Feldman asked if Valentine volunteered any information DEA was developing "with regard to Peroff, Bouchard, Vesco and LeBlanc?" Viviani said:

All I recall is that he said something about Dillon's office, it is being worked out of Dillon's office (p. 713). This discussion occurred between Feldman and Viviani:

FELDMAN. Did Mr. Valentine give you any information except the fact that this was in Dillon's shop?

VIVIANI. I can only recall him saying it is Dos Santos' informant and something to the effect that they are working something in Dillon's office. That is all I recall.

FELDMAN. Would it have been of interest for you to get this tape or a transcript of this tape in light of the cases and indictments and possible extradition that you had going at that time with regard to Robert Vesco?

VIVIANI. I have to say no. I think it would be really not an accurate answer. I guess I would have to know more. I mean if the name merely Vesco was mentioned by someone, I would think not. But in this context, sure, I think it would be important (pp. 716, 717).

Feldman asked Wing the same question. Would the taped conversation implicating Vesco in a heroin deal have interested him? Wing

said:

It wouldn't have been any assistance in the [MitchellStans] trial. The only type of assistance it could have been was in the later extradition proceedings that we pursued. The only possibility was if there was enough evidence that, by itself I don't think would be enough evidence, but if from that we could have developed a case, a narcotics case involving Vesco and secured an indictment, then obviously that would have been a help because the extradition treaties cover narcotics offenses perhaps better than some of the frauds with which we charged Mr. Vesco (pp. 717, 718).

TIME OF VIVIANI-VALENTINE CALL IS DISCUSSED

Viviani said he had this conversation with Wayne Valentine in late. July or August (pp. 710, 711). Viviani said it occurred while Walter Phillips, the head of the narcotics unit, was on vacation and that Phillips was on vacation for most of the month of August (p. 709). However, Viviani said he called Valentine immediately after he spoke with Wing (p. 727). Wing said the date of his conversation with Viviani could have been July 18 or July 20; he simply was not sure when it was. But Wing did say that the reason he was so rushed during this period was that he was trying desperately to meet a trial motion deadline of July 29 (p. 725). Therefore, while he was uncertain of the date he spoke with Viviani, Wing dated the call as being prior to July 29.

Viviani's and Wing's testimony, particularly Viviani's, raise questions about the testimony of Wayne T. Valentine. Valentine told Senators he learned about Frank Peroff from Richard Dos Santos in early July of 1973. But, Valentine said, he first learned of the possible involvement of Robert Vesco in the Bouchard case in September or October of 1973 (p.665).

In addition, Valentine gave a sworn statement in the DEA-Customs inquiry December 4, 1973. In that statement, Valentine said the first time he heard Robert Vesco's name mentioned in connection with the Bouchard and Peroff inquiry, was November of 1973. Valentine said Vesco's name came up at the time he was informed that Peroff had gone to the Investigations Subcommittee with "certain allegations." That was, Valentine said, "sometime in November 1973."

If Viviani's testimony is accurate, then Valentine knew before September of Vesco's involvement because, according to Viviani, Valentine told him in late July or August that Vesco was said to be involved. In addition, if Wing's testimony is accurate, Valentine could have spoken with Viviani about Vesco as early as July 28 and possibly sooner, possibly July 20.

Valentine said in the statement that Viviani called on the Peroff matter in late July or early September. He was on annual leave in August.

In the DEA-Customs inquiry, Valentine went on to say that when Viviani called him Viviani explained that "I was the fourth or fifth person in the Drug Enforcement Administration at New York that he had conversed with in attempts to identify a person by the name of Frank Peroff."

Valentine added:

Mr. Viviani did not furnish me any reasons as to why his office was concerned about Peroff except to say that Peroff had made allegations to his office and to one of the District Attorney's offices. I told him that Frank Peroff was an informant working under the direction of Agent Rick Dos Santos who was assigned to Mr. O'Neill's group and my division.

These remarks by Valentine indicate that Viviani knew the name of the caller who turned out to be Frank Peroff. But John Wing made clear in his testimony that he, Wing, did not know the name of the caller, that that was one of the problems he confronted in dealing with him over the phone (pp. 705, 708).

In part because Peroff would not give his name, Wing said, he asked Gerald Feffer of the narcotics unit for help. Wing did have the name Cotroni and he hoped Feffer, who specialized in drug cases, could track down the anonymous caller by the association with Cotroni (pp. 708, 709).

Viviani got into the act when Feffer's secretary, Anna Schwartz, asked him to help out because the drug unit was short handed. Viviani testified that he called Wing and they talked about "an individual” who had called in connection with "a Canadian heroin deal." Peroff's name was still unknown (p. 710).

Subcommittee Investigator Manuel asked Viviani what he did when he finished this call with John Wing. Viviani said, "I hung up, dialed Mr. Valentine. . . ." (P. 727.)

According to the testimony of Wing and Viviani, then, they did not know who the caller was-except that he knew Cotroni and Bouchard and claimed to know something criminal about Robert Vesco.

It was Wayne Valentine who identified the caller as being Frank Peroff, informant to Richard Dos Santos. Viviani's testimony can be interpreted no other way.

Chief Counsel Feldman asked Viviani:

So then you called Mr. Valentine not knowing the name of Peroff because Mr. Wing didn't know.

VIVIANI. You don't believe I did. That is correct.

FELDMAN. You asked Mr. Valentine

VIVIANI. Yes, I simply said to him, "Do you have a case going with the following individuals? Rusty Wing is interested in Vesco for obvious reasons. If you do, could you get back to him." (Pp. 712, 713.)

It was then, Viviani said, that Valentine identified the caller as Dos Santos' informant, Frank Peroff (p. 710).

Valentine said just the opposite in his DEA-Customs statement. He said Viviani called him for information about a man named Frank Peroff. Moreover, Valentine was the fourth or fifth person Viviani had asked at DEA New York about Peroff, Valentine said.

But Viviani testified he called Valentine immediately after talking to Wing. Valentine was not No. 4 or 5-he was No. 1, Viviani said.

THE DATES OF EVENTS

A difficult task was establishing the dates of when the events of July 17-22 actually occurred. The only person who was at all precise in his dates was Frank Peroff. Federal officials were virtually always vague and imprecise about when things happened. Moreover, neither the DEA nor the U.S. Attorney's office could provide documentation which would have dated these events as they occurred.

Frank Peroff said he called John Wing on or about July 18. Wing and Viviani were not sure when the Peroff call came in. Wing said it could have been July 20 but he wasn't certain. Viviani said he became involved in the Peroff call in either late July or August.

Wayne Valentine was able to specify that the call came through in July, however. Valentine said that during the "same time span" as his first conversation with Viviani the name Frank Peroff came up again in his work. Valentine identified this time span as either late July or September. He was on leave in August.

On this occasion, the reference to Peroff had to do with Peroff's calls to the White House, Valentine said. Valentine said in this time span-either late July or September, he wasn't sure which he received a call from DEA headquarters in Washington. Valentine could not remember the name of the official who called him. At the hearings, Valentine said the official was DEA Agent Morris H. (Pete) Davis, Jr. (p. 668).

In the DEA-Customs inquiry, Valentine said this DEA officialDavis-explained that Peroff had called the White House and made "allegations against DEA." Davis told him that the person who took the call at the White House was a Secret Service agent, Valentine said. Valentine said he had forgotten the Secret Service man's name. But when Davis talked to him, Valentine said, he wrote down the Secret Service agent's name and telephone number. Valentine said he conveyed this information to Group Supervisor John J. O'Neill. Valentine said he has since been reminded that the name of the Secret Service agent was Peter Grant.

Valentine said he instructed O'Neill to get together with Richard Dos Santos and "handle the matter" in coordination with Peter Grant. Valentine said the call from Davis came after the call from Viviani. In the DEA-Customs statement, Valentine discussed the call from Viviani and then turned to the call from Davis. Valentine said:

The next time that I can recall Mr. Peroff's name coming to my attention was in the same time span as my conversation with Mr. Viviani.

Then Valentine described the call from Davis. When he wrote "the next time" he had to mean that the Viviani call was before the Davis call.

VIVIANI'S CALL MAY HAVE BEEN JULY 20

There is another possibility as to one sequence in the chronology of events. It is that Valentine was alerted to Peroff's having called the White House before he spoke to Viviani.

Valentine said the call from Viviani was before the call about Peroff contacting the White House. But Valentine's recollection could be inaccurate.

John Wing could not remember what day he spoke with Peroff but, he testified, he was "almost positive" it was a Friday (p. 724). July 20, 1973 was a Friday.

If it was July 20 when Peroff and he spoke, then it was also July 20 when Viviani and Wing spoke for the first time about Peroff and it was also July 20 when Viviani talked to Valentine about Peroff.

As will be seen in the testimony of John J. O'Neill reviewed later in this report, O'Neill ordered that Peroff be arrested (p. 585). That order had to be before or on July 19 because July 19 is the date of the telegram from Florida to New York asking for Peroff's arrest.

Valentine said in the DEA-Customs inquiry that when he learned of Peroff's calls to the White House, he, Valentine, directed John O'Neill to "handle the matter."

In his testimony before the Subcommittee, Valentine characterized his direction to O'Neill this way: "I asked O'Neill to get in touch with the informant and find out exactly what did happen." (P. 671.)

As events developed, O'Neill did not "get in touch" with Peroff but he did "handle the matter"-he had Peroff arrested.

If, then, Peroff and Wing spoke July 20, Viviani and Valentine also spoke July 20. Viviani wanted to know what Valentine knew about the anonymous caller. Valentine identified him as Frank Peroff, informant to Richard Dos Santos, but there is no mention in Viviani's

testimony or Valentine's testimony and sworn statement that Valentine explained an equally relevant point about Peroff--that Peroff was calling the White House and that he, Valentine, had directed John J. O'Neill to "handle the matter." (Again, this assumes that Valentine was alerted to Peroff having called the White House prior to Valentine's speaking to Viviani.)

O'Neill left no doubt about how he handled the matter. Manuel asked O'Neill, "who made the decision to have Mr. Peroff arrested?" O'Neill said, "I did."

Manuel asked, "You did?”

O'Neill said, "Yes sir."

Manuel asked, "Did you consult with anyone, either in DEA or any other government agency, prior to making that decision?"

O'Neill said, "No, sir." (P. 585.)

O'Neill did not hesitate at any time in his two days of testimony before the Subcommittee to insist that it was his decision, and his decision alone, to have Frank Peroff arrested. Officials senior to O'Neill did not contest O'Neill on that point. They said they had nothing to do with Peroff's going to jail.

The closest to the decision-making in the Peroff arrest which any senior official came was Wayne Valentine, O'Neill's boss, who said:

I did concur with the decision but I did not take part in reaching the decision (p. 677).

The Subcommittee then sought to determine how Valentine could concur in the decision without being a part of it.

VALENTINE'S KNOWLEDGE OF THE WARRANTS

DEA Agent Morris Davis said he advised a New York DEA agent that a warrant was outstanding on Frank Peroff in Florida.

DEA Assistant Regional Director Wayne Valentine told Senators on three separate occasions in his testimony that he took the call from Agent Davis (pp. 668, 669, 674).

Therefore, if Davis' sworn testimony is accurate and if Valentine did take his call, it follows that Valentine knew about the outstanding warrant on Peroff in Florida. But, also in his testimony before the Subcommittee, Valentine said that he learned about the outstanding warrants on Peroff not from Davis but from John J. O'Neilland O'Neill informed him of them two or three days after he heard from Davis (p. 674). Valentine made these remarks in this discussion with Manuel:

MANUEL. Mr. Valentine, following your knowledge of Mr. Peroff's calls to the White House, did you have anything to do in the decision-making process to have Mr. Peroff arrested?

VALENTINE. No, sir.

MANUEL. To your knowledge, was anyone in DEA aware of the existence of the outstanding warrants against Mr. Peroff prior to July 18, 1973?

VALENTINE. I am not sure on the date, but whatever the date was that I received the phone call from Pete [Morris II.]

43-085-75-9