas license R/S1585, accompanied by Kerley, Hubbard, and Van Griffin (all known addicts and
regular crossers at this port). Personal search given as he was in the company
of these known addicts. Given by Customs Inspector Botello, witnessed by Air
Police Taylor. No contraband found on person, released. Born at Cuero, Tex.,
August 15, 1919: United States citizen; Negro race, 5 foot 8 inches height; 158
pounds weight: black eyes, black hair; married to Prudence Stevens. Suspected
of being an addict.
Tijerina, Cruz, 1222 Tampico, San Antonio, Texc., November 20, 1955
Arrived from Mexico in 1949 Ford, club coupe, gray, Texas license F/A-4026T,
accompanied by Maria Luna Castillo, Adolfo Mercada (Rudy) Auguilar, and
Melicio M. Villerreal, Jr. Given personal search by Customs Inspector Botello,
witnessed by Inspector Valdez. No contraband found on person. Approximately
one-quarter pound marihuana was found in this car, owned by Cruz Tijerina.
(See seizure #136-L.)
Customs Agents Richards and Kenney came to the foot-
3510
bridge and conducted the investigation, and this man and his companions were
taken to the county jail, pending hearing before the United States Commissioner.
Had lookout.
Vilarreal, Jr., Melicto M., 230 South San Joaquin, San Antonio, Tem., November
20,1955
Arrived from Mexico in 1949 Ford, club coupe, gray, Texas license F/A-4026,
accompanied by Maria Luna Castillo, Adolfo Mercada (Rudy) Aguilar, and
Cruz Tijerina. Given personal search (on lookout posted) by Customs Inspector
Botello, witnessed by Inspector Valdez, no contraband found on person. Approximately one-quarter pound marihuana was found in this car. (Seizure No. 136-L.)
Customs Agents Richards and Kenney came to the footbridge and conducted the
investigation, and this man and his companions were taken to the county jail,
pending hearing before the United States Commissioner. Occupation: bone
buyer and seller, self-employed.
Williams, Hamilton Butler, 1781 Tenor, Corpus Christi, Tex., November 19, 1955
Arrived from Mexico in 1951 Ford, blue, Texas license H/D-6693, accompanied
by Van Griffin (an addict) and Albert Kellough, Jr. (not known to be an addict).
Given personal search by Customs Inspector Botello, witnessed by Air Police
Remias, not anything found on person. He is an addict. Born at Tivola, Tex.,
August 21, 1921, United States citizen; Negro race; 5 feet 9 inches height;
Has scar on right leg. Arrested three times for gambling. Occupation: Cook
at Tips Cafe.
H. P. BARNES.
Chief Inspectorof Customs.
LAREDO, TEX., November 15, 1955.
3511
Agents called. Born Stockton, Calif., August 30, 1930. Height, 6 feet; weight,
145 pounds; married. Not an addict but traveling with an addict.
Kerley, Harry F. (colored) (already in our files), November 11, 1955
Arrived by car accompanied by Thomas Jefferson and Warren Harris.
Searched but nothing found. No additional data obtained on this person.
Lopez, Ramiro, 4010 El Paso, San Antonio, Tea., November 10, 1955
Arrived by car accompanied by Cleofas Cuellar, Jr., who had picked him up
in Cuellar's car, a Ford 2-door, black, license HU-8334, Texas, on the bridge
when Lopez asked for a ride. Lopez has served 20 months in prison at Reno,
Okla., in 1954 and has been an addict since he was 14 years old. Agents were
notified. Lopez was given medical examination by United States Public Health
doctor. He is a broommaker by occupation, born in San Antonio, Tex., August
6, 1934. Height, 5 feet 9 inches; weight, 135 pounds; eyes, brown; hair, black;
married. Wife's maiden name: Irene Campos Lopez. Has tattoos on left hand
("Amor Deo") on back of hand, "Lopez" in between thumb and forefinger.
'oR.L." on right hand.
Lynch, Tommie R. (Mrs.), 2404 Commercial Avenue, San Antonio, Tea., November 10, 1955
Arrived by car accompanied by Joe Felix Zamora, Rudy Benito Zamora, and
Walter Albert Harris, all suspected of being peddlars of narcotics according to
information from customs agency. One bottle of benzedrine with 25 tablets found
on the person of Mrs. Lynch. She is employed as a waitress at Midway Tavern,
San Antonio. She was searched by Public Health Service doctor. She has cut
1 inch long above left eye. Had bruises over all of her body. Needle mark noted
on arms. Said she had blood tests taken. Arrived in car, Lincoln, 1949, blue,
license, Tex., ET-7085, owned by Walter Albert Harris. She was born In San
Antonio, Tex., July 9, 1931. Height 5'2" ; weight, 120 pounds; eyes, hazel; hair,
blond. She is divorced. Husband was Robert R. Lynch.
Zamora, Joe Felia, Route 7 Box 231, San Antonio, Tea., November 10, 1955
Arrived by car accompanied by Mrs. Tommie R. Lynch, Rudy B. Zamora, and
Walter A. Harris, all believed to be peddlars of narcotics according to information obtained from customs agents. Found 2 bottles with 25 tablets of benzedrine
on Joe Felix Zamora. He has been sentenced to 304 days in October 1955, for
aggravated assault In San Antonio, Tex. Was in car of W. A. Harris, Lincoln,
1949, blue, Tex., License ET-7085. Has cut across left cheek about 6 inches long.
He is a bartender. Unemployed at present. Had $40 on person.
Zamora, Rudy Benito, 814 Chalmers Street, San Antonio, Tea,., November 10, 1955
Arrived by car accompanied by Walter A. Harris, Mrs. Tommie R. Lynch, and
Joe F. Zamora, all suspected of being peddlars of narcotics according to information from customs agency. Searched by Inspector Villarreal and Worley. Rudy
B. Zamora was accompanying Miss Dorothy Holley November 13, 1954 (see
seizure 3024-L). He works at State TB hospital as mess attendant. Born in
San Antonio, Tex., March. 21, 1925; height 5'6" ; weight, 160 pounds; eyes, brown;
hair, brown. Married. Wife's maiden name: Mary Louis Rodriguez. Was in
Harris' car, a Lincoln, 1949, blue, License ET-7085, Tex. Arrested for drunkenness, fighting, etc. Served 3 months for drivng while drunk. Has a cut 11/
inches long upper lip.
H. P. BARNES,
Chief Inspector of Customs.
LIST OF ADDICTS AND SUSPECTED ADDICTS WHO HAVE BEEN SEARCHED AND OF
WHOM A RECORD HAS BEEN KEPT AT THE PORT OF LOREDO, TEX.
Abalos, Miguel, 506 Avenue Garagoza,North Laredo, Tamaulipas, Mexico
Personal search May 11, 1955.
Arrived from Mexico on foot and alone. Given a personal search by Customs
Inspectors Villarreal and Medellin. Nothing found. Occupation: Laborer. He
Is an addict.
Adams, Jerry James, 18
North Hutcheson, Houston, Tea,.
Personal search August 21, 1955.
Arrived from Mexico February 5, 1955, on foot, accompanied by Glen Hathorn.
Given personal search by Inspector McManus, witnessed by Inspector F. C.
.3512
3513
3514
3515
74
3516
3517
3518
3519
3520
3521
3522
3523
3524
Heidtmann, Henry J., 8433 Liberty Avenue, Brooklyn, N. Y. (also 823 North
St. Mary's Street, San Antonio, T'ex.)
Personal search, March 2, 1955
Arrived from Mexico on foot alone. Given personal search by Inspector Haley,
witnessed by Immigration Inspector Jurecka. Nothing found. He stated he had
been arrested in almost every big city and has smoked marihuana. Occupation:
Deckhand, merchant marine. He is an addict. Data submitted to Senator
Butler, October 18, 1955.
Hemby, Mrs. Loma, 1001 Porter,San Antonio, Tex.
Personal search, 7:50 a. m. (no date).
Given personal search at request of Inspector J. E. Worley for narcotics.
Nothing found. She was accompanied by her husband who is an addict. She had
marks in the bend of her arm but stated they were caused by thyroid injections.
She was overweight, very nervous and stated she had had a nervous breakdown.
She gave her age as 25. They arrived at the footbridge in a taxi.
Herrera, Sophia Moreno, 4118 West Commerce, San Antonio, Tex.
Personal search, May 5, 1955.
Arrived from Mexico by auto accompanied by Maria Rodriguez, sometimes
known as Trina. Given personal search by Inspectress M. J. Pearson. No contraband found. Occupation: Housewife. Went to Mexico this date. Ate at Alma
Latina. Name taken from driver's license. (See seizure report No. 3164-L,
April 27, 1955.) Previous arrival on April 27, 1955, in car accompanied by Carmen Saldana and Tina or Maria Rodriguez. Given personal search by Inspectoress M. J. Pearson. Nothing found. (See seizure No. 3164-L.) Has commonlaw husband, Raymond Cadena, and he works for the Budget Food Store in San
Antonio. Stated she went to North Laredo shopping about 10 a. m. She and her
companions are waitresses and work at various bars. Occupation: waitress.
Apparently not an addict.
Holbrook, Clifford Billy, 530 Bennington, Houston, Tex.
Personal search. April 21, 1955.
Arrived from Mexico alone on foot. Given personal search by Immigration
Inspector P. D. Parker, witness, E. L. Haley. Occupation: Shop helper; weight
155 pounds; height 5 feet 11 inches. Has been arrested 4 or 5 times. Served
time in county jail 7 months on theft, sentence reduced to misdemeanor. Left
Houston April 20 at 8 p. m.; arrived Laredo 6 or 7 a. m. Went to Nuevo Laredo.
Had only small change. Stated he was going to wire to Houston for money so
he could return there. His companion, Charles Adams, 20 years old, owner of
1952 green Ford car had remained in Nuevo Laredo. A slip of paper was found
on Holbrook showing name and address of a guide from Monterrey named Rutelio F. Lara, 5 de Febrero Ote. 513, Monterrey, Nuevo Laredo, Mexico. A hypodermic needle was found on Holbrook's person. He is an addict.
Holley, Dorothy, 511 South Presa Street, San Antonio, Tem.
Personal search, November 13, 1954.
Arrived from Mexico in car, accompanied by Rudy Benito Zamora. She was
given personal search by Inspector M. J. Pearson. Appeared dopey, gave evasive
answers. One cigarette found in her pocket and one in her brassiere. Stated
she had smoked three of these marihuana cigarettes. Marihuana seized under
seizure No. 3024-L Arrested. Occupation: Unemployed beauty operator. She
is an addict.
Hollie, Robert, 8912 Marina Avenue, San Antonio, Tex.
Personal search, February 21, 1955.
Arrived from Mexico in car accompanied by Elroy Lee (addict) Waedell
Morris and Gus Buffin. Given personal search by Inspector J. E. Worley, witness, Inspector E. Herring, trace of marihuana found in his coat pocket. Occupation: Caddy. It is possible that he is an addict.
Hood, Joe, 3 North Swan, Albany N. Y.
Personal search, August 6, 1955.
Arrived from Mexico by auto accompanied by Louis Pulos, New York, N. Y.
Was given personal search by Inspector J. E. Worley; witness, Inspector J. T.
Gonzales, Jr. Marihuana seeds were found in pants cuffs. Also in suitcase.
(See seizure report No. 39-L.) Occupation: Boxer and stevedore. He is a
marihuana addict.
3525
3526
I I
Filatel, air police. Nothing found. Suspected of smuggling narcotics. Customs Agents Richards and Wagner conducted an investigation. Occupation:
Waiter, Kelly Field. He is an addict. December 23, 1954 arrived in car accompanied by Shelby Williams. Given search by Inspector Botello, witness,
Inspector McManus, which revealed that he had recently had a shot in the arm.
January 22, 1955 arrived in car accompanied by Willie G. Smith (not an addict).
Given search by Inspector A. C. Munoz; witness, G. E. Dabdoud. Nothing found,
Suspicious. He is an addict.
Johnson, Carl, 4011 Wayne Street (Wyane Street), Houston, Tex.
Personal search, June 13, 1955.
Arrived from Mexico by car accompanied by man named Ward. Given per.
sonal search by Inspector Botello; witness, Inspector Winters. One vial of
Spanish fly was found on his person. Is not an addict.
Johnson, Robert Carmel,811 East Main Street, Shawnee, Okla.
Personal search, August 27, 1955.
Arrived from Mexico by auto accompanied by Mrs. Yvonne Johnson (not an
addict) and Hazel Meyers (not an addict). Was given personal search by
Inspector A. C. Munoz; witness, Inspector L. A. Marks. 5 obscene pictures in
brief case. Nothing found on person. Occupation: Leather craftsman. Age 41.
Not an addict. Remarks: Arrested in 1934 with 3 other boys 19 to 26 years of
age for robbery-Negro crap game-given 5 years in Oklahoma State Prison.
Released after 9 months and paroled in 1947. Was carrying makings of marihuana for approximately 1 cigarettes, claims belonged to M. L. Peters. Given
6 months and returned to State prison for breaking parole. Served an additional
22
months for first offense (robbery). Now operates and owns leathercraft
shop in Oklahoma-Vinter 1-2-3-Club. Was released after his car was searched.
Johnson, Yvonne, 811 East Main Street, Shawnee, Okla.
Personal search, August 26, 1955.
Arrived from Mexico by auto accompanied by her husband, Robert Carmel
Johnson, and Hazel Meyers. Was given personal search by Inspector J. L. Devine.
Nothing found. Occupation: Housewife. Not an addict.
Jones, Clifford L., 1123 Sam Rankin, Corpus Christi, Tex.
Personal search, August 23, 1955.
Arrived from Mexico accompanied by Charles N. Hubbard (addict), James
Price Busby (not an addict), and J. Cartwright (not an addict). Given personal
search by Inspectors Winters and Parker. Nothing found. Occupation, laborer.
Age, 23. Not an addict but accompanied by an addict (Hubbard).
Jones, Margaret (colored), (also known as Dorothy Dickson), 2219 Wilson, Coplus Christi, Tex.
Personal search, February 15, 1955.
Arrived from Mexico in taxi, accompanied by Roy Taylor (addict). Given
personal search by Inspector J. L. Devine. Nothing found. She was formerly
a user of narcotics but says she is off it and has been for about 1 year. Occupation, maid. Was formerly an addict.
Jones, Robert A., 1818 Capitol, Houston, Tex.
Personal search September 26, 1955.
Arrived from Mexico by taxi accompanied by ack Mitchell (addict) and Helen
Dixon (addict). Was given personal search by Inspector F. Chamberlain; witness, Inspector W. C. Pena. Had $45 on his person. Agent Gallagher was called.
A doctor's examination found nothing. Occupation, truckdriver. Age, 45. He
is an addict.
Joniec, Thadeus, 3797 Alabama St., Gary, Ind.
Personal search, October 9, 1955.
Arrived from Mexico by taxi accompanied only by the taxi driver. Was given
personal search by Inspector G. E. Dabdoub; witness, Air Police Shehan. Two
marihuana cigarettes found on his clothing (see seizure Report No. 100-L).
Occupation, laborer. Age, 28. He is an addict.
Judge, Louis, 122 Branch Village, Camden, N. J.
Personal search, March 10, 1955.
Arrived from Mexico in a car and alone. Given a personal search by Inspector
Haley; witness, Inspector Chamberlain. Nothing found on his person but about
4 pounds marihuana found in car (seizure report No. 3137). Says he has never
I I
3527
been arrested. Stopped in West Virginia, San Antonio, Tex., and other cities
trying to book work. Married and has three children. Was here in January and
stayed at Hollywood Hotel. Occupation, musician. Not an addict
Kerley, Harry Franklin (colored), 1012 Chipito Street, Corpus Christi, Tex.
Personal search, June 4, 1955.
Merchant seaman, accompanied by friend, Joseph Foots, 618 West 18th Street,
Port Arthur, Tex. (an addict). Given personal search by Inspector G. E. Villarreal; witness, J. E. Biggio. Nohting found. Description: 24 years age, 6 feet,
159 pounds, gold tooth in front. He is an addict. Stated had last shot in 1950.
Searched again on June 8, 1955, by Customs Agent Kenney and Inspector McBeth.
June 13, 1955, searched by Inspectors Adkins and Botello. Accompanied by wife,
Gloria Kerley, searched by Inspector M. J. Pearson. Taken to Mercy Hospital
for examination. Nothing found. June 13, 1955, has tattoo mark over needle
mark. Accompanied by wife, Gloria Kerley (an addict). Given search. August
5, 1955, arrived by auto accompanied by R. E. King (addict) and R. S. Roberson
(addict). Given personal search by Inspector L. A. Marks; witness, E. L. Haley.
Nothing found. Has been arrested for drunkenness. August 11, 1955, arrived
from Mexico by auto accompanied by Robert Eugene (addict), colored, and Tom
Hall (not addict), colored. Given search by Inspector Villarreal; witness, Customs Agent T. Wagner. No contraband found. Occupation: waiter. September
30, 1955, arrived by auto accompanied by Albert "Moose." Given personal search
by Inspector Villarreal. Witnessed by Inspector J. E. Worley. Nothing found.
Looked like he was "hopped up." Driving car, Plymouth 1955, green, license No.
R/S 1585. September 11, 1955, arrived from Mexico by auto accompanied by a
man and woman. Given personal search by Inspector 0. L. Ramirez, witnessed
by Inspector W. E. Jones. Nothing found. He claims he was checked 2
weeks ago in this search room. Works part time at country club. October
19, 1955, arrived from Mexico by automobile accompanied by Antonio Garcia (Herrera) (not an addict) and Roberto Cavazos (not an addict). Searched by 0. L.
Ramirez; witness, Inspector Trees, of Immigration Service. Nothing found. Released without medical test. Customs agent trying to work out some way to trap
him. Frequent crosser.
Garcia and Cavazos claim they gave Kerley assistance on the Corpus Christi
Highway since he had a flat tire. Kerley claims he just met Cavazos and Garcia
last night. Evidence shows they were together since they left Corpus Christi.
October 3, 1955, arrived from Mexico on foot alone. Search by Worley; witness
Villarreal. Nothing found. Examined by Dr. Lowry; also X-rayed. Accompanied to doctor by Inspector Worley and Customs Agent Gallagher. Wagner
said to let him go. He is an addict.
Kerley, Gloria (Yegro), 1012 Chipito Street, Corpus Christi, Tex.
Personal search, October 11, 1955.
Arrived from Mexico accompanied by her husband, Harry F. Kerley (addict).
Given personal search by Inspector M. J. Pearson; called to the bridge by Inspector Adkins. No contraband found. Taken to Mercy Hospital; Dr. Joaquin G. Cigarroa made examination. Nothing found. This woman's husband
has been given personal searches on June 4, 1955, and June 8, 1955. Nothing
found. July 26, 1955, arrived from Mexico by bus and given a personal search
by Inspector J. L. Devine but nothing was found. Search requested by Inspector
Tones. Occupation, waitress. October 11, 1955, arrived from Mexico by auto
accompanied by Harry F. Kerley, her husband, and Van Griffin (C. P. & L.
worker). Given personal search by Inspector M. J. Pearson, who found that
Mrs. Kerely has long broken veins on arm---claimed it was from shots given by
doctors named below to administer vitamins: Dr. Mary Gorman, Clifford Street,
Corpus Christi, and Dr. Williams, Sam Rankin Street, Corpus Christi. She has
been married 3 years and 4 months. Age 21. Occupation, works in the kitchen
of the cafeteria, Robert Wilson School. (Her husband is an addict.)
Kinder, Leonas, A2/c, Serial No. 13489251,Laredo Air Force Base, Laredo, Tem.
Personal search November 22, 1954.
Arrived from Mexico in car, accompanied by Samuel L. Pascul. Given personal
search by Inspector D. D. McManus, witness; Inspector A. C. Munoz. Nothing
found. A lookout from Nuevo Laredo showed this man had bought $10 worth
of weed. Occupation, Air Force. Not an addict.
3528
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
TRAFFIC
3529
by Inspector M. J. Pearson, witnessed by Inspector J. L. Devine, and four fingerstalls with heroin were found concealed in her brassiere (seizure 3141-L). Occupation, housewife. Apparently not an addict. Previous arrival on same day.
Given search by Inspector J. L. Devine. Nothing found.
LItterio, Rolando, 1703 Colima Street, San Antonio, Tex.
Personal search, March 15, 1955.
Arrived from Mexico in a car, accompanied by his wife, Martina Litterio and
Serapio Arriga (not an addict). Given personal search by Customs Inspector
Villarreal, witness, Inspector Haley. Nothing found. Has tattoo 13 on left arm
(see seizure rept. No. 3141-L). Occupation, bartender. Not an addict. December 13, 1954, arrived previously as a pedestrian, accompanied by his brother,
Gilberto Litterio (addict) and was given personal search by Inspector E. Botello,
witness, E. L. Haley. Nothing found.
Loftus, Francis D., 4920 Yale Street, Houston, Tex.
Personal search, January 31, 1955.
Arrived from Mexico in car, accompanied by his wife. Given personal search
by Customs Inspector Villarreal, witness, Inspector Haley. Nothing found.
Came from Houston yesterday, stayed in Laredo last night and went over at
10 a. m. today. Had new needle marks. Occupation, painter. He is an addict.
Loftus, Billie Ruth, 14920 Yale, Houston, Tex.
Personal search, January 31, 1955.
Arrived from Mexico in a car, accompanied by her husband. She was given
personal search by Customs Inspector J. L. Devine. Nothing found. At one time
was an addict but states she has given it up but took a shot about a week ago.
Occupation: Housewife. Sbe is or was an addict.
Lognion, Annette, 1209 North Rampart, New Orleans, La.
Personal search, August 15, 1954.
Given personal search at request of Station Inspector Dunham because of
lookout posted by Customs Agent Palacios at 1: 15 p. m. Nothing found. Traveling in cream-colored Studebaker, Mississippi license 379-556, Hinds County,
and accompanied by Dolores Carpenter, 1419( Dyer Street, San Fernando, Calif.,
P'aul Achille Lampiosi, 1220 Marais, New Orleans, La., and Murray Thompson,
1030 North Congress, Jackson, Miss. Have been staying at Nuevo Laredo Motel
shice last Saturday.
Lopatio, Milton, 84121 Belden Street, Nuevo Laredo, Mexico.
Personal search, October 15, 1954.
Arrived from Mexico on foot and alone. He was given personal search by
Customs Inspector L. A. Marks. Nothing found. Lookout issued on him by custonis agents sometime back. Occupation: Coin machine service. Not an addict.
Lopez, Alfredo, 3400 West Martin, San Antonio, Tex.
Personal search, April 6, 1955.
Arrived from Mexico on foot, accompanied by Roy Dominguez. Given personal
search by Customs Inspector Haley, witness, Inspector Gonzalez. Nothing found.
Occupation: Dishwasher. Had the appearance of having smoked marihuana.
Lopcz, Rodolfo, 122 Mlathews Arenue, Nan Antonio, Tex.
Personal search; April 6, 1955.
Arrived from Mexico in a taxi and alone. Given personal search by (ustoms
Inspeclor Medellin, Ininiigration Inspector Parker, and BEPQ Inspector Pearson. No contraband found. Had needle marks all over his hit arm. Had just
(Note:
1h11d a shot ; has to take one each day. Youn_- fellow, 20-22 years of age.
If tlhis character shows up, l)ease call Dan Yates, customs agent-gets deliveries
in (Cotulla). He is an addict. Arrived June 7, 1955, as pedestrian traveling
alone. Given personal search by Customs Inspector V. D. Gunnoe: witness, InSpector A. C. Munoz. He had a needle and eye dropper in his possession. He is
an addict. Customs Agents Wagner, Yates, and Palicios were phoned, but no
answer. Customs Agent Kenney was contacted at 9:57 p. m. Came to the footbridge and conducted investigation.
Lopez, Roberto Torres, 56.27 St. Fernando,San Antonio, Tex.
Personal search. April 9, 1955.
Arrived from Mexico alone and on foot. Given personal search by Customs Inspectors Gonzalez and Herring. Nothing found. Had tattoos on both hands andi
3530
needle marks on both arms. He had a shot about 2 days ago. Occupation, de.
livery boy (20 years of age). He is an addict.
Loza, Rudy G., 1310 Ruiz, San Antonio, Tem.
Personal search, June 15, 1955.
Arrived from Mexico by car, accompanied by Angie Alfaro, waitress from San
Antonio, Tex., and Robert Flores, radio operator with United States Navy, Wash.
ington, D. C. Given personal search by Customs Inspector Gonzalez; witness,
Inspector Haley. Nothing found on person. Had needle marks on arm, claimed
to be from blood test. Occupation, grocery store owner; age 27.
LUuna, Abelardo Coronado,3318 Colima, San Antonio, Teiv.
Personal search, March 6, 1955.
Arrived from Mexico in a car with Jose Gonzalo Graciano (addict), Ramona
and Jose Martinez Mendoza (addict) and his wife, Anita. Given personal search
by Customs Inspector Gonzalez, witness, Inspector Cisneros. Nothing foul.
Stated he had a shot last night. Occupation: Laborer. He is an addict.
Luna, Eduardo, 614 Bruni Ct., Laredo, Tex.
Personal search, April 29, 1955.
Arrived from Mexico on foot and alone. Given a personal search by Customs
Inspectors Gonzalez and Medellin. He had shot marks on right arm but claimed
he got them at the Mercy Hospital under doctors orders. Had fungus sores all
over top of head and had his hair shaved. Occupation: Mold setter. Do not
know if he is an addict.
Lyl, Jackie Lee, Box 812, Cotulla, Tea.
Personal search, May 20, 1954.
Age 34 years. Given a personal search at request of Customs Agent Ellis for
narcotics. Nothing found. She was accompanied by Gloria Smith of San
Antonio, Tex., and two colored men.
Mallory, Henry Leon, 1929 South Harding,Chicago, Ill.
Personal search, February 12, 1955.
Arrived from Mexico in his car, accompanied by his wife, Juanita, and Marilyn
and Tonia Grant. He was given personal search by Customs Inspectors E.
Botello and J. E. Biggio. He had four marihuana cigarettes in a case which
he gave to Inspector Biggio. (See seizure report No. 3104-L). Occupation:
House maintenance. Marihuana smoker.
Mallory, Juanita,1929 South Harding, Chicago, Ill.
Personal search, February 22, 1955.
Arrived from Mexico in car accompanied by her husband, Henry Mallory, and
two women they had picked up in Monterrey, Marilyn and and Tonia Grant
She was given personal search by Customs Inspector M. J. Pearson. Nothing
found on her person. They had been in Monterrey 5 or 6 days and met the
two women at the California Courts. Marihuana was found on the other two
women (seizure report No. 3104-L). Occupation: Demonstrates cooking utensils. She apparently had smoked some marihuana cigarettes.
Marley, Harvey A., Jr. (Buster) 1423 Kayton, San Antonio, Tex.
Personal search, February 24, 1955.
Arrived from Mexico in a car and alone. He was given a personal search by
Customs Inspector Villarreal, witnessed by Customs Inspector J. E. Worley, ,nd
nothing found. He stated he had been in jail for several things, including peddling of narcotics, which he said he does not use. He has served 5 years in the
penitentiary. Occupation: Automobile salesman. States he is not an addict
but it is believed that he is.
Marshall, Albert, 5427 Avenue K, Galveston, Tea.
Personal search, March 20, 1955.
Arrived from Mexico in a car accompanied by Robert E. King (addict).
Given a personal search by Customs Inspector Marks, Inspector Babb, of the
Department of Agriculture, and Sergeant Remias. Nothing found. Occupation:
Chief cook. Not an addict (but in company of addict).
May, Sam Vernon, 1500 South Buckhan, Amarillo, Tem.
Personal search, August 2, 1955.
Arrived from Mexico by automobile (Ford V-8, 1939) accompanied by Reginald
Sharp. Was given personal search by Inspector H. Scherr; witness, Inspector
3531
3532
MLICI
NARCOTICS TRAFFIC
3533
3534
3535
3536
3537
3538
I
V
3539
3540
3541
Stone, E. 0., 8306 Capital Street, 1911 Cincinnati Street, San Antonio, Tex.
Personal search, April 13, 1955.
Arrived from Mexico in a car accompanied by Elbert H. Perkins. Given a
personal search by Customs Inspectors Chamberlain and A. P. Remas. Nothing
found. Searched because he was with Perkins who is an addict. Occupation,
none. Not an addict.
Sweat, Ernest, 317 Dicawma Street, Dallas, Tex.
Personal search, December 17, 1954.
Arrived from Mexico as pedestrian. Given personal search by Inspector
Gonzalez; witness, Inspector Haley. He arrived in company of ' illiam Lee
Niess, same address, who was also given a search. Last time he was at Laredo
was 2 years ago. No contraband found. Occupation, receives pension for the
blind. He is an addict. December 24, 1954, arrived on foot, accompanied by
William Niess. Search by Inspector Marks; witness, Inspector Sanders. He
had fresh scars and claimed last shot received in Dallas (E. C. Brand, ear and
eye doctor) on Maple Avenue, across from Stove and Court. Occupation, salesman. He is an addict. January 8, 1955, arrived on foot, accompanied by William Lee Niess. He was given personal search by Worley and Gunuoe. Nothing
found. Occupation, peddler of needles. Addict.
Taylor, Edward, 3235 Montana, San Antonio, Tem.
Personal search January 20, 1955.
Arrived from Mexico on foot and alone. Given personal search by Inspector
E. Botello; witness, Inspector F. R. Pena. Nothing found. He had been caught
with marihuana in 1941 in Laredo. Occupation, waiter. Not an addict.
Taylor, William L., 509 C Avenue NW., Ardmore, Okla.
Personal search, February 15, 1955.
Arrived from Mexico in taxi, alone. Given a personal search by Inspectors
Villarreal and Worley. Had needle marks on right wrist and right foot. No
contraband found. Driving a 1954 Cadillac, Oklahoma license 1-39291 (1955).
Stayed in Shamrock Hotel, Houston, February 10, 1955, and February 11, 1955.
Paid $11 per day. Address shown on the bill from Shamrock Hotel: 5201
Benton Boulevard, Kansas City, Mo. The following names and addresses were
in a little black book in his possesion: Lauro Lopez Gonzalez, of San Antonio
and Nuevo Laredo, Mexico; Matt Tinsley, San Antonio, Tex. The taxi driver
stated he had a companion who stayed in Nuevo Laredo, Mexico. Occupation,
oilfield worker. He is an addict.
Taylor, Roy (colored), 3605 Cobb Street, Houston, Tex.
Personal search, October 1, 1955.
Arrived from Mexico in taxi, accompanied by Margaret Jones, also known as
Dorothy Dickson. Given personal search by Inspectors D. D. McManus and
Cisneros. Nothing found. He has served 13 months in El Reno for possessing
marihuana at El Paso. Occupation, accountant. He is an addict.
Terrasas, Amado
Personal search, October 19, 1955.
Accompanied by Antonio C. Davila (an addict). Married to Patsy Terrasas.
Occupation, Pearl Distributing Co. He is an addict.
Terry, John Prescott, 2031 North Kansas, El Paso, Tex.
Personal search, April 19, 1955.
Arrived from Mexico in a taxi, alone. Given a personal search by Inspectors
0. L. Ramirez and E. Botello, and some Yohimbina tablets were found in the
pocket of his trousers (seizure 3157). Said, at first, that he did not know his
address because he had been staying in a trailer. Two other boys, Carlos
Calluzzo and Richard Robertson (addict) stayed in Nuevo Laredo. He admitted
smoking a marihuana cigarette. Occupation, musician. He is not an addict
(stated this was the only marihuana cigarette he had smoked).
Toambs, Roy C., 3340 Baker Street, Dallas, Tex.
Personal search, February 9, 1955.
Arrived from Mexico in a car with Harman L. Toambs. A personal search
was given by Inspectors McManus and W. C. Pena, but nothing was found.
There was a lookout posted on the above-mentioned by Customs Agent Wagner.
Not an addict. Occupation, truckdriver.
3542
Tovar, Manuel Martinez, 1110 South San Jacinto, San Antonio, Tex.
Personal search, February 12, 1955.
Arrived from Mexico on foot and alone (he had arrived from San Antonio by
bus). Given personal search by Immigration Inspector P. D. Parker; witness,
BEPQ Inspector Reuthinger. An eye dropper and needle together with 4 cello.
phane packs found in pocket sewed on undershorts; 4 cellophane packs contained
heroin (seizure report No. 3108-L). Occupation, unemployed. He is an addict,
Trejo, Frank Peter, 241 Earl Street (also, Route 2), St. Paul, Minn.
Personal search, March 18, 1955.
Arrived from Mexico on foot and alone. Given personal search by Customs
Inspector F. Chamberlain and E. L. Haley. He had a tattoo on the left arm
"E. V."; had two new needle marks. Said he had not been on it very long. He
is 21 years old, 5 feet 6 inches tall and weight is 125 pounds. Says he has never
been arrested; came down on February 21; had $11, 3 pesos, and some change.
Occupation, laborer. He is an addict.
Tucker, Henry, PerrinAirforce Base, Shermann, Tex.
Personal search, September 5, 1955.
Arrived from Mexico in a car accompanied by Tressie Polk, Walter Farrier,
and Ellie E. Porter. Given a personal search by Inspectors Duke and Worley,
Nothing found. Suspected of having marihuana. They were stopped 1 mile
north of Laredo and 2 pounds prepared marihuana was found concealed under
the hood (seizure No. 71-L). Occupation, airman, 1st class. Age, 23. Not an
addict.
Vasquez, Miguec, 2307 Vera Cruz, San Antonio, Tem.
Personal search, August 24, 1955.
Arrived from Mexico on foot and alone. Given a personal search by Inspectors
Botello and Fierros. Nothing found. Stated he had served 4 years in 1951 for
narcotics. Tattoo "Mike" on left hand. Needle marks on both arms. Has dark
hair and fair complexion, is 35 years of age, 5 feet 11 inches in height and weighs
160 pounds. Occupation, laborer. He is an addict.
Vega, Alex, 2006 Decater, Houston, Ter.
Personal search, July 3, 1955.
Arrived from Mexico in car with Alejandro Reyna and was given personal
search by Inspectors Villarreal and Gunnoe. Marihuana seeds were found
under the floor mats of the car which he was traveling in. Customs agent in
charge was notified. Age 21. Occupation: Jewelry repair. Smokes marihuana.
Vasquez, Carlos R., 536 Tampico, San Antonio, Tex.
Personal search, March 1, 1955.
Arrived from Mexico in a car alone. Given personal search by Inspector
Valdez, witness, Inspector Herring. He is a user of narcotics and had several
recent needle marks on his arms from shots of heroin. Occupation: Furniture
mover. He is an addict.
Watkins, Harold, 759 Entcrprise (Inte'pise) Street, Houston, Tex.
Personal search, August 5, 1955.
Arrived from Mexico by automobile accompanied by Booker T. Young. Was
given a personal search by Inspector Cisneros, witness, Inspector Gonzales. No
contraband found. Has been heroin user since 1950. Took two shots this morning. Agents notified. Wagner tailed him. Occupation: Truckdriver (gambler).
Age 24. He is an addict. $680 found on person, also address 119 Himan Street,
San Antonio, Tex.
Watson, Raehel William, 1,450 Kilgore Street, Corpws Christi,Tex.
Personal search, March 11, 1955.
Arrived from Mexico on foot and alone. Given personal search by Customs
Inspector Worley, witness, Poteet, Air Police. Nothing found. He had been
caught with marihuana in Corpus Christi and had been on probation for a year
ending in November 1954. Occupation: Blueprint processor. He is an addict.
Weaver, Louis Q. (colored), 2219/2 Lockwood Drive, Houston Tem.
Personal search, February 8, 1955.
Arrived from Mexico in a taxi, accompanied by Willie E. Bowie (believed to
be a sniffer of narcotics). Given personal search by Inspector J. E. Worley, witness, E. L. Haley; 4 grams heroin found on floor of taxi (seizure Report No.
3543
3544
No. 5
EXHIBIT
A~M:
1or~
0
W 01ZO 16
.
]-.
-,,
- *-")
ar
19
31 W
...
--
Now-
Ln
....
1&
*2SI
Addrew
Ha
, ll,
_t!,- n--
ask'
._
Hair
Date and
Pla.e .1 Binh
IMEut
Al'...--
TezA
2l./7"
A...,
*-h
341-MB
W
stL
Bearknd N.
hI .
USIA
__
__
__
__
"___ "__
__
_,.
Last Place
-e
Emlyd
,00.--_
"O~d
Jwore
m--ma
50611 NNW
Moth-
--A
,,_ 4amA rW
,le
1&li
..
Wife-Hupso.... IM
Broter
"
______________________
Place of Panate
, Tn
irt.
,.
,,,
Arrmtlug
Charger
Crime
Mo. operandi
and
DAnce
u wo__,
--
~~~AI
Ms
c~it
BoJY7967.
I-
Printed by ,
D(.
P*'
~~~sj..
w
.'
"
..
+t
,
_.T
U;,-:(.
,,.,., ,, - -,
.
I.;
Stan ipbot.
RAW
Photo by-
attoo,,U"
pemai"
T
qa&.-
J01=ea
11
Am TOeMV2
C9x
04a
UMarb, Be
_t: ~~pl
As-
p. 4
It,
',.
Ark:.
;We
4306 LIllian,
Invest.
3545
Arr._f!!315 Shepperd-AlienwV.yo
Ho. P.O., i,:volved ih fliht.
Washngton.
".;
3-30-4?:
3-23-49:
he0
I
-T%.
76,
Ra rr MRSSM: 1346.Jan 'e1j0 C te bmostSO0 Snove. Arr
W lftfo 0ok h7306V Reuben Stokei77)I 5491(son-Smith
_M.0. Arrested V
Bobby Blckburn "417JO& Mp. n~othng3o7964
Bd bwur'lg
tools In theta
oab-'Crowbar, Bro 6 It
I wae
o
tsm
Ra O
-ahd
Six Marfri ra
DISP:
'-.0 %:PeAzr
:M9SS
%w-
3546
NAM
MSE R,
t ther
Spir ton
SIMET No. 1
%-0%'erMSRl5
-San Felipe Cte.Arzrf1Y66.4O0S Polkc Ave. SeifeVer-THo3] 11a'.
V.0. Stole a radio at ponk% & nni
a t 4006 Polk Will be filed cr.
T)TqP? 5-9-51 1u4 P.M. ft. Ma. Soeft (agm 0t) ?/be. 4U1
-1451:
co Ct Cn #93-120 Vied Theft PG fined 1 day jail and
$10.00 end costs;
PD H-37270 .Whopliftlog)
f-94-5l9 1ARR.MUS3B&lg1 Spo Felipe O e-m
mftSGO-oisdellgienwok,Trrell1.
V.0. Arr: Offiezm. zrolwd emil that a em was down on the -C(o~lenneld.
~ 9Had ocard frmi Courtesy oab so0. Cu 09 9witty In pooato
DSt7-25-51 46 P.M. lelad. by ye=4.
J7..27...81RoArrM~VSM:1a1 S.F.: AmWst U-I96S5 404 San Felipe BoelVahldisk.
woos VW tht 3ote wel
oefetezu at abv lopatiou Grouting a dist,
Atimy ~OrlieI.....p~l.I
#-.i
amour 01j
1abei
#
DISP,?-2SW MU~T'WRled, b y Lt. Dtvidson.
~ 30)S-Ueaer-1251 San rellpe Cts-Invoit-hahics-Kennedy
~.0. Arrested at 68O03WashinCtoh *ith Edwin Po Higby3 1Bsrt I 21"kir
t
-'~-!~:br
194-58u Pas
. eat b~
no"
fte %onP
Pet
fto
DIShI
19--4-55
W.11T
10-14#-55 upmwxft1s
bIesip
beluevbuwmqviU tiedji
inatteMA to r,
3547
90S1
DDVNE'7.WOF
IM
opa
&A
DtJ.1I
1911
Uubft~a
.Wh
12U. a[
1113 OW 2820 Li.11.
5
D&Wwmd1-30-52
==?~&~ -hag
3607
AMt No
r*01
CvhztJL.
00NMD:
DPAL
WAMYN
I=-
-.
No
IWIN
2402 Pennington St
AddeM'W
Blue
K d.
_no
Har.
Rudd.
0pr.
Ls.
win
Di.nbsd,2=
17-52
165
6-0.
Amer*
1,.12,- 35
UL
Keyatoe
L ,tPt,,
'oOL
Co.
adlail..
L B Conner.
Jae
'L.
n
M,
Dpq
-"-
. 8am.
FBI
Place
Pmrtau
Birth. ofIift.
ArrM"
Of'lf
ice m.-
II
- ..
R,mund-Chandler,
Char" or
Gen-novest;has been headed before for oar theft .Stole oar In Atisit
arrosteoe In Uldding,.
xam
-and
owpojn__Le_, by Lt. 1'rt ln 1-30-52, 1:05 PK
moduOpemar"and
Ammur*
Printed by:
Poto by,
New Photo and
Descripton: z.kt.
Lad
&
0.-
Mark Sww.
Tatt-4m Tuook
1d~-
UtIag_.b
_jia 1rd.
55
am fm
71515--60--pt. 7-76
111
~A
.-
hp
3548
~ar ar.1 her daughter also. 11adWnIn minor aedident,Re opened M.r
pftnts and threatened her daughter if she did not play with hisroi~
.1O-28-Y.-,a-ReAr:CUN~lt2.O2 Penningtona, et
O Jenson; Arx3729e. Rice-Johsn
M.O.t Walking down the street drinkring Beer out of a bottle.
l-52:ReArrCONEmR:lO6l7 Strickland Invest :2800 Luell ;Arr#.1786;
Clark -H1k,i&n.
M*.. Arr with Artmar Ortl:,#9966 and Paul Davis,#334i3 prowling
buiding3 in thaa 2800 Blk. Laaell.
CEO:
DISP:
2-6-53 :R *rr: COMM:R 10617 Strickland: Invest :682 Jmaz: Arr#5249 : lrrelson- Conley
M1.076: Involed In fight at hsngout, for charmotore.
(Johzzfor-Bullock)
CHO:
DZSP:
Z-.e.1A-:ReArr:CONNER :10617 Strickland;Tnvpst :6202 Jeneen;Arr#6939; Romund-TRobhir.:.
5iOtWith Don Smith,# ....
Z
nd Alfred Reymn,#58000. Had In his porser:-...
3 sticks of Marij. In his left shirt pooketCIgs turned ov-r to Blllnltz-r.
CI{0:.
DIOOP:
3-19-53 :RpArr:CONNER:4L02 Pennington;Invest.-700 Famnnin;Arr#11359; Smith.
M.O.: Appeared-to be under Influence of dope.Had 3 sticks of Parij. In HNs
poss.Hnd a~dress book containing names & addresoes,phone nots * et c,
CHG:
DISP&
4-18-533 Rekrr: CONNER::10617 Strioiland; Invest::820 Jensen: Arr# %8* : Kenrnedy -Bulboc k..
P,0.: Arr at Gordon's Underpass Inn, well known hangout (Rieh-Carlnon)
for thieves & dope heads. AU~ pilled up. Was In ladies rest room with twu
juxenile girls,
CIII:
DISP:
IJ-2L&-53:ReArr:CPN1IER: 10W'~ Striokland:Invent: Ar #16347 890b Jensen Chardler.
"1.0. Is wanted by Officer W C Rommd for Fun- & Theft !2n Humble Rd diet.
CHO:Q
C8w ufl-S9
4-5-5!eArr:CON1[R :10617 Strickl'nd ; nvest :12e'0 Prairie ;Arr#17077;Tu.oker.
M.O.--With Jiummy-Do~y,#____....t. above lo;eeInvolved
ian g of Pin-up
Lounge At. 3721 N.Mil'nA Picture w~p tisken while In ant. Casoij-0898
CliG:
DISP:
99.4:ReArr:C0NNER:10617 Strioklarad:Inveat:8700 Fulton irr#32171:Johnnon-Lott
M1.0.: Arr with two white boys, there they were Involved In a non-c6llisioi
accident. Seem to be high on dope. Property was found In car at time of
arrest. Car belong to Come. Co. which Is putting in sewage at this
Location. Boss of company will be down to file charges.
CHO:
DI~i?:
1-9-55:ReArr:CONNER:2523 LyzmnfieldtInvest:2700 Lyons:Arr#1269:Tlichols-Tyler
M.O.: Subj & Arthur O.Luecb#60277, said they were looking fvm negro prostitutes.Both out on bond nor for matijuana.
CHO:
DISP:
5-5ReArrCQXNN~s2523 Linfield ;Invest: 7806 HottmaArrf5O79; Jenkins,
M.0: Wi~th Art hur Lueckp#6o277 at negro drive in,have info sel1iqg -M.-rLi
by aL negro man to white men this loco.Unkinown wm ran and escaped.
CHG:
ISp
.. shst #2
3549
Ing
'US
O
No.53PA2
Rber-Vwneher
.r,)'ONN!..R:2523 Lynnfled;inveet;5700 Jensen Arr#55)38
ith .me*t L. Ivey,WKl,19 abv 13c.,aaw officers a" ducked into Zervite
X ,).r.-
"i
Tucker-Frec
14-551 RPA.-rCONN.Rs2523 Lynfiledinvoet:5006 Jensen;*rt,6534
'..O Art. with Bobt' R.BarrWK, Kelly C. Gf'acona, i, Ernest L. Ivey, and ?ry L, !k.t
after officers executed a Fel. Warrant on Jerry Comer, have Info that characters %.-.
buying narcotics at this location. (The foaloing caes were cleared by this arr"-..
j'(.- i1*Tul #2':"9 -2-18-55i K-?3781., X-64.33,K-55008;X-56979k;
K-55932:K-625l;K-5- tL;
.-5762;IC-57271;K-58335;K-58352;K-59211;K-58158;
CE3:
DISP
t-..-* FeArr-"
:2523 Lynnfie.d:Invest:8800 Ccpton:ArrA.#0675. Rhode@-Peterson.
Y..3.: Dropped serow driver ad crow bar vhen stopped by officers.
CHG:
DISP
".A ZIA .3t #3 WnM AM'S CT (1r).
-J
Invenst
Ipnfiold,
a.-:,r-C0IN=
!,,eckJews
060
Ar 0.0120
with Arth'
arrested
:'.%.
lc t2523
jD.,
Rce rt In*'.Az?1240,
HMd Inthlmo.
a :d-.
1har s ub.e:1 !
Extra Car& -A,(# f:
ory.
.. 'WX3'OI(W.z21523
1 nfeld; Thveet zZ303 Canal ;Ar-r#3'2C;Wooioy-.i-r.
35
EximititaN.#Ii
~'
- ..4
'4
A'
(7
..
0
'
w WI'
Ox
'I
p
Cl
-V
A 0of. *-
o UN
..1~
ao
Sp/
I.
r
'-4
C-
.4
4,
:4
1~.
44
h.
~:~'-
49
s,:rt;,1kv
-4-,,,
V.4.
1:
-1-
V.".
J
,/4
'44.
441
74'.
1~
N
I-
A'
-- ''C
tl
I'd
-S
TI
34
I,1.
I
F
,4~
kIT"
a:
4
4 '
?.
IC,,F
-.
-.
:.- .'
*1*.
I
4-,-, -
II'
4''
A.
A.
RXIIIIIT
No,
f0
'4~ I'
4?
-I
)jt,
(~A
4
()
()
T
r
t
(ore,
B
1,
4^1
40r
4>
I.
r
'00
44
__
-~
41t
-~
~
I.
II'
'-V.
~?(
ItI
Ism.4-,'
K~91
~go
\
IN
i~
-4
I ,a
~I
,~/I
~Y
*
4,
'4
44/
.4.,
N'
-7
~I
4~\ .4$4,
*
'
t~4
.41
'4
4*
4,4
1*.
44~4-4
'V
Iit_
p.
4',.
~
'~
'4
I,
(F-I
4,.,.
Ep W_
4',
3,
''4'
~'
4.
ro
t'
"4
A.
4-'
kh, - - i - -
"V..
4..
-Voq L t- ns,
qpw"m-
4*.
-.
'NL
ob..i
~44'
I~tf
lb~
4'
4*
,4*,
~'
4
"1
imp'
I',
'p.
40'4
41
Alw
I Mid,
'V.
I
A*
oc
w4
41
IL
4'
-s
41,
VA
j.-
~F'~'
'~st
.2
.4.S.
//
'1
',
4~4
"15
.1
'1
t014
4*~'>
.21>
7,422.'
4,'
'
''i'
.4
*
'~
'iI;;K
/
V
;>"
if:
4'
,-t*.
'
I.
'(4,
MI.4.&cI'ik AO
44,
44.
-,
-,
hkLAI4&)
h,
t~'
AVE
.i
'I
*.4,
4'
rky
F.
*
4.4
".
;v $9<iQ~k'
}'
44\
'~
4/,
.4
'1:
r
;r
~tJ
4 ~
4'
'
~~"~"'
'.~
'
:t''4<%
A.
44/
'4
V.
Ap
K""
V!
toe
AN
'.4
~
'<47
#''~,
(4(4..4
.4'
4-
.4
".1
4:4
'N
A
>9A
%.A.
sixV Ltit
'.
'V.
,j/~4
-.
'~.
':14
t~
,jf444J~
4yk~J4
t.
JCA
A ~- 1'
7)
*t-
'S.
4"
V.A
.4.
.4f.
4.'
"4
'
44'
It
*44
4jt,9~H'4
4.
'K
4%
"
4..
K\
94
.1.,.
I,,.
*>
...s
I'
4,,
''44%.
N
"1443"...,
/7
C;
-~
y4i}'
I,?
#4
,,11
~I!
If
~"'
~'1'
'4
.4
44
r~e-.
A
(F'~
>~
'I
4,,
#
.4.'
.4
t.
a'.
*,
.4(4'
'474.4
(V
.44
*4
so,,'
I.
I
00~g
'4
.1<>
'ft
K
4
"p
4.
3-
9)
7<.4
VI
"f4
tv"
'14<
'
4.7'
.AWAW
.4"
4'
.J
IS
444'4'~'
.44
44
.;,
4t,'
~
~94
4.AJLVLN
,4.4
'W
.44
4
y44
''p
S'S.'
I'
/
'4.
4.
'.4,
>44.4
*.t'
.A 1
-.
"4
.~
p
4~4
.4.4
'f~/3.4
444
40
>$ZN
.4944 44'44 -.
(4
.4'.
.4
'4'5 '4
77
'4'
*Gomm6
~'
V1'
P.A.
-,
4.
4.
'74
'ti'
.4
'N
4
34'
4'
44'
444
"
4,
/
~
.4 tt.
44"
4
A.
4<
44~
'4'
4'
0<'
.1
.4,,
ft
.4
44
0"'
I . , -11
4y4
1fT4
p
4'
Ilk
44
444 '
'.fi
low
t:,
j,4t
-Z
'N
NI>
N
-~
N
V
I
I
I
-9
'p
17
1
12*
j4
#'
(2
Cs
*flsawm~Zuesmuug
inn.nw.
amf~~
-~
oe,
1--1111
1 ". I"I,,
qo-,
1-
14-
4 N
21
~>.N
N.
'It,
,1*
I.
\r~
I
it->
t.
jr
10000
a.2
~tAL.AI.~
4
-
N-I
4.
'I.
*1*
......
tar"
Ar,-.
.1
',.
9.
Is
rr~
~1.
:i
It
1
~
~L ~
I,
7'
4,
Li.
'
14"'.
low
-~
-Ma
K -,
.0i"
"
NI
;l
. 1
IN.
~1
24
II.irr~
sJ~-
J. C. Brock
Houston No. 40968, 24 years of age. He is an ex-inmate of Gatesville Refornatory; ex-convict from the Texas Penetentiary, well known dope addict and has 22
arrests to his credit. He is now under bond on grand jury indictment No. 75336
for burglary and felony theft. His present bond $2,500.
Jack Broussard
Houston No. 43727, 23 who has just recently been no-billed for burglary and
._lony theft by Harris County grand jury is now in jail in Wharton, Tex., for
burglary and felony theft and is wanted for burglary and felony theft at Richmond, Fort Bend County and Liberty, Tex. and is wanted in Houston at present
time on 2 cases of burglary and 2 cases of felony theft. Charges filed in Judge
Maes court today in these cases. Broussard has been arrested 29 times in Harris
County. He is a dope head and well-known thief.
Danny Edward Bayly
Houston No. 53257 has been a dope addict since 1952. He has 30 arrests to
his credit in Harris County for dope and associating with dope heads, burglary,
and felony theft. He is at present under grand jury indictment No. 75266 and
75267 and is out on $3,000 bond from Harris County. Is now in jail in Wharton,
Tex., for burglary and felony theft and is wanted for burglary and felony theft in
Richmond, Tex. and Liberty County. Bayly is now 25 years of age.
Oren Edward Newton
Alias ParbyNewton, Houston No. 19760 has been arrested in Houston 28 tilnes
He is under indictment 75912 and 75916, both for felony theft and is
since 1 P.
under $4,000 bond in Harris County at present time and is under $10,000 appeal
bond from Jefferson County.
EXHIBIT No.
Map of Dallas, Tex., showing the areas where narcotic violations have occurred
as reflected by the testimony of Lt. W. P. Gannaway. Police Department,
Dallas, Tex., faces this page.
EXHIBIT No. 7
List of narcotic cases indicted in the northern district of Texas, their last known
address, sentence received or final disposition, of 'their cases, fiscal year 1954.
(1) List of names (with aliases) and last known address of all persons who have
been indicted in the fiscal year 1954 in the northern district of Texas for violation
of the Federal narcotic marihuana, or synthetic drug laws, together with the
,entence they received or the final disposition of their cases.
Offense
record
Criminal No.
I--
_________-I-
Fort Worth
2d ----------
3d ..........
lst_
335 -----------
1st ----------
.347-----------
1st ----------
Ist ---------1st.
3552
Criminal No.
Offense
record
Fort Worth-Con.
9356 -
1st ---------
9357 -------------
1st .........
935-1
lst_
9359-----------
1st-
3d ----------1st --------
2d-- - - - -
1st ----------
1st.
9360---------
2d-- - - - -
9362 ...........
1st------1st.
9363 ------------
9365---------
Ist ---------
9378 -----------
1st--------
9379 -----------
1st-------1st - - - - -
Hall, Willie, 612 Missouri St., Fort Worth, Tex. Indictment flied on
Nov. 5, 1953; Nov. 30, 1953, defendant entered plea of not guilty to -J
1-count indictment charging unlawful possession of narcotics. There;
was a jury trial, verdict of guilty rendered. Sentence-3 years.
Henderson, Bert C., 1119 E. Oleander St., Fort Worth, Tex. Indictment
filed on Nov. 5, 1953; case dismissed on authority of the Attorney Gen.
eral on Feb. 26, 1954 (insufficient evidence).
White, Bennie Elton, alias James Earl Jackson, 1875 Harding St., Fort
Worth, Tex. Indictment filed on Nov. 5, 1953; charging four counts,
sale of narcotics; Feb. 26, 1954, defendant entered plea of not guilty; set
for trial Mar. 3, 1954; changed plea to guilty. Sentence-2 years generally on all counts.
Lott, John Thomas, alias J. T. Edward, alias Johnny, 1701 South Jonnings St., Fort Worth, Tex.
Reed, Johnnie Lee, alias "Yank," 2200 West Terrell St., Fort Worth, Te.
Pierce, Larry, 1002 East Second St., Fort Worth, Tex.
Miller, Doris Jean, 315 East Tucker St., Fort Worth, Tex.
Shaw, Joe Melvin, alias Joe Melvin, 1507 Conklin St., Dallas, Tex.
Nov. 6, 1953, a 5-count indictment filed, charging sale of narcotics, conspiracy, transfer of marihuana, purchase of narcotics, receiving and concealing narcotics. Nov. 23, 1953, all defendants arraigned; each entered
plea of not guilty. Dec. 3, 1953, tried before jury; Dec. 7, 1953, verdict of
guilty as to all counts and as to all defendants.
Sentence-Lott on count 1, 5 years to serve; count 4, 5 years to run consecutively with count 1; Reed-10 years generally; Shaw-10 years
generally; Miller-5 years generally; Pierce-5 years generadlv.
Dec. 11, 1953, motion for new trial filed as to all defendants; overruled by
the court. Jan. 23, 1954, notice of appeal filed. Mar. 16, 1954, defendant Doris Jean Miller filed motion to set aside appeal. Sept. 30, 1954,
brief of appellee filed with clerk of Appeals Court. Nov. 5, 1954, c:lse
argued before Fifth Circuit. Jan. 20, 1955, Court of Appeals handed
down its opinion whereby judgments of the District Court of convict ion
on all counts reversed as to Lott, Reed, Pierce. and Shaw, with instructions to enter a judgment of acquittal as to Lott on count 4. (Appeal
of Doris Jean Miller was dismissed.) Feb. 15, 1955, Attorney General
advised that the Solicitor General decided that no petition for a writ
of certiorari should be filed to review the judgment of the United St Ites
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. Mar. 25, 1955, each defendant
entered plea of guilty; jury trial; verdict-guilty as to all defendants.
Sontences-Lott-5 years, Reed-10 years, Shaw-5 years, Pierce-3 ye; rs.
Apr. 1, 1955, notice of appeal given by John Thomas Lott. Apr. 11,
1955, notice of appeal given by Johnnie Lee Reed. Pending.
Pruitt, John, alias "Jiggs," 401 Crawford St., Fort Worth, Tei. Indictme t filed on Nov. 5, 1953, charging one count, sale of marihuana.
Nov. 29, 1954, indictment dismissed upon authority of the Attorney
General, inasmuch as defendant was sentenced in State court to serve
a 30-year term for robbery.
RUnnels. R. T. (I. 0.), 1510 West Peter Smith St., Fort Worth, Tex.
Sowers, Thomas Lowe, alias "Red," 3007 Nichols St., Fort Worth, Tex.
Indictment filed on Nov. 5, 1953, charging three counts, sale of narcotics.
Dee. 1, 1953, both defendants plead not guilty; jury trial; verdict of
guilty as to all counts rendered.
Sentence-Dec. 2, 1953, Sowers-2 years on count 2; $1 fine prob.ti, 1
day on count 1: Runnels-2 years on count 1.
White, Harmen Nathaniel, 1005 Tucker St., Fort Worth, Tex.
Maxwell, Roberta Jo, 1609 Elm St., Fort Worth, Tex.
Miller, Charles Etta.
Indictment filed on Nov. 5, 1953. charging four counts, sale of nar.otic
White and Maxwell entered pleas of guilty.
Sentence-White sentenced to 2 years on each count to run concurrD
Maxwell pleaded guilty and sentenced to 2 years on each count to
concurrent. Mar. 25, 1955, indictment as to Miller dismissed on autlity of the Attorney General, since defendant was serving a 3-year
sentence in the State penitentiary.
Averitt, Mrs. Myrtle Mildred, 412 Wimberly, Fort Worth. Tex. Indictment waived on Nov. 23. 1953; information charging one coutt,
)efendant
uttering and passing falsely made narcotic prescriptions.
enteredplea of guilty. Sentence-6 months, probated 1 year.
Hannah, Vernon, 5628 Truman Dr., Fort Worth, Tex. Indictment filed
on Dec. 8, 1954, charging four counts of unlawful sale of narcotics;
2 .yearson
Feb.:25r4954, defendant,ehtered plea of guilty." Szneft
each count to run concurrent.
Scocos, William Nicholas, Frazier Hotel Fort Worth, Tex.
Kithas, Angeles Bill, 2200 West Lotus. Fort Worth, Tex.
Indictment filed Jan. 28, 1954; charging failure to keep records on1 paregoric prescriptions (I count) and 4 counts charging unlawful sale of
paregoric; Mar. 1, 1954 Scocos entered plea of guilty. Sentence Scocos was sentenced to pay $500 fine. June 18, 1954, indictment as
to Kithas was dismissed upon authority of the Attorney General due
to lack of sufficient evidence.
Criminal No.
Offense
record
3553
Fort Worth-Con.
9418 ----------
3rd
M423 -----------
1st ---------
9427 -------------
1st ----------
9429 -----------
1st ----------
9430 ............
1st.........
Lubbock
845 -------------
1st .......
Carr, Sam Alexander, 216 East Gregg St., San Antonio, Tex. March 12,
1954, waived indictment and an information filed, charging one count,
sale of narcotics. Entered plea of guilty. Sentenced-10 years,
hospitalization recommended.
Ross, Red Edmund, 5923 Tuxedo, Dallas, Tex. Mar. 26, 1954, 26, 1954,
indictment waived and an information filed, charging two counts,
transfer of marihuana. Entered plea of guilty. Sentence-2 years,
probated for 2 years.
Coleman Charles Stafford, 3528 West Vickery, Fort Worth, Tex. Indictment flied on Apr. 15, 1954, charging failure to keep records of narcotics
sales; entered plea of guilty on June 14, 1954. Sentence-2 years,
probated for 1 year.
Arnold, Johnnie Welch, 4035 Boyd St., Fort Worth, Tex. Indictment
filed on Apr. 13, 1954, charging one count unlawful sale of paregoric.
June 14, 1954, entered plea of guilty. Sentence-2 years, probated for 1
year and imposed a fine of $1,000. On same date fine was paid June 14,
1954.
Bowlin William Paul, alias Doc Bowlin, 4927 West Rosedale, Fort
Worth, Tex. Indictment filed on Apr. 13, 1954, charging three counts
of unlawful sale of narcotics. June 14, 1954, defendant entered a plea of
guilty. Sentence-2 years, probated for I year.
Powell, Mitchel Emmit, alias "Mitch," 409 South Tom Green St.,
Odessa, Tex.
1st ---------- Watson, Gilbert, Park Hotel, Lubbock, Tex.
1st........
Patterson, Sterling, address unknown.
Indictment filed on Sept. 25, 1953, charging one count, transfer of marlhuana. Oct. 28 1953, Patterson entered plea of not guilty; Powell
and Watson each entered plea of guilty; Oct. 29, 1953 jury trial as to
Patterson, verdict resulted in a hung jury and court declared a mistrial
as to Patterson. Oct. 30, 1953, sentence as to Watson 5 years to serve;
Powell sentenced to 2 years to serve and imposed a $100 fine, this
sentence shall run concurrently with sentence imposed in Cr. 848.
Jan. 28 1954, Patterson entered plea of not guilty; jury trial; verdict,
not guilty.
0 ............
-46
2d .........
Bowles, Clifford, 1705 East 24th St. and 103 East 22d St. in Lubbock,
Tex. Indictment filed Sept. 22, 1953, charging unlawful acquisition of
marihuana, two counts. Oct. 28, 1953, entered plea of guilty. Sentence-5 years on each of counts and each shall run concurrently and
also fined $200.
347--------1st ........
Garcia, Faustino DeLeon, alias Frank Garcia, Idalou, Tex.
1st .......Garcia, Consuelo Dumas, alias Connie Garcia, Idalou, Tex.
2d ----------- Rowlan, Foster, alias "Pete," El Paso Tex
Indictment filed on Sept 22 1953, charging two counts, transfer and
acquisition of marihuana. 6 ct 26, 1953, Faustino and Consuelo Garcia
each entered plea of not guilty; Rowlan entered plea of guilty; jury
trial, as to the Garcias, verdict of guilty on all counts. Sentence-Oct. 30, 1953, Faustino, 5 years, to serve on 1st count; 5 years to serve
on 2d count and fined $1,000 on each count, sentences respectively on
the counts shall run consecutively and cumulatively; Connie, 5 years
to serve on 1st count and fined $200; 5 years on 2d count, probated for
5 years, the probation to begin after serving of 5 years on 1st count;
Rowlan 5 years to serve and fined $500.
S48 ............
2d .........
Rowlan, Foster, alias "Pete," El Paso, Tex.
1st --------- Chavez, Gilbert Ramirez, 118 Norther Avenue North, Lubbock, Tex.
1st --------Powell, Mitchel Emmit, alias "Mitch," 409 South Tom Green St.,
(See Cr 845)
Odessa, Tex.
Indictment filed on Sept. 22 1953, charging two counts, transfer of marihuana. Powell entered plea of guilty; Chavez entered plea of guilty
and Rowlan entered plea of not guilty. Sentence-Chavez, 3 years to
serve on 1st count and 3 years to serve on 2d count, these sentences to
run consecutively with one another and further a fine of $200 imposed.
Oct. 29, 1953, jury trial as to Rowlan; Oct. 30, 1953, court declared a
mistrial as to Rowlan since it was a hung jury; case continued as to
defendant. Oct. 31, 1953, court passed sentence as to Powell on 1st
count, 3 years to serve and fined $100; on 2d count, 2 years to serve
and $100 fine, the sentences to run consecutively with each other. Jan.
7, 1954, Rowlan entered plea of not guilty; jury trial, verdict of guilty.
Sentence-3 years consecutively to previous sentence -imposed and
fined $200.
' 5 ......
........ 1st ---------- Hereford, Clifton 2008 Date St., Lubbock, Tex.
(See above) Powell, Mitchel Emmit, alias "Mitch," Odessa, Tex.
Indictment filed on Sept. 22 1953, charging one count, transfer of marlhuana. Oct. 31, 1955, both defendants entered plea of guilty. Sentence-Powell, 2 years to serve and fined $100, this sentence to run
concurrently with any other sentence under other indictments. Oct. 31,
1953, sentence as to Hereford, 3 years to serve and fined $200.
3554
ILLICIT NARCOTICS
TRAFFIC
(1) List of names (with aliases) and last known address of all persons who have
been indicted in the past year in the northern district of Texas for violation of
the Federal narcotic marihuana, or synthetic drug laws, together with the sentence
they received or the final disposition of their cases.
Offense
Criminal No.
record
2d ----------
James T. Elliott, alias Jim, alias George White, Reliance Hotel, Fort
Worth. indictment filed on July 7, 1955, charging one count, purchase
of narcotics. Case pending.
Daniel Watkins, alias Dan, 4929 Harlem St., Fort Worth, Tex.
Willie Anderson, alias "Bodilly", 1131 Morgan St., Fort Worth, Tex.
Indictment filed Sept. 9, 1954; charge of 2 counts, transfer of narcotics,
but Government made motion to dismiss 1 count and same was granted.
On Nov. 30, 1954, each defendant entered plea of not guilty; jury trial;
verdict guilty.
Sentence-Anderson, 5 years; Watkins, 5 years.
Ossie Bedford, Jr., alias Sonny, 2204 Wenneca St., Fort Worth, Tex. Indictment filed Sept. 9, 1954; on Nov. 30, 1954, defendant entered plea
of guilty. Sentence-2 years, hospitalization recommended.
Theodore Demming, Jr., 2016 Wenneca St., Fort Worth, Tex. Indictment filed Sept. 9, 1954, charging unlawful sale of narcotics. On Nov.
29, 1954, defendant entered plea of guilty. Sentence-2 years.
Della Mae Miller, 1610 Elm St., Fort Worth, Tex. Indictment filed
Sept. 9, 1954, charging two counts, unlawful acquisition of marihuana.
Defendant plead guilty on Nov. 29, 1954. Sentence-2 years generally
and a fine of $50, the 2 years was probated upon payment of fine made
on November 30, 1954, said probation for 2 years.
Robert Lee Phillips, alias James Brown, 932 East Annie, Fort Worth, Tex.
Willie Anderson, 1131 Morgan St., Fort Worth, Tex.
Indictment filed Sept. 9, 1954, charging one count, transfer of marihuana.
Anderson entered plea of guilty on Nov. 30, 1954, and was sentenced to
serve 2 years, same to run concurrent with sentence in Cr. No. 9466.
Phillips plead guilty on Mar. 25, 1955, and was sentenced to serve 2
years and same to run concurrent with sentence in Cr. No. 9465.
Willie Richard Steward, Jr., alias Willie Mitchell, 1205 East Presidio,
Fort Worth, Tex.
Robert Lee Phillips, alias James Brown, 932 East Annie, Fort Worth, Tex.
Indictment filed Sept. 10, 1954, charging one count, transfer of marihuana.
On Nov. 29, 1954, defendant Steward entered plea of guilty and was
sentenced to serve 5 years and probation in Cr. 9232 was revoked, said
sentence to run concurrent with sentence in No. 9232. On Mar. 25,
1955, defendant Phillips entered plea of guilty and was sentenced to
serve 2 years, sentence to run concurrent with sentence in Cr. 9464.
Commie Campbell, Jr., alias "Pie," 812 Southwest First St., Mineral
Wells, Tex. Indictment filed on May 9, 1954, charging two counts,
unlawful transfer of marihuana. On May 31, 1955, defendant entered
ea of guilty; on June 1, 1955, defendant was sentenced to serve 2 years.
John Earnest Miller, alias Johnny Miller, 1400 North Beckley, Dallas
Tex. Indictment filed on May 11, 1955, charging four counts, unlawful
sale of heroin. On May 30, 1955, defendant entered plea of guilty and
was sentenced to serve 10 years.
James Thomas Elliott, alias Jim, alias George White, Reliance Hotel
Fort Worth, Tex. Indictment was filed on May 11, 1955; case dismissed
on May 31, 1955, because of the variance in chemists report and charge
in indictment.
Thomas Richard Moore, alias Tommy Moore, Dallas, Tex. Indictment
filed on July 7, 1955. On August 4, 1955, defendant waived venue and
entered plea of guilty. Sentence was 5 years to serve.
John B. Noble alias unknown 4408 Sycamore, Dallas, Tex. Indictment
waived and information filed Aug. 4, 1955, charging one count, receiving
and concealing heroin. Defendant entered plea of guilty on Aug. 5,
1955, and was fined $500 and sentenced to serve 10 years.
I.
Fort Worth
9566 _
9451 _
- -.
1st ----------
9456---------
Ist ----------
9462 -------------
Ist ----------
9464 -------------
2d -----------
2d -----------
9545 -----------
1st ----------
9550---------
3d -----------
9551 --------
3d ..........
9568 ---------
2d ..........
9575---------
2dt
San Angdo
882 ----------
Ist - - - - - Faustino Ramirez Gonzales, 15 West Avenue P, San Angelo, Tex. Indictment filed Sept. 10, 1954; plea of guilty entered on Oct. 18, 1954, and
sentenced to serve 15 months.
3555
(1) List of names (with alimes); and last know addresses of all persons who
have been indicted in the past year in Dallas Division of northern district of
Texas for violation of Federal narcotic, marihuana, or synthetic drug laws, together with the sentence they received or the final disposition of their cases.
Criminal
No.
13,695
13,600
13,602
13, 607
13,611
13,615
13,620
13, 621
13, 622
13,623
13, 626
13, 627
13,628
13, 629
13, 630
13, 631
13,632
13,633
13, 635
13,640
Offense record
1st-----------
Henry L. Leonard, alias Ervin Allurs, alias Slim Kinler; 2756 Metal St.,
Shreveport, La. Information in one count filed Jan. 18, 1954, charging
sale of maxguvaa. Transferred under rule 20 to WD Louisiana.
Kenneth Ray McKinney, 3219 Ross Avenue, Dallas, Tex. One count
2d
indictment filed Jan. 19, 1954, charging sale of opium. Two-year
sentence probated 1 year. (P. G.)
Ist ---------------- Robert Lee Barrow, Apt. 203, 5506 Miller, Dallas, Tex. Two-count
indictment filed Jan. 19, 1954, charging possession of cocaine and marihuana. Sentenced to 2 years at Texarkana, Tex. (P. G.)
Roy Carlton Campbell, 7403 Ireland, Dallas, Tex. One-count indict12d-_.
ment filed Jan. 19, 1954, charging passing of forged prescription for
narcotics (cocaine). Two years in Leavenworth. (P. G.)
1st----------Charles Eugene Hamilton, 5111 Live Oak, Dallas, Tex. At time of
offense, resided at 6628 Hillcrest, Dallas. Four-count indictment filed
Jan. 19, 1954, charging sale of marihuana. Two years on counts 2, 3,
and 4 to run consecutively. Appealed. Reversed and remanded by
CCA. Sentence modified to 2 years, probated 2 years. (Also see
13,631 CR.) (P. N. G. Court)
Eddie Stern, address unknown. Charged in count 2 of indictment filed
2d
Jan. 19, 1954. Verdict of acquittal.
1st --------------Joseph Son Hill, 1820 Hawes St., Dallas, Tex. Three-count indictment
filed Jan. 19; 1954 charging sale of marihuana. Three years probated
2 years. (P. N. 0. Jiiry)
1st ---------------- Leon Nicholson, 2350 Balleycastle, Dallas, Tex. One-count indictment
filed Jan. 19, 1954, charging possession dilaudid. Two years and $500
fine, 2 years probated 1 year. (P. G.)
1st ................ Dixie Jay Roach, alias Dixie Batterton, Phillis Hudson, Dixie Ewert;
(Was No.
617 NE 33d, Grand PrIirie, Tex. One-count indictment filed Jan. 19,
billed in 1950).
1954, charging possession dolophine. Two years, Lexington, Ky.
(P. 0.)
3d-.
Sam Shores, 719 W. Jefferson, Dallas, Tex. One-count indictment filed
Jan. 19, 1954, charging possession morphine. Dismissed May 19, 1954.
2d
Forest Wilburn Whidby, 3526 Campbell, Dallas, Tex. Two-count
indictment filed Jan. 19, 1954, charging possession of dilaudid and
marihuana. Two years probated I year. (P. N. 0. Court)
Ist ---------------- Mildred Juanita Adams, alias Peggy Allen, Peggy Vaughn, Mildred J.
Vaughn, 1505 Houston Street, Vernon, Tex. Two-count indictment
filed Jan. 21, 1954, charging sale of heroin. Five-year sentence. Case
appealed. Reversed by CCA; USD0 directed to enter verdict of
acquittal. (P. N. G. Jury)
2d - - - - - - - - Nick, Cammarata, 1554 E. Vermont, Dallas, Tex. One-count indictment filed Jan. 21, 1954, charging possession of marihuana. (Previous
narcotic conviction.) 5-year sentence and fined $500. (Leavenworth)
(P. N. G. Court)
2d
Herman J. L. Griffin, 201 Monaghan Court, Dallas, Tex. One-count
indictment filed Jan. 21, 1954, charging possession marihuana. (Previous conviction.) 5-year sentence, FCI, Seagoville, Tex. (P. G.)
Luke Gross, Jr., 2312 Stoneman, Dallas, Tex. One-count indictment
4th .......
filed Jan. 21, 1954, charging possession of marihuana. (Previous convictions.) 10-year, Leavenworth. (P. N. G. Jury)
1st --------------James Samuel Hall, alias Jimmy Hall. alias Red; 4936 Live Oak, Dallas,
Tex. Two-count indictment filed Jan. 21, 1954, charging sale of heroin.
Two years to run concunently. Appealed. Dismissed Feb. 21, 1955,
by CCA. (P. N. 0. Jury)
2d ---------------- Charles Eugene Hamilton, 5111 Live Oak, Dallas, Tex. (Also see 13,611.).
2d .....
Joseph Manuel Rodriguez, 2305 North Fitzhugh, Dallas, Tex.
Ist ....
- - Gene Hobel, Ambassador Hotel, Dallas, Tex. One-count indictment
filed Jan. 21, 1954, charging possession of Marihuana; dismissed July
17 1954.
2d --------------Darlene Fern Hauer, alias Mickey Myers; 2504 Whitmore Street, Fort
Worth, Tex. One-count indictment filed Jan. 21, 1954, charging
(Ist dismissed
possession of cocaine and morphine; 2 years, Lexington, Ky. (P. G.)
without prosecution)
Wilbur Sidney Howard alias Buster; Carlton Hotel, Dallas, Tex. Two2d --------------count indictment filed Jan. 21, 1954, charging sale of codeine and marihuana. (Previous conviction.) Five years, U. S. P. H. S. H., Fort
Worth, Tex., (P; 0.)
1st ---------------- Earlie Chester'Peterson, 2902 Bethurum Street, Dallas, Tex. Four-count
indictment f1iiJU. 21, 1954, charging sale of marihuana. Two years,
FCr,SeMvfll, Tex. (P. N. G.)
2d ......
Woodie Revis Wade, 3107 Tuskegee Street, Dallas, Tex. Two-count
indictment charging sale of marihuana. (Previous conviction.) Five
years, El Reno, Okla. (P. G.)
3556
*Criminal
No.
Offense
record
1st............
Leonard Leroy Moore and Betty Joyce Hamilton, 601 East Second,
Irving Tex. One-count indictment filed Jan. 21, 1954, charging possession of morphine. Dismissed as to Hamilton Feb. 12, 1954; dismissed
as to Moore 'May 19, 1954. (P. N. 0. Court)
13,680 1st ---------------- Reggie Robert Stewart, Fair Park Hotel, Dallas, Tex. One count
information filed Apr. 3, 1954, charging possession dilaudid. Two years,
Leavenworth. (P. G.)
13,682 1st ---------------- Buster Brown James, 1727 Forest, Dallas, Tex. One count information
filed Apr. 3, 1954. Two years probated 2 years. Deft. to enter
U. S. P. H. S. H., Fort Worth, and remain until cured, or until 2 y\,erz
expire, or until transferred to another institution. (P. G.)
13,694 1st ------- ---------Charles Washington Baxter, alias Charles Washington Burgess, alias
James Charles Reed, alias Rex Lawrence; Homestead St., Dallas, rTe\.
One-count indictment filed Apr. 23, 1954, charging sale of marihuana.
Transferred to District of Minnesota at St. Paul where on Mar. 28, 1055
he was sentenced to 2 years and fined $200.
13, 695 1st.
Balto Castro, alias Joe Castro; 1208 Sullivan Dr., Dallas, Tex. Three.
count indictment filed Apr. 23, 1954, charging sale and possession of
marihuana. Two years, FCI, Seagoville. (P. 0.)
13,698 1st-------------Danny Allen Davis. 1327 Plymouth Rd., Apt. B, Dallas, Tex. One.
count indictment filed Apr. 23, 1954, charging possession liquid demerol.
Two years, U. S. P. H. S. H., Fort Worth. (P. 0.)
Charles Edwin Harris, alias Eddie; Hamilton Hotel. Two-count indict13, 702 1st --------------ment filed Apr. 23, 1954, charging sale of morphine, sulphate and
dilaudid. Two years U. S. P. H. S. H., Fort Worth. (P. G.)
John L. Johnson. alias Poor Boy; 1309 East Seventh St., Corsicana, Tk.\.
13,705 1st-.
One-count indictment filed Apr. 23, 1954, charging sale of marihuana.
Two years probated 2 years. (P. G.)
13, 707 1st ............... Donovan Michael Kellctt, Liberal, Kans. One-count Indictment filed
Apr. 23, 1954, charging possession codeine. Dismissed Sept. 16, 1954.
Also see 13,804 CR.
2d --------------- Thomas Grady Malone, Fair Park Hotel Dallas Tex. One-count
13,710
indictment filed Apr. 23, 1954, charging possession dilaudid. (Previous
conviction.) Five years, U. S. P. H. S. H. Fort Worth. (P. G.)
13, 715 2d
Thomas Willard Eugene Moore, alias Eugene Willard Moore; 613 2d Ave.,
Dallas, Tex. One-count indictment filed Apr. 23, 1954, charging
possession dilaudid. (Previous conviction.) Five years, Leavenworth
(P. G.)
Henry Burnice Norwood, 2212 Allen, Dallas, Tex. One-count Indict13,716 3d-------------ment filed Apr. 23, 1954 charging possession marihuana. (Previous
conviction.) Ten years, Leavenworth. (P. N. G. Jury.)
Harry Young Noble, 6254 Lakeshore Dr., Dallas, Tex. One-count
13, 717
4th ..............
indictment filed Apr. 23, 1954, charging possession dilaudid. (Previous
conviction.) Ten years, Leavenworth. (P. N. 0. Jury.)
Benjamin Montgomery Sumner, 1715 Eugene St., Dallas, Tex. One13, 722 1st ..............
count indictment filed Apr. 23 1954, charging possession heroin. Two
years, FCI, Texarkana. (P. 6.)
Wendell Odell Stephens, 907 North Justin, Arcadia Park (Dallas), Tex.
13, 724 1st -------------Two-count indictment filed Apr. 23, 1954, charging possession codeine
and marihuana. Two years, U. S. P. H. S. H., Fort Worth. (P. 0.)
13,728 Ist -------------- Hudgen Thomas, alias Boo; 2913 Homestead St., Dallas, Tex. Twocount indictment filed Apr. 23, 1954, charging sale of marihuana; to be
dismissed.
Ralph Hammack, Greenville, Tex.; Homer Whitaker, Route 5 Green13, 729 1st --------------ville, Tex. and Willie McGee, Greenville, Tex. Two count indictment
filed Apr. 23, 1954, charging unlawful production of marihuana and
conspiracy to produce same. Dismissed as to Whitaker and Mcee
May 26,1954. Hammack sentenced to 3 years and $100 fite on count 2;
count 1 dismissed, sentence probated 2 years on condition fine paid
within 30 days. Paid. (P. N. 0. Jury.)
Wendell Hollis Oler Room 607, Ambassador Hotel, Dallas, Tex. One
13, 751 Ist --------------count indictment Aled June 24, 1954, charging possession heroin. Two
years and $100 fine, U. S. P. H. S. H., Fort Worth. (P. G.)
Leonard J. Abernathy, 2810 Troy St., Dallas, Tex. Three-count informia13, 761 1st --------------tion, charging sale of marihuana. Two years, Leavenworth. (P. 0.)
13, 804 2d ---------------- Donovan Michael Kellett, Liberal, Kans. One-count indictment filed
Sept. 8, 1954, charging purchase codeine. Two years. Filed appeal.
Appeal bond forfeited and bench warrant issued to arrest and deliver
to any penitentiary to serve sentence. (P. N. G.)
Carroll Stone, alias Gene; 1911 Cincinnatti St., San Antonio, 'ex.
Eugene
--------------1st
i3,805
(P. N. G. Jury.)
Antonio Cisneros Ayala, alias Tony; 230 Givens, San Antonio, Tex. Two
2d-------------count indictment filed Sept. 8, 1954. Stone sentenced to 2 yearS;
appealed Sept. 14, 1954; case reversed by CCA and remanded July 23,
1955. Ayala sentenced to 2 years, FCI, Seagdvlle, Tex. (Acquisition
of marihuana.) (P. N. G. Jury.)
Tim Smith, alias T. S. Smith; 2101 Clark, Dallas, Tex. Two-count in13,806 Ist.------------dictment filed Sept. 8, 1954, charging sale of paregoric. Two years and
$200 fine; 2 years probated 1 year if fine paid. Paid.
Crawford, alias Bug Eye, Jr., 2404 Clark, Dallas, Tex. Two-count
Archie
--------------Ist
13,807
indictment filed Sept. 8 1954, charging sale of marihuana. Two years,
13, 643
Ist ----------------
(As to each)
Ed1, Seagoville.
(P.
-.
)
Marcus Lee Brown, 500 South Fitzhugh, Dallas, Tex. Two-count indictment filed Sept. 8, 1954, charging sale of paregoric. Two years and
$200 fine, 2 years probated 1 year if fine paid. Paid. (P. G.)
3557
1st ---------------