Advanced Search
Of All Things:Tuna Fishing
Of All Things: Tuna fishing
Porpoise in ocean
Porpoise in ocean
Porpoise acting at Min & Tom's
Porpoise acting at Min & Tom's
Porpoise
Porpoise
B/W Pt. porpoise
B/W Pt. porpoise
Int. house
Int. house
Int. oriental living room, family having tea
Int. oriental living room, family having tea
Home Int., the bathroom
Home Int., the bathroom
Magnificent winding staircase
Magnificent winding staircase
Int. of a room (fireplace)
Int. of a room (fireplace)
Victorian style living room
Victorian style living room
The master bedroom
The master bedroom Shots of several different 1950s era master bedrooms
Int. house oriental style
Int. house oriental style
Int. homes
Int. homes
Int. house
Int. house
Dog in living room
Dog in living room
Int. of a modern
Int. of a modern
Int. house (bed)
Int. house (bed)
Apples in kitchen
Apples in kitchen
Window of kitchen
Window of kitchen
Family in home library room reading
Family in home library room reading
Watering flower plant in pot
Watering flower plant in pot
Kitchen &dining room
Kitchen &dining room ON PREVIEW CASSETTE 98838
Senate Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities, June 5, 1973
[00.59.41] Senator ERVIN. And that happened on June 19? Mr. REISNER. Yes, sir. Senator ERVIN. When were You first interviewed by the prosecuting attorney Mr. Silbert,? Mr. REISNER. I met Mr. Silbert for the first time on April 8 of this Year. Senator ERVIN. And did you make a statement to him substantially what you have made to the committee today? Mr. REISNER. Yes, sir. It was not on April 8 that I made this statement. As a matter of fact, I had completely forgotten that action. You are speaking of' the shredding of that document or the Gemstone? Senator ERVIN. Just generally speaking. Mr. REISNER. Generally speaking, shredding that document, by remembered for the first, time when I read that Mr. Gray had shredded a document and I simply realized that there was a similarity there. Senator ERVIN. When were you subpenaed to go before the, grand jury? Mr. REISNER. On April 8. It was at a subsequent meeting with Mr. Silbert that I described that, document to him. It Was in a previous appearance before the grand jury that I described virtually all that I have described here today, Senator ERVIN. Did you talk to Mr. Silbert before you talked to this committee staff? Mr. REISNER. Yes, sir. Senator ERVIN. Were you subpenaed before the grand jury before you talked to the staff of this committee? Mr. Reisner To be precise, on March 30. your staff subpenaed me, which was the first time I had heard from an investigatory body. I met with two of your investigators on that Friday. The subpena was canceled. I believe, Mr. Chairman, you were out of town and returned and the nature of the proceeding changed. Subsequently, I was subpenaed by the grand jury and appeared there. Senator ERVIN. Now, did you receive a, phone call or any communciation from Mr. Magruder after you were subpenaed to go before the grand jury or before our committee? Mr. REISNER. Yes, sir; on that Friday, which was, I believe, March 30. Actually, it was in the newspaper before I knew what was going to happen. I read in the newspaper that morning that I was to be subpenaed Senator ERVIN. What did Mr. Magruder ask you to do? Mr. REISNER. He asked me to get together with him, He called me at home and asked me to get together with him that morning. He asked me whether he could take me to work. I indicated that I didn't think that was appropriate, because I presumed that the reason I was being subpenaed before this committee was to discuss Mr. Magruder; therefore, I didn't think it was appropriate for us to meet. He then called me again that morning to urge a meeting. I suggested there should be a third person there. 'We set a meeting. Then I chose not to attend the meeting. I wanted to be firm about not meeting' with him. Senator ERVIN. Did he say anything to you in either of those conversations about meeting with a Paul O'Brien? Mr. Reisner Yes, sir; the nature of that was this, as I understand it. I indicated to him that, if we were going to meet, there should be a third person there. He said, well, we will have to find someone. How about if we find either Paul O'Brien or Ken Parkinson, who were counsel to the committee? I said that that would be acceptable, but subsequently called O'Brien at 11 o'clock that morning and said that I didn't think it was appropriate to get together with the man about whom I was going to be asked to testify. Mr. O'Brien agreed with that and said that he understood completely and there was no problem. [01.03.10--TAPE OUT]